• Intermittent Fasting Myths Expertly Debunked in New Video
    Anthony Colpo

    As regular readers will know, I recently released a book on intermittent fasting (IF) and time restricted eating (TRE) called Not So Fast.

    The bulk of the book deals with the misleading fat loss/weight loss claims made for IF and TRE. Instead of relying on anecdote or forum bro-science, I carefully review each of the published, peer-reviewed studies that compared IF diets with more conventional calorie-restricted diets.

    I do the same for TRE, but in that case I also include studies with non-calorie-restricted regular diets, because many of the TRE groups in those studies were instructed to eat ad libitum (without restriction) in their assigned eating windows.

    Those studies show the lavish weight loss claims made for IF and TRE are pure bunkum.

    In many of the studies, there is no difference in fat or weight loss between groups. When differences were noted in favour of IF or TRE, it was entirely explained by differences in caloric intake.

    Many of you may be familiar with Dave Asprey, a self-proclaimed "biohacker" who I consider the epitome of pseudoscience (you can read my dissection of his "Bulletproof Coffee" bollockery here).

    Asprey has convinced a lot of people he holds the keys to anti-aging, and charges thousands to share those 'secrets' at “Biohacking” conferences. In a January 2021 story, he claimed to have spent $2 million on his quest to “biohack” his way to eternal youth, but by December 2022 had revised that figure down to $300,000. He’s a former Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur, which probably explains the dodgey figures.


    A grey-haired Asprey, now 50, who claims to have spent … well, lots … on “biohacking”.
    In his book Fast This Way, Asprey writes, in a section titled "PAY NO MIND TO THE CALORIE COPS" (pages 60-61):

    "Nothing makes you feel more like a failure than enduring suffering to lose 25 pounds, only to gain them back in a few weeks, plus a dozen more."

    And nothing makes you realize you're dealing with a world-class BSer than the fantasmagorical claim you can gain 37 pounds in only a few weeks, when even deliberate overfeeding studies fail to replicate such an astonishing rate of weight gain.

    Even the Guinness Book of World Records lists the greatest ever alleged weight gain at 325 lb (147 kg) over 12 months. That averages out at 27 lbs per month, which casts serious doubt on the veracity of Asprey's 37 lb-in-a-month claim.

    Not to be deterred, Asprey continues with more utter bollocks:

    "... the 'calories in, calories out' model, commonly abbreviated as CICO, should be relegated to the dustbin of failed science. This approach treats your body as though it's a meat robot when in reality it's a dynamic system that responds to calories differently based on their source, the time they're consumed, and the unique physiological makeup of the person consuming them. Yet the myth lives on, leaving obesity, shame, and suffering in its wake."

    Oh boy. It's hard to know where to start with such complete and utter hogwash.

    CICO will never be relegated to the dustbin of science, because it has been verified time and time again by real scientists, as opposed to reality-denying diet gurus and 'biohackers'.

    Time and again, I've challenged the anti-CICO reality-deniers to book themselves into a metabolic ward, and prove their claim that you can gain or lose different amounts of weight (from fat, not dehydration, diarrhea or glycogen losses) on their pet diet when compared to an isocaloric high-carb/mixed diet, and in every instance my challenge has been met with deafening silence.

    There's a good reason: It's an impossible challenge to meet, because it defies physiological reality.

    Asprey's claim that CICO can be rendered invalid by "the unique physiological makeup of the person consuming [calories]" is a real crack-up.

    Again, I've been asking for proof of the existence of these metabolic freaks-of-nature to whom the laws of nature have been magically suspended, but again, my requests keep drawing a blank.

    Scientists haven't been able to find them either, as decades of metabolic ward studies have confirmed. Even a ward study commissioned and funded by NuSI, a low-carb propaganda outfit masquerading as a non-profit, failed to produce the magical "metabolic advantage" that flabby diet gurus incessantly wank on about.

    All someone like Asprey needs to do is give a small portion of his millions to researchers, who can then put out the call for these freaks of nature to live in a metabolic ward for a set period of time. When these subjects lose more weight on a IF/TRE/low-carb/keto diet than on an isocaloric mixed diet, or they lose weight despite eating more than their verified energy maintenance needs - as some especially shameless/deluded diet gurus would have you believe is possible - then we can start questioning CICO.

    Until then, the only thing that should be questioned is the ethics and motives of people who make nonsensical statements about diet and calories they know full well have no scientific backing.

    When people follow IF and TRE diets and proceed to lose weight, it's for one reason and one reason only: They created a calorie deficit.

    Just because you're not actively counting calories, it does not change one iota the fact you still consumed a calorie deficit. I've been driving manual cars for so long that I don't even think about changing gears. If you were to ask me immediately after a drive how many times I just changed gears, I'd have absolutely no idea because I wasn't counting. That doesn't mean I go around telling everyone my car's an automatic.

    That would be delusional. Just like the anti-CICO crowd.

    As I explain in Not So Fast, the science shows these diets do not "boost" metabolism, they do not boost growth hormone, nor do they flip some magical "metabolic switch". That's pure marketing flimflam.

    In fact, TRE studies in active males found reductions in testosterone and the key thyroid hormone triiodothyronine (T3). That's the kind of "metabolic switch" I'll happily leave off.

    Another demonstration of Asprey's anti-scientific tendencies comes when he then bangs on about Ancel Keys. The late Keys is an easy target, because he's roundly hated by anyone who knows what an outright fraud the whole anti-cholesterol/anti-saturate hysteria campaign is. But what Asprey doesn't mention is the then-groundbreaking study Keys conducted before he became an anti-cholesterol quack. This was the famous Minnesota Study, that showed when men were fed a very low-calorie mixed diet in conjunction with daily physical labor, they lost weight. Lots of it. Sometimes they lost too much weight and became emaciated. That tends to happen when you work like a lumberjack but eat like a small secretary.

    When Keys and his colleagues then greatly increased the men’s caloric intakes, they gained weight. Just as CICO dictates they would. But Asprey doesn't mention the Minnesota Experiment because, like most diet hucksters, he tells a one-sided story designed to sell whatever he's peddling at the time, be it "Bulletproof" coffee or the nouveau-trendy phenomenon of skipping breakfast.

    A Reality Check from New Zealand

    Like Australia, there hasn't been much good to say about New Zealand over the past few years. Earlier this year however, Dr Brad Stanfield, a Primary Care Physician in Auckland, posted a very insightful video titled "Why Many People Are Abandoning Intermittent Fasting." You can watch it at the end of this post.

    The video briefly discusses the fallacy of the weight loss claims, so if you want a detailed breakdown of that research, then Chapters 2 and 3 of Not So Fast are where you need to be.

    But Dr Brad touches upon some additional research when he addresses some of the untenable "autophagy", hormone, glycemic and general health claims made for these diets. It's a must-watch for anyone considering these diets.

    The comments below the video are also a must-read for anyone fascinated by the psychology endemic in the diet and health arena.

    Many of the commenters swear IF or TRE is the best thing they ever did. That it changed their life, even. Just like low-carbers and vegans used to insist whenever I wrote anything remotely critical of their pet diet theories. Funnily enough, I don't hear from them anymore.

    Look, I don't doubt many of these people did experience improvements. That happens with many diets, at least initially. And one of the major reasons is that when people embrace a new diet, they often do so as part of a sweeping "get my sh!t together" campaign that includes increasing physical activity, improving their food choices, cutting back on the booze, keeping better sleep hours, and so on.

    Here are some cases in point:


    Despite Dr Brad saying absolutely nothing offensive and relying on actual science in the video, some of the comments ooze butt-hurtedness.

    So much so, that if I was a billionaire philanthropist, I'd offer some of the negative commenters a lifetime supply of Preparation H. Like this person:

    Wow.

    I don't know why people get so ridiculously defensive about diet. Dr Brad presents the facts, and I note that a grand total of nobody in the comments section refutes even a single of the studies he cites.

    He even posts links to each of the studies below the video but, hey, why let a little thing like science get in the way of knee-jerk emotional reactions?

    Rest assured, however much folks like mfcypher claim to love IF and TRE, I love cannoli more. But when I meet someone who says they don't like cannoli (it's happened), as utterly shocked, astounded and flabbergasted as I might be, I don't scowl and get all Joe Pesci.

    Instead, I just quietly think to myself, "wow, someone who doesn't like cannoli! The world really is full of surprises!"

    Look, if someone ever posts a video earnestly claiming the best way to fight ageing and lose weight is to molest the village goat once a week, then please, get angry and indignant. At least for the goat's sake.

    But when someone posts a video critiquing your pet diet, and you can't factually refute any of the abundant science he presents, and so you instead get all ad hominem and carry on like he just asked you to molest the village goat, then the problem lies not with the poster of the video.

    The problem lies with you.

    As I stated in Not So Fast, I'm an information provider, not a dictator. Dr Brad hardly comes across as a domineering "my way or the highway" type either.

    We present the side of the story that all the hyperbolic hucksters won't tell you, because it's the side of the story that desperately needs to be told. If IF or TRE seem to work for you, more power to you! But the reality is that they do not work for everybody, as a number of the YouTube comments would attest.

    Some people do experience negative effects from IF and TRE, and this is hardly surprising given scientific research has already detected negative hormonal effects.

    Don’t expect the anti-CICO crowd to tell you about these negative effects. If they can’t accept the reality of calories in, calories out, what on Earth would they know about the potential pitfalls of, say, routinely raising counterregulatory hormones?

    Do they even know what counterregulatory hormones are?

    Even if there was only a single person on this entire planet who could be harmed by IF and TRE, then that person has every right to know these diets may not be the best for him or her.

    The reality is there are a lot more folks in the world who won't do well on these diets. Information about the potential pitfalls of IF and TRE shouldn't be withheld from these people because a bunch of IF and TRE fanboys and girls will have their remarkably fragile feelings hurt.

    Anyways, here's Dr Brad's video, enjoy.



    Ciao,

    Anthony.


    Anthony's new book, Not So Fast: The Truth About Intermittent Fasting & Time-Restricted Eating is now available at at Amazon and Lulu.

    Share

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-139452240
    Intermittent Fasting Myths Expertly Debunked in New Video Anthony Colpo As regular readers will know, I recently released a book on intermittent fasting (IF) and time restricted eating (TRE) called Not So Fast. The bulk of the book deals with the misleading fat loss/weight loss claims made for IF and TRE. Instead of relying on anecdote or forum bro-science, I carefully review each of the published, peer-reviewed studies that compared IF diets with more conventional calorie-restricted diets. I do the same for TRE, but in that case I also include studies with non-calorie-restricted regular diets, because many of the TRE groups in those studies were instructed to eat ad libitum (without restriction) in their assigned eating windows. Those studies show the lavish weight loss claims made for IF and TRE are pure bunkum. In many of the studies, there is no difference in fat or weight loss between groups. When differences were noted in favour of IF or TRE, it was entirely explained by differences in caloric intake. Many of you may be familiar with Dave Asprey, a self-proclaimed "biohacker" who I consider the epitome of pseudoscience (you can read my dissection of his "Bulletproof Coffee" bollockery here). Asprey has convinced a lot of people he holds the keys to anti-aging, and charges thousands to share those 'secrets' at “Biohacking” conferences. In a January 2021 story, he claimed to have spent $2 million on his quest to “biohack” his way to eternal youth, but by December 2022 had revised that figure down to $300,000. He’s a former Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur, which probably explains the dodgey figures. A grey-haired Asprey, now 50, who claims to have spent … well, lots … on “biohacking”. In his book Fast This Way, Asprey writes, in a section titled "PAY NO MIND TO THE CALORIE COPS" (pages 60-61): "Nothing makes you feel more like a failure than enduring suffering to lose 25 pounds, only to gain them back in a few weeks, plus a dozen more." And nothing makes you realize you're dealing with a world-class BSer than the fantasmagorical claim you can gain 37 pounds in only a few weeks, when even deliberate overfeeding studies fail to replicate such an astonishing rate of weight gain. Even the Guinness Book of World Records lists the greatest ever alleged weight gain at 325 lb (147 kg) over 12 months. That averages out at 27 lbs per month, which casts serious doubt on the veracity of Asprey's 37 lb-in-a-month claim. Not to be deterred, Asprey continues with more utter bollocks: "... the 'calories in, calories out' model, commonly abbreviated as CICO, should be relegated to the dustbin of failed science. This approach treats your body as though it's a meat robot when in reality it's a dynamic system that responds to calories differently based on their source, the time they're consumed, and the unique physiological makeup of the person consuming them. Yet the myth lives on, leaving obesity, shame, and suffering in its wake." Oh boy. It's hard to know where to start with such complete and utter hogwash. CICO will never be relegated to the dustbin of science, because it has been verified time and time again by real scientists, as opposed to reality-denying diet gurus and 'biohackers'. Time and again, I've challenged the anti-CICO reality-deniers to book themselves into a metabolic ward, and prove their claim that you can gain or lose different amounts of weight (from fat, not dehydration, diarrhea or glycogen losses) on their pet diet when compared to an isocaloric high-carb/mixed diet, and in every instance my challenge has been met with deafening silence. There's a good reason: It's an impossible challenge to meet, because it defies physiological reality. Asprey's claim that CICO can be rendered invalid by "the unique physiological makeup of the person consuming [calories]" is a real crack-up. Again, I've been asking for proof of the existence of these metabolic freaks-of-nature to whom the laws of nature have been magically suspended, but again, my requests keep drawing a blank. Scientists haven't been able to find them either, as decades of metabolic ward studies have confirmed. Even a ward study commissioned and funded by NuSI, a low-carb propaganda outfit masquerading as a non-profit, failed to produce the magical "metabolic advantage" that flabby diet gurus incessantly wank on about. All someone like Asprey needs to do is give a small portion of his millions to researchers, who can then put out the call for these freaks of nature to live in a metabolic ward for a set period of time. When these subjects lose more weight on a IF/TRE/low-carb/keto diet than on an isocaloric mixed diet, or they lose weight despite eating more than their verified energy maintenance needs - as some especially shameless/deluded diet gurus would have you believe is possible - then we can start questioning CICO. Until then, the only thing that should be questioned is the ethics and motives of people who make nonsensical statements about diet and calories they know full well have no scientific backing. When people follow IF and TRE diets and proceed to lose weight, it's for one reason and one reason only: They created a calorie deficit. Just because you're not actively counting calories, it does not change one iota the fact you still consumed a calorie deficit. I've been driving manual cars for so long that I don't even think about changing gears. If you were to ask me immediately after a drive how many times I just changed gears, I'd have absolutely no idea because I wasn't counting. That doesn't mean I go around telling everyone my car's an automatic. That would be delusional. Just like the anti-CICO crowd. As I explain in Not So Fast, the science shows these diets do not "boost" metabolism, they do not boost growth hormone, nor do they flip some magical "metabolic switch". That's pure marketing flimflam. In fact, TRE studies in active males found reductions in testosterone and the key thyroid hormone triiodothyronine (T3). That's the kind of "metabolic switch" I'll happily leave off. Another demonstration of Asprey's anti-scientific tendencies comes when he then bangs on about Ancel Keys. The late Keys is an easy target, because he's roundly hated by anyone who knows what an outright fraud the whole anti-cholesterol/anti-saturate hysteria campaign is. But what Asprey doesn't mention is the then-groundbreaking study Keys conducted before he became an anti-cholesterol quack. This was the famous Minnesota Study, that showed when men were fed a very low-calorie mixed diet in conjunction with daily physical labor, they lost weight. Lots of it. Sometimes they lost too much weight and became emaciated. That tends to happen when you work like a lumberjack but eat like a small secretary. When Keys and his colleagues then greatly increased the men’s caloric intakes, they gained weight. Just as CICO dictates they would. But Asprey doesn't mention the Minnesota Experiment because, like most diet hucksters, he tells a one-sided story designed to sell whatever he's peddling at the time, be it "Bulletproof" coffee or the nouveau-trendy phenomenon of skipping breakfast. A Reality Check from New Zealand Like Australia, there hasn't been much good to say about New Zealand over the past few years. Earlier this year however, Dr Brad Stanfield, a Primary Care Physician in Auckland, posted a very insightful video titled "Why Many People Are Abandoning Intermittent Fasting." You can watch it at the end of this post. The video briefly discusses the fallacy of the weight loss claims, so if you want a detailed breakdown of that research, then Chapters 2 and 3 of Not So Fast are where you need to be. But Dr Brad touches upon some additional research when he addresses some of the untenable "autophagy", hormone, glycemic and general health claims made for these diets. It's a must-watch for anyone considering these diets. The comments below the video are also a must-read for anyone fascinated by the psychology endemic in the diet and health arena. Many of the commenters swear IF or TRE is the best thing they ever did. That it changed their life, even. Just like low-carbers and vegans used to insist whenever I wrote anything remotely critical of their pet diet theories. Funnily enough, I don't hear from them anymore. Look, I don't doubt many of these people did experience improvements. That happens with many diets, at least initially. And one of the major reasons is that when people embrace a new diet, they often do so as part of a sweeping "get my sh!t together" campaign that includes increasing physical activity, improving their food choices, cutting back on the booze, keeping better sleep hours, and so on. Here are some cases in point: Despite Dr Brad saying absolutely nothing offensive and relying on actual science in the video, some of the comments ooze butt-hurtedness. So much so, that if I was a billionaire philanthropist, I'd offer some of the negative commenters a lifetime supply of Preparation H. Like this person: Wow. I don't know why people get so ridiculously defensive about diet. Dr Brad presents the facts, and I note that a grand total of nobody in the comments section refutes even a single of the studies he cites. He even posts links to each of the studies below the video but, hey, why let a little thing like science get in the way of knee-jerk emotional reactions? Rest assured, however much folks like mfcypher claim to love IF and TRE, I love cannoli more. But when I meet someone who says they don't like cannoli (it's happened), as utterly shocked, astounded and flabbergasted as I might be, I don't scowl and get all Joe Pesci. Instead, I just quietly think to myself, "wow, someone who doesn't like cannoli! The world really is full of surprises!" Look, if someone ever posts a video earnestly claiming the best way to fight ageing and lose weight is to molest the village goat once a week, then please, get angry and indignant. At least for the goat's sake. But when someone posts a video critiquing your pet diet, and you can't factually refute any of the abundant science he presents, and so you instead get all ad hominem and carry on like he just asked you to molest the village goat, then the problem lies not with the poster of the video. The problem lies with you. As I stated in Not So Fast, I'm an information provider, not a dictator. Dr Brad hardly comes across as a domineering "my way or the highway" type either. We present the side of the story that all the hyperbolic hucksters won't tell you, because it's the side of the story that desperately needs to be told. If IF or TRE seem to work for you, more power to you! But the reality is that they do not work for everybody, as a number of the YouTube comments would attest. Some people do experience negative effects from IF and TRE, and this is hardly surprising given scientific research has already detected negative hormonal effects. Don’t expect the anti-CICO crowd to tell you about these negative effects. If they can’t accept the reality of calories in, calories out, what on Earth would they know about the potential pitfalls of, say, routinely raising counterregulatory hormones? Do they even know what counterregulatory hormones are? Even if there was only a single person on this entire planet who could be harmed by IF and TRE, then that person has every right to know these diets may not be the best for him or her. The reality is there are a lot more folks in the world who won't do well on these diets. Information about the potential pitfalls of IF and TRE shouldn't be withheld from these people because a bunch of IF and TRE fanboys and girls will have their remarkably fragile feelings hurt. Anyways, here's Dr Brad's video, enjoy. Ciao, Anthony. Anthony's new book, Not So Fast: The Truth About Intermittent Fasting & Time-Restricted Eating is now available at at Amazon and Lulu. Share https://substack.com/home/post/p-139452240
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Intermittent Fasting Myths Expertly Debunked in New Video
    As regular readers will know, I recently released a book on intermittent fasting (IF) and time restricted eating (TRE) called Not So Fast. The bulk of the book deals with the misleading fat loss/weight loss claims made for IF and TRE. Instead of relying on anecdote or forum bro-science, I carefully review each of the published, peer-reviewed studies that compared IF diets with more conventional calorie-restricted diets.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2369 Views
  • Meet the Mad Scientist Who wants to Fight Climate Change by Making Humans Smaller and Allergic to Meat.
    Yes, it's a crazy world.

    Anthony Colpo

    If WEF frontman Klaus Schwab is your archetypal Bond villain, S. Matthew Liao is your textbook classic evil nerd. The kind that should be locked away somewhere he can't hurt anybody.

    If you think I'm being harsh, read on.

    I first became aware of Laio, a 'bioethicist' at NYU, several years ago while researching the nonsensical Unified Cow Fart Theory of Global Warming put forward by people who think the ultimate in human nutrition is to eat like a rabbit.

    During the course of that research, I came upon a 2012 paper Liao co-authored with UK professors Anders Sandberg and Rebecca Roache titled “Human Engineering and Climate Change.”

    The paper begins by claiming "Anthropogenic climate change is arguably one of the biggest problems that confront us today."

    I can't disagree with that. The nonsensical claim that the minsicule 0.28% of global greenhouse gases attributable to humans has caused runaway warming is being used to implement measures with potentially dire consequences for both the global economy and human wellbeing.

    That is a big problem.

    This feigned concern for the environment, by the way, is organized and funded by the same people who masterminded the campaign to pollute the entire human species with toxic gene therapies ('Lockstep' author and dark money 'philanthropy’ outfit Rockefeller Foundation, for example, recently announced they were pumping $1 billion dollars to advance climate bribes “solutions”). These are the same people heavily invested in industries that pollute both our bodies and the environment with all manner of toxic porqueria.

    Climate change is not a science, but a religion. It is not comprised of known facts based on valid and reproducible experimentation, but a belief system resting entirely upon the highly fallible (and often fraudulent) practice of climate modelling. That modelling is used to issue doomsday forecasts, expressly designed to scare the population into compliance. Those who dare express skepticism of this nonsense are derided as "deniers," no matter how sound their arguments.

    Of course, Liao, Sandberg and Roache don't see climate change as a problem for the same reasons I do. Liao really seems to believe Planet Earth is in danger of becoming Planet Hot Pot With Extra Chili if we don't "do something" yesterday, and his co-authors are happy to tag along for the ride.

    A brief intro to this trio is in order.

    S. Matthew Liao is a bioethicist at NYU Global School of Public Health. As you’re about to see, Liao has a rather twisted set of ethics, and I find it quite worrying to read he “provides students with an education grounded in a broad conception of bioethics encompassing both medical and environmental ethics.”

    Anders Sandberg is a Swedish transhumanist and currently a senior research fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford which, along with Loma Linda University in the US, has produced most of the world’s peer-reviewed propaganda epidemiology erroneously claiming meat-free diets are better for you.

    In 2018, Sandberg published a paper on arxiv.org entitled "Blueberry Earth", which finally answered the pressing question that has bothered great minds for centuries:

    "What if the entire Earth was instantaneously replaced with an equal volume of closely packed, but uncompressed blueberries?"

    Seriously.

    Rebecca Roache, formerly of Oxford, is now a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at Royal Holloway, University of London. According to Wikipedia, Roache “is particularly noted for her work on swearing, which has featured in various media, such as the BBC.”

    If that’s not the resume of a trio with way too much time on their hands, I don’t know what is.

    So now you know the intellectual caliber of this brains trust, let’s see how it proposes to solve the non-existent problem of anthropogenic global warming.

    Noting that geoengineering is too risky (I think they just confirmed another conspiracy theory as fact), our heroic trio propose something every bit as dicey and stupid:

    Biomedical human engineering.

    According to Liao et al, this "involves biomedical modifications of humans so that they can mitigate and/or adapt to climate change." They further argue that this Frankensteinian idiocy "is potentially less risky" than geoengineering.

    As staunch believers in the nonsensical Unified Cow Fart Theory of Global Warming, the first order of business for our intrepid trio would be to create “Pharmacological meat intolerance.”

    Because "people often lack the motivation or willpower to give up eating red meat," they write, "a more realistic option might be to induce mild intolerance (akin, e.g., to milk intolerance) to these kinds of meat."

    "While meat intolerance is normally uncommon," they continue, oblivious to the fact they've just confirmed meat is an ideal, evolutionary-correct food for humans, "in principle, it could be induced by stimulating the immune system against common bovine proteins."

    "The immune system would then become primed to react to such proteins, and henceforth eating ‘eco-unfriendly’ food would induce unpleasant experiences," they continue.

    "A potentially safe and practical way of delivering such intolerance may be to produce ‘meat’ patches – akin to nicotine patches," they write. "We can produce patches for those animals that contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions and encourage people to use such patches."

    Kids, this is why you need to avoid drugs, vegan propaganda, and mad scientists masquerading as university professors.

    But our cray cray trio aren’t finished yet. Heck no.

    Their next brilliant idea for saving the planet is “Making humans smaller.”

    "[O]ther things being equal," they write, "the larger one is, the more food and energy one requires."

    With their brains farting like the winner of a baked beans eating contest, they further claim "a car uses more fuel per mile to carry a heavier person than a lighter person; more fabric is needed to clothe larger than smaller people; heavier people wear out shoes, carpets, and furniture more quickly than lighter people, and so on."

    So how do we make humans smaller so that their shoes won't wear out as quick?

    Oh, that's easy.

    "One way is through preimplantation genetic diagnosis" which "would simply involve rethinking the criteria for selecting which embryos to implant" during IVF.

    !?

    Another way "is to use hormone treatment either to affect somatotropin (growth hormone) levels or to trigger the closing of the epiphyseal plate (at the ends of bones) earlier than normal.”

    Hormone treatments are used for growth reduction in excessively tall children so, argue Liao et al, why not use them to make normal height kids shorter? I mean, what could possibly go wrong by subjecting growing bodies to unnecessary hormone treatments?

    But hey, why even wait for kids to get to that point? Why not target them before they've even popped out of mummy’s tummy?

    "[A] more speculative and controversial way of reducing adult height is to reduce birth weight," write our unabashed Masters of the Looniverse.

    "Drugs or nutrients that either reduce the expression of paternally imprinted genes, or increase the expression of maternally imprinted genes, could potentially regulate birth size."

    But again, why even wait to target kids in the womb? Why not stop them being conceived in the first place?

    Yep, it's time to roll out the overpopulation card.

    Which brings us to a dilemma: How to lower birth rates when almost one half of the world’s population already lives in countries with below replacement fertility?

    Oh, again, that's easy.

    Make women smarter!

    Hey, they said it, not me.

    They write there is “strong evidence that birth-rates are negatively correlated with adequate access to education for women” and "[a]t least in the US, women with low cognitive ability are more likely to have children before age 18."

    Even if that latter contention is true (it’s based on a single case-control study published in 2002), the median age for giving birth in the US is now 30.

    They’re basically saying that the number of kids a women has is negatively correlated with her intelligence. If you’re a woman who wants to have multiple kids, then they assume you can’t be the sharpest tool in the shed.

    But women are made to have children, and Feminism Inc. still hasn’t figured out how to sue Mother Nature for designating this role to females.

    So in a world already saturated with hook-up culture, abortion and morning-after pills, how do Liao et al propose to stop women making the ‘dumb’ choice of ensuring the continued propagation of the human species?

    Well, they don’t actually say. Not surprising, given their own intellectual output indicates they themselves have yet to discover an effective brain doping strategy. They do seem to be alluding to pharmaceutical means when they write “many parents are indeed happy to give their children cognitive enhancements," citing the widespread (and often misguided) use of Ritalin.

    They’re basically saying making kids smarter will make them want to avoid or minimize childbearing when older.

    In order to get people to go along with this bollocks, Liao et al suggest administering oxytocin in an attempt to increase people’s trust levels.

    Interestingly, when discussing how to convince people into cooperating with this nonsense despite its obvious downsides, the authors note “people are routinely vaccinated to prevent themselves and those around them from acquiring infectious diseases, even though vaccinations can sometimes even lead to death.”

    Thanks for confirming.

    The authors wrote in their paper, “To be clear, we shall not argue that human engineering ought to be adopted; such a claim would require far more exposition and argument than we have space for here.”

    The 2012 paper understandably caused controversy and aroused heated responses from both laymen and academics. When a Guardian writer asked shortly afterwards just what they were trying to achieve with their paper, all three authors and one of the journal’s editors were at pains to portray it as a philosophical “thought experiment” designed to stimulate discussion. When discussion of their patently absurd suggestions didn’t go the way they hoped, Sandberg and Roache accused critics of not having read the paper, which begs the question of just how critics knew of its numerous bizarre suggestions. For the record, I have read the paper in its entirety, and rather than find it an innocuous philosophical excursion, I find it disturbing that people could put forward such suggestions without any awareness of just how truly dystopian and dysfunctional they sound.

    Sandberg even told the reporter that in his work “with global catastrophic risks at the Future of Humanity Institute, climate change is at the lower end of concern. Certainly a problem, but unlikely to wipe out humanity.”

    So why the need for radically ridiculous suggestions to deal with a problem that’s been way overblown? Is this how academics entertain themselves when they’re bored?

    As you’re about to learn, despite the apparently token disclaimer in the 2012 paper, Liao in fact remains a highly enthusiastic promoter of the human engineering angle - and he may have some powerful sympathizers.

    From Poison Pricks to Toxic Ticks

    In 2016, Liao spoke at the 2016 World Science Festival, once again insisting we eat too much meat and that human engineering held the potential to solve this non-problem. If you watch the following snippet through to the end, you’ll hear Liao say “There’s this thing called the Lone Star tick where if it bites you, you will become allergic to meat. So that’s something we can do through human engineering. We can possibly address really big world problems through human engineering.”


    In 2017, he gave a TED Talk, which is a really popular forum for crazy ‘interesting’ people to get up on a stage and pretend they’re experts.

    A snippet of the talk, for which YouTube comments are understandably turned off, can be viewed below.



    Note the complete lack of shame or embarrassment as Liao recites the core principles of his insane 2012 paper. He can barely hide his glee, both at expressing his transhuman fantasies and being in the presence of people who don’t respond by telling him to check into an asylum. Note how when he mentions creating “mild intolerance to meat,” a handful of vetards in the transfixed audience begin applauding, and one even lets out a “wooo!”

    The audience also laughs along when Liao suggests preemptively screening for smaller IVF babies.

    They also applaud and chuckle approvingly when he suggests this carry on will allow parents the “liberty-enhancing option” of having “one large child, two medium-sized children, or three smaller children.” A liberty-enhancing option suggests an improvement over current restrictions, which isn’t the case.

    Ah, lunatics. Where would we be without them?

    While the video is basically a condensed rehash of his 2012 paper, there are a few new revelations. In an attempt to make “people” smarter (ever the PC sycophant, he doesn’t say “women” in front of the mixed-gender audience), he’s now embracing ritalin as a nootropic for kids, despite acknowledging in his 2012 paper it’s “for children with ADHD and certainly has side effects.”

    He’s also suggesting modafinil for kids, the long-term use of which has not been studied in children.

    Reckless is as stupid does.


    Enter the Biggest Lunatics of All

    It should come as no surprise to most readers that Liao’s demented “human engineering” suggestions have garnered favourable attention from the hypocritical parasite class that descends upon Davos every year to decide what’s best for the rest of us.

    In December 2020, the WEF unveiled its bioengineering framework in a presentation called “3 Scenarios for How Bioengineering Could Change Our World in 10 Years.” Among the highlights were edible vaccines grown in plants and various forms of genetic manipulation.

    That presentation was based off a WEF-sponsored academic paper titled Bioengineering Horizon Scan 2020.

    For the WEF’s 2021 Davos Summit, reported BioHack, Liao et al’s 2012 paper was cited during discussion of the ‘Planetary Health Diet’, a globalist initiative to shift humankind towards plant-and insect-based diets.

    Liao et al’s 2012 paper was also considered as a possible add-on to the Bioengineering Horizon Scan 2020 paper. However, perusal of the reference list shows no mention of the 2012 paper. It seems the Liao et al paper may have been too much of a hot potato for the WEF, which had to pull it’s original 2030 video that featured what may go down in history as the world’s worst PR line (“You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy”).

    It seems that just about every week, what was once considered a kooky conspiracy theory is confirmed as a genuine concern.

    Share

    https://anthonycolpo.substack.com/p/meet-the-mad-scientist-who-wants?utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
    Meet the Mad Scientist Who wants to Fight Climate Change by Making Humans Smaller and Allergic to Meat. Yes, it's a crazy world. Anthony Colpo If WEF frontman Klaus Schwab is your archetypal Bond villain, S. Matthew Liao is your textbook classic evil nerd. The kind that should be locked away somewhere he can't hurt anybody. If you think I'm being harsh, read on. I first became aware of Laio, a 'bioethicist' at NYU, several years ago while researching the nonsensical Unified Cow Fart Theory of Global Warming put forward by people who think the ultimate in human nutrition is to eat like a rabbit. During the course of that research, I came upon a 2012 paper Liao co-authored with UK professors Anders Sandberg and Rebecca Roache titled “Human Engineering and Climate Change.” The paper begins by claiming "Anthropogenic climate change is arguably one of the biggest problems that confront us today." I can't disagree with that. The nonsensical claim that the minsicule 0.28% of global greenhouse gases attributable to humans has caused runaway warming is being used to implement measures with potentially dire consequences for both the global economy and human wellbeing. That is a big problem. This feigned concern for the environment, by the way, is organized and funded by the same people who masterminded the campaign to pollute the entire human species with toxic gene therapies ('Lockstep' author and dark money 'philanthropy’ outfit Rockefeller Foundation, for example, recently announced they were pumping $1 billion dollars to advance climate bribes “solutions”). These are the same people heavily invested in industries that pollute both our bodies and the environment with all manner of toxic porqueria. Climate change is not a science, but a religion. It is not comprised of known facts based on valid and reproducible experimentation, but a belief system resting entirely upon the highly fallible (and often fraudulent) practice of climate modelling. That modelling is used to issue doomsday forecasts, expressly designed to scare the population into compliance. Those who dare express skepticism of this nonsense are derided as "deniers," no matter how sound their arguments. Of course, Liao, Sandberg and Roache don't see climate change as a problem for the same reasons I do. Liao really seems to believe Planet Earth is in danger of becoming Planet Hot Pot With Extra Chili if we don't "do something" yesterday, and his co-authors are happy to tag along for the ride. A brief intro to this trio is in order. S. Matthew Liao is a bioethicist at NYU Global School of Public Health. As you’re about to see, Liao has a rather twisted set of ethics, and I find it quite worrying to read he “provides students with an education grounded in a broad conception of bioethics encompassing both medical and environmental ethics.” Anders Sandberg is a Swedish transhumanist and currently a senior research fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford which, along with Loma Linda University in the US, has produced most of the world’s peer-reviewed propaganda epidemiology erroneously claiming meat-free diets are better for you. In 2018, Sandberg published a paper on arxiv.org entitled "Blueberry Earth", which finally answered the pressing question that has bothered great minds for centuries: "What if the entire Earth was instantaneously replaced with an equal volume of closely packed, but uncompressed blueberries?" Seriously. Rebecca Roache, formerly of Oxford, is now a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at Royal Holloway, University of London. According to Wikipedia, Roache “is particularly noted for her work on swearing, which has featured in various media, such as the BBC.” If that’s not the resume of a trio with way too much time on their hands, I don’t know what is. So now you know the intellectual caliber of this brains trust, let’s see how it proposes to solve the non-existent problem of anthropogenic global warming. Noting that geoengineering is too risky (I think they just confirmed another conspiracy theory as fact), our heroic trio propose something every bit as dicey and stupid: Biomedical human engineering. According to Liao et al, this "involves biomedical modifications of humans so that they can mitigate and/or adapt to climate change." They further argue that this Frankensteinian idiocy "is potentially less risky" than geoengineering. As staunch believers in the nonsensical Unified Cow Fart Theory of Global Warming, the first order of business for our intrepid trio would be to create “Pharmacological meat intolerance.” Because "people often lack the motivation or willpower to give up eating red meat," they write, "a more realistic option might be to induce mild intolerance (akin, e.g., to milk intolerance) to these kinds of meat." "While meat intolerance is normally uncommon," they continue, oblivious to the fact they've just confirmed meat is an ideal, evolutionary-correct food for humans, "in principle, it could be induced by stimulating the immune system against common bovine proteins." "The immune system would then become primed to react to such proteins, and henceforth eating ‘eco-unfriendly’ food would induce unpleasant experiences," they continue. "A potentially safe and practical way of delivering such intolerance may be to produce ‘meat’ patches – akin to nicotine patches," they write. "We can produce patches for those animals that contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions and encourage people to use such patches." Kids, this is why you need to avoid drugs, vegan propaganda, and mad scientists masquerading as university professors. But our cray cray trio aren’t finished yet. Heck no. Their next brilliant idea for saving the planet is “Making humans smaller.” "[O]ther things being equal," they write, "the larger one is, the more food and energy one requires." With their brains farting like the winner of a baked beans eating contest, they further claim "a car uses more fuel per mile to carry a heavier person than a lighter person; more fabric is needed to clothe larger than smaller people; heavier people wear out shoes, carpets, and furniture more quickly than lighter people, and so on." So how do we make humans smaller so that their shoes won't wear out as quick? Oh, that's easy. "One way is through preimplantation genetic diagnosis" which "would simply involve rethinking the criteria for selecting which embryos to implant" during IVF. !? Another way "is to use hormone treatment either to affect somatotropin (growth hormone) levels or to trigger the closing of the epiphyseal plate (at the ends of bones) earlier than normal.” Hormone treatments are used for growth reduction in excessively tall children so, argue Liao et al, why not use them to make normal height kids shorter? I mean, what could possibly go wrong by subjecting growing bodies to unnecessary hormone treatments? But hey, why even wait for kids to get to that point? Why not target them before they've even popped out of mummy’s tummy? "[A] more speculative and controversial way of reducing adult height is to reduce birth weight," write our unabashed Masters of the Looniverse. "Drugs or nutrients that either reduce the expression of paternally imprinted genes, or increase the expression of maternally imprinted genes, could potentially regulate birth size." But again, why even wait to target kids in the womb? Why not stop them being conceived in the first place? Yep, it's time to roll out the overpopulation card. Which brings us to a dilemma: How to lower birth rates when almost one half of the world’s population already lives in countries with below replacement fertility? Oh, again, that's easy. Make women smarter! Hey, they said it, not me. They write there is “strong evidence that birth-rates are negatively correlated with adequate access to education for women” and "[a]t least in the US, women with low cognitive ability are more likely to have children before age 18." Even if that latter contention is true (it’s based on a single case-control study published in 2002), the median age for giving birth in the US is now 30. They’re basically saying that the number of kids a women has is negatively correlated with her intelligence. If you’re a woman who wants to have multiple kids, then they assume you can’t be the sharpest tool in the shed. But women are made to have children, and Feminism Inc. still hasn’t figured out how to sue Mother Nature for designating this role to females. So in a world already saturated with hook-up culture, abortion and morning-after pills, how do Liao et al propose to stop women making the ‘dumb’ choice of ensuring the continued propagation of the human species? Well, they don’t actually say. Not surprising, given their own intellectual output indicates they themselves have yet to discover an effective brain doping strategy. They do seem to be alluding to pharmaceutical means when they write “many parents are indeed happy to give their children cognitive enhancements," citing the widespread (and often misguided) use of Ritalin. They’re basically saying making kids smarter will make them want to avoid or minimize childbearing when older. In order to get people to go along with this bollocks, Liao et al suggest administering oxytocin in an attempt to increase people’s trust levels. Interestingly, when discussing how to convince people into cooperating with this nonsense despite its obvious downsides, the authors note “people are routinely vaccinated to prevent themselves and those around them from acquiring infectious diseases, even though vaccinations can sometimes even lead to death.” Thanks for confirming. The authors wrote in their paper, “To be clear, we shall not argue that human engineering ought to be adopted; such a claim would require far more exposition and argument than we have space for here.” The 2012 paper understandably caused controversy and aroused heated responses from both laymen and academics. When a Guardian writer asked shortly afterwards just what they were trying to achieve with their paper, all three authors and one of the journal’s editors were at pains to portray it as a philosophical “thought experiment” designed to stimulate discussion. When discussion of their patently absurd suggestions didn’t go the way they hoped, Sandberg and Roache accused critics of not having read the paper, which begs the question of just how critics knew of its numerous bizarre suggestions. For the record, I have read the paper in its entirety, and rather than find it an innocuous philosophical excursion, I find it disturbing that people could put forward such suggestions without any awareness of just how truly dystopian and dysfunctional they sound. Sandberg even told the reporter that in his work “with global catastrophic risks at the Future of Humanity Institute, climate change is at the lower end of concern. Certainly a problem, but unlikely to wipe out humanity.” So why the need for radically ridiculous suggestions to deal with a problem that’s been way overblown? Is this how academics entertain themselves when they’re bored? As you’re about to learn, despite the apparently token disclaimer in the 2012 paper, Liao in fact remains a highly enthusiastic promoter of the human engineering angle - and he may have some powerful sympathizers. From Poison Pricks to Toxic Ticks In 2016, Liao spoke at the 2016 World Science Festival, once again insisting we eat too much meat and that human engineering held the potential to solve this non-problem. If you watch the following snippet through to the end, you’ll hear Liao say “There’s this thing called the Lone Star tick where if it bites you, you will become allergic to meat. So that’s something we can do through human engineering. We can possibly address really big world problems through human engineering.” In 2017, he gave a TED Talk, which is a really popular forum for crazy ‘interesting’ people to get up on a stage and pretend they’re experts. A snippet of the talk, for which YouTube comments are understandably turned off, can be viewed below. Note the complete lack of shame or embarrassment as Liao recites the core principles of his insane 2012 paper. He can barely hide his glee, both at expressing his transhuman fantasies and being in the presence of people who don’t respond by telling him to check into an asylum. Note how when he mentions creating “mild intolerance to meat,” a handful of vetards in the transfixed audience begin applauding, and one even lets out a “wooo!” The audience also laughs along when Liao suggests preemptively screening for smaller IVF babies. They also applaud and chuckle approvingly when he suggests this carry on will allow parents the “liberty-enhancing option” of having “one large child, two medium-sized children, or three smaller children.” A liberty-enhancing option suggests an improvement over current restrictions, which isn’t the case. Ah, lunatics. Where would we be without them? While the video is basically a condensed rehash of his 2012 paper, there are a few new revelations. In an attempt to make “people” smarter (ever the PC sycophant, he doesn’t say “women” in front of the mixed-gender audience), he’s now embracing ritalin as a nootropic for kids, despite acknowledging in his 2012 paper it’s “for children with ADHD and certainly has side effects.” He’s also suggesting modafinil for kids, the long-term use of which has not been studied in children. Reckless is as stupid does. Enter the Biggest Lunatics of All It should come as no surprise to most readers that Liao’s demented “human engineering” suggestions have garnered favourable attention from the hypocritical parasite class that descends upon Davos every year to decide what’s best for the rest of us. In December 2020, the WEF unveiled its bioengineering framework in a presentation called “3 Scenarios for How Bioengineering Could Change Our World in 10 Years.” Among the highlights were edible vaccines grown in plants and various forms of genetic manipulation. That presentation was based off a WEF-sponsored academic paper titled Bioengineering Horizon Scan 2020. For the WEF’s 2021 Davos Summit, reported BioHack, Liao et al’s 2012 paper was cited during discussion of the ‘Planetary Health Diet’, a globalist initiative to shift humankind towards plant-and insect-based diets. Liao et al’s 2012 paper was also considered as a possible add-on to the Bioengineering Horizon Scan 2020 paper. However, perusal of the reference list shows no mention of the 2012 paper. It seems the Liao et al paper may have been too much of a hot potato for the WEF, which had to pull it’s original 2030 video that featured what may go down in history as the world’s worst PR line (“You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy”). It seems that just about every week, what was once considered a kooky conspiracy theory is confirmed as a genuine concern. Share https://anthonycolpo.substack.com/p/meet-the-mad-scientist-who-wants?utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3052 Views
  • Vegetarianism/Veganism is a Globalist Trojan Horse With No Scientific Backing
    Here's what happens when you remove studies conducted by biased religious zealots from vegetarian research.

    Anthony Colpo

    The globalists are using a number of Trojan horses to advance their agendas of population control and "global governance" (the sanitized UN term for worldwide tyranny).

    Among these Trojan Horses are fake pandemics, climate change and "plant-based" eating, which is the PR-friendly term for vegetarianism and its histrionic offshoot, veganism.

    The monumental irony with the climate change and plant-based diet phenomena is that believers typically consider themselves not only to be enlightened, but sticking it to the man/corporatism/fascism/etc.

    The reality is they are being played like puppets by the very forces they think they're rebelling against. Individuals militantly pushing these paradigms, along with all those who became zealous Covidiots during the fake pandemic, are a modern-day embodiment of the "useful idiot."

    That derogatory term came into widespread use during the Cold War era to describe non-communists that fell for communist propaganda and psychological manipulation.

    Mariam-Webster defines "useful idiot" as "a naive or credulous person who can be manipulated or exploited to advance a cause or political agenda."

    The Cambridge Dictionary defines a useful idiot as "a person who is easy to persuade to do, say, or believe things that help a particular group or another person politically."

    Follow the Science - Not the Manipulative Propaganda

    In yet another shining testament to human gullibility, millions of people have been convinced that nature's most nutrient-dense and evolutionary-correct food - meat - is in fact bad for humans. They have been further conned that avoiding this incredibly healthful food will prevent disease and extend longevity. They have even been convinced that avoiding a food hominids have been eating with great success for over 2.5 million years will somehow make us more peaceful and spiritually elevated beings.

    The latter argument can easily be dismissed with a few choice names: Adolf Hitler (vegetarian and infamous megalomaniac), Harley "Durianrider" Johnstone (raw vegan and psychopath/narcissist/fraudster/stalker/cyberbully/alleged sex predator/utter scumbag), and Dan Hoyt (vegan restauranteur to the stars and serial public masturbator).

    The alleged health benefits of meatless malnutrition, in contrast, are given credence by a facade of 'science'. Most of this pseudoscience takes the form of epidemiological prospective and cross-sectional studies in which the vegetarian participants allegedly experienced superior health outcomes over time when compared to non-vegetarian subjects.

    Most of this epidemiological pseudoscience emanates from two sources:

    1) Loma Linda University, which is run by the Seventh-day Adventist religion, whose 'prophetess' Ellen G White espoused a vegetarian diet, and;

    2) Oxford University, home to the Oxford Vegetarians, whose members' names feature on many pro-vegetarian 'studies' (Timothy Key and Paul Appleby are two prominent examples). By the way, another infamous Oxford alumni is Peter Singer, the 'bioethicist' (a term used to describe people with incredibly twisted, anti-human ethics) who has waxed much lyrical about animal welfare yet sees nothing wrong with bestiality or pedophilia.

    The studies pumped out by these entities are heavily-biased, confounder-prone and easily-debunked garbage that I've dismantled numerous times over the years.

    However, it's always nice to see published confirmation of what I've been saying all along.

    In 2014, the International Journal of Cardiology published a systematic review and meta-analysis you almost certainly haven't heard about because it doesn't support the globalist anti-meat agenda.

    Authored by UK researchers not from Oxford, it featured a pooled analysis of eight studies encompassing 183,321 participants. Six were prospective cohort studies and 2 were observational cohort studies "where it was not clear if their design was prospective or retrospective," which should give you some idea of the quality of research used to prop up "plant-based" eating. One of those studies involved Japanese monks, the other SDAs in the Netherlands. Neither featured a non-vegetarian 'control' sample within the same population; instead, these studies simply used standardized mortality rates for the surrounding population.

    Adjustment for confounders was poor. Six studies adjusted for potential confounders, while the use of adjustment was not clear in the two aforementioned studies. Only two studies adjusted for BMI, and five adjusted for smoking status.

    True adherence to vegetarian or non-vegetarian diets in these studies is unknown, as some involved a single questionnaire administered at the start of the study.

    The results?

    All-cause mortality: Three of 8 studies involved Seventh-day Adventist cohorts. All three Adventist cohorts demonstrated significant associations between vegetarian diet and reduced all-cause mortality, whereas the 4 non-Adventist studies examining all-cause death did not show any mortality reduction in vegetarians.

    Ischaemic heart disease or cardiac adverse events: Two of the 3 Adventist cohorts demonstrated significant associations between vegetarian diet and reduced cardiac adverse events, whereas the non-Adventist studies each failed to show any benefit in vegetarians.

    Cerebrovascular disease (stroke): One Adventist cohort showed significant reduction in cerebrovascular events while the other did not; when pooled there was no significant difference. There was no significant difference in cerebrovascular disease in any of the four non-Adventist studies.

    The authors concluded: "Data from observational studies indicates that there is modest cardiovascular benefit, but no clear reduction in overall mortality associated with a vegetarian diet. This evidence of benefit is driven mainly by studies in SDA, whereas the effect of vegetarian diet in other cohorts remains unproven."

    A 2016 meta-analysis of 108 cross-sectional and prospective cohort studies by Italian researchers returned a similar finding.

    Among Adventist vegetarian cohorts, the pooled risk of all-cause mortality was 0.84; among Non-Adventist vegetarians it was 1.04 (less than 1.0 represents reduced risk, greater than 1.0 represents increased risk).

    For Adventist vegetarians, the pooled risk of breast cancer mortality was 0.79; among Non-Adventist vegetarians it was 1.40.

    Among studies rated as medium quality, the all-cause mortality risk for vegetarians was 0.93; in studies rated as high quality, the risk was 1.05.

    So vegetarian diets only show a mortality benefit in lower quality studies involving Seventh-day Adventists.

    Why is that?

    Confounders, my little grasshoppers, confounders.

    SDA members are encouraged to not only avoid meat, but to abstain from smoking, non-medicinal drugs and alcohol, and to have regular exercise, sufficient rest and maintain stable psychosocial relationships.

    As with most religions, adherence to these recommendations varies widely. Researchers have found intensity of religious involvement (e.g. higher church attendance) correlates with lower rates of substance abuse, higher likelihood of marriage and lower rate of divorce, and lower all-cause mortality.

    As the UK researchers noted, "the non-dietary factors (confounders) in SDA lifestyle may be responsible for the risk reduction among the vegetarian studies."

    In other words, the SDA studies are not showing a health benefit of vegetarianism; they are showing a health benefit of religiosity. More devout followers are not just more likely to abstain from meat - they are more likely to abstain from smoking, drugs, overeating and other intemperate lifestyle practices.

    While they are by no means guilt-free entities with exemplary ethics, the fact remains most major religions do feature at least some beneficial lifestyle prescriptions, including temperance, moderation, monogamy/avoidance of promiscuity and charity/community above wealth accumulation/self-aggrandizement.

    Few people want to admit it in this self-entitled, instant gratification-oriented age, but there's a lot to be said for not drinking and eating to excess, not smoking and doing drugs, and not staying out late indiscriminately fighting and fornicating.

    There's also much to be admired about striving to forge stronger family and community bonds instead of trying to outrank other attention-seeking wankers on social media.

    It's sad that humans need theologies to get them to embrace what should be plain commonsense but, hey, we are talking the same species that made crack cocaine and "brown showers" a thing.

    Discussion

    Compassion - which motivates people to relieve the physical and psychological pains of others - is one of the most beautiful and admirable of all feelings.

    It is also one of the most dangerous, because it is so easily manipulated by conniving psychopaths. Witness the ease with which they used the "we're all in this together" lie to con people into readily embracing COVID tyranny. GloboPedo cynically exploits concern for the environment to impose freedom- and economy-destroying regulations on society. The globalists exploit concern for animal welfare to impose harmful dietary recommendations that will ultimately render us sicker and weaker.

    Globalists know full well vegetarianism and veganism are scams. Heck, they are the driving force behind those scams. Their farcical climate change get-togethers feature lavish meat- and dairy-rich dishes.

    The Conference of the Parties (COP) is the unelected "decision-making body responsible for monitoring and reviewing the implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change." Every year, traitors from countries all around the world fly in on gas-guzzling private jets to the host city and pretend to be concerned about the environment, while they get down to the real business of enjoying lavish gala meals and prostitutes at taxpayer expense.

    The menu at the 2021 COP26 in Glasgow was almost 60 per cent meat or dairy dishes. The same crowd that wants you and I to abstain from meat and increase our plant and bug intake dined on such luxuriant items as burgers, venison, beef ramen, haggis, farmed salmon, and Scottish buffalo mozzarella pizza.


    Brought to you by the same evil cretins who insist by 2030 you will own nothing and be happy.
    Globalists don't give two turds about the environment nor animals. Their idea of environmental conservation is getting rid of the rest of us to 'offset' their lavish and environmentally-harmful lifestyles.

    Stop being a useless idiot. Stop succumbing to the patently fraudulent propaganda of megalomaniac psychopaths. Stop unwittingly helping them to enact their agendas. If you want to show compassion for animals, adopt one from a shelter and treat it like the precious gift it is; chances are it will prove to be the best friend you ever had.

    Share

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-144829378
    Vegetarianism/Veganism is a Globalist Trojan Horse With No Scientific Backing Here's what happens when you remove studies conducted by biased religious zealots from vegetarian research. Anthony Colpo The globalists are using a number of Trojan horses to advance their agendas of population control and "global governance" (the sanitized UN term for worldwide tyranny). Among these Trojan Horses are fake pandemics, climate change and "plant-based" eating, which is the PR-friendly term for vegetarianism and its histrionic offshoot, veganism. The monumental irony with the climate change and plant-based diet phenomena is that believers typically consider themselves not only to be enlightened, but sticking it to the man/corporatism/fascism/etc. The reality is they are being played like puppets by the very forces they think they're rebelling against. Individuals militantly pushing these paradigms, along with all those who became zealous Covidiots during the fake pandemic, are a modern-day embodiment of the "useful idiot." That derogatory term came into widespread use during the Cold War era to describe non-communists that fell for communist propaganda and psychological manipulation. Mariam-Webster defines "useful idiot" as "a naive or credulous person who can be manipulated or exploited to advance a cause or political agenda." The Cambridge Dictionary defines a useful idiot as "a person who is easy to persuade to do, say, or believe things that help a particular group or another person politically." Follow the Science - Not the Manipulative Propaganda In yet another shining testament to human gullibility, millions of people have been convinced that nature's most nutrient-dense and evolutionary-correct food - meat - is in fact bad for humans. They have been further conned that avoiding this incredibly healthful food will prevent disease and extend longevity. They have even been convinced that avoiding a food hominids have been eating with great success for over 2.5 million years will somehow make us more peaceful and spiritually elevated beings. The latter argument can easily be dismissed with a few choice names: Adolf Hitler (vegetarian and infamous megalomaniac), Harley "Durianrider" Johnstone (raw vegan and psychopath/narcissist/fraudster/stalker/cyberbully/alleged sex predator/utter scumbag), and Dan Hoyt (vegan restauranteur to the stars and serial public masturbator). The alleged health benefits of meatless malnutrition, in contrast, are given credence by a facade of 'science'. Most of this pseudoscience takes the form of epidemiological prospective and cross-sectional studies in which the vegetarian participants allegedly experienced superior health outcomes over time when compared to non-vegetarian subjects. Most of this epidemiological pseudoscience emanates from two sources: 1) Loma Linda University, which is run by the Seventh-day Adventist religion, whose 'prophetess' Ellen G White espoused a vegetarian diet, and; 2) Oxford University, home to the Oxford Vegetarians, whose members' names feature on many pro-vegetarian 'studies' (Timothy Key and Paul Appleby are two prominent examples). By the way, another infamous Oxford alumni is Peter Singer, the 'bioethicist' (a term used to describe people with incredibly twisted, anti-human ethics) who has waxed much lyrical about animal welfare yet sees nothing wrong with bestiality or pedophilia. The studies pumped out by these entities are heavily-biased, confounder-prone and easily-debunked garbage that I've dismantled numerous times over the years. However, it's always nice to see published confirmation of what I've been saying all along. In 2014, the International Journal of Cardiology published a systematic review and meta-analysis you almost certainly haven't heard about because it doesn't support the globalist anti-meat agenda. Authored by UK researchers not from Oxford, it featured a pooled analysis of eight studies encompassing 183,321 participants. Six were prospective cohort studies and 2 were observational cohort studies "where it was not clear if their design was prospective or retrospective," which should give you some idea of the quality of research used to prop up "plant-based" eating. One of those studies involved Japanese monks, the other SDAs in the Netherlands. Neither featured a non-vegetarian 'control' sample within the same population; instead, these studies simply used standardized mortality rates for the surrounding population. Adjustment for confounders was poor. Six studies adjusted for potential confounders, while the use of adjustment was not clear in the two aforementioned studies. Only two studies adjusted for BMI, and five adjusted for smoking status. True adherence to vegetarian or non-vegetarian diets in these studies is unknown, as some involved a single questionnaire administered at the start of the study. The results? All-cause mortality: Three of 8 studies involved Seventh-day Adventist cohorts. All three Adventist cohorts demonstrated significant associations between vegetarian diet and reduced all-cause mortality, whereas the 4 non-Adventist studies examining all-cause death did not show any mortality reduction in vegetarians. Ischaemic heart disease or cardiac adverse events: Two of the 3 Adventist cohorts demonstrated significant associations between vegetarian diet and reduced cardiac adverse events, whereas the non-Adventist studies each failed to show any benefit in vegetarians. Cerebrovascular disease (stroke): One Adventist cohort showed significant reduction in cerebrovascular events while the other did not; when pooled there was no significant difference. There was no significant difference in cerebrovascular disease in any of the four non-Adventist studies. The authors concluded: "Data from observational studies indicates that there is modest cardiovascular benefit, but no clear reduction in overall mortality associated with a vegetarian diet. This evidence of benefit is driven mainly by studies in SDA, whereas the effect of vegetarian diet in other cohorts remains unproven." A 2016 meta-analysis of 108 cross-sectional and prospective cohort studies by Italian researchers returned a similar finding. Among Adventist vegetarian cohorts, the pooled risk of all-cause mortality was 0.84; among Non-Adventist vegetarians it was 1.04 (less than 1.0 represents reduced risk, greater than 1.0 represents increased risk). For Adventist vegetarians, the pooled risk of breast cancer mortality was 0.79; among Non-Adventist vegetarians it was 1.40. Among studies rated as medium quality, the all-cause mortality risk for vegetarians was 0.93; in studies rated as high quality, the risk was 1.05. So vegetarian diets only show a mortality benefit in lower quality studies involving Seventh-day Adventists. Why is that? Confounders, my little grasshoppers, confounders. SDA members are encouraged to not only avoid meat, but to abstain from smoking, non-medicinal drugs and alcohol, and to have regular exercise, sufficient rest and maintain stable psychosocial relationships. As with most religions, adherence to these recommendations varies widely. Researchers have found intensity of religious involvement (e.g. higher church attendance) correlates with lower rates of substance abuse, higher likelihood of marriage and lower rate of divorce, and lower all-cause mortality. As the UK researchers noted, "the non-dietary factors (confounders) in SDA lifestyle may be responsible for the risk reduction among the vegetarian studies." In other words, the SDA studies are not showing a health benefit of vegetarianism; they are showing a health benefit of religiosity. More devout followers are not just more likely to abstain from meat - they are more likely to abstain from smoking, drugs, overeating and other intemperate lifestyle practices. While they are by no means guilt-free entities with exemplary ethics, the fact remains most major religions do feature at least some beneficial lifestyle prescriptions, including temperance, moderation, monogamy/avoidance of promiscuity and charity/community above wealth accumulation/self-aggrandizement. Few people want to admit it in this self-entitled, instant gratification-oriented age, but there's a lot to be said for not drinking and eating to excess, not smoking and doing drugs, and not staying out late indiscriminately fighting and fornicating. There's also much to be admired about striving to forge stronger family and community bonds instead of trying to outrank other attention-seeking wankers on social media. It's sad that humans need theologies to get them to embrace what should be plain commonsense but, hey, we are talking the same species that made crack cocaine and "brown showers" a thing. Discussion Compassion - which motivates people to relieve the physical and psychological pains of others - is one of the most beautiful and admirable of all feelings. It is also one of the most dangerous, because it is so easily manipulated by conniving psychopaths. Witness the ease with which they used the "we're all in this together" lie to con people into readily embracing COVID tyranny. GloboPedo cynically exploits concern for the environment to impose freedom- and economy-destroying regulations on society. The globalists exploit concern for animal welfare to impose harmful dietary recommendations that will ultimately render us sicker and weaker. Globalists know full well vegetarianism and veganism are scams. Heck, they are the driving force behind those scams. Their farcical climate change get-togethers feature lavish meat- and dairy-rich dishes. The Conference of the Parties (COP) is the unelected "decision-making body responsible for monitoring and reviewing the implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change." Every year, traitors from countries all around the world fly in on gas-guzzling private jets to the host city and pretend to be concerned about the environment, while they get down to the real business of enjoying lavish gala meals and prostitutes at taxpayer expense. The menu at the 2021 COP26 in Glasgow was almost 60 per cent meat or dairy dishes. The same crowd that wants you and I to abstain from meat and increase our plant and bug intake dined on such luxuriant items as burgers, venison, beef ramen, haggis, farmed salmon, and Scottish buffalo mozzarella pizza. Brought to you by the same evil cretins who insist by 2030 you will own nothing and be happy. Globalists don't give two turds about the environment nor animals. Their idea of environmental conservation is getting rid of the rest of us to 'offset' their lavish and environmentally-harmful lifestyles. Stop being a useless idiot. Stop succumbing to the patently fraudulent propaganda of megalomaniac psychopaths. Stop unwittingly helping them to enact their agendas. If you want to show compassion for animals, adopt one from a shelter and treat it like the precious gift it is; chances are it will prove to be the best friend you ever had. Share https://substack.com/home/post/p-144829378
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Vegetarianism/Veganism is a Globalist Trojan Horse With No Scientific Backing
    Here's what happens when you remove studies conducted by biased religious zealots from vegetarian research.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2511 Views
  • Why the Official AIDS Story is a Complete Crock
    The Great Rebranding, 1980s-Style: HIV Was a Sham, Just Like Sars-Cov-2

    Anthony Colpo

    All you youngsters born after the Glomesh era have surely heard of AIDS, but probably have no idea of just how big a deal it was when it burst onto the scene in the early 1980s.

    It was the biggest show in town. Sure, it wasn't as big a deal as what COVID would later be. It wasn't accompanied by 'vaccine' mandates, lockdowns or heavily-armed goons bashing people for sitting peacefully in the park. Instead of masks, there were condoms and paper toilet seat covers. There was no social distancing, only admonitions to avoid unprotected sex and not share needles when shooting up.

    Fauci was there, front and center, but he wasn't telling us to wear two condoms at once. Instead, he was pimping a toxic concoction known as AZT.

    Right off the bat, nothing made sense about the AIDs charade. It does make sense in hindsight if you view it as a giant test run, an exercise in spreading 'virus' hysteria. The HIV/AIDS charade confirmed most people don't ask questions, and those who do can be quickly shouted over and marginalized as "deniers," "conspiracists" and menaces to society. It also confirmed that not only could people be convinced to take toxic drugs in response to an overblown 'pandemic' scare, but they could be manipulated into rabidly demanding their expedited release.

    It was an exercise whose lessons would prove valuable come December 2019.

    AIDS stands for "acquired immunodeficiency syndrome." In other words, you somehow "acquired" an immune system that, like a tired car engine with 300,000 km on the clock, was about to blow its last gasket.

    It was first identified in 1981 in Los Angeles when the CDC reported on five young homosexual men suffering pneumonia caused by a protozoon known as Pneumocystis carinii.

    This microbe is ordinarily innocuous and, in fact, found in nearly all healthy persons. For reasons unknown it had suddenly become lethal - an outcome previously seen only in persons whose immune systems were being undermined by immunosuppressant therapy, cancer, or severe malnourishment.

    This same pneumonia promptly appeared in New York, together with several dozen cases of an unusual skin cancer called Kaposi's Sarcoma which had previously been almost unknown in the US.

    Eventually Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and Kaposi's Sarcoma were interpreted as secondary manifestations of an underlying immune-system deficiency of unknown origin which was eventually dubbed "acquired immunodeficiency disease syndrome" or AIDS.

    The bodies of AIDS patients seemed to have just given up. Patients suffered severe weight loss and lethargy and were so immune deficient that even a minor infection threatened to kill them.

    The first few thousand cases were found mostly in homosexual males, and the media bombarded us with images of emaciated gay blokes on the verge of death and barely able to sit upright. Initially, the condition was referred to as GRID (gay-related immune deficiency). Outside of scientific circles, it came to be known as the "gay plague" and religious fundamentalists trumpeted the phenomenon as God's revenge on evil sodomites.

    That began to change in 1983, when AIDS was found to affect heterosexual women, which caused the fear porn to increase by an order of magnitude. As with COVID, health authorities treated us to an orgy of fearmongering and doomsday predictions - and the sheeple lapped it up.

    In 1986, Dr. Donald Ian Macdonald, then Acting Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services, described "the escalating AIDS epidemic" as "staggering," "devastating" and a "huge problem."

    Dr. Halfdan Mahler, Danish physician and head of the World Health Organization, called AIDS "a health disaster of pandemic proportions" and said he could "not imagine a worse health problem in this century."

    "We stand nakedly in front of a very serious pandemic as mortal as any pandemic there ever has been," Mahler bizarrely quipped. Why he would don his birthday suit instead of a Hazmat one in the face of such a mortal pandemic was never explained, but that's globalist bureaucrats for you.

    "I don't know of any greater killer than AIDS, not to speak of its psychological, social and economic maiming," continued Mahler, who after leaving WHO became director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

    Not to be outdone, in 1987 Harvard biology professor Stephen Jay Gould, said AIDS was "potentially, the greatest natural tragedy in human history." He warned "AIDS may run through the entire population, and may carry off a quarter or more of us" (in 1987, the world population was just over 5 billion; it now stands at over 8 billion).

    That same year, Gallup asked an open-ended question about what Americans saw as the most urgent health problem facing the US. Despite the fact AIDS has never even come close to being the leading cause of death in the US, more than two-thirds of Americans said AIDS. The disease continued as the top pick until 2000.

    According to Gallop polls conducted in 1987, most Americans (60%) agreed people with AIDS should be made to carry a card noting they had the disease, and one in three (33%) agreed employers should be allowed to fire employees who had AIDS. Twenty-one percent of Americans said people with AIDS should be isolated from the rest of society.

    An earlier LA Times poll from 1985 found more than half of US adults supported quarantining AIDS patients, nearly half would approve of ID cards for those testing positive for "AIDS antibodies," and one in seven favored tattooing those with the disease.

    People never learn.

    A Disease Looking For a Cause

    Authorities had presented us with a new public health scare, but no causal agent. No-one knew what caused the immune systems of AIDS patients to become so deficient.

    Was it a new microbe? A new drug scourge? God's revenge for Abba and Disco Duck?

    No-one knew.

    At least officially.

    In reality, authorities knew damn well what was going on.

    But they didn’t tell us. Instead, they eventually claimed AIDS was the result of a 'novel virus' that, in 1986, was named "human immunodeficiency virus,” or HIV.

    The 'novel virus' paradigm holds that a 'zoonotic' virus wakes up one day, and decides to "jump" from apes/bats/pangolins/garden gnomes to humans. This novel virus then acts like a seventeen year old that has been given the keys to an alcohol-filled mansion while mom and dad head off for a weekend vacation. However, the virus has no friends to party with. So he first has to convert to a 'human' form of the virus, then he has to begin self-replicating in order to build a social circle. Once this is done, the virions party so hard that the host becomes sick. The virions conclude their current host is no fun, so they go looking for a new host to party inside. The process repeats itself, and before you know it, there's a 'pandemic' going on with squillions of little virions pogo-dancing in global synchrony and chanting "the roof, the roof, the roof is on fire!!" while trashing everything in sight.

    Viruses these days, sheesh.

    Setting aside the glaring fallacies of the virus 'isolation' charade, the 'novel virus = pandemic’ theory is an inherent load of cobblers.

    Outbreaks of what look to be infectious illnesses don't just happen for no reason. There has to be some facilitating factor.

    AIDS became a big thing in the early 1980s, and we know that initially, the majority of patients were gay males. African-Americans were also known to be at increased risk.

    Even if butt sex is an especially efficient method of transmitting STDs, it doesn't explain why AIDS became a phenomenon in the 1980s. After all, both sodomy and homosexuality have been around as long as humans have. Heck, even apes have been observed taking rides on the Hershey Highway.

    Which begs the question: What other events with the potential for dire impact on health occurred around the same time as the AIDS outbreak?

    The Other Crack Rears Its Ugly Head

    Thanks in no small part to Uncle Sam and his ability to conveniently look the other way when it suits his financial and geopolitical interests*, the early 1980s saw a massive flood of cocaine into the US, with urban black neighborhoods the worst afflicted.

    So plentiful was the supply of cocaine, drug dealers came up with a way to make it even cheaper and more addictive in order to expand their customer base.

    Freebase is the name given to the original form of smokable coke, which resulted in a more intense high than snorting. While this constituted an obvious selling point, the process for making freebase required ether, making it notoriously volatile and dangerous to produce. In a famed 1980 incident, comedian Richard Pryor suffered severe and life-threatening burns after mixing cocaine with ether at his home; the mixture promptly exploded in his face.

    Freebase cocaine seems to have first surfaced in the US in the mid-1970s. Around 1980, a less volatile but similar process was developed by dealers in which cocaine was dissolved in a solution of water and baking soda and then dried out into "crack rocks." As the rocks are heated, it makes a crackling sound, hence the name.

    As early as 1981, reports of crack appeared in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, and in the Caribbean. Its use quickly spread to other major US cities, and by 1987, crack was reportedly available in DC and all but four states in the Union.

    "In some major cities, such as New York, Detroit, and Philadelphia, one dosage unit of crack could be obtained for as little as $2.50," writes the US DEA. "Never before had any form of cocaine been available at such low prices and at such high purity."

    The crack epidemic dramatically increased the number of Americans addicted to cocaine, as well as the number of cocaine-related hospital emergencies. In 1985, cocaine-related hospital emergencies rose by 12 percent, from 23,500 to 26,300. In 1986, these incidents increased 110 percent, from 26,300 to 55,200.

    The crack cocaine explosion, you'll notice, overlaps neatly with the AIDS "explosion."

    The House of Representatives Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control held cocaine hearings in July, October, and November 1980. Dr. Robert Byck, who along with his colleagues conducted the first scientific studies of cocaine plasma levels after coca paste smoking, testified at the hearings. He warned that the heavy use of smokable freebase cocaine, employed by an estimated 10 percent of cocaine users, was about to change. He warned Congress that the US was about to experience the worst epidemic of drug abuse the country had ever seen. Byck predicted the use of smoked cocaine in the 1980s would match the widespread use of "speed" (methamphetamine) in the 1960s. He urged Congress and the National Institute on Drug Abuse to mount an education and prevention campaign to avert this impending epidemic.

    No such campaign was undertaken.

    "The emergence of crack cocaine use in the United States during the mid-1980s was one of the most significant public health problems of that era," note Watkins et al in a 1998 paper. "Crack use contributed to a series of sexually transmitted disease epidemics, to epidemic increases in violent injuries and homicides, and to significant increases in the incidence and prevalence of cocaine addiction. Despite these threats to health and safety, a national public health campaign to counter crack-related morbidity and mortality was never mounted."

    Is that because authorities were already committed to carrying out a manufactured 'HIV' crisis?

    Crack, Risky Sex, and 'HIV'

    A 1994 NEJM article reported an analysis of 1,967 people recruited from inner-city neighborhoods in New York, Miami, and San Francisco. All respondents reported never having injected drugs, however 1,137 were regular smokers of crack. The remaining 830 people reported never having smoked crack.

    The results for crack users weren't pretty.

    Female crack users were 4.1 times more likely to have been raped, and 1.6 times more likely to have had their first vaginal or anal sex encounter before 13 years of age.

    Both male and female crack users reported a higher number of sexual partners than non-users; in the case of women, crack users were 11 times more likely to have had 50 or more sexual partners.

    Crack-smoking women were 13.5 times more likely than nonsmoking women to have engaged in sexual work at any time, and 28.8 times more likely to have engaged in recent, unprotected sex work.

    Male crack smokers, meanwhile, were 3.4 times more likely to report ever having homosexual anal sex, and 23 times more likely to have had 50 or more male anal sex partners.

    Clearly, crack users were significantly more likely to engage in prostitution and risky sexual practices.

    Not surprising then, that female and male crack users had higher historical rates of syphilis (3.5 and 2.2, respectively) and gonorrhea (1.8 and 1.6, respectively).

    When the researchers ran blood tests for current infection, female and male crack users were significantly more likely to test positive for syphilis (2.8 and 1.6, respectively).

    Among the participants in New York and Miami, HIV 'infection' was 2.3 times more prevalent among crack smokers than among nonsmokers (prevalence of HIV antibodies among participants recruited in San Francisco was low).

    Testing positive for ‘HIV antibodies’ was strongly associated with previous or current infection with other STDs.

    A positive reactive syphilis test (adjusted odds ratio, 2.3) and a history of herpes (adjusted odds ratio, 3.6) remained significantly associated with HIV infection after adjustment for high-risk sexual practices and African-American race.

    Other studies found similar results.

    Chiasson and colleagues at the New York City Department of Health examined the link between HIV infection and crack use. Examining patients at an STD clinic in the South Bronx, they found that, among women with no other identified risk (i.e., no injectible drug use), crack use, prostitution, crack-using prostitution and history of syphilis were all found to be risk factors for HIV infection. Among men with no other risk behavior, a history of syphilis was in fact the strongest predictor of HIV infection - greater than crack use and contact with prostitutes.

    In a 1990 paper, Greenspan and Castro note "between 1981 and 1983, the incidence of primary and secondary syphilis in the United States increased 34%, reaching a rate in 1989 (18.4 cases per 100,000 persons) that was higher than at any time since 1949. Between 1985 and 1989, incidence among blacks more than doubled, from 52.5 to 121.8 cases per 100,000; the increase was greater for black women than for black men (176% versus 106%). These trends are markers for the same high-risk sexual practices that promote transmission of HIV."

    So crack, syphilis and ‘HIV’ are closely related. Now let's look at another class of drugs showing a close correlation with pre-existing STDs and ‘HIV.’

    The Popper Phenomenon

    “Poppers” is a slang term for nitrite inhalant drugs (when they were first manufactured, they came in small ampoules that were 'popped' to release fumes). Amyl nitrite was originally developed to treat angina pectoris by dilating blood vessels, allowing the heart to get more oxygen and thereby relieving the pain.

    Arteries are not the only thing poppers help to dilate. Inhaling nitrites relaxes smooth muscles throughout the body - including the sphincter muscles, making it particularly helpful to gay posteriors. Along with facilitating anal sex, the blood vessel-dilating effects of poppers can produce a brief but intense sensation of heat and euphoria lasting 1 or 2 minutes.

    The story of poppers is an interesting one, involving US Vietnam vets, a profiteering Big Pharma and an enabling FDA, a gay medical student and organized criminals.

    The latter two entities sidestepped an eventual prescription requirement for amyl nitrite by creating butyl and isobutyl nitrite - less pure, more toxic, and even faster-acting versions than the original. Further restrictions were averted thanks to an unwritten agreement between producers and the FDA that poppers were only to be advertised in gay-oriented publications, as 'room deodorizers.'

    During the 1970s and early 80s, poppers were advertised heavily in the gay press, and the drugs became an integral part of gay culture. Not only was it routine for patrons at gay nightclubs to freely pass the vials around, some "disco clubs would even add to the general euphoria by occasionally spraying the dance floor with poppers fumes."

    "The miasma of nitrite fumes was taken for granted at gay gathering places: bars, baths, leather clubs," writes John Lauritsen in a 1994 New York Native article. "Some gay men were never without their little bottle, from which they snorted fumes around the clock."

    Throwing caution to the wind when it comes to drugs never ends well. Amyl nitrite was developed for occasional use by angina patients, not as a party drug to be snorted every time one hit the dance floor or engaged in a bout of Jolly Rogering.

    Apart from causing localized damage to nasal membranes, poppers have been linked to anemia, strokes, heart, lung, and brain damage, cardiovascular collapse, and, tellingly, the blood de-oxygenation, thymus atrophy, chronic depletion of T-cell ratio's associated with severe immune dysfunction. The drugs have also been linked to the development of Kaposi's Sarcoma.

    Sounds a lot like AIDS, doesn't it?

    While researchers and the more level-headed of gay advocates warned of the dangers, the FDA continued to look the other way. The gay press, whose advertising revenue relied heavily on popper ads, also willfully turned a blind eye to the dangers.

    In the 1980s, in a lukewarm attempt to be seen to be doing something about the problem, US health officials banned the use of poppers in public places and required merchants to post warnings about their dangers. "The warnings about their use disappeared sometime in the late '80s to early '90s," reports SFGATE, "and no one seems to know why."

    "During the first few years of the AIDS epidemic," writes Ian Young at VirusMyth.org, "poppers came under suspicion as a possible contributing factor. But after 1984, when the Reagan administration pronounced a single retrovirus to be the only cause of the growing list of AIDS illnesses, the health hazards of poppers were dismissed. All attention and funding was directed to HIV."

    Fun fact: Burroughs Wellcome, the original manufacturers of poppers, went on to profit handsomely from the subsequent AIDS hysteria with its highly-toxic 'anti-AIDS' drug AZT.

    History is Made (Up)

    There were major drug scourges afflicting the high-risk gay and African-American communities, drugs whose chronologies overlapped neatly with the AIDS outbreak. Use and abuse of these drugs was well established to cause severe illness, immune dysfunction and was also strongly correlated with pre-existing STDs like syphilis.

    The powers-that-be, however, had already decided the sole cause of AIDs was a 'novel virus.' They just needed to come up with one.

    And so along came the virologists to save the day. Not just any old bunch of virologists, but virologists with friends in high places. In France, this meant Luc Montagnier and his team at the Pasteur Institute, which advises the French government and the World Health Organization (WHO), and maintains a close collaboration with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    In the US, it meant sci-bureaucrats from the government's behemoth National Institutes of Health (NIH). One of the key figures was the caustic Robert S Gallo, a researcher at the NIH's National Cancer Institute, where he worked for 30 years mainly as head of the Laboratory of Tumor Cell Biology. Gallo’s career would be dogged by controversy and misconduct allegations, but that’s a whole other article (stay tuned).

    The other career bureaucrat that would play a key role on the US side was none other than Anthony S Fauci, who recently completed a ridiculous 38-year reign as unelected head of the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

    If you've surmised that, with names like the above, the HIV story must be a real shite show, you are absolutely correct.

    HIV is Invented 'Discovered'

    In 1983, the Pasteur Institute researchers declared they had 'isolated' a 'retrovirus' belonging to the family of T-cell leukemia viruses (HTLV), and concluded it "may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS." (Bold emphasis added)

    Their isolate came from a promiscuous 33-year-old Caucasian homosexual male referred to as "BRU", who indicated he'd had more than 50 sexual partners per year. Nasty. According to the authors, he displayed "signs and symptoms that often precede the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)." However, the only symptoms reported for the patient were multiple lymphadenopathies (swollen lymph glands) and asthenia (weakness), which are evident in many conditions aside from AIDS. Neither fever nor recent loss of weight were noted.

    In other words, the patient from whom the alleged AIDS-causing virus was first 'isolated' from did not have an AIDS diagnosis.

    Tellingly, the patient did have a history of several episodes of gonorrhea and had been treated for syphilis in September 1982. Lymphadenopathy is one of the symptoms of both the aforementioned infections.

    The study's lead author was Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, although the finding is routinely credited to the paper's last listed author, the late Montagnier.

    The French study was marred by two key problems. It did not isolate any virus, and it did not show AIDS was caused by any HTLV offshoot.

    Forty years later, little has changed. The terminology and rationalizations have indeed become increasingly complex (as is the case with most elaborate lies), but there is no physical isolate of 'HIV.'

    Virologists and their sycophants, of course, insist this doesn't matter and that their non-purified mixtures are indeed isolates.

    While they condescendingly sneer and dismiss anyone who disputes this as a silly little dumb-dumb that doesn't 'understand' virology, they tend to remain rather quiet on another highly inconvenient observation.

    Namely, there is no proof that whatever is in their ‘isolates’ actually causes AIDS.

    HIV and Sars-Cov-2: The 'Deadly' Viruses That Aren't Deadly

    In the early days of 'COVID', testing positive for the mythical Sars-Cov-2 was considered a death sentence. So much so, that some folks didn't even bother getting their affairs in order; they instead killed themselves.

    Such is the power of all this heinous "deadly virus" bullshit.

    It was the same in the 'HIV' Dark Ages - testing positive was considered a death sentence. When a famous basketballer by the name of Erving “Magic” Johnson announced he was HIV positive in 1991, everyone was shocked. "Now we all know someone with HIV," said someone I can't recall in what was supposed to be a profound, insight-triggering moment.

    Johnson, everyone assumed, was now living on borrowed time.

    Thirty-three years later, Johnson is still alive and wealthy. He attributes his survival to antiretroviral cocktails that have never been shown in clinical studies to benefit survival: GlaxoSmithKline's Trizivir and Abbott's Kaletra. These cocktails are comprised of drugs like AZT which increase the risk of side effects but have never been shown to exert a mortality benefit.

    Johnson, it should be noted, has featured in ads for both products. In 2009, the FDA issued a warning letter to Abbott Laboratories regarding a promotional DVD in which Johnson discussed his experiences with Kaletra. The letter stated the violations were of public health concern "because they suggest that Kaletra is safer and more effective than has been demonstrated by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience, and encourage use in circumstances other than those for which the drug has been shown to be safe and effective."

    "FDA is not aware of substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience to support effectiveness for five or more years of treatment with Kaletra in treatment-experienced adults. The personal experience of Kaletra patients, such as Magic Johnson, does not constitute such evidence."

    So if overpriced drug cocktails aren't keeping Johnson alive, what explains his survival?

    It's explained by the fact that HIV is a load of bollocks. A shady test that claims you are ‘HIV positive’ does not mean you are in fact harboring a deadly 'virus.'

    If ‘HIV’ was so deadly, then lab animals infected with it would get sick and die.

    But guess what? Administering a so-called isolate of uber-deadly HIV to animals results in ... nothing.

    Stugatz.

    That's right - directly administering the Virus That Causes AIDS™ to animals does not cause AIDS.

    "The only animals susceptible to experimental HIV-1** infection are the chimpanzee, gibbon ape, and rabbit but AIDS-like disease has not yet been reported in these species," lamented the authors of a 1989 FASEB paper.

    Oops.

    I'm guessing those chimps, gibbons and wascawwy wabbits didn't have a history of syphilis, smoking crack or inhaling poppers.

    Experiments in which human volunteers are deliberately 'infected' with the 'HIV isolate' would never get past the ethics committees of most research institutions.

    We do, however, have numerous instances of involuntary infection to give us a guide as to what happens when otherwise low-risk individuals are exposed to 'HIV.'

    In a 1984 NEJM letter, before 'HIV' testing became available, Sloan Kettering researchers reported there had been 27 parenteral exposures by 25 staff to the blood of AIDS patients since August 1982 (24 exposures were via needlestick).

    "All the involved staff are in their usual (generally excellent) state of health," including those who were exposed more than 12 months ago. Blood work was available for 12 staff with exposure more than 6 months prior, and no abnormalities were evident, reported the researchers.

    During 1985–2013, 58 confirmed and 150 possible cases of occupationally acquired HIV infection among healthcare workers were reported to the CDC. Since 1999, only one confirmed case (a laboratory technician sustaining a needle puncture while working with a live HIV culture in 2008) has been reported. There is no mention of subsequent AIDS, something the fear-porn agents at the CDC would surely have mentioned had it occurred.

    Some of you have probably heard of Dr Robert Willner, who twice deliberately pricked himself on TV with blood from 'HIV-positive' men (in Spain 1993, and USA 1994). Willner was an outspoken critic of the HIV hypothesis, having authored a book titled Deadly Deception: The Proof that Sex and HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause AIDS. Depending on who you listen to, Willner died 3 months after his 1994 TV appearance in a car crash, or the following year from a heart attack. Neither outcome is consistent with the oft-cited sequelae of AIDS.

    Jump, Jump, Jump Around

    Despite the fact that it is scientifically untenable, the HIV theory of AIDS still reigns supreme. Which brings us back to the key question: Why did 'HIV' wait until Wham! and Devine hit the charts before it started striking down gay blokes en mass?

    Enter the apes.

    According to Wikipedia, "HIV made the jump from other primates to humans in west-central Africa in the early-to-mid-20th century." (Bold emphasis added)

    Just like Sars-Cov-2 was purported to have kicked off when the allegedly zoonotic virus "jumped" to humans from a bat or pangolin at a Wuhan wet market that did not sell any bats or pangolins.

    Says Wikipedia, "Scientists generally accept that the known strains (or groups) of HIV-1 are most closely related to the simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) endemic in wild ape populations of West Central African forests." (Bold emphasis added).

    "Generally accept" is code for "Scientists have no proof of this, but pretend it's true anyway."

    This brings us to an oft-cited 2011 paper titled "Origins of HIV and the AIDS Pandemic" which repeats the claim that "simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) ... crossed from monkeys to apes and from apes to humans." The paper was authored by Paul Sharp and Beatrice Hahn, the latter a member of Gallo's NCI lab team which she joined in 1982.


    A chimpanzee minding his own business while a Gallo associate who blames apes for spreading HIV to humans (Beatrice Hahn) stares at him from a distance.
    In their paper, the researchers provide a graphic claiming SIV resulting in HIV-1 has been transmitted to humans via chimpanzees and gorillas.

    Hold that thought.

    According to the official narrative, the primary routes of 'HIV' transmission in humans are sexual intercourse with an infected individual, sharing needles with an infected person while taking drugs, transfusions of infected blood, or transmission from an infected pregnant mother to fetus.

    Sharp and Hahn speculate that SIVs first developed in chimpanzees, and were spread among the chimpanzee community primarily through sexual activity, from infected mothers to infants, and "in rare cases, possibly by aggression."

    But how did the disease "jump" from apes to humans? Researchers can't claim humans and apes were shooting up drugs together and sharing needles while doing so, or that apes were administering blood transfusions to humans, because that would be patently absurd.

    Ditto for suggesting apes were passing SIV to humans via birth, because apes don't give birth to humans.

    Claiming that apes transmitted SIV to humans because they were having cross-species sexual encounters would also be a hard sell. Humans are capable of some pretty weird and degenerate behaviour, but good luck pinning down a chimp or gorilla while you attempt to get jiggy with it.


    Meet Bruce. Can bench press you and your extended family with one arm. Incursions into his personal space not advised.
    "How humans acquired the ape precursors of HIV-1 groups M, N, O, and P is not known," write Sharp and Hahn, "however, based on the biology of these viruses, transmission must have occurred through cutaneous or mucous membrane exposure to infected ape blood and/or body fluids. Such exposures occur most commonly in the context of bushmeat hunting." (Bold emphasis added).

    Researchers can't explain exactly how immunodeficiency viruses pole-vaulted from apes to human, so they simply assume it must have happened during hunting expeditions.

    Virologists do a lot of assuming.

    Sharp and Hahn write that the first clue to HIV-1's "sudden emergence, epidemic spread, and unique pathogenicity" came in 1986 when a “morphologically similar but anti-genically distinct” virus was allegedly found to cause AIDS in patients in western Africa.

    Well riddle me this, Batman: Humans have been around for 2.5 million years, and the earliest Homo sapiens were getting around some 300,000 years ago.

    We've been hunting that whole time.

    Furthermore, the advance of agriculture and the steadily declining numbers of hunter-gatherers in modern times would have meant a greatly reduced opportunity for SIV to jump aboard the H-train via scratchy-bitey-fluid-exchangey hunting confrontations.

    Yet immunodeficiency viruses waited until the latter half of the Twentieth Century to successfully make the big cross-species jump?

    What an utter crock.

    Wikipedia admits "How the SIV virus would have transformed into HIV after infection of the hunter or bushmeat handler from the ape/monkey is still a matter of debate."

    Translated: There is no actual scientific evidence to support the claim that, after allegedly entering the human body, ‘SIV’ magically transformed into ‘HIV.’

    The Sodomy Paradox

    There's another problem with the official AIDS narrative which holds that, after catching SIV from apes during hunting mishaps in Africa, it "transformed" into HIV, which hunter-gatherers then spread by doing the backdoor boogie with gay abandon.

    That story further holds that, somewhere along the way, one of these HIV-carrying ape-hunters nailed a gay airline steward from America. Patient Zero then flew back to the US, and began having lots of AIDS-causing unprotected sex in the saunas of San Francisco. Or the gay bars of New York. Or the wet markets of Wisconsin, I'm not sure, all this virus BS gets a bit hard to keep track of after a while.

    It doesn't really matter, because like the rest of the AIDS tale, the gay airline steward story was nonsense. Gaetan Dugas, the French-Canadian flight attendant posthumously labelled 'Patient Zero' and accused of single-handedly igniting the spread of HIV/AIDS across North America, was later exonerated.

    Thanks to the determined sleuthing of Pullitzer Prize-winning reporter John Crewdson, it was known by 1988 that what we now call AIDS was in fact present in America in the 1960s. While the rest of the media was tripping over itself to blame Dugas (“THE MAN WHO GAVE US AIDS” blared the New York Post’s October 6, 1987 headline; “Canadian Said to Have Had Key Role in Spread of AIDS,” wrote the New York Times, while the National Review nicknamed Dugas “the Columbus of AIDS"), Crewdson had discovered a 1973 case report that showed the official Patient Zero story was bollocks.

    That 1973 case report described Robert Rayford, a 15-year-old black lad from St. Louis who had died of AIDS in 1969 - more than a decade before anyone knew what AIDS was. The impoverished teen had presented to hospital in the spring of 1968 with swollen loins covered with open, infected sores. He struggled while breathing, was razor thin and pale as a ghost. Doctors initially suspected cancer, but subsequent tests revealed herpes, genital warts, and a severe case of chlamydia. The infection spread, in the form of purple colored lesions, to his legs, causing a misdiagnosis of lymphedema. He eventually succumbed to his condition in May 1969, leaving doctors baffled.

    The teen, who doctors described as mildly intellectually impaired, said he'd suffered the symptoms for around two years prior to seeking medical help. He denied injury or animal bites, had not travelled outside the midwestern United States, but admitted to "frequent" heterosexual intercourse. His family consented to an autopsy, which revealed "widespread Kaposi's sarcoma of the aggressive, disseminated type." The autopsy also found evidence of anal scarring and a particular kind of lesion no one had identified when Rayford was alive. Some doctors thought the scarring indicated Rayford was gay; others pointed out he may have been sexually abused.

    Struck by how closely Rayford's symptoms resembled those of AIDS, Crewdson flew to St. Louis and found a pathologist willing to dig through laboratory freezers in search of the youth's tissue samples. By using the test 'co-developed' by Gallo and the French, researchers were able to determine that the boy, incredibly, had been infected with 'HIV.'

    The finding was published in JAMA in 1988. However, it was not until 2016 that the fake Dugas tale was officially revoked.

    Had the Rayford story been more widely known, it wouldn’t have been good for HIV business.

    Not to worry, the out-of-Africa hypothesis was salvaged in 1998 when researchers claimed they had detected HIV - by a PCR process involving two rounds of amplification for a combined total of 69 cycles - in a plasma sample obtained in early 1959 from an adult Bantu male, with a sickle-cell trait and a glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase deficiency, living in the Belgian Congo. Two of the researchers announcing this narrative-saving discovery hailed from the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, at Rockefeller University in New York.

    So just like the COVID charade, we have a shamdemic for which the original Patient Zero story was shown to be a bunch of cobblers. Just like the COVID sham, few people noticed or cared and the rest of the AIDS tale continued its relentless march and took on a life of its own.

    Despite more holes than a ... wait, that's dangerous pun territory ... I mean, despite a plethora of discrepancies, the official Fauci-endorsed tale still has HIV migrating from Africa to the US and spread in the early 1980s by blokes bumping uglies in big city gay bars and saunas.

    And Fauci should know, because he went to gay saunas and gay bars himself in the “early stages” of the AIDS “explosion” to get a “feel” for the situation.

    Purely for ‘research’ purposes, of course (wink, wink).

    It's okay Tony, it's 2024, you don't have to cover for your sexuality anymore.


    A young Anthony Fauci displaying his "I've just been to the saunas!" smile. Your tax money at work.
    You could literally fill a book with all the discrepancies contained within the official AIDS story; several authors have already done just that. What I wanted to highlight here are the commonalities between the AIDS and COVID sagas.

    Both featured never-isolated 'viruses' with nonsensical 'Patient Zero' stories.

    ‘Isolates’ of both these ‘deadly’ and ‘novel’ viruses do a whole lot of nothing when administered to our primate cousins.

    Both sagas featured Anthony Fauci, showing up on cue touting the most toxic drug he could get away with recommending.

    Both featured doomsday, end-of-times hyperbole in which testing 'positive' was initially considered a death sentence.

    Both were remarkable demonstrations of how the media and masses could be easily manipulated into accepting a pandemic scare that, upon the most cursory examination, simply didn't add up.


    *During the presidency of former actor Ronald Reagan, senior administration officials secretly — and illegally — arranged for the sale of arms to Iran in return for Iran’s promise to help secure the release of a group of Americans being held hostage in Lebanon.

    Suspiciously, the hostages were formally released into US custody just minutes after Reagan was sworn into office.

    Proceeds from the arms sales were then secretly, and again illegally, funneled to the Contras, a group of rebels fighting the Marxist Sandinista government of Nicaragua.

    Is if that wasn't bad enough, the CIA looked the other way while the Contras trafficked cocaine into the US to help finance their fight to oust the communist Sandinistas. The scandal was exposed in 1996 by the brilliant, Pullitzer Prize-winning journalist Gary Webb while writing for the San Jose Mercury News. His series described a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring that sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles, funelling millions in drug profits to the CIA-assisted Contras. This drug ring "opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles" and, as a result, "helped spark a crack explosion in urban America."

    His articles caused a proverbial shit-storm, prompting the government to conduct several investigations into itself and declaring itself innocent of all charges. We were supposed to believe it was all just an accidental oversight when even the Kerry report acknowledged "the Contra drug links included", among other connections, "... payments to drug traffickers by the U.S. State Department of funds authorized by the Congress for humanitarian assistance to the Contras, in some cases after the traffickers had been indicted by federal law enforcement agencies on drug charges, in others while traffickers were under active investigation by these same agencies." (Bold emphasis added).

    The Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Washington Post launched their own 'investigations' (read: hatchet jobs) and rejected Webb's allegations, instead siding with the government - a practice they uphold to this day.

    However, an internal CIA report released in 1998 admitted the CIA ‘overlooked’ or ‘ignored’ reports that the Nicaragua Contra rebels financed their fight to oust the communist Sandinistas through the sale of drugs in the United States.

    **‘HIV-1’ is the form of ‘HIV’ allegedly most common and threatening to humans. According to the official tale, ‘HIV-2’ is rare and of little threat.

    Share

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-146567752
    Why the Official AIDS Story is a Complete Crock The Great Rebranding, 1980s-Style: HIV Was a Sham, Just Like Sars-Cov-2 Anthony Colpo All you youngsters born after the Glomesh era have surely heard of AIDS, but probably have no idea of just how big a deal it was when it burst onto the scene in the early 1980s. It was the biggest show in town. Sure, it wasn't as big a deal as what COVID would later be. It wasn't accompanied by 'vaccine' mandates, lockdowns or heavily-armed goons bashing people for sitting peacefully in the park. Instead of masks, there were condoms and paper toilet seat covers. There was no social distancing, only admonitions to avoid unprotected sex and not share needles when shooting up. Fauci was there, front and center, but he wasn't telling us to wear two condoms at once. Instead, he was pimping a toxic concoction known as AZT. Right off the bat, nothing made sense about the AIDs charade. It does make sense in hindsight if you view it as a giant test run, an exercise in spreading 'virus' hysteria. The HIV/AIDS charade confirmed most people don't ask questions, and those who do can be quickly shouted over and marginalized as "deniers," "conspiracists" and menaces to society. It also confirmed that not only could people be convinced to take toxic drugs in response to an overblown 'pandemic' scare, but they could be manipulated into rabidly demanding their expedited release. It was an exercise whose lessons would prove valuable come December 2019. AIDS stands for "acquired immunodeficiency syndrome." In other words, you somehow "acquired" an immune system that, like a tired car engine with 300,000 km on the clock, was about to blow its last gasket. It was first identified in 1981 in Los Angeles when the CDC reported on five young homosexual men suffering pneumonia caused by a protozoon known as Pneumocystis carinii. This microbe is ordinarily innocuous and, in fact, found in nearly all healthy persons. For reasons unknown it had suddenly become lethal - an outcome previously seen only in persons whose immune systems were being undermined by immunosuppressant therapy, cancer, or severe malnourishment. This same pneumonia promptly appeared in New York, together with several dozen cases of an unusual skin cancer called Kaposi's Sarcoma which had previously been almost unknown in the US. Eventually Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and Kaposi's Sarcoma were interpreted as secondary manifestations of an underlying immune-system deficiency of unknown origin which was eventually dubbed "acquired immunodeficiency disease syndrome" or AIDS. The bodies of AIDS patients seemed to have just given up. Patients suffered severe weight loss and lethargy and were so immune deficient that even a minor infection threatened to kill them. The first few thousand cases were found mostly in homosexual males, and the media bombarded us with images of emaciated gay blokes on the verge of death and barely able to sit upright. Initially, the condition was referred to as GRID (gay-related immune deficiency). Outside of scientific circles, it came to be known as the "gay plague" and religious fundamentalists trumpeted the phenomenon as God's revenge on evil sodomites. That began to change in 1983, when AIDS was found to affect heterosexual women, which caused the fear porn to increase by an order of magnitude. As with COVID, health authorities treated us to an orgy of fearmongering and doomsday predictions - and the sheeple lapped it up. In 1986, Dr. Donald Ian Macdonald, then Acting Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services, described "the escalating AIDS epidemic" as "staggering," "devastating" and a "huge problem." Dr. Halfdan Mahler, Danish physician and head of the World Health Organization, called AIDS "a health disaster of pandemic proportions" and said he could "not imagine a worse health problem in this century." "We stand nakedly in front of a very serious pandemic as mortal as any pandemic there ever has been," Mahler bizarrely quipped. Why he would don his birthday suit instead of a Hazmat one in the face of such a mortal pandemic was never explained, but that's globalist bureaucrats for you. "I don't know of any greater killer than AIDS, not to speak of its psychological, social and economic maiming," continued Mahler, who after leaving WHO became director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Not to be outdone, in 1987 Harvard biology professor Stephen Jay Gould, said AIDS was "potentially, the greatest natural tragedy in human history." He warned "AIDS may run through the entire population, and may carry off a quarter or more of us" (in 1987, the world population was just over 5 billion; it now stands at over 8 billion). That same year, Gallup asked an open-ended question about what Americans saw as the most urgent health problem facing the US. Despite the fact AIDS has never even come close to being the leading cause of death in the US, more than two-thirds of Americans said AIDS. The disease continued as the top pick until 2000. According to Gallop polls conducted in 1987, most Americans (60%) agreed people with AIDS should be made to carry a card noting they had the disease, and one in three (33%) agreed employers should be allowed to fire employees who had AIDS. Twenty-one percent of Americans said people with AIDS should be isolated from the rest of society. An earlier LA Times poll from 1985 found more than half of US adults supported quarantining AIDS patients, nearly half would approve of ID cards for those testing positive for "AIDS antibodies," and one in seven favored tattooing those with the disease. People never learn. A Disease Looking For a Cause Authorities had presented us with a new public health scare, but no causal agent. No-one knew what caused the immune systems of AIDS patients to become so deficient. Was it a new microbe? A new drug scourge? God's revenge for Abba and Disco Duck? No-one knew. At least officially. In reality, authorities knew damn well what was going on. But they didn’t tell us. Instead, they eventually claimed AIDS was the result of a 'novel virus' that, in 1986, was named "human immunodeficiency virus,” or HIV. The 'novel virus' paradigm holds that a 'zoonotic' virus wakes up one day, and decides to "jump" from apes/bats/pangolins/garden gnomes to humans. This novel virus then acts like a seventeen year old that has been given the keys to an alcohol-filled mansion while mom and dad head off for a weekend vacation. However, the virus has no friends to party with. So he first has to convert to a 'human' form of the virus, then he has to begin self-replicating in order to build a social circle. Once this is done, the virions party so hard that the host becomes sick. The virions conclude their current host is no fun, so they go looking for a new host to party inside. The process repeats itself, and before you know it, there's a 'pandemic' going on with squillions of little virions pogo-dancing in global synchrony and chanting "the roof, the roof, the roof is on fire!!" while trashing everything in sight. Viruses these days, sheesh. Setting aside the glaring fallacies of the virus 'isolation' charade, the 'novel virus = pandemic’ theory is an inherent load of cobblers. Outbreaks of what look to be infectious illnesses don't just happen for no reason. There has to be some facilitating factor. AIDS became a big thing in the early 1980s, and we know that initially, the majority of patients were gay males. African-Americans were also known to be at increased risk. Even if butt sex is an especially efficient method of transmitting STDs, it doesn't explain why AIDS became a phenomenon in the 1980s. After all, both sodomy and homosexuality have been around as long as humans have. Heck, even apes have been observed taking rides on the Hershey Highway. Which begs the question: What other events with the potential for dire impact on health occurred around the same time as the AIDS outbreak? The Other Crack Rears Its Ugly Head Thanks in no small part to Uncle Sam and his ability to conveniently look the other way when it suits his financial and geopolitical interests*, the early 1980s saw a massive flood of cocaine into the US, with urban black neighborhoods the worst afflicted. So plentiful was the supply of cocaine, drug dealers came up with a way to make it even cheaper and more addictive in order to expand their customer base. Freebase is the name given to the original form of smokable coke, which resulted in a more intense high than snorting. While this constituted an obvious selling point, the process for making freebase required ether, making it notoriously volatile and dangerous to produce. In a famed 1980 incident, comedian Richard Pryor suffered severe and life-threatening burns after mixing cocaine with ether at his home; the mixture promptly exploded in his face. Freebase cocaine seems to have first surfaced in the US in the mid-1970s. Around 1980, a less volatile but similar process was developed by dealers in which cocaine was dissolved in a solution of water and baking soda and then dried out into "crack rocks." As the rocks are heated, it makes a crackling sound, hence the name. As early as 1981, reports of crack appeared in Los Angeles, San Diego, Houston, and in the Caribbean. Its use quickly spread to other major US cities, and by 1987, crack was reportedly available in DC and all but four states in the Union. "In some major cities, such as New York, Detroit, and Philadelphia, one dosage unit of crack could be obtained for as little as $2.50," writes the US DEA. "Never before had any form of cocaine been available at such low prices and at such high purity." The crack epidemic dramatically increased the number of Americans addicted to cocaine, as well as the number of cocaine-related hospital emergencies. In 1985, cocaine-related hospital emergencies rose by 12 percent, from 23,500 to 26,300. In 1986, these incidents increased 110 percent, from 26,300 to 55,200. The crack cocaine explosion, you'll notice, overlaps neatly with the AIDS "explosion." The House of Representatives Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control held cocaine hearings in July, October, and November 1980. Dr. Robert Byck, who along with his colleagues conducted the first scientific studies of cocaine plasma levels after coca paste smoking, testified at the hearings. He warned that the heavy use of smokable freebase cocaine, employed by an estimated 10 percent of cocaine users, was about to change. He warned Congress that the US was about to experience the worst epidemic of drug abuse the country had ever seen. Byck predicted the use of smoked cocaine in the 1980s would match the widespread use of "speed" (methamphetamine) in the 1960s. He urged Congress and the National Institute on Drug Abuse to mount an education and prevention campaign to avert this impending epidemic. No such campaign was undertaken. "The emergence of crack cocaine use in the United States during the mid-1980s was one of the most significant public health problems of that era," note Watkins et al in a 1998 paper. "Crack use contributed to a series of sexually transmitted disease epidemics, to epidemic increases in violent injuries and homicides, and to significant increases in the incidence and prevalence of cocaine addiction. Despite these threats to health and safety, a national public health campaign to counter crack-related morbidity and mortality was never mounted." Is that because authorities were already committed to carrying out a manufactured 'HIV' crisis? Crack, Risky Sex, and 'HIV' A 1994 NEJM article reported an analysis of 1,967 people recruited from inner-city neighborhoods in New York, Miami, and San Francisco. All respondents reported never having injected drugs, however 1,137 were regular smokers of crack. The remaining 830 people reported never having smoked crack. The results for crack users weren't pretty. Female crack users were 4.1 times more likely to have been raped, and 1.6 times more likely to have had their first vaginal or anal sex encounter before 13 years of age. Both male and female crack users reported a higher number of sexual partners than non-users; in the case of women, crack users were 11 times more likely to have had 50 or more sexual partners. Crack-smoking women were 13.5 times more likely than nonsmoking women to have engaged in sexual work at any time, and 28.8 times more likely to have engaged in recent, unprotected sex work. Male crack smokers, meanwhile, were 3.4 times more likely to report ever having homosexual anal sex, and 23 times more likely to have had 50 or more male anal sex partners. Clearly, crack users were significantly more likely to engage in prostitution and risky sexual practices. Not surprising then, that female and male crack users had higher historical rates of syphilis (3.5 and 2.2, respectively) and gonorrhea (1.8 and 1.6, respectively). When the researchers ran blood tests for current infection, female and male crack users were significantly more likely to test positive for syphilis (2.8 and 1.6, respectively). Among the participants in New York and Miami, HIV 'infection' was 2.3 times more prevalent among crack smokers than among nonsmokers (prevalence of HIV antibodies among participants recruited in San Francisco was low). Testing positive for ‘HIV antibodies’ was strongly associated with previous or current infection with other STDs. A positive reactive syphilis test (adjusted odds ratio, 2.3) and a history of herpes (adjusted odds ratio, 3.6) remained significantly associated with HIV infection after adjustment for high-risk sexual practices and African-American race. Other studies found similar results. Chiasson and colleagues at the New York City Department of Health examined the link between HIV infection and crack use. Examining patients at an STD clinic in the South Bronx, they found that, among women with no other identified risk (i.e., no injectible drug use), crack use, prostitution, crack-using prostitution and history of syphilis were all found to be risk factors for HIV infection. Among men with no other risk behavior, a history of syphilis was in fact the strongest predictor of HIV infection - greater than crack use and contact with prostitutes. In a 1990 paper, Greenspan and Castro note "between 1981 and 1983, the incidence of primary and secondary syphilis in the United States increased 34%, reaching a rate in 1989 (18.4 cases per 100,000 persons) that was higher than at any time since 1949. Between 1985 and 1989, incidence among blacks more than doubled, from 52.5 to 121.8 cases per 100,000; the increase was greater for black women than for black men (176% versus 106%). These trends are markers for the same high-risk sexual practices that promote transmission of HIV." So crack, syphilis and ‘HIV’ are closely related. Now let's look at another class of drugs showing a close correlation with pre-existing STDs and ‘HIV.’ The Popper Phenomenon “Poppers” is a slang term for nitrite inhalant drugs (when they were first manufactured, they came in small ampoules that were 'popped' to release fumes). Amyl nitrite was originally developed to treat angina pectoris by dilating blood vessels, allowing the heart to get more oxygen and thereby relieving the pain. Arteries are not the only thing poppers help to dilate. Inhaling nitrites relaxes smooth muscles throughout the body - including the sphincter muscles, making it particularly helpful to gay posteriors. Along with facilitating anal sex, the blood vessel-dilating effects of poppers can produce a brief but intense sensation of heat and euphoria lasting 1 or 2 minutes. The story of poppers is an interesting one, involving US Vietnam vets, a profiteering Big Pharma and an enabling FDA, a gay medical student and organized criminals. The latter two entities sidestepped an eventual prescription requirement for amyl nitrite by creating butyl and isobutyl nitrite - less pure, more toxic, and even faster-acting versions than the original. Further restrictions were averted thanks to an unwritten agreement between producers and the FDA that poppers were only to be advertised in gay-oriented publications, as 'room deodorizers.' During the 1970s and early 80s, poppers were advertised heavily in the gay press, and the drugs became an integral part of gay culture. Not only was it routine for patrons at gay nightclubs to freely pass the vials around, some "disco clubs would even add to the general euphoria by occasionally spraying the dance floor with poppers fumes." "The miasma of nitrite fumes was taken for granted at gay gathering places: bars, baths, leather clubs," writes John Lauritsen in a 1994 New York Native article. "Some gay men were never without their little bottle, from which they snorted fumes around the clock." Throwing caution to the wind when it comes to drugs never ends well. Amyl nitrite was developed for occasional use by angina patients, not as a party drug to be snorted every time one hit the dance floor or engaged in a bout of Jolly Rogering. Apart from causing localized damage to nasal membranes, poppers have been linked to anemia, strokes, heart, lung, and brain damage, cardiovascular collapse, and, tellingly, the blood de-oxygenation, thymus atrophy, chronic depletion of T-cell ratio's associated with severe immune dysfunction. The drugs have also been linked to the development of Kaposi's Sarcoma. Sounds a lot like AIDS, doesn't it? While researchers and the more level-headed of gay advocates warned of the dangers, the FDA continued to look the other way. The gay press, whose advertising revenue relied heavily on popper ads, also willfully turned a blind eye to the dangers. In the 1980s, in a lukewarm attempt to be seen to be doing something about the problem, US health officials banned the use of poppers in public places and required merchants to post warnings about their dangers. "The warnings about their use disappeared sometime in the late '80s to early '90s," reports SFGATE, "and no one seems to know why." "During the first few years of the AIDS epidemic," writes Ian Young at VirusMyth.org, "poppers came under suspicion as a possible contributing factor. But after 1984, when the Reagan administration pronounced a single retrovirus to be the only cause of the growing list of AIDS illnesses, the health hazards of poppers were dismissed. All attention and funding was directed to HIV." Fun fact: Burroughs Wellcome, the original manufacturers of poppers, went on to profit handsomely from the subsequent AIDS hysteria with its highly-toxic 'anti-AIDS' drug AZT. History is Made (Up) There were major drug scourges afflicting the high-risk gay and African-American communities, drugs whose chronologies overlapped neatly with the AIDS outbreak. Use and abuse of these drugs was well established to cause severe illness, immune dysfunction and was also strongly correlated with pre-existing STDs like syphilis. The powers-that-be, however, had already decided the sole cause of AIDs was a 'novel virus.' They just needed to come up with one. And so along came the virologists to save the day. Not just any old bunch of virologists, but virologists with friends in high places. In France, this meant Luc Montagnier and his team at the Pasteur Institute, which advises the French government and the World Health Organization (WHO), and maintains a close collaboration with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In the US, it meant sci-bureaucrats from the government's behemoth National Institutes of Health (NIH). One of the key figures was the caustic Robert S Gallo, a researcher at the NIH's National Cancer Institute, where he worked for 30 years mainly as head of the Laboratory of Tumor Cell Biology. Gallo’s career would be dogged by controversy and misconduct allegations, but that’s a whole other article (stay tuned). The other career bureaucrat that would play a key role on the US side was none other than Anthony S Fauci, who recently completed a ridiculous 38-year reign as unelected head of the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). If you've surmised that, with names like the above, the HIV story must be a real shite show, you are absolutely correct. HIV is Invented 'Discovered' In 1983, the Pasteur Institute researchers declared they had 'isolated' a 'retrovirus' belonging to the family of T-cell leukemia viruses (HTLV), and concluded it "may be involved in several pathological syndromes, including AIDS." (Bold emphasis added) Their isolate came from a promiscuous 33-year-old Caucasian homosexual male referred to as "BRU", who indicated he'd had more than 50 sexual partners per year. Nasty. According to the authors, he displayed "signs and symptoms that often precede the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS)." However, the only symptoms reported for the patient were multiple lymphadenopathies (swollen lymph glands) and asthenia (weakness), which are evident in many conditions aside from AIDS. Neither fever nor recent loss of weight were noted. In other words, the patient from whom the alleged AIDS-causing virus was first 'isolated' from did not have an AIDS diagnosis. Tellingly, the patient did have a history of several episodes of gonorrhea and had been treated for syphilis in September 1982. Lymphadenopathy is one of the symptoms of both the aforementioned infections. The study's lead author was Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, although the finding is routinely credited to the paper's last listed author, the late Montagnier. The French study was marred by two key problems. It did not isolate any virus, and it did not show AIDS was caused by any HTLV offshoot. Forty years later, little has changed. The terminology and rationalizations have indeed become increasingly complex (as is the case with most elaborate lies), but there is no physical isolate of 'HIV.' Virologists and their sycophants, of course, insist this doesn't matter and that their non-purified mixtures are indeed isolates. While they condescendingly sneer and dismiss anyone who disputes this as a silly little dumb-dumb that doesn't 'understand' virology, they tend to remain rather quiet on another highly inconvenient observation. Namely, there is no proof that whatever is in their ‘isolates’ actually causes AIDS. HIV and Sars-Cov-2: The 'Deadly' Viruses That Aren't Deadly In the early days of 'COVID', testing positive for the mythical Sars-Cov-2 was considered a death sentence. So much so, that some folks didn't even bother getting their affairs in order; they instead killed themselves. Such is the power of all this heinous "deadly virus" bullshit. It was the same in the 'HIV' Dark Ages - testing positive was considered a death sentence. When a famous basketballer by the name of Erving “Magic” Johnson announced he was HIV positive in 1991, everyone was shocked. "Now we all know someone with HIV," said someone I can't recall in what was supposed to be a profound, insight-triggering moment. Johnson, everyone assumed, was now living on borrowed time. Thirty-three years later, Johnson is still alive and wealthy. He attributes his survival to antiretroviral cocktails that have never been shown in clinical studies to benefit survival: GlaxoSmithKline's Trizivir and Abbott's Kaletra. These cocktails are comprised of drugs like AZT which increase the risk of side effects but have never been shown to exert a mortality benefit. Johnson, it should be noted, has featured in ads for both products. In 2009, the FDA issued a warning letter to Abbott Laboratories regarding a promotional DVD in which Johnson discussed his experiences with Kaletra. The letter stated the violations were of public health concern "because they suggest that Kaletra is safer and more effective than has been demonstrated by substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience, and encourage use in circumstances other than those for which the drug has been shown to be safe and effective." "FDA is not aware of substantial evidence or substantial clinical experience to support effectiveness for five or more years of treatment with Kaletra in treatment-experienced adults. The personal experience of Kaletra patients, such as Magic Johnson, does not constitute such evidence." So if overpriced drug cocktails aren't keeping Johnson alive, what explains his survival? It's explained by the fact that HIV is a load of bollocks. A shady test that claims you are ‘HIV positive’ does not mean you are in fact harboring a deadly 'virus.' If ‘HIV’ was so deadly, then lab animals infected with it would get sick and die. But guess what? Administering a so-called isolate of uber-deadly HIV to animals results in ... nothing. Stugatz. That's right - directly administering the Virus That Causes AIDS™ to animals does not cause AIDS. "The only animals susceptible to experimental HIV-1** infection are the chimpanzee, gibbon ape, and rabbit but AIDS-like disease has not yet been reported in these species," lamented the authors of a 1989 FASEB paper. Oops. I'm guessing those chimps, gibbons and wascawwy wabbits didn't have a history of syphilis, smoking crack or inhaling poppers. Experiments in which human volunteers are deliberately 'infected' with the 'HIV isolate' would never get past the ethics committees of most research institutions. We do, however, have numerous instances of involuntary infection to give us a guide as to what happens when otherwise low-risk individuals are exposed to 'HIV.' In a 1984 NEJM letter, before 'HIV' testing became available, Sloan Kettering researchers reported there had been 27 parenteral exposures by 25 staff to the blood of AIDS patients since August 1982 (24 exposures were via needlestick). "All the involved staff are in their usual (generally excellent) state of health," including those who were exposed more than 12 months ago. Blood work was available for 12 staff with exposure more than 6 months prior, and no abnormalities were evident, reported the researchers. During 1985–2013, 58 confirmed and 150 possible cases of occupationally acquired HIV infection among healthcare workers were reported to the CDC. Since 1999, only one confirmed case (a laboratory technician sustaining a needle puncture while working with a live HIV culture in 2008) has been reported. There is no mention of subsequent AIDS, something the fear-porn agents at the CDC would surely have mentioned had it occurred. Some of you have probably heard of Dr Robert Willner, who twice deliberately pricked himself on TV with blood from 'HIV-positive' men (in Spain 1993, and USA 1994). Willner was an outspoken critic of the HIV hypothesis, having authored a book titled Deadly Deception: The Proof that Sex and HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause AIDS. Depending on who you listen to, Willner died 3 months after his 1994 TV appearance in a car crash, or the following year from a heart attack. Neither outcome is consistent with the oft-cited sequelae of AIDS. Jump, Jump, Jump Around Despite the fact that it is scientifically untenable, the HIV theory of AIDS still reigns supreme. Which brings us back to the key question: Why did 'HIV' wait until Wham! and Devine hit the charts before it started striking down gay blokes en mass? Enter the apes. According to Wikipedia, "HIV made the jump from other primates to humans in west-central Africa in the early-to-mid-20th century." (Bold emphasis added) Just like Sars-Cov-2 was purported to have kicked off when the allegedly zoonotic virus "jumped" to humans from a bat or pangolin at a Wuhan wet market that did not sell any bats or pangolins. Says Wikipedia, "Scientists generally accept that the known strains (or groups) of HIV-1 are most closely related to the simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) endemic in wild ape populations of West Central African forests." (Bold emphasis added). "Generally accept" is code for "Scientists have no proof of this, but pretend it's true anyway." This brings us to an oft-cited 2011 paper titled "Origins of HIV and the AIDS Pandemic" which repeats the claim that "simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) ... crossed from monkeys to apes and from apes to humans." The paper was authored by Paul Sharp and Beatrice Hahn, the latter a member of Gallo's NCI lab team which she joined in 1982. A chimpanzee minding his own business while a Gallo associate who blames apes for spreading HIV to humans (Beatrice Hahn) stares at him from a distance. In their paper, the researchers provide a graphic claiming SIV resulting in HIV-1 has been transmitted to humans via chimpanzees and gorillas. Hold that thought. According to the official narrative, the primary routes of 'HIV' transmission in humans are sexual intercourse with an infected individual, sharing needles with an infected person while taking drugs, transfusions of infected blood, or transmission from an infected pregnant mother to fetus. Sharp and Hahn speculate that SIVs first developed in chimpanzees, and were spread among the chimpanzee community primarily through sexual activity, from infected mothers to infants, and "in rare cases, possibly by aggression." But how did the disease "jump" from apes to humans? Researchers can't claim humans and apes were shooting up drugs together and sharing needles while doing so, or that apes were administering blood transfusions to humans, because that would be patently absurd. Ditto for suggesting apes were passing SIV to humans via birth, because apes don't give birth to humans. Claiming that apes transmitted SIV to humans because they were having cross-species sexual encounters would also be a hard sell. Humans are capable of some pretty weird and degenerate behaviour, but good luck pinning down a chimp or gorilla while you attempt to get jiggy with it. Meet Bruce. Can bench press you and your extended family with one arm. Incursions into his personal space not advised. "How humans acquired the ape precursors of HIV-1 groups M, N, O, and P is not known," write Sharp and Hahn, "however, based on the biology of these viruses, transmission must have occurred through cutaneous or mucous membrane exposure to infected ape blood and/or body fluids. Such exposures occur most commonly in the context of bushmeat hunting." (Bold emphasis added). Researchers can't explain exactly how immunodeficiency viruses pole-vaulted from apes to human, so they simply assume it must have happened during hunting expeditions. Virologists do a lot of assuming. Sharp and Hahn write that the first clue to HIV-1's "sudden emergence, epidemic spread, and unique pathogenicity" came in 1986 when a “morphologically similar but anti-genically distinct” virus was allegedly found to cause AIDS in patients in western Africa. Well riddle me this, Batman: Humans have been around for 2.5 million years, and the earliest Homo sapiens were getting around some 300,000 years ago. We've been hunting that whole time. Furthermore, the advance of agriculture and the steadily declining numbers of hunter-gatherers in modern times would have meant a greatly reduced opportunity for SIV to jump aboard the H-train via scratchy-bitey-fluid-exchangey hunting confrontations. Yet immunodeficiency viruses waited until the latter half of the Twentieth Century to successfully make the big cross-species jump? What an utter crock. Wikipedia admits "How the SIV virus would have transformed into HIV after infection of the hunter or bushmeat handler from the ape/monkey is still a matter of debate." Translated: There is no actual scientific evidence to support the claim that, after allegedly entering the human body, ‘SIV’ magically transformed into ‘HIV.’ The Sodomy Paradox There's another problem with the official AIDS narrative which holds that, after catching SIV from apes during hunting mishaps in Africa, it "transformed" into HIV, which hunter-gatherers then spread by doing the backdoor boogie with gay abandon. That story further holds that, somewhere along the way, one of these HIV-carrying ape-hunters nailed a gay airline steward from America. Patient Zero then flew back to the US, and began having lots of AIDS-causing unprotected sex in the saunas of San Francisco. Or the gay bars of New York. Or the wet markets of Wisconsin, I'm not sure, all this virus BS gets a bit hard to keep track of after a while. It doesn't really matter, because like the rest of the AIDS tale, the gay airline steward story was nonsense. Gaetan Dugas, the French-Canadian flight attendant posthumously labelled 'Patient Zero' and accused of single-handedly igniting the spread of HIV/AIDS across North America, was later exonerated. Thanks to the determined sleuthing of Pullitzer Prize-winning reporter John Crewdson, it was known by 1988 that what we now call AIDS was in fact present in America in the 1960s. While the rest of the media was tripping over itself to blame Dugas (“THE MAN WHO GAVE US AIDS” blared the New York Post’s October 6, 1987 headline; “Canadian Said to Have Had Key Role in Spread of AIDS,” wrote the New York Times, while the National Review nicknamed Dugas “the Columbus of AIDS"), Crewdson had discovered a 1973 case report that showed the official Patient Zero story was bollocks. That 1973 case report described Robert Rayford, a 15-year-old black lad from St. Louis who had died of AIDS in 1969 - more than a decade before anyone knew what AIDS was. The impoverished teen had presented to hospital in the spring of 1968 with swollen loins covered with open, infected sores. He struggled while breathing, was razor thin and pale as a ghost. Doctors initially suspected cancer, but subsequent tests revealed herpes, genital warts, and a severe case of chlamydia. The infection spread, in the form of purple colored lesions, to his legs, causing a misdiagnosis of lymphedema. He eventually succumbed to his condition in May 1969, leaving doctors baffled. The teen, who doctors described as mildly intellectually impaired, said he'd suffered the symptoms for around two years prior to seeking medical help. He denied injury or animal bites, had not travelled outside the midwestern United States, but admitted to "frequent" heterosexual intercourse. His family consented to an autopsy, which revealed "widespread Kaposi's sarcoma of the aggressive, disseminated type." The autopsy also found evidence of anal scarring and a particular kind of lesion no one had identified when Rayford was alive. Some doctors thought the scarring indicated Rayford was gay; others pointed out he may have been sexually abused. Struck by how closely Rayford's symptoms resembled those of AIDS, Crewdson flew to St. Louis and found a pathologist willing to dig through laboratory freezers in search of the youth's tissue samples. By using the test 'co-developed' by Gallo and the French, researchers were able to determine that the boy, incredibly, had been infected with 'HIV.' The finding was published in JAMA in 1988. However, it was not until 2016 that the fake Dugas tale was officially revoked. Had the Rayford story been more widely known, it wouldn’t have been good for HIV business. Not to worry, the out-of-Africa hypothesis was salvaged in 1998 when researchers claimed they had detected HIV - by a PCR process involving two rounds of amplification for a combined total of 69 cycles - in a plasma sample obtained in early 1959 from an adult Bantu male, with a sickle-cell trait and a glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase deficiency, living in the Belgian Congo. Two of the researchers announcing this narrative-saving discovery hailed from the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, at Rockefeller University in New York. So just like the COVID charade, we have a shamdemic for which the original Patient Zero story was shown to be a bunch of cobblers. Just like the COVID sham, few people noticed or cared and the rest of the AIDS tale continued its relentless march and took on a life of its own. Despite more holes than a ... wait, that's dangerous pun territory ... I mean, despite a plethora of discrepancies, the official Fauci-endorsed tale still has HIV migrating from Africa to the US and spread in the early 1980s by blokes bumping uglies in big city gay bars and saunas. And Fauci should know, because he went to gay saunas and gay bars himself in the “early stages” of the AIDS “explosion” to get a “feel” for the situation. Purely for ‘research’ purposes, of course (wink, wink). It's okay Tony, it's 2024, you don't have to cover for your sexuality anymore. A young Anthony Fauci displaying his "I've just been to the saunas!" smile. Your tax money at work. You could literally fill a book with all the discrepancies contained within the official AIDS story; several authors have already done just that. What I wanted to highlight here are the commonalities between the AIDS and COVID sagas. Both featured never-isolated 'viruses' with nonsensical 'Patient Zero' stories. ‘Isolates’ of both these ‘deadly’ and ‘novel’ viruses do a whole lot of nothing when administered to our primate cousins. Both sagas featured Anthony Fauci, showing up on cue touting the most toxic drug he could get away with recommending. Both featured doomsday, end-of-times hyperbole in which testing 'positive' was initially considered a death sentence. Both were remarkable demonstrations of how the media and masses could be easily manipulated into accepting a pandemic scare that, upon the most cursory examination, simply didn't add up. *During the presidency of former actor Ronald Reagan, senior administration officials secretly — and illegally — arranged for the sale of arms to Iran in return for Iran’s promise to help secure the release of a group of Americans being held hostage in Lebanon. Suspiciously, the hostages were formally released into US custody just minutes after Reagan was sworn into office. Proceeds from the arms sales were then secretly, and again illegally, funneled to the Contras, a group of rebels fighting the Marxist Sandinista government of Nicaragua. Is if that wasn't bad enough, the CIA looked the other way while the Contras trafficked cocaine into the US to help finance their fight to oust the communist Sandinistas. The scandal was exposed in 1996 by the brilliant, Pullitzer Prize-winning journalist Gary Webb while writing for the San Jose Mercury News. His series described a San Francisco Bay Area drug ring that sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods street gangs of Los Angeles, funelling millions in drug profits to the CIA-assisted Contras. This drug ring "opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles" and, as a result, "helped spark a crack explosion in urban America." His articles caused a proverbial shit-storm, prompting the government to conduct several investigations into itself and declaring itself innocent of all charges. We were supposed to believe it was all just an accidental oversight when even the Kerry report acknowledged "the Contra drug links included", among other connections, "... payments to drug traffickers by the U.S. State Department of funds authorized by the Congress for humanitarian assistance to the Contras, in some cases after the traffickers had been indicted by federal law enforcement agencies on drug charges, in others while traffickers were under active investigation by these same agencies." (Bold emphasis added). The Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Washington Post launched their own 'investigations' (read: hatchet jobs) and rejected Webb's allegations, instead siding with the government - a practice they uphold to this day. However, an internal CIA report released in 1998 admitted the CIA ‘overlooked’ or ‘ignored’ reports that the Nicaragua Contra rebels financed their fight to oust the communist Sandinistas through the sale of drugs in the United States. **‘HIV-1’ is the form of ‘HIV’ allegedly most common and threatening to humans. According to the official tale, ‘HIV-2’ is rare and of little threat. Share https://substack.com/home/post/p-146567752
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Why the Official AIDS Story is a Complete Crock
    The Great Rebranding, 1980s-Style: HIV Was a Sham, Just Like Sars-Cov-2
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 4301 Views
  • The Invention the Illuminati does not want you to know about
    Absolute Zero Emissions forever combined with theoretical infinite speed

    Fritz Freud

    Absolute Zero Emissions forever

    Before I start this there is something you should know and that is the scam that is net zero!
    Net Zero means nothing it is a Hollywood accounting scam.
    It means that you pay money to offset your emissions against planting trees while the Biofuel scammers burn down the Rainforest to plant GM crops and poison the earth.
    It is the biggest Lie.
    I counter their lies with one of the greatest inventions ever made that will produce an absolute zero emissions forever and as such exposing their scam.

    Theoretical Infinite Speed

    In my patent I describe the working of a linear scramjet that as it moves forward inside a constant environment will always be able to produce more output power than needed to accelerate.
    Therefore it will be able to accelerate consistently between any given point A to B, I call this linear travel because there is no top speed and the speed you can achieve is directly related to the distance you travel.
    The longer the distance the higher the speed you can achieve.
    In fact the acceleration goes up exponentially.
    Therefore if you theoretically make A to B infinite and have an infinite fuel source where you are in an environment such as space where you have no mass, you can theoretically reach infinite speed.
    This is why this invention is so powerful and so important that they cannot afford me to have an open discussion about it.
    And I am willing to discuss this openly, but they don’t.
    Einstein is a scam, I am the truth.
    Also I am willing to cooperate with anyone willing to do so.

    Let us begin

    Everyone should have heard by now about Klaus Schwab. To remind you Klaus Schwab is the founder of the WEF which is a private continuation of the Nazi regime which Klaus Schwab and his Family were model citizens of. It is a conglomerate of Occult Families rich people and useful Idiots lead by Henry Kissinger Klaus Schwab and the Rothschild clan. They control all of the Media to serve their purpose all of the money which is in private Rothschild hands and all of the Government through their Occult networks with bribery pedophilia and corruption. They promise you a “Great Reset” which in short is an AI war through AI policing where the Human race is connected to the Internet via the Neural Lace technology currently deployed through the “Corona” scam and in the Injection shots. This Technology was developed by the Harvard Wyss Foundation of the Escher-Wyss family that connects directly to Klaus Schwab, Elon Musk DARPA and Boston Dynamics. It is part of a bigger plan that includes Neural Link (implant, Mark of the beast) Starlink (SkyNet) Boston Dynamics (Autonomous Robots)and Freescale semiconductor (Jacob Rothschild). When this AI infrastructure is ready (in 2022) it will be the end of the Human Race. This is the meaning of the “Great Reset” an absolute fascist New World Order where there is no escape and the many are controlled by the few (WEF).

    But they promised us also a “Green New Deal” and I want to focus on that. The so called “Green New Deal” is a scam and I shall explain you why. It does not do anything it just promises you “Net Zero” emissions which is nothing but a Hollywood accounting scam where the emissions you create are countered by the promise you plant trees, to offset your emissions you make by some fictional promise and it reduces nothing in fact it accelerates Global warming.

    It is a scam fraud and a lie worth of Joseph Goebbels. It is a scam just like Richard Branson’s scam of the Virgin Earth Challenge.

    From their website:

    The benefits of the European Green Deal. The European Green Deal will improve the well-being and health of citizens and future generations by providing: fresh air, clean water, healthy soil and biodiversity; renovated, energy efficient buildings; healthy and affordable food; more public transport; cleaner energy and cutting-edge clean technological innovation.

    The Green New Deal is “not a detailed plan that gives some specific outcomes, [but] a framework proposal … and is a good idea,” according to Eric Orts, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics. Orts is also director of Wharton’s Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership. It promises net zero emissions by 2050.

    Green New Deal vs Absolute Zero Emissions

    Now I am going to destroy those lying fascists with facts. Over 15 years ago I patented the only absolute zero emission transportation system designed to put an end to aviation which doubles as an infrastructure support system and is capable of hypersonic speed. It will produce absolute zero emissions forever, something that can never be bettered. There is no transportation technology faster, safer, cheaper, cleaner than this. And alone aviation is responsible for over 36 million tons of CO² emissions per year. That means that I could have saved you 540 million tons of CO² emissions already. And there is more:

    All cars can run on water so we can eliminate CO² emissions from cars too and still using the car you drive just upgrading it will be fine, no need for the scam that are electric cars, problem solved.


    In fact the electric cars will use up all pure rare earth metals needed for computers so that nobody will be able to afford a computer anymore.
    You are scammed deceived and fooled.
    Also you pay for it making you a slave forever.

    On 9 February 2007, Branson announced the setting up of a new global science and technology prize — The Virgin Earth Challenge — in the belief that history has shown that prizes of this nature encourage technological advancements for the good of mankind. The Virgin Earth Challenge was to award $25 million to the individual or group who are able to demonstrate a commercially viable design that will result in the net removal of anthropogenic, atmospheric greenhouse gases each year for at least ten years without countervailing harmful effects. This removal must have long-term effects and contribute materially to the stability of the Earth’s climate. Branson also announced that he would be joined in the adjudication of the prize by a panel of five judges, all world authorities in their respective fields: Al Gore, Sir Crispin Tickell, Tim Flannery, James E. Hansen, and James Lovelock.

    Richard Branson is Illuminati.
    Richard Branson you owe me $25 million.
    Richard Branson you are using my Technology and as such infringing my patent.
    Same for Elon Musk who is also Illuminati and a Fraud.
    Elon Musk you are a thief who stole my Invention on which the Hyperloop is based.
    I claim the Hyperloop as my Intellectual Property

    Now at that time I was already working on my Invention for some time which not only reduces CO² emissions by not creating it, it is to this day the only technology that creates absolute Zero emissions forever. Not only that, it is the fastest safest cheapest transportation technology that can ever be. And there is so much more to it.

    The Absolute Transportation Technology

    So let us start from the beginning: I sat out to create an absolute in transportation technology with the technology currently available.
    It had to be fast safe cheap and to produce zero emissions. In 2005 I saw the first experimental Hypersonic craft flying from womera Australia the HyShot. It uses an air breathing technology that is called “Scramjet” technology.

    A scramjet (supersonic combustion ramjet) is a variant of a ramjet air breathing jet engine in which combustion takes place in supersonic airflow. As in ramjets, a scramjet relies on high vehicle speed to compress the incoming air forcefully before combustion (hence scramjet), but whereas a ramjet decelerates the air to subsonic velocities before combustion, the airflow in a scramjet is supersonic.

    The first patent for a scramjet was done in 1908 by René Lorin. René Lorin (24 March 1877– 16 January 1933) was a French aerospace engineer and inventor of the ramjet. In 1908 he patented the first subsonic ramjet design. Lorin published the principles of a ramjet in articles in the journal L’Aérophile from 1908 to 1913, expressing the idea that the exhaust from internal combustion engines could be directed into nozzles to create jet propulsion. He could not build this invention since there was no way at the time for an aircraft to go fast enough for a ramjet to function properly.

    To this day this is one of the most interesting and capable Inventions of all time. It certainly is my favorite and I studied it to the detail, so much that I feel not another person knows this technology as I do.

    But there is a catch. Flying an aircraft at Hypersonic speed is a problem, simply because above a certain speed it will become uncontrollable. Also Hypersonic physics are different and dictate the shape of the aircraft making it commercially insignificant. To go around this problem I put the aircraft on a track so navigation is purposely build into the system and it becomes as save as it can be. Again this isn’t really a new Idea combining train and aviation technology into one. M-497 Black Beetle LIMRV and SVL Turbojet Trains were all build and failed because you cannot just put a rocket engine on a car or a train in the hope it works.

    In 1929 Franz Kruckenberg demonstrated with his “Schienenzeppelin” a combination of aviation and track technology that reached 250kph using lightweight engineering and a 600hp BMW engine. In 1974 the Aérotrain, invented by Jean Bertin in the 1960s, used a single reinforced concrete rail in the shape of an inverted “T”. Prototypes for long-distance travel used gas turbines for propulsion, eventually reaching a peak speed of 430.4 km/h (breaking rail’s record at the time) with the I80-HV.

    Funnily enough there is a tax evasion company in Paris that calls themselves “Spacetrain.fr” which is nothing but exactly Jean Bertin’s Aérotrain sold as their technology, an old hag in a new frog. They have changed nothing but somehow they attracted investment of over 5 mil Euro which I suppose is what fraudsters do. I contacted those criminals, because frauds they are and I promised to expose them as I do. Emeuric Gleizes Thomas Bernin and the others of this money laundering tax evasion criminal enterprise I contacted and offered my technology which let’s face it deserves more the name spacetrain than they do. They called me insane for proposing my technology and I promised to expose their fraud which I do. Emeuric Gleizes in particular has a pocket full of § 1.000 companies meaning he is a fraud and does money laundering for the mafia. So I shall expose them all.

    My technology took all those who came before me into account and analyzed them to create an absolute in transportation technology. It uses Lightweight engineering and a combination of hovercraft, track, jet, ramjet, scramjet and other technologies to be able to basically “fly” over a specially shaped track with absolute zero emissions.

    It is faster than any airplane can ever be safer too and since it is capable to go from city center to city center it shaves at least 2h of any journey that you take to and from the airport. It can carry up to 256 passengers. It has the highest passenger transition rate of any transport technology that increases with the distance you travel. It uses a linear scramjet technology and it’s speed is directly related to the distance you travel. It has the capability to accelerate between any given point A to Be permanently. It does so by enabling all four strokes of a combustion engine permanently at the same time. The air is compressed by forward motion and it is an open system. The meaning of this is that the faster you go the faster you can go without limitations. It uses self levitation by forward motion to keep itself at balance at any given speed. There is no maximum speed because the speed is directly related to the distance you travel; the longer the distance the higher the speed you can achieve. There is no cruising speed, you accelerate, you decelerate and you are there. Every point on this planet can be reached within under one hour. And all that with absolute zero emissions.

    Jules Verne famously wrote a book called “In 80 Days around the world”. With my technology you can travel in 4 h around the world with absolute zero emissions; beat that.

    Now let us have a look at the biggest Illuminati scumbag of all; Elon Musk. Elon Musk copied my whole website back in 2010 / 2011. I traced his IP address to SpaceX and I tried to contact him through Tesla. I stayed in contact with Rick Avalos from Tesla but scumbag Elon never came back to me, now I know why. The Hyperloop is a blatant copy of my technology with the only difference is that it is in a tube which makes no difference it would work but not as efficiently. It actually would slow it down being in a tube.

    Richard Branson the other Illuminati fraud and a fraud he is by all accounts and his Virgin Hyperloop is just another scam just like Elon Musk. In fact everything they promise they have infringed on my patent from the central command center to the design it all came from me and they try to bury me and my invention and have done so over the past decade.

    Remember when Thomas Edison killed an Elephant to demonstrate the dangers of Nikola Tesla’s AC technology? It is just that.

    The Hyperloop is just a diversion a distraction from the fact that we are capable of so much more than we are told we are.

    Elon Musk is Illuminati and so is Richard Branson. Neural Lace (which is in the so called Vax shots) Neural Link Starlink SpaceX Boston Dynamics and Freescale semiconductor, all these combined are one gigantic weapon against mankind. The Boring Company and Hyperloop are designed to build underground cities and connect them. What they plan is the following:

    In 2022 they will start to unleash a war a war which is AI robots against the Human Race. When this happens they will go underground in the cities they build and already have and connect them with my technology deviation the Hyperloop. The Boring Company will help them expand their cities underground and build tunnels for the Hyperloop. Then they will start to poison the Atmosphere so they can kill all the useless eaters (that is you and me). At that stage there is no escape from hell on earth.

    But we have a choice. All energy can be created out of water with absolute zero emissions forever. We can regrow all the deserts in this world and make lush gardens out of it. We can connect every continent every country every city with Hypersonic Zero Emission Trains. All the Airports which will be obsolete can be with little to no costs converted into Cities making room a plenty for people to have space to live. All this with absolute zero emissions. Man can live free and birds can recoup the skies. We can make this world a paradise. And by 2050 we will be able to reach every planet in this solar system based on the technology I propose and that is available to us right here right now.

    It is either that what I propose or slavery forever under the illusion of a Great Reset and a Green new Deal that like always promises you everything and gives you nothing.
    It is Orwell’s 1984 Huxley's Brave new World and Adolf Hitler on steroids.


    The choice is yours and yours alone. Stand up and fight for your freedom. Or perish forever.

    Veni Vidi Veritas

    Fritz Freud

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-44098947
    The Invention the Illuminati does not want you to know about Absolute Zero Emissions forever combined with theoretical infinite speed Fritz Freud Absolute Zero Emissions forever Before I start this there is something you should know and that is the scam that is net zero! Net Zero means nothing it is a Hollywood accounting scam. It means that you pay money to offset your emissions against planting trees while the Biofuel scammers burn down the Rainforest to plant GM crops and poison the earth. It is the biggest Lie. I counter their lies with one of the greatest inventions ever made that will produce an absolute zero emissions forever and as such exposing their scam. Theoretical Infinite Speed In my patent I describe the working of a linear scramjet that as it moves forward inside a constant environment will always be able to produce more output power than needed to accelerate. Therefore it will be able to accelerate consistently between any given point A to B, I call this linear travel because there is no top speed and the speed you can achieve is directly related to the distance you travel. The longer the distance the higher the speed you can achieve. In fact the acceleration goes up exponentially. Therefore if you theoretically make A to B infinite and have an infinite fuel source where you are in an environment such as space where you have no mass, you can theoretically reach infinite speed. This is why this invention is so powerful and so important that they cannot afford me to have an open discussion about it. And I am willing to discuss this openly, but they don’t. Einstein is a scam, I am the truth. Also I am willing to cooperate with anyone willing to do so. Let us begin Everyone should have heard by now about Klaus Schwab. To remind you Klaus Schwab is the founder of the WEF which is a private continuation of the Nazi regime which Klaus Schwab and his Family were model citizens of. It is a conglomerate of Occult Families rich people and useful Idiots lead by Henry Kissinger Klaus Schwab and the Rothschild clan. They control all of the Media to serve their purpose all of the money which is in private Rothschild hands and all of the Government through their Occult networks with bribery pedophilia and corruption. They promise you a “Great Reset” which in short is an AI war through AI policing where the Human race is connected to the Internet via the Neural Lace technology currently deployed through the “Corona” scam and in the Injection shots. This Technology was developed by the Harvard Wyss Foundation of the Escher-Wyss family that connects directly to Klaus Schwab, Elon Musk DARPA and Boston Dynamics. It is part of a bigger plan that includes Neural Link (implant, Mark of the beast) Starlink (SkyNet) Boston Dynamics (Autonomous Robots)and Freescale semiconductor (Jacob Rothschild). When this AI infrastructure is ready (in 2022) it will be the end of the Human Race. This is the meaning of the “Great Reset” an absolute fascist New World Order where there is no escape and the many are controlled by the few (WEF). But they promised us also a “Green New Deal” and I want to focus on that. The so called “Green New Deal” is a scam and I shall explain you why. It does not do anything it just promises you “Net Zero” emissions which is nothing but a Hollywood accounting scam where the emissions you create are countered by the promise you plant trees, to offset your emissions you make by some fictional promise and it reduces nothing in fact it accelerates Global warming. It is a scam fraud and a lie worth of Joseph Goebbels. It is a scam just like Richard Branson’s scam of the Virgin Earth Challenge. From their website: The benefits of the European Green Deal. The European Green Deal will improve the well-being and health of citizens and future generations by providing: fresh air, clean water, healthy soil and biodiversity; renovated, energy efficient buildings; healthy and affordable food; more public transport; cleaner energy and cutting-edge clean technological innovation. The Green New Deal is “not a detailed plan that gives some specific outcomes, [but] a framework proposal … and is a good idea,” according to Eric Orts, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics. Orts is also director of Wharton’s Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership. It promises net zero emissions by 2050. Green New Deal vs Absolute Zero Emissions Now I am going to destroy those lying fascists with facts. Over 15 years ago I patented the only absolute zero emission transportation system designed to put an end to aviation which doubles as an infrastructure support system and is capable of hypersonic speed. It will produce absolute zero emissions forever, something that can never be bettered. There is no transportation technology faster, safer, cheaper, cleaner than this. And alone aviation is responsible for over 36 million tons of CO² emissions per year. That means that I could have saved you 540 million tons of CO² emissions already. And there is more: All cars can run on water so we can eliminate CO² emissions from cars too and still using the car you drive just upgrading it will be fine, no need for the scam that are electric cars, problem solved. In fact the electric cars will use up all pure rare earth metals needed for computers so that nobody will be able to afford a computer anymore. You are scammed deceived and fooled. Also you pay for it making you a slave forever. On 9 February 2007, Branson announced the setting up of a new global science and technology prize — The Virgin Earth Challenge — in the belief that history has shown that prizes of this nature encourage technological advancements for the good of mankind. The Virgin Earth Challenge was to award $25 million to the individual or group who are able to demonstrate a commercially viable design that will result in the net removal of anthropogenic, atmospheric greenhouse gases each year for at least ten years without countervailing harmful effects. This removal must have long-term effects and contribute materially to the stability of the Earth’s climate. Branson also announced that he would be joined in the adjudication of the prize by a panel of five judges, all world authorities in their respective fields: Al Gore, Sir Crispin Tickell, Tim Flannery, James E. Hansen, and James Lovelock. Richard Branson is Illuminati. Richard Branson you owe me $25 million. Richard Branson you are using my Technology and as such infringing my patent. Same for Elon Musk who is also Illuminati and a Fraud. Elon Musk you are a thief who stole my Invention on which the Hyperloop is based. I claim the Hyperloop as my Intellectual Property Now at that time I was already working on my Invention for some time which not only reduces CO² emissions by not creating it, it is to this day the only technology that creates absolute Zero emissions forever. Not only that, it is the fastest safest cheapest transportation technology that can ever be. And there is so much more to it. The Absolute Transportation Technology So let us start from the beginning: I sat out to create an absolute in transportation technology with the technology currently available. It had to be fast safe cheap and to produce zero emissions. In 2005 I saw the first experimental Hypersonic craft flying from womera Australia the HyShot. It uses an air breathing technology that is called “Scramjet” technology. A scramjet (supersonic combustion ramjet) is a variant of a ramjet air breathing jet engine in which combustion takes place in supersonic airflow. As in ramjets, a scramjet relies on high vehicle speed to compress the incoming air forcefully before combustion (hence scramjet), but whereas a ramjet decelerates the air to subsonic velocities before combustion, the airflow in a scramjet is supersonic. The first patent for a scramjet was done in 1908 by René Lorin. René Lorin (24 March 1877– 16 January 1933) was a French aerospace engineer and inventor of the ramjet. In 1908 he patented the first subsonic ramjet design. Lorin published the principles of a ramjet in articles in the journal L’Aérophile from 1908 to 1913, expressing the idea that the exhaust from internal combustion engines could be directed into nozzles to create jet propulsion. He could not build this invention since there was no way at the time for an aircraft to go fast enough for a ramjet to function properly. To this day this is one of the most interesting and capable Inventions of all time. It certainly is my favorite and I studied it to the detail, so much that I feel not another person knows this technology as I do. But there is a catch. Flying an aircraft at Hypersonic speed is a problem, simply because above a certain speed it will become uncontrollable. Also Hypersonic physics are different and dictate the shape of the aircraft making it commercially insignificant. To go around this problem I put the aircraft on a track so navigation is purposely build into the system and it becomes as save as it can be. Again this isn’t really a new Idea combining train and aviation technology into one. M-497 Black Beetle LIMRV and SVL Turbojet Trains were all build and failed because you cannot just put a rocket engine on a car or a train in the hope it works. In 1929 Franz Kruckenberg demonstrated with his “Schienenzeppelin” a combination of aviation and track technology that reached 250kph using lightweight engineering and a 600hp BMW engine. In 1974 the Aérotrain, invented by Jean Bertin in the 1960s, used a single reinforced concrete rail in the shape of an inverted “T”. Prototypes for long-distance travel used gas turbines for propulsion, eventually reaching a peak speed of 430.4 km/h (breaking rail’s record at the time) with the I80-HV. Funnily enough there is a tax evasion company in Paris that calls themselves “Spacetrain.fr” which is nothing but exactly Jean Bertin’s Aérotrain sold as their technology, an old hag in a new frog. They have changed nothing but somehow they attracted investment of over 5 mil Euro which I suppose is what fraudsters do. I contacted those criminals, because frauds they are and I promised to expose them as I do. Emeuric Gleizes Thomas Bernin and the others of this money laundering tax evasion criminal enterprise I contacted and offered my technology which let’s face it deserves more the name spacetrain than they do. They called me insane for proposing my technology and I promised to expose their fraud which I do. Emeuric Gleizes in particular has a pocket full of § 1.000 companies meaning he is a fraud and does money laundering for the mafia. So I shall expose them all. My technology took all those who came before me into account and analyzed them to create an absolute in transportation technology. It uses Lightweight engineering and a combination of hovercraft, track, jet, ramjet, scramjet and other technologies to be able to basically “fly” over a specially shaped track with absolute zero emissions. It is faster than any airplane can ever be safer too and since it is capable to go from city center to city center it shaves at least 2h of any journey that you take to and from the airport. It can carry up to 256 passengers. It has the highest passenger transition rate of any transport technology that increases with the distance you travel. It uses a linear scramjet technology and it’s speed is directly related to the distance you travel. It has the capability to accelerate between any given point A to Be permanently. It does so by enabling all four strokes of a combustion engine permanently at the same time. The air is compressed by forward motion and it is an open system. The meaning of this is that the faster you go the faster you can go without limitations. It uses self levitation by forward motion to keep itself at balance at any given speed. There is no maximum speed because the speed is directly related to the distance you travel; the longer the distance the higher the speed you can achieve. There is no cruising speed, you accelerate, you decelerate and you are there. Every point on this planet can be reached within under one hour. And all that with absolute zero emissions. Jules Verne famously wrote a book called “In 80 Days around the world”. With my technology you can travel in 4 h around the world with absolute zero emissions; beat that. Now let us have a look at the biggest Illuminati scumbag of all; Elon Musk. Elon Musk copied my whole website back in 2010 / 2011. I traced his IP address to SpaceX and I tried to contact him through Tesla. I stayed in contact with Rick Avalos from Tesla but scumbag Elon never came back to me, now I know why. The Hyperloop is a blatant copy of my technology with the only difference is that it is in a tube which makes no difference it would work but not as efficiently. It actually would slow it down being in a tube. Richard Branson the other Illuminati fraud and a fraud he is by all accounts and his Virgin Hyperloop is just another scam just like Elon Musk. In fact everything they promise they have infringed on my patent from the central command center to the design it all came from me and they try to bury me and my invention and have done so over the past decade. Remember when Thomas Edison killed an Elephant to demonstrate the dangers of Nikola Tesla’s AC technology? It is just that. The Hyperloop is just a diversion a distraction from the fact that we are capable of so much more than we are told we are. Elon Musk is Illuminati and so is Richard Branson. Neural Lace (which is in the so called Vax shots) Neural Link Starlink SpaceX Boston Dynamics and Freescale semiconductor, all these combined are one gigantic weapon against mankind. The Boring Company and Hyperloop are designed to build underground cities and connect them. What they plan is the following: In 2022 they will start to unleash a war a war which is AI robots against the Human Race. When this happens they will go underground in the cities they build and already have and connect them with my technology deviation the Hyperloop. The Boring Company will help them expand their cities underground and build tunnels for the Hyperloop. Then they will start to poison the Atmosphere so they can kill all the useless eaters (that is you and me). At that stage there is no escape from hell on earth. But we have a choice. All energy can be created out of water with absolute zero emissions forever. We can regrow all the deserts in this world and make lush gardens out of it. We can connect every continent every country every city with Hypersonic Zero Emission Trains. All the Airports which will be obsolete can be with little to no costs converted into Cities making room a plenty for people to have space to live. All this with absolute zero emissions. Man can live free and birds can recoup the skies. We can make this world a paradise. And by 2050 we will be able to reach every planet in this solar system based on the technology I propose and that is available to us right here right now. It is either that what I propose or slavery forever under the illusion of a Great Reset and a Green new Deal that like always promises you everything and gives you nothing. It is Orwell’s 1984 Huxley's Brave new World and Adolf Hitler on steroids. The choice is yours and yours alone. Stand up and fight for your freedom. Or perish forever. Veni Vidi Veritas Fritz Freud https://substack.com/home/post/p-44098947
    SUBSTACK.COM
    The Invention the Illuminati does not want you to know about
    Absolute Zero Emissions forever combined with theoretical infinite speed
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 2749 Views
  • Ana Maria Mihalcea's Defamation Against ASEA Redox Molecules
    Dr. Ariyana Love (ND)
    I met Ana Maria Mihalcea while I was working in Spain, in July 2022. I was meeting weekly with the Medical Doctors For Covid Ethics (MD4CE) group since October 2021. Ana Maria was invited into MD4CE group in the summer of 2022.

    Ana Maria learned from others in the MD4CE group that I was successfully detoxing people from the Covid-19 vaccines. She approached me early in July and asked me to do a Skype call with her. During the video call she told me that she’s a “Medical Doctor who now uses only Naturopathic Medicines”. She did this in order to get me to trust her but it’s obviously a lie because now she’s promoting unapproved industrial poisons such as EDTA and Methylene Blue.

    Ana Maria showed me two images that were supposedly of her own blood, and said that she had been “poisoned”. The blood image was clearly contaminated with Covid-19 tech. Ana Maria claimed that the tech induced brain injury and caused her to lose some of her cognitive ability. I could see the brain damage from the way she slurred her words and struggled to find words.

    Ana Maria told me she’d “tried everything to get the tech out” of her body but nothing worked, and she asked me if I could help her. I gave her a free consultation and instructed her to use 16 ounces of ASEA Redox daily, along with other supplements in my protocol. She further asked me if there was anything else that could be used to detox besides the Redox supplement. I told her that Humic Acid might work or at least it would help, along with other natural medicines in my protocol. I also told her that Humic Acid is natural nano-minerals so it’s aborption rate into cells is rapid, and it works as a cellular driver of nutrients.

    After the free consultation, Ana Maria began buying about 4 cases of the ASEA Redox supplement from me each month. Her first purchase was on July 10th 2022. She continued to buy 4 cases of the Redox supplement for 5 consecutive months.

    In September 2022, Ana Maria began telling people in the MD4CE group that redox molecules do not work. Despite this, she continued buying 4 cases per month from me.

    In October 2022, Ana Maria publicly addressed the MD4CE group on a weekly call with about 100 of the world’s leading experts in attendance, exclaiming that “ASEA Redox doesn’t work Ariyana”. I was stunned. That was a bald-faced lie!

    Ana Maria continued to purchase 4 cases of ASEA Redox in November 2022. Her last purchase was on December 27th, 2022. So, while Ana Maria was defaming me and ASEA to my colleagues and peers, she was simultaneously using my protocol to detox herself. Then she turned around and gave credit to EDTA. How bloody devious!

    The MD4CE group includes some of the world’s leading experts in the fields of medicine, science, biology, chemistry, and more. Ana Maria’s defamation resulted in members of the group lashing out at me, abusing me and putting me down. Despite the fact that the group is led by medical experts, they failed to do any due diligence and failed to read from the hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed papers on the healing power of redox molecules, before inflicting damaging to my career.

    Ana Maria further stole my research and began using Humic Acid in her protocols with her patients! She did this without crediting me because she obviously felt entitled to do so.

    After Ana Maria lied about me and the efficacy of redox molecules to the medical doctors, the founder of the group, Dr. Stephen Frost, began censoring and defaming me as well. He and the moderator, Charles (CK), decided that I would no longer be allowed to speak in the group, despite that I’d been speaking freely in the group for an entire year, without any problems.

    I captured this screenshot on October 13, 2022, while I was in a MD4CE call when residing in Hollola, Finland.


    Dr. Stephen Frost contacted me in October 2021, asking me to join and give a presentation to the MD4CE group. I was in the group for several months before Charles joined and began moderating. Prior to Charles joining, the group operated democratically, and each member could raise their hand and have a turn at speaking and asking questions of other presenters.

    Treating me in this way and censoring my ability to interact in the group was degrading and hurtful. I took a screenshot of their undemocratic abuse and posted it onto the group chat for everyone to see. I wanted the others to know that I was being targeted. Immediately, Charles and Stephen removed me from the group and stopped sending me invites.

    Right before I was removed from MD4CE, I invited Dr. Robert Young into the group in October 2022. Despite that Dr. Young had analyzed ASEA’s redox molecules in a science lab and knew their efficacy, the medical doctors took Ana Maria’s word without question. Dr. Frost did not bother to consult with Dr. Young. He failed to read the research papers such as “ASEA And The Big Three” which demonstrates how redox molecules boost glutathione levels up to between 500-800%.


    Dr. Frost proceeded to defame me. I had a couple members of MD4CE reach out to tell me that Dr. Frost refused to give them my contact information when they asked him for it and told me he was attacking my good character.

    The Israeli-Zionists in MD4CE had also been pressuring Dr. Frost to remove me from the group ever since I joined. They attacked everyone who was exposing Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles in the Covid-19 jabs, including Karen Kingston and La Quinta Columna.

    MD4CE knowledge of redox molecules and our body’s natural operating system is close to non-existent. A few members were complaining that the Redox supplement was “too expensive”. They didn’t want ASEA to get the credit they deserve, possibly because it’s from nature and not a pharmaceutical. Instead of researching redox molecules, they chose to cancel me and inflict harm on my career. Dr. Frost has made no effort to apologize to me. He too feels entitled to discriminate against me.

    Ana Maria’s defamation was successful, but it didn’t stop there. She went straight to Stew Peters and got me canceled from his show with her viscous lies. My last interview with Stew Peters was a year ago, where I revealed that the patent for the PCR “test” is linked to human cloning. The interview was in September 2022.

    Dr. Judy Mikovitz went on the Thrivetime Show on InfoWars, and backed my research. Clay Clark played a clip of that interview with Stew Peters and asked Dr. Judy Mikovitz to comment on the PCR swabs being cloning devices. She not only backed my research, but she also revealed that SARS-Cov-2 is a “synthetic retrovirus" which is part of HIV and XRV (snake venom syncytin). It was a great interview that was unfortuneately censored!

    While many have heralded Ana Maria Mihalcea as a hero for mainstreaming a deadly industrial poison as a “detox” for Covid-19 vaccine injuries, and touting it as a miracle treatment for everybody else, it’s important to take a closer look at her shady character.

    Ana Maria is deeply involved in Ramtha’s teachings. Ramtha is a male entity channeled by a woman. Ana Maria’s testimonial was featured on Ramtha’s RSE Newsletter in 2014, where she boasts about Ramtha’s spiritual guidance enabling her to win more money by gambling on slot machines in a casino.

    In Ana Maria’s own words:

    “This past week, after a days work, and maintaining my Peace, I won:

    9/2/14 $1,300 Net on Rainbow Riches
    9//3/14 $1,715.75 Jackpot on Cheetah (Net $1,520)
    9/4/14 $700 Net on Cheetah
    9/5/14 $750 Net on Rainbow Riches
    9/7/14 $1,973 Jackpot on Count Vampire (Net $1,898)

    I went to the Casino on 9/6. I for the first time in days got angry about something at work and did not immediately self correct. I won that evening, but did not walk out with a net Win. That was a great lesson that Nothing and Nobody is worth loosing my Peace for and interrupting my future Consciousness Stream.”



    Now, are these spiritual values? I hope this sheds more light into Ana Maria’s ambitions.

    The MD4CE complained many times to me that ASEA Redox is “too expensive” but the EDTA chelation is about $2,000 per visit, not including travel! Whereas a case of ASEA Redox is $160 at retail price, and $130 wholesale, with a monthly subscription.

    ASEA Redox is perhaps the world’s most effective heavy metal chelator and this is why Ana Maria defamed me after using my protocol to detox herself while giving credit to EDTA “chelation”. She knows redox molecules are effective, but she had an agenda to get rich and sell EDTA snakeoil poison to people.

    Now Ana Maria is attacking Master Peace through a nurse practitioner. They’re falsely claiming that Master Peace includes self-assembling nanotechnology in an insidious attempt to defame the company and prevent people from achieving true detox. Ana Maria is defaming all the best supplements that are in competition with her EDTA snakeoil.

    Master Peace is another critical breakthrough in medicine. It’s affordable for all and is one of the best heavy metal chelators to exist. It works synergistically with redox molecules, increasing their efficacy.

    Please review the detailed peer reviewed literature on redox molecules and review the Dark Field Microscopy images of blood before and after using ASEA Redox, through the work of a colleague, Dr. Peggy Marienfeld.


    PLEASE READ: EDTA Snakeoil! Ana Maria Mihalcea’s Medical Malfeasance Exposed



    https://substack.com/home/post/p-144981224
    Ana Maria Mihalcea's Defamation Against ASEA Redox Molecules Dr. Ariyana Love (ND) I met Ana Maria Mihalcea while I was working in Spain, in July 2022. I was meeting weekly with the Medical Doctors For Covid Ethics (MD4CE) group since October 2021. Ana Maria was invited into MD4CE group in the summer of 2022. Ana Maria learned from others in the MD4CE group that I was successfully detoxing people from the Covid-19 vaccines. She approached me early in July and asked me to do a Skype call with her. During the video call she told me that she’s a “Medical Doctor who now uses only Naturopathic Medicines”. She did this in order to get me to trust her but it’s obviously a lie because now she’s promoting unapproved industrial poisons such as EDTA and Methylene Blue. Ana Maria showed me two images that were supposedly of her own blood, and said that she had been “poisoned”. The blood image was clearly contaminated with Covid-19 tech. Ana Maria claimed that the tech induced brain injury and caused her to lose some of her cognitive ability. I could see the brain damage from the way she slurred her words and struggled to find words. Ana Maria told me she’d “tried everything to get the tech out” of her body but nothing worked, and she asked me if I could help her. I gave her a free consultation and instructed her to use 16 ounces of ASEA Redox daily, along with other supplements in my protocol. She further asked me if there was anything else that could be used to detox besides the Redox supplement. I told her that Humic Acid might work or at least it would help, along with other natural medicines in my protocol. I also told her that Humic Acid is natural nano-minerals so it’s aborption rate into cells is rapid, and it works as a cellular driver of nutrients. After the free consultation, Ana Maria began buying about 4 cases of the ASEA Redox supplement from me each month. Her first purchase was on July 10th 2022. She continued to buy 4 cases of the Redox supplement for 5 consecutive months. In September 2022, Ana Maria began telling people in the MD4CE group that redox molecules do not work. Despite this, she continued buying 4 cases per month from me. In October 2022, Ana Maria publicly addressed the MD4CE group on a weekly call with about 100 of the world’s leading experts in attendance, exclaiming that “ASEA Redox doesn’t work Ariyana”. I was stunned. That was a bald-faced lie! Ana Maria continued to purchase 4 cases of ASEA Redox in November 2022. Her last purchase was on December 27th, 2022. So, while Ana Maria was defaming me and ASEA to my colleagues and peers, she was simultaneously using my protocol to detox herself. Then she turned around and gave credit to EDTA. How bloody devious! The MD4CE group includes some of the world’s leading experts in the fields of medicine, science, biology, chemistry, and more. Ana Maria’s defamation resulted in members of the group lashing out at me, abusing me and putting me down. Despite the fact that the group is led by medical experts, they failed to do any due diligence and failed to read from the hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed papers on the healing power of redox molecules, before inflicting damaging to my career. Ana Maria further stole my research and began using Humic Acid in her protocols with her patients! She did this without crediting me because she obviously felt entitled to do so. After Ana Maria lied about me and the efficacy of redox molecules to the medical doctors, the founder of the group, Dr. Stephen Frost, began censoring and defaming me as well. He and the moderator, Charles (CK), decided that I would no longer be allowed to speak in the group, despite that I’d been speaking freely in the group for an entire year, without any problems. I captured this screenshot on October 13, 2022, while I was in a MD4CE call when residing in Hollola, Finland. Dr. Stephen Frost contacted me in October 2021, asking me to join and give a presentation to the MD4CE group. I was in the group for several months before Charles joined and began moderating. Prior to Charles joining, the group operated democratically, and each member could raise their hand and have a turn at speaking and asking questions of other presenters. Treating me in this way and censoring my ability to interact in the group was degrading and hurtful. I took a screenshot of their undemocratic abuse and posted it onto the group chat for everyone to see. I wanted the others to know that I was being targeted. Immediately, Charles and Stephen removed me from the group and stopped sending me invites. Right before I was removed from MD4CE, I invited Dr. Robert Young into the group in October 2022. Despite that Dr. Young had analyzed ASEA’s redox molecules in a science lab and knew their efficacy, the medical doctors took Ana Maria’s word without question. Dr. Frost did not bother to consult with Dr. Young. He failed to read the research papers such as “ASEA And The Big Three” which demonstrates how redox molecules boost glutathione levels up to between 500-800%. Dr. Frost proceeded to defame me. I had a couple members of MD4CE reach out to tell me that Dr. Frost refused to give them my contact information when they asked him for it and told me he was attacking my good character. The Israeli-Zionists in MD4CE had also been pressuring Dr. Frost to remove me from the group ever since I joined. They attacked everyone who was exposing Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles in the Covid-19 jabs, including Karen Kingston and La Quinta Columna. MD4CE knowledge of redox molecules and our body’s natural operating system is close to non-existent. A few members were complaining that the Redox supplement was “too expensive”. They didn’t want ASEA to get the credit they deserve, possibly because it’s from nature and not a pharmaceutical. Instead of researching redox molecules, they chose to cancel me and inflict harm on my career. Dr. Frost has made no effort to apologize to me. He too feels entitled to discriminate against me. Ana Maria’s defamation was successful, but it didn’t stop there. She went straight to Stew Peters and got me canceled from his show with her viscous lies. My last interview with Stew Peters was a year ago, where I revealed that the patent for the PCR “test” is linked to human cloning. The interview was in September 2022. Dr. Judy Mikovitz went on the Thrivetime Show on InfoWars, and backed my research. Clay Clark played a clip of that interview with Stew Peters and asked Dr. Judy Mikovitz to comment on the PCR swabs being cloning devices. She not only backed my research, but she also revealed that SARS-Cov-2 is a “synthetic retrovirus" which is part of HIV and XRV (snake venom syncytin). It was a great interview that was unfortuneately censored! While many have heralded Ana Maria Mihalcea as a hero for mainstreaming a deadly industrial poison as a “detox” for Covid-19 vaccine injuries, and touting it as a miracle treatment for everybody else, it’s important to take a closer look at her shady character. Ana Maria is deeply involved in Ramtha’s teachings. Ramtha is a male entity channeled by a woman. Ana Maria’s testimonial was featured on Ramtha’s RSE Newsletter in 2014, where she boasts about Ramtha’s spiritual guidance enabling her to win more money by gambling on slot machines in a casino. In Ana Maria’s own words: “This past week, after a days work, and maintaining my Peace, I won: 9/2/14 $1,300 Net on Rainbow Riches 9//3/14 $1,715.75 Jackpot on Cheetah (Net $1,520) 9/4/14 $700 Net on Cheetah 9/5/14 $750 Net on Rainbow Riches 9/7/14 $1,973 Jackpot on Count Vampire (Net $1,898) I went to the Casino on 9/6. I for the first time in days got angry about something at work and did not immediately self correct. I won that evening, but did not walk out with a net Win. That was a great lesson that Nothing and Nobody is worth loosing my Peace for and interrupting my future Consciousness Stream.” Now, are these spiritual values? I hope this sheds more light into Ana Maria’s ambitions. The MD4CE complained many times to me that ASEA Redox is “too expensive” but the EDTA chelation is about $2,000 per visit, not including travel! Whereas a case of ASEA Redox is $160 at retail price, and $130 wholesale, with a monthly subscription. ASEA Redox is perhaps the world’s most effective heavy metal chelator and this is why Ana Maria defamed me after using my protocol to detox herself while giving credit to EDTA “chelation”. She knows redox molecules are effective, but she had an agenda to get rich and sell EDTA snakeoil poison to people. Now Ana Maria is attacking Master Peace through a nurse practitioner. They’re falsely claiming that Master Peace includes self-assembling nanotechnology in an insidious attempt to defame the company and prevent people from achieving true detox. Ana Maria is defaming all the best supplements that are in competition with her EDTA snakeoil. Master Peace is another critical breakthrough in medicine. It’s affordable for all and is one of the best heavy metal chelators to exist. It works synergistically with redox molecules, increasing their efficacy. Please review the detailed peer reviewed literature on redox molecules and review the Dark Field Microscopy images of blood before and after using ASEA Redox, through the work of a colleague, Dr. Peggy Marienfeld. PLEASE READ: EDTA Snakeoil! Ana Maria Mihalcea’s Medical Malfeasance Exposed https://substack.com/home/post/p-144981224
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Ana Maria Mihalcea's Defamation Against ASEA Redox Molecules
    I met Ana Maria Mihalcea while I was working in Spain, in July 2022. I was meeting weekly with the Medical Doctors For Covid Ethics (MD4CE) group since October 2021. Ana Maria was invited into MD4CE group in the summer of 2022. Ana Maria learned from others in the MD4CE group that I was successfully detoxing people from the Covid-19 vaccines. She approached me early in July and asked me to do a Skype call with her. During the video call she told me that she’s a
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1964 Views
  • Call To Action: 26,000+ Signatories are Calling to STOP THE SHOTS — The Hope Accord - LETS JOIN THEM
    Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD
    Dear subscribers,

    please see this article on the Hope Accord, calling to Stop The Bioweapon Shots.

    I signed today.

    There are now 60.000 awake subscribers on this substack and we can help this cause along.

    While we know that this language is soft, careful and diplomatic - rather than calling these shots the genocidal weapons of mass destruction that they are - but the outcome is what we do want and support. STOP THE SHOTS… Ban the Jabs, get the weapons of mass destruction off the market. DO IT NOW.

    Please consider signing and sharing this.

    Thank you for your support to help save our human family.

    Dr Ana

    26,000+ Signatories are Calling to STOP THE SHOTS — The Hope Accord

    The Hope Accord - sign here

    1. THE IMMEDIATE SUSPENSION OF THE COVID-19 mRNA VACCINE PRODUCTS A growing body of evidence suggests that the widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths.

    The association observed between the vaccine rollout and these concerning trends is now supported by additional significant findings. These include the discovery of plausible biological mechanisms of harm demonstrated in laboratory and autopsy studies, as well as high rates of adverse events seen in randomised clinical trials and national surveillance programs. Altogether, these observations indicate a causal link.

    This new technology was granted emergency use authorisation to address a situation that no longer exists. Going forward, the burden of proof falls on those still advocating for these products to compellingly demonstrate that they aren’t resulting in net harm. Until such evidence is presented, regulators should suspend their use as a matter of standard medical precaution.

    2. A COMPREHENSIVE RE-EVALUATION OF THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF ALL COVID-19 VACCINE PRODUCTS Independent investigations must be properly resourced to allow a comprehensive re-evaluation of all Covid-19 vaccine products.

    There must be a full exploration of mechanisms of harm to provide insight into their impact on the human body, both short and long term. Effectiveness must be reassessed through a comprehensive review of actual clinical impact on illness and mortality, as opposed to synthetic results based on modelled assumptions.

    We call on the scientific community to come forward with findings from unpublished Covid-19 vaccine studies. This will help mitigate publication bias, whereby unfavourable results were often rejected or withheld due to fears of reputational damage. Crucially, government bodies and the pharmaceutical industry must also provide full transparency, granting access to previously undisclosed anonymised patient-level data from clinical trials and surveillance programs.

    These cumulative actions will help determine any real world benefit of these products versus the true extent of the damage caused.

    3. THE IMMEDIATE RECOGNITION AND SUPPORT FOR THE VACCINE-INJURED The denial of vaccine injury is a betrayal of those who followed official directives, often under coercion from mandates restricting their access to work, education, travel, hospitality and sports.

    The vaccine-injured must be recognised and every effort made to understand their conditions. Support should include readily accessible multidisciplinary clinics offering investigation and treatment as well as appropriate compensation for all those who have been harmed.

    4. THE RESTORATION OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES ABANDONED DURING THE COVID-19 ERA Fundamental and cherished principles of medical ethics were disregarded on the premise of an emergency. These included: ‘first do no harm’, informed consent, bodily autonomy and the notion that adults protect children – not the other way around. The precautionary principle was inverted. Also, particularly concerning was the erosion of free speech – a democratic principle that underpinned the ability to question untested interventions whilst ensuring other principles were upheld. The consequence was exposing the public, especially healthy young people – including children – to unacceptable risks of harm.

    Emergencies are never a reason to abandon our principles; it is precisely at such times that we most profoundly depend on them. Only after acknowledging they were wrongly abandoned can we commit to upholding them consistently and in doing so, better protect future generations.

    5. ADDRESSING THE ROOT CAUSES OF OUR CURRENT PREDICAMENT The medical profession must lead by admitting we lost our way.

    By drawing attention to these medical and ethical issues surrounding the Covid-19 response, we hope to validate and amplify the call to establish the relevant facts and ensure vital lessons are learned.

    An honest and thorough investigation is needed, addressing the root causes that have led us to this place, including institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate.

    We ultimately seek a renewed commitment to the core principles of ethical medicine, returning to an era in which we strive for transparency, accountability and responsible decision-making throughout the spheres of medicine and public health.

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-146512265
    Call To Action: 26,000+ Signatories are Calling to STOP THE SHOTS — The Hope Accord - LETS JOIN THEM Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD Dear subscribers, please see this article on the Hope Accord, calling to Stop The Bioweapon Shots. I signed today. There are now 60.000 awake subscribers on this substack and we can help this cause along. While we know that this language is soft, careful and diplomatic - rather than calling these shots the genocidal weapons of mass destruction that they are - but the outcome is what we do want and support. STOP THE SHOTS… Ban the Jabs, get the weapons of mass destruction off the market. DO IT NOW. Please consider signing and sharing this. Thank you for your support to help save our human family. Dr Ana 26,000+ Signatories are Calling to STOP THE SHOTS — The Hope Accord The Hope Accord - sign here 1. THE IMMEDIATE SUSPENSION OF THE COVID-19 mRNA VACCINE PRODUCTS A growing body of evidence suggests that the widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths. The association observed between the vaccine rollout and these concerning trends is now supported by additional significant findings. These include the discovery of plausible biological mechanisms of harm demonstrated in laboratory and autopsy studies, as well as high rates of adverse events seen in randomised clinical trials and national surveillance programs. Altogether, these observations indicate a causal link. This new technology was granted emergency use authorisation to address a situation that no longer exists. Going forward, the burden of proof falls on those still advocating for these products to compellingly demonstrate that they aren’t resulting in net harm. Until such evidence is presented, regulators should suspend their use as a matter of standard medical precaution. 2. A COMPREHENSIVE RE-EVALUATION OF THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF ALL COVID-19 VACCINE PRODUCTS Independent investigations must be properly resourced to allow a comprehensive re-evaluation of all Covid-19 vaccine products. There must be a full exploration of mechanisms of harm to provide insight into their impact on the human body, both short and long term. Effectiveness must be reassessed through a comprehensive review of actual clinical impact on illness and mortality, as opposed to synthetic results based on modelled assumptions. We call on the scientific community to come forward with findings from unpublished Covid-19 vaccine studies. This will help mitigate publication bias, whereby unfavourable results were often rejected or withheld due to fears of reputational damage. Crucially, government bodies and the pharmaceutical industry must also provide full transparency, granting access to previously undisclosed anonymised patient-level data from clinical trials and surveillance programs. These cumulative actions will help determine any real world benefit of these products versus the true extent of the damage caused. 3. THE IMMEDIATE RECOGNITION AND SUPPORT FOR THE VACCINE-INJURED The denial of vaccine injury is a betrayal of those who followed official directives, often under coercion from mandates restricting their access to work, education, travel, hospitality and sports. The vaccine-injured must be recognised and every effort made to understand their conditions. Support should include readily accessible multidisciplinary clinics offering investigation and treatment as well as appropriate compensation for all those who have been harmed. 4. THE RESTORATION OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES ABANDONED DURING THE COVID-19 ERA Fundamental and cherished principles of medical ethics were disregarded on the premise of an emergency. These included: ‘first do no harm’, informed consent, bodily autonomy and the notion that adults protect children – not the other way around. The precautionary principle was inverted. Also, particularly concerning was the erosion of free speech – a democratic principle that underpinned the ability to question untested interventions whilst ensuring other principles were upheld. The consequence was exposing the public, especially healthy young people – including children – to unacceptable risks of harm. Emergencies are never a reason to abandon our principles; it is precisely at such times that we most profoundly depend on them. Only after acknowledging they were wrongly abandoned can we commit to upholding them consistently and in doing so, better protect future generations. 5. ADDRESSING THE ROOT CAUSES OF OUR CURRENT PREDICAMENT The medical profession must lead by admitting we lost our way. By drawing attention to these medical and ethical issues surrounding the Covid-19 response, we hope to validate and amplify the call to establish the relevant facts and ensure vital lessons are learned. An honest and thorough investigation is needed, addressing the root causes that have led us to this place, including institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate. We ultimately seek a renewed commitment to the core principles of ethical medicine, returning to an era in which we strive for transparency, accountability and responsible decision-making throughout the spheres of medicine and public health. https://substack.com/home/post/p-146512265
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Call To Action: 26,000+ Signatories are Calling to STOP THE SHOTS — The Hope Accord - LETS JOIN THEM
    Dear subscribers, please see this article on the Hope Accord, calling to Stop The Bioweapon Shots. I signed today. There are now 60.000 awake subscribers on this substack and we can help this cause along. While we know that this language is soft, careful and diplomatic - rather than calling these shots the genocidal weapons of mass destruction that they are - but the outcome is what we do want and support. STOP THE SHOTS… Ban the Jabs, get the weapons of mass destruction off the market. DO IT NOW.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 1708 Views
  • A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    July 7, 2024
    Uncategorized
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021)

    The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses.

    The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4).

    1. Strengths of the Study

    The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments.

    2. Areas for Improvement

    2.1. Overall Presentation

    The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice.

    There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review.

    2.2. Descriptive Statistics

    More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial.

    2.3. Covariates/Confounders

    Multicollinearity

    The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table.

    Limited Covariates

    The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4).

    Statistical Methods

    An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results.

    It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively.

    If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results.

    While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results.

    The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3).

    Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers.

    3. Conclusion

    There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research.

    For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research.

    4. References

    Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343

    Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.



    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key

    by Sarena L. McLean, MSc.

    The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses.

    Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key July 7, 2024 Uncategorized By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4). 1. Strengths of the Study The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments. 2. Areas for Improvement 2.1. Overall Presentation The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice. There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review. 2.2. Descriptive Statistics More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial. 2.3. Covariates/Confounders Multicollinearity The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table. Limited Covariates The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Statistical Methods An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results. It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively. If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results. While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results. The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3). Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers. 3. Conclusion There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research. For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research. 4. References Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson. A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key by Sarena L. McLean, MSc. The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    DOCTORS4COVIDETHICS.ORG
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study 'A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province' by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3620 Views
  • WORLDWIDE REVOLT vs KILLER VACCINES - VT Foreign Policy
    July 10, 2024
    VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel

    $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts
    Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State.

    Introduction by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio

    VERSIONE IN ITALIANO

    While in Italy and the European Union the shameful strategy of continuing the propaganda of Covid vaccines without the slightest concrete investigation into their safety continues to prevail, in the rest of the world, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world which was the first to support the need for Covid genetic sera although experimental (mRNA or mDNA messenger) there is now a real battle underway for the truth also shared by the judges.

    The magistrates who in the United Kingdom have put Big Pharma on trial for dead or damaged vaccinated people and in the USA have opened very heavy investigations into the pharmaceutical companies sponsored by Bill Gates who seems untouchable only by his friend the Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her prize-winning President of the European Commission Ursula Von Der Leyen.

    What interests do Meloni and Von Der Leyen have in not shedding light on the now clear crimes of Big Pharma’s vaccines???

    Hundreds of Doctors and Scientists Sign Accord Calling for Suspension and Investigation of mRNA Vaccines

    Hundreds of doctors and scientists from around the world have signed an accord calling for the suspension and investigation of mRNA Covid vaccines due to serious concerns about their safety and efficacy.

    The statement, called the Hope Accord, was released this week and swiftly gained nearly 3,000 signatures. These included endorsements from over 200 doctors, 300 other healthcare professionals and over 100 scientists and academics, with all signatures being verified to ensure they are from real and qualified people.

    The statement, which also calls for recognition and support for the vaccine injured, addresses five key priorities:

    Immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine products: It says mRNA vaccine products should be suspended immediately due to a growing body of evidence suggesting a link between the vaccine rollout and alarming trends in disability and excess deaths.
    Comprehensive re-evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy: It demands independent investigations to thoroughly reassess the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products, ensuring transparency and full disclosure of data.
    Recognition and support for the vaccine injured: The accord stresses the need to acknowledge and support individuals who have suffered vaccine-related injuries, providing them with the necessary medical care and compensation.
    Restoration of ethical principles abandoned during the COVID-19 era: It calls for a return to core medical ethics, including informed consent, bodily autonomy and the protection of children, all of which were compromised in the last few years.
    Addressing the root causes of the current predicament: The accord advocates an honest investigation into the factors that led to the current ethical and medical issues, including institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate.
    The initiative grew out of the U.K. People’s Vaccine Inquiry, beginning life as a statement by members of Doctors for Patients U.K., including GP Dr. Ayiesha Malik, Surgeon Dr. James Royle and Cardiologist Dr. Dean Patterson. Emergency physician Dr. Tim Kelly saw the need for a broader international ethical statement and drew in supportive clinicians from the U.S., Canada, South Africa and Australia.

    In a press release, the organisers said the accord “calls on the medical community and policymakers to reassess the ethical breaches of recent years and ensure future health crises are managed with greater adherence to ethical principles and scientific integrity”.

    Healthcare professionals, scientists and concerned members of the public are invited to join the movement by adding their signature and support.

    Top heart doctor Aseem Malhotra has endorsed the statement in a video on X. Jordan Peterson has also backed the initiative, saying that while he doubts ethics can really be brought back to medicine, “these people are worth supporting”.

    Originally publisthed by The Daily Sceptic

    All links to previous Gospa News investigations have been added aftermath, for the ties with the topics highlighted

    Fabio G. C. Carisio
    Fabio is investigative journalist since 1991. Now geopolitics, intelligence, military, SARS-Cov-2 manmade, NWO expert and Director-founder of Gospa News: a Christian Information Journal.

    His articles were published on many international media and website as SouthFront, Reseau International, Sputnik Italia, United Nation Association Westminster, Global Research, Kolozeg and more…

    Most popolar investigation on VT is:

    Rumsfeld Shady Heritage in Pandemic: GILEAD’s Intrigues with WHO & Wuhan Lab. Bio-Weapons’ Tests with CIA & Pentagon

    Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio, born on 24/2/1967 in Borgosesia, started working as a reporter when he was only 19 years old in the alpine area of Valsesia, Piedmont, his birth region in Italy. After studying literature and history at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, he became director of the local newspaper Notizia Oggi Vercelli and specialized in judicial reporting.

    For about 15 years he is a correspondent from Northern Italy for the Italian newspapers Libero and Il Giornale, also writing important revelations on the Ustica massacre, a report on Freemasonry and organized crime.

    With independent investigations, he collaborates with Carabinieri and Guardia di Finanza in important investigations that conclude with the arrest of Camorra entrepreneurs or corrupt politicians.

    In July 2018 he found the counter-information web media Gospa News focused on geopolitics, terrorism, Middle East, and military intelligence.

    In 2020 published the book, in Italian only, WUHAN-GATES – The New World Order Plot on SARS-Cov-2 manmade focused on the cycle of investigations Wuhan-Gates

    His investigations was quoted also by The Gateway Pundit, Tasnim and others

    He worked for many years for the magazine Art & Wine as an art critic and curator.

    VETERANS TODAY OLD POSTS

    www.gospanews.net/

    ATTENTION READERS

    We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
    In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

    About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
    Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

    https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/07/worldwide-revolt-vs-killer-vaccines/
    WORLDWIDE REVOLT vs KILLER VACCINES - VT Foreign Policy July 10, 2024 VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State. Introduction by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio VERSIONE IN ITALIANO While in Italy and the European Union the shameful strategy of continuing the propaganda of Covid vaccines without the slightest concrete investigation into their safety continues to prevail, in the rest of the world, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world which was the first to support the need for Covid genetic sera although experimental (mRNA or mDNA messenger) there is now a real battle underway for the truth also shared by the judges. The magistrates who in the United Kingdom have put Big Pharma on trial for dead or damaged vaccinated people and in the USA have opened very heavy investigations into the pharmaceutical companies sponsored by Bill Gates who seems untouchable only by his friend the Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her prize-winning President of the European Commission Ursula Von Der Leyen. What interests do Meloni and Von Der Leyen have in not shedding light on the now clear crimes of Big Pharma’s vaccines??? Hundreds of Doctors and Scientists Sign Accord Calling for Suspension and Investigation of mRNA Vaccines Hundreds of doctors and scientists from around the world have signed an accord calling for the suspension and investigation of mRNA Covid vaccines due to serious concerns about their safety and efficacy. The statement, called the Hope Accord, was released this week and swiftly gained nearly 3,000 signatures. These included endorsements from over 200 doctors, 300 other healthcare professionals and over 100 scientists and academics, with all signatures being verified to ensure they are from real and qualified people. The statement, which also calls for recognition and support for the vaccine injured, addresses five key priorities: Immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine products: It says mRNA vaccine products should be suspended immediately due to a growing body of evidence suggesting a link between the vaccine rollout and alarming trends in disability and excess deaths. Comprehensive re-evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy: It demands independent investigations to thoroughly reassess the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products, ensuring transparency and full disclosure of data. Recognition and support for the vaccine injured: The accord stresses the need to acknowledge and support individuals who have suffered vaccine-related injuries, providing them with the necessary medical care and compensation. Restoration of ethical principles abandoned during the COVID-19 era: It calls for a return to core medical ethics, including informed consent, bodily autonomy and the protection of children, all of which were compromised in the last few years. Addressing the root causes of the current predicament: The accord advocates an honest investigation into the factors that led to the current ethical and medical issues, including institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate. The initiative grew out of the U.K. People’s Vaccine Inquiry, beginning life as a statement by members of Doctors for Patients U.K., including GP Dr. Ayiesha Malik, Surgeon Dr. James Royle and Cardiologist Dr. Dean Patterson. Emergency physician Dr. Tim Kelly saw the need for a broader international ethical statement and drew in supportive clinicians from the U.S., Canada, South Africa and Australia. In a press release, the organisers said the accord “calls on the medical community and policymakers to reassess the ethical breaches of recent years and ensure future health crises are managed with greater adherence to ethical principles and scientific integrity”. Healthcare professionals, scientists and concerned members of the public are invited to join the movement by adding their signature and support. Top heart doctor Aseem Malhotra has endorsed the statement in a video on X. Jordan Peterson has also backed the initiative, saying that while he doubts ethics can really be brought back to medicine, “these people are worth supporting”. Originally publisthed by The Daily Sceptic All links to previous Gospa News investigations have been added aftermath, for the ties with the topics highlighted Fabio G. C. Carisio Fabio is investigative journalist since 1991. Now geopolitics, intelligence, military, SARS-Cov-2 manmade, NWO expert and Director-founder of Gospa News: a Christian Information Journal. His articles were published on many international media and website as SouthFront, Reseau International, Sputnik Italia, United Nation Association Westminster, Global Research, Kolozeg and more… Most popolar investigation on VT is: Rumsfeld Shady Heritage in Pandemic: GILEAD’s Intrigues with WHO & Wuhan Lab. Bio-Weapons’ Tests with CIA & Pentagon Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio, born on 24/2/1967 in Borgosesia, started working as a reporter when he was only 19 years old in the alpine area of Valsesia, Piedmont, his birth region in Italy. After studying literature and history at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, he became director of the local newspaper Notizia Oggi Vercelli and specialized in judicial reporting. For about 15 years he is a correspondent from Northern Italy for the Italian newspapers Libero and Il Giornale, also writing important revelations on the Ustica massacre, a report on Freemasonry and organized crime. With independent investigations, he collaborates with Carabinieri and Guardia di Finanza in important investigations that conclude with the arrest of Camorra entrepreneurs or corrupt politicians. In July 2018 he found the counter-information web media Gospa News focused on geopolitics, terrorism, Middle East, and military intelligence. In 2020 published the book, in Italian only, WUHAN-GATES – The New World Order Plot on SARS-Cov-2 manmade focused on the cycle of investigations Wuhan-Gates His investigations was quoted also by The Gateway Pundit, Tasnim and others He worked for many years for the magazine Art & Wine as an art critic and curator. VETERANS TODAY OLD POSTS www.gospanews.net/ ATTENTION READERS We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion. About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT. https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/07/worldwide-revolt-vs-killer-vaccines/
    WWW.VTFOREIGNPOLICY.COM
    WORLDWIDE REVOLT vs KILLER VACCINES
    Introduction by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio VERSIONE IN ITALIANO While in Italy and the European Union the shameful strategy of continuing the propaganda of Covid vaccines without the slightest concrete investigation into their safety continues to prevail, in the rest of the world, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world which was the first to support the
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 4505 Views

  • Watch: International ‘Hope Accord’ Calls for Immediate Suspension of COVID mRNA Vaccines
    An international group of healthcare professionals, scientists and academics has launched The Hope Accord, demanding immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and the return of “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people,” according to health commentator John Campbell, Ph.D.

    covid vaccines and word "suspend"
    An international group of healthcare professionals, scientists and academics has launched The Hope Accord, demanding immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and the return of “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people,” according to health commentator John Campbell, Ph.D.

    A group of healthcare professionals, scientists, academics and concerned citizens has launched The Hope Accord, an international initiative calling for the immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and a comprehensive reevaluation of their safety and efficacy.

    The accord has garnered signatures from prominent medical experts and researchers who argue that emerging evidence suggests these novel vaccine products may be contributing to increased rates of disability and excess deaths.

    John Campbell, Ph.D., a retired nurse educator and popular health commentator, described the accord in a July 5 video as “basically a new international movement … developed by clever doctors and scientists.” But he emphasized that the accord is “open for everyone to sign.”

    The accord’s signatories, including “well-known and highly reputable professionals” such as diagnostic pathologist Clare Craig, Dr. Kat Lindley and Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., are calling for a return to what they consider fundamental medical ethics and scientific transparency.

    The movement comes amid ongoing debates about the long-term impacts of the global COVID-19 response and the rapid deployment of new vaccine technologies.

    The Hope Accord outlines five primary demands, each addressing what signatories view as critical issues in today’s medical and scientific landscape.

    Hand in glove holding vaccine
    The Vaccine Safety Project

    Learn More

    1. Suspension of COVID mRNA vaccine products

    At the forefront of the accord is a call for the immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine products.

    The accord argues that a “growing body of evidence suggests that the widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths.”

    Signatories justify this call by pointing to what they describe as “plausible biological mechanisms of harm” and high rates of adverse events reported in clinical trials, national surveillance programs and autopsy studies.

    “These vaccine products … contain genetic sequences we feel should be suspended, at least for the time being, until we know one heck of a lot more about them,” Campbell said.

    Gavel and money vaccines
    Did DOJ Lawyers Commit Fraud in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding?

    Learn More

    2. Reevaluation of vaccine safety and efficacy

    The second point calls for a comprehensive reevaluation of the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products.

    The accord demands “independent investigations” that are “properly resourced, preferably by governments and independent agencies,” Campbell said in a follow-up video exploring the details of The Hope Accord.

    The accord calls for focusing on the actual clinical impact on illness and mortality rather than relying on “synthetic results based on modeled assumptions.”

    “We certainly want to limit the use of modeling,” Campbell said, adding that it “causes all sorts of problems.”

    Accord signer and DarkHorse Podcast co-host Weinstein, in a brief video posted July 6 on X (formerly Twitter), said the claim that the mRNA vaccines were safe “was a dangerous lie.”

    3. Recognition and support for vaccine-injured individuals

    The Hope Accord’s third demand focuses on immediate recognition and support for those claiming to be injured by COVID-19 vaccines.

    “Vaccine injury must be recognized and every effort made to understand their conditions,” Campbell said.

    The accord calls for “readily accessible multidisciplinary clinics” offering investigation and treatment, and “appropriate compensation for all those who have been harmed,” according to Campbell.

    Signatories argue that denying vaccine injuries betrays those who followed official directives, often under coercion from mandates restricting access to work, education and other aspects of daily life.

    Lindley, president of the Global Heath Project and an organizer of the Global Covid Summit, told The Defender she signed the accord because governments and regulatory agencies continue to ignore safety and injury issues.

    “While we have had some hearings, there has been no accountability for actions taken during the pandemic,” she said.

    Do you have a news tip? We want to hear from you!

    Contact Us

    4. Restoration of ethical principles

    The fourth point addresses what signatories see as the abandonment of fundamental medical ethics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Campbell highlighted principles such as “First, do no harm,” informed consent, bodily autonomy and “the notion that adults protect children, not the other way around.”

    The accord argues these principles were disregarded under the premise of an emergency.

    “Emergencies are never a reason to abandon our principles; it is precisely at such times that we most profoundly depend on them,” it states.

    Lindley said the lack of ethics on the part of the medical establishment has been “very disheartening” and is one of the reasons she rewrote the Hippocratic oath a few years ago.

    “As physicians, we have failed in our duty to protect the vulnerable and we must reevaluate the state of medicine that we find ourselves in,” she said. “Primu Non Nocere [first, do no harm] is not just a quote, but a way of life and our most sacred promise.”

    scales of justice
    Your support helps fund this work, and CHD’s related advocacy, education and scientific research.

    Donate Now

    5. Addressing root causes

    The final demand calls for addressing what signatories view as the root causes of current medical and scientific predicaments. The accord seeks “an honest and thorough investigation” into factors such as “institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate.”

    Campbell emphasized the need for greater transparency and data access throughout his discussion of The Hope Accord.

    “Unpublished data needs to be put into the public domain,” he said. “Agencies and vested interests around the world are holding data that you and I are not allowed to see. This has to stop.”

    Campbell stressed the importance of free speech and scientific debate. “This is how science progresses.”

    He also highlighted the need to address publication bias, suggesting that unfavorable results may have been “rejected or withheld due to fears of reputational damage.” He argued that this approach contradicts scientific principles. “All results should be published — good, bad and indifferent, warts and all, the whole thing.”

    In a July 5 post on X, U.K. cardiologist and accord signer Dr. Aseem Malhotra discussed the accord, saying “Big Pharma … is an industry whose business model is one of fraud.”

    ‘Healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people’

    Campbell expressed particular concern about the erosion of free speech during the pandemic response, saying it reminded him of “past totalitarian regimes.”

    “We don’t want censorship in our era,” he said. “We want free speech and a democratic principle that underpins the ability to question untested interventions.”

    Looking to the future, Campbell stressed the need to learn from recent experiences and restore ethical principles in medicine and public health. He said:

    “We ultimately seek a renewed commitment to the core principles of ethical medicine, and how it includes science and all life in general, really — returning to an era in which we strive for transparency, accountability and responsible decision-making through the spheres of medicine and public health.”

    Campbell framed the accord as a movement of ordinary people, calling for a return to “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people.”

    This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

    The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.

    Please Donate Today

    ‘We want everyone to sign this’

    As of July 9, The Hope Accord had over 33,000 signatures, including nearly 4,000 from medical doctors and other healthcare professionals, over 1,000 from scientists and academics, and over 28,000 from concerned members of the public. Campbell highlighted some of the prominent founding signers in his video presentation.

    He emphasized that the accord aims to be “a sort of a ground-up, grassroots movement of people internationally,” open for anyone to sign, regardless of their professional background.

    He encouraged viewers to consider signing the accord if they agree with its principles, emphasizing its potential to influence future approaches to public health challenges and scientific discourse.

    “We want clever doctors, we want clever scientists, then we want people like me and everyone else — the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker,” Campbell said. “We want everyone to sign this to show our dissatisfaction with what is happening.”

    Watch Campbell’s introduction to The Hope Accord:



    Watch Campbell’s ‘Hope accord in detail’:




    El 'Acuerdo de Esperanza' internacional exige la suspensión inmediata de las vacunas de ARNm contra la COVID...
    Watch: International ‘Hope Accord’ Calls for Immediate Suspension of COVID mRNA Vaccines https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/hope-accord-suspension-covid-vaccines-john-campbell/
    Watch: International ‘Hope Accord’ Calls for Immediate Suspension of COVID mRNA Vaccines An international group of healthcare professionals, scientists and academics has launched The Hope Accord, demanding immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and the return of “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people,” according to health commentator John Campbell, Ph.D. covid vaccines and word "suspend" An international group of healthcare professionals, scientists and academics has launched The Hope Accord, demanding immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and the return of “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people,” according to health commentator John Campbell, Ph.D. A group of healthcare professionals, scientists, academics and concerned citizens has launched The Hope Accord, an international initiative calling for the immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and a comprehensive reevaluation of their safety and efficacy. The accord has garnered signatures from prominent medical experts and researchers who argue that emerging evidence suggests these novel vaccine products may be contributing to increased rates of disability and excess deaths. John Campbell, Ph.D., a retired nurse educator and popular health commentator, described the accord in a July 5 video as “basically a new international movement … developed by clever doctors and scientists.” But he emphasized that the accord is “open for everyone to sign.” The accord’s signatories, including “well-known and highly reputable professionals” such as diagnostic pathologist Clare Craig, Dr. Kat Lindley and Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., are calling for a return to what they consider fundamental medical ethics and scientific transparency. The movement comes amid ongoing debates about the long-term impacts of the global COVID-19 response and the rapid deployment of new vaccine technologies. The Hope Accord outlines five primary demands, each addressing what signatories view as critical issues in today’s medical and scientific landscape. Hand in glove holding vaccine The Vaccine Safety Project Learn More 1. Suspension of COVID mRNA vaccine products At the forefront of the accord is a call for the immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine products. The accord argues that a “growing body of evidence suggests that the widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths.” Signatories justify this call by pointing to what they describe as “plausible biological mechanisms of harm” and high rates of adverse events reported in clinical trials, national surveillance programs and autopsy studies. “These vaccine products … contain genetic sequences we feel should be suspended, at least for the time being, until we know one heck of a lot more about them,” Campbell said. Gavel and money vaccines Did DOJ Lawyers Commit Fraud in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding? Learn More 2. Reevaluation of vaccine safety and efficacy The second point calls for a comprehensive reevaluation of the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products. The accord demands “independent investigations” that are “properly resourced, preferably by governments and independent agencies,” Campbell said in a follow-up video exploring the details of The Hope Accord. The accord calls for focusing on the actual clinical impact on illness and mortality rather than relying on “synthetic results based on modeled assumptions.” “We certainly want to limit the use of modeling,” Campbell said, adding that it “causes all sorts of problems.” Accord signer and DarkHorse Podcast co-host Weinstein, in a brief video posted July 6 on X (formerly Twitter), said the claim that the mRNA vaccines were safe “was a dangerous lie.” 3. Recognition and support for vaccine-injured individuals The Hope Accord’s third demand focuses on immediate recognition and support for those claiming to be injured by COVID-19 vaccines. “Vaccine injury must be recognized and every effort made to understand their conditions,” Campbell said. The accord calls for “readily accessible multidisciplinary clinics” offering investigation and treatment, and “appropriate compensation for all those who have been harmed,” according to Campbell. Signatories argue that denying vaccine injuries betrays those who followed official directives, often under coercion from mandates restricting access to work, education and other aspects of daily life. Lindley, president of the Global Heath Project and an organizer of the Global Covid Summit, told The Defender she signed the accord because governments and regulatory agencies continue to ignore safety and injury issues. “While we have had some hearings, there has been no accountability for actions taken during the pandemic,” she said. Do you have a news tip? We want to hear from you! Contact Us 4. Restoration of ethical principles The fourth point addresses what signatories see as the abandonment of fundamental medical ethics during the COVID-19 pandemic. Campbell highlighted principles such as “First, do no harm,” informed consent, bodily autonomy and “the notion that adults protect children, not the other way around.” The accord argues these principles were disregarded under the premise of an emergency. “Emergencies are never a reason to abandon our principles; it is precisely at such times that we most profoundly depend on them,” it states. Lindley said the lack of ethics on the part of the medical establishment has been “very disheartening” and is one of the reasons she rewrote the Hippocratic oath a few years ago. “As physicians, we have failed in our duty to protect the vulnerable and we must reevaluate the state of medicine that we find ourselves in,” she said. “Primu Non Nocere [first, do no harm] is not just a quote, but a way of life and our most sacred promise.” scales of justice Your support helps fund this work, and CHD’s related advocacy, education and scientific research. Donate Now 5. Addressing root causes The final demand calls for addressing what signatories view as the root causes of current medical and scientific predicaments. The accord seeks “an honest and thorough investigation” into factors such as “institutional groupthink, conflicts of interest and the suppression of scientific debate.” Campbell emphasized the need for greater transparency and data access throughout his discussion of The Hope Accord. “Unpublished data needs to be put into the public domain,” he said. “Agencies and vested interests around the world are holding data that you and I are not allowed to see. This has to stop.” Campbell stressed the importance of free speech and scientific debate. “This is how science progresses.” He also highlighted the need to address publication bias, suggesting that unfavorable results may have been “rejected or withheld due to fears of reputational damage.” He argued that this approach contradicts scientific principles. “All results should be published — good, bad and indifferent, warts and all, the whole thing.” In a July 5 post on X, U.K. cardiologist and accord signer Dr. Aseem Malhotra discussed the accord, saying “Big Pharma … is an industry whose business model is one of fraud.” ‘Healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people’ Campbell expressed particular concern about the erosion of free speech during the pandemic response, saying it reminded him of “past totalitarian regimes.” “We don’t want censorship in our era,” he said. “We want free speech and a democratic principle that underpins the ability to question untested interventions.” Looking to the future, Campbell stressed the need to learn from recent experiences and restore ethical principles in medicine and public health. He said: “We ultimately seek a renewed commitment to the core principles of ethical medicine, and how it includes science and all life in general, really — returning to an era in which we strive for transparency, accountability and responsible decision-making through the spheres of medicine and public health.” Campbell framed the accord as a movement of ordinary people, calling for a return to “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people.” This article was funded by critical thinkers like you. The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write. Please Donate Today ‘We want everyone to sign this’ As of July 9, The Hope Accord had over 33,000 signatures, including nearly 4,000 from medical doctors and other healthcare professionals, over 1,000 from scientists and academics, and over 28,000 from concerned members of the public. Campbell highlighted some of the prominent founding signers in his video presentation. He emphasized that the accord aims to be “a sort of a ground-up, grassroots movement of people internationally,” open for anyone to sign, regardless of their professional background. He encouraged viewers to consider signing the accord if they agree with its principles, emphasizing its potential to influence future approaches to public health challenges and scientific discourse. “We want clever doctors, we want clever scientists, then we want people like me and everyone else — the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker,” Campbell said. “We want everyone to sign this to show our dissatisfaction with what is happening.” Watch Campbell’s introduction to The Hope Accord: Watch Campbell’s ‘Hope accord in detail’: El 'Acuerdo de Esperanza' internacional exige la suspensión inmediata de las vacunas de ARNm contra la COVID... Watch: International ‘Hope Accord’ Calls for Immediate Suspension of COVID mRNA Vaccines https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/hope-accord-suspension-covid-vaccines-john-campbell/
    CHILDRENSHEALTHDEFENSE.ORG
    Watch: International ‘Hope Accord’ Calls for Immediate Suspension of COVID mRNA Vaccines
    An international group of healthcare professionals, scientists and academics has launched The Hope Accord, demanding immediate suspension of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and the return of “healthcare and science of the people, for the people, by the people,” according to health commentator John Campbell, Ph.D.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 4091 Views
  • Air Vax — The Latest mRNA Delivered Into Lungs
    (Mercola)—Yale University researchers have developed a new airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs. The team has also used the method to vaccinate mice intranasally,1 opening the door for human testing in the near future.

    While scientists are hailing the creation as an easy way to vaccinate the masses, critics wonder if the development of an airborne vaccine could be used for nefarious purposes, including covert bioenhancements,2 which have already been recommended in academic literature.3

    Yale Team Develops Airborne mRNA, Delivers It to Lungs

    In a study on mice, Yale scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable so it can reach the lungs. Courtney Malo, editor with Science Translational Medicine, which published the study, explained:4

    “The ability to efficiently deliver mRNA to the lung would have applications for vaccine development, gene therapy, and more. Here, Suberi et al. showed that such mRNA delivery can be accomplished by encapsulating mRNAs of interest within optimized poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes [nanoparticles].

    Polyplex-delivered mRNAs were efficiently translated into protein in the lungs of mice with limited evidence of toxicity. This platform was successfully applied as an intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, eliciting robust immune responses that conferred protection against subsequent viral challenge. These results highlight the potential of this delivery system for vaccine applications and beyond.”

    Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef

    MORE NEWS: Stephanopoulos Caught on Camera After Biden Interview: ‘I Don’t Think He Can Serve Four More Years’

    The team, led by cellular and molecular physiologist Mark Saltzman, explained that the inhalable mRNA vaccine successfully protected against SARS-CoV-2, which “opens the door to delivering other messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics for gene replacement therapy and other treatments in the lungs.”5

    For the study, mice received two intranasal doses of nanoparticles carrying mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which proved to be effective in the animals. In the past, lung-targeted mRNA therapies had trouble making it into the cells necessary to express the encoded protein, known as poor transfection efficiency.6

    Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef

    “The Saltzman group got around this hurdle in part by using a nanoparticle made from poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes, or PACE, a biocompatible and highly customizable polymer,” a Yale University news release explained.7 In a previous study, Saltzman had tried a “prime and spike” system to deliver COVID-19 shots, which involved injecting mRNA shots into a muscle, then spraying spike proteins into the nose.8

    It turned out the injection portion may be unnecessary, and Saltzman has high hopes for the airborne delivery method, beyond vaccines:9

    “In the new report, there is no intramuscular injection. We just gave two doses, a prime and a boost, intranasally, and we got a highly protective immune response. But we also showed that, generally, you can deliver different kinds of mRNA. So it’s not just good for a vaccine, but potentially also good for gene replacement therapy in diseases like cystic fibrosis and gene editing.

    We used a vaccine example to show that it works, but it opens the door to doing all these other kinds of interventions.”

    Air Vax Could ‘Radically Change’ How People Are Vaccinated

    MORE NEWS: Data Analyst Says Gold Will Be the “New Reserve Asset” — Time to Get the Gold Guide

    Saltzman says this “new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’” making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles.10 But that’s not all. An airborne vaccine makes it possible to rapidly disseminate it across a population.

    By releasing the vaccine in the air, there’s no need to inject each person individually — which is not only time-consuming but difficult if an individual objects to the shot. This isn’t the case with an airborne vaccine, which can be released into the air without consent or even the public’s knowledge.

    A similar strategy is being used with mRNA in shrimp, which are too small and numerous to be injected individually. Instead, an oral “nanovaccine” was created to stop the spread of a virus. Shai Ufaz, chief executive officer of ViAqua, which developed the technology, stated:11

    “Oral delivery is the holy grail of aquaculture health development due to both the impossibility of vaccinating individual shrimp and its ability to substantially bring down the operational costs of disease management while improving outcomes …”

    While the Yale scientists are targeting an intranasal mRNA product, the outcome is the same — get as many exposed as possible with the least amount of cost and effort. According to the Yale study:12

    “An inhalable platform for messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics would enable minimally invasive and lung-targeted delivery for a host of pulmonary diseases. Development of lung-targeted mRNA therapeutics has been limited by poor transfection efficiency and risk of vehicle-induced pathology.

    Here, we report an inhalable polymer-based vehicle for delivery of therapeutic mRNAs to the lung. We optimized biodegradable poly(amine-co-ester) (PACE) polyplexes [nanoparticles] for mRNA delivery using end-group modifications and polyethylene glycol. These polyplexes achieved high transfection of mRNA throughout the lung, particularly in epithelial and antigen-presenting cells.

    We applied this technology to develop a mucosal vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and found that intranasal vaccination with spike protein–encoding mRNA polyplexes induced potent cellular and humoral adaptive immunity and protected susceptible mice from lethal viral challenge. Together, these results demonstrate the translational potential of PACE polyplexes for therapeutic delivery of mRNA to the lungs.”

    US Government Has History of Bioweapons Release

    When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, a disturbing picture emerges. As reported by The Epoch Times, we have a history of the U.S. government taking extreme measures to mandate and promote COVID-19 shots to the public. Now, researchers have developed an airborne mRNA vaccine, offering a vehicle by which to rapidly vaccinate the masses without their knowledge or consent.13

    Is there proof that the government or another entity has plans to covertly release an air vax on the population? No. But there is a history of it carrying out secret bioweapon simulations on Americans. In 1950, the U.S. Navy sprayed Serratia marcescens bacteria into the air near San Francisco over a period of six days.

    MORE NEWS: Washington State Is ‘Ground Zero’ for EV Charging Port Thefts

    Dubbed “Operation Sea Spray,” the project was intended to determine how susceptible the city was to a bioweapon attack. Serratia marcescens turns whatever it touches bright red, making it easy to track. It spread throughout the city, as residents inhaled the microbes from the air. While the U.S. military initially thought Serratia marcescens wouldn’t harm humans, an outbreak occurred, with some developing urinary tract infections as a result.

    At least one person died “and some have suggested that the release forever changed the area’s microbial ecology,” Smithsonian Magazine reported.14 This wasn’t an isolated incident, as the U.S. government carried out many other experiments across the U.S. over the next 20 years.15 So, while it’s disturbing to think of an air vax experiment being conducted on an unsuspecting public, it’s not unprecedented.

    Bioethics Study Promotes Covert, Compulsory Bioenhancement

    Adding to the story is academic endorsement of the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements. Writing in the journal Bioethics,16 Parker Crutchfield with Western Michigan University, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, discusses moral bioenhancements, which refers to the use of biomedical means to trigger moral improvements.

    Drug treatments, including vaccines, and genetic engineering are potential examples of bioenhancements.17 Further, according to Crutchfield:18

    “It is necessary to morally bioenhance the population in order to prevent ultimate harm. Moral bioenhancement is the potential practice of influencing a person’s moral behavior by way of biological intervention upon their moral attitudes, motivations, or dispositions.

    The technology that may permit moral bioenhancement is on the scale between nonexistent and nascent, but common examples of potential interventions include infusing water supplies with pharmaceuticals that enhance empathy or altruism or otherwise intervening on a person’s emotions or motivations, in an attempt to influence the person’s moral behavior.”

    Some argue that moral bioenhancements should be compulsory for the greater good. Crutchfield believes this doesn’t go far enough. He also wants them to be covert:19

    “I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement.”

    MORE NEWS: Suspect Arrested After Shooting Houston Police Officer Amid Hurricane Recovery

    He even goes so far as to suggest “a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality and autonomy better than an overt program does.”20 So here we have evidence of academic support for covertly releasing drugs and other bioenhancements onto the public. This, combined with the creation of an airborne mRNA vaccine and the government’s history of experimenting on the public, paints an unsettling picture of the future.

    Problems With mRNA COVID Shots Persist

    Aside from the concerns of airborne delivery, mRNA COVID-19 shots are associated with significant risks — no matter how you’re exposed. People ages 65 and older who received Pfizer’s updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster shot may be at increased risk of stroke, according to an announcement made by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.21

    Further, a large study from Israel22 revealed that Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,23 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.24 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.25

    At least 16,183 people also say they’ve developed tinnitus after receiving a COVID-19 shot.26 The reports were filed with the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. But considering only between 1%27 and 10%28 of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, the actual number is likely much higher.

    It’s because of risks like these that informed consent is essential for any medical procedure, including vaccinations. The development of airborne mRNA jabs, however, makes the possibility of informed consent being taken away all the more real.

    1, 4 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709
    2, 13 The Epoch Times September 5, 2023
    3 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29
    5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Yale School of Engineering & Applied Science, News & Events August 16, 2023
    10 Bitchute, Truther’s Lair September 5, 2023, 5:09
    11 Fish Farmer September 5, 2023
    12 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709, Abstract
    14, 15 Smithsonian Magazine July 6, 2015
    16, 18 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Intro
    17 Topoi volume 38, pages 1–5 (2019)
    19, 20 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Abstract
    21 U.S. FDA January 13, 2023
    22, 24, 25 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021
    23 MedPage Today August 25, 2021
    26 NBC News April 23, 2023
    27 Harvard Pilgrim Health Care report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011, Page 6
    28 BMJ 2005;330:433
    Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef



    It’s becoming increasingly clear that fiat currencies across the globe, including the U.S. Dollar, are under attack. Paper money is losing its value, translating into insane inflation and less value in our life’s savings.

    Genesis Gold Group believes physical precious metals are an amazing option for those seeking to move their wealth or retirement to higher ground. Whether Central Bank Digital Currencies replace current fiat currencies or not, precious metals are poised to retain or even increase in value. This is why central banks and mega-asset managers like BlackRock are moving much of their holdings to precious metals.

    As a Christian company, Genesis Gold Group has maintained a perfect 5 out of 5 rating with the Better Business Bureau. Their faith-driven values allow them to help Americans protect their life’s savings without the gimmicks used by most precious metals companies. Reach out to them today to see how they can streamline the rollover or transfer of your current and previous retirement accounts.

    https://discernreport.com/air-vax-the-latest-mrna-delivered-into-lungs/
    Air Vax — The Latest mRNA Delivered Into Lungs (Mercola)—Yale University researchers have developed a new airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs. The team has also used the method to vaccinate mice intranasally,1 opening the door for human testing in the near future. While scientists are hailing the creation as an easy way to vaccinate the masses, critics wonder if the development of an airborne vaccine could be used for nefarious purposes, including covert bioenhancements,2 which have already been recommended in academic literature.3 Yale Team Develops Airborne mRNA, Delivers It to Lungs In a study on mice, Yale scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable so it can reach the lungs. Courtney Malo, editor with Science Translational Medicine, which published the study, explained:4 “The ability to efficiently deliver mRNA to the lung would have applications for vaccine development, gene therapy, and more. Here, Suberi et al. showed that such mRNA delivery can be accomplished by encapsulating mRNAs of interest within optimized poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes [nanoparticles]. Polyplex-delivered mRNAs were efficiently translated into protein in the lungs of mice with limited evidence of toxicity. This platform was successfully applied as an intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, eliciting robust immune responses that conferred protection against subsequent viral challenge. These results highlight the potential of this delivery system for vaccine applications and beyond.” Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef MORE NEWS: Stephanopoulos Caught on Camera After Biden Interview: ‘I Don’t Think He Can Serve Four More Years’ The team, led by cellular and molecular physiologist Mark Saltzman, explained that the inhalable mRNA vaccine successfully protected against SARS-CoV-2, which “opens the door to delivering other messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics for gene replacement therapy and other treatments in the lungs.”5 For the study, mice received two intranasal doses of nanoparticles carrying mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which proved to be effective in the animals. In the past, lung-targeted mRNA therapies had trouble making it into the cells necessary to express the encoded protein, known as poor transfection efficiency.6 Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef “The Saltzman group got around this hurdle in part by using a nanoparticle made from poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes, or PACE, a biocompatible and highly customizable polymer,” a Yale University news release explained.7 In a previous study, Saltzman had tried a “prime and spike” system to deliver COVID-19 shots, which involved injecting mRNA shots into a muscle, then spraying spike proteins into the nose.8 It turned out the injection portion may be unnecessary, and Saltzman has high hopes for the airborne delivery method, beyond vaccines:9 “In the new report, there is no intramuscular injection. We just gave two doses, a prime and a boost, intranasally, and we got a highly protective immune response. But we also showed that, generally, you can deliver different kinds of mRNA. So it’s not just good for a vaccine, but potentially also good for gene replacement therapy in diseases like cystic fibrosis and gene editing. We used a vaccine example to show that it works, but it opens the door to doing all these other kinds of interventions.” Air Vax Could ‘Radically Change’ How People Are Vaccinated MORE NEWS: Data Analyst Says Gold Will Be the “New Reserve Asset” — Time to Get the Gold Guide Saltzman says this “new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’” making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles.10 But that’s not all. An airborne vaccine makes it possible to rapidly disseminate it across a population. By releasing the vaccine in the air, there’s no need to inject each person individually — which is not only time-consuming but difficult if an individual objects to the shot. This isn’t the case with an airborne vaccine, which can be released into the air without consent or even the public’s knowledge. A similar strategy is being used with mRNA in shrimp, which are too small and numerous to be injected individually. Instead, an oral “nanovaccine” was created to stop the spread of a virus. Shai Ufaz, chief executive officer of ViAqua, which developed the technology, stated:11 “Oral delivery is the holy grail of aquaculture health development due to both the impossibility of vaccinating individual shrimp and its ability to substantially bring down the operational costs of disease management while improving outcomes …” While the Yale scientists are targeting an intranasal mRNA product, the outcome is the same — get as many exposed as possible with the least amount of cost and effort. According to the Yale study:12 “An inhalable platform for messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics would enable minimally invasive and lung-targeted delivery for a host of pulmonary diseases. Development of lung-targeted mRNA therapeutics has been limited by poor transfection efficiency and risk of vehicle-induced pathology. Here, we report an inhalable polymer-based vehicle for delivery of therapeutic mRNAs to the lung. We optimized biodegradable poly(amine-co-ester) (PACE) polyplexes [nanoparticles] for mRNA delivery using end-group modifications and polyethylene glycol. These polyplexes achieved high transfection of mRNA throughout the lung, particularly in epithelial and antigen-presenting cells. We applied this technology to develop a mucosal vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and found that intranasal vaccination with spike protein–encoding mRNA polyplexes induced potent cellular and humoral adaptive immunity and protected susceptible mice from lethal viral challenge. Together, these results demonstrate the translational potential of PACE polyplexes for therapeutic delivery of mRNA to the lungs.” US Government Has History of Bioweapons Release When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, a disturbing picture emerges. As reported by The Epoch Times, we have a history of the U.S. government taking extreme measures to mandate and promote COVID-19 shots to the public. Now, researchers have developed an airborne mRNA vaccine, offering a vehicle by which to rapidly vaccinate the masses without their knowledge or consent.13 Is there proof that the government or another entity has plans to covertly release an air vax on the population? No. But there is a history of it carrying out secret bioweapon simulations on Americans. In 1950, the U.S. Navy sprayed Serratia marcescens bacteria into the air near San Francisco over a period of six days. MORE NEWS: Washington State Is ‘Ground Zero’ for EV Charging Port Thefts Dubbed “Operation Sea Spray,” the project was intended to determine how susceptible the city was to a bioweapon attack. Serratia marcescens turns whatever it touches bright red, making it easy to track. It spread throughout the city, as residents inhaled the microbes from the air. While the U.S. military initially thought Serratia marcescens wouldn’t harm humans, an outbreak occurred, with some developing urinary tract infections as a result. At least one person died “and some have suggested that the release forever changed the area’s microbial ecology,” Smithsonian Magazine reported.14 This wasn’t an isolated incident, as the U.S. government carried out many other experiments across the U.S. over the next 20 years.15 So, while it’s disturbing to think of an air vax experiment being conducted on an unsuspecting public, it’s not unprecedented. Bioethics Study Promotes Covert, Compulsory Bioenhancement Adding to the story is academic endorsement of the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements. Writing in the journal Bioethics,16 Parker Crutchfield with Western Michigan University, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, discusses moral bioenhancements, which refers to the use of biomedical means to trigger moral improvements. Drug treatments, including vaccines, and genetic engineering are potential examples of bioenhancements.17 Further, according to Crutchfield:18 “It is necessary to morally bioenhance the population in order to prevent ultimate harm. Moral bioenhancement is the potential practice of influencing a person’s moral behavior by way of biological intervention upon their moral attitudes, motivations, or dispositions. The technology that may permit moral bioenhancement is on the scale between nonexistent and nascent, but common examples of potential interventions include infusing water supplies with pharmaceuticals that enhance empathy or altruism or otherwise intervening on a person’s emotions or motivations, in an attempt to influence the person’s moral behavior.” Some argue that moral bioenhancements should be compulsory for the greater good. Crutchfield believes this doesn’t go far enough. He also wants them to be covert:19 “I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement.” MORE NEWS: Suspect Arrested After Shooting Houston Police Officer Amid Hurricane Recovery He even goes so far as to suggest “a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality and autonomy better than an overt program does.”20 So here we have evidence of academic support for covertly releasing drugs and other bioenhancements onto the public. This, combined with the creation of an airborne mRNA vaccine and the government’s history of experimenting on the public, paints an unsettling picture of the future. Problems With mRNA COVID Shots Persist Aside from the concerns of airborne delivery, mRNA COVID-19 shots are associated with significant risks — no matter how you’re exposed. People ages 65 and older who received Pfizer’s updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster shot may be at increased risk of stroke, according to an announcement made by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.21 Further, a large study from Israel22 revealed that Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,23 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.24 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.25 At least 16,183 people also say they’ve developed tinnitus after receiving a COVID-19 shot.26 The reports were filed with the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. But considering only between 1%27 and 10%28 of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, the actual number is likely much higher. It’s because of risks like these that informed consent is essential for any medical procedure, including vaccinations. The development of airborne mRNA jabs, however, makes the possibility of informed consent being taken away all the more real. 1, 4 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709 2, 13 The Epoch Times September 5, 2023 3 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Yale School of Engineering & Applied Science, News & Events August 16, 2023 10 Bitchute, Truther’s Lair September 5, 2023, 5:09 11 Fish Farmer September 5, 2023 12 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709, Abstract 14, 15 Smithsonian Magazine July 6, 2015 16, 18 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Intro 17 Topoi volume 38, pages 1–5 (2019) 19, 20 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Abstract 21 U.S. FDA January 13, 2023 22, 24, 25 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021 23 MedPage Today August 25, 2021 26 NBC News April 23, 2023 27 Harvard Pilgrim Health Care report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011, Page 6 28 BMJ 2005;330:433 Skyrocketing Food Prices Are Prompting Many Americans to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Beef It’s becoming increasingly clear that fiat currencies across the globe, including the U.S. Dollar, are under attack. Paper money is losing its value, translating into insane inflation and less value in our life’s savings. Genesis Gold Group believes physical precious metals are an amazing option for those seeking to move their wealth or retirement to higher ground. Whether Central Bank Digital Currencies replace current fiat currencies or not, precious metals are poised to retain or even increase in value. This is why central banks and mega-asset managers like BlackRock are moving much of their holdings to precious metals. As a Christian company, Genesis Gold Group has maintained a perfect 5 out of 5 rating with the Better Business Bureau. Their faith-driven values allow them to help Americans protect their life’s savings without the gimmicks used by most precious metals companies. Reach out to them today to see how they can streamline the rollover or transfer of your current and previous retirement accounts. https://discernreport.com/air-vax-the-latest-mrna-delivered-into-lungs/
    Angry
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 5207 Views
  • Pilot Testifies Bill Gates Spraying ‘Air Vax’ mRNA on Humanity via Chemtrails
    Baxter Dmitry
    Fact checked by The People's Voice Community
    Bill Gates is spraying airborne mRNA on dense urban populations and rural areas with low vaccine uptake according to a commercial airlines pilot who has come forward to blow the whistle on chemtrails operations in North America and Europe.
    Bill Gates is spraying airborne mRNA on dense urban populations and rural areas with low vaccine uptake according to a commercial airlines pilot who has come forward to blow the whistle on chemtrails operations in North America and Europe.



    As the globalist elite find it harder to convince humanity to submit to Covid mRNA shots and endless boosters, they are having to find deceitful new ways to force their mRNA on us.



    BYPASS THE CENSORS

    Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.

    You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

    Latest Video


    According to pilots familiar with the scheme, the new airborne mRNA, known as Air Vax, is designed to deliver the vaccine right into people’s lungs, bypassing the need for injections – and the need for consent.

    Before we dive in, subscribe to the channel if you haven’t already, join the People’s Voice Locals community to join our incredible community and support the channel, and check out the new free speech forum.

    In the last 12 months mainstream media has begun preparing the public for the revelation that the global elite have been secretly spraying chemicals on populations for decades.

    This is a slow reveal and the elite are using the media to spread their doom-mongering climate predictions in the hopes the public will be terrified into accepting chemtrails as a solution to climate change.

    However, the climate change narrative is nothing more than a cover story. How do we know? Declassified documents released decades ago proved the real genocidal intent of the government’s top-secret chemtrail agenda.

    Some things don’t change. The government are still going to great lengths to deceive the people, only now the smokescreen is climate change rather than the Cold War.

    Fast forward to 2024 and everyone in North America and most of Europe is inhaling toxic chemicals and airborne mRNA, according to whistleblowing pilots who reveal that governments are working hand-in-glove with the military and private contractors to operate the top-secret operations.

    According to one commercial airline pilot who has been doing in-depth research into chemtrails, there are thousands of people in the US, and as many again across Europe, who are involved in the business of chemtrails, most of whom have some idea of what they are doing.

    Speaking anonymously with his voice digitized to protect his identity, the pilot, who asked to be called John, explains that many people within the aviation industry are fearing for their lives:

    Everybody working in aviation understands the stakes are high and whistleblowers get whacked. They don’t last long. The stakes are too high. Did you see what happened to the Boeing guy? All he did was try and talk about safety, cutting corners, basic things. Try talking about chemtrails – you won’t last a minute.

    Everyone working on chemtrails in any capacity understands this. There are thousands of these people and none of them are talking. You’ve got the pilots, many of them are military or ex-military and they know how to keep quiet. Then you’ve got commercial planes involved too. These guys have signed NDAs and they understand the gravity of what they are doing. They have to understand what they are doing because they sign dangerous goods declarations whenever there are hazardous chemicals onboard. These commercial planes are modified with conversions that are easy to roll on, roll off. But these pilots, yeah… they know what they are doing. The same goes for the engineers and the air-traffic controllers. They can’t not know. Chemtrail planes don’t appear on flight radar. A lot of people have noticed this while watching a plane leave grid-like patterns above their houses in the countryside. There is no trace of the plane on flight radar websites. Ghost planes. So air traffic control and the government and military are all involved – because if they weren’t, an unregistered plane not appearing on flight radars would be taken out within minutes by the air force.

    You have to realize there are thousands of people involved but a lot of these people believe chemtrails are in the public interest. They have been told by their superiors that they are fighting climate change, they are making the world a better place, and what they are doing is necessary – but the public can’t find out under any circumstances. So these guys, they think they are doing something glamorous and exciting, like working for the CIA or military intelligence. They think they are James Bond.

    In reality, these misguided souls following orders from above are responsible for spraying densely populated urban areas with highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Including, as John explains, airborne mRNA.

    As Science Translational Medicine‘s editor Courtney Malo explained in this important article, newly developed airborne vaccines can be used to disseminate mRNA widely and rapidly without relying on injections – or the need to seek consent:

    We have been looking into this because we started hearing reports from colleagues that something had changed in the storage facilities onboard and they weren’t signing hazardous goods forms anymore. In the US, the military is spraying mRNA. From what we understand, mRNA is being sprayed in remote areas and cities where vaccine uptake is lagging. In Europe, we hear that it is a combination of military and commercial planes. Many of these guys don’t understand what they are doing. But we know that in the US the military has been spraying chemicals on populations for decades now.

    Our research suggests that mRNA is a military developed product and the cover story involving Moderna and Pfizer was just for cover. In reality mRNA was a DoD and Deep State product made in conjunction with the globalists around 10 years ago. The Project Warp Speed, eight month production schedule, that was all kabuki theater, part of the grand plan to brainwash the masses, force them into mass formation psychosis. So it’s no surprise the Pentagon is involved in administering mRNA to the masses.

    What else are they spraying? As John explains, they have done tests in Europe using mass spectrometry to analyze the residue that settles on cars and windows during periods of heavy chemtrail pollution. The results from Europe are disturbing to say the least:

    It’s important to understand how toxic this stuff is. We are talking about graphene oxide, aluminum oxide, barium and mRNA. These are some of the most toxic metals in the universe. I have young children. To think they are being slowly poisoned with this stuff… When I saw the results of these tests, I became radicalized. There is no other word for it. A fire was lit inside me. I have been researching ever since and this is very dangerous but I quickly realized I am not the only one in the industry, far from the only one, who wants to expose this.

    Chemtrails aren’t only crimes against our children and crimes against humanity. They are also crimes against the natural world. The chemicals from the chemtrails land on plants and get into the grass which animals are then eating.

    When aluminum gets into the soil, it slowly kills everything. Aluminum promotes autism in children and Alzheimer’s disease in adults. They have sprayed so much aluminum in chemtrails around the world that bees have elevated levels of aluminum and they are starting to develop a form of Alzheimer’s. When bees stop fertilizing flowers and pollinating our crops, we will be totally reliant on the elite for our food:

    There is a theory that the real goal of spraying chemtrails is to convert the atmosphere into plasma for weather modification, scalar mind control technology, geotectonic warfare, and other nefarious uses. From what I can see, and my colleagues agree with me, it’s all part of the control apparatus.

    The root cause is the depopulation agenda. This is at the heart of everything. If you have been listening to the crap that is coming out of the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum, the European Union, these sorts of places, you can connect the dots for yourself.

    You won’t be surprised to hear that Bill Gates is a key player in the plot to deliver airborne mRNA to the masses – without their consent.

    There are a lot of companies that apply for geoengineering contracts and when we have looked into their funding it always leads back to the Gates Foundation. From what we understand, Gates is fanatical about disseminating mRNA far and wide. He’s also developing ways to lace the food supply with mRNA, so we are experiencing a two-pronged attack at the moment.

    This information, while shocking, should not come as a surprise to anybody who has been paying attention.

    Dr William Deagle warned us almost twenty years ago that the government and military were engaged in spraying operations and using climate change as a smokescreen.

    The Georgia Guidestones told us the global elite want to reduce the population to 500 million. Since then, a procession of globalist ghouls, often speaking from their safe space in Davos, have made the same pronouncement about eugenics and depopulation.

    The elite’s strange code of ethics requires that they tell us what they are going to do to us – using occult code and symbols.

    The problem for the elite is that we have cracked the code and we can see what they are doing to us.

    We understand the real purpose of Agenda 2030 and their so-called sustainable development goals.


    We understand that when they say they are spraying the skies to “fight climate change”, they actually have a far more nefarious goal in mind.

    We understand that barium, aluminum, and graphene oxide should not be injected into our children, nor should they be sprayed all over us from a great height.

    Here at the People’s Voice we are determined to continue holding the global elite to account for their crimes against humanity but we need your help. Subscribe to the channel, tell your friends and family about us, and join the People’s Voice Locals community and check out the new forum. I hope to see you there.

    Watch:


    There’s loads of evidence of this. Help me dig up some patents!

    https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/pilot-testifies-bill-gates-spraying-air-vax-mrna-on-humanity-via-chemtrails/

    Won’t get an mRNA jab? Fine. Yale scientists plan to force-vaccinate you with their new nanoparticle AIR VAX

    ~Natural News
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-10-03-mrna-jab-yale-vaccinate-nanoparticle-air-vax.html

    Air Vax — The Latest mRNA Delivered Into Lungs

    https://discernreport.com/air-vax-the-latest-mrna-delivered-into-lungs/
    Pilot Testifies Bill Gates Spraying ‘Air Vax’ mRNA on Humanity via Chemtrails Baxter Dmitry Fact checked by The People's Voice Community Bill Gates is spraying airborne mRNA on dense urban populations and rural areas with low vaccine uptake according to a commercial airlines pilot who has come forward to blow the whistle on chemtrails operations in North America and Europe. Bill Gates is spraying airborne mRNA on dense urban populations and rural areas with low vaccine uptake according to a commercial airlines pilot who has come forward to blow the whistle on chemtrails operations in North America and Europe. As the globalist elite find it harder to convince humanity to submit to Covid mRNA shots and endless boosters, they are having to find deceitful new ways to force their mRNA on us. BYPASS THE CENSORS Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox. You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use Latest Video According to pilots familiar with the scheme, the new airborne mRNA, known as Air Vax, is designed to deliver the vaccine right into people’s lungs, bypassing the need for injections – and the need for consent. Before we dive in, subscribe to the channel if you haven’t already, join the People’s Voice Locals community to join our incredible community and support the channel, and check out the new free speech forum. In the last 12 months mainstream media has begun preparing the public for the revelation that the global elite have been secretly spraying chemicals on populations for decades. This is a slow reveal and the elite are using the media to spread their doom-mongering climate predictions in the hopes the public will be terrified into accepting chemtrails as a solution to climate change. However, the climate change narrative is nothing more than a cover story. How do we know? Declassified documents released decades ago proved the real genocidal intent of the government’s top-secret chemtrail agenda. Some things don’t change. The government are still going to great lengths to deceive the people, only now the smokescreen is climate change rather than the Cold War. Fast forward to 2024 and everyone in North America and most of Europe is inhaling toxic chemicals and airborne mRNA, according to whistleblowing pilots who reveal that governments are working hand-in-glove with the military and private contractors to operate the top-secret operations. According to one commercial airline pilot who has been doing in-depth research into chemtrails, there are thousands of people in the US, and as many again across Europe, who are involved in the business of chemtrails, most of whom have some idea of what they are doing. Speaking anonymously with his voice digitized to protect his identity, the pilot, who asked to be called John, explains that many people within the aviation industry are fearing for their lives: Everybody working in aviation understands the stakes are high and whistleblowers get whacked. They don’t last long. The stakes are too high. Did you see what happened to the Boeing guy? All he did was try and talk about safety, cutting corners, basic things. Try talking about chemtrails – you won’t last a minute. Everyone working on chemtrails in any capacity understands this. There are thousands of these people and none of them are talking. You’ve got the pilots, many of them are military or ex-military and they know how to keep quiet. Then you’ve got commercial planes involved too. These guys have signed NDAs and they understand the gravity of what they are doing. They have to understand what they are doing because they sign dangerous goods declarations whenever there are hazardous chemicals onboard. These commercial planes are modified with conversions that are easy to roll on, roll off. But these pilots, yeah… they know what they are doing. The same goes for the engineers and the air-traffic controllers. They can’t not know. Chemtrail planes don’t appear on flight radar. A lot of people have noticed this while watching a plane leave grid-like patterns above their houses in the countryside. There is no trace of the plane on flight radar websites. Ghost planes. So air traffic control and the government and military are all involved – because if they weren’t, an unregistered plane not appearing on flight radars would be taken out within minutes by the air force. You have to realize there are thousands of people involved but a lot of these people believe chemtrails are in the public interest. They have been told by their superiors that they are fighting climate change, they are making the world a better place, and what they are doing is necessary – but the public can’t find out under any circumstances. So these guys, they think they are doing something glamorous and exciting, like working for the CIA or military intelligence. They think they are James Bond. In reality, these misguided souls following orders from above are responsible for spraying densely populated urban areas with highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Including, as John explains, airborne mRNA. As Science Translational Medicine‘s editor Courtney Malo explained in this important article, newly developed airborne vaccines can be used to disseminate mRNA widely and rapidly without relying on injections – or the need to seek consent: We have been looking into this because we started hearing reports from colleagues that something had changed in the storage facilities onboard and they weren’t signing hazardous goods forms anymore. In the US, the military is spraying mRNA. From what we understand, mRNA is being sprayed in remote areas and cities where vaccine uptake is lagging. In Europe, we hear that it is a combination of military and commercial planes. Many of these guys don’t understand what they are doing. But we know that in the US the military has been spraying chemicals on populations for decades now. Our research suggests that mRNA is a military developed product and the cover story involving Moderna and Pfizer was just for cover. In reality mRNA was a DoD and Deep State product made in conjunction with the globalists around 10 years ago. The Project Warp Speed, eight month production schedule, that was all kabuki theater, part of the grand plan to brainwash the masses, force them into mass formation psychosis. So it’s no surprise the Pentagon is involved in administering mRNA to the masses. What else are they spraying? As John explains, they have done tests in Europe using mass spectrometry to analyze the residue that settles on cars and windows during periods of heavy chemtrail pollution. The results from Europe are disturbing to say the least: It’s important to understand how toxic this stuff is. We are talking about graphene oxide, aluminum oxide, barium and mRNA. These are some of the most toxic metals in the universe. I have young children. To think they are being slowly poisoned with this stuff… When I saw the results of these tests, I became radicalized. There is no other word for it. A fire was lit inside me. I have been researching ever since and this is very dangerous but I quickly realized I am not the only one in the industry, far from the only one, who wants to expose this. Chemtrails aren’t only crimes against our children and crimes against humanity. They are also crimes against the natural world. The chemicals from the chemtrails land on plants and get into the grass which animals are then eating. When aluminum gets into the soil, it slowly kills everything. Aluminum promotes autism in children and Alzheimer’s disease in adults. They have sprayed so much aluminum in chemtrails around the world that bees have elevated levels of aluminum and they are starting to develop a form of Alzheimer’s. When bees stop fertilizing flowers and pollinating our crops, we will be totally reliant on the elite for our food: There is a theory that the real goal of spraying chemtrails is to convert the atmosphere into plasma for weather modification, scalar mind control technology, geotectonic warfare, and other nefarious uses. From what I can see, and my colleagues agree with me, it’s all part of the control apparatus. The root cause is the depopulation agenda. This is at the heart of everything. If you have been listening to the crap that is coming out of the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum, the European Union, these sorts of places, you can connect the dots for yourself. You won’t be surprised to hear that Bill Gates is a key player in the plot to deliver airborne mRNA to the masses – without their consent. There are a lot of companies that apply for geoengineering contracts and when we have looked into their funding it always leads back to the Gates Foundation. From what we understand, Gates is fanatical about disseminating mRNA far and wide. He’s also developing ways to lace the food supply with mRNA, so we are experiencing a two-pronged attack at the moment. This information, while shocking, should not come as a surprise to anybody who has been paying attention. Dr William Deagle warned us almost twenty years ago that the government and military were engaged in spraying operations and using climate change as a smokescreen. The Georgia Guidestones told us the global elite want to reduce the population to 500 million. Since then, a procession of globalist ghouls, often speaking from their safe space in Davos, have made the same pronouncement about eugenics and depopulation. The elite’s strange code of ethics requires that they tell us what they are going to do to us – using occult code and symbols. The problem for the elite is that we have cracked the code and we can see what they are doing to us. We understand the real purpose of Agenda 2030 and their so-called sustainable development goals. We understand that when they say they are spraying the skies to “fight climate change”, they actually have a far more nefarious goal in mind. We understand that barium, aluminum, and graphene oxide should not be injected into our children, nor should they be sprayed all over us from a great height. Here at the People’s Voice we are determined to continue holding the global elite to account for their crimes against humanity but we need your help. Subscribe to the channel, tell your friends and family about us, and join the People’s Voice Locals community and check out the new forum. I hope to see you there. Watch: There’s loads of evidence of this. Help me dig up some patents! https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/pilot-testifies-bill-gates-spraying-air-vax-mrna-on-humanity-via-chemtrails/ Won’t get an mRNA jab? Fine. Yale scientists plan to force-vaccinate you with their new nanoparticle AIR VAX ~Natural News https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-10-03-mrna-jab-yale-vaccinate-nanoparticle-air-vax.html Air Vax — The Latest mRNA Delivered Into Lungs https://discernreport.com/air-vax-the-latest-mrna-delivered-into-lungs/
    THEPEOPLESVOICE.TV
    Pilot Testifies Bill Gates Spraying 'Air Vax' mRNA on Humanity via Chemtrails
    Bill Gates is spraying airborne mRNA on dense urban populations and rural areas with low vaccine uptake according to a commercial airlines pilot who has come forward to blow the whistle on chemtrails operations in North America and Europe.
    Angry
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 5043 Views
  • To keep the hippocampus happy, we need:
    Physical activity
    Social life
    Sunlight
    Good food and sleep
    Relaxing time with others.
    watch here:
    https://t.me/Doctorsforcovidethics/1090
    To keep the hippocampus happy, we need: Physical activity Social life Sunlight Good food and sleep Relaxing time with others. watch here: https://t.me/Doctorsforcovidethics/1090
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 413 Views 0
  • A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    July 7, 2024
    Uncategorized
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021)

    The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses.

    The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4).

    1. Strengths of the Study

    The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments.

    2. Areas for Improvement

    2.1. Overall Presentation

    The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice.

    There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review.

    2.2. Descriptive Statistics

    More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial.

    2.3. Covariates/Confounders

    Multicollinearity

    The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table.

    Limited Covariates

    The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4).

    Statistical Methods

    An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results.

    It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively.

    If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results.

    While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results.

    The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3).

    Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers.

    3. Conclusion

    There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research.

    For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research.

    4. References

    Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343

    Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.



    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key

    by Sarena L. McLean, MSc.

    The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses.

    Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key July 7, 2024 Uncategorized By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4). 1. Strengths of the Study The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments. 2. Areas for Improvement 2.1. Overall Presentation The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice. There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review. 2.2. Descriptive Statistics More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial. 2.3. Covariates/Confounders Multicollinearity The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table. Limited Covariates The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Statistical Methods An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results. It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively. If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results. While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results. The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3). Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers. 3. Conclusion There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research. For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research. 4. References Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson. A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key by Sarena L. McLean, MSc. The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    DOCTORS4COVIDETHICS.ORG
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study 'A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province' by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 2908 Views
  • Two Case Reports of Severe Cardiovascular Disease Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines
    July 6, 2024
    Uncategorized

    This article by Robert Chandler, Ivana Pavić and Michael Palmer documents two autopsy cases that were examined by pathologists Arne Burkhardt and Walter Lang at Reutlingen, Germany. These case summaries were translated and edited from Dr. Burkhardt’s own files, and they are illustrated with Dr. Burkhardt’s own histopathological images. Both cases demonstrate catastrophic damage to the cardiovascular system from the COVID19 gene therapy drugs. Both had fatal outcomes, one by suicide.

    The report is available for download in PDF format.

    https://doctors4covidethics.org/two-case-reports-of-severe-cardiovascular-disease-caused-by-covid-19-vaccines/
    Two Case Reports of Severe Cardiovascular Disease Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines July 6, 2024 Uncategorized This article by Robert Chandler, Ivana Pavić and Michael Palmer documents two autopsy cases that were examined by pathologists Arne Burkhardt and Walter Lang at Reutlingen, Germany. These case summaries were translated and edited from Dr. Burkhardt’s own files, and they are illustrated with Dr. Burkhardt’s own histopathological images. Both cases demonstrate catastrophic damage to the cardiovascular system from the COVID19 gene therapy drugs. Both had fatal outcomes, one by suicide. The report is available for download in PDF format. https://doctors4covidethics.org/two-case-reports-of-severe-cardiovascular-disease-caused-by-covid-19-vaccines/
    DOCTORS4COVIDETHICS.ORG
    Two Case Reports of Severe Cardiovascular Disease Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines
    This article by Robert Chandler, Ivana Pavić and Michael Palmer documents two autopsy cases that were examined by pathologists Arne Burkhardt and Walter Lang at Reutlingen, Germany. These case summaries were translated and edited from Dr. Burkhardt’s own files, and they are illustrated with Dr. Burkhardt’s own histopathological images. Both cases demonstrate catastrophic damage to the cardiovascular system from the COVID19 gene therapy drugs. Both
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 687 Views
More Results