Pfizer partnering with Ido Bachelet on DNA nanorobots OUTRAGED HUMAN “No, no it’s not science fiction; it’s already happening,” said Ido Bachelet to a somewhat incredulous audience member https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzLTWU2EqP4 Ido Bachelet - Moonshot Thinking ... when they cause too much damage by mistake... or intentionally... 5:12 study your biology and activate targeted medication when necessary. 5:36 We also know how to remote-control these robots, using magnetic fields. 5:40 Furthermore, we can control them, as you saw in the clip, with a joystick, 5:43 directing them to a specific part of the body, 5:46 and then activating them with the push of a button. 5:49 We have also connected this joystick to the internet. 5:51 Our robots have a IP address, 5:54 so you can connect with them from afar and activate them online. 6:01 Imagine that in a couple of years, 6:03 your doctor will be able to sit at home with his smartphone, 6:05 and instead of playing "Candy Crush" 6:08 he will connect with the robots inside of you, 6:11 activate a certain medication and possibly even save you, just in time. AND IMAGINE THAT YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW IT, YOU WOULDN'T BE TOLD ABOUT IT. AND THAT IN ORDER TO IMPLANT/INJECT IT, YOU WOULD BE TOLD THAT THERE IS A DREADFUL PANDEMIC, AND AT EVERY STEP YOU WOULD BE FORCED TO TAKE IT AS A NECESSARY "VACCINATION." AND A “PCR TEST”. BY YOUR GOVERNMENT, THE AIRLINES, THE EMPLOYER, THE WAITER AT THE RESTAURANT, THE FDA, THE EMA, THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION... AND YET IMAGINE THAT MANY PEOPLE WOULD DIE FROM IT, AND THEY WOULD BE YOUR RELATIVES AND FRIENDS. BUT YOU WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT IT WAS BECAUSE OF IT. IMAGINE BEING SURROUNDED BY CENSORSHIP, BEING RIDICULED, HAVING YOUR RIGHTS TO DO YOUR JOB, MOVE AROUND, OR EVEN SPEAK THE TRUTH AT ALL TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU.... ISN’T THIS A BRIGHT FURTURE AND A FANTASTIC REALITY? ARE YOU AGAINST SCIENCE? AGAINST PROGRESS? AGAINST PREVENTING DISEASES? https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/pfizer-partnering-with-ido-bachelet-on.html Pfizer is cooperating with the DNA robot laboratory managed by Prof. Ido Bachelet at Bar-Ilan University. Bachelet has developed a method of producing innovative DNA molecules with characteristics that can be used to "program" them to reach specific locations in the body and carry out pre-programmed operations there in response to stimulation from the body. This cooperation was revealed in a lecture by Pfizer president of worldwide research and development (WRD), portfolio strategy and investment committee chairman, and executive VP Mikael Dolstein at the IATI Biomed Conference in Tel Aviv being concluded today. Research will focus on the possibility that the robots will deliver the medical proteins to designated tissue. Bachelet came to Bar-Ilan from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) several years ago. At a Tedmed event held two years ago, he explained, "In order to make a nanometric robot, we first of all create a selected DNA sequence, and then fold it using a process called DNA origami. With this method, a person can give a command to a computer, which folds the DNA molecule as needed. "The result is that a DNA sequence can be made in the form of a clam, for example, and containing a drug. The DNA molecule, however, contains a code activated upon encountering certain materials in the body. For example, the clam can be designed to change its shape and release the drug only when it meets a cancer cell or the right tissue. "In addition, the molecules can receive signals from each other, and can theoretically change their shape according to signals from the body, and can be pre-programmed to attach themselves to one another. In the future, it will be possible to combine each such molecule with a miniature antenna. When the antenna receives an external signal, it will make a small change in the molecule that will make it open or close, and dissipate or connect itself to another molecule." In a brief talk, Bachelet said DNA nanobots will soon be tried in a critically ill leukemia patient. The patient, who has been given roughly six months to live, will receive an injection of DNA nanobots designed to interact with and destroy leukemia cells—while causing virtually zero collateral damage in healthy tissue. According to Bachelet, his team have successfully tested their method in cell cultures and animals and written two papers on the subject, one in Science and one in Nature. Contemporary cancer therapies involving invasive surgery and blasts of drugs can be as painful and damaging to the body as the disease itself. If Bachelet's approach proves successful in humans, and is backed by more research in the coming years, the team’s work could signal a transformational moment in cancer treatment. If this treatment works this will be a medical breakthrough and can be used for many other diseases by delivering drugs more effectively without causing side effects. 2012 Video with answers from George Church, Ido Bachelet and Shawn Douglas on the medical DNA double helix clamshell nanobucket nanobot George Church indicates the smart DNA nanobot has applications beyond nanomedicine. Applications where there is any need for programmable and targeted release or interaction at the cellular or near molecular scale. 2014 Geek Time Presentation from Ido Bachelet “AND THE LAST THING I AM GOING TO SCHOW YOU IS… PANDEMIC. SO, WE ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT PANDEMICS… ESPECIALLY INFLUENZA PANDEMICS. SO THE BEST WAY TO AVOID PANDEMICS OR TO HANDLE PANDEMICS, IS SIMPLY TO KNOW WHERE THE VIRUS IS AND NOT TO BE THERE… IT SOUNDS STUPID, BUT IT IS ACTUALLY THE CASE… IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY WHERE THE VIRUS IS IN REAL TIME AND YOU CAN CONTAIN THAT AREA, YOU WOULD STOP THE PANDEMIC, YOU WOULD STOP THE DISEASE… OK? SO, WHAT WE DEVELOPED IS A SENSOR… COMPOSED OF CARBON NANOTUBES FUNCTIONALIZED WITH ALL KIND OF THINGS… THE SENSOR IS EXTREMELY SENSITIVE… WE’VE BUILT THIS APPLICATION… THEY SEND THEIR GPS COORDINATES TO OUR SERVER SO WE CAN SORT OF RECONSTRUCT A REAL MAP… I HOPE YOU ENJOYED THIS AND UNDESTOOND WHAT BIONICS IS ALL ABOUT… At the British Friends of Bar-Ilan University's event in Otto Uomo October 2014 Professor Ido Bachelet announced the beginning of the human treatment with nanomedicine. He indicates DNA nanobots can currently identify cells in humans with 12 different types of cancer tumors. A human patient with late stage leukemia will be given DNA nanobot treatment. Without the DNA nanobot treatment the patient would be expected to die in the summer of 2015. Based upon animal trials they expect to remove the cancer within one month. Within 1 or 2 years they hope to have spinal cord repair working in animals and then shortly thereafter in humans. This is working in tissue cultures. Previously Ido Bachelet and Shawn Douglas have published work on DNA nanobots in the journal Nature and other respected science publications. One Trillion 50 nanometer nanobots in a syringe will be injected into people to perform cellular surgery. The DNA nanobots have been tuned to not cause an immune response. They have been adjusted for different kinds of medical procedures. Procedures can be quick or ones that last many days. Medicine or treatment released based upon molecular sensing - Only targeted cells are treated Ido's daughter has a leg disease which requires frequent surgery. He is hoping his DNA nanobots will make the type of surgery she needs relatively trivial - a simple injection at a doctor's office. We can control powerful drugs that were already developed Effective drugs that were withdrawn from the market for excessive toxicity can be combined with DNA nanobots for effective delivery. The tiny molecular computers of the DNA nanobots can provide molecular selective control for powerful medicines that were already developed. Using DNA origami and molecular programming, they are reality. These nanobots can seek and kill cancer cells, mimic social insect behaviors, carry out logical operators like a computer in a living animal, and they can be controlled from an Xbox. Ido Bachelet from the bio-design lab at Bar Ilan University explains this technology and how it will change medicine in the near future. Ido Bachelet earned his Ph.D. from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and was a postdoctoral fellow at M.I.T. and Harvard University. He is currently an assistant professor in the Faculty of Life Sciences and the Nano-Center at Bar Ilan University, Israel, the founder of several biotech companies, and a composer of music for piano and molecules. Researchers have injected various kinds of DNA nanobots into cockroaches. Because the nanobots are labelled with fluorescent markers, the researchers can follow them and analyse how different robot combinations affect where substances are delivered. The team says the accuracy of delivery and control of the nanobots is equivalent to a computer system. This is the development of the vision of nanomedicine. This is the realization of the power of DNA nanotechnology. This is programmable dna nanotechnology. The DNA nanotechnology cannot perform atomically precise chemistry (yet), but having control of the DNA combined with advanced synthetic biology and control of proteins and nanoparticles is clearly developing into very interesting capabilities. "This is the first time that biological therapy has been able to match how a computer processor works," says co-author Ido Bachelet of the Institute of Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials at Bar Ilan University. The team says it should be possible to scale up the computing power in the cockroach to that of an 8-bit computer, equivalent to a Commodore 64 or Atari 800 from the 1980s. Goni-Moreno agrees that this is feasible. "The mechanism seems easy to scale up so the complexity of the computations will soon become higher," he says. An obvious benefit of this technology would be cancer treatments, because these must be cell-specific and current treatments are not well-targeted. But a treatment like this in mammals must overcome the immune response triggered when a foreign object enters the body. Bachelet is confident that the team can enhance the robots' stability so that they can survive in mammals. "There is no reason why preliminary trials on humans can't start within five years," he says Biological systems are collections of discrete molecular objects that move around and collide with each other. Cells carry out elaborate processes by precisely controlling these collisions, but developing artificial machines that can interface with and control such interactions remains a significant challenge. DNA is a natural substrate for computing and has been used to implement a diverse set of mathematical problems, logic circuits and robotics. The molecule also interfaces naturally with living systems, and different forms of DNA-based biocomputing have already been demonstrated. Here, we show that DNA origami can be used to fabricate nanoscale robots that are capable of dynamically interacting with each other in a living animal. The interactions generate logical outputs, which are relayed to switch molecular payloads on or off. As a proof of principle, we use the system to create architectures that emulate various logic gates (AND, OR, XOR, NAND, NOT, CNOT and a half adder). Following an ex vivo prototyping phase, we successfully used the DNA origami robots in living cockroaches (Blaberus discoidalis) to control a molecule that targets their cells. Nature Nanotechnology - Universal computing by DNA origami robots in a living animal 44 pages of supplemental information Ido Bachelet's moonshot to use nanorobotics for surgery has the potential to change lives globally. But who is the man behind the moonshot? Ido graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with a PhD in pharmacology and experimental therapeutics. Afterwards he did two postdocs; one in engineering at MIT and one in synthetic biology in the lab of George Church at the Wyss Institute at Harvard. Now, his group at Bar-Ilan University designs and studies diverse technologies inspired by nature. They will deliver enzymes that break down cells via programmable nanoparticles. Delivering insulin to tell cells to grow and regenerate tissue at the desired location. Surgery would be performed by putting the programmable nanoparticles into saline and injecting them into the body to seek out remove bad cells and grow new cells and perform other medical work. Research group website is here. SOLVE FOR DISEASE X? https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-pfizer-to-collaborate-on-bar-ilan-dna-robots-1001036703 Pfizer is cooperating with the DNA robot laboratory managed by Prof. Ido Bachelet at Bar-Ilan University. Bachelet has developed a method of producing innovative DNA molecules with characteristics that can be used to "program" them to reach specific locations in the body and carry out pre-programmed operations there in response to stimulation from the body. This cooperation was revealed in a lecture by Pfizer president of worldwide research and development (WRD), portfolio strategy and investment committee chairman, and executive VP Mikael Dolstein at the IATI Biomed Conference in Tel Aviv being concluded today. Bar-Ilan Research & Development Co. CEO Orli Tori said, "This is Pfizer's first cooperative venture with someone in Israeli higher education. The technology is fairly new for a drug company, but Pfizer has agreed to take up the challenge and support this technology, in the hope that it will make a contribution to the company at the proper time. "As in all of our research agreements, the company coming from the industry has the right to negotiate the acquisition of the technology at the end of the process." The financial volume of the deal was not disclosed, but most such agreements amount to several hundred thousand dollars at most. The medical sector in which cooperation will take place was also not disclosed, but it appears that research will focus on the possibility that the robots will deliver the medical proteins to designated tissue. Bachelet came to Bar-Ilan from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) several years ago. At a Tedmed event held two years ago, he explained, "In order to make a nanometric robot, we first of all create a selected DNA sequence, and then fold it using a process called DNA origami. With this method, a person can give a command to a computer, which folds the DNA molecule as needed. "The result is that a DNA sequence can be made in the form of a clam, for example, and containing a drug. The DNA molecule, however, contains a code activated upon encountering certain materials in the body. For example, the clam can be designed to change its shape and release the drug only when it meets a cancer cell or the right tissue. "In addition, the molecules can receive signals from each other, and can theoretically change their shape according to signals from the body, and can be pre-programmed to attach themselves to one another. In the future, it will be possible to combine each such molecule with a miniature antenna. When the antenna receives an external signal, it will make a small change in the molecule that will make it open or close, and dissipate or connect itself to another molecule." Tori adds, "What is special about the robots is that they open and close according to signals from the surroundings, and that makes it possible to manage the disease. The robot exposes the drug to the target site according to biological signs within the body. For example were we to develop a product for diabetes, although that is not the purpose of this cooperation, it would be possible to develop a robot that would release insulin only when it sensed a rise in the blood sugar level." Published by Globes [online], Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on May 14, 2015 https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/03/ido-bachelet-dna-nanobots-summary-with.html Disadvantages 1. Designing of nanorobot is very costly and complicated 2. Stray field might be created from electrical systems which can trigger bioelectric based molecular recognition system in biology 3. Electrical nanorobots remain vulnerable to electrical interference from other sources like radiofrequency or electric fields, electromagnetic pulse and stray fields from other in-vivo electronic devices. 4. Nanorobots are difficult to design, and customize 5. These are capable of molecular level destruction of human body thus it can cause terrible effect in terrorism field. Terrorist may make usage of nanorobots as a tool for torturing opponent community 6. Other possible threat associated with nanorobots is privacy issue. As it dealt with designing of miniature form of devices, there are risks for snooping than that exist already. [https://web.archive.org/web/20200718043030/https://pharmascope.org/ijrps/article/download/2523/5031] [https://web.archive.org/web/20150911233849/http://www.nanosafe.org/home/liblocal/docs/Nanosafe%202014/Session%201/PL1%20-%20Fran%C3%A7ois%20TARDIF.pdf] NANOROBOTS: SOCIETAL CONCERNS: INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, TRANSHUMANISM!!! http://immortality-roadmap.com/nanorisk.pdf http://jddtonline.info/index.php/jddt/article/download/891/533 There are several drawbacks with this technology like toxicity, contamination. Sometime human body generates strong immune response against them. https://web.archive.org/web/20051218111931/http://teknologiskfremsyn.dk:80/download/58.pdf “Nanotubes can be highly toxic” Fifteen percent of the rats treated with carbon nanotubes suffocated to death within twenty-four hours due to clumping of the nanotubes that obstructed the bronchial passageways. Toxicity- the issue of toxicity of nanoparticles was raised as an area in which more research is needed, particularly in terms of whether the regulatory system is sufficient. … And it's injected into people, soldiers, children, even infants… Thank you Zz for this link. Pfizer partnering with Ido Bachelet on DNA nano robots. “No, no it’s not science fiction; it’s already happening,” said Ido Bachelet to a somewhat incredulous audience member, displaying a test tube in which he says just one drop contains approximately 1,000 billiard robots. https://outraged.substack.com/p/pfizer-partnering-with-ido-bachelet?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=1087020&post_id=143153580&utm_campaign=956088&isFreemail=true&r=1sq9d8&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email Follow @zeeemedia Website | X | Instagram | Rumble https://telegra.ph/Pfizer-partnering-with-Ido-Bachelet-on-DNA-nanorobots-04-03

The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Guide By David Bell, Thi Thuy Van Dinh March 22, 2024 Government, Society 30 minute read The World Health Organization (WHO) and its 194 Member States have been engaged for over two years in the development of two ‘instruments’ or agreements with the intent of radically changing the way pandemics and other health emergencies are managed. One, consisting of draft amendments to the existing International health Regulations (IHR), seeks to change the current IHR non-binding recommendations into requirements or binding recommendations, by having countries “undertake” to implement those given by the WHO in future declared health emergencies. It covers all ‘public health emergencies of international concern’ (PHEIC), with a single person, the WHO Director-General (DG) determining what a PHEIC is, where it extends, and when it ends. It specifies mandated vaccines, border closures, and other directives understood as lockdowns among the requirements the DG can impose. It is discussed further elsewhere and still under negotiation in Geneva. A second document, previously known as the (draft) Pandemic Treaty, then Pandemic Accord, and more recently the Pandemic Agreement, seeks to specify governance, supply chains, and various other interventions aimed at preventing, preparing for, and responding to, pandemics (pandemic prevention, preparedness and response – PPPR). It is currently being negotiated by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB). Both texts will be subject to a vote at the May 2024 World Health Assembly (WHA) in Geneva, Switzerland. These votes are intended, by those promoting these projects, to bring governance of future multi-country healthcare emergencies (or threats thereof) under the WHO umbrella. The latest version of the draft Pandemic Agreement (here forth the ‘Agreement’) was released on 7th March 2024. However, it is still being negotiated by various committees comprising representatives of Member States and other interested entities. It has been through multiple iterations over two years, and looks like it. With the teeth of the pandemic response proposals in the IHR, the Agreement looks increasingly irrelevant, or at least unsure of its purpose, picking up bits and pieces in a half-hearted way that the IHR amendments do not, or cannot, include. However, as discussed below, it is far from irrelevant. Historical Perspective These aim to increase the centralization of decision-making within the WHO as the “directing and coordinating authority.” This terminology comes from the WHO’s 1946 Constitution, developed in the aftermath of the Second World War as the world faced the outcomes of European fascism and the similar approaches widely imposed through colonialist regimes. The WHO would support emerging countries, with rapidly expanding and poorly resourced populations struggling under high disease burdens, and coordinate some areas of international support as these sovereign countries requested it. The emphasis of action was on coordinating rather than directing. In the 80 years prior to the WHO’s existence, international public health had grown within a more directive mindset, with a series of meetings by colonial and slave-owning powers from 1851 to manage pandemics, culminating in the inauguration of the Office Internationale d’Hygiene Publique in Paris in 1907, and later the League of Nations Health Office. World powers imposed health dictates on those less powerful, in other parts of the world and increasingly on their own population through the eugenics movement and similar approaches. Public health would direct, for the greater good, as a tool of those who wish to direct the lives of others. The WHO, governed by the WHA, was to be very different. Newly independent States and their former colonial masters were ostensibly on an equal footing within the WHA (one country – one vote), and the WHO’s work overall was to be an example of how human rights could dominate the way society works. The model for international public health, as exemplified in the Declaration of Alma Ata in 1978, was to be horizontal rather than vertical, with communities and countries in the driving seat. With the evolution of the WHO in recent decades from a core funding model (countries give money, the WHO decides under the WHA guidance how to spend it) to a model based on specified funding (funders, both public and increasingly private, instruct the WHO on how to spend it), the WHO has inevitably changed to become a public-private partnership required to serve the interests of funders rather than populations. As most funding comes from a few countries with major Pharma industrial bases, or private investors and corporations in the same industry, the WHO has been required to emphasize the use of pharmaceuticals and downplay evidence and knowledge where these clash (if it wants to keep all its staff funded). It is helpful to view the draft Agreement, and the IHR amendments, in this context. Why May 2024? The WHO, together with the World Bank, G20, and other institutions have been emphasizing the urgency of putting the new pandemic instruments in place earnestly, before the ‘next pandemic.’ This is based on claims that the world was unprepared for Covid-19, and that the economic and health harm would be somehow avoidable if we had these agreements in place. They emphasize, contrary to evidence that Covid-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) origins involve laboratory manipulation, that the main threats we face are natural, and that these are increasing exponentially and present an “existential” threat to humanity. The data on which the WHO, the World Bank, and G20 base these claims demonstrates the contrary, with reported natural outbreaks having increased as detection technologies have developed, but reducing in mortality rate, and in numbers, over the past 10 to 20 years.. A paper cited by the World Bank to justify urgency and quoted as suggesting a 3x increase in risk in the coming decade actually suggests that a Covid-19-like event would occur roughly every 129 years, and a Spanish-flu repetition every 292 to 877 years. Such predictions are unable to take into account the rapidly changing nature of medicine and improved sanitation and nutrition (most deaths from Spanish flu would not have occurred if modern antibiotics had been available), and so may still overestimate risk. Similarly, the WHO’s own priority disease list for new outbreaks only includes two diseases of proven natural origin that have over 1,000 historical deaths attributed to them. It is well demonstrated that the risk and expected burden of pandemics is misrepresented by major international agencies in current discussions. The urgency for May 2024 is clearly therefore inadequately supported, firstly because neither the WHO nor others have demonstrated how the harms accrued through Covid-19 would be reduced through the measures proposed, and secondly because the burden and risk is misrepresented. In this context, the state of the Agreement is clearly not where it should be as a draft international legally binding agreement intended to impose considerable financial and other obligations on States and populations. This is particularly problematic as the proposed expenditure; the proposed budget is over $31 billion per year, with over $10 billion more on other One Health activities. Much of this will have to be diverted from addressing other diseases burdens that impose far greater burden. This trade-off, essential to understand in public health policy development, has not yet been clearly addressed by the WHO. The WHO DG stated recently that the WHO does not want the power to impose vaccine mandates or lockdowns on anyone, and does not want this. This begs the question of why either of the current WHO pandemic instruments is being proposed, both as legally binding documents. The current IHR (2005) already sets out such approaches as recommendations the DG can make, and there is nothing non-mandatory that countries cannot do now without pushing new treaty-like mechanisms through a vote in Geneva. Based on the DG’s claims, they are essentially redundant, and what new non-mandatory clauses they contain, as set out below, are certainly not urgent. Clauses that are mandatory (Member States “shall”) must be considered within national decision-making contexts and appear against the WHO’s stated intent. Common sense would suggest that the Agreement, and the accompanying IHR amendments, be properly thought through before Member States commit. The WHO has already abandoned the legal requirement for a 4-month review time for the IHR amendments (Article 55.2 IHR), which are also still under negotiation just 2 months before the WHA deadline. The Agreement should also have at least such a period for States to properly consider whether to agree – treaties normally take many years to develop and negotiate and no valid arguments have been put forward as to why these should be different. The Covid-19 response resulted in an unprecedented transfer of wealth from those of lower income to the very wealthy few, completely contrary to the way in which the WHO was intended to affect human society. A considerable portion of these pandemic profits went to current sponsors of the WHO, and these same corporate entities and investors are set to further benefit from the new pandemic agreements. As written, the Pandemic Agreement risks entrenching such centralization and profit-taking, and the accompanying unprecedented restrictions on human rights and freedoms, as a public health norm. To continue with a clearly flawed agreement simply because of a previously set deadline, when no clear population benefit is articulated and no true urgency demonstrated, would therefore be a major step backward in international public health. Basic principles of proportionality, human agency, and community empowerment, essential for health and human rights outcomes, are missing or paid lip-service. The WHO clearly wishes to increase its funding and show it is ‘doing something,’ but must first articulate why the voluntary provisions of the current IHR are insufficient. It is hoped that by systematically reviewing some key clauses of the agreement here, it will become clear why a rethink of the whole approach is necessary. The full text is found below. The commentary below concentrates on selected draft provisions of the latest publicly available version of the draft agreement that seem to be unclear or potentially problematic. Much of the remaining text is essentially pointless as it reiterates vague intentions to be found in other documents or activities which countries normally undertake in the course of running health services, and have no place in a focused legally-binding international agreement. REVISED Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement. 7th March, 2024 Preamble Recognizing that the World Health Organization…is the directing and coordinating authority on international health work. This is inconsistent with a recent statement by the WHO DG that the WHO has no interest or intent to direct country health responses. To reiterate it here suggests that the DG is not representing the true position regarding the Agreement. “Directing authority” is however in line with the proposed IHR Amendments (and the WHO’s Constitution), under which countries will “undertake” ahead of time to follow the DG’s recommendations (which thereby become instructions). As the HR amendments make clear, this is intended to apply even to a perceived threat rather than actual harm. Recalling the constitution of the World Health Organization…highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition. This statement recalls fundamental understandings of public health, and is of importance here as it raises the question of why the WHO did not strongly condemn prolonged school closures, workplace closures, and other impoverishing policies during the Covid-19 response. In 2019, WHO made clear that these dangers should prevent actions we now call ‘lockdowns’ from being imposed. Deeply concerned by the gross inequities at national and international levels that hindered timely and equitable access to medical and other Covid-19 pandemic-related products, and the serious shortcomings in pandemic preparedness. In terms of health equity (as distinct from commodity of ‘vaccine’ equity), inequity in the Covid-19 response was not in failing to provide a vaccine against former variants to immune, young people in low-income countries who were at far higher risk from endemic diseases, but in the disproportionate harm to them of uniformly-imposed NPIs that reduced current and future income and basic healthcare, as was noted by the WHO in 2019 Pandemic Influenza recommendations. The failure of the text to recognize this suggests that lessons from Covid-19 have not informed this draft Agreement. The WHO has not yet demonstrated how pandemic ‘preparedness,’ in the terms they use below, would have reduced impact, given that there is poor correlation between strictness or speed of response and eventual outcomes. Reiterating the need to work towards…an equitable approach to mitigate the risk that pandemics exacerbate existing inequities in access to health services, As above – in the past century, the issue of inequity has been most pronounced in pandemic response, rather than the impact of the virus itself (excluding the physiological variation in risk). Most recorded deaths from acute pandemics, since the Spanish flu, were during Covid-19, in which the virus hit mainly sick elderly, but response impacted working-age adults and children heavily and will continue to have effect, due to increased poverty and debt; reduced education and child marriage, in future generations. These have disproportionately affected lower-income people, and particularly women. The lack of recognition of this in this document, though they are recognized by the World Bank and UN agencies elsewhere, must raise real questions on whether this Agreement has been thoroughly thought through, and the process of development been sufficiently inclusive and objective. Chapter I. Introduction Article 1. Use of terms (i) “pathogen with pandemic potential” means any pathogen that has been identified to infect a human and that is: novel (not yet characterized) or known (including a variant of a known pathogen), potentially highly transmissible and/or highly virulent with the potential to cause a public health emergency of international concern. This provides a very wide scope to alter provisions. Any pathogen that can infect humans and is potentially highly transmissible or virulent, though yet uncharacterized means virtually any coronavirus, influenza virus, or a plethora of other relatively common pathogen groups. The IHR Amendments intend that the DG alone can make this call, over the advice of others, as occurred with monkeypox in 2022. (j) “persons in vulnerable situations” means individuals, groups or communities with a disproportionate increased risk of infection, severity, disease or mortality. This is a good definition – in Covid-19 context, would mean the sick elderly, and so is relevant to targeting a response. “Universal health coverage” means that all people have access to the full range of quality health services they need, when and where they need them, without financial hardship. While the general UHC concept is good, it is time a sensible (rather than patently silly) definition was adopted. Society cannot afford the full range of possible interventions and remedies for all, and clearly there is a scale of cost vs benefit that prioritizes certain ones over others. Sensible definitions make action more likely, and inaction harder to justify. One could argue that none should have the full range until all have good basic care, but clearly the earth will not support ‘the full range’ for 8 billion people. Article 2. Objective This Agreement is specifically for pandemics (a poorly defined term but essentially a pathogen that spreads rapidly across national borders). In contrast, the IHR amendments accompanying it are broader in scope – for any public health emergencies of international concern. Article 3. Principles 2. the sovereign right of States to adopt, legislate and implement legislation The amendments to the IHR require States to undertake to follow WHO instructions ahead of time, before such instruction and context are known. These two documents must be understood, as noted later in the Agreement draft, as complementary. 3. equity as the goal and outcome of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, ensuring the absence of unfair, avoidable or remediable differences among groups of people. This definition of equity here needs clarification. In the pandemic context, the WHO emphasized commodity (vaccine) equity during the Covid-19 response. Elimination of differences implied equal access to Covid-19 vaccines in countries with large aging, obese highly vulnerable populations (e.g. the USA or Italy), and those with young populations at minimal risk and with far more pressing health priorities (e.g. Niger or Uganda). Alternatively, but equally damaging, equal access to different age groups within a country when the risk-benefit ratio is clearly greatly different. This promotes worse health outcomes by diverting resources from where they are most useful, as it ignores heterogeneity of risk. Again, an adult approach is required in international agreements, rather than feel-good sentences, if they are going to have a positive impact. 5. …a more equitable and better prepared world to prevent, respond to and recover from pandemics As with ‘3’ above, this raises a fundamental problem: What if health equity demands that some populations divert resources to childhood nutrition and endemic diseases rather than the latest pandemic, as these are likely of far higher burden to many younger but lower-income populations? This would not be equity in the definition implied here, but would clearly lead to better and more equal health outcomes. The WHO must decide whether it is about uniform action, or minimizing poor health, as these are clearly very different. They are the difference between the WHO’s commodity equity, and true health equity. Chapter II. The world together equitably: achieving equity in, for and through pandemic prevention, preparedness and response Equity in health should imply a reasonably equal chance of overcoming or avoiding preventable sickness. The vast majority of sickness and death is due to either non-communicable diseases often related to lifestyle, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus, undernutrition in childhood, and endemic infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV/AIDS. Achieving health equity would primarily mean addressing these. In this chapter of the draft Pandemic Agreement, equity is used to imply equal access to specific health commodities, particularly vaccines, for intermittent health emergencies, although these exert a small fraction of the burden of other diseases. It is, specifically, commodity-equity, and not geared to equalizing overall health burden but to enabling centrally-coordinated homogenous responses to unusual events. Article 4. Pandemic prevention and surveillance 2. The Parties shall undertake to cooperate: (b) in support of…initiatives aimed at preventing pandemics, in particular those that improve surveillance, early warning and risk assessment; .…and identify settings and activities presenting a risk of emergence and re-emergence of pathogens with pandemic potential. (c-h) [Paragraphs on water and sanitation, infection control, strengthening of biosafety, surveillance and prevention of vector-born diseases, and addressing antimicrobial resistance.] The WHO intends the Agreement to have force under international law. Therefore, countries are undertaking to put themselves under force of international law in regards to complying with the agreement’s stipulations. The provisions under this long article mostly cover general health stuff that countries try to do anyway. The difference will be that countries will be assessed on progress. Assessment can be fine if in context, less fine if it consists of entitled ‘experts’ from wealthy countries with little local knowledge or context. Perhaps such compliance is best left to national authorities, who are more in use with local needs and priorities. The justification for the international bureaucracy being built to support this, while fun for those involved, is unclear and will divert resources from actual health work. 6. The Conference of the Parties may adopt, as necessary, guidelines, recommendations and standards, including in relation to pandemic prevention capacities, to support the implementation of this Article. Here and later, the COP is invoked as a vehicle to decide on what will actually be done. The rules are explained later (Articles 21-23). While allowing more time is sensible, it begs the question of why it is not better to wait and discuss what is needed in the current INB process, before committing to a legally-binding agreement. This current article says nothing not already covered by the IHR2005 or other ongoing programs. Article 5. One Health approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response Nothing specific or new in this article. It seems redundant (it is advocating a holistic approach mentioned elsewhere) and so presumably is just to get the term ‘One Health’ into the agreement. (One could ask, why bother?) Some mainstream definitions of One Health (e.g. Lancet) consider that it means non-human species are on a par with humans in terms of rights and importance. If this is meant here, clearly most Member States would disagree. So we may assume that it is just words to keep someone happy (a little childish in an international document, but the term ‘One Health’ has been trending, like ‘equity,’ as if the concept of holistic approaches to public health were new). Article 6. Preparedness, health system resilience and recovery 2. Each Party commits…[to] : (a) routine and essential health services during pandemics with a focus on primary health care, routine immunization and mental health care, and with particular attention to persons in vulnerable situations (b) developing, strengthening and maintaining health infrastructure (c) developing post-pandemic health system recovery strategies (d) developing, strengthening and maintaining: health information systems This is good, and (a) seems to require avoidance of lockdowns (which inevitably cause the harms listed). Unfortunately other WHO documents lead one to assume this is not the intent…It does appear therefore that this is simply another list of fairly non-specific feel-good measures that have no useful place in a new legally-binding agreement, and which most countries are already undertaking. (e) promoting the use of social and behavioural sciences, risk communication and community engagement for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. This requires clarification, as the use of behavioral science during the Covid-19 response involved deliberate inducement of fear to promote behaviors that people would not otherwise follow (e.g. Spi-B). It is essential here that the document clarifies how behavioral science should be used ethically in healthcare. Otherwise, this is also a quite meaningless provision. Article 7. Health and care workforce This long Article discusses health workforce, training, retention, non-discrimination, stigma, bias, adequate remuneration, and other standard provisions for workplaces. It is unclear why it is included in a legally binding pandemic agreement, except for: 4. [The Parties]…shall invest in establishing, sustaining, coordinating and mobilizing a skilled and trained multidisciplinary global public health emergency workforce…Parties having established emergency health teams should inform WHO thereof and make best efforts to respond to requests for deployment… Emergency health teams established (within capacity etc.) – are something countries already do, when they have capacity. There is no reason to have this as a legally-binding instrument, and clearly no urgency to do so. Article 8. Preparedness monitoring and functional reviews 1. The Parties shall, building on existing and relevant tools, develop and implement an inclusive, transparent, effective and efficient pandemic prevention, preparedness and response monitoring and evaluation system. 2. Each Party shall assess, every five years, with technical support from the WHO Secretariat upon request, the functioning and readiness of, and gaps in, its pandemic prevention, preparedness and response capacity, based on the relevant tools and guidelines developed by WHO in partnership with relevant organizations at international, regional and sub-regional levels. Note that this is being required of countries that are already struggling to implement monitoring systems for major endemic diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria, HIV, and nutritional deficiencies. They will be legally bound to divert resources to pandemic prevention. While there is some overlap, it will inevitably divert resources from currently underfunded programs for diseases of far higher local burdens, and so (not theoretically, but inevitably) raise mortality. Poor countries are being required to put resources into problems deemed significant by richer countries. Article 9. Research and development Various general provisions about undertaking background research that countries are generally doing anyway, but with an ’emerging disease’ slant. Again, the INB fails to justify why this diversion of resources from researching greater disease burdens should occur in all countries (why not just those with excess resources?). Article 10. Sustainable and geographically diversified production Mostly non-binding but suggested cooperation on making pandemic-related products available, including support for manufacturing in “inter-pandemic times” (a fascinating rendering of ‘normal’), when they would only be viable through subsidies. Much of this is probably unimplementable, as it would not be practical to maintain facilities in most or all countries on stand-by for rare events, at cost of resources otherwise useful for other priorities. The desire to increase production in ‘developing’ countries will face major barriers and costs in terms of maintaining quality of production, particularly as many products will have limited use outside of rare outbreak situations. Article 11. Transfer of technology and know-how This article, always problematic for large pharmaceutical corporations sponsoring much WHO outbreak activities, is now watered down to weak requirements to ‘consider,’ promote,’ provide, within capabilities’ etc. Article 12. Access and benefit sharing This Article is intended to establish the WHO Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS System). PABS is intended to “ensure rapid, systematic and timely access to biological materials of pathogens with pandemic potential and the genetic sequence data.” This system is of potential high relevance and needs to be interpreted in the context that SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen causing the recent Covid-19 outbreak, was highly likely to have escaped from a laboratory. PABS is intended to expand the laboratory storage, transport, and handling of such viruses, under the oversight of the WHO, an organization outside of national jurisdiction with no significant direct experience in handling biological materials. 3. When a Party has access to a pathogen [it shall]: (a) share with WHO any pathogen sequence information as soon as it is available to the Party; (b) as soon as biological materials are available to the Party, provide the materials to one or more laboratories and/or biorepositories participating in WHO-coordinated laboratory networks (CLNs), Subsequent clauses state that benefits will be shared, and seek to prevent recipient laboratories from patenting materials received from other countries. This has been a major concern of low-and middle-income countries previously, who perceive that institutions in wealthy countries patent and benefit from materials derived from less-wealthy populations. It remains to be seen whether provisions here will be sufficient to address this. The article then becomes yet more concerning: 6. WHO shall conclude legally binding standard PABS contracts with manufacturers to provide the following, taking into account the size, nature and capacities of the manufacturer: (a) annual monetary contributions to support the PABS System and relevant capacities in countries; the determination of the annual amount, use, and approach for monitoring and accountability, shall be finalized by the Parties; (b) real-time contributions of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccines produced by the manufacturer, 10% free of charge and 10% at not-for-profit prices during public health emergencies of international concern or pandemics, … It is clearly intended that the WHO becomes directly involved in setting up legally binding manufacturing contracts, despite the WHO being outside of national jurisdictional oversight, within the territories of Member States. The PABS system, and therefore its staff and dependent entities, are also to be supported in part by funds from the manufacturers whom they are supposed to be managing. The income of the organization will be dependent on maintaining positive relationships with these private entities in a similar way in which many national regulatory agencies are dependent upon funds from pharmaceutical companies whom their staff ostensibly regulate. In this case, the regulator will be even further removed from public oversight. The clause on 10% (why 10?) products being free of charge, and similar at cost, while ensuring lower-priced commodities irrespective of actual need (the outbreak may be confined to wealthy countries). The same entity, the WHO, will determine whether the triggering emergency exists, determine the response, and manage the contracts to provide the commodities, without direct jurisdictional oversight regarding the potential for corruption or conflict of interest. It is a remarkable system to suggest, irrespective of political or regulatory environment. 8. The Parties shall cooperate…public financing of research and development, prepurchase agreements, or regulatory procedures, to encourage and facilitate as many manufacturers as possible to enter into standard PABS contracts as early as possible. The article envisions that public funding will be used to build the process, ensuring essentially no-risk private profit. 10. To support operationalization of the PABS System, WHO shall…make such contracts public, while respecting commercial confidentiality. The public may know whom contracts are made with, but not all details of the contracts. There will therefore be no independent oversight of the clauses agreed between the WHO, a body outside of national jurisdiction and dependent of commercial companies for funding some of its work and salaries, and these same companies, on ‘needs’ that the WHO itself will have sole authority, under the proposed amendments to the IHR, to determine. The Article further states that the WHO shall use its own product regulatory system (prequalification) and Emergency Use Listing Procedure to open and stimulate markets for the manufacturers of these products. It is doubtful that any national government could make such an overall agreement, yet in May 2024 they will be voting to provide this to what is essentially a foreign, and partly privately financed, entity. Article 13. Supply chain and logistics The WHO will become convenor of a ‘Global Supply Chain and Logistics Network’ for commercially-produced products, to be supplied under WHO contracts when and where the WHO determines, whilst also having the role of ensuring safety of such products. Having mutual support coordinated between countries is good. Having this run by an organization that is significantly funded directly by those gaining from the sale of these same commodities seems reckless and counterintuitive. Few countries would allow this (or at least plan for it). For this to occur safely, the WHO would logically have to forgo all private investment, and greatly restrict national specified funding contributions. Otherwise, the conflicts of interest involved would destroy confidence in the system. There is no suggestion of such divestment from the WHO, but rather, as in Article 12, private sector dependency, directly tied to contracts, will increase. Article 13bis: National procurement- and distribution-related provisions While suffering the same (perhaps unavoidable) issues regarding commercial confidentiality, this alternate Article 13 seems far more appropriate, keeping commercial issues under national jurisdiction and avoiding the obvious conflict of interests that underpin funding for WHO activities and staffing. Article 14. Regulatory systems strengthening This entire Article reflects initiatives and programs already in place. Nothing here appears likely to add to current effort. Article 15. Liability and compensation management 1. Each Party shall consider developing, as necessary and in accordance with applicable law, national strategies for managing liability in its territory related to pandemic vaccines…no-fault compensation mechanisms… 2. The Parties…shall develop recommendations for the establishment and implementation of national, regional and/or global no-fault compensation mechanisms and strategies for managing liability during pandemic emergencies, including with regard to individuals that are in a humanitarian setting or vulnerable situations. This is quite remarkable, but also reflects some national legislation, in removing any fault or liability specifically from vaccine manufacturers, for harms done in pushing out vaccines to the public. During the Covid-19 response, genetic therapeutics being developed by BioNtech and Moderna were reclassified as vaccines, on the basis that an immune response is stimulated after they have modified intracellular biochemical pathways as a medicine normally does. This enabled specific trials normally required for carcinogenicity and teratogenicity to be bypassed, despite raised fetal abnormality rates in animal trials. It will enable the CEPI 100-day vaccine program, supported with private funding to support private mRNA vaccine manufacturers, to proceed without any risk to the manufacturer should there be subsequent public harm. Together with an earlier provision on public funding of research and manufacturing readiness, and the removal of former wording requiring intellectual property sharing in Article 11, this ensures vaccine manufacturers and their investors make profit in effective absence of risk. These entities are currently heavily invested in support for WHO, and were strongly aligned with the introduction of newly restrictive outbreak responses that emphasized and sometimes mandated their products during the Covid-19 outbreak. Article 16. International collaboration and cooperation A somewhat pointless article. It suggests that countries cooperate with each other and the WHO to implement the other agreements in the Agreement. Article 17. Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches A list of essentially motherhood provisions related to planning for a pandemic. However, countries will legally be required to maintain a ‘national coordination multisectoral body’ for PPPR. This will essentially be an added burden on budgets, and inevitably divert further resources from other priorities. Perhaps just strengthening current infectious disease and nutritional programs would be more impactful. (Nowhere in this Agreement is nutrition discussed (essential for resilience to pathogens) and minimal wording is included on sanitation and clean water (other major reasons for reduction in infectious disease mortality over past centuries). However, the ‘community ownership’ wording is interesting (“empower and enable community ownership of, and contribution to, community readiness for and resilience [for PPPR]”), as this directly contradicts much of the rest of the Agreement, including the centralization of control under the Conference of Parties, requirements for countries to allocate resources to pandemic preparedness over other community priorities, and the idea of inspecting and assessing adherence to the centralized requirements of the Agreement. Either much of the rest of the Agreement is redundant, or this wording is purely for appearance and not to be followed (and therefore should be removed). Article 18. Communication and public awareness 1. Each Party shall promote timely access to credible and evidence-based information …with the aim of countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation… 2. The Parties shall, as appropriate, promote and/or conduct research and inform policies on factors that hinder or strengthen adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic, as well as trust in science and public health institutions and agencies. The key word is as appropriate, given that many agencies, including the WHO, have overseen or aided policies during the Covid-19 response that have greatly increased poverty, child marriage, teenage pregnancy, and education loss. As the WHO has been shown to be significantly misrepresenting pandemic risk in the process of advocating for this Agreement and related instruments, its own communications would also fall outside the provision here related to evidence-based information, and fall within normal understandings of misinformation. It could not therefore be an arbiter of correctness of information here, so the Article is not implementable. Rewritten to recommend accurate evidence-based information being promoted, it would make good sense, but this is not an issue requiring a legally binding international agreement. Article 19. Implementation and support 3. The WHO Secretariat…organize the technical and financial assistance necessary to address such gaps and needs in implementing the commitments agreed upon under the Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005). As the WHO is dependent on donor support, its ability to address gaps in funding within Member States is clearly not something it can guarantee. The purpose of this article is unclear, repeating in paragraphs 1 and 2 the earlier intent for countries to generally support each other. Article 20. Sustainable financing 1. The Parties commit to working together…In this regard, each Party, within the means and resources at its disposal, shall: (a) prioritize and maintain or increase, as necessary, domestic funding for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, without undermining other domestic public health priorities including for: (i) strengthening and sustaining capacities for the prevention, preparedness and response to health emergencies and pandemics, in particular the core capacities of the International Health Regulations (2005);… This is silly wording, as countries obviously have to prioritize within budgets, so that moving funds to one area means removing from another. The essence of public health policy is weighing and making such decisions; this reality seems to be ignored here through wishful thinking. (a) is clearly redundant, as the IHR (2005) already exists and countries have agreed to support it. 3. A Coordinating Financial Mechanism (the “Mechanism”) is hereby established to support the implementation of both the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005) This will be in parallel to the Pandemic Fund recently commenced by the World Bank – an issue not lost on INB delegates and so likely to change here in the final version. It will also be additive to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and other health financing mechanisms, and so require another parallel international bureaucracy, presumably based in Geneva. It is intended to have its own capacity to “conduct relevant analyses on needs and gaps, in addition to tracking cooperation efforts,” so it will not be a small undertaking. Chapter III. Institutional and final provisions Article 21. Conference of the Parties 1. A Conference of the Parties is hereby established. 2. The Conference of the Parties shall keep under regular review, every three years, the implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement and take the decisions necessary to promote its effective implementation. This sets up the governing body to oversee this Agreement (another body requiring a secretariat and support). It is intended to meet within a year of the Agreement coming into force, and then set its own rules on meeting thereafter. It is likely that many provisions outlined in this draft of the Agreement will be deferred to the COP for further discussion. Articles 22 – 37 These articles cover the functioning of the Conference of Parties (COP) and various administrative issues. Of note, ‘block votes’ will be allowed from regional bodies (e.g. the EU). The WHO will provide the secretariat. Under Article 24 is noted: 3. Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the Secretariat of the World Health Organization, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the domestic laws or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures, or implement lockdowns. These provisions are explicitly stated in the proposed amendments to the IHR, to be considered alongside this agreement. Article 26 notes that the IHR is to be interpreted as compatible, thereby confirming that the IHR provisions including border closures and limits on freedom of movement, mandated vaccination, and other lockdown measures are not negated by this statement. As Article 26 states: “The Parties recognize that the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations should be interpreted so as to be compatible.” Some would consider this subterfuge – The Director-General recently labeled as liars those who claimed the Agreement included these powers, whilst failing to acknowledge the accompanying IHR amendments. The WHO could do better in avoiding misleading messaging, especially when this involves denigration of the public. Article 32 (Withdrawal) requires that, once adopted, Parties cannot withdraw for a total of 3 years (giving notice after a minimum of 2 years). Financial obligations undertaken under the agreement continue beyond that time. Finally, the Agreement will come into force, assuming a two-thirds majority in the WHA is achieved (Article 19, WHO Constitution), 30 days after the fortieth country has ratified it. Further reading: WHO Pandemic Agreement Intergovernmental Negotiating Board website: https://inb.who.int/ International Health Regulations Working Group website: https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/index.html On background to the WHO texts: Amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations: An Annotated Guide An Unofficial Q&A on International Health Regulations On urgency and burden of pandemics: https://essl.leeds.ac.uk/downloads/download/228/rational-policy-over-panic Disease X and Davos: This is Not the Way to Evaluate and Formulate Public Health Policy Before Preparing for Pandemics, We Need Better Evidence of Risk Revised Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement: Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Authors David Bell David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA. View all posts Thi Thuy Van Dinh Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh (LLM, PhD) worked on international law in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Subsequently, she managed multilateral organization partnerships for Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund and led environmental health technology development efforts for low-resource settings. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide/ https://www.minds.com/donshafi911/blog/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide-1621719398509187077

The Silent Shame of Health Institutions J.R. Bruning For how much longer will health policy ignore multimorbidity, that looming, giant elephant in the room, that propagates and amplifies suffering? For how much longer will the ‘trend’ of increasing diagnoses of multiple health conditions, at younger and younger ages be rendered down by government agencies to better and more efficient services, screening modalities, and drug choices? Multimorbidity, the presence of many chronic conditions, is the silent shame of health policy. All too often chronic conditions overlap and accumulate. From cancer, to diabetes, to digestive system diseases, to high blood pressure, to skin conditions in cascades of suffering. Heartbreakingly, these conditions commonly overlap with mental illnesses or disorders. It’s increasingly common for people to be diagnosed with multiple mental conditions, such as having anxiety and depression, or anxiety and schizophrenia. Calls for equity tend to revolve around medical treatment, even as absurdities and injustices accrue. Multimorbidity occurs a decade earlier in socioeconomically deprived communities. Doctors are diagnosing multimorbidity at younger and younger ages. Treatment regimens for people with multiple conditions necessarily entail a polypharmacy approach – the prescribing of multiple medications. One condition may require multiple medications. Thus, with multimorbidity comes increased risk of adverse outcomes and polyiatrogenesis – ‘medical harm caused by medical treatments on multiple fronts simultaneously and in conjunction with one another.’ Side effects, whether short-term or patients’ concerns about long-term harm, are the main reason for non-adherence to prescribed medications. So ‘equity’ which only implies drug treatment doesn’t involve equity at all. Poor diets may be foundational to the Western world’s health crisis. But are governments considering this? The antinomies are piling up. We are amid a global epidemic of metabolic syndrome. Insulin resistance, obesity, elevated triglyceride levels and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and elevated blood pressure haunt the people queuing up to see doctors. Research, from individual cases to clinical trials, consistently show that diets containing high levels of ultra-processed foods and carbohydrates amplify inflammation, oxidative stress, and insulin resistance. What researchers and scientists are also identifying, at the cellular level, in clinical and medical practice, and at the global level – is that insulin resistance, inflammation, oxidative stress, and nutrient deficiencies from poor diets not only drive metabolic illness, but mental illnesses, compounding suffering. There is also ample evidence that the metabolic and mental health epidemic that is driving years lost due to disease, reducing productivity, and creating mayhem in personal lives – may be preventable and reversible. Doctors generally recognise that poor diets are a problem. Ultra-processed foods are strongly associated with adult and childhood ill health. Ultra-processed foods are ‘formulations of ingredients, mostly of exclusive industrial use, typically created by series of industrial techniques and processes (hence ‘ultra-processed’).’ In the USA young people under age 19 consume on average 67% of their diet, while adults consume around 60% of their diet in ultra-processed food. Ultra-processed food contributes 60% of UK children’s calories; 42% of Australian children’s calories and over half the dietary calories for children and adolescents in Canada. In New Zealand in 2009-2010, ultra-processed foods contributed to the 45% (12 months), 42% (24 months), and 51% (60 months) of energy intake to the diets of children. All too frequently, doctors are diagnosing both metabolic and mental illnesses. What may be predictable is that a person is likely to develop insulin resistance, inflammation, oxidative stress, and nutrient deficiencies from chronic exposure to ultra-processed food. How this will manifest in a disease or syndrome condition is reflective of a human equivalent of quantum entanglement. Cascades, feedback loops, and other interdependencies often leave doctors and patients bouncing from one condition to another, and managing medicine side effects and drug-drug relationships as they go. In New Zealand it is more common to have multiple conditions than a single condition. The costs of having two NCDs simultaneously is typically superadditive and ‘more so for younger adults.’ This information is outside the ‘work programme’ of the top echelons in the Ministry of Health: Official Information Act (OIA) requests confirm that the Ministries’ Directors General who are responsible for setting policy and long-term strategy aren’t considering these issues. The problem of multimorbidity and the overlapping, entangled relationship with ultra-processed food is outside of the scope of the work programme of the top directorates in our health agency. New Zealand’s Ministry of Health’s top deputy directors general might be earning a quarter of a million dollars each, but they are ignorant of the relationship of dietary nutrition and mental health. Nor are they seemingly aware of the extent of multimorbidity and the overlap between metabolic and mental illnesses. Neither the Public Health Agency Deputy Director-General – Dr Andrew Old, nor the Deputy Director-General Evidence, Research and Innovation, Dean Rutherford, nor the Deputy Director-General of Strategy Policy and Legislation, Maree Roberts, nor the Clinical, Community and Mental Health Deputy Director-General Robyn Shearer have been briefed on these relationships. If they’re not being briefed, policy won’t be developed to address dietary nutrition. Diet will be lower-order. The OIA request revealed that New Zealand’s Ministry of Health ‘does not widely use the metabolic syndrome classification.’ When I asked ‘How do you classify, or what term do you use to classify the cluster of symptoms characterised by central obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and insulin resistance?’, they responded: ‘The conditions referred to are considered either on their own or as part of a broader cardiovascular disease risk calculation.’ This is interesting. What if governments should be calculating insulin resistance first, in order to then calculate a broader cardiovascular risk? What if insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress are appearing at younger and younger ages, and ultra-processed food is the major driver? Pre-diabetes and Type 2 diabetes are driven by too much blood glucose. Type 1 diabetics can’t make insulin, while Type 2 diabetics can’t make enough to compensate for their dietary intake of carbohydrates. One of insulin’s (many) jobs is to tuck away that blood glucose into cells (as fat) but when there are too many dietary carbohydrates pumping up blood glucose, the body can’t keep up. New Zealand practitioners use the HbA1c blood test, which measures the average blood glucose level over the past 2-3 months. In New Zealand, doctors diagnose pre-diabetes if HbA1c levels are 41-49 nmol/mol, and diabetes at levels of 50 nmol/mol and above. Type 2 diabetes management guidelines recommend that sugar intake should be reduced, while people should aim for consistent carbohydrates across the day. The New Zealand government does not recommend paleo or low-carbohydrate diets. If you have diabetes you are twice as likely to have heart disease or a stroke, and at a younger age. Prediabetes, which apparently 20% of Kiwis have, is also high-risk due to, as the Ministry of Health states: ‘increased risk of macrovascular complications and early death.’ The question might become – should we be looking at insulin levels, to more sensitively gauge risk at an early stage? Without more sensitive screens at younger ages these opportunities to repivot to avoid chronic disease are likely to be missed. Currently, Ministry of Health policies are unlikely to justify the funding of tests for insulin resistance by using three simple blood tests: fasting insulin, fasting lipids (cholesterol and triglycerides), and fasting glucose – to estimate where children, young people, and adults stand on the insulin resistance spectrum when other diagnoses pop up. Yet insulin plays a powerful role in brain health. Insulin supports neurotransmitter function and brain energy, directly impacting mood and behaviours. Insulin resistance might arrive before mental illness. Harvard-based psychiatrist Chris Palmer recounts in the book Brain Energy, a large 15,000-participant study of young people from age 0-24: ‘Children who had persistently high insulin levels (a sign of insulin resistance) beginning at age nine were five times more likely to be at risk for psychosis, meaning they were showing at least some worrisome signs, and they were three times for likely to already be diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia by the time they turned twenty-four. This study clearly demonstrated that insulin resistance comes first, then psychosis.’ Psychiatrist Georgia Ede suggests that high blood glucose and high insulin levels act like a ‘deadly one-two punch’ for the brain, triggering waves of inflammation and oxidative stress. The blood-brain barrier becomes increasingly resistant to chronic high insulin levels. Even though the body might have higher blood insulin, the same may not be true for the brain. As Ede maintains, ‘cells deprived of adequate insulin ‘sputter and struggle to maintain normal operations.’ Looking at the relationship between brain health and high blood glucose and high insulin simply might not be on the programme for strategists looking at long-term planning. Nor are Directors General in a position to assess the role of food addiction. Ultra-processed food has addictive qualities designed into the product formulations. Food addiction is increasingly recognised as pervasive and difficult to manage as any substance addiction. But how many children and young people have insulin resistance and are showing markers for inflammation and oxidative stress – in the body and in the brain? To what extent do young people have both insulin resistance and depression resistance or ADHD or bipolar disorder? This kind of thinking is completely outside the work programme. But insulin levels, inflammation, and oxidative stress may not only be driving chronic illness – but driving the global mental health tsunami. Metabolic disorders are involved in complex pathways and feedback loops across body systems, and doctors learn this at medical school. Patterns and relationships between hormones, the brain, the gastrointestinal system, kidneys, and liver; as well as problems with joints and bone health, autoimmunity, nerves, and sensory conditions evolve from and revolve around metabolic health. Nutrition and diet are downplayed in medical school. What doctors don’t learn so much – the cognitive dissonance that they must accept throughout their training – is that metabolic health is commonly (except for some instances) shaped by the quality of dietary nutrition. The aetiology of a given condition can be very different, while the evidence that common chronic and mental illnesses are accompanied by oxidative stress, inflammation, and insulin resistance are primarily driven by diet – is growing stronger and stronger. But without recognising the overlapping relationships, policy to support healthy diets will remain limp. What we witness are notions of equity that support pharmaceutical delivery – not health delivery. What also inevitably happens is that ‘equity’ focuses on medical treatment. When the Ministry of Health prefers to atomise the different conditions or associate them with heart disease – they become single conditions to treat with single drugs. They’re lots of small problems, not one big problem, and insulin resistance is downplayed. But just as insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress send cascading impacts across body systems, systemic ignorance sends cascading effects across government departments tasked with ‘improving, promoting, and protecting health.’ It’s an injustice. The literature solidly points to lower socio-economic status driving much poorer diets and increased exposures to ultra-processed food, but the treatments exclusively involve drugs and therapy. Briefings to Incoming Ministers with the election of new Governments show how ignorance cascades across responsible authorities. Health New Zealand, Te Whatu Ora’s November 2023 Briefing to the new government outlined the agency’s obligations. However, the ‘health’ targets are medical, and the agency’s focus is on infrastructure, staff, and servicing. The promotion of health, and health equity, which can only be addressed by addressing the determinants of health, is not addressed. The Māori Health Authority and Health New Zealand Joint Briefing to the Incoming Minister for Mental Health does not address the role of diet and nutrition as a driver of mental illness and disorder in New Zealand. The issue of multimorbidity, the related problem of commensurate metabolic illness, and diet as a driver is outside scope. When the Briefing states that it is important to address the ‘social, cultural, environmental and economic determinants of mental health,’ without any sound policy footing, real movement to address diet will not happen, or will only happen ad hoc. The Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission, Te Hiringa Mahara’s November 2023 Briefing to Incoming Ministers that went to the Ministers for Health and Mental Health might use the term ‘well-being’ over 120 times – but was silent on the related and overlapping drivers of mental illness which include metabolic or multimorbidity, nutrition, or diet. Five years earlier, He Ara Ora, New Zealand’s 2018 Mental Health and Addiction enquiry had recognised that tāngata whaiora, people seeking wellness, or service users, also tend to have multiple health conditions. The enquiry recommended that a whole of government approach to well-being, prevention, and social determinants was required. Vague nods were made to diet and nutrition, but this was not sufficiently emphasised as to be a priority. He Ara Ora was followed by 2020 Long-term pathway to mental well-being viewed nutrition as being one of a range of factors. No policy framework strategically prioritised diet, nutrition, and healthy food. No governmental obligation or commitment was built into policy to improve access to healthy food or nutrition education. Understanding the science, the relationships, and the drivers of the global epidemic, is ‘outside the work programmes’ of New Zealand’s Ministry of Health and outside the scope of all the related authorities. There is an extraordinary amount of data in the scientific literature, so many case studies, cohort studies, and clinical trials. Popular books are being written, however government agencies remain ignorant. In the meantime, doctors must deal with the suffering in front of them without an adequate toolkit. Doctors and pharmacists are faced with a Hobson’s choice of managing multiple chronic conditions and complex drug cocktails, in patients at younger and younger ages. Ultimately, they are treating a patient whom they recognise will only become sicker, cost the health system more, and suffer more. Currently there is little support for New Zealand medical doctors (known as general practitioners, or GPs) in changing practices and recommendations to support non-pharmaceutical drug treatment approaches. Their medical education does not equip them to recognise the extent to which multiple co-existing conditions may be alleviated or reversed. Doctors are paid to prescribe, to inject, and to screen, not to ameliorate or reverse disease and lessen prescribing. The prescribing of nutrients is discouraged and as doctors do not have nutritional training, they hesitate to prescribe nutrients. Many do not want to risk going outside treatment guidelines. Recent surges in protocols and guidelines for medical doctors reduce flexibility and narrow treatment choices for doctors. If they were to be reported to the Medical Council of New Zealand, they would risk losing their medical license. They would then be unable to practice. Inevitably, without Ministry of Health leadership, medical doctors in New Zealand are unlikely to voluntarily prescribe non-drug modalities such as nutritional options to any meaningful extent, for fear of being reported. Yet some doctors are proactive, such as Dr Glen Davies in Taupo, New Zealand. Some doctors are in a better ‘place’ to work to alleviate and reverse long-term conditions. They may be later in their career, with 10-20 years of research into metabolism, dietary nutrition, and patient care, and motivated to guide a patient through a personal care regime which might alleviate or reverse a patient’s suffering. Barriers include resourcing. Doctors aren’t paid for reversing disease and taking patients off medications. Doctors witness daily the hopelessness felt by their patients in dealing with chronic conditions in their short 15-minute consultations, and the vigilance required for dealing with adverse drug effects. Drug non-compliance is associated with adverse effects suffered by patients. Yet without wrap-around support changing treatments, even if it has potential to alleviate multiple conditions, to reduce symptoms, lower prescribing and therefore lessen side effects, is just too uncertain. They saw what happened to disobedient doctors during Covid-19. Given such context, what are we to do? Have open public discussions about doctor-patient relationships and trust. Inform and overlay such conversations by drawing attention to the foundational Hippocratic Oath made by doctors, to first do no harm. Questions can be asked. If patients were to understand that diet may be an underlying driver of multiple conditions, and a change in diet and improvement in micronutrient status might alleviate suffering – would patients be more likely to change? Economically, if wrap-around services were provided in clinics to support dietary change, would less harm occur to patients from worsening conditions that accompany many diseases (such as Type 2 diabetes) and the ever-present problem of drug side-effects? Would education and wrap-around services in early childhood and youth delay or prevent the onset of multimorbid diagnoses? Is it more ethical to give young people a choice of treatment? Could doctors prescribe dietary changes and multinutrients and support change with wrap-around support when children and young people are first diagnosed with a mental health condition – from the clinic, to school, to after school? If that doesn’t work, then prescribe pharmaceutical drugs. Should children and young people be educated to appreciate the extent to which their consumption of ultra-processed food likely drives their metabolic and mental health conditions? Not just in a blithe ‘eat healthy’ fashion that patently avoids discussing addiction. Through deeper policy mechanisms, including cooking classes and nutritional biology by the implementation of nourishing, low-carbohydrate cooked school lunches. With officials uninformed, it’s easy to see why funding for Green Prescriptions that would support dietary changes have sputtered out. It’s easy to understand why neither the Ministry of Health nor Pharmac have proactively sourced multi-nutrient treatments that improve resilience to stress and trauma for low-income young people. Why there’s no discussion on a lower side-effect risk for multinutrient treatments. Why are there no policies in the education curriculum diving into the relationship between ultra-processed food and mental and physical health? It’s not in the work programme. There’s another surfacing dilemma. Currently, if doctors tell their patients that there is very good evidence that their disease or syndrome could be reversed, and this information is not held as factual information by New Zealand’s Ministry of Health – do doctors risk being accused of spreading misinformation? Government agencies have pivoted in the past 5 years to focus intensively on the problem of dis- and misinformation. New Zealand’s disinformation project states that Disinformation is false or modified information knowingly and deliberately shared to cause harm or achieve a broader aim. Misinformation is information that is false or misleading, though not created or shared with the direct intention of causing harm. Unfortunately, as we see, there is no division inside the Ministry of Health that reviews the latest evidence in the scientific literature, to ensure that policy decisions correctly reflect the latest evidence. There is no scientific agency outside the Ministry of Health that has flexibility and the capacity to undertake autonomous, long-term monitoring and research in nutrition, diet, and health. There is no independent, autonomous, public health research facility with sufficient long-term funding to translate dietary and nutritional evidence into policy, particularly if it contradicted current policy positions. Despite excellent research being undertaken, it is highly controlled, ad hoc, and frequently short-term. Problematically, there is no resourcing for those scientists to meaningfully feedback that information to either the Ministry of Health or to Members of Parliament and government Ministers. Dietary guidelines can become locked in, and contradictions can fail to be chewed over. Without the capacity to address errors, information can become outdated and misleading. Government agencies and elected members – from local councils all the way up to government Ministers, are dependent on being informed by the Ministry of Health, when it comes to government policy. When it comes to complex health conditions, and alleviating and reversing metabolic or mental illness, based on different patient capacity – from socio-economic, to cultural, to social, and taking into account capacity for change, what is sound, evidence-based information and what is misinformation? In the impasse, who can we trust? Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author J.R. Bruning is a consultant sociologist (B.Bus.Agribusiness; MA Sociology) based in New Zealand. Her work explores governance cultures, policy and the production of scientific and technical knowledge. Her Master’s thesis explored the ways science policy creates barriers to funding, stymying scientists’ efforts to explore upstream drivers of harm. Bruning is a trustee of Physicians & Scientists for Global Responsibility (PSGR.org.nz). Papers and writing can be found at TalkingRisk.NZ and at JRBruning.Substack.com and at Talking Risk on Rumble. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-silent-shame-of-health-institutions/

A compilation of corporate media’s explanation of sudden deaths Rhoda WilsonMarch 22, 2024 As sudden deaths and cardiovascular diseases became more common, corporate media has needed to find explanations for the alarming trends. Filipe Rafaeli has compiled corporate media headlines that provide the most curious explanations. Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… The list of reasons for increased sudden deaths and strokes, according to the mainstream media By Filipe Rafaeli In the initial study of the Pfizer vaccine, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, with around 44,000 people, with 22,000 in the placebo group and about 22,000 in the vaccine group, more people died from all causes in the vaccine arm than in the placebo arm. Initially, it was 15 to 14. Shortly after, when updating this number at the Food and Drug Administration, the US regulatory agency, the number changed to 21 to 17. Now, without any surprise, in the most recent update, it’s already 22 to 16. “Most importantly, we found evidence of an over 3.7-fold increase in number of deaths due to cardiac events in the BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] vaccinated individuals compared to those who received only the placebo.” wrote the scientists in the latest update. After the mass application of the product, an excess of population mortality was recorded. In The Lancet, the world’s most impactful scientific journal, they analysed UK data: a 7.2% excess in 2022 and an 8.6% excess in 2023. The highlight? Cardiovascular diseases. The comparison is with the 5 previous years. And do you know what is the most interesting thing in this Lancet analysis? It’s the increase in deaths at home, that is, sudden deaths. There wasn’t even time to go to the hospital. There’s an impressive 22% increase. US life insurance companies, the ones paying the bills, also found the same thing: more deaths in younger people since 2021. Well, since everyone is seeing many people suddenly dying and others with cardiovascular diseases, the mainstream media needed to talk about heart attacks and sudden deaths. It made headlines. They needed to explain. Normalisation Here, the collection of headlines in the national and international mainstream media with the most curious explanations since 2021. According to Wales Online, from Wales, what is causing heart attacks is the increase in electricity bills: Energy bill price rise may cause heart attacks and strokes, says TV GP – Wales Online On the other hand, the Express from the UK claims that the cause of heart attacks is heavy metal and techno music: Atrial fibrillation: Two music genres linked to ‘potentially dangerous’ heart arrhythmias In Revista Veja, from Brazil, the cause of heart attacks is attributed to global warming: With a warmer world, the impact of climate change on health increases However, according to CNN Brazil, the real culprit isn’t heat but cold: Cardiovascular diseases can increase by up to 30% in winter; see precautions For the Daily Mail, from the UK, it is indeed the cold, but the issue arises only if you remove the snow: Expert warns that shovelling snow can be a deadly way to discover underlying heart conditions In The Times of India, the blame isn’t on the cold, but on the heat, along with humidity: Heart attacks more frequent when heat, humidity high: Study | Ahmedabad News In The Guardian, from the UK, the blame is actually on rain: Floods linked to increased deaths from heart and lung disease, Australian-led research shows In the Express, from the UK, it has nothing to do with the weather. The culprit for heart attacks is dirty dishes: Washing up helps wipe out heart risk In the UK’s Express, the mystery is solved. Skipping breakfast is blamed for heart attacks: Heart attack: Does skipping breakfast increase your risk? According to The Sun, from the UK, the reason for the excess of heart attacks is because you poop too much: RISK FACTOR How often you go to the toilet every day can ‘predict your risk of heart attack’ In The Times, from the UK, the cause of heart attacks is being single: Lonely older women at greater risk of heart attack, study shows However, according to Wales Online, from Wales, the reason people die suddenly is the opposite. It’s because people are dating: Average age of sudden death during sex is 38 – why it happens – Wales Online On the other hand, The Independent, from the UK, explains that the real cause is troubled relationships: A happy relationship enhances heart health, claims new study | The Independent According to News19, from the US, the cause of increased heart attacks is breaking up: Doctors say ‘Broken Heart Syndrome’ is real, and it can be deadly | WHNT.com In Isto é, from Brazil, the cause of cardiovascular problems is not exercising and watching too much TV: Watching TV can increase the risk of blood clots, study suggests However, The Irish Times, from Ireland, says the opposite, that the culprit is exercising: Physical activity may increase heart attack risk, study suggests – The Irish Times According to the British Heart Foundation, the cause is improper sleep. It’s because people sleep too little or too much: Does sleeping too little or too much raise your risk of heart disease? – BHF In The Sun, from the UK, the cause is indeed related to sleep, but because of daylight saving time: Moving clocks forward an hour could be dangerous for millions of Brits with serious heart problems – The Sun Meanwhile, for Canaltech, from Brazil, the culprit of heart attacks isn’t daylight saving time, but rather illuminated light: Sleeping with lights on increases the risk of heart disease and diabetes; understand For the Express, from the UK, the cause of heart attacks is “low-fat” processed foods: Heart attack: The ‘healthy’ food which may ‘put you at risk for heart disease’ – avoid According to The Standard, from the UK, what’s causing heart attacks is stress: Thousands facing heart problems due to ‘post-pandemic stress disorder’ | Evening Standard In the North Wales Chronicle, from Australia, the culprit of heart attacks is artificial sweeteners: Artificial sweeteners found in diet drinks could increase risk of heart attack – research | North Wales Chronicle In The Sun, from the UK, scientists have recently discovered the culprit. It’s the common cold: Common cold can trigger a killer blood clot disorder, scientists discover for the first time | The Sun The Express, from the UK, blames obsessive-compulsive disorder for strokes: Stroke: People with a common disorder could be ‘three times’ more likely to have a stroke In the UK’s Express, the culprit is the gluten-free diet: Heart attack: A gluten-free diet could increase the risk | Express.co.uk According to The Scientist, from the US, the culprit of heart attacks and strokes is noise from cars, airplanes, and trains: How Environmental Noise Harms the Cardiovascular System | The Scientist Magazine® According to UOL, from Brazil, the culprit for the increase in heart attacks and strokes is elections: How elections increased cases of heart attack and stroke in the US: is there the same risk in Brazil? In the New York Post, from the US, sudden infant deaths are caused by video games: Video games could trigger deadly heart problems in children: study According to Today, from the US, sudden infant deaths are actually common occurrences: All kids should be screened for possibility of sudden cardiac arrest, group says According to Today, from the US, the cause is that people are angry or emotionally disturbed: Stroke may be triggered by anger, upset or intense exercise in the hour before In the UK’s Daily Mail, the cause of heart attacks is said to be sun exposure for just one day: Sunbathing for just ONE DAY may increase your risk of heart disease – and stop the body fighting infections, study suggests However, according to The Times UK, all of the above are wrong. It’s only known that it’s happening, but the reason is a mystery: Mystery rise in heart attacks from blocked arteries The US-based New Scientist confirms it is indeed a mystery. Nobody knows the reason: There are thousands more UK deaths than usual and we don’t know why | New Scientist And even though it’s a mystery, and therefore could be anything, absolutely anything, the Brazilian Government has already assured me that one thing, at least, is not the cause: It’s false that Covid-19 vaccines cause sudden illness Although nobody should worry too much, because according to the US-based health and science website Revyuh News, it’s actually beneficial to have a heart attack: New Study Reveals Shocking Benefit of “Heart Attack” About the Author Filipe Rafaeli is a filmmaker and four-time Brazilian aerial acrobatics champion. He publishes articles on a Substack page titled ‘Pandemia’ which you can subscribe to and follow HERE. The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help... Can you please help power The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful journalism for the years to come… Your Government & Big Tech organisations such as Google, Facebook, Twitter & PayPal are trying to silence & shut down The Expose. So we need your help to ensure we can continue to bring you the facts the mainstream refuse to… We’re not funded by the Government to publish lies & propaganda on their behalf like the mainstream media. Instead, we rely solely on our support. So please support us in our efforts to bring you honest, reliable, investigative journalism today. It’s secure, quick and easy… Just choose your preferred method to show your support below support Lawyer, Dr Reiner Fuellmich asks to Be Released From Jail With an Electronic Anklet. While you were distracted by the “Where’s Princess Kate Conspiracy”, Deagel’s Depopulation Forecast was confirmed by Heavily Censored Pfizer Documents It’s all over for the Anthropocene, the official geologic period of human-caused climate change The List of Reasons for Increased Sudden Deaths and Strokes, According to the Mainstream Media. https://expose-news.com/2024/03/22/corporate-medias-explanation-of-sudden-deaths/

Understanding the Effects on Your Body When You Consume Turmeric-Infused Lemon Water Daily, Backed by Science 8 March 2024 grandmaremedy.net Understanding the Effects on Your Body When You Consume Turmeric-Infused Lemon Water Daily, Backed by Science Ensuring proper hydration is essential for the optimal functioning of the body. By incorporating lemon and turmeric into your water, you can significantly enhance the benefits of regular water consumption. While individual water needs may vary based on climate and activity levels, a general guideline is to consume 8 ounces of water eight times a day or about half a gallon. Turmeric, a powerful antioxidant, is widely used in Ayurveda for its ability to combat cancer-causing free radicals. It serves as an antiseptic, natural anti-inflammatory, and is a staple in Indian cuisine, offering a distinctive and appealing flavor. Known for its antiviral, antibacterial, and anticancer properties, turmeric has been used to address various conditions, including skin issues, digestive problems, diabetes, high cholesterol, and even neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s and dementia. On the other hand, lemons are a nutritional powerhouse, rich in vitamin C, soluble fiber, potassium, and an array of other beneficial nutrients. They contribute to heart health, skin improvement, weight loss, and enhanced cognitive function. The citric acid content aids digestion, while vitamin C supports the immune system. To harness the combined benefits of turmeric and lemons, simply add a teaspoon of turmeric and the juice from half a lemon to an 8-ounce glass of water. Enjoy this refreshing beverage throughout the day. For added flavor, consider incorporating honey or mint. This simple yet potent concoction can positively impact your overall health and well-being. https://grandmaremedy.net/understanding-the-effects-on-your-body-when-you-consume-turmeric-infused-lemon-water-daily-backed-by-science/

UK HAS A PROBLEM: Excess deaths are up a staggering 22% among 1 to 14-year-olds. Notably, this trend didn’t start until “the magic juice started to be issued to children later in 2021.” 2020: 9 percent fewer deaths than expected 2021: 7 percent fewer deaths than expected 2022: 16 percent MORE deaths than expected 2023: 22 percent MORE deaths than expected Additionally, the United States continues to experience a high rate of excess deaths among individuals under the age of 25: 2020: 10 percent more deaths than expected 2021: 20 percent more deaths than expected (mandates) 2022: ~20 percent more deaths than expected 2023: 16 percent more deaths than expected UK health officials are quietly investigating a 10% rise in deaths across all age groups. They believe “circulatory diseases and diabetes are ... behind the increase.” Join ➡️ @ShankaraChetty

What If Everything They’ve Been Telling You About Food Is… WRONG? Vigilant NewsFebruary 2, 2024 By Brian Cates The last 9 months have been an exceedingly strange journey for me. While I had already figured out the FDA food pyramid was garbage and had watched in real-time as all the federal “medical” “health” “science” agencies played a direct role in suppressing accurate information on COVID-19 and C-19 origins, treatments, vaccines, etc., it took me the better of part of 3 years to begin critically and logically examining what these self-same propagandists disguised as ‘experts’ have been telling all of us about food and what supposedly comprises a healthy diet. I’d struggled with my weight since I was a young man of 24. I am soon turning 60. I’d spent the past few years talking about losing weight and the all the issues I was dealing with from lugging around over 100+ pounds of useless bodyfat. But I was still eating 4-5 times a day, at least two of those meals being sizable. And though I cut down on the sweets and was eating what I was told were ‘healthy whole grains’, the weight not only refused to go down, it kept going up. I would go through the same cycle several times from when I was around 26 to last year: Start working out religiously, while eating what I was told was mostly ‘healthy’ food. I’d add some muscle, my weight would drop maybe 20 pounds or so…and then after 3-4 months, hit the wall. No changes, and despite working out, the weight crept back up. Quit working out, gain all the weight back, a year goes by…then start the cycle again. 34 years or so I ran on this hamster wheel. When this picture was taken, I’d just started writing for The Epoch Times in mid-2018. I was 350 pounds or so. Hadn’t weighed myself in a while. I was too scared to look anyway. Image I had just gone through the cycle again early last year. Working out, eating the “healthy food” chock full of carbs, various forms of sugars and toxic seed oils & chemicals, etc., etc. Then in May, I quit again. In late June, my stepmom visited me in my new house in Florida while I was on an RV tour around the US, and when she saw how I was living and eating, she read me the riot act. She kicked me in the ass and got me not only moving again, but that visit was also the catalyst I needed to go back and re-examine 35+ years of failure and why trying the same thing over and over again wasn’t working. For years, people like me were told this was a willpower/laziness thing. You’re fat and you can’t lose the weight because you don’t eat right/work out hard enough or long enough, etc. So I was mentally beaten down after exhausting myself on this hamster’s wheel as I was headed into decade #4 with the wrong programming in my head. Overweight Man Tired after Training, with Hand on Forehead Against ... But here’s the thing. As a journalist, I’d just spent the last 3 1/2 years extensively and exhaustively covering how federal and state and county ‘health’ ‘medical’ and ‘science’ ‘experts’ had just engaged in a deliberate conspiracy to hide and censor true and accurate information from the American public. Not to mention also covering the amount of gaslighting we were all being hit with following the blatant theft of the 2020 election from Donald Trump. So at this time, in late June/early July of last year, I started my re-examination of around 35 years of failure with an intriguing thought: **COULD IT BE** that the very same ‘health’ ‘medical’ & ‘science’ experts who’d just exposed and outed themselves as Big Pharma propagandists and business partners lying to us about COVID & many of the drugs involved in the treatment/prevention of infection…were also wrong or deliberately misleading us about….food? Image Could it possibly be…. One of the first things I realized, when I began examining what the federal ‘health’ ‘medical’ ‘science’ agencies tout as a ‘healthy’ diet, is that when they last changed the food pyramid in the early 1990’s, the rates of both obesity and diabetes exploded in this country as people began following this ‘expert’ advice. As you can see from the graphs below, an already alarming rising trend suddenly shot dramatically upward in the early 1990s. Image Image How bad has the obesity/diabetes/insulin resistance crisis gotten in the US? It is now so bad they’ve coined a bullshit term – ‘prediabetes’ – to try to mask the deadly seriousness of the crisis. If you are diagnosed as ‘prediabetic,’ you ARE diabetic; it’s just that your insulin resistance hasn’t progressed to such an extent that they’ll officially call it ‘diabetes.’ Image Or as actor Wilford Brimley would say: Wilford Brimley Has Diabeetus - Misc - quickmeme Insulin resistance leads directly to a massive amount of chronic health issues of which diabetes is only one. By giving Americans the ‘expert’ advice that they needed to start chugging down ‘6-11 servings’ every day of ‘healthy whole grains’ and cook their food with seed oils while counseling them to also **reduce** the amount of meat and animal fats they were eating, Americans began ingesting way more carbohydrates and PUFA’s [that’s ‘polyunsaturated fatty acids, for those of you in Rio Linda…] every day than they’d been eating before. And yet I recall for the past 30 years or so watching the popular culture health reporters scratch their heads and wondering what could possibly be causing the massive explosion of obesity and chronic illnesses, as well as the dropping testosterone and estrogen levels they were observing. So the fact that the federal ‘health’ agencies caused much of the country to make a dramatic wrong turn that exacerbated the rising trends of obesity and chronic illness with their drastically wrong official ‘food pyramid’ in the early 1990s, caused me to wonder: If they were giving the American public such rotten, terrible, horrible, no-good ‘expert’ instructions on what they should be eating every day, **what else** have they been telling us that is utter bullshit? And the very first thing I stumbled over in this regard was the history of SEED OILS and how medical scientists doing animal experiments back in the 1890s/early 1900s quickly established that seed oils were toxic and harmful to growing and developing animals. By the end of July last year, I was sharing the alarming stuff I was finding in my research with my readers on my Substack: Image You have to fully grasp this. They **knew** from animal experiments on rats and cows and horses and birds **exactly** what SEED OILS did to growing and developing animals. Many of these experiments were carried out from the late 1880s through the 1910s. Experiment results were published in books, such as this one from scientist E.V. McCollum in 1918. There was no mystery here. The results were established and easily observable. And yet…what ended up happening over the next 100 years? Government ‘health’ experts working hand-in-glove with Big Food corporations convinced most Americans to stop cooking their food with butter, lard, and tallow, and instead use the new ‘Crisco’ and other highly processed seed oils and margarine. Because they claimed these new processed products were ‘healthier’. And because Americans back then were very trusting people who didn’t know their government was controlled by hidden corporations and interests out to make massive profits while not caring about their health, they followed this ‘expert’ advice from authority figures they were taught to trust. From the 1920s through today, Big Food, working in conjunction with Big Government, began creating many new highly processed foods that contained large amounts of these seed oils and myriad toxic chemicals and food additives. Our American culture is now flooded with highly processed fake ‘food’ that didn’t exist even 100 years ago. And they are inventing new kinds of fake food every year. Image If they knew what seed oils would do to human beings who began eating them early in life, and ate them throughout their physical development and into adulthood – and evidence seems to suggest they did – then the only possible reason for them to do that would be to arrest the development of children, cause chronic illnesses throughout life, and ensure a premature death. What I saw through my research was **deeply disturbing to me**. Image This can’t be just about profit motive, the fact they’d make a lot of MONEY creating new addictive processed sugar-and-carb-and-seed oil-filled foods. They had to also have seen the very real and OBVIOUS HARM they would be doing to their fellow citizens by introducing these heavily toxic and health-destroy products into the American food supply. Not when you realize the wealthy elite who run everything in this fallen world behind the scenes are constantly wringing their hands and brainstorming about how to ‘fix’ the world’s overpopulation problem, think even the concept of human rights is a big funny hilarious joke, and that human rights don’t exist, just like God doesn’t exist. They’ve always sat around at their big, important conferences in places like Davos and talked about culling the human herd like they’re ranchers planning for the next cattle drive. It’s just that they’re starting to get embarrassed that the cows are now spying on them in the barn and figuring out what they’re talking about, their plans for the rest of us. What more clever way could be devised than convincing people to simply EAT themselves into chronic illnesses that will guide them expeditiously into an early grave? The rise in life expectancy rates over the past 100 years is not because people are HEALTHIER overall. Image Far from it. The rates rose because of medical advancements in keeping chronically ill people alive longer. Were people not being tricked and misled into fattening themselves with constant insulin resistance and filling their bodies with toxins, most people would very likely be living into their upper 90s by now. Instead, life expectancy is dropping because the amount of toxic and unhealthy food Americans are eating is going up. This cannot be overstated. With the medical/health/scientific advancements in knowledge and technology over the past 120 years, the only way this was allowed to happen and to become so widespread at this point millions of people are dying from easily preventable chronic illnesses is that… …and I know some of you will struggle to accept this…. …the real owners of the world out there **wanted** this to happen. They demanded it. There’s no way they don’t know. So if they know…and nothing’s been done to stop it? It’s not just about money. There’s what looks like an exceedingly nefarious agenda at work here. Image Sometimes in my more paranoid moments, I wonder if…. Nah. Couldn’t be…. Could it? Image Tastes like chicken! https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/W-JhfjGtlp8?rel=0&autoplay=0&showinfo=0&enablejsapi=0 So the first two things I discovered in my new research starting in the middle of last year: 1. The food pyramid was a massive ‘mistake’…or was it? 2. Seed Oils are toxic and harm human development and shorten the human lifespan Yet they were allowed to proliferate into the American food supply by accident…or was it really an ‘accident’? Next, I discovered that the conventional ‘expert’ findings about animal fat were wrong. For decades I’d been endlessly told and had read that too much dietary animal fat caused health/heart issues. Cut down dramatically on the red meat, the eggs, the butter, replace the fat with ‘healthy’ food… And yet what do you actually **FIND** when you examine the medical research? You find when people dramatically reduced their animal fat intake they still got FATTER and more CHRONICALLY ILL. After all, one of the biggest reasons for creating a ‘new and improved!’ food pyramid back in the early 1990s was to convince people to CUT the amount of meat and animal fat they were eating and replace them with ‘healthy’ carbs. For people who were supposedly becoming more ‘healthy’ by following the new food pyramid’s ‘expert’ advice, Americans seemed to be getting fatter, heavier, and more unhealthy. It’s been noticed for some time now that people in America in the 1940s and 1950s sure do look pretty darn healthy, even though we were constantly being told by our modern ‘health experts’ that those poor folks were eating WAY too much animal fats and red meat and eggs and [gasp!] butter. I mean…there’s just NO WAY that Americans back then eating all that bad stuff were healthier than US today, right? 🤔 Why, that very idea would be absurd! They didn’t know any better! They didn’t have our advantages! Image Image Image Hey…maybe it’s time for us to stop, go back and look, and rethink this all out again… Because SOMETHING clearly isn’t working. We’re **supposed to be** far healthier than those poor fools back in the 1940s and 1950s…but we’re NOT. Why is that? If you commit yourself to finding the truth and facing it unflinchingly, no matter where it leads…you can find it. The brutal truth is…people here in America have been misled. Just about EVERYTHING the ‘health’ and ‘diet’ ‘experts’ have been telling them all their lives is….SURPRISE!…wrong. It’s not your fault. It is THEIR fault. They either didn’t know what they were talking about when they were teaching you how to eat, or they had a hidden agenda. Either way…NOT YOUR FAULT. Image Image Image Its not that you lack willpower. Or that you’re lazy. Or that you don’t work out enough. Its that what the ‘experts’ taught you about how to eat a proper diet wasn’t true. You were not getting accurate information. You were steered towards unhealthy seed oil/sugar/carb-filled processed foods because authority figures you trusted gave you terrible advice. You were given bad information by government and medical authority figures on 7 dietary subjects: 1. Cholesterol levels 2. Salt/mineral levels 3. Protein levels 4. Animal Fats 5. Fiber 6. Seed oils 7. Meal frequency My research has led me to conclude that we need to go BACK to how our ancestors ate. A mostly meat diet where we do not eat large meals of highly processed fake foods several times a day with snacks in between. We’re not designed to put food into our stomachs 3-6 times a day, constantly spiking our insulin levels and hormonal system, developing lifelong insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome-related chronic illnesses and diseases. Especially not the kind of food we’re surrounded by in our popular culture, the highly over-processed stuff that didn’t exist 100 years ago that are now chock-full of toxic seed oils, sugars, and chemicals. Sure, people back in the 1940s and 1950s were eating 3 squares a day, but look at **what** they were eating compared to what we are surrounded by now. Until around 120 years ago, most people lived on farms, and even if they didn’t, most of the food they ate came almost directly from a farm. Have you heard stories about people who travel to Europe and visit places like France and Italy where they eat all the bread and pasta, drink all the wine they want, etc. and don’t get fat? Know why that is? Because it’s ILLEGAL over there in many European countries to add in the toxic chemical crap they put into US processed food on this side of the pond. Look at the following links for just a HINT of how bad this issue is. Why are European governments taking better care of their people’s health than our supposedly superior US government? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-food-additives-banned-europe-making-americans-sick-expert-says/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/28/bread-additives-chemicals-us-toxic-america https://foodrevolution.org/blog/banned-ingredients-in-other-countries/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/23/titanium-dioxide-banned-chemicals-carcinogen-eu-us Image So, when I began changing my diet again in 2023, I switched to a [O]ne [M]eal [A] [D]ay program [OMAD] where I ate only once time in every 24-hour period. I adopted a 4-hour ‘feeding window’ from 4 pm to 8 pm. I also cut out most of the processed foods I had been eating – including the Weight Watcher’s stuff. I increased the amount of meat I ate from around 1/3rd of my diet to 2/3rds. From late June through early September, I went from 345 pounds [my stepmom made me get on the scale with her watching. I expected to see around 320. Ulp!] down to 320. And then I got stuck. The weight stopped coming off and I fluctuated between 317 and 320 for around a month and a half. Then my ‘little sister from another Mister,’ investigative journalist and head editor of Uncover DC, Tracy Beanz, shared some pictures and testimony about her husband William, who had lost over 160 pounds on a Carnivore Diet in one year. He not only lost a massive amount of unhealthy body fat, but he also had several chronic health issues evaporate. Image Image So….in early November, I decided to cut out the bread and the potatoes and the ‘healthy’ cereal I was still eating and stay only with raw milk and unpasteurized cheese for my carbs, and the rest of my diet was Amish-farm raised beef, bison, chicken, turkey, and fish with large brown eggs. The weight started coming again…slowly. I went from 320 down to my current weight of 295. I’ve gone down to 293, but 295 is what I saw the last 2 times I weighed myself. So. I learned a lot in the last 8 months. I wanted to share some of what I learned in this thread. I am not telling or advising anyone to do what I’m doing. I’m providing information and asking for people to check this out for themselves and make up their own minds. A key part of The Great Awakening is, I am convinced, teaching people how to get healthy and stay that way. And if people have been getting wrong and perhaps even deliberate disinformation from ‘health experts,’ the more people realize that and start reassessing what they’ve been told over the past few decades? THAT’S A BEAUTIFUL THING. https://vigilantnews.com/post/what-if-everything-theyve-been-telling-you-about-food-is-wrong/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/what-if-everything-theyve-been-telling.html

The Truth About HPV Vaccination, Part 2: Studies Link the Vaccines to Neurological, Autoimmune Disorders Researchers who looked closely into the Gardasil HPV vaccine concluded the risks from the vaccine seem to significantly outweigh the as-yet-unproven long-term benefits. The Epoch Times Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free. By Dr. Yuhong Dong Editor’s Note: This second installment in a multi-part series about the human papillomavirus, or HPV, vaccine examines studies that link the vaccines to increased risk of serious neurological and autoimmune disorders. Read Part 1 here. Summary of key facts A Danish review of 79,102 female and 16,568 male subjects, found human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines had significantly increased rates of serious nervous system disorders. Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and complex regional pain syndrome were judged “definitely associated” with the HPV vaccine. A large Danish and Swedish study including nearly 300,000 girls found a significant association between the HPV vaccine and increased rates of Bechet’s syndrome (rate ratio 3.37), Raynaud’s disease (1.67) and type 1 diabetes (1.29). A large study including 3 million Danish and Swedish women aged 18 to 44, identified seven adverse events with statistically significant increased risks following HPV vaccination: Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, celiac disease, lupus erythematosus, pemphigus vulgaris, Addison’s disease, Raynaud’s disease and encephalitis, myelitis, or encephalomyelitis. A 2017 French study of over 2.2 million young girls found evidence of a 3.78-fold increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). A 2011 U.S. study found nearly a two-and-a-half to 10 times greater risk of acquiring GBS within six weeks post-Gardasil vaccination. While the underlying mechanisms causing these autoimmune reactions are not yet fully understood, some researchers speculate that the sizable overlap in protein sequences between the HPV and the human genome may cause the immune system to attack itself. Others are concerned that the adjuvants (such as aluminum) used to attract the attention of the immune system may be causing harm. Neurological and autoimmune disorders Danish review found increased nervous system disorder In 2020, a group of Danish scientists conducted a systematic review of the overall benefits and harms of HPV vaccines. Twenty-four eligible randomized controlled clinical studies were obtained, with a total of 95,670 participants, mostly women, and 49 months mean weighted follow-up. Almost all controls were given an active comparator vaccine (typically a hepatitis vaccine with a comparable aluminum-based adjuvant). Given that the adjuvant is highly immunogenic by design (it is meant to grab the attention of the immune system), this trial design makes it difficult to detect an excess risk with the HPV vaccines. Without true controls (such as a saline placebo), the real risks of HPV vaccination cannot be accurately assessed. In the vaccine group, 367 cancers were detected, compared to 490 in the comparator group. Younger participants (15 to 29) seemed to benefit more from the vaccine concerning preventing moderate HPV-related intraepithelial neoplasia compared to older participants (ages 21 to 72). Younger participants also had fewer fatal harms. Even though the studies were flawed in their design, at four years post-vaccination, those who had received the HPV vaccines had significantly increased rates of serious nervous system disorders: 49%, as well as general harms totaling 7%. The serious harms that were judged “definitely associated” with HPV vaccines were postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome. POTS had a nearly twofold increase in the vaccinated group. By July 2017, only two-thirds of the results from HPV vaccine trials had been published, and only about half the results had been posted, due to manuscript length limitations, reporting bias and confounding journal articles offering a limited view of trial outcomes. This Danish systematic review compiled data from all the HPV trials to offer a summary of the evidence thus far. Nevertheless, the investigators acknowledged that despite three years of work, the limitations of their analysis remained. These included reporting bias, incomplete reporting, data fragmentation and limited trial follow-up. These investigators similarly note that the trials were powered to assess the benefits of HPV vaccination, not rare harms. The degree to which benefits outweigh risks is therefore unknown. They concluded that future research should carefully evaluate the harms following Gardasil 9 compared to Gardasil because the former contains more than double the virus proteins and aluminum-containing adjuvant than the same dose of Gardasil. RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax” Order Now Large studies reveal autoimmune events In 2009, the HPV4 vaccine was integrated into the Danish childhood vaccination program. Since then, two large cohort studies on the HPV4 vaccine adverse events have been carried out using the hospital-based healthcare registries of Denmark and Sweden. The first study in Denmark and Sweden included 296,826 girls aged 10 to 17 who received a total of 696,420 HPV4 vaccine doses. The scientists evaluated rate ratios for autoimmune events and found no significant association for 20 out of 23 events. They found a significant association between the HPV4 vaccine and Bechet’s syndrome (rate ratio 3.37), Raynaud’s disease (1.67) and type 1 diabetes (1.29). But after further review, they concluded that there was insufficient evidence for a causal association, because of the weakness of the signal and the lack of an underlying mechanism to explain biological plausibility. In a second large cohort study, the same team expanded their research to more than 3 million Danish and Swedish adult women aged 18 to 44. The authors identified seven adverse events with statistically significant increased risks following HPV4 vaccination: Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, celiac disease, lupus erythematosus, pemphigus vulgaris, Addison’s disease, Raynaud’s disease and encephalitis, myelitis or encephalomyelitis. After sensitivity analyses, the association between HPV4 vaccination and celiac disease was the most robust finding. Celiac disease is a condition where a person’s immune system attacks the body’s own gut after eating gluten. As the graph below shows, the scientists used two risk periods after HPV4 vaccination: the first 180 days and after. 1 time since first dose HPV4 vaccine coeliac cases Time since the first dose of the HPV4 vaccine for vaccinated coeliac cases in a cohort of Danish and Swedish women. Credit: Journal of Internal Medicine The authors noted that the observed 56% increased risk of celiac disease “was strong, and the increase was strikingly similar in both risk periods after vaccination.” Celiac disease is underdiagnosed in Denmark. So one possible explanation is that vaccination visits allow a chance for this and other conditions to be diagnosed and explored. This explanation suggests that the association between the HPV vaccine and autoimmune disorders may be coincidental. However, given the lack of any real control groups in these studies, as well as the growing body of scientific literature from countries around the world showing problems with the HPV vaccine, dismissing these safety signals as coincidence seems short-sighted. Large French study and U.S. VAERS study identify risks of Guillain-Barré Syndrome The concern about autoimmune disease adverse events has contributed to low HPV vaccination uptake in France. A 2017 study of over 2.2 million young girls in France found troubling evidence of a link with Guillain-Barré syndrome. GBS is a condition that arises when our own antibodies attack the nerves. The incidence of GBS was found to be 1.4 per 100,000 person-years among the vaccinated girls compared to 0.4 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated, resulting in an increased risk of GBS of more than 200%. The association appeared to be “particularly marked in the first months following vaccination.” This finding is corroborated by the pattern of adverse reactions reported worldwide. Data from a large number of case reports document similar serious adverse events associated with Gardasil administration, with nervous system disorders of autoimmune origin being the most frequently reported. A 2011 U.S. study found that the estimated weekly reporting rate of post-Gardasil GBS within the first six weeks (6.6 per 10,000,000) was higher than in the general population, and higher than post-Menactra and post-influenza vaccinations. In particular, there was nearly a two-and-a-half to 10 times greater risk of acquiring GBS within six weeks after vaccination, compared to the general population. Additionally, the study found Gardasil vaccination was associated with approximately eight-and-a-half times more emergency department visits, 12.5 times more hospitalizations, 10 times more life-threatening events and 26.5 times more disability than the Menactra vaccination. Plausible mechanisms of harm Despite the conflicting data in the scientific literature to date, it is clear that the HPV vaccines can cause autoimmune disorders in susceptible people. But how? Autoimmunity has been reported as a complication of natural infection as well as virus vaccination. This phenomenon has been observed with many viruses, including the Epstein-Barr virus, COVID-19 and HPV. According to a 2019 study, the HPV vaccine contains epitopes — portions of the virus proteins — that overlap with the human proteins. This means that if we develop antibodies to those viruses, we may also generate autoantibodies to our own cells, which is the root cause of autoimmune dysfunction. The study showed that most of the immunoreactive HPV L1 epi­topes are overlapping peptides present in human proteins. The authors explained that this “unexpected enormous size of the peptide overlap between the HPV epitopes and human proteins” is relevant, and may be why a wide variety of autoimmune diseases have been reported post-HPV vaccination, including ovarian failure, systemic lupus erythematosus, breast cancer and sudden death, among others. Why some people develop these conditions and others do not is unclear. The authors suggest that vaccines should target the few peptides that do not overlap with human proteins, but which do overlap with the other HPVs. Despite this overlap and the potential for causing autoimmune disease, medical doctors usually ignore or dismiss the connection. We are told that these diseases are rare. The human body has something called immune tolerance. This protects a person’s immune system against attacking itself. Therefore, HPV infection is also “immune tolerated,” which means it lays dormant for some time until it becomes cancerous. HPV vaccination was actually designed with this immune tolerance in mind. Given the human body’s built-in defenses against autoimmune conditions, vaccinology requires an immunogenic catalyst to get the body’s attention. This is the job of an adjuvant. An adjuvant is an ingredient used in a vaccine that the body recognizes as foreign. It is added to vaccines so that the body will mount a stronger immune response. The idea is that in attacking the adjuvant, the body will also recognize other vaccine ingredients (in this case, purified HPV proteins). In addition, the antigen dose is much higher than in natural infections and the capsids in the vaccine are directly exposed to systemic immune responses as opposed to the virus staying relatively hidden within the natural barrier of the skin following infection. The vaccine was well-designed to trigger an immune response, but this advantage may come at a cost: Generating antibodies to HPV proteins through vaccination could, theoretically, set the stage for an autoimmune attack. Link between HPV-vaccine-associated nervous system dysfunction and autoimmunity A December 2022 Danish and German study was designed to elucidate a possible mechanism of harm. The lead author, Dr. Jesper Mehlsen, a specialist in treating autoimmune conditions, noted that the HPV major capsid L1s antigen resembles human autonomic nerve receptors, including G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR). According to the researchers, in the past several years, case series of suspected vaccination side effects have pointed to three disease entities: POTS, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and complex regional pain syndrome. These syndromes may be associated with neuroendocrine GPCR antibodies. From 2011 to 2018, researchers saw 845 patients (839 females, six males) with suspected side effects following the HPV4 vaccine. The control group included vaccinated people without side effects. Moderate to severe fatigue was recorded in 83.3% of the patients but in none of the controls. A high prevalence of symptoms, such as dizziness (91%), heart palpitations (71%), nausea (80%) and hyperactive bladder suggested that the patients were experiencing some kind of autonomic dysfunction. Autonomic dysfunction occurs when the part of the nervous system that controls well-being and balance does not function properly. 2 most frequent symptoms hpv vaccine Most frequent symptoms reported by 612 patients in Denmark. Credit: Journal of Autoimmunity Twenty-four percent higher antinuclear antibodies (ANA, a common type of autoantibodies) were found in patients, suggesting possible autoimmunity. 3 antinuclear antibodies HPV vaccines A larger proportion of the symptomatic patients were found with a common type of autoantibodies compared to healthy controls. Credit: Journal of Autoimmunity Antibodies against the adrenergic ß-2-receptor and muscarinic M-2 receptors were also found significantly higher in patients. Many of the symptoms, including immune activation and autonomic dysregulation, could be mediated or aggravated by dysregulated autoantibodies against adrenergic receptors and impaired peripheral adrenergic function. The authors suggested that girls and women with probable side effects of HPV vaccination have symptoms and biological markers compatible with an autoimmune disease closely resembling that seen in ME/CFS. Interestingly, people who already had HPV infections at some point appeared to be at greater risk for adverse events following vaccination. The authors noted that “prior disease may precondition some individuals for vaccine-related adverse events.” They also noted that some of the adverse events resembled long-COVID symptoms. Universal HPV vaccination called into question Academic researcher at the University of British Columbia, Lucija Tomljenovic, and neuroscientist Christopher Shaw, who have closely looked into Gardasil, have argued that the risks from the vaccine seem to significantly outweigh the as-yet-unproven long-term benefits. In a 2012 comment published in the American Journal of Public Health, they took issue with “incomplete and inaccurate” data and poorly designed trials. Vaccination is unjustified if the vaccine carries any substantial risk, as healthy teenagers face little to no risk of dying from cervical cancer. Risk-benefit analyses must be conducted to ascertain the overall balance of benefits and harms on both individual and societal levels. Reprinted with permission from The Epoch Times. Dr. Yuhong Dong, a medical doctor who also holds a doctorate in infectious diseases in China, is the chief scientific officer and co-founder of a Swiss biotech company and former senior medical scientific expert for antiviral drug development at Novartis Pharma in Switzerland. If you or your child suffered harm after receiving the Gardasil HPV vaccine, you may have a legal claim. Please visit Wisner Baum for a free case evaluation. Click here to watch a Gardasil litigation update interview with Wisner Baum Senior Partner Bijan Esfandiari. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/truth-hpv-vaccine-part-2-et/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-truth-about-hpv-vaccination-part-2.html

Screening for Silent Spike Toxicity Spike levels build up over time with repeated exposures and eventually the dam breaks. Here's how to detect toxicity before it causes symptoms. Dr. Syed Haider Pet Toxin Safety - Mill Creek Animal Hospital This post will provide a deep dive on tests for spike toxicity, including the best screening tests for those who have no symptoms, but have been exposed. These tests detect specific spike-induced inflammation, clotting, AIDS, turbo cancer, etc, and can help get ahead of disease developing underneath the surface. In a future post I plan to cover the best tests for fine tuning a healing protocol. There are now hundreds if not thousands of physicians treating spike toxicity with varying protocols and degrees of success. In my experience most hesitate to escalate ivermectin enough. At high enough doses it almost always helps (at mygotodoc.com I usually start where others end, at 0.2mg/kg/day and then may gradually escalate as high as 10 times more than that ie 2mg/kg/day in some patients over the course of 5-10 weeks). Most physicians treating spike toxicity also refrain from much or any testing. This makes sense on a budget, and I often come across patients who can’t afford testing and we skip it as well, but if it can be afforded then it can be helpful in fine tuning the protocol and sometimes uncovering key missing ingredients, like nutritional deficiencies, or particularly stubborn micro clotting requiring escalated dosing and varied types of anticoagulants. The other place for testing is in screening of the general population without symptoms, both vaxxed and unvaxxed (though when you really press you often do find new symptoms have sprouted up since the beginning of the pandemic). But even in those who truly have no new symptoms and feel perfectly fine, it seems that it may simply be a matter of time before spike toxicity catches up with them, especially if, like so many people, they can’t detox quickly enough, can’t break up the atypical microclots fast enough, and then are reexposed to a new variant, or a big shedding bolus, and that tips the scales and sends them into outright long haul. People find it hard to believe that they could feel fantastic and yet there could be something brewing inside that is just 1 straw away from breaking their backs. Yet almost everyone was in this very situation even before the pandemic. We all have a health span and a lifespan, and for most in the modern world the overlap between them has been dramatically shrinking for generations, and it has only gained speed with each passing year, and especially the last 3 years since the pandemic hit. Health is wealthqbak - http://asianpin.com/health-is-wealthqbak/ | Funny cartoons jokes, Funny cartoon pictures, Funny cartoons source In plain English, we often gradually become chronically ill and then debilitated starting decades before we finally die. In the worst cases spending the last years of our lives in nursing homes, oblivious to our surroundings and infrequently visiting loved ones. The reason for this is a chronic mismatch between our bodies and our environments - not just lack of exercise and poor diets, but also the chemical soup we find ourselves in, the toxins in the air, water and soil, the lack of fresh air and sunlight throughout the day, the lack of grounding, and too much toxic blue light at night that is soaked up by our eyes and very skin while we lounge in front of our screens, greatly stressing ourselves, while thinking we’re relaxing, followed by restless, unfulfilling sleep. Most of us are drawing down on our health savings accounts - not the tax free HSA - but a metaphorical account that represents our life force. Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share Just like a regular bank account, if it isn’t managed properly and wealth is overused, it will eventually get close to zero, by which time we will be liable to illness at the drop of a hat - anything that is too taxing can overdraw the account since what’s flowing into it can’t overcome what’s flowing out. And then some of us become chronically overdrawn, living on credit, and in the toxic embrace of chronic illness because of it, dragging us into the depths, while we struggle vainly to get back above the surface. This is why when you finally realize you have to change your ways to get better, it makes no sense to give up those changes as soon as you break free of illness. You are just above zero, still liable to dipping below the surface again. You need to build up your reserves of health over time and not overdraw your account again. You have to become a good steward of your body and resources. And over time you can get to the point where you’re on solid ground again and can put up with small and large stressors without backsliding. But you should always keep in mind how bad it can get to motivate you to stay on the straight and narrow going forward. To get back to the topic, the spike protein builds up in our bodies over time and causes detectable changes to our immune and vascular systems. There is an immune fingerprint of various cytokine markers, there are the microclots, there are alterations to the red blood cell zeta potential, there are predictable decreases of various micronutrients. There may be early warning signs of AIDS, or cancer or organ dysfunction. Nowadays almost all new patients with Long COVID or Vax injury made it through a few shots, or a few rounds of COVID without getting long haul, but the final infection or shot put them over the edge. If they had come before they got that last shot or infection I could have detected their susceptibility in the lab and we could have worked to correct it. This is the epidemic of Silent Spike Toxicity. And these are the tests we have available to screen for it: The Microclot Test: only available from 1 lab in the US (mail order). Detects abnormal clotting not seen on any other test. The single most specific spike toxicity test. The Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel: includes imaging tests: EKG, CXR, Echo. Blood tests that detect damage to the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys. Checks zeta potential. Can show the immune fingerprint of spike. Detection of AIDS. Typical gut microbiome changes. Advanced cancer screening (blood & whole body MRI), and more. The Masterjohn-Schilling Spike Healing Panel: detects neuroinflammation, free radicals, mitochondrial dysfunction, autoantibodies, reactivated viruses and bacteria, MCAS, specific micronutrients that are depleted by spike toxicity, and more. Masterjohn’s Deep Dive Nutrition Panel goes beyond nutrients depleted by spike toxicity to provide a complete snapshot of functional nutrition and is indispensable for deep healing when half measures don’t work. source A quick note on tests in general: There is no perfect test. Tests are evaluated by their sensitivity and specificities, but we don’t have research on any of these for spike toxicity diseases. Sensitivity is how good a test is at ruling out a diagnosis and specificity is how good it is at ruling in a diagnosis. The best screening tests would be 100% specific - meaning if you have the diagnosis it will be detected 100% of the time, but in order to gain that level of specificity they often have to cast a wide net and give up some sensitivity. What this means practically is that if the diagnosis is present you will test positive, but there will also be some people who don’t have the diagnosis who also test positive. Highly specific tests are usually paired with confirmatory tests that are hopefully highly sensitive. Meaning they can weed out the people who were including in the first round of screening, but don’t actually have the diagnosis in question. In the absence of research into spike toxicity diseases and optimal screening regimens we have to fall back on expert opinion. It seems that the microclot test is likely the best screening test, because those treating spike toxicity have never come across someone with the clinical symptoms of the disease who doesn’t have elevated microclots. Unfortunately microclots can be elevated by other conditions. So a confirmatory test like the incelldx Incellkyne panel might be ordered from the Comprehensive Spike Screening panel, along with other tests we’ll discuss below. If the diagnosis of spike toxicity is made then the Masterjohn-Schilling panel is the best next step for fine tuning the protocol, ensuring that the right micronutrients are topped up and the right treatments are prescribed. If not improving after targeted and sustained treatment, then the Deep Dive Nutrition panel is indicated to uncover rare and unusual nutritional deficits that could be holding you back. Here I’ll cover the primary screening tests: The Microclot Test and the Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel. In a future article I may cover the more expansive and complicated panels that are used primarily in treatment. Share The Microclot Test figure 3 source Typical microclots are usually found in the elderly and those with chronic illnesses like diabetes. Spike induced atypical amyloid fibrin microclots are found in those with spike induced blood toxicity. The difference between typical and atypical are that spike induced microclots are very difficult to break down, so difficult that they often do not break down at all. This explains why the D-dimer isn’t helpful for detecting spike toxicity. D-dimer is always trapped inside of clots. Typical clots are always being broken down on the margins - at the edge of a typical clot there will be breakdown. Sometimes the breakdown happens slower than the growth of the clot, but there is always a battle going on between clot growth and clot destruction which will release D-dimer into the blood stream. Since it is virtually always elevated in the presence of clotting it is a very specific test, and is used as a screening test when a physician suspects a clotting disorder, but isn’t sure. For example if someone shows up with chest pain and it could be a pulled muscle or a pulmonary embolism (clot in the pulmonary veins), a D-dimer is a simple ad very cheap test that can be done to determine if further confirmatory, but more expensive more risky testing should be considered, like a CT Angiogram of the chest. For this reason every doctor going through residency comes to consider a positive D-dimer as indicative of clotting and a negative D-dimer as indicative of no clotting. figure 4 source The D-dimer is often elevated during severe acute COVID-19 infection, and during a severe acute injection reaction, but it is not usually elevated in chronic spike toxicity, including chronic long haul and vaccine injured patients. The reason it isn’t elevated is that most people cannot break down the atypical microclots caused by spike protein without some additional help from medications and supplements. Once medications like aspirin (and sometimes prescriptions ones like plavix and eliquis), supplements like nattokinase, serrapeptase, lumbrokinase, bromelain and NAC are started the atypical microclots start to be broken down and D-dimer goes up, which in this case is usually reason for celebration. So the microclot test is the only test in America today that can detect elevated atypical microclots. It’s only available from one lab in the country via mail order (request it from mygotodoc.com), and it helps detect spike toxicity as well as helping track treatment. If initial treatment for microclots with aspirin and supplements doesn’t bring the levels down then we escalate to using higher doses, or add plavix and then later eliquis. And we can also consider plasma donation, or even therapeutic plasmapheresis, if available. DETOX [spike buster] PRE-ORDER NOW: initial stock is limited! Shipping late November 2023. The Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel This set of tests includes an EKG, CXR, Echo. It includes blood tests to screen for daamage to the major organs including the heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys. It checks for zeta potential in the blood, which is affected by spike toxicity. It detects an immune fingerprint of spike. It can detect AIDS. It covers stool testing for the gut microbiome as well as advanced cancer screening (via blood & whole body MRI), and more. Tests Included in the Panel: Spike antibody test: Measures your B cell’s response to the spike protein. In the absence of a direct test for spike protein this helps indirectly detect and track the spike protein levels in your body. Your body produces antibodies in response to the spike protein, and this test measures those antibodies. Generally speaking the more spike protein in your body, the higher the antibody levels. However, what's considered a problematic level varies by individual. The goal is to lower this level as much as possible. The test can also help detect those individuals who might be transmitting the spike protein to others. This is by no means a perfect test, but in the right setting it is helpful as a red flag for further workup, or as a way of monitoring response to therapies over time. Incellkyne Panel from Incelldx - provides an immune fingerprint of spike protein, a combination of elevated cytokine markers that are typically seen in spike protein disease. There are other immune fingerprints they have identified on this same test that indicate non spike Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Lyme disease. If CCL-5/RANTES and/or VEGF are elevated (VEGF is almost always elevated) then the medication Maraviroc can be helpful. VEGF indicates vascular inflammation and omega-3s, infrared light exposure, and a number of other approaches can be particularly helpful to deal with that. Other inflammatory markers tested are TNF-alpha, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-13, GM-CSF, SCD40L, CCL3, CCL-4, and IFN-Gamma. Ivermectin is known to decrease IL-6, which is commonly elevated in Long Haul and Vax injury. Lymphocyte Subset Panel or Cyrex Lymphocyte MAP: The subset panel is the standard test for AIDS and tests for these immune subsets: CD3, CD19,CD20, CD4, CD8, CD56+. The primary pathognomic feature of AIDS would be a CD4 T cell count lower than 200, though there are other red flags such as NK cell activity <10%, or a deficit of T helper cells (CD4+), as well as these others that would only be found on the Cyrex Lymphocyte MAP test: TH1 insufficiency, Increased T-Reg (CD4+ CD25+), deficits of cytotoxic cells (CD8+, CD56+), increased TGF-beta, etc. The Lymphocyte subset panel is cheaper and available at any standard lab and may be covered by insurance, the Cyrex test is more expensive and is a mail order blood test only that has to be paid in cash up front. The Cyrex test can detect 14 different immunotypes and reveal immune under or overactivity, infections, inflammation, autoimmunity, allergies, asthma, hypersentivities and some cancers. It also helps determine what further immune tests can be done to fine tune a healing protocol. Galleri Cancer Screening is an advanced test for 50+ types of common cancers based on a genetic marker found in the blood. It is a good screening test because it is 99.5% specific. This might be a good option for someone with a family or personal history of cancer as it can detect occurance at a the earliest microscopic stage, far before any visual test like an MRI or CT scan would show a mass. If cancer is found ivermectin, fenbendazole, vitamin C, baking soda and many other of label easily available substances are very promising for treatment. Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer? Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer? Cancer rates have skyrocketed in the past century for a number of reasons not least of which is the incredibly large number of toxins spewed into the environment and incorporated into our food supplies. And now with most of humanity exposed to the cancerous spike protein there is likely to be even further acceleration. Those exposed to the fallout from … Read full story Complete Blood Count (CBC) Measures various components and features of the blood, including red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets. Amongst the white blood cells we can see various abnormalities - they can be high or low, and subsets like basophils, neutrophils and eosinophils might be off. For example a patient started aspirin which is a cornerstone of most treatments of spike toxicity, but in this case raised the eosinophil level and caused some histaminergic symptoms. The symptoms were the same as her usual disease symptoms so initially were written off as a normal fluctuation in symptomatology over time, but in light of the elevated eosinophil level we finally determined that the aspirin was triggering a problem, since that is possible side effect of aspirin. Once off aspirin the symptoms and the eosinophils normalized. Comprehensive Metabolic Panel (CMP) Measures 14 different substances in the blood. It provides information about kidney and liver function, electrolyte levels, and blood sugar. Blood sugar can be high or low in spike toxicity, and that would indicate a pancreatic issue requiring further workup. Liver function often needs to be tracked in those on ivermectin and many other medications. Potassium balances sodium and usually needs to be supplemented in long haul, since most people don’t get enough, especially if blood pressure is rising. Cystatin C is a more specific marker of kidney dysfunction than the creatinine level that is included on the CMP. D-dimer: as mentioned earlier this is a product of the breakdown of clots, it’s often elevated in the acute phase of spike injury or disease, but over time the microclots being inherently difficult to break down stop releasing D-dimer unless the patient is taking a combination of supplements and/or medications to trigger this. Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Decoding ESR Test: What Your Results Could Reveal About Your Health | Pathkind Labs Blog Measures the rate at which red blood cells settle in a standardized tube over one hour. It is a nonspecific marker of inflammation in the body. It is also an indication of the zeta potential, which is a measure of the normal negative charge on red cells that prevents them from clumping together. Spike protein lowers the normal zeta potential which usually causes ESR to rise. Potassium citrate can help reverse this trend, as can sunlight and grounding. hs-CRP Test (C-Reactive Protein High-Sensitivity) is another non specific marker of inflammation in the body and if found require further workup. It can be elevated in myo-pericarditis. Troponin T is a protein relatively specific to heart muscle cells, leaked into the blood. This is a cardiac biomarker that indicates myocardial injury and along with an EKG is. one of the primary screening tests for a heart attack as well as for myocarditis/pericarditis. Pro BNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) is produced by the heart in response to strain, particularly heart failure. Electrocardiogram (EKG) EKG: What is it and what does it mean? – JP Stroke Foundation Non-invasive medical test that records the heart's electrical activity. Can be used to diagnose myocarditis/pericarditis, heart attack, and various rhythm abnormalities like atrial fibrillation, SVTs and more that can raise the risk of sudden cardiac arrest, such as that seen in some athletes who have been vaxxed. Echocardiogram (ECHO) Provides valuable information about the heart's structure, function, and blood flow and is an important test for helping visualize the inflammatory changes of myocarditis-pericarditis, such as fluid leaking into the sack around the heart. Chest X-ray source Non-invasive imaging test that uses X-rays to visualize the structures and organs within the chest, including the lungs, heart, ribs, diaphragm, and large arteries. Anyone with shortness of breath should have a Chest Xray as a first screening test looking for pneumonia, inflammation, scarring, nodules/cancer, etc. Whole Body MRI The Latest Quantified Self Trend: Whole-Body MRI Another imaging modality that can turn up hidden cancers and a whole host of other abnormalities and might be ordered for someone where the Galleri test was negative but there was still some suspicion present (here is always the risk of over diagnosis with imaging tests like this, which can lead to otherwise unnecessary stress and procedures that can themselves cause harm). Microbiome testing: Microbiomix Metagenomic Sequencing of Stool by Genova or Sabine Hazan’s Whole Genome Deep Sequencing by Progenabiome. Spike toxicity leads to depletion of beneficial gut bacterials species such as Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Roseburia inulinivorans, and Roseburia hominis all of which are associated with long COVID complications. Presence of 'unfriendly' bacterial species is linked to poor performance on the 6-minute walk test among long COVID patients. Microbiomix is cheaper because it uses a less thorough sequencing technique, but can show some changes found due to spike toxicity. Sabine Hazan’s test is better if budgeting allows, both because it does a whole genome sequencing, but also because it benefits from her proprietary and private knowledge base (essentially studies and findings that have not yet been published). There are some supplements that can help correct deficits, and in stubborn cases a stool transplant can be transformative, though this is somewhat difficult to get done as it usually requires travel. And that’s a wrap! Next time We’ll look at the Masterjohn-Schilling panel which is our go to for optimizing treatment of long haul/vax injury and perhaps the Comprehensive Nutrition panel, which is important for anyone who has a chronic illness resistant to treatment, including long haul syndromes. https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/screening-for-silent-spike-toxicity https://telegra.ph/Screening-for-Silent-Spike-Toxicity-01-07

Everything to know about the Health Benefits of Beets Some benefits of eating beets may include lower blood pressure and better athletic performance, among others. Eating beets raw or juicing and roasting them may be more beneficial than boiling them. Beetroots, commonly known as beets, are a vibrant and versatile type of vegetable. They’re known for their earthy flavor and aroma. Many people call them a superfood because of their rich nutritional profile. In addition to bringing a pop of color to your plate, beets are highly nutritious and packed with essential vitamins, minerals, and plant compounds, many of which have medicinal properties. What’s more, they’re delicious and easy to add to your diet in dishes like balsamic roasted beets, hummus, fries, and salads, among many others. Here are 9 evidence-based benefits of beets, plus some tasty ways to increase your intake. Share on Pinterest Beets boast an impressive nutritional profile. They’re low in calories yet high in valuable vitamins and minerals. In fact, they contain a bit of almost all of the vitamins and minerals your body needs (1Trusted Source). Here’s an overview of the nutrients found in a 3.5-ounce (100-gram) serving of boiled beetroot (1Trusted Source): Calories: 44 Protein: 1.7 grams Fat: 0.2 grams Carbs: 10 grams Fiber: 2 grams Folate: 20% of the Daily Value (DV) Manganese: 14% of the DV Copper: 8% of the DV Potassium: 7% of the DV Magnesium: 6% of the DV Vitamin C: 4% of the DV Vitamin B6: 4% of the DV Iron: 4% of the DV Beets are particularly rich in folate, a vitamin that plays a key role in growth, development, and heart health (2Trusted Source). They also contain a good amount of manganese, which is involved in bone formation, nutrient metabolism, brain function, and more (3Trusted Source). Plus, they’re high in copper, an important mineral required for energy production and the synthesis of certain neurotransmitters (4Trusted Source). Summary Beets are loaded with vitamins and minerals yet low in calories and fat. They’re also a good source of several key nutrients, including folate, manganese, and copper. Beets have been well studied for their ability to decrease elevated blood pressure levels, which are a major risk factor for heart disease (5Trusted Source). In fact, some studies show that beetroot juice could significantly lower levels of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (6Trusted Source, 7Trusted Source). The effect appears to be greater for systolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart contracts, rather than diastolic blood pressure, which is the pressure when your heart is relaxed. Also, raw beets may exert a stronger effect than cooked ones (7Trusted Source, 8Trusted Source). These blood-pressure-lowering effects are likely due to the high concentration of nitrates in this root vegetable. In your body, dietary nitrates are converted into nitric oxide, a molecule that dilates blood vessels and causes blood pressure levels to drop (9Trusted Source). Beets are also a great source of folate. Although research has turned up mixed results, several studies suggest that increasing your intake of folate could significantly lower blood pressure levels (10Trusted Source). However, keep in mind that beets’ effect on blood pressure is only temporary. As such, you need to consume them regularly to experience heart-health benefits over the long term (11Trusted Source). Summary Beets contain a high concentration of nitrates, which can help lower your blood pressure levels. This may lead to a reduced risk of heart disease and stroke. Several studies suggest that dietary nitrates like those found in beets may enhance athletic performance. Nitrates appear to affect physical performance by improving the efficiency of mitochondria, which are responsible for producing energy in your cells (12Trusted Source). According to one review, beetroot juice could enhance endurance by increasing how long it takes to become exhausted, boosting cardiorespiratory performance, and improving efficiency for athletes (13Trusted Source). Promisingly, beet juice has also been shown to improve cycling performance and increase oxygen use by up to 20% (14Trusted Source, 15Trusted Source). It’s important to note that blood nitrate levels peak within 2–3 hours of consuming beets or their juice. Therefore, it’s best to consume them a couple of hours before training or competing to maximize their potential benefits (16Trusted Source). Summary Eating beets may enhance athletic performance by improving oxygen use and endurance. To maximize their effects, consume them 2–3 hours prior to training or competing. Beets contain pigments called betalains, which possess a number of anti-inflammatory properties (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 18Trusted Source). This could benefit several aspects of health, as chronic inflammation has been associated with conditions like obesity, heart disease, liver disease, and cancer (19Trusted Source). One study in 24 people with high blood pressure found that consuming 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beet juice for 2 weeks significantly reduced several markers of inflammation, including C-reactive protein (CRP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) (8Trusted Source). Plus, an older 2014 study in people with osteoarthritis — a condition that causes inflammation in the joints — showed that betalain capsules made with beetroot extract reduced pain and discomfort (20). Beetroot juice and extract have also been shown to reduce kidney inflammation in rats injected with toxic, injury-causing chemicals (17Trusted Source). Still, more studies in humans are needed to determine whether enjoying beets in normal amounts as part of a healthy diet may provide the same anti-inflammatory benefits. Summary Beets may have a number of anti-inflammatory effects, although further research in humans is needed. One cup of beetroot contains 3.4 grams of fiber, making beets a good fiber source (1Trusted Source). Fiber bypasses digestion and travels to the colon, where it feeds friendly gut bacteria and adds bulk to stools (21Trusted Source). This can promote digestive health, keep you regular, and prevent digestive conditions like constipation, inflammatory bowel disease (IBS), and diverticulitis (22Trusted Source, 23Trusted Source). Moreover, fiber has been linked to a reduced risk of chronic diseases, including colon cancer, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes (23Trusted Source, 24Trusted Source, 25Trusted Source). Summary Beets are a good source of fiber, which benefits your digestive health and reduces the risk of several chronic health conditions. »MORE:Living with diabetes? Explore our top resources. Mental and cognitive functions naturally decline with age, which can increase the risk of neurodegenerative disorders like dementia. The nitrates in beets may improve brain function by promoting the dilation of blood vessels and thus increasing blood flow to the brain (26Trusted Source). Particularly, beets have been shown to improve blood flow to the frontal lobe of the brain, an area associated with higher level thinking like decision making and working memory (27Trusted Source). Furthermore, an older study in people with type 2 diabetes found that reaction time during a cognitive function test was 4% faster in those who consumed 8.5 ounces (250 mL) of beetroot juice daily for 2 weeks, compared with a control group (28Trusted Source). However, more research is needed to determine whether beets could be used to improve brain function and reduce the risk of dementia among the general population. Summary Beets contain nitrates, which may increase blood flow to the brain and improve cognitive function. However, more research in this area is needed. Beetroot contains several compounds with cancer-fighting properties, including betaine, ferulic acid, rutin, kaempferol, and caffeic acid (29Trusted Source). Although more research is needed, test-tube studies have shown that beetroot extract can slow the division and growth of cancer cells (30Trusted SourceTrusted Source, 31Trusted Source, 32Trusted Source). Several other studies have found that having higher blood levels of betaine may be associated with a lower risk of developing cancer (33Trusted Source, 34Trusted Source). However, it’s important to note that most studies on the topic have used isolated compounds rather than beetroot. Therefore, further research on beetroot consumption as part of a well-rounded diet and cancer risk is needed. Summary Some studies show that certain compounds found in beets could have cancer-fighting properties. Still, further research is needed to better understand this potential connection. Beets have several nutritional properties that could make them a great addition to a balanced diet. First, they’re low in fat and calories but high in water, which can help balance your energy intake. Increasing your intake of low calorie foods like this root vegetable has also been associated with weight loss (35Trusted Source). Furthermore, despite their low calorie content, they contain moderate amounts of protein and fiber. Both of these nutrients can make it easier to achieve and maintain a moderate weight (36Trusted Source, 37Trusted Source). The fiber in beets may also support digestive health, decrease appetite, and promote feelings of fullness, thereby reducing your overall calorie intake (38Trusted Source). Additionally, by including them in smoothies or other recipes, you can easily increase your intake of fruits and vegetables to improve the quality of your diet (39Trusted Source). Summary Beets have are high in water, moderate in fiber and protein, and low in calories. All of these properties can balance your energy intake and improve your diet quality. Beets are not only nutritious but also incredibly delicious and easy to incorporate into your diet. You can juice, roast, steam, or pickle them. For a convenient option, you can purchase them precooked and canned. You can even enjoy them raw, either sliced thinly or grated. Choose beets that feel heavy for their size with fresh, unwilted green leafy tops still attached, if possible. Because dietary nitrates are water-soluble, it’s best to avoid boiling beets if you’d like to maximize their nitrate content. Are beets good for people with diabetes? Here are some delicious and interesting ways to add more beets to your diet: Salad. Grated beets make a flavorful and colorful addition to coleslaw or other salads. Try this recipe for Amazing Dressed Beets or a Beetroot, Orange, and Carrot Salad. Dip. Beets blended with Greek yogurt and fresh garlic make a delicious, healthy, and colorful dip. Have a go at this Beetroot and Honey Lemon Houmous. Juice. Fresh beetroot juice is typically better than store-bought versions, which can be high in added sugar and contain only a small amount of beets. Try this beetroot juice recipe, which uses carrot, apple, ginger, celery, and lemon for flavor Soup: Borscht is a popular soup in Eastern Europe and Northeast Asia. Try this classic recipe or this beetroot and tomato variation. Leaves. You can cook and enjoy fresh beet leaves similarly to how you’d use spinach. Get some ideas for cooking beet greens here. Roasted. Wedge beetroots and toss them with a little olive oil, salt, pepper, and herbs or spices of your choice. Then, roast them in a 400°F (205°C) oven for 15–20 minutes until they’re tender. Or try these Balsamic Roasted Beets. Summary Beetroot is a delicious and versatile vegetable that’s easy to add to your diet. If possible, choose beets that feel heavy for their size with green tops still attached. Can you eat beets everyday? It’s always best to follow a varied diet. Eating a small amount of beetroot every day is unlikely to do any harm, but a high intake could lead to low blood pressure, red or black urine and feces, and digestive problems for anyone with a sensitivity to the nutrients. A high daily beet consumption may also mean you are not getting nutrients from other foods, however, so try to vary your diet. Always speak with a doctor before making significant dietary changes. Are beets a superfood? Some people call beets a superfood because they are rich in essential nutrients. Are beets anti-inflammatory? Beets contain betalains, a natural coloring agent with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Some research suggests belatains may help reduce both symptoms and biological markers in the body related to inflammation (8Trusted Source, 17Trusted Source, 20). Can beets boost your sexual health? Beets contain nitrates and there is some evidence they may improve the body’s nitric oxide production (40Trusted Source). The body needs nitric oxide to open the blood vessels that are necessary for getting and maintaining an erection. This may make them suitable for people with erectile dysfunction, although there is no scientific evidence to confirm this. Can beets help with sexual function? Beets are highly nutritious and loaded with health-promoting properties. They can support the health of your brain, heart, and digestive system, are a great addition to a balanced diet, boost athletic performance, help alleviate inflammation, and possibly slow the growth of cancer cells. Best of all, beets are delicious and easy to include in your diet. For example, they’re a great addition to salads, side dishes, smoothies, dips, and juices. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-beets#nutrients-and-calories

EXCLUSIVEInside NIH virus lab in Montana - that has eerie ties to Wuhan - where US scientists inject pigs and monkeys with EBOLA and other dangerous bio-agents By Alexa Lardieri U.S. Deputy Health Editor Dailymail.Com 14:57 GMT 27 Jan 2024 , updated 14:57 GMT 27 Jan 2024 Photos obtained by a watchdog group show experiments performed on animals NIH lab in Montana was previously found to have been experimenting with SARS REVEALED: NIH lab experimented with coronaviruses from Wuhan in 2018 Photos and videos obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show US government-funded researchers experimenting on animals at a controversial lab in Montana where risky virus research is carried out. Advertisement Advertisement Images and video footage obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and shared exclusively with this website show researchers sedating monkeys and pigs and giving them injections, as well as piglets housed in small and unsanitary cages. Top Stories by Daily Mail 01:00 Admiral Rob Bauer: 'The next 20 years will not be hunky dory' MailOnline explains the top myths and facts surrounding Diabetes Prince William visits Kate as she spends her third day in hospital Crack appears in block of flats where 88 homes are being bulldozed Kate in hospital after undergoing abdominal surgery PETER HITCHENS: We don't wantdeath or blackouts, end the march to war While there is no suggestion any of the footage shows illegal activity, it gives an eerie glimpse into what goes on at the National Institutes of Health's Rocky Mountain Lab (RML), which has come under scrutiny in recent months. Last year, this website revealed that RML in Montana had been experimenting with SARS-like viruses a year before the Covid pandemic, and while that research has stopped, current projects involving other deadly pathogens with the potential to spark a new pandemic are still being carried out at the lab. These include injecting pigs with Ebola and infecting monkeys with Covid-19 and studying how they react to Hemorrhagic Fever, which involves vomiting blood, internal bleeding, bleeding in the brain and from the eyes, nose and mouth. The documents reveal NIH scientists proposed infecting two- to three-week old piglets with reston virus (REBOV), a family of pathogens that could cause Ebola, for a project to take place between 2017 and 2020 The documents reveal NIH scientists proposed infecting two- to three-week old piglets with reston virus (REBOV), a family of pathogens that could cause Ebola, for a project to take place between 2017 and 2020 The White Coat Waste project obtained photos of animal experiments on monkeys and pigs at the National Institutes of Health's Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana The White Coat Waste project obtained photos of animal experiments on monkeys and pigs at the National Institutes of Health's Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana The National Institutes of Health's Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana was previously found to have been experimenting with SARS-like viruses in 2018 The National Institutes of Health's Rocky Mountain Lab in Montana was previously found to have been experimenting with SARS-like viruses in 2018 Piglet experiments were to be carried in two parts, first infecting the pigs with REBOV via their noses - as seen in the photos above Piglet experiments were to be carried in two parts, first infecting the pigs with REBOV via their noses - as seen in the photos above The footage was obtained through a FOIA request by the White Coat Waste Project (WCW), which has campaigned against risky virus research and cruel animal experiments. The RML was first revealed to be experimenting with deadly pathogens in WCW's first batch of documents provided to this website last year. Previous documents from WCW revealed that in 2018, NIH researchers infected bats at the Rocky Mountain Lab with a 'SARS-like' virus as part of a collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is at the center of the Covid cover-up scandal. They showed US taxpayer money was used to experiment with coronaviruses from the Chinese lab thought to be the source of the Covid pandemic more than a year before the global outbreak. The NIH, under Dr Anthony Fauci's leadership, infected 12 Egyptian fruit bats with a 'SARS-like' virus called WIV1 at RML. The WIV1-coronavirus was shipped from the Wuhan lab the FBI believes caused the Covid pandemic and was tested on bats acquired from a 'roadside' Maryland zoo. Senators probe Fauci-run virus lab in Montana where US scientists were infecting bats with Covid-like viruses shipped in from WUHAN in 2018 - years before the pandemic Senators are demanding answers about a laboratory in Montana where US taxpayer money was used to manipulate coronaviruses before the pandemic. The research determined the novel virus could not cause a 'robust infection,' but is more evidence of ties between the US government and the Wuhan lab, as well as the funding of dangerous virus research across the globe. Advertisement Advertisement Following the WCW's investigation and DailyMail.com's reporting, Republican Senators Joni Ernst, from Iowa, and Eric Schmitt, from Missouri, sent a letter to the NIH demanding 'to learn more about potentially risky research' carried out by scientists at RML. Most recently, Sen Ernst wrote another letter, along with Rep Mike Gallagher, to the Pentagon demanding a review of the $50million in grants the US is sending to Chinese pandemic research institutions, including those based in Wuhan. The senator said in a statement: 'Taxpayers deserve to know how much of their money is being shipped to China and why Washington continues collecting and creating deadly super viruses — both of which could pose threats to our national security.' While the 'SARS-like' virus research has stopped, current projects involving other deadly pathogens with the potential to spark a new pandemic are still being carried out at the lab. As part of WCW's current lawsuit, the NIH was compelled to send the group records of its experiments taking place at RML. The documents reveal NIH scientists proposed infecting two- to three-week old piglets with reston virus (REBOV), a family of pathogens that could cause Ebola, a virus with a death rate of up to 90 percent, for a project to take place between 2017 and 2020. The project, 'The role of Arterivirus co-infection in the pathogenesis of Reston Ebola Virus in swine', was to test how the co-infection of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) and REBOV increased the virus' transmissibility and severity. The experiment was to be carried out in two parts, first infecting the pigs with REBOV via their noses - as seen in photos. On day three and between days five and 10 after inoculation, four animals were to be euthanized so necropsies could be performed. The remaining animals were to be euthanized on day 28. Then, researchers proposed inoculating pigs with PRRSV and REBOV several days later to observe their behavior and take vitals then euthanize them on day 28. One study was to evaluate up to three species of nonhuman primates as potential animal models for Covid-19. For each species, one group of eight animals would be inoculated with a high dose of the virus via the eyes, nose or mouth One study was to evaluate up to three species of nonhuman primates as potential animal models for Covid-19. For each species, one group of eight animals would be inoculated with a high dose of the virus via the eyes, nose or mouth In documents obtained by WCW, scientists proposed experimenting on non-human primate that included infecting monkeys with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and Covid-19 In documents obtained by WCW, scientists proposed experimenting on non-human primate that included infecting monkeys with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and Covid-19 In documents obtained by WCW, scientists proposed experimenting on non-human primate that included infecting monkeys with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and Covid-19 In documents obtained by WCW, scientists proposed experimenting on non-human primate that included infecting monkeys with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and Covid-19 Advertisement Advertisement While experimental 'manipulations' were to take place while the pigs were under anesthesia, the researchers said, 'Since we are evaluating these animals as potential models of disease progression, we are unable to alleviate the signs of disease.' Symptoms of these diseases include fever, breathing problems, weight loss, diarrhea, excessive or internal bleeding, coughing up or vomiting blood and neurological disorders that could be fatal. Researchers said: 'The illness experienced by animals exposed to these viruses must not be treated with analgesics because treatment will interfere with studying the disease manifestation and ultimate outcomes of infection.' In additional documents obtained by WCW, scientists proposed experiments between 2019 and 2022 on non-human primate that included infecting monkeys with Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever, a tick-borne virus that causes a life-threatening fever, muscle and joint pain, liver and kidney failure or pulmonary failure. The proposal said: 'In previous studies animals were scored for... reduced movement in cage and edema that on rare instances was of severity sufficient to impair function of internal organs such as the lungs and intestines. 'Since the objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of DNA vaccine candidates against CCHFV and contains necessary irrelevant DNA control group it is expected that some or animals will develop clinical signs and may suffer pain and distress. 'The illness experienced by the animals exposed to CCHFV must not be treated with analgesics because treatment could interfere with the disease manifestation and the outcome of vaccination.' Photos show piglets housed in small and unsanitary cages Photos show piglets housed in small and unsanitary cages Photos show piglets housed in small and unsanitary cages Photos show piglets housed in small and unsanitary cages A third proposal for experiments between 2020 and 2023 was titled 'Nonhuman primate model development for the novel coronavirus emerging in Wuhan, China.' The aim was to evaluate up to three species of nonhuman primates as potential animal models for Covid-19. For each species, one group of eight animals would be inoculated with a high dose of the virus via the eyes, nose or mouth - as seen in photos. The primates were to be evaluated and have their vitals taken and on day three, four would be euthanized. The remaining were to be monitored for disease progression. Advertisement Advertisement The proposal read: 'Infection with 2019-nCoV may cause mild to severe disease in nonhuman primates. Signs of illness may include fever, malaise, fatigue cough and heavy breathing potentially resulting in acute respiratory distress; the infection may be fatal. 'However, in this study we are unable to alleviate the disease manifestations potentially associated with 2019-nCoV infection as treatment would interfere with the outcome of the study.' Justin Goodman, the senior vice president of the White Coat Waste Project told DailyMail.com: 'Our successful lawsuit has pierced the veil of secrecy around the NIH’s dangerous, wasteful, and cruel maximum pain animal experiments with deadly bioagents that have up to 100 percent kill rates in humans. 'We’ve uncovered how NIH gain-of-function researchers linked to EcoHealth and the Wuhan lab import primates to the Rocky Mountain Lab from Fauci’s Monkey Island in South Carolina, infect them with viruses including Ebola and COVID, and then completely withhold pain relief while the animals suffer excruciating deaths. 'Taxpayers have a right to know how their money is being spent in barbaric NIH animal labs that can cause a devastating lab leak and pandemic right here in the US.' https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13008119/montana-lab-scientists-experimenting-dangerous-pathogens.html

THE MEDICAL FREEDOM SYMPOSIUM CONFERENCE at THE CONSCIOUS LIFE EXPO Monday, Feb.12 - 2pm-4:30pm FORGING THE FUTURE TERRAIN OF WELLNESS Join us for a riveting, powerful, inspiring exchange of motivational insights that will stir you to support and create the changes we need for our Medical Freedom! Together We Stand! The Supreme Court has long recognized a person's constitutionally protected liberty interest in his or her own medical autonomy, especially when those interests are secured by state laws. Kelly Gallagher Kelly Gallagher is an Award-winning filmmaker, writer, poet, international health activist, and wellness/survival expert. Hailing from Network TV, this 5x cancer “thriver” powered by her 6th pacemaker, and a prosthetic heart valve has successfully navigated both conventional and alternative wellness protocols for almost 40 years. Del Bigtree Del Bigtree inspires thousands with his unique blend of investigation, scientific expertise and solutions. As the Emmy winning producer of "The Doctors" TV series and producer of the ground-breaking documentary, Vaxxed:From Cover-up to Catastrophe, he ignited a revolution against pharmaceutical tyranny around the world. Del’s internet TV news show, The HighWire reaches out to over 100 million views. His non-profit, the Informed Consent Action Network, (ICAN), is leading worldwide investigations into drug and vaccine fraud that have already resulted in multiple winning lawsuits against US Government agencies Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, CDC and FDA. Dr. Judy Mikovits Dr. Judy Mikovits has been called one of the most accomplished scientist of her generation. Her 1991 doctoral thesis revolutionized the treatment of HIV/AIDS.. In 2020 Dr. Mikovits started Dr Solution, a company focused, not only on education, but on providing solutions for prevention and treatment of autoimmune/auto-inflammatory diseases resulting from viral infection, drugs and environmental toxins.. Her heart and passion is to focus on natural products chemistry and plant based drug and nutritional therapeutic protocols. Dr Mikovits is a New York Times Best selling author of the books Plague, Plague of Corruption, Ending Plague and the Truth about the Masks. Dr. Mikovits is featured in both "Plandemic" films. Dr. Jeffrey Barke Dr. Jeffrey Barke is a board certified primary care physician in private practice for over 25 years. He has served as an Associate Clinical Professor at U.C. Irvine and a board member of the Orange County Medical Association. Dr. Barke is the author of COVID-19: A Physicians Take on the Exaggerated Fear of Corona Virus. He is a sought after speaker on the failure of government education and all things related to COVID-19. Dr. Barke is a proud founding member of America’s Frontline Doctor.He is also the co-host of the podcast: InformedDissentMedia.com Steve Kirsch Steve Kirsch is a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, MIT graduate and philanthropist, as well the founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund and the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation. He has been featured on 60 Minutes and profiled in Forbes. Kirsch has one of the most widely read Substacks in the world. Dr. Byran Ardis Dr. Bryan Ardis is a tireless researcher, seeking to weed out deception in health and medicine and provide truth through his personal research,“The Dr. Ardis” Podcast and his product formulations. In May of 2020, Dr. Ardis blew the whistle on the deadly, toxic and experimental drug, Remdesivir. Dr Ardis has been featured in many documentaries including, “Antidote” with Jason Shurka, “Watch the Water” and “Watch the Water 2”, with Stew Peters, “COVENOM-19” with Jonathan Otto, and “Propaganda Exposed” with the Bollinger’s. The Dr. Ardis Show has a mission statement which is, “Creating Doubt in Big Pharma, and Restoring Faith in Nature!” During the intentionally created supply chain issues of the fraudulent COVID pandemic, Dr. Ardis launched his own brand of all natural supplements called ArdisLabs.com. Whether by media interviews, speaking on stages, or testifying in state capital buildings, Dr. Ardis is on a mission to protect the health of innocent human beings worldwide, and help them make sense of their symptoms Dr. Robert O. Young has been recognized as one of the top clinical scientists in the world specializing in cellular nutrition, biochemistry and microbiology. Dr. Young has devoted his life to researching the true causes of "disease," subsequently developing "The New Biology™" to help people balance their life. He is the author of over 100 published peer-reviewed articles and author and co-author of many books. The pH Miracle series of books have sold over 10 million copies and are gaining a widespread following in over 159 countries. He is best known for his four book series, The pH Miracle, The pH Miracle for Diabetes, The pH Miracle for Weight Loss and The pH Miracle for Cancer. Last year Dr. Young and his co-author Tom Ballantyne, Jr. published 3 new books, “Truth vs Deception – Liberty vs. Tyranny - Facts vs, Fiction - Science vs, Scientism, Part 1, 2 and 3 based on the premise that if we are to remain free, we must learn the truth on what is going on around us, and not just from the media, government, etc. While author's Dr. Robert Young and T. M. Ballantyne, Jr. (the "Truth Author," so-named by Dr. Young) will discuss the facts surrounding what Sasha Stone has called "Covidiocy," and its attendant "vaccines," along with the third book in the series, 'Let Freedom Ring', about child trafficking and its attendant evils, released in late October of 2023 (3 1/2 months ago), the underlying theme of the series is exactly what the title indicates: How to discern truth and avoid deception. As the goal of the conference is "to create a new world based on new paradigms in various areas of life," we will address how truth liberates us from the captivity of deception." "Given that the key to both health and happiness is right-thinking, we posit that only by recognizing and embracing actual truth can our thoughts achieve those ends. We maintain that the ultimate aim of our existence, both now and hereafter, is that we "might have joy." Authors Young and Ballantyne T. M. Ballantyne, Jr. https://consciouslifeexpo.com/dr-robert-young-2024/... PRESS CONTACT: Dawna Shuman, Lighthouse Public Relations [email protected]/Cell: 818-632-3297 I wonder why I'm never invited to panels? https://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/the-medical-freedom-symposiumpost-conference-at-the-conscious-life-expo

☆~ CARA MANDI RASULULLAH SAW ~☆ Yang diajarkan oleh Baginda... 1. Bermula dari segayung siram di telapak kaki 2. Segayung di betis 3. Segayung di paha 4. Segayung di perut 5. Segayung di bahu 6. Berhentilah sejenak 5-10 saat/detik. ●Kita akan merasakan seperti uap/angin yang keluar dari ubun-ubun bahkan meremang, setelah itu lanjutkan dengan mandi seperti biasa. ●Hikmahnya: Seperti pada gelas yang diisi air panas kemudian kita isi dengan air sejuk. Apa yang terjadi? Gelas akan retak !!! ●Jika tubuh kita.... apa yang retak? Suhu tubuh kita cenderung panas dan air itu sejuk, maka yang terjadi jika kita mandi langsung menyiram pada badan atau kepala, angin yang harusnya keluar jadi terperangkap atau kadang membawa maut karena pecahnya pembuluh darah. ●Maka sebab itu kita sering menjumpai orang jatuh di bilik mandi tiba-tiba kena 'stroke'. Boleh jadi kita sering masuk angin karena cara mandi kita yang salah. Boleh jadi kita sering migrain karena cara mandi yang salah. ●Cara mandi ini baik bagi semua umur terutama yang mempunyai sakit diabetes, darah tinggi, kolesterol dan migrain/sakit kepala sebelah. Insya Allah dpt ber angsur sembuh...

Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67% Rhoda WilsonDecember 28, 2023 Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer. Most recently, researchers found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%. Having a serum vitamin D level of at least 40 ng/ml reduces your risk for cancer by 67% compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less; most cancers occur in people with a vitamin D level between 10 and 40 ng/ml. Higher Vitamin D Levels Lower Cancer Risk By Dr. Joseph Mercola This article was originally published on 10 April 2017. Thousands of studies have been done on the health effects of vitamin D, and research shows it is involved in the biology of all cells and tissues in your body, including your immune cells. Your cells actually need the active form of vitamin D to gain access to the genetic blueprints stored inside. This is one of the reasons why vitamin D has the ability to impact such a wide variety of health problems – from foetal development to cancer. Unfortunately, despite being easy and inexpensive to address, vitamin D deficiency is an epidemic around the world. It’s been estimated that as many as 90% of pregnant mothers and newborns in the sunny Mediterranean region are even deficient in vitamin D,1 thanks to chronic Sun avoidance. A simple mathematical error may also deter many Americans and Canadians from optimising their vitamin D. The Institute of Medicine (“IOM”) recommends a mere 600 IUs of vitamin D per day for adults. As pointed out in a 2014 paper,2 the IOM underestimates the need by a factor of 10 due to a mathematical error, which has never been corrected. Grassroots Health has created a petition for the IOM and Health Canada to re-evaluate its vitamin D guidelines and correct this mathematical error.3 You can help further this important cause by signing the petition on ipetitions.com. More recent research 4 suggests it would require 9,600 IUs of vitamin D per day to get a majority (97.5%) of the population to reach 40 nanograms per millilitre (ng/ml). The American Medical Association uses of 20 ng/ml as sufficient, but research shows 40 ng/mL should be the cutoff point for sufficiency in order to prevent a wide range of diseases, including cancer. Research Again Concludes Vitamin D Lowers Cancer Risk A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer. Most recently, a randomised clinical trial 5 by researchers at Creighton University, funded by the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%.6,7,8 The study, which included more than 2,300 postmenopausal women from Nebraska who were followed for four years, looked at the effects of vitamin D supplementation on all types of cancer. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 2,000 IUs of vitamin D3 in combination with 1,500 mg of calcium, or a placebo for the duration of the study. Blood testing revealed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels were significantly lower in those who did develop cancer. Joan Lappe, Ph.D., professor of nursing and associate dean of research at Creighton University’s College of Nursing, and lead author of the study, said: The study provides evidence that higher concentrations of 25(OH)D in the blood, in the context of vitamin D3 and calcium supplementation, decrease risk of cancer … While people can make their own vitamin D3 when they are in the Sun near mid-day, sunscreen blocks most vitamin D production. Also, due to more time spent indoors, many individuals lack adequate levels of vitamin D compounds in their blood. The results of this study lend credence to a call for more attention to the importance of vitamin D in human health and specifically in preventing cancer. Vitamin D Status Is Strongly Correlated with Cancer Risk Previous research has shown that once you reach a serum vitamin D level of 40 ng/ml, your risk for cancer diminishes by 67%, compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less.9,10,11,12,13,14,15 Most cancers, they found, occurred in people with a vitamin D blood level between 10 and 40 ng/ml. The optimal level for cancer protection was identified as being between 40 and 60 ng/ml. Another study 16 published in 2015 found women with vitamin D concentrations of at least 30 ng/ml had a 55% lower risk of colorectal cancer than those who had a blood level below 18 ng/ml. Even earlier research, 17 published in 2005, showed women with vitamin D levels above 60 ng/ml had an 83% lower risk of breast cancer than those with levels below 20 ng/ml! The Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (formerly IOM) has also reported an association between vitamin D and overall mortality risk from all causes, including cancer.18,19 Vitamin D also increases your chances of surviving cancer if you do get it,20,21 and this includes melanoma. 22 Access Sun Exposure as Much as Possible and Get Your Vitamin D Level Checked The UVB in sunlight is what triggers your body to produce vitamin D. I firmly believe getting regular, sensible Sun exposure is the ideal way to not only optimise your vitamin D level but maximise your health as well because sunlight also has many other important health functions. I’ll review some of these in another section below. Regular Sun exposure provides over 1,500 different wavelengths, and we’re just now rediscovering the value of many of these other wavelengths besides UVA and UVB. For example, we now know that red and infrared light helps your body form structured water, which is important for cellular function. Many do not appreciate that red, near, mid and far-infrared have many important biological functions. One of them is to improve mitochondrial function, especially the 660 nm and 830 nm wavelengths, as cytochrome C oxidase in mitochondria uses these wavelengths to produce ATP more efficiently. Vitamin D3 supplements are a poor second resort, but if you’re unable to get sufficient Sun exposure, then it’s better than nothing. As demonstrated in the featured study – which specifically looked at the effects of supplementation – they do have some benefits. Also, while not addressed in this study, I strongly recommend taking your vitamin D3 with vitamin K2 and magnesium as well, since all three work in tandem. A primary consideration when it comes to vitamin D is to get your level checked, ideally twice a year, in the middle of the summer and winter, when your level is at its highest and lowest. What you’re aiming for is a level between 40 and 60 ng/ml year-round. Grassroots Health offers vitamin D testing at a great value through its D*Action study. Read more: Harness the Power of the Sun for Health (Infographic) How to Minimise Your Risk of Skin Cancer from Sun Exposure Many avoid Sun exposure for fear of melanoma, an aggressive and potentially lethal form of skin cancer. However, it’s important to realise that melanoma occurs among those with minimal Sun exposure as well. An important risk factor for melanoma is overexposure to UV radiation. Baking in the Sun for hours on end on a weekend here and there is not a wise choice. To minimise your skin cancer risk, you want to avoid sunburn at all costs. If you’re going to the beach, bring long-sleeved cover-ups and a wide-brimmed hat, and cover up as soon as your skin starts to turn pink. Following are some general guidelines for sensible Sun exposure. If you pay close attention to these, you can determine, within reason, safe exposure durations. Know your skin type based on the Fitzpatrick skin type classification system. The lighter your skin, the less exposure to UV light is necessary. The downside is that lighter skin is also the most vulnerable to damage from overexposure. For very fair-skinned people and those with photodermatitis, any Sun exposure may be unwanted and they should carefully measure vitamin D levels while ensuring they have an adequate intake of vitamin D, vitamin K2, magnesium and calcium. For most people, safe UV exposure is possible by knowing your skin type and the current strength of the Sun’s rays. There are several apps and devices to help you optimise the benefits of Sun exposure while mitigating the risks. Also, be extremely careful if you have not been in the Sun for some time. Your first exposures of the year are the most sensitive, so be especially careful to limit your initial time in the Sun. Vitamin D Influences Your Health in Many Ways The benefits of vitamin D are not restricted to cancer prevention. In fact, the list of health benefits of vitamin D is exceedingly long. As noted earlier, researchers have now realised that vitamin D affects virtually every cell and tissue in your body, so it might be easier to list what it will not affect, rather than what it will impact. Compelling evidence suggests that optimising your vitamin D can reduce your risk of death from any cause, 23 making it a foundational component of optimal health. Mega doses of vitamin D have also been shown to decrease the length of time critical care patients must remain hospitalised.24 Those who received 250,000 IUs for five days were released after an average of 25 days, compared to the average of 36 days for those receiving a placebo. Patients who received 500,000 IUs of vitamin D for five days were released after an average of just 18 days, effectively cutting their hospital stay in half. The health care savings in this instance alone are tremendous. When you add in all possible diseases and ailments vitamin D can prevent and/or ameliorate, the savings could potentially tally into the trillions each year. Certainly, for the average person, optimising your vitamin D level is one of the least expensive preventive care strategies at your disposal. If you suffer from any of the following ailments and still haven’t checked your vitamin D level, now may be the time to go ahead and do so, as research 25 into vitamin D has found it can help prevent and/or address: Osteoporosis, osteomalacia (bone softening) and hip fractures Type 1 and type 2 diabetes Cancer, including cancers of the breast, colon, prostate, ovaries, oesophagus and lymphatic system. Adding vitamin D to the conventional treatment for pancreatic cancer may also boost the effectiveness of the treatment 26 Hypertension (high blood pressure), cardiovascular disease and heart attacks – (According to vitamin D researcher Dr. Michael Holick, deficiency can raise your risk of heart attack by 50%. What’s worse, if you have a heart attack while vitamin D deficient, your risk of dying is nearly guaranteed) Obstructive sleep apnoea – In one study, 98% of patients with sleep apnoea had vitamin D deficiency, and the more severe the sleep apnoea, the more severe the deficiency27 Multiple sclerosis28 (“MS”) – Research shows MS patients with higher levels of vitamin D tend to experience fewer disabling symptoms Rheumatoid arthritis Reduced immune function Autoimmune diseases, including psoriasis Infections, including influenza Depression, 29 Seasonal Affective Disorder and psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia Neurological disorders, including autism, dementia and Alzheimer’s 30 Health Benefits of Sun Exposure Beyond Vitamin D There’s overwhelming evidence to suggest the human body evolved to obtain health benefits from, and to thrive in, sunlight. As previously noted in The Daily Mail:31 Even taking the skin cancer risk fully into account, [scientists] say that getting a good dose of sunshine is statistically going to make us live longer, healthier and happier lives. One significant mechanism by which sunlight helps optimise your health is by triggering the release of nitric oxide (“NO”) when sunlight strikes your skin. 32 NO is a powerful blood pressure-lowering compound that helps protect your cardiovascular system, cutting your risk for both heart attacks and stroke. According to one 2013 study, 33 for every single skin cancer death, 60 to 100 people die from stroke or heart disease related to hypertension. So, your risk of dying from heart disease or stroke is on average 80 times greater than your risk of dying from skin cancer. Importantly, while higher vitamin D levels correlate with lower rates of cardiovascular disease, oral vitamin D supplements do not appear to benefit blood pressure, and the fact that supplements do not increase NO may be the reason for this. According to researcher Dr. Richard Weller: We suspect that the benefits to heart health of sunlight will outweigh the risk of skin cancer. The work we have done provides a mechanism that might account for this, and also explains why dietary vitamin D supplements alone will not be able to compensate for lack of sunlight. To get a thorough understanding of how UV light affects your cardiovascular function, read Weller’s paper, ‘Sunlight Has Cardiovascular Benefits Independently of Vitamin D’. 34 Research also shows that UV light: Helps treat and prevent the spread of diseases like tuberculosis. 35 Helps anchor your circadian rhythm, helping you sleep better. Helps kill and prevent the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. UV light at 254 nanometres acts as a potent bactericidal, killing drug-resistant strains of S. aureus and E. faecalis in as little as 5 seconds. 36 Reduces your risk of myopia (short-sightedness). As reported by The Daily Mail: 37 “[R]esearchers believe that the neurotransmitter dopamine is responsible. It is known to inhibit the excessive eyeball growth that causes myopia. Sunshine causes the retina to release more dopamine.” Helps treat seasonal affective disorder and major depression. 38 Schizophrenia has also been linked to maternal lack of Sun exposure during pregnancy. 39 Boosts men’s libido by increasing testosterone. Research reveals men’s testosterone levels rise and fall with the seasons. Researchers have also linked low vitamin D with an increased risk for erectile dysfunction. 40 Helps maintain vitamin D status in elderly people at a lower cost than that of using oral vitamin D supplementation. 41 Not only could UV lamps help improve nursing home patients’ physical health, but they could also help relieve symptoms of depression. Lowers all-cause mortality. In one study,42,43 women who avoided Sun exposure had double the all-cause mortality rate of those who got regular Sun exposure. Another 54-month-long study, 44 involving more than 422,800 healthy adults, found that those who were most deficient in vitamin D had an 88% increased mortality risk. Embrace Sensible Sun Exposure as a Health-Promoting Habit Safe exposure to sunshine is possible by understanding your skin type, the UV strength at the time of exposure, and your duration of exposure. My advice has been clear: Always avoid sunburn. Once your skin develops the slightest tint of pink, cover up with clothing to avoid further exposure. The most important part of the equation is to pay close attention to your vitamin D level. Ideally, get your vitamin D tested during the peak of summer and at the end of winter to help guide your UV exposure and vitamin D supplementation. The evidence is overwhelming: You really do need sensible Sun exposure for optimal health. Since few foods contain any significant amount of vitamin D, and your body certainly was not designed to get its vitamin D from supplements, which are a modern invention, the only rational conclusion is that Sun exposure is the ideal way to raise your vitamin D level. Research has shown just how beautifully your body has been designed to use the Sun’s UV rays to promote health. It even has built-in “fail-safes” and self-regulatory processes to ensure you cannot produce too much vitamin D from Sun exposure. Plus, the vitamin D produced by UVB rays actually helps counteract the skin damage caused by UVA. It’s an intricate dance that simply cannot be fully duplicated with a supplement. Sources and References 1 Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis v.8(4); 2016 Aug 2 Nutrients 2014; 6(10): 4472-4475 3 ipetitions.com 4 Anticancer Research 2011 Feb;31(2):607-11 5 JAMA 2017;317(12):1234-1243 6 Lab Manager March 30, 2017 7 Newswise March 28, 2017 8 Time March 28, 2017 9 PLOS ONE 2016; 11 (4): e0152441 10 PR Web April 6, 2016 11 UC San Diego Health April 6, 2016 12 Science World Report April 13, 2016 13 Oncology Nurse Advisor April 22, 2016 14 Tech Times April 11, 2016 15 Chrisbeatcancer.com, Vitamin D 16 Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015 Aug;8(8):675-82 17 European Journal of Cancer 2005 May;41(8):1164-9 18 Institute of Medicine, Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium, Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D 19, 44 J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013;98:2160-2167 20 Anticancer Research February 2011: 31(2); 607-611 21 UC San Diego Health System Press Release March 6, 2014 22 Cancer Therapy Advisor March 23, 2016 23 New York Times November 24, 2014 24 Medical Press May 27, 2015 25 Harvard T.H. Chan. Vitamin D 26 Salk. FAQ on Pancreatic Cancer and Vitamin D 27 Bel Marra Health May 3, 2016 28 Mayo Clinic. Vitamin D and MS: Is There Any Connection? 29 J Nutr Health Aging 1999;3(1): 5-7 30 Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec 21;24(1):87. Vitamin D in Neurological Diseases 31, 37 Daily Mail May 2, 2016 32 Medical News Today May 8, 2013 33 BBC News May 7, 2013 34 Sunlight Institute January 18, 2016 35 Science Daily March 17, 2009 36 Ostomy Wound Management 1998 Oct;44(10):50-6 38 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1991 May; 52(5): 213-6 39 BBC News July 20, 2001 40 New Hope Network May 2, 2016 41 Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2001 Aug;17(4):168-71 42 Journal of Internal Medicine 2014 Jul;276(1):77-86 43 Business Insider May 7, 2014 About the Author Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder and owner of Mercola.com, a Board-Certified Family Medicine Osteopathic Physician, a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition and a New York Times bestselling author. He publishes multiple articles a day covering a wide range of topics on his website Mercola.com. Why do you think the satanic oligarchs, who want us sick, weak and gone, are blocking our sun from healing us? Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67% Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer... https://expose-news.com/2023/12/28/health-benefits-of-the-sun T.me/AgentsOfTruth T.me/AgentsOfTruthChat

This morning, Dr. Paul Marik joined host Jan Jeffcoat on The National Desk to discuss how intermittent fasting can be used to treat long COVID, "long vax", and other chronic diseases including diabetes. Watch here: https://flccc.net/flccc-and-the-national-desk-tnd-kick-off-partnership/