• Dear Virology: Do You Have ANYTHING Other than Insults, Logical Fallacies and Lies to Back Up Your Claims?
    Virology: An unwitting master class in exposing pseudoscience.

    Anthony Colpo

    Recently overheard conversation between virologist and normal person with an honest job:

    Virologist: There are leprechauns living in my closet.

    Normal person: Really? Can you show me?

    V: No, they're invisible.

    NP: Can I reach into your closet and feel around for them?

    V: No, because when you try to touch them they instantly transform from solid to a gas.

    NP: OK, so let me get this straight. You're saying there are leprechauns living in your closet, but it's impossible to see or feel them.

    V: Correct.

    NP: So how, exactly, do you know they exist?

    V: Well, I once left some cheese in the closet. The next morning, it was gone. That means the leprechauns ate it. It's called the "lepropathic effect."

    NP: Are those mice droppings I see over there?

    V: Where?

    NP: There.

    V: Yeah.

    NP: You have mice droppings in your closet, which means mice are getting in here. Mice eat cheese. But you're claiming when you leave cheese here and it's gone the next morning, it's proof that invisible, phantom leprechauns live in your closet?

    V: That's right.

    NP: Are you on drugs? Seriously, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard!

    V: I've got images of leprechaun footprints taken through my really powerful magnifying glass to prove it! Here, look at these!

    NP: Yes, I see them ... but they're not ‘leprechaun’ footprints. They look just like mouse paw prints.

    V: [Explodes with rage] You're a leprechaun DENIER! You're a donkey that DOESN’T UNDERSTAND leprechology! You and the rest of the no-leprechaun crowd are soooo ANTI-SCIENCE!! It’s SELFISH PEOPLE LIKE YOU who PUT EVERYONE ELSE AT RISK!!

    NP: [Calls 911 for paramedic assistance] Hi, I've got a guy here having some sort of mental episode. There are mice getting into his closet, but he insists they're leprechauns. I tried to explain it was mice, but he’s become very agitated and hostile.

    911: He wouldn't happen to be a virologist, by any chance?

    NP: Yes, how did you know?

    911: Oh, you wouldn't believe how many calls we get about those guys. Listen, he can't be helped. Best thing you can do is just get out of there. And for heaven's sake, if he offers you any “antiviral” drugs or “safe and effective” gene therapies, run like your life depends on it!

    NP: Gotcha, thanks for your help!

    Pseudoscientists are a predictable lot. They routinely spout untenable nonsense and frequently get away with it, because most people aren't well-schooled in the fundamentals of logic and reason, let alone science.

    As their beliefs gain an increasingly larger audience, pseudoscientists start to assume an air of invincibility and omnipotence. The very fact their ideas have such widespread acceptance is, in their minds, further proof of their veracity.

    People whose beliefs thrive largely because of ignorance, popular consensus and authority appeal tend to do poorly when challenged on scientific grounds.

    At first, they’ll attempt to address critiques with more pseudoscience. This, however, results in an argument that becomes increasingly untenable, self-contradictory and often downright absurd. Frustrated by the results of their self-defeating attempts to expound on The Scienceβ„’, they quickly revert to their natural environment:

    The gutter.

    They abandon all pretense at science, and unleash a barrage of anti-logic and ad hominem attacks. This barrage will feature lies, dishonesty, smug condescension, red herrings, appeals to authority - everything except irrefutable evidence of the controlled scientific kind.

    Unable to refute important criticisms, they will talk as if their beliefs are self-evident and beyond challenge. You will be called a “denier” and “conspiracy theorist” for having the temerity to question their very questionable claims.

    They will retort that you have no formal scientific qualifications (i.e, you don’t have a piece of paper saying you spent several years at a government/globalist-controlled inculcation facility that receives large amounts of money from drug companies).

    Angry at being outpointed by a person who didn’t spend hundreds of thousands on college debt and Che Guevara t-shirts, they’ll insist you don’t “understand” the topic. This is a sly attempt to reframe your ability to see through their BS as an inability to comprehend supposedly complex topics.

    Pseudoscience, by the way, often appears “complex” because lies invariably require more lies to fortify the original untruths. The end result is a web of bollocks so intricate that, if you sit back patiently, will eventually ensnare the pseudoscientist in his or her own nonsense.

    When that happens, pseudoscientists get really frustrated. They’ll call you names, declare that arguing with you is not worth their time, and then reproduce a quote that has nothing to do with the topic at hand:


    This person has a PhD and runs a virology blog. Yet the best she can do to defend the virus paradigm is call skeptics “donkeys” and post quotes about the shortcomings of democracy by a science-fiction writer. Oh, and did I mention she takes Steve Kirsch seriously? You’re in great hands, virology LOL
    A Not-So-Nice Attempt to Undermine Critics of Virology

    One of my valued readers recently posted a link to a Substack post by a guy called Matthew Aldred titled “Viruses and DNA Are 'Just' Models?”

    The post’s subtitle reads “And governments sprayed toxins on people to make them think they had COVID?”

    So before I even start reading the post, it’s clear its intent is to portray virus skeptics as a bunch of cuckoo conspiracy theorists.

    This intent is confirmed when he includes a partial transcript allegedly reproduced from a podcast discussion featuring two virus skeptics. I say allegedly, because we’re not told where this podcast can be found, we’re not told when it took place, and we’re not told who the participants are.

    We are simply presented with a rambling, incoherent transcript that does a good job of making the mystery guest appear rambling and incoherent.

    What the transcript does not do is address the actual and inherently-flawed research that virology uses to claim the existence of viruses like Sars-Cov-2.

    And neither does Aldred.

    This evasiveness, this willingness to cast aspersions without actually addressing the relevant research, is a hallmark of Aldred’s post. In fact, it is so consistent of virus believers in general that they may as well register it as a trademark.

    There are countless pro-virus posts I could highlight as examples of pseudoscientific hack jobs. The reason I chose this one is because the author seems at pains to present himself as an impartial commentator. This claim to impartiality, and the author's professed disdain for the often uncivil nature of internet discussions, may disarm and lure some folks into dropping their intellectual guard. After all, how can you not trust a guy who says he just wants to get at the truth and wonders why we can't all just get along?

    I don’t know Aldred from a bar of soap, so cannot claim to know his motives. Maybe he is a nice guy. Maybe he really does believe himself to be impartial.

    What I can say without a doubt is that his post, be it by accident or design, is a catalog of logical fallacies and sleight of hand, the kind that allow charades like the Great COVID Con to gain traction.

    The post is a virtual masterclass in fuzzy logic, the kind used to defend untenable pseudoscience like the Sars-Cov-2 charade. Deconstructing that fuzzy logic, and exposing its mechanics and inherent fallacies, is like the research version of building situational awareness. You can recognize an assailant's intent ahead of time, and take the appropriate action.

    Fuzzy Logic Tactic #1: Making Untenable Claims then Switching the Burden of Proof to Skeptics

    Aldred begins his post with a bold-type disclaimer:

    In this article, I critique the trend of presenting speculative ideas with scant evidence as undeniable truths, particularly focusing on claims that ‘viruses are not real’. I examine a podcast that was sent to me and discuss the broader implications of the theories it presents. I argue that while scepticism is necessary, it’s unwise to completely dismiss established scientific concepts without substantial evidence.

    Before the article even gets going, he hits us with the ol’ switcheroo. With effortless sleight of hand, he has just transferred the burden of proof from virologists to those skeptical of virology.

    In his view, it’s not virology that lays claim to undeniable truths based on scant evidence - it is those of us who identify the huge cracks in virology’s foundation.

    It bears reminding that virology, to this day, still cannot even begin to physically isolate an alleged ‘virus.’

    It is virology that claims you can ‘isolate’ an RNA- or DNA-virus by adding things like culture medium, bovine fetal serum and cell lines, which inevitably contaminate the mixture with extraneous RNA and likely DNA.

    This is the very opposite of isolation!

    It is virology that makes the self-serving and highly convenient claim that viruses can’t be isolated like bacteria can, because a virus needs a living host to survive and replicate.

    Michael Palmer, MD and Suchairt Bhakdi are textbook classic purveyors of this ruse, writing “Viruses, by their very nature, can only multiply within living cells but not in pure culture.”

    “The legend that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated,” they continue, “is founded solely on the rigid demand that such isolation be accomplished without the use of cell cultures.”

    Viruses can’t party hardy without first shacking up in a living cell, they claim, and therefore it’s “rigid” and unreasonable to expect scientists to isolate a virus in pure cell culture.

    A most curious claim, because during the COVIDiot years we were instructed to spray and wipe down everything in sight until our surroundings reeked like a hospital.

    Which begs an obvious question: Why did we need to disinfect inanimate objects to guard against a pathogen that can only survive and replicate inside living hosts?

    The Sars-Cov-2 virus, claimed people from the CDC and Fauci’s NIAID masquerading as scientists, “can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days.”

    Listen virus-believers, you can’t have it both ways. Either a virus can survive outside a host, or it can’t. The Expertsβ„’ themselves have proclaimed in a leading medical tabloid that the ‘Sars-Cov-2 virus’ can survive on plastic and stainless steel “up to 72 hours after application.”

    Their words, not mine.

    Yet we’re supposed to believe, despite having up to a 72 hour window to do so, none of the world’s sophisticated microbiology labs has been able to take a single electron micograph happy snap of a single Sars-Cov-2 virion without first mixing non-purified patient samples with a bunch of other RNA- and DNA-containing material?

    To illustrate just what an utter load of tripe the virus paradigm is, here’s none other than Robert W Malone trying to answer what should be a simple question:

    “How would you explain the virus?”

    As you watch the video, keep in mind this is a guy who has an MD, BS in biochemistry, MS in biology, attended Harvard Medical School for a postdoc, taught pathology at two universities, received $10 billion of taxpayer funds from the US military for assorted shenanigans including vaccine development, and who proclaims himself to be the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology. He’s also made countless media appearances and charges $10,000 a pop to give speeches, so it’s fair to say Malone feels right at home in front of a camera.

    With a background like that, few people should be as eminently qualified as Sly Malone to explain what a virus is.

    So let's take a moment to learn from the great one:


    Even in the invigorating mountain air of beautiful Andalucia, Tio Roberto can’t even begin to offer a coherent explanation of what a virus is.

    "This particle is really ... self-replicating ... genes ... ... that aren't really alive. Uh, they exist as a parasite, in the way they become alive when they get into our cells.”

    Uh-huh.

    “It is a parasitic relationship, we ... I like to say we are the food for the virus.”

    “I think it's really good to think of this as a, um, a virus is a parasitic gene that, um, isn't truly alive but is at the boundary of living and non-living."

    Parasites operating on the boundary of living and non-living, huh?

    Sounds more like a government department to me.

    "A virus is even closer to a pure gene parasite. That's, that's really what they are."

    I think it's fair to say Sly has no clue what a virus is. Let's not be too hard on the guy - after all, it's hard to describe something that doesn't exist.

    Unable to quit when he's behind, Malone then objects to the objection that there is no Sars-Cov-2 virus by droning on about cell culture and isolation, not once mentioning that the cell culture 'isolation' experiments do not isolate anything but in fact add a bunch of other stuff to a patient sample that itself is already comprised of countless substances apart from an alleged virus.

    Man Offers €100,000 to Prove Existence of Measles Virus; Virologists Stay Quiet

    In November 2011, German biologist Stefan Lanka publicly issued a bold challenge. He offered the hefty sum of 100,000 Euros to anyone who could prove the existence of the measles virus.

    If the science behind virology was as well “established” as we’re repeatedly told, this should have constituted a quick and easy opportunity to score a large sum of money. Yet not one of the world’s countless virologists, microbiologists, or vocal health authorities took up Lanka’s offer.

    The only response came from a cocksure medical student called David Bardens, who submitted six studies he erroneously believed to constitute proof of the measles virus. Lanka reviewed the studies and correctly pointed out they proved nothing of the sort. Bardens then tried to sue for the money, but the German courts eventually ruled in Lanka’s favour.

    Documented liars like Steve Kirsch claim Lanka only won because of a legal technicality (Lanka actually required only one study and, not unreasonably, demanded that study not only establish the existence of a measles virus but also document its size. None of the six studies submitted by Bardens met this clearly stipulated requirement). The reality that Kirsch and his ilk refuse to discuss is that, irrespective of whether they included morphological details or not, none of the six studies Bardens served up even begin to prove the existence of a measles virus.

    In fact, the seminal 1954 ‘isolation’ paper by Enders and Peebles almost undermined the entire virus charade. They admit in the paper that “an uninoculated culture of monkey kidney cells” also demonstrated the cytopathic effect! Rather than entertain the possibility that the cell culture isolation charade was untenable, they simply declared, without any evidence whatsoever, that this unexpected 'cytopathic effect' was due to an unknown "agent" and then quickly moved on like nothing ever happened.

    The world of virology learned a valuable lesson: Never perform true control procedures during the cell culture isolation gig, because it could undermine the entire ruse.

    This is the inherently absurd, self-contradictory field of claptrap that Aldred deems an “established scientific concept.” He further excoriates us not to dismiss it without “substantial evidence,” never once addressing the reality that virology itself asks us to accept the presence of highly contagious pathogens without anything resembling substantial evidence.

    Remember the invisible leprechaun scenario at the start of this article? Using Aldred’s logic, in such a scenario the onus is on the disbelieving normal person, and not on the deluded virologist, to disprove the existence of invisible leprechauns.

    No. If you claim the existence of something that has never been seen before, you prove it.

    Fuzzy Logic Tactic #2: Gaslighting

    Successful advertisers know you don’t sell products by presenting people with a list of unassailable facts and figures. Nope, you need to press their hot buttons, and the way to do that is by triggering an emotional response.

    That’s why car advertisements don’t recite a list of impressive specifications. Instead, they feature attractive couples with Colgate smiles, happy families driving along while everyone stares in envy, and blokey blokes with huge grins blasting up and down muddy countrysides while the ad soundtrack blares “You can go your own way!”

    The message is: Buy our vehicle and you’ll get the pretty girl, have a picture perfect family, and be a trail-blazing maverick who lives life on his own terms. And everyone will look on in envy and admiration while you do it!

    It’s complete bollocks, of course - but it works. This kind of messaging bypasses our rational faculties and triggers our emotional hot buttons, often to the point where we’ll go into heavy debt just to scratch that emotional itch.

    “Yeah I get that, Anthony,” I hear you saying, “but what have car adverts got to do with the topic at hand?”

    Lots.

    Car manufacturers, you see, are hardly the only ones who know how to trigger our hot buttons.

    People who promote fake pandemics are also experts at bypassing people’s rational faculties.

    Attempts to appeal to people’s rational faculties during CONVID were quickly drowned out by rabid objections that anyone who refused to mask up and get poison-pricked was a selfish, heartless, evil granny-killer that deserved to be locked out of society.

    News outlets routinely ran heart-breaking stories of people who were once amazingly healthy until they were cruelly struck down by ‘COVID.’ No mention was made of the inconvenient fact that what really struck these people down was state-sanctioned murder, which included administration of drugs like midazolam and remdesivir, regular use of what should be last resort mechanical ventilation, and unlawful DNR (do not resuscitate) orders.

    It was a global gaslighting campaign that used emotional hotspotting to shut down rational discussion and instead cast the lone voices of reason - skeptics - as cold-blooded, tinfoil hat-wearing, menaces to society.

    And it worked. Spectacularly.

    So along comes Aldred, telling us to “beware of those handwaving away scientific models of reality that help us make good predictions, especially when it comes to important matters that keep us alive.”

    Translated: Virologists are keeping us alive, and by challenging them you virus skeptics are placing lives at risk!

    Rubbish.

    I’d like to see Aldred explain, in his own words, how the ‘scientific model’ of virology - which would have us believe resistance to disease comes from a syringe as opposed to healthy lifestyle habits - is keeping people alive?

    The bulk of the population-wide decline in measles mortality, for example, happened long before kids ever starting getting pricked with who-knows-what. Below are the trajectories for measles mortality in the US, UK and France, with the introduction of the measles vaccine overlaid on each graph.




    https://dissolvingillusions.com/graphs-images/#Figures
    I think it’s fair to say that, if you want to reduce death from a disease, first port of call for advice should not be people who think the key to public health is turning young kids into pin cushions.

    As for COVID, I’d love someone to explain how virology’s disgustingly reckless ‘scientific model’ of Sars-Cov-2 - which eagerly welcomed and even gushingly praised a complete abandonment of the usual safeguards to protect against dangerous and ineffective drugs - kept anyone alive?

    During the Pfizer vaxxx clinical trial, more people died in the gene therapy group than in the control group, and global estimates of excess post-vaxxx mortality run as high as 35 million lost lives.

    Now, name me even a single anti-vaxxxer who can boast that kind of body count?

    I’ll wait.

    The reality is that virology now has the kind of body count history’s bloodiest tyrants would be proud of.

    Other blockbusters from Virology’s Great Hits! include azidothymidine (AZT), a product of the early-1980s psy-op known as HIV/AIDS (funded by GloboPedo, produced by Fauci and Gallo Records). Despite all the hooplah, clinical trials found no reduction in mortality from AZT. People who got suckered into using this highly toxic drug, however, did find plenty of side effects.

    Another virology blockbuster, courtesy Bill & Melinda Productions, is the disgraceful polio vaccine rollout that caused almost 500,000 Indian children to suffer paralysis. While shamelessly dishonest ‘fact check’ outfits like Politifact would prefer you believed this never happened, it sure as heck did (Politifact is owned by Poynter who, by way of amazing coincidence, just happens to count the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations among its funders).

    Dhiman et al 2018 documented 491,000 additional cases of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis in India between 2000-2017. The rise and decline in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis in India aligned neatly with the increase and subsequent decrease in polio immunization rates.

    Once again, it’s not virus skeptics who murdered up to 35 million people. It’s not virology skeptics who are committing democide, and scarring survivors with everything from Guillain Barré Syndrome to myocarditis.

    It’s not virus skeptics who caused almost 500,000 poor Indian kids to suffer paralysis, or convinced people with ‘HIV/AIDS’ to take a drug that offered no mortality benefit but lots of severe side effects.

    The brains trust that enabled those criminal acts, in case anyone needs reminding, was Team Virology.

    I’ve barely scratched the surface of harms caused by this branch of pseudoscience. Suffice to say, it’s much easier to cite the lives ruined by this charade, than to cite lives saved from pathogens never shown to exist except by some voodoo ritual known as “cell culture isolation.”


    Virologists: So confident in their science, their inventions require immunity from prosecution.
    Fuzzy Logic Tactic #3: Pointing to ‘Experts’ for Validation, Without Offering Your Own Coherent Discussion of the Evidence

    Aldred’s post reaches comedic levels when he writes:

    “If you feel strongly that viruses are flawed science or even a conspiracy, please write a concise defence of your position in the comments section below (please avoid ‘just read so-and-so’s book’ or ‘watch so-and-so’s video’; I have the arguments from all the usual suspects and have yet to find a concise, coherent, and convincing case against viruses).”

    Aldred is specifically demanding you do not simply defer to other people’s material when making your case for the no-virus argument.

    Yet that is exactly what he does when making his own case. At no point in his article does he actually discuss the highly problematic research claiming to demonstrate viral isolation.

    I and others have presented detailed explanations of why these experiments are untenable; Aldred offers no counter-discussion of why we might be wrong.

    He makes bold claims that he fails to expound upon. Instead, he simply links to external sources, as if including a hyperlink is proof in itself.

    “Here’s another article on this subject by Michael Palmer at his new substack,” he writes, linking to an article that again fails to dissect the isolation studies. It simply declares that Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated “numerous times.”

    Continuing the game of Chinese Whispers, Palmer and co-author Bkahdi do as Aldred does and shun the opportunity to discuss these studies. Once again, they hyperlink the responsibility away to external websites. That’s fine for a Twitter post, but when you present yourself as an authoritative commentator and write an article making definitive claims, the onus is on you to explain your stance in a manner that shows you have a sound understanding of the topic. Making a claim like “yes, Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated,” then failing to address even a single criticism raised by skeptics hardly fulfills that obligation.

    “An overview of such studies,” write Palmer and Bkahdi of the so-called ‘isolation’ experiments, “has been provided by Jefferson et al” and a “solid study that correlates virus isolation, PCR and clinical findings in a series of hospitalized COVID-19-patients has been published by Wölfel et al.” (Bold emphasis added - correlation does not equal causation).

    Those of us who call Palmer and Bkahdi’s bluff and retrieve the full texts of the Jefferson and Wölfel papers quickly confirm the emperor has no clothes.

    All the studies reviewed by Jefferson et al and conducted by Wölfel et al involve the same old anti-isolation, cell culture flimflammery that gives rise to this controversy in the first place.

    You can see right here for yourself that Wölfel et al’s ‘isolation’ involved the usual charade of mixing non-purified patient samples with culture medium containing, among other things, 10% fetal calf serum, and Vero E6 (African green monkey kidney cells).

    I’ve discussed at length on this site why African green monkey kidney cells (aka Vero cells) are virology’s first choice of cell line for ‘isolation’ experiments, instead of more intuitive options like human lung cells. Unlike many other cell lines, Vero cells can be relied upon to deform and die off during the experiments, allowing virologists to claim a “cytopathic effect.” They then declare this cytopathic effect to be caused, not by their hand-picked choice of a purpose-bred cell line, but by a ‘virus.’

    To top off the absurdities, Wölfel et al confirm the presence of Sars-Cov-2 in their utter non-isolate via “SARS-CoV-2 specific real-time RT-PCR using the SARS-2-CoV E assay."

    In plain English: Nothing was ever isolated. To the contrary, they added more stuff - including RNA- and DNA-containing bovine fetal serum - to the non-purified patient samples. When purpose-bred cells guaranteed to deform showed the “cytopathic effect,” they declared it was due to a virus.

    They then used the purpose-built PCR test designed to find Sars-Cov-2 in just about anything - including papaya, quail and goat - to proclaim that this virus was the mythical Sars-Cov-2.

    It bears reiterating that the handball strategy is a key fuzzy logic technique routinely used by pseudoscientists. They link to external sources, knowing full well most people won’t click through and read those sources. In Aldred’s case, this typically involves clicking through three links to finally get at the source document - something I dare say most people won’t do.

    Such a strategy allows people to make a bold claim and be seen to be providing evidence for it, when in reality they’re doing no such thing.

    Another example of the handball charade occurs when Aldred writes:

    “Ralph Baric’s work involves real viruses in gain-of-function research,” he declares. “You can isolate these viruses too. Also, scientists do indeed create viruses from scratch.”

    Once again, Aldred offers no elaboration of these bold claims, simply hyperlinks to external sources - the very thing he forbids others from doing.

    Clicking on the astounding claim that “scientists do indeed create viruses from scratch” takes one to a rather unhelpful press release from none other than the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health - a major player in the Great COVID Con.

    Clicking through from that press release to the Science paper brings one to an abstract of a 2002 paper, the full text of which is hidden behind a paywall. Science, however, has made the full paper available at another location.

    That full text reveals the study was funded by “the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency" aka DARPA, another major perpetrator of the Great COVID Con.

    Hiding such information from your readers doesn’t do much for your credibility, but things get even more curious.

    The DARPA-funded researchers claim to have created a synthetic ‘poliovirus.’ If a virus is a living entity, then what these researchers have effectively claimed is to have created a synthetic life form. Now that would be truly revolutionary - if it were true.

    What the researchers really created was a chemical, and they actually admit it several times during the paper. However, they claim this chemical is “self-replicating” and “infectious.” Despite this, to “infect” mice with this chemical they had to first inject it directly into the brains of the hapless critters.

    To what should be no-one’s surprise, intracerebral injection of mice bred to be genetically susceptible to this bollockery caused “flaccid paralysis or death,” although “a larger inoculum” of the synthetic chemical was required to achieve this effect than stock-standard ‘poliovirus.’

    I’d bet good money Aldred never read this study. It doesn’t prove the existence of ‘poliovirus,’ and it sure as heck doesn’t prove the existence of Sars-Cov-2. All it proves is that US military-sponsored researchers can claim to have created a chemical compound that, when injected directly into the brains of susceptible mice, causes neurological symptoms and death.

    Gee, whoever would’ve guessed injecting synthetic chemicals into an animal’s brain could cause symptoms of nerve damage and death?

    What, exactly, does this have to do with the claim that we humans transmit live ‘viruses’ to each other via sneezing, coughing, touching, fornicating, etc, etc, etc?

    Where, exactly, is the epidemic of ‘viruses’ caused by people injecting lab-made chemicals into each other’s brains?

    A revealing clue to the study’s true purpose can be gleaned in the closing paragraph, when the researchers write:

    “As a result of the World Health Organization’s vaccination campaign to eradicate poliovirus, the global population is better protected against poliomyelitis than ever before. Any threat from bioterrorism will only arise if mass vaccination stops and herd immunity against poliomyelitis is lost. No doubt technical advances will permit rapid synthesis of the poliovirus genome, given access to sophisticated resources.

    The potential for virus synthesis is an additional important factor for consideration in designing the closing strategies of the poliovirus eradication campaign.”

    That paragraph serves several useful purposes for the parasite class. It praises the evil WHO for eradicating poliovirus via vaccines, even though we know the threat from polio was overwhelmingly removed before polio vaccines were released.

    It paves the way for development of toxic bioweapons that can be conducted under the guise of defending against bioterrorism.

    It provides fodder for future man-made virus and “gain of function” stories that can be positioned as an alternative and suppressed explanation for pre-orchestrated pandemics. These alternative explanations can then be strategically ‘unsuppressed’ at key time points, like during a vaxxx rollout.

    It reinforces the inherently absurd mass vaccination and herd immunity paradigms, which hold that people who have taken an allegedly highly effective life-saving drug are in danger from those who haven’t. In a sane world, that would be known as a failed drug.

    Fuzzy Logic Tactic #4: Hypocrisy & Double-Standards

    We’ve already seen how Aldred demands others adhere to a higher standard of evidence than he believes he is obliged to.

    “I’ve no problem with someone speculating that viruses might not be real,” writes Aldred, “but I object when they claim with absolute certainty that this is the case.”

    Interestingly, Aldred has no problem with virologists claiming with absolute certainty that viruses exist, when they cannot provide any proof.

    Any last shred of credibility evaporates when Aldred does exactly what he accuses the 'no-virus' skeptics of: Namely, asserting something without evidence.

    He writes:

    "When multiple independent studies consistently support the existence of something—like the SARS-CoV-2 virus—it becomes scientifically prudent to accept its existence based on this substantial evidence, although this will probably evolve as new data emerges."

    Here, we see Aldred claim “multiple independent studies” consistently support the existence of Sars-Cov-2, but again he offers no discussion whatsoever of those studies.

    To describe those studies as “independent” when they were in fact conducted in a suspiciously similar manner by interrelated organizations like the Chinese CDC, US CDC and Australia’s Doherty Institute is an insult to one’s intelligence.

    The Chinese were the first to claim ‘isolation’ of the mythical ‘Sars-Cov-2.’ Shortly afterwards, the Doherty Institute in South China Melbourne, Australia loudly boasted it was the first entity outside of China to isolate the Woohoo virus.

    Any discussion of whether Sars-Cov-2 exists must discuss these studies and the numerous absurdities and inconsistencies contained within them.

    Aldred won’t touch them. Neither do pandemic shills like Steve Kirsch or Robert Malone or virologist Ian M. Mackay (a WEF ‘agenda contributor’) or Imperial College-indoctrinated Dr Siouxsie Wiles, all of whom rabidly insist Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated.

    That’s okay. I’m happy to discuss them. In fact, I already have, at length:

    The Great Covid Con: Sars-Cov-2 Doesn't Exist & Has NEVER Really Been Isolated

    "Sars-Cov-2" Does Not Exist (Part 2): Why Chinese Researchers NEVER Isolated the Virus

    The Doherty study was an utter joke. They couldn't find anything that looked like a coronavirus during their cell culture escapade, so they squirted some trypsin - a protein-digesting enzyme - into the mix, and when particles in that mix developed ragged edges they promptly declared them to be the spikes of a coronavirus!

    Aldred expects us to accept rubbish like this as proof of a 'novel' and deadly coronavirus?

    The Doherty researchers also admit they conducted no control procedures during their genetic sequencing caper, and their 'isolation' endeavor involved no control procedure using samples from healthy control subjects.

    When asked if they tested for other ‘viral’ genomes, the Doherty researchers even admitted: "We did not look for other viral genomes. Our assembly was performed against the released Wuhan-1 reference sequence as we were looking for Sars-CoV-2." (Bold emphasis added)

    I don’t know how much more obvious it gets: Come hell or high water, the Doherty researchers were going to find ‘Sars-Cov-2’ - even if they had to handsculpt it with trypsin and willfully blind themselves to the possibility that other ‘virus’ genomes may be present.

    To refuse to accept such anti-scientific rot as evidence of anything is not being a “denialist” or “conspiracist” - it simply means you refuse to be a gullible idiot.

    Ditto with the various papers released by the Chinese who claim to have first isolated Sars-Cov-2. As I outline in some detail, those papers are a vague, incoherent and suspicious mess, and when I emailed three of the researchers to get some clarification, the answer was ... total silence.

    It's all well and good to post URLs to other writers who agree with you, but when the actual researchers of the studies claiming isolation of Sars-Cov-2 either confirm lack of control procedures or refuse to even respond to you, that speaks volumes.

    Conclusion

    As a person who values truth way above appearing right all the time, I’m happy to be proven wrong.

    I'm more than happy to accept that viruses exist - if someone can show me isolation and transmission studies confirming as much that aren't laughable garbage.

    Until that happens, you virus believers can stop trying to gaslight me and others who refuse to believe your anti-scientific hogwash. When you call us “deniers” and “conspiracists”, all you’re doing is showing off your scientific ineptitude and your penchant for projection. It’s most unbecoming.

    Share

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-146094701
    Dear Virology: Do You Have ANYTHING Other than Insults, Logical Fallacies and Lies to Back Up Your Claims? Virology: An unwitting master class in exposing pseudoscience. Anthony Colpo Recently overheard conversation between virologist and normal person with an honest job: Virologist: There are leprechauns living in my closet. Normal person: Really? Can you show me? V: No, they're invisible. NP: Can I reach into your closet and feel around for them? V: No, because when you try to touch them they instantly transform from solid to a gas. NP: OK, so let me get this straight. You're saying there are leprechauns living in your closet, but it's impossible to see or feel them. V: Correct. NP: So how, exactly, do you know they exist? V: Well, I once left some cheese in the closet. The next morning, it was gone. That means the leprechauns ate it. It's called the "lepropathic effect." NP: Are those mice droppings I see over there? V: Where? NP: There. V: Yeah. NP: You have mice droppings in your closet, which means mice are getting in here. Mice eat cheese. But you're claiming when you leave cheese here and it's gone the next morning, it's proof that invisible, phantom leprechauns live in your closet? V: That's right. NP: Are you on drugs? Seriously, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! V: I've got images of leprechaun footprints taken through my really powerful magnifying glass to prove it! Here, look at these! NP: Yes, I see them ... but they're not ‘leprechaun’ footprints. They look just like mouse paw prints. V: [Explodes with rage] You're a leprechaun DENIER! You're a donkey that DOESN’T UNDERSTAND leprechology! You and the rest of the no-leprechaun crowd are soooo ANTI-SCIENCE!! It’s SELFISH PEOPLE LIKE YOU who PUT EVERYONE ELSE AT RISK!! NP: [Calls 911 for paramedic assistance] Hi, I've got a guy here having some sort of mental episode. There are mice getting into his closet, but he insists they're leprechauns. I tried to explain it was mice, but he’s become very agitated and hostile. 911: He wouldn't happen to be a virologist, by any chance? NP: Yes, how did you know? 911: Oh, you wouldn't believe how many calls we get about those guys. Listen, he can't be helped. Best thing you can do is just get out of there. And for heaven's sake, if he offers you any “antiviral” drugs or “safe and effective” gene therapies, run like your life depends on it! NP: Gotcha, thanks for your help! Pseudoscientists are a predictable lot. They routinely spout untenable nonsense and frequently get away with it, because most people aren't well-schooled in the fundamentals of logic and reason, let alone science. As their beliefs gain an increasingly larger audience, pseudoscientists start to assume an air of invincibility and omnipotence. The very fact their ideas have such widespread acceptance is, in their minds, further proof of their veracity. People whose beliefs thrive largely because of ignorance, popular consensus and authority appeal tend to do poorly when challenged on scientific grounds. At first, they’ll attempt to address critiques with more pseudoscience. This, however, results in an argument that becomes increasingly untenable, self-contradictory and often downright absurd. Frustrated by the results of their self-defeating attempts to expound on The Science™, they quickly revert to their natural environment: The gutter. They abandon all pretense at science, and unleash a barrage of anti-logic and ad hominem attacks. This barrage will feature lies, dishonesty, smug condescension, red herrings, appeals to authority - everything except irrefutable evidence of the controlled scientific kind. Unable to refute important criticisms, they will talk as if their beliefs are self-evident and beyond challenge. You will be called a “denier” and “conspiracy theorist” for having the temerity to question their very questionable claims. They will retort that you have no formal scientific qualifications (i.e, you don’t have a piece of paper saying you spent several years at a government/globalist-controlled inculcation facility that receives large amounts of money from drug companies). Angry at being outpointed by a person who didn’t spend hundreds of thousands on college debt and Che Guevara t-shirts, they’ll insist you don’t “understand” the topic. This is a sly attempt to reframe your ability to see through their BS as an inability to comprehend supposedly complex topics. Pseudoscience, by the way, often appears “complex” because lies invariably require more lies to fortify the original untruths. The end result is a web of bollocks so intricate that, if you sit back patiently, will eventually ensnare the pseudoscientist in his or her own nonsense. When that happens, pseudoscientists get really frustrated. They’ll call you names, declare that arguing with you is not worth their time, and then reproduce a quote that has nothing to do with the topic at hand: This person has a PhD and runs a virology blog. Yet the best she can do to defend the virus paradigm is call skeptics “donkeys” and post quotes about the shortcomings of democracy by a science-fiction writer. Oh, and did I mention she takes Steve Kirsch seriously? You’re in great hands, virology LOL A Not-So-Nice Attempt to Undermine Critics of Virology One of my valued readers recently posted a link to a Substack post by a guy called Matthew Aldred titled “Viruses and DNA Are 'Just' Models?” The post’s subtitle reads “And governments sprayed toxins on people to make them think they had COVID?” So before I even start reading the post, it’s clear its intent is to portray virus skeptics as a bunch of cuckoo conspiracy theorists. This intent is confirmed when he includes a partial transcript allegedly reproduced from a podcast discussion featuring two virus skeptics. I say allegedly, because we’re not told where this podcast can be found, we’re not told when it took place, and we’re not told who the participants are. We are simply presented with a rambling, incoherent transcript that does a good job of making the mystery guest appear rambling and incoherent. What the transcript does not do is address the actual and inherently-flawed research that virology uses to claim the existence of viruses like Sars-Cov-2. And neither does Aldred. This evasiveness, this willingness to cast aspersions without actually addressing the relevant research, is a hallmark of Aldred’s post. In fact, it is so consistent of virus believers in general that they may as well register it as a trademark. There are countless pro-virus posts I could highlight as examples of pseudoscientific hack jobs. The reason I chose this one is because the author seems at pains to present himself as an impartial commentator. This claim to impartiality, and the author's professed disdain for the often uncivil nature of internet discussions, may disarm and lure some folks into dropping their intellectual guard. After all, how can you not trust a guy who says he just wants to get at the truth and wonders why we can't all just get along? I don’t know Aldred from a bar of soap, so cannot claim to know his motives. Maybe he is a nice guy. Maybe he really does believe himself to be impartial. What I can say without a doubt is that his post, be it by accident or design, is a catalog of logical fallacies and sleight of hand, the kind that allow charades like the Great COVID Con to gain traction. The post is a virtual masterclass in fuzzy logic, the kind used to defend untenable pseudoscience like the Sars-Cov-2 charade. Deconstructing that fuzzy logic, and exposing its mechanics and inherent fallacies, is like the research version of building situational awareness. You can recognize an assailant's intent ahead of time, and take the appropriate action. Fuzzy Logic Tactic #1: Making Untenable Claims then Switching the Burden of Proof to Skeptics Aldred begins his post with a bold-type disclaimer: In this article, I critique the trend of presenting speculative ideas with scant evidence as undeniable truths, particularly focusing on claims that ‘viruses are not real’. I examine a podcast that was sent to me and discuss the broader implications of the theories it presents. I argue that while scepticism is necessary, it’s unwise to completely dismiss established scientific concepts without substantial evidence. Before the article even gets going, he hits us with the ol’ switcheroo. With effortless sleight of hand, he has just transferred the burden of proof from virologists to those skeptical of virology. In his view, it’s not virology that lays claim to undeniable truths based on scant evidence - it is those of us who identify the huge cracks in virology’s foundation. It bears reminding that virology, to this day, still cannot even begin to physically isolate an alleged ‘virus.’ It is virology that claims you can ‘isolate’ an RNA- or DNA-virus by adding things like culture medium, bovine fetal serum and cell lines, which inevitably contaminate the mixture with extraneous RNA and likely DNA. This is the very opposite of isolation! It is virology that makes the self-serving and highly convenient claim that viruses can’t be isolated like bacteria can, because a virus needs a living host to survive and replicate. Michael Palmer, MD and Suchairt Bhakdi are textbook classic purveyors of this ruse, writing “Viruses, by their very nature, can only multiply within living cells but not in pure culture.” “The legend that SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated,” they continue, “is founded solely on the rigid demand that such isolation be accomplished without the use of cell cultures.” Viruses can’t party hardy without first shacking up in a living cell, they claim, and therefore it’s “rigid” and unreasonable to expect scientists to isolate a virus in pure cell culture. A most curious claim, because during the COVIDiot years we were instructed to spray and wipe down everything in sight until our surroundings reeked like a hospital. Which begs an obvious question: Why did we need to disinfect inanimate objects to guard against a pathogen that can only survive and replicate inside living hosts? The Sars-Cov-2 virus, claimed people from the CDC and Fauci’s NIAID masquerading as scientists, “can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days.” Listen virus-believers, you can’t have it both ways. Either a virus can survive outside a host, or it can’t. The Experts™ themselves have proclaimed in a leading medical tabloid that the ‘Sars-Cov-2 virus’ can survive on plastic and stainless steel “up to 72 hours after application.” Their words, not mine. Yet we’re supposed to believe, despite having up to a 72 hour window to do so, none of the world’s sophisticated microbiology labs has been able to take a single electron micograph happy snap of a single Sars-Cov-2 virion without first mixing non-purified patient samples with a bunch of other RNA- and DNA-containing material? To illustrate just what an utter load of tripe the virus paradigm is, here’s none other than Robert W Malone trying to answer what should be a simple question: “How would you explain the virus?” As you watch the video, keep in mind this is a guy who has an MD, BS in biochemistry, MS in biology, attended Harvard Medical School for a postdoc, taught pathology at two universities, received $10 billion of taxpayer funds from the US military for assorted shenanigans including vaccine development, and who proclaims himself to be the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology. He’s also made countless media appearances and charges $10,000 a pop to give speeches, so it’s fair to say Malone feels right at home in front of a camera. With a background like that, few people should be as eminently qualified as Sly Malone to explain what a virus is. So let's take a moment to learn from the great one: Even in the invigorating mountain air of beautiful Andalucia, Tio Roberto can’t even begin to offer a coherent explanation of what a virus is. "This particle is really ... self-replicating ... genes ... ... that aren't really alive. Uh, they exist as a parasite, in the way they become alive when they get into our cells.” Uh-huh. “It is a parasitic relationship, we ... I like to say we are the food for the virus.” “I think it's really good to think of this as a, um, a virus is a parasitic gene that, um, isn't truly alive but is at the boundary of living and non-living." Parasites operating on the boundary of living and non-living, huh? Sounds more like a government department to me. "A virus is even closer to a pure gene parasite. That's, that's really what they are." I think it's fair to say Sly has no clue what a virus is. Let's not be too hard on the guy - after all, it's hard to describe something that doesn't exist. Unable to quit when he's behind, Malone then objects to the objection that there is no Sars-Cov-2 virus by droning on about cell culture and isolation, not once mentioning that the cell culture 'isolation' experiments do not isolate anything but in fact add a bunch of other stuff to a patient sample that itself is already comprised of countless substances apart from an alleged virus. Man Offers €100,000 to Prove Existence of Measles Virus; Virologists Stay Quiet In November 2011, German biologist Stefan Lanka publicly issued a bold challenge. He offered the hefty sum of 100,000 Euros to anyone who could prove the existence of the measles virus. If the science behind virology was as well “established” as we’re repeatedly told, this should have constituted a quick and easy opportunity to score a large sum of money. Yet not one of the world’s countless virologists, microbiologists, or vocal health authorities took up Lanka’s offer. The only response came from a cocksure medical student called David Bardens, who submitted six studies he erroneously believed to constitute proof of the measles virus. Lanka reviewed the studies and correctly pointed out they proved nothing of the sort. Bardens then tried to sue for the money, but the German courts eventually ruled in Lanka’s favour. Documented liars like Steve Kirsch claim Lanka only won because of a legal technicality (Lanka actually required only one study and, not unreasonably, demanded that study not only establish the existence of a measles virus but also document its size. None of the six studies submitted by Bardens met this clearly stipulated requirement). The reality that Kirsch and his ilk refuse to discuss is that, irrespective of whether they included morphological details or not, none of the six studies Bardens served up even begin to prove the existence of a measles virus. In fact, the seminal 1954 ‘isolation’ paper by Enders and Peebles almost undermined the entire virus charade. They admit in the paper that “an uninoculated culture of monkey kidney cells” also demonstrated the cytopathic effect! Rather than entertain the possibility that the cell culture isolation charade was untenable, they simply declared, without any evidence whatsoever, that this unexpected 'cytopathic effect' was due to an unknown "agent" and then quickly moved on like nothing ever happened. The world of virology learned a valuable lesson: Never perform true control procedures during the cell culture isolation gig, because it could undermine the entire ruse. This is the inherently absurd, self-contradictory field of claptrap that Aldred deems an “established scientific concept.” He further excoriates us not to dismiss it without “substantial evidence,” never once addressing the reality that virology itself asks us to accept the presence of highly contagious pathogens without anything resembling substantial evidence. Remember the invisible leprechaun scenario at the start of this article? Using Aldred’s logic, in such a scenario the onus is on the disbelieving normal person, and not on the deluded virologist, to disprove the existence of invisible leprechauns. No. If you claim the existence of something that has never been seen before, you prove it. Fuzzy Logic Tactic #2: Gaslighting Successful advertisers know you don’t sell products by presenting people with a list of unassailable facts and figures. Nope, you need to press their hot buttons, and the way to do that is by triggering an emotional response. That’s why car advertisements don’t recite a list of impressive specifications. Instead, they feature attractive couples with Colgate smiles, happy families driving along while everyone stares in envy, and blokey blokes with huge grins blasting up and down muddy countrysides while the ad soundtrack blares “You can go your own way!” The message is: Buy our vehicle and you’ll get the pretty girl, have a picture perfect family, and be a trail-blazing maverick who lives life on his own terms. And everyone will look on in envy and admiration while you do it! It’s complete bollocks, of course - but it works. This kind of messaging bypasses our rational faculties and triggers our emotional hot buttons, often to the point where we’ll go into heavy debt just to scratch that emotional itch. “Yeah I get that, Anthony,” I hear you saying, “but what have car adverts got to do with the topic at hand?” Lots. Car manufacturers, you see, are hardly the only ones who know how to trigger our hot buttons. People who promote fake pandemics are also experts at bypassing people’s rational faculties. Attempts to appeal to people’s rational faculties during CONVID were quickly drowned out by rabid objections that anyone who refused to mask up and get poison-pricked was a selfish, heartless, evil granny-killer that deserved to be locked out of society. News outlets routinely ran heart-breaking stories of people who were once amazingly healthy until they were cruelly struck down by ‘COVID.’ No mention was made of the inconvenient fact that what really struck these people down was state-sanctioned murder, which included administration of drugs like midazolam and remdesivir, regular use of what should be last resort mechanical ventilation, and unlawful DNR (do not resuscitate) orders. It was a global gaslighting campaign that used emotional hotspotting to shut down rational discussion and instead cast the lone voices of reason - skeptics - as cold-blooded, tinfoil hat-wearing, menaces to society. And it worked. Spectacularly. So along comes Aldred, telling us to “beware of those handwaving away scientific models of reality that help us make good predictions, especially when it comes to important matters that keep us alive.” Translated: Virologists are keeping us alive, and by challenging them you virus skeptics are placing lives at risk! Rubbish. I’d like to see Aldred explain, in his own words, how the ‘scientific model’ of virology - which would have us believe resistance to disease comes from a syringe as opposed to healthy lifestyle habits - is keeping people alive? The bulk of the population-wide decline in measles mortality, for example, happened long before kids ever starting getting pricked with who-knows-what. Below are the trajectories for measles mortality in the US, UK and France, with the introduction of the measles vaccine overlaid on each graph. https://dissolvingillusions.com/graphs-images/#Figures I think it’s fair to say that, if you want to reduce death from a disease, first port of call for advice should not be people who think the key to public health is turning young kids into pin cushions. As for COVID, I’d love someone to explain how virology’s disgustingly reckless ‘scientific model’ of Sars-Cov-2 - which eagerly welcomed and even gushingly praised a complete abandonment of the usual safeguards to protect against dangerous and ineffective drugs - kept anyone alive? During the Pfizer vaxxx clinical trial, more people died in the gene therapy group than in the control group, and global estimates of excess post-vaxxx mortality run as high as 35 million lost lives. Now, name me even a single anti-vaxxxer who can boast that kind of body count? I’ll wait. The reality is that virology now has the kind of body count history’s bloodiest tyrants would be proud of. Other blockbusters from Virology’s Great Hits! include azidothymidine (AZT), a product of the early-1980s psy-op known as HIV/AIDS (funded by GloboPedo, produced by Fauci and Gallo Records). Despite all the hooplah, clinical trials found no reduction in mortality from AZT. People who got suckered into using this highly toxic drug, however, did find plenty of side effects. Another virology blockbuster, courtesy Bill & Melinda Productions, is the disgraceful polio vaccine rollout that caused almost 500,000 Indian children to suffer paralysis. While shamelessly dishonest ‘fact check’ outfits like Politifact would prefer you believed this never happened, it sure as heck did (Politifact is owned by Poynter who, by way of amazing coincidence, just happens to count the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations among its funders). Dhiman et al 2018 documented 491,000 additional cases of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis in India between 2000-2017. The rise and decline in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis in India aligned neatly with the increase and subsequent decrease in polio immunization rates. Once again, it’s not virus skeptics who murdered up to 35 million people. It’s not virology skeptics who are committing democide, and scarring survivors with everything from Guillain Barré Syndrome to myocarditis. It’s not virus skeptics who caused almost 500,000 poor Indian kids to suffer paralysis, or convinced people with ‘HIV/AIDS’ to take a drug that offered no mortality benefit but lots of severe side effects. The brains trust that enabled those criminal acts, in case anyone needs reminding, was Team Virology. I’ve barely scratched the surface of harms caused by this branch of pseudoscience. Suffice to say, it’s much easier to cite the lives ruined by this charade, than to cite lives saved from pathogens never shown to exist except by some voodoo ritual known as “cell culture isolation.” Virologists: So confident in their science, their inventions require immunity from prosecution. Fuzzy Logic Tactic #3: Pointing to ‘Experts’ for Validation, Without Offering Your Own Coherent Discussion of the Evidence Aldred’s post reaches comedic levels when he writes: “If you feel strongly that viruses are flawed science or even a conspiracy, please write a concise defence of your position in the comments section below (please avoid ‘just read so-and-so’s book’ or ‘watch so-and-so’s video’; I have the arguments from all the usual suspects and have yet to find a concise, coherent, and convincing case against viruses).” Aldred is specifically demanding you do not simply defer to other people’s material when making your case for the no-virus argument. Yet that is exactly what he does when making his own case. At no point in his article does he actually discuss the highly problematic research claiming to demonstrate viral isolation. I and others have presented detailed explanations of why these experiments are untenable; Aldred offers no counter-discussion of why we might be wrong. He makes bold claims that he fails to expound upon. Instead, he simply links to external sources, as if including a hyperlink is proof in itself. “Here’s another article on this subject by Michael Palmer at his new substack,” he writes, linking to an article that again fails to dissect the isolation studies. It simply declares that Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated “numerous times.” Continuing the game of Chinese Whispers, Palmer and co-author Bkahdi do as Aldred does and shun the opportunity to discuss these studies. Once again, they hyperlink the responsibility away to external websites. That’s fine for a Twitter post, but when you present yourself as an authoritative commentator and write an article making definitive claims, the onus is on you to explain your stance in a manner that shows you have a sound understanding of the topic. Making a claim like “yes, Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated,” then failing to address even a single criticism raised by skeptics hardly fulfills that obligation. “An overview of such studies,” write Palmer and Bkahdi of the so-called ‘isolation’ experiments, “has been provided by Jefferson et al” and a “solid study that correlates virus isolation, PCR and clinical findings in a series of hospitalized COVID-19-patients has been published by Wölfel et al.” (Bold emphasis added - correlation does not equal causation). Those of us who call Palmer and Bkahdi’s bluff and retrieve the full texts of the Jefferson and Wölfel papers quickly confirm the emperor has no clothes. All the studies reviewed by Jefferson et al and conducted by Wölfel et al involve the same old anti-isolation, cell culture flimflammery that gives rise to this controversy in the first place. You can see right here for yourself that Wölfel et al’s ‘isolation’ involved the usual charade of mixing non-purified patient samples with culture medium containing, among other things, 10% fetal calf serum, and Vero E6 (African green monkey kidney cells). I’ve discussed at length on this site why African green monkey kidney cells (aka Vero cells) are virology’s first choice of cell line for ‘isolation’ experiments, instead of more intuitive options like human lung cells. Unlike many other cell lines, Vero cells can be relied upon to deform and die off during the experiments, allowing virologists to claim a “cytopathic effect.” They then declare this cytopathic effect to be caused, not by their hand-picked choice of a purpose-bred cell line, but by a ‘virus.’ To top off the absurdities, Wölfel et al confirm the presence of Sars-Cov-2 in their utter non-isolate via “SARS-CoV-2 specific real-time RT-PCR using the SARS-2-CoV E assay." In plain English: Nothing was ever isolated. To the contrary, they added more stuff - including RNA- and DNA-containing bovine fetal serum - to the non-purified patient samples. When purpose-bred cells guaranteed to deform showed the “cytopathic effect,” they declared it was due to a virus. They then used the purpose-built PCR test designed to find Sars-Cov-2 in just about anything - including papaya, quail and goat - to proclaim that this virus was the mythical Sars-Cov-2. It bears reiterating that the handball strategy is a key fuzzy logic technique routinely used by pseudoscientists. They link to external sources, knowing full well most people won’t click through and read those sources. In Aldred’s case, this typically involves clicking through three links to finally get at the source document - something I dare say most people won’t do. Such a strategy allows people to make a bold claim and be seen to be providing evidence for it, when in reality they’re doing no such thing. Another example of the handball charade occurs when Aldred writes: “Ralph Baric’s work involves real viruses in gain-of-function research,” he declares. “You can isolate these viruses too. Also, scientists do indeed create viruses from scratch.” Once again, Aldred offers no elaboration of these bold claims, simply hyperlinks to external sources - the very thing he forbids others from doing. Clicking on the astounding claim that “scientists do indeed create viruses from scratch” takes one to a rather unhelpful press release from none other than the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health - a major player in the Great COVID Con. Clicking through from that press release to the Science paper brings one to an abstract of a 2002 paper, the full text of which is hidden behind a paywall. Science, however, has made the full paper available at another location. That full text reveals the study was funded by “the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency" aka DARPA, another major perpetrator of the Great COVID Con. Hiding such information from your readers doesn’t do much for your credibility, but things get even more curious. The DARPA-funded researchers claim to have created a synthetic ‘poliovirus.’ If a virus is a living entity, then what these researchers have effectively claimed is to have created a synthetic life form. Now that would be truly revolutionary - if it were true. What the researchers really created was a chemical, and they actually admit it several times during the paper. However, they claim this chemical is “self-replicating” and “infectious.” Despite this, to “infect” mice with this chemical they had to first inject it directly into the brains of the hapless critters. To what should be no-one’s surprise, intracerebral injection of mice bred to be genetically susceptible to this bollockery caused “flaccid paralysis or death,” although “a larger inoculum” of the synthetic chemical was required to achieve this effect than stock-standard ‘poliovirus.’ I’d bet good money Aldred never read this study. It doesn’t prove the existence of ‘poliovirus,’ and it sure as heck doesn’t prove the existence of Sars-Cov-2. All it proves is that US military-sponsored researchers can claim to have created a chemical compound that, when injected directly into the brains of susceptible mice, causes neurological symptoms and death. Gee, whoever would’ve guessed injecting synthetic chemicals into an animal’s brain could cause symptoms of nerve damage and death? What, exactly, does this have to do with the claim that we humans transmit live ‘viruses’ to each other via sneezing, coughing, touching, fornicating, etc, etc, etc? Where, exactly, is the epidemic of ‘viruses’ caused by people injecting lab-made chemicals into each other’s brains? A revealing clue to the study’s true purpose can be gleaned in the closing paragraph, when the researchers write: “As a result of the World Health Organization’s vaccination campaign to eradicate poliovirus, the global population is better protected against poliomyelitis than ever before. Any threat from bioterrorism will only arise if mass vaccination stops and herd immunity against poliomyelitis is lost. No doubt technical advances will permit rapid synthesis of the poliovirus genome, given access to sophisticated resources. The potential for virus synthesis is an additional important factor for consideration in designing the closing strategies of the poliovirus eradication campaign.” That paragraph serves several useful purposes for the parasite class. It praises the evil WHO for eradicating poliovirus via vaccines, even though we know the threat from polio was overwhelmingly removed before polio vaccines were released. It paves the way for development of toxic bioweapons that can be conducted under the guise of defending against bioterrorism. It provides fodder for future man-made virus and “gain of function” stories that can be positioned as an alternative and suppressed explanation for pre-orchestrated pandemics. These alternative explanations can then be strategically ‘unsuppressed’ at key time points, like during a vaxxx rollout. It reinforces the inherently absurd mass vaccination and herd immunity paradigms, which hold that people who have taken an allegedly highly effective life-saving drug are in danger from those who haven’t. In a sane world, that would be known as a failed drug. Fuzzy Logic Tactic #4: Hypocrisy & Double-Standards We’ve already seen how Aldred demands others adhere to a higher standard of evidence than he believes he is obliged to. “I’ve no problem with someone speculating that viruses might not be real,” writes Aldred, “but I object when they claim with absolute certainty that this is the case.” Interestingly, Aldred has no problem with virologists claiming with absolute certainty that viruses exist, when they cannot provide any proof. Any last shred of credibility evaporates when Aldred does exactly what he accuses the 'no-virus' skeptics of: Namely, asserting something without evidence. He writes: "When multiple independent studies consistently support the existence of something—like the SARS-CoV-2 virus—it becomes scientifically prudent to accept its existence based on this substantial evidence, although this will probably evolve as new data emerges." Here, we see Aldred claim “multiple independent studies” consistently support the existence of Sars-Cov-2, but again he offers no discussion whatsoever of those studies. To describe those studies as “independent” when they were in fact conducted in a suspiciously similar manner by interrelated organizations like the Chinese CDC, US CDC and Australia’s Doherty Institute is an insult to one’s intelligence. The Chinese were the first to claim ‘isolation’ of the mythical ‘Sars-Cov-2.’ Shortly afterwards, the Doherty Institute in South China Melbourne, Australia loudly boasted it was the first entity outside of China to isolate the Woohoo virus. Any discussion of whether Sars-Cov-2 exists must discuss these studies and the numerous absurdities and inconsistencies contained within them. Aldred won’t touch them. Neither do pandemic shills like Steve Kirsch or Robert Malone or virologist Ian M. Mackay (a WEF ‘agenda contributor’) or Imperial College-indoctrinated Dr Siouxsie Wiles, all of whom rabidly insist Sars-Cov-2 has been isolated. That’s okay. I’m happy to discuss them. In fact, I already have, at length: The Great Covid Con: Sars-Cov-2 Doesn't Exist & Has NEVER Really Been Isolated "Sars-Cov-2" Does Not Exist (Part 2): Why Chinese Researchers NEVER Isolated the Virus The Doherty study was an utter joke. They couldn't find anything that looked like a coronavirus during their cell culture escapade, so they squirted some trypsin - a protein-digesting enzyme - into the mix, and when particles in that mix developed ragged edges they promptly declared them to be the spikes of a coronavirus! Aldred expects us to accept rubbish like this as proof of a 'novel' and deadly coronavirus? The Doherty researchers also admit they conducted no control procedures during their genetic sequencing caper, and their 'isolation' endeavor involved no control procedure using samples from healthy control subjects. When asked if they tested for other ‘viral’ genomes, the Doherty researchers even admitted: "We did not look for other viral genomes. Our assembly was performed against the released Wuhan-1 reference sequence as we were looking for Sars-CoV-2." (Bold emphasis added) I don’t know how much more obvious it gets: Come hell or high water, the Doherty researchers were going to find ‘Sars-Cov-2’ - even if they had to handsculpt it with trypsin and willfully blind themselves to the possibility that other ‘virus’ genomes may be present. To refuse to accept such anti-scientific rot as evidence of anything is not being a “denialist” or “conspiracist” - it simply means you refuse to be a gullible idiot. Ditto with the various papers released by the Chinese who claim to have first isolated Sars-Cov-2. As I outline in some detail, those papers are a vague, incoherent and suspicious mess, and when I emailed three of the researchers to get some clarification, the answer was ... total silence. It's all well and good to post URLs to other writers who agree with you, but when the actual researchers of the studies claiming isolation of Sars-Cov-2 either confirm lack of control procedures or refuse to even respond to you, that speaks volumes. Conclusion As a person who values truth way above appearing right all the time, I’m happy to be proven wrong. I'm more than happy to accept that viruses exist - if someone can show me isolation and transmission studies confirming as much that aren't laughable garbage. Until that happens, you virus believers can stop trying to gaslight me and others who refuse to believe your anti-scientific hogwash. When you call us “deniers” and “conspiracists”, all you’re doing is showing off your scientific ineptitude and your penchant for projection. It’s most unbecoming. Share https://substack.com/home/post/p-146094701
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 5873 Views
  • A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    July 7, 2024
    Uncategorized
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021)

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

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

    1. Strengths of the Study

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

    2. Areas for Improvement

    2.1. Overall Presentation

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

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

    2.2. Descriptive Statistics

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

    2.3. Covariates/Confounders

    Multicollinearity

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

    Limited Covariates

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

    Statistical Methods

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

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

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

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

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

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

    3. Conclusion

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

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

    4. References

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

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



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

    by Sarena L. McLean, MSc.

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

    Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key July 7, 2024 Uncategorized By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4). 1. Strengths of the Study The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments. 2. Areas for Improvement 2.1. Overall Presentation The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice. There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review. 2.2. Descriptive Statistics More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial. 2.3. Covariates/Confounders Multicollinearity The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table. Limited Covariates The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Statistical Methods An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results. It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively. If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results. While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results. The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3). Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers. 3. Conclusion There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research. For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research. 4. References Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson. A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key by Sarena L. McLean, MSc. The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    DOCTORS4COVIDETHICS.ORG
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study 'A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province' by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3941 Views
  • Dermatology's Horrendous War Against The Sun, and the True Origins of the American Medical Association
    Untangling Dermatology's Huge Skin Cancer Scam - and deep corruption that enables them to get away with it.

    Brucha Weisberger
    BS”D

    I’m republishing this extremely important article from A Midwestern Doctor, which not only explains how very important sun exposure is in preventing cancer, other illnesses, and death, but also exposes the criminality at the very foundation of the American Medical Association, starting more than 100 years ago and continuing since.

    I’d like to note that if we just take a few moments to think deeply about the “sun is dangerous” propaganda we’ve grown up with, we realize that it cannot possibly be true. The sun has been shining on the world since G-d created it, and people have traditionally spent their days outdoors tending to their fields and animals. Sunscreen was not invented, and cancer was not prevalent. Since we’ve started spending more time indoors and applying sunscreen, we’ve only seen an increase in cancer, heart disease, and other modern illnesses.

    Aside from the historical impossibility of the medical establishment’s claims, there’s also logic - observation of the universe shows that G-d always sets things up to work as a perfect, beneficial system, with everything that’s needed for survival provided. There’s no conceivable way that He made the sun to be harmful for us, requiring modern chemical sunscreens to combat it.

    By A MIDWESTERN DOCTOR

    Story At a Glance:

    •Sunlight is crucial for health, and avoiding it doubles mortality rates and cancer risk.

    •Skin cancers are the most common cancers in the U.S., leading to widespread “advice” to avoid the sun. However, the deadliest skin cancers are linked to a lack of sunlight.

    •The dermatology field, aided by a top marketing firm, rebranded themselves as skin cancer (and sunlight) fighters, becoming one of the highest-paid medical specialties.

    •Despite billions spent annually, skin cancer deaths haven't significantly changed. Likewise, the Dermatology profession has buried a variety of effective and affordable skin cancer treatments.

    Note: this is an abridged version of a longer article. (BW: Click for expanded version. I have included a few pieces of AMD’s longer article which I felt were extremely significant.)

    I always found it odd that everyone insisted I avoid sunlight and wear sunscreen during outdoor activities, as I noticed that sunlight felt great and caused my veins to dilate, indicating the body deeply craved sunlight. Later, I learned that blocking natural light with glass (e.g., with windows or eyeglasses) significantly affected health, and that many had benefitted from utilizing specialized glass that allowed the full light spectrum through. This ties into one of my favorite therapeutic modalities, ultraviolet blood irradiation, which produces a wide range of truly remarkable benefits by putting the sun’s ultraviolet light inside the body.

    Once in medical school, aware of sunlight's benefits, I was struck by dermatologists' extreme aversion to it. Patients were constantly warned to avoid sunlight, and in northern latitudes, where people suffer from seasonal affective disorder, dermatologists even required students to wear sunscreen and cover most of their bodies indoors. At this point my perspective changed to “This crusade against the sun is definitely coming from the dermatologists” and “What on earth is wrong with these people?” A few years ago I learned the final piece of the puzzle through Robert Yoho MD and his book Butchered by Healthcare.

    Note: This comment I received perfectly illustrates the dysfunctional status quo.

    The Monopolization of Medicine

    Throughout my life, I’ve noticed the medical industry will:

    •Promote healthy activities people are unlikely to do (e.g., exercising or quitting smoking).

    •Promote unhealthy activities industries make money from (e.g., eating processed foods or taking a myriad of harmful pharmaceuticals).

    •Attack beneficial activities that are easy to do (e.g., sunbathing or consuming egg yolks, butter and raw dairy).

    As best as I can gather, much of this is rooted in the scandalous history of the American Medical Association, when in 1899, George H. Simmons, MD took possession of the floundering organization (MDs were going out of business because their treatments were barbaric and didn’t work). He, in turn, started a program to give the AMA seal of approval in return for the manufacturers disclosing their ingredients and agreeing to advertise in a lot of AMA publications (they were not however required to prove their product was safe or effective). This maneuver was successful, and in just ten years, increased their advertising revenues 5-fold, and their physician membership 9-fold.

    At the same time this happened, the AMA moved to monopolize the medical industry by doing things such as establishing a general medical education council (which essentially said their method of practicing medicine was the only credible way to practice medicine), which allowed them to then become the national accrediting body for medical schools. This in turn allowed them to end the teaching of many of the competing models of medicine such as homeopathy, chiropractic, naturopathy, and to a lesser extent, osteopathy—as states would often not give licenses to graduates of schools with a poor AMA rating.

    BW: Here’s just one paragraph from the article AMD linked above, describing how the Rockefeller cartel took over the medical system. Remember, the Flexner report was funded by The Carnegie Foundation and John D. Rockefeller; Flexner’s brother was the first medical director of the Rockefeller Medical Foundation.

    In 1910, the same year that the Flexner report was published, the AMA published "Essentials of an Acceptable Medical College" (Report of the Council, 1910), which echoed similar criteria for medical education and a disdain for non-conventional medical study. In fact, the AMA's head of the Council on Medical Education traveled with Abraham Flexner as they evaluated medical schools. The medical sociologist Paul Starr wrote in his Pulitzer Prize-winning book: "The AMA Council became a national accrediting agency for medical schools, as an increasing number of states adopted its judgments of unacceptable institutions." Further, he noted: "Even though no legislative body ever set up ... the AMA Council on Medical Education, their decisions came to have the force of law" (Starr, 1982, 121).(3)

    BW: More fascinating detail on the Rockefeller takeover, from another site:

    … the Flexner Report … made the case that old, traditional medicine is bad, and new pharmacologic medicine is good. Rockefeller, as owner of 90% of the American petrol industry at the time, personally stood to gain as petrochemicals were emerging as a profitable sector. Today, they are used extensively in producing active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), solvents, excipients, and packaging materials. The petrochemical industry as it relates to pharmaceuticals alone is valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars today. The pharmaceutical industry, as we know it, stemmed from the initial investment by the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations into medical universities following the Flexner Report’s recommendations.

    See: https://covid19criticalcare.com/the-flexner-report-and-the-rise-of-big-pharma/

    Likewise, Simmons (along with his successor, Fishbein, who reigned from 1924 to 1950) established a "Propaganda Department" in 1913 to attack all unconventional medical treatments and anyone (MD or not) who practiced them. Fishbein was very good at what he did and could often organize massive media campaigns against anything he elected to deem “quackery” that were heard by millions of Americans (at a time when the country was much smaller).

    After Simmons and Fishbein created this monopoly, they were quick to leverage it. This included blackmailing pharmaceutical companies to advertise with them, demanding the rights for a variety of healing treatments to be sold to the AMA, and sending the FDA or FTC after anyone who refused to sell out (which in at least in one case was proved in court since one of Fishbein’s “compatriots” thought what he was doing was wrong and testified against him). Because of this, many remarkable medical innovations were successfully erased from history (part of my life’s work and much of what I use in practice are essentially the therapies Simmons and Fishbein largely succeeded in wiping off the Earth).

    Note: to illustrate that this is not just ancient history, consider how viciously and ludicrously the AMA attacked the use of ivermectin to treat COVID (as it was the biggest competitor to the COVID cartel). Likewise, one of the paradigm changing moments for Pierre Kory (which he discusses with Russel Brand here) was that after he testified to the Senate about ivermectin, he was put into a state of shock by the onslaught of media and medical journal campaigns from every direction trying to tank ivermectin and destroy his and his colleagues’ reputations (e.g., they got fired and had their papers which had already passed peer-review retracted). Two weeks into it, he got an email from Professor William B Grant (a vitamin D expert) that said “Dear Dr. Kory, what they're doing to ivermectin they've been doing to vitamin D for decades” and included a 2017 paper detailing the exact playbook industry uses again and again to bury inconvenient science.

    Before long, Big Tobacco became the AMA’s biggest client, which led to countless ads like this one being published by the AMA which persisted until Fishbein was forced out (at which point he became a highly paid lobbyist for the tobacco industry):


    Note: because of how nasty they were, they often got people to dig into their past, at which point it was discovered how unscrupulous and sociopathic both Simmons and Fishbein were. Unfortunately, while I know from first-hand experience this was the case (e.g., a friend of mine knew Fishbein’s secretary and she stated that Fishbein was a truly horrible person she regularly saw carry out despicable actions and I likewise knew people who knew the revolutionary healers Fishbein targeted), I was never able to confirm many of the abhorrent allegations against Simmons because the book they all cite as a reference did not provide its sources, while the other books which provide different but congruent allegations are poorly sourced.

    The Benefits of Sunlight

    One of the oldest “proven” therapies in medicine was having people bathe in sunlight (e.g., it was one of the few things that actually had success in treating the 1918 influenza, prior to antibiotics it was one of the most effective treatments for treating tuberculosis and it was also widely used for a variety of other diseases). In turn, since it is safe, effective, and freely available, it stands to reason that unscrupulous individuals who wanted to monopolize the practice of medicine would want to cut off the public’s access to it.

    Note: the success of sunbathing was the original inspiration for ultraviolet blood irradiation.

    Because of how successful the war against sunlight has been many people are unaware of its benefits. For example:

    1. Sunlight is critical for mental health. This is most well appreciated with depression (e.g., seasonal affective disorder) but in reality the effects are far more broad reaching (e.g., unnatural light exposure destroys your circadian rhythm).

    Note: I really got this point during my medical internship, where after a long period of night shifts under fluorescent lights, noticed I was becoming clinically depressed (which has never otherwise happened to me and led to a co-resident I was close to offering to prescribe antidepressants). I decided to do an experiment (I do this a lot—e.g., I try to never recommend treatments to patients I haven’t already tried on myself) and stuck with it for a few more days, then went home and bathed under a full spectrum bulb, at which point I almost instantly felt better. I feel my story is particularly important for healthcare workers since many people in the system are forced to spend long periods of their under artificial light and their mental health (e.g., empathy) suffers greatly from it. For example, consider this study of Chinese operating room nurses which found their mental health was significantly worse than the general population and that this decline was correlated to their lack of sunlight exposure.

    2. A large epidemiological study found women with higher solar UVB exposure had only half the incidence of breast cancer as those with lower solar exposure and that men with higher residential solar exposure had only half the incidence of fatal prostate cancer.
    Note: a 50% reduction in either of these cancers greatly exceeds what any of the approaches we use to treat or prevent them have accomplished.

    3. A 20 year prospective study evaluated 29,518 women in Southern Sweden where average women from each age bracket with no significant health issues were randomly selected, essentially making it one of the best possible epidemiologic studies that could be done. It found that women who were sun avoidant compared to those who had regular exposure to sunlight were:

    •Overall 60% more likely to die, being roughly 50% more likely to die than the moderate exposure group and roughly 130% more likely to die than the group with high sun exposure.
    Note: to be clear, there are very few interventions in medicine that do anything close to this.

    •The largest gain was seen in the risk of dying from heart disease, while the second gain was seen in the risk of all causes of death besides heart disease and cancer (“other”), and the third largest gain was seen in deaths from cancer.
    Note: the investigators concluded the smaller benefit in reduced cancer deaths was in part an artifact of the subjects living longer and hence succumbing to a type of cancer that would have only affected them later in life.

    • The largest benefit was seen in smokers, to the point non-smokers who avoided the sun had the same risk of dying as smokers who got sunlight.
    Note: I believe this and the cardiovascular benefits are in large part due to sunlight catalyzing the synthesis of nitric oxide (which is essential for healthy blood vessels) and sulfates (which coat cells like the endothelium and in conjunction with infrared (or sunlight) creates the liquid crystalline water which is essential for the protection and function of the cardiovascular system).

    So given all of this, I would say that you need a really good justification to avoid sun exposure.

    Skin Cancer

    According to the American Academy of Dermatology, skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, with current estimates suggesting that one in five Americans will develop skin cancer in their lifetime. Approximately 9,500 people in the U.S. are diagnosed with skin cancer every day.

    The Academy emphasizes that UV exposure is the most preventable risk factor for skin cancer, advising people to avoid indoor tanning beds and protect their skin outdoors by seeking shade, wearing protective clothing, and applying broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or higher.

    The Skin Cancer Foundation states that more than two people die of skin cancer in the U.S. every hour, which sounds alarming. Let's break down what all this means.

    Basal Cell Carcinoma

    Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common skin cancer, making up 80% of cases, with about 2.64 million Americans diagnosed annually. Risk factors include excessive sun exposure, fair skin, and family history. BCC primarily occurs in sun-exposed areas like the face.


    BCC rarely metastasizes and has a near 0% fatality rate, but it frequently recurs (65%-95%) after removal. The standard excision approach often doesn't address underlying causes, leading to repeated surgeries and potential disfigurement.

    While BCCs can grow large if left untreated, they aren't immediately dangerous. Treatment is necessary but not urgent. Alternative therapies can effectively treat large BCCs without disfiguring surgery.
    Note: since the COVID-19 vaccines came out, I have heard of a few cases of BCC metastasizing in the vaccinated, but it is still extraordinarily rare.

    Squamous Cell Carcinoma

    Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common skin cancer, with an estimated 1.8 million cases in the U.S. Its incidence varies widely due to sunlight exposure, ranging from 260 to 4,970 cases per million person-years. Previously thought to be four times less common than BCC, SCC is now only half as common.


    Unlike BCC, SCC can metastasize, making it potentially dangerous. If removed before metastasis, the survival rate is 99%; after metastasis, it drops to 56%. Typically caught early, SCC has an average survival rate of 95%. Around 2,000 people die from SCC each year in the U.S.

    Note: unlike more lethal skin cancers, it is not required to report BCC or SCC. Consequently, there is no centralized database tracking their occurrence, so the official figures are largely estimates.

    Melanoma

    Melanoma occurs at a rate of 218 cases per million persons annually in the United States, with survival rates ranging from 99% to 35% depending on its stage when diagnosed, averaging out to 94%. However, despite only comprising 1% of all skin cancer diagnoses, Melanoma is responsible for most skin cancer deaths. In total, this works out to a bit over 8000 deaths each year in the United States. Since survival is greatly improved by early detection, many guides online exist to help recognize the common signs of a potential melanoma.


    What’s critically important to understand about melanoma is that while it’s widely considered to be linked to sunlight exposure—it’s not. For example:

    Patients with solar elastosis, a sign of sun exposure, were 60% less likely to die from melanoma.

    Melanoma predominantly occurs in areas of the body with minimal sunlight exposure, unlike SCC and BCC, which are linked to sun-exposed regions.

    Outdoor workers, despite significantly higher UV exposure, have lower rates of melanoma compared to indoor workers.

    Many sunscreens contain toxic carcinogens (to the point Hawaii banned them to protect coral reefs). Conversely, existing research indicates widespread sunscreen use has not reduced skin cancer rates.

    •A mouse study designed to study malignant melanoma found mice kept under simulated daylight develop tumors at a slower and diminished rate compared to those under cool white fluorescent light.

    There has been a significant increase in many areas from melanoma, something which argues against sunlight being the primary issue as it has not significantly changed in the last few decades. For instance, consider this data from Norway’s cancer registry on malignant melanoma:


    Note: in addition to these three cancers, other (much rarer) skin cancers also exist, most of which have not been linked to sunlight exposure.

    The Great Dermatology Scam

    If you consider the previous section, the following should be fairly clear:

    •By far the most common “skin cancer” is not dangerous.

    •The “skin cancers” you actually need to worry about are a fairly small portion of the existing skin cancers.

    • Sunlight exposure does not cause the most dangerous cancers.

    In essence, there’s no way to justify “banning sunlight” to “prevent skin cancer,” as the “benefit” from this prescription is vastly outweighed by its harm. However, a very clever linguistic trick bypasses this contradiction—a single label, “skin cancer,” is used for everything, which then selectively adopts the lethality of melanoma, the frequency of BCC, and the sensitivity to sunlight that BCC and SCC have.

    This has always really infuriated me, so I’ve given a lot of thought to why they do this.

    Note: a variety of other deceptive linguistic tricks are also utilized by the pharmaceutical company. I am presently working on an article about that was also done with high blood pressure (hypertension).

    The Transformation of Dermatology

    In the 1980s, dermatology was one of the least desirable specialties in medicine (e.g., dermatologists were often referred to as pimple poppers). Now however, dermatology is one of the most coveted specialties in medicine as dermatologists make 2-4 times as much as a regular doctor, but have a much less stressful lifestyle.

    A relatively unknown blog by Dermatologist David J. Elpern, M.D. at last explained what happened:

    Over the past 40 years, I have witnessed these changes in my specialty and am dismayed by the reluctance of my colleagues to address them. This trend began in the early 1980s when the Academy of Dermatology (AAD) assessed its members over 2 million dollars to hire a prominent New York advertising agency to raise the public’s appreciation of our specialty. The mad men recommended “educating” the public to the fact that dermatologists are skin cancer experts, not just pimple poppers; and so the free National Skin Cancer Screening Day was established [through a 1985 Presidential proclamation].

    These screenings serve to inflate the public’s health anxiety about skin cancer and led to the performance of vast amounts of expensive low-value procedures for skin cancer and actinic keratosis (AKs). At the same time, pathologists were expanding their definitions of what a melanoma is, leading to “diagnostic drift” that misleadingly increased the incidence of melanoma while the mortality has remained at 1980 levels. Concomitantly, non-melanoma skin cancers are being over-treated by armies of micrographic surgeons who often treat innocuous skin cancers with unnecessarily aggressive, lucrative surgeries.

    This heightened awareness led to a dramatic increase in skin cancer screenings and diagnoses, fueled by fears instilled in the public about sun exposure. Alongside this massive sales funnel, there was a significant expansion in the incredibly lucrative Mohs micrographic surgery, promoted as a gold standard for treating skin cancers due to its precision and efficacy in sparing healthy tissue. However, critics argue that Mohs surgery is often overused, driven by financial incentives rather than clinical necessity, contributing to immense healthcare costs.

    Note: we frequently see patients who developed complications from these surgeries.

    The commercialization of dermatology was further amplified by the entry of private equity firms into the field. These firms acquired dermatology practices, sometimes staffing them with non-physician providers to maximize profitability. This trend raised concerns about quality of care, with reports of misdiagnoses and over-treatment, particularly in vulnerable populations like nursing home residents—to the point the New York Times authored a 2017 investigation on this exploitative industry.

    Moreover, the shift towards profit-driven models in dermatology has sparked ethical debates within the medical community. Some dermatologists have voiced concerns over the commodification of skin cancer treatments and the erosion of traditional doctor-patient relationships in favor of more transactional interactions. Despite these challenges, dermatology remains a lucrative field, attracting both medical professionals and investors seeking financial gain from skin care services.

    Many in turn are victimized by these exploitative practices. The popular comedian Jimmy Dore for example recently covered the Great Dermatology Scam after realizing he’d been subjected to it.

    After Jimmy Dore’s segment, this story went viral, and as best as I can tell, was seen by between 5 to 10 million people. A few weeks after Dore’s segment, two surveys were released highlighting an “epidemic” of insufficient sun protection which the New York Times then covered (and numerous readers then sent to me since they thought it was a response to my article). Since it was such a classic medical propaganda piece, I will to quote a few lines from it:

    Two new surveys suggest a troubling trend: Young adults seem to be slacking on sun safety.

    14 percent of adults under 35 believed the myth that wearing sunscreen every day is more harmful than direct sun exposure

    Young adults are often unaware of what sun damage looks like and how best to prevent it

    Ultraviolet rays — whether from tanning beds or direct sunlight — can damage skin and cause skin cancer, which can be deadly

    Experts said that Gen Z is uniquely susceptible to misinformation about sunscreen and skin cancer that has proliferated on social media platforms like TikTok.

    Generously apply — and reapply — sunscreen. UV rays can damage skin even when it’s cloudy or chilly, so experts recommend wearing sunscreen every day.

    Note: I must emphasize that some skin cancers (e.g., many melanomas) require immediate removal. My point here is not to avoid dermatologists entirely but to consider seeking a second opinion from another dermatologist as there are many excellent and ethical dermatologists out there.

    Changes in Skin Cancer

    Given how much is being spent to end skin cancer, one would expect some results. Unfortunately, like many other aspects of the cancer industry that’s not what’s happened. Instead, more and more (previously benign) cancers are diagnosed, but for the most part, no significant change has occurred in the death rate.


    The best proof for this came from a study which found that almost all of the increase in “skin cancer” was from stage 1 melanomas (which rarely create problems):


    Another study illustrates exactly what the result of our war on skin cancer has accomplished:

    Finally, since many suspected the COVID vaccines might lead to an increase in melanoma (or other skin cancers), I compiled all the available annual reports from the American Cancer Society into a few graphs:


    Conclusion

    Dermatology’s need to create a villain (the sun) to justify its racket is arguably one of the most damaging things the medical profession has done to the world. Fortunately, the insatiable greed of the medical industry went too far during COVID-19, and the public is now starting to question many of the other exploitative and unscientific practices we are subjected to. It is my sincere hope that our society will begin re-examining dermatology’s disastrous war against the sun.

    I in turn am incredibly grateful because this new political climate has made it possible to expose a variety of unscrupulous tactics in medicine which have remained largely unchallenged for decades.

    Author’s note: This is an abbreviated version of a full-length article about Dermatology’s Disastrous War Again the Sun that also discusses safer ways to treat or prevent skin cancer and the nutritional approaches (e.g., avoiding seed oils) which make it possible for the skin to tolerate and be nourished by longer sun exposures. For the entire read with much more specific details and sources, and those approaches please click here.


    (End of AMD’s quoted article. Link to original: https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dermatologys-horrendous-war-against.)

    Share

    To help me continue my work, you may make a one-time gift here: https://ko-fi.com/truth613

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-146483737
    Dermatology's Horrendous War Against The Sun, and the True Origins of the American Medical Association Untangling Dermatology's Huge Skin Cancer Scam - and deep corruption that enables them to get away with it. Brucha Weisberger BS”D I’m republishing this extremely important article from A Midwestern Doctor, which not only explains how very important sun exposure is in preventing cancer, other illnesses, and death, but also exposes the criminality at the very foundation of the American Medical Association, starting more than 100 years ago and continuing since. I’d like to note that if we just take a few moments to think deeply about the “sun is dangerous” propaganda we’ve grown up with, we realize that it cannot possibly be true. The sun has been shining on the world since G-d created it, and people have traditionally spent their days outdoors tending to their fields and animals. Sunscreen was not invented, and cancer was not prevalent. Since we’ve started spending more time indoors and applying sunscreen, we’ve only seen an increase in cancer, heart disease, and other modern illnesses. Aside from the historical impossibility of the medical establishment’s claims, there’s also logic - observation of the universe shows that G-d always sets things up to work as a perfect, beneficial system, with everything that’s needed for survival provided. There’s no conceivable way that He made the sun to be harmful for us, requiring modern chemical sunscreens to combat it. By A MIDWESTERN DOCTOR Story At a Glance: •Sunlight is crucial for health, and avoiding it doubles mortality rates and cancer risk. •Skin cancers are the most common cancers in the U.S., leading to widespread “advice” to avoid the sun. However, the deadliest skin cancers are linked to a lack of sunlight. •The dermatology field, aided by a top marketing firm, rebranded themselves as skin cancer (and sunlight) fighters, becoming one of the highest-paid medical specialties. •Despite billions spent annually, skin cancer deaths haven't significantly changed. Likewise, the Dermatology profession has buried a variety of effective and affordable skin cancer treatments. Note: this is an abridged version of a longer article. (BW: Click for expanded version. I have included a few pieces of AMD’s longer article which I felt were extremely significant.) I always found it odd that everyone insisted I avoid sunlight and wear sunscreen during outdoor activities, as I noticed that sunlight felt great and caused my veins to dilate, indicating the body deeply craved sunlight. Later, I learned that blocking natural light with glass (e.g., with windows or eyeglasses) significantly affected health, and that many had benefitted from utilizing specialized glass that allowed the full light spectrum through. This ties into one of my favorite therapeutic modalities, ultraviolet blood irradiation, which produces a wide range of truly remarkable benefits by putting the sun’s ultraviolet light inside the body. Once in medical school, aware of sunlight's benefits, I was struck by dermatologists' extreme aversion to it. Patients were constantly warned to avoid sunlight, and in northern latitudes, where people suffer from seasonal affective disorder, dermatologists even required students to wear sunscreen and cover most of their bodies indoors. At this point my perspective changed to “This crusade against the sun is definitely coming from the dermatologists” and “What on earth is wrong with these people?” A few years ago I learned the final piece of the puzzle through Robert Yoho MD and his book Butchered by Healthcare. Note: This comment I received perfectly illustrates the dysfunctional status quo. The Monopolization of Medicine Throughout my life, I’ve noticed the medical industry will: •Promote healthy activities people are unlikely to do (e.g., exercising or quitting smoking). •Promote unhealthy activities industries make money from (e.g., eating processed foods or taking a myriad of harmful pharmaceuticals). •Attack beneficial activities that are easy to do (e.g., sunbathing or consuming egg yolks, butter and raw dairy). As best as I can gather, much of this is rooted in the scandalous history of the American Medical Association, when in 1899, George H. Simmons, MD took possession of the floundering organization (MDs were going out of business because their treatments were barbaric and didn’t work). He, in turn, started a program to give the AMA seal of approval in return for the manufacturers disclosing their ingredients and agreeing to advertise in a lot of AMA publications (they were not however required to prove their product was safe or effective). This maneuver was successful, and in just ten years, increased their advertising revenues 5-fold, and their physician membership 9-fold. At the same time this happened, the AMA moved to monopolize the medical industry by doing things such as establishing a general medical education council (which essentially said their method of practicing medicine was the only credible way to practice medicine), which allowed them to then become the national accrediting body for medical schools. This in turn allowed them to end the teaching of many of the competing models of medicine such as homeopathy, chiropractic, naturopathy, and to a lesser extent, osteopathy—as states would often not give licenses to graduates of schools with a poor AMA rating. BW: Here’s just one paragraph from the article AMD linked above, describing how the Rockefeller cartel took over the medical system. Remember, the Flexner report was funded by The Carnegie Foundation and John D. Rockefeller; Flexner’s brother was the first medical director of the Rockefeller Medical Foundation. In 1910, the same year that the Flexner report was published, the AMA published "Essentials of an Acceptable Medical College" (Report of the Council, 1910), which echoed similar criteria for medical education and a disdain for non-conventional medical study. In fact, the AMA's head of the Council on Medical Education traveled with Abraham Flexner as they evaluated medical schools. The medical sociologist Paul Starr wrote in his Pulitzer Prize-winning book: "The AMA Council became a national accrediting agency for medical schools, as an increasing number of states adopted its judgments of unacceptable institutions." Further, he noted: "Even though no legislative body ever set up ... the AMA Council on Medical Education, their decisions came to have the force of law" (Starr, 1982, 121).(3) BW: More fascinating detail on the Rockefeller takeover, from another site: … the Flexner Report … made the case that old, traditional medicine is bad, and new pharmacologic medicine is good. Rockefeller, as owner of 90% of the American petrol industry at the time, personally stood to gain as petrochemicals were emerging as a profitable sector. Today, they are used extensively in producing active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), solvents, excipients, and packaging materials. The petrochemical industry as it relates to pharmaceuticals alone is valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars today. The pharmaceutical industry, as we know it, stemmed from the initial investment by the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations into medical universities following the Flexner Report’s recommendations. See: https://covid19criticalcare.com/the-flexner-report-and-the-rise-of-big-pharma/ Likewise, Simmons (along with his successor, Fishbein, who reigned from 1924 to 1950) established a "Propaganda Department" in 1913 to attack all unconventional medical treatments and anyone (MD or not) who practiced them. Fishbein was very good at what he did and could often organize massive media campaigns against anything he elected to deem “quackery” that were heard by millions of Americans (at a time when the country was much smaller). After Simmons and Fishbein created this monopoly, they were quick to leverage it. This included blackmailing pharmaceutical companies to advertise with them, demanding the rights for a variety of healing treatments to be sold to the AMA, and sending the FDA or FTC after anyone who refused to sell out (which in at least in one case was proved in court since one of Fishbein’s “compatriots” thought what he was doing was wrong and testified against him). Because of this, many remarkable medical innovations were successfully erased from history (part of my life’s work and much of what I use in practice are essentially the therapies Simmons and Fishbein largely succeeded in wiping off the Earth). Note: to illustrate that this is not just ancient history, consider how viciously and ludicrously the AMA attacked the use of ivermectin to treat COVID (as it was the biggest competitor to the COVID cartel). Likewise, one of the paradigm changing moments for Pierre Kory (which he discusses with Russel Brand here) was that after he testified to the Senate about ivermectin, he was put into a state of shock by the onslaught of media and medical journal campaigns from every direction trying to tank ivermectin and destroy his and his colleagues’ reputations (e.g., they got fired and had their papers which had already passed peer-review retracted). Two weeks into it, he got an email from Professor William B Grant (a vitamin D expert) that said “Dear Dr. Kory, what they're doing to ivermectin they've been doing to vitamin D for decades” and included a 2017 paper detailing the exact playbook industry uses again and again to bury inconvenient science. Before long, Big Tobacco became the AMA’s biggest client, which led to countless ads like this one being published by the AMA which persisted until Fishbein was forced out (at which point he became a highly paid lobbyist for the tobacco industry): Note: because of how nasty they were, they often got people to dig into their past, at which point it was discovered how unscrupulous and sociopathic both Simmons and Fishbein were. Unfortunately, while I know from first-hand experience this was the case (e.g., a friend of mine knew Fishbein’s secretary and she stated that Fishbein was a truly horrible person she regularly saw carry out despicable actions and I likewise knew people who knew the revolutionary healers Fishbein targeted), I was never able to confirm many of the abhorrent allegations against Simmons because the book they all cite as a reference did not provide its sources, while the other books which provide different but congruent allegations are poorly sourced. The Benefits of Sunlight One of the oldest “proven” therapies in medicine was having people bathe in sunlight (e.g., it was one of the few things that actually had success in treating the 1918 influenza, prior to antibiotics it was one of the most effective treatments for treating tuberculosis and it was also widely used for a variety of other diseases). In turn, since it is safe, effective, and freely available, it stands to reason that unscrupulous individuals who wanted to monopolize the practice of medicine would want to cut off the public’s access to it. Note: the success of sunbathing was the original inspiration for ultraviolet blood irradiation. Because of how successful the war against sunlight has been many people are unaware of its benefits. For example: 1. Sunlight is critical for mental health. This is most well appreciated with depression (e.g., seasonal affective disorder) but in reality the effects are far more broad reaching (e.g., unnatural light exposure destroys your circadian rhythm). Note: I really got this point during my medical internship, where after a long period of night shifts under fluorescent lights, noticed I was becoming clinically depressed (which has never otherwise happened to me and led to a co-resident I was close to offering to prescribe antidepressants). I decided to do an experiment (I do this a lot—e.g., I try to never recommend treatments to patients I haven’t already tried on myself) and stuck with it for a few more days, then went home and bathed under a full spectrum bulb, at which point I almost instantly felt better. I feel my story is particularly important for healthcare workers since many people in the system are forced to spend long periods of their under artificial light and their mental health (e.g., empathy) suffers greatly from it. For example, consider this study of Chinese operating room nurses which found their mental health was significantly worse than the general population and that this decline was correlated to their lack of sunlight exposure. 2. A large epidemiological study found women with higher solar UVB exposure had only half the incidence of breast cancer as those with lower solar exposure and that men with higher residential solar exposure had only half the incidence of fatal prostate cancer. Note: a 50% reduction in either of these cancers greatly exceeds what any of the approaches we use to treat or prevent them have accomplished. 3. A 20 year prospective study evaluated 29,518 women in Southern Sweden where average women from each age bracket with no significant health issues were randomly selected, essentially making it one of the best possible epidemiologic studies that could be done. It found that women who were sun avoidant compared to those who had regular exposure to sunlight were: •Overall 60% more likely to die, being roughly 50% more likely to die than the moderate exposure group and roughly 130% more likely to die than the group with high sun exposure. Note: to be clear, there are very few interventions in medicine that do anything close to this. •The largest gain was seen in the risk of dying from heart disease, while the second gain was seen in the risk of all causes of death besides heart disease and cancer (“other”), and the third largest gain was seen in deaths from cancer. Note: the investigators concluded the smaller benefit in reduced cancer deaths was in part an artifact of the subjects living longer and hence succumbing to a type of cancer that would have only affected them later in life. • The largest benefit was seen in smokers, to the point non-smokers who avoided the sun had the same risk of dying as smokers who got sunlight. Note: I believe this and the cardiovascular benefits are in large part due to sunlight catalyzing the synthesis of nitric oxide (which is essential for healthy blood vessels) and sulfates (which coat cells like the endothelium and in conjunction with infrared (or sunlight) creates the liquid crystalline water which is essential for the protection and function of the cardiovascular system). So given all of this, I would say that you need a really good justification to avoid sun exposure. Skin Cancer According to the American Academy of Dermatology, skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, with current estimates suggesting that one in five Americans will develop skin cancer in their lifetime. Approximately 9,500 people in the U.S. are diagnosed with skin cancer every day. The Academy emphasizes that UV exposure is the most preventable risk factor for skin cancer, advising people to avoid indoor tanning beds and protect their skin outdoors by seeking shade, wearing protective clothing, and applying broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of 30 or higher. The Skin Cancer Foundation states that more than two people die of skin cancer in the U.S. every hour, which sounds alarming. Let's break down what all this means. Basal Cell Carcinoma Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common skin cancer, making up 80% of cases, with about 2.64 million Americans diagnosed annually. Risk factors include excessive sun exposure, fair skin, and family history. BCC primarily occurs in sun-exposed areas like the face. BCC rarely metastasizes and has a near 0% fatality rate, but it frequently recurs (65%-95%) after removal. The standard excision approach often doesn't address underlying causes, leading to repeated surgeries and potential disfigurement. While BCCs can grow large if left untreated, they aren't immediately dangerous. Treatment is necessary but not urgent. Alternative therapies can effectively treat large BCCs without disfiguring surgery. Note: since the COVID-19 vaccines came out, I have heard of a few cases of BCC metastasizing in the vaccinated, but it is still extraordinarily rare. Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common skin cancer, with an estimated 1.8 million cases in the U.S. Its incidence varies widely due to sunlight exposure, ranging from 260 to 4,970 cases per million person-years. Previously thought to be four times less common than BCC, SCC is now only half as common. Unlike BCC, SCC can metastasize, making it potentially dangerous. If removed before metastasis, the survival rate is 99%; after metastasis, it drops to 56%. Typically caught early, SCC has an average survival rate of 95%. Around 2,000 people die from SCC each year in the U.S. Note: unlike more lethal skin cancers, it is not required to report BCC or SCC. Consequently, there is no centralized database tracking their occurrence, so the official figures are largely estimates. Melanoma Melanoma occurs at a rate of 218 cases per million persons annually in the United States, with survival rates ranging from 99% to 35% depending on its stage when diagnosed, averaging out to 94%. However, despite only comprising 1% of all skin cancer diagnoses, Melanoma is responsible for most skin cancer deaths. In total, this works out to a bit over 8000 deaths each year in the United States. Since survival is greatly improved by early detection, many guides online exist to help recognize the common signs of a potential melanoma. What’s critically important to understand about melanoma is that while it’s widely considered to be linked to sunlight exposure—it’s not. For example: Patients with solar elastosis, a sign of sun exposure, were 60% less likely to die from melanoma. Melanoma predominantly occurs in areas of the body with minimal sunlight exposure, unlike SCC and BCC, which are linked to sun-exposed regions. Outdoor workers, despite significantly higher UV exposure, have lower rates of melanoma compared to indoor workers. Many sunscreens contain toxic carcinogens (to the point Hawaii banned them to protect coral reefs). Conversely, existing research indicates widespread sunscreen use has not reduced skin cancer rates. •A mouse study designed to study malignant melanoma found mice kept under simulated daylight develop tumors at a slower and diminished rate compared to those under cool white fluorescent light. There has been a significant increase in many areas from melanoma, something which argues against sunlight being the primary issue as it has not significantly changed in the last few decades. For instance, consider this data from Norway’s cancer registry on malignant melanoma: Note: in addition to these three cancers, other (much rarer) skin cancers also exist, most of which have not been linked to sunlight exposure. The Great Dermatology Scam If you consider the previous section, the following should be fairly clear: •By far the most common “skin cancer” is not dangerous. •The “skin cancers” you actually need to worry about are a fairly small portion of the existing skin cancers. • Sunlight exposure does not cause the most dangerous cancers. In essence, there’s no way to justify “banning sunlight” to “prevent skin cancer,” as the “benefit” from this prescription is vastly outweighed by its harm. However, a very clever linguistic trick bypasses this contradiction—a single label, “skin cancer,” is used for everything, which then selectively adopts the lethality of melanoma, the frequency of BCC, and the sensitivity to sunlight that BCC and SCC have. This has always really infuriated me, so I’ve given a lot of thought to why they do this. Note: a variety of other deceptive linguistic tricks are also utilized by the pharmaceutical company. I am presently working on an article about that was also done with high blood pressure (hypertension). The Transformation of Dermatology In the 1980s, dermatology was one of the least desirable specialties in medicine (e.g., dermatologists were often referred to as pimple poppers). Now however, dermatology is one of the most coveted specialties in medicine as dermatologists make 2-4 times as much as a regular doctor, but have a much less stressful lifestyle. A relatively unknown blog by Dermatologist David J. Elpern, M.D. at last explained what happened: Over the past 40 years, I have witnessed these changes in my specialty and am dismayed by the reluctance of my colleagues to address them. This trend began in the early 1980s when the Academy of Dermatology (AAD) assessed its members over 2 million dollars to hire a prominent New York advertising agency to raise the public’s appreciation of our specialty. The mad men recommended “educating” the public to the fact that dermatologists are skin cancer experts, not just pimple poppers; and so the free National Skin Cancer Screening Day was established [through a 1985 Presidential proclamation]. These screenings serve to inflate the public’s health anxiety about skin cancer and led to the performance of vast amounts of expensive low-value procedures for skin cancer and actinic keratosis (AKs). At the same time, pathologists were expanding their definitions of what a melanoma is, leading to “diagnostic drift” that misleadingly increased the incidence of melanoma while the mortality has remained at 1980 levels. Concomitantly, non-melanoma skin cancers are being over-treated by armies of micrographic surgeons who often treat innocuous skin cancers with unnecessarily aggressive, lucrative surgeries. This heightened awareness led to a dramatic increase in skin cancer screenings and diagnoses, fueled by fears instilled in the public about sun exposure. Alongside this massive sales funnel, there was a significant expansion in the incredibly lucrative Mohs micrographic surgery, promoted as a gold standard for treating skin cancers due to its precision and efficacy in sparing healthy tissue. However, critics argue that Mohs surgery is often overused, driven by financial incentives rather than clinical necessity, contributing to immense healthcare costs. Note: we frequently see patients who developed complications from these surgeries. The commercialization of dermatology was further amplified by the entry of private equity firms into the field. These firms acquired dermatology practices, sometimes staffing them with non-physician providers to maximize profitability. This trend raised concerns about quality of care, with reports of misdiagnoses and over-treatment, particularly in vulnerable populations like nursing home residents—to the point the New York Times authored a 2017 investigation on this exploitative industry. Moreover, the shift towards profit-driven models in dermatology has sparked ethical debates within the medical community. Some dermatologists have voiced concerns over the commodification of skin cancer treatments and the erosion of traditional doctor-patient relationships in favor of more transactional interactions. Despite these challenges, dermatology remains a lucrative field, attracting both medical professionals and investors seeking financial gain from skin care services. Many in turn are victimized by these exploitative practices. The popular comedian Jimmy Dore for example recently covered the Great Dermatology Scam after realizing he’d been subjected to it. After Jimmy Dore’s segment, this story went viral, and as best as I can tell, was seen by between 5 to 10 million people. A few weeks after Dore’s segment, two surveys were released highlighting an “epidemic” of insufficient sun protection which the New York Times then covered (and numerous readers then sent to me since they thought it was a response to my article). Since it was such a classic medical propaganda piece, I will to quote a few lines from it: Two new surveys suggest a troubling trend: Young adults seem to be slacking on sun safety. 14 percent of adults under 35 believed the myth that wearing sunscreen every day is more harmful than direct sun exposure Young adults are often unaware of what sun damage looks like and how best to prevent it Ultraviolet rays — whether from tanning beds or direct sunlight — can damage skin and cause skin cancer, which can be deadly Experts said that Gen Z is uniquely susceptible to misinformation about sunscreen and skin cancer that has proliferated on social media platforms like TikTok. Generously apply — and reapply — sunscreen. UV rays can damage skin even when it’s cloudy or chilly, so experts recommend wearing sunscreen every day. Note: I must emphasize that some skin cancers (e.g., many melanomas) require immediate removal. My point here is not to avoid dermatologists entirely but to consider seeking a second opinion from another dermatologist as there are many excellent and ethical dermatologists out there. Changes in Skin Cancer Given how much is being spent to end skin cancer, one would expect some results. Unfortunately, like many other aspects of the cancer industry that’s not what’s happened. Instead, more and more (previously benign) cancers are diagnosed, but for the most part, no significant change has occurred in the death rate. The best proof for this came from a study which found that almost all of the increase in “skin cancer” was from stage 1 melanomas (which rarely create problems): Another study illustrates exactly what the result of our war on skin cancer has accomplished: Finally, since many suspected the COVID vaccines might lead to an increase in melanoma (or other skin cancers), I compiled all the available annual reports from the American Cancer Society into a few graphs: Conclusion Dermatology’s need to create a villain (the sun) to justify its racket is arguably one of the most damaging things the medical profession has done to the world. Fortunately, the insatiable greed of the medical industry went too far during COVID-19, and the public is now starting to question many of the other exploitative and unscientific practices we are subjected to. It is my sincere hope that our society will begin re-examining dermatology’s disastrous war against the sun. I in turn am incredibly grateful because this new political climate has made it possible to expose a variety of unscrupulous tactics in medicine which have remained largely unchallenged for decades. Author’s note: This is an abbreviated version of a full-length article about Dermatology’s Disastrous War Again the Sun that also discusses safer ways to treat or prevent skin cancer and the nutritional approaches (e.g., avoiding seed oils) which make it possible for the skin to tolerate and be nourished by longer sun exposures. For the entire read with much more specific details and sources, and those approaches please click here. (End of AMD’s quoted article. Link to original: https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dermatologys-horrendous-war-against.) Share To help me continue my work, you may make a one-time gift here: https://ko-fi.com/truth613 https://substack.com/home/post/p-146483737
    SUBSTACK.COM
    Dermatology's Horrendous War Against The Sun, and the True Origins of the American Medical Association
    Untangling Dermatology's Huge Skin Cancer Scam - and deep corruption that enables them to get away with it.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 9018 Views
  • A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    July 7, 2024
    Uncategorized
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021)

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

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

    1. Strengths of the Study

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

    2. Areas for Improvement

    2.1. Overall Presentation

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

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

    2.2. Descriptive Statistics

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

    2.3. Covariates/Confounders

    Multicollinearity

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

    Limited Covariates

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

    Statistical Methods

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

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

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

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

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

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

    3. Conclusion

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

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

    4. References

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

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



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

    by Sarena L. McLean, MSc.

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

    Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key July 7, 2024 Uncategorized By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. The study found an increased risk of death associated with receiving one or two doses of the vaccine, with less clear results for three or four doses. Covariates analyzed included gender, age, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The authors used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios for all-cause mortality and employed Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) and Restricted Mean Time Lost (RMTL) for additional measures of survival and life expectancy (Alessandria et al., p. 4). 1. Strengths of the Study The study used an innovative ITB correction, designed for accurate vaccination impact assessment. Additionally, the use of a large dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System provided a comprehensive dataset for analysis. Importantly, the authors chose to complete an all-cause mortality analysis versus examining COVID-19 death statistics, which are rife with misclassification errors. The all-cause mortality is not only more robust but also captures the impact from other indirect effects of COVID-19 such as delayed medical treatments. 2. Areas for Improvement 2.1. Overall Presentation The article requires clarity, and a few items are missing. For example, when beginning to read the abstract, the authors lay out the analysis problem in general, which is an excellent consideration. However, the authors would best help the reader orient themselves first by providing an overview or context. We know nothing about the work, so help us follow along with you. There is no clear research question, and all reviewers want to see clear hypotheses, objectives, and purpose. I struggled at first to understand the unstratified sample size. Do not make work for the reader is always good advice. There are many indications the authors were innovative and thorough in their approach and diligent in their process. Unfortunately, there were details and explanations missing that created a lot of questions during the review. It is challenging to discern if there are methodological or statistical analysis issues or are simply missing pieces of information creating a conversation about items that are already addressed and valid. The comments below are intended to demonstrate what arose in this review. 2.2. Descriptive Statistics More detailed descriptive statistics are needed to provide context for the study population and their baseline characteristics. These statistics are vital for both lay readers and academics to understand the foundation of the investigation and provide essential information to assess both the statistical approach and interpret the findings. As a health science researcher, I am always looking for the measures of central tendency because I am interested in the distribution of these variables. Additionally, this item relates to the above point about unclear or missing details. The scientific method is predicated on the ability to replicate a study. We are unable to do that in this instance because the information is unclear. For example, I am assuming the authors chose not to provide details about vaccine manufacturers or types of vaccines for a substantial reason. However, there is no discussion about this. We are all challenged by word counts in publishing our work; yet some background and explanatory information is crucial. 2.3. Covariates/Confounders Multicollinearity The study includes several covariates that may have the potential to cause multicollinearity issues. Age and sex are unlikely to present problems. Cancer and infection are only moderately correlated with other conditions, while hypertension and COPD, though more correlated with other comorbidities, are still manageable within the model. However, cardiovascular disease is highly correlated with multiple conditions, notably hypertension and diabetes, which can complicate the analysis. The most significant concerns are diabetes and kidney disease, which are strongly correlated with each other and with other chronic conditions. This high correlation, known as multicollinearity, which can severely impact the stability of the regression coefficients, making it difficult to determine the individual effect of each variable. For example, the study’s regression model might show a misleadingly high effect of vaccination on mortality if the true effect is confounded by the combined impact of diabetes and kidney disease, leading to unreliable results. I would have preferred to read the authors’ comments on the associations among their covariates briefly in prose or shown in a table. Limited Covariates The covariates were limited in this study. This is generally problematic, because it limits the ability to control for factors that can significantly influence health outcomes. Specifically from a social epidemiological perspective, missing covariates highly correlated with poor health outcomes, such as socio-economic status (SES), access to healthcare, and mental health status, can lead to residual confounding where we may miss the opportunity to see what is truly driving the relationship(s) resulting in poor outcomes (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Importantly, these same factors were directly impacted by COVID-19 response measures. For instance, individuals with lower SES often face greater barriers to healthcare access and may have challenging living conditions, which can increase their vulnerability and result in an increase in both the burden of disease, and mortality. The study did include clinical covariates such as chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, kidney diseases, cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 infection status, but broader social determinants of health were overlooked (Alessandria et al., p. 4). Statistical Methods An early question about the model was the exclusion of deaths in the first 2-week time period after vaccination. For example, we know that cardiac death occurs in that time frame; thus, the omission of this time period could impact the results. It was unclear from the paper whether the authors examined and could assure readers that the data met the assumption criteria for the Cox model statistical analysis. The assumption required for a Cox model to be robust and valid is that the hazard ratios for the covariates must be constant over time (Alessandria et al., p. 5-6). Confirming this would be helpful for readers, as it would address concerns about the robustness of the statistical analysis. There is some information in the notes for Table 3, which do demonstrate the authors were addressing this issue along with a reference to the Schoenfeld’s test (Alessandria et al., p. 4). However, in my view, it remains unclear if the assumption is sufficiently addressed, particularly with respect to the confounders. By providing more comprehensive evidence of how the proportional hazards assumption was tested and addressed for each covariate (and confounders) including detailed plots or test statistics and explaining the stratification rationale would strengthen the study’s validity and address concerns effectively. If the proportional hazards assumption is violated in a Cox regression model, it can cause several problems. The estimates of the hazard ratios may be biased, meaning they do not accurately show the true relationship between the covariates and the risk of the event occurring. This can lead to incorrect statistical tests and confidence intervals, causing wrong conclusions about the effects of the covariates. In the context of the study by Alessandria et al., if this assumption is violated, it could compromise the validity of their findings about the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality. The observed effects might be due to changes over time rather than a true relationship, leading to erroneous results. While Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a simplified Cox model do not directly address immortal time bias as comprehensively as the authors’ approach, these methods can be adjusted to partially mitigate ITB. Incorporating time-dependent covariates can help align risk periods correctly. As Tabachnick and Fidell (2013) explain, using time-dependent covariates within Cox regression can effectively handle violations of the proportional hazards assumption, providing more reliable results. The advanced and complex nature of the original analysis, combined with missing or unclear foundational information, such as the research question and descriptive statistics, makes it difficult to determine if the authors’ findings are robust. For example, when reviewing Table 3.0, the covariate ‘Infection’ with SARS-CoV-2 shows hazard ratios of less than 1 compared to the population without infection, which is curious. Amon subjects who had received a single dose, the HR was 0.58, which suggests that the SARS-CoV-2-infected group had 42% lower hazard or risk compared to the non-infected group. I did not find any outcomes listed in the paper that suggested a lower risk made sense given the outcomes referred to are death and COVID-19-related deaths (Alessandria et al., p. 3). Finally, an important suggestion is to clearly state what you are not going to do. It clears up any confusion and lays a boundary for why we do not venture into areas that are beyond the scope and resources we have in our work. Overall, it takes away a critique of the reviewers. 3. Conclusion There could be valuable findings in this study, but the presentation is hindered by insufficient foundational information and very complex data analysis. Simplifying the methods and ensuring clarity in objectives and descriptive statistics would enhance the study’s reliability and accessibility. It would allow the reader to move beyond the initial information without so many questions. In this study, the investigators have been bold to embrace an untraditional statistical approach thus, to truly add to the body of literature, the detail is important. By embracing a more rigorous review process, we uphold the integrity of science and contribute to more reliable and impactful research. For the authors, consider revising the study to address these concerns and recirculate their work. It is innovative yet complex, so clarity is key. I give credit to the authors for stepping out boldly to address gaps in the research. 4. References Alessandria, M. et al. (2024) A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during {COVID}-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province. Microorganisms 12:1343 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson. A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key by Sarena L. McLean, MSc. The study “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province” by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study utilized a retrospective cohort design using a dataset from the Italian National Healthcare System, residents aged 10 and older, from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022 (Alessandria et al., p. 2). The authors aligned follow-up periods to ensure comparability between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, dividing the cohort into groups based on vaccination status: unvaccinated, one dose, two doses, and three or four doses. Read the full report: https://doctors4covidethics.org/a-critical-look-at-a-covid-19-vaccination-study-clarity-is-key/
    DOCTORS4COVIDETHICS.ORG
    A Critical Look at a COVID-19 Vaccination Study: Clarity is Key
    By Sarena L. McLean MSc. (Epidemiology & Biostatistics), Health Sciences Researcher & Member of Doctors for Covid Ethics (2021) The study 'A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province' by Alessandria et al. aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on all-cause mortality while correcting for immortal time bias (ITB). Conducted in the Piedmont region of Italy, the study
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 3149 Views
  • THAT I MAY KNOW HIM![PHP.3:10]

    MERE CRITICISM CAN'T ROOT OUT THE DECAY FROM THE CHURCH TODAY!

    I was reading a message written about 17 years ago,and I came across something that made me wonder if it's true!

    Could it be that when one generation allows God’s house to become empty the next generation pays the price? Could it be that we are in danger of losing our children to the world because we have neglected to show them the power of God at work in and through the Church? These are heavy questions. And I don’t mean to come on too strong this evening, but let us take a good solid look at ourselves.

    The thing is most of us are now into the third generation as Christians. Most of us, my age, can remember our great-grandparents, our grandparents, and our parents. If you are saved and in the church now, it is probably because you had some strong Christian roots that were handed down from your great-grandparents to your grand-parents, to your parents. In other words, you have a background of folk who knew the Lord as their Saviour

    They were people of sacrifice and prayer. They cherished the Touch of God. Many of them blazed the trails. They laid the groundwork for the revival... the fire that consumed both the old and the young of that generation.

    In that sense,we of today, should be weeping, for we owe a great debt to those old soldiers, but the question for us is: “What’s happened to the fire and the sacrifice, and the prayer in us? What will we be leaving for the generation of young men and young women who are coming after us, who are watching what we do and how we act, and what we say, and how we treat one another, and that is if CHRIST JESUS TARRIES?

    Today, we have so allowed the enemy to frustrate the church and individual families that altars that were sacred have been abandoned. Pastors have gone haywire as God's Work became a financial investment. A money making venture. It NEVER was like this, with the likes of the late archbishop Idahosa that championed prosperity teachings. HOLINESS WAS AND SHOULD STILL BE AN UNCOMPROMISED VIRTUE. Holiness shouldn't be relegated to the background because of prosperity. God NEVER said anywhere in His Word that we would be beggars,as long as we maintain our absolute loyalty to Him. And that *loyalty* means obedience.

    Observing our evangelical Zion, I note that we are infected with a debilitating virus that was once confined to those living in the world. Our humour reflects what we watch on television. Consequently, we are growing increasingly coarse and sarcastic in responding to those about us. We defend ourselves in such a way that it appears that we no longer recognise the enemy. We seem to believe that anyone who does not agree with us deserves our scorn, or even our rage. James addresses the tendency of Christians to bring into the new life attitudes which should have been left in the world. We will do well to review his words and learn how to root out rot in our lives;
    19. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
    20. For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
    21. Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. (Jas 1: 19-21)

    Holiness is a concept that is seemingly absent from contemporary religious life. The holiness that is accepted among the saints(including pastors)appears artificial...a pale, insipid imitation of the real thing.
    Our piety is outward; we substitute religious observance for true holiness. The great tragedy of contemporary evangelicals is that we have what has been described as peg-leg religion...we have to strap it on every morning. And we do know that the devil is behind all this and making good use of the opportunity too.

    Please allow me to point out some of the observations I make concerning the absence of holiness.

    There was a day(a time)when modesty in dress and demeanour was a mark of a young woman’s or a young man’s Christian walk. I know that our grandmothers were somewhat fanatical about their dress, but somehow young women today, to say nothing of many older women, are indistinguishable from the world in their dress sense,(just to belong)!

    Perhaps we have forgotten the apostolic admonition that declares, “I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarrelling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works” [1 Timothy 2:8-10]. The Apostle specifically addresses women’s dress, as that is an apparent problem.

    But today,right from kindergarten, parents now dress their children in skimpy worldly attire,all in the name of modernism. When these kids grow up like this, what do we expect from them? And I am talking specifically about supposedly Christian parents...whom should be role models.

    It doesn't end with dress sense and expression.Neither of these observations immediately addresses the lack of gentleness, the absence of civility, or the apparent delight in harbouring hostility that now appears to mark the lives of many of the professed saints of God. We have seen them fight themselves on the electronic,print and even more on social media. Each with their own group of supporters prepared for any kind of showdown. These supporters/followers worship their pastors and not God. The word of their pastors is usually the truth. God help you if you speak evil of their *daddy* in their presence.

    In part, this condition exists and is tolerated, perhaps even fostered, because churches are run like business and congregants generally have a consumer mentality concerning church. Church leaders are too often selected, not on the basis of godliness, but because of their stature in the community, because of their business acumen, according to the size of their portfolio, or by other such criteria that are valued in the world. Congregants are loath to commit themselves to a congregation, and churches are reluctant to hold members accountable to the standards clearly set forth in the Word of God. Attendance at a service is more highly prized than is commitment and submission to the Body of Christ. As result of substituting our own values for godly values, we seldom witness church bodies that are regenerate. What we do witness are churches that are run like business with application of the latest psychological techniques to continue to “grow” the church.

    Pastors are chosen to be administrators instead of being shepherds charged with the ministry of the Word, protecting the flock, oversight of the church, pastoring the people and providing an example in godliness. Consequently, congregations are often ignorant of the Word and of the will of God, and they are frequently unruly in their deportment and conduct. However, Christians usually feel good about themselves, primarily because they are not held accountable for their behaviour and because they see their own behaviour as good as or better than that of the pastor.

    What a tragedy!!! And the devil is gloating over the disaster...but not for long will he gloat, because IT'S BIBLE PROPHECY PLAYING OUT. The most important thing is to be caught on the right side;
    3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
    4. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2Ti 4: 3-4)
    But on which side do we wish to be found...the Lord's side or the devil's side?

    We still have more on this coming by His Grace and Mercy, Amen !
    THAT I MAY KNOW HIM![PHP.3:10] πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯ MERE CRITICISM CAN'T ROOT OUT THE DECAY FROM THE CHURCH TODAY! πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯πŸš₯ I was reading a message written about 17 years ago,and I came across something that made me wonder if it's true! Could it be that when one generation allows God’s house to become empty the next generation pays the price? Could it be that we are in danger of losing our children to the world because we have neglected to show them the power of God at work in and through the Church? These are heavy questions. And I don’t mean to come on too strong this evening, but let us take a good solid look at ourselves. The thing is most of us are now into the third generation as Christians. Most of us, my age, can remember our great-grandparents, our grandparents, and our parents. If you are saved and in the church now, it is probably because you had some strong Christian roots that were handed down from your great-grandparents to your grand-parents, to your parents. In other words, you have a background of folk who knew the Lord as their Saviour They were people of sacrifice and prayer. They cherished the Touch of God. Many of them blazed the trails. They laid the groundwork for the revival... the fire that consumed both the old and the young of that generation. In that sense,we of today, should be weeping, for we owe a great debt to those old soldiers, but the question for us is: “What’s happened to the fire and the sacrifice, and the prayer in us? What will we be leaving for the generation of young men and young women who are coming after us, who are watching what we do and how we act, and what we say, and how we treat one another, and that is if CHRIST JESUS TARRIES? Today, we have so allowed the enemy to frustrate the church and individual families that altars that were sacred have been abandoned. Pastors have gone haywire as God's Work became a financial investment. A money making venture. It NEVER was like this, with the likes of the late archbishop Idahosa that championed prosperity teachings. HOLINESS WAS AND SHOULD STILL BE AN UNCOMPROMISED VIRTUE. Holiness shouldn't be relegated to the background because of prosperity. God NEVER said anywhere in His Word that we would be beggars,as long as we maintain our absolute loyalty to Him. And that *loyalty* means obedience. Observing our evangelical Zion, I note that we are infected with a debilitating virus that was once confined to those living in the world. Our humour reflects what we watch on television. Consequently, we are growing increasingly coarse and sarcastic in responding to those about us. We defend ourselves in such a way that it appears that we no longer recognise the enemy. We seem to believe that anyone who does not agree with us deserves our scorn, or even our rage. James addresses the tendency of Christians to bring into the new life attitudes which should have been left in the world. We will do well to review his words and learn how to root out rot in our lives; 19. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: 20. For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. 21. Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. (Jas 1: 19-21) Holiness is a concept that is seemingly absent from contemporary religious life. The holiness that is accepted among the saints(including pastors)appears artificial...a pale, insipid imitation of the real thing. Our piety is outward; we substitute religious observance for true holiness. The great tragedy of contemporary evangelicals is that we have what has been described as peg-leg religion...we have to strap it on every morning. And we do know that the devil is behind all this and making good use of the opportunity too. Please allow me to point out some of the observations I make concerning the absence of holiness. There was a day(a time)when modesty in dress and demeanour was a mark of a young woman’s or a young man’s Christian walk. I know that our grandmothers were somewhat fanatical about their dress, but somehow young women today, to say nothing of many older women, are indistinguishable from the world in their dress sense,(just to belong)! Perhaps we have forgotten the apostolic admonition that declares, “I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarrelling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works” [1 Timothy 2:8-10]. The Apostle specifically addresses women’s dress, as that is an apparent problem. But today,right from kindergarten, parents now dress their children in skimpy worldly attire,all in the name of modernism. When these kids grow up like this, what do we expect from them? And I am talking specifically about supposedly Christian parents...whom should be role models. It doesn't end with dress sense and expression.Neither of these observations immediately addresses the lack of gentleness, the absence of civility, or the apparent delight in harbouring hostility that now appears to mark the lives of many of the professed saints of God. We have seen them fight themselves on the electronic,print and even more on social media. Each with their own group of supporters prepared for any kind of showdown. These supporters/followers worship their pastors and not God. The word of their pastors is usually the truth. God help you if you speak evil of their *daddy* in their presence. In part, this condition exists and is tolerated, perhaps even fostered, because churches are run like business and congregants generally have a consumer mentality concerning church. Church leaders are too often selected, not on the basis of godliness, but because of their stature in the community, because of their business acumen, according to the size of their portfolio, or by other such criteria that are valued in the world. Congregants are loath to commit themselves to a congregation, and churches are reluctant to hold members accountable to the standards clearly set forth in the Word of God. Attendance at a service is more highly prized than is commitment and submission to the Body of Christ. As result of substituting our own values for godly values, we seldom witness church bodies that are regenerate. What we do witness are churches that are run like business with application of the latest psychological techniques to continue to “grow” the church. Pastors are chosen to be administrators instead of being shepherds charged with the ministry of the Word, protecting the flock, oversight of the church, pastoring the people and providing an example in godliness. Consequently, congregations are often ignorant of the Word and of the will of God, and they are frequently unruly in their deportment and conduct. However, Christians usually feel good about themselves, primarily because they are not held accountable for their behaviour and because they see their own behaviour as good as or better than that of the pastor. What a tragedy!!! And the devil is gloating over the disaster...but not for long will he gloat, because IT'S BIBLE PROPHECY PLAYING OUT. The most important thing is to be caught on the right side; 3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4. And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2Ti 4: 3-4) But on which side do we wish to be found...the Lord's side or the devil's side? We still have more on this coming by His Grace and Mercy, Amen πŸ™‡πŸ™!
    0 Comments 0 Shares 13666 Views
  • Launching Your Own DoorDash: Blueprint for Food Delivery Success

    Discover the essential blueprint for launching a successful food delivery app like DoorDash. Explore key strategies to develop robust features, ensure seamless user experience, and attract a loyal customer base. Learn from the market insights and operational models that have propelled apps like DoorDash to the forefront of the food delivery industry, ensuring your venture stands out in the competitive landscape of food delivery apps.

    READ MORE:
    https://www.techugo.ca/blog/how-to-create-an-app-like-doordash-to-revolutionize-your-food-delivery-business/

    #fooddeliveryappslikedoordash #fooddeliveryappdevelopmentcompany
    #appdevelopmentcompanyincanada
    Launching Your Own DoorDash: Blueprint for Food Delivery Success Discover the essential blueprint for launching a successful food delivery app like DoorDash. Explore key strategies to develop robust features, ensure seamless user experience, and attract a loyal customer base. Learn from the market insights and operational models that have propelled apps like DoorDash to the forefront of the food delivery industry, ensuring your venture stands out in the competitive landscape of food delivery apps. READ MORE: https://www.techugo.ca/blog/how-to-create-an-app-like-doordash-to-revolutionize-your-food-delivery-business/ #fooddeliveryappslikedoordash #fooddeliveryappdevelopmentcompany #appdevelopmentcompanyincanada
    WWW.TECHUGO.CA
    How To Create an App Like DoorDash To Revolutionize Your Food Delivery Business
    If you imagine a seamless platform that unites hungry customers with their favourite eateries, you’re in the right place. But where to start? The process of making food delivery apps like DoorDash is quite an interesting adventure, which, besides being part of enthusiastic teamwork, also needs detailed planning and expertise. That is where a food … Continue reading
    0 Comments 0 Shares 4025 Views
  • The most famous broadcaster in America is Oprah Winfrey. She announced her retirement, and they held a festival honoring her in a football stadium, but the surprise was to discover that she had sponsored 65,000 poor people for a quarter of a century without anyone knowing...

    Many of them attended the stadium and 450 people came out with candles... !
    Five of them were professors at Harvard University who gave a short sermon summarizing it: “If it were not for Oprah, we would now be in a different place than this...”!!!

    One person changes the lives of 65,000 people? And in secret?

    Humanity is not a religion, but rather a rank that some people reach.
    "Socrates".

    Over to Nigerian millionaires and billionaires. Build human capacities instead of competing in building castles and buying exotic vehicles which will become old models in a few years.
    Be an epitome of humanity. Sponsor children of the poor to school
    The most famous broadcaster in America is Oprah Winfrey. She announced her retirement, and they held a festival honoring her in a football stadium, but the surprise was to discover that she had sponsored 65,000 poor people for a quarter of a century without anyone knowing... Many of them attended the stadium and 450 people came out with candles... ! Five of them were professors at Harvard University who gave a short sermon summarizing it: “If it were not for Oprah, we would now be in a different place than this...”!!! One person changes the lives of 65,000 people? And in secret? Humanity is not a religion, but rather a rank that some people reach. "Socrates". Over to Nigerian millionaires and billionaires. Build human capacities instead of competing in building castles and buying exotic vehicles which will become old models in a few years. Be an epitome of humanity. Sponsor children of the poor to school
    0 Comments 0 Shares 6065 Views
  • Electric Vehicle Updates: Innovations, Infrastructure, and Market Trends

    The electric vehicle (EV) market is booming with significant advancements and updates. Several major automakers have recently unveiled new electric models, reflecting the industry's shift towards sustainable transportation. For instance, Tesla announced updates to its Model S and Model X, enhancing battery life and introducing advanced autonomous driving features.

    These developments indicate a promising future for electric vehicles, driven by innovation and a growing commitment to reducing carbon footprints. Stay tuned for more exciting electric vehicle updates in the running industry.

    Visit: https://kilowattjournal.com/
    Electric Vehicle Updates: Innovations, Infrastructure, and Market Trends The electric vehicle (EV) market is booming with significant advancements and updates. Several major automakers have recently unveiled new electric models, reflecting the industry's shift towards sustainable transportation. For instance, Tesla announced updates to its Model S and Model X, enhancing battery life and introducing advanced autonomous driving features. These developments indicate a promising future for electric vehicles, driven by innovation and a growing commitment to reducing carbon footprints. Stay tuned for more exciting electric vehicle updates in the running industry. Visit: https://kilowattjournal.com/
    KILOWATTJOURNAL.COM
    Homepage
    Explore the future of transportation with electric vehicle updates: stay informed on news, trends, and breakthroughs.
    1 Comments 0 Shares 5869 Views
  • New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging

    SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol are considering merging into AltSignals tokens, targeting a $7.5 billion valuation.
    The merger, led by SingularityNET’s Ben Goertzel and Fetch.ai’s Humayun Sheikh, aims to create a decentralized AI alternative.
    Operational independence will be maintained post-merger, reflecting a trend toward democratizing AI access.
    Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to witness a landmark development as three major protocols, SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol, engage in discussions to merge their tokens into a unified AltSignals token (ASI), potentially boasting a fully diluted valuation of $7.5 billion.
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging 2
    Read more: SingularityNET Review: Detailed About The Project, Will It Explode With AI Trend?

    SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol Eye Merger With AltSignals Token
    Bloomberg reported on March 27 that the merger aims to establish a decentralized alternative in the AI domain, countering the dominance of tech giants. Pending community approval, the deal could be officially announced as early as Wednesday.

    The collaborative effort seeks to form the largest open-sourced, independent player in AI research and development, affirming a commitment to capitalizing on the AI surge and fostering decentralized infrastructure at scale. SingularityNET CEO Ben Goertzel is scheduled to lead the newly formed Superintelligence Collective, with Fetch.ai CEO Humayun Sheikh serving as chairman.


    AI Trends Are Attracting Attention
    Despite the merger and the establishment of the AltSignals token, SingularityNET, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol will maintain operational autonomy, operating as distinct entities within the collective. This strategic move underscores a broader industry trend toward democratizing AI access, challenging the dominance of corporate giants like Alphabet and Microsoft.

    The convergence of these leading AI platforms mirrors a broader trend within the crypto market, where entities are increasingly exploring opportunities in AI development. Notably, Tether, a prominent stablecoin issuer, has recently announced plans to venture into open-source AI models, highlighting a growing synergy between AI and blockchain technologies in addressing real-world challenges.
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol are considering merging into AltSignals tokens, targeting a $7.5 billion valuation. The merger, led by SingularityNET’s Ben Goertzel and Fetch.ai’s Humayun Sheikh, aims to create a decentralized AI alternative. Operational independence will be maintained post-merger, reflecting a trend toward democratizing AI access. Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to witness a landmark development as three major protocols, SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol, engage in discussions to merge their tokens into a unified AltSignals token (ASI), potentially boasting a fully diluted valuation of $7.5 billion. New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging 2 Read more: SingularityNET Review: Detailed About The Project, Will It Explode With AI Trend? SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol Eye Merger With AltSignals Token Bloomberg reported on March 27 that the merger aims to establish a decentralized alternative in the AI domain, countering the dominance of tech giants. Pending community approval, the deal could be officially announced as early as Wednesday. The collaborative effort seeks to form the largest open-sourced, independent player in AI research and development, affirming a commitment to capitalizing on the AI surge and fostering decentralized infrastructure at scale. SingularityNET CEO Ben Goertzel is scheduled to lead the newly formed Superintelligence Collective, with Fetch.ai CEO Humayun Sheikh serving as chairman. AI Trends Are Attracting Attention Despite the merger and the establishment of the AltSignals token, SingularityNET, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol will maintain operational autonomy, operating as distinct entities within the collective. This strategic move underscores a broader industry trend toward democratizing AI access, challenging the dominance of corporate giants like Alphabet and Microsoft. The convergence of these leading AI platforms mirrors a broader trend within the crypto market, where entities are increasingly exploring opportunities in AI development. Notably, Tether, a prominent stablecoin issuer, has recently announced plans to venture into open-source AI models, highlighting a growing synergy between AI and blockchain technologies in addressing real-world challenges.
    Like
    1
    1 Comments 0 Shares 16052 Views
  • New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging

    SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol are considering merging into AltSignals tokens, targeting a $7.5 billion valuation.
    The merger, led by SingularityNET’s Ben Goertzel and Fetch.ai’s Humayun Sheikh, aims to create a decentralized AI alternative.
    Operational independence will be maintained post-merger, reflecting a trend toward democratizing AI access.
    Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to witness a landmark development as three major protocols, SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol, engage in discussions to merge their tokens into a unified AltSignals token (ASI), potentially boasting a fully diluted valuation of $7.5 billion.
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging 2
    Read more: SingularityNET Review: Detailed About The Project, Will It Explode With AI Trend?

    SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol Eye Merger With AltSignals Token
    Bloomberg reported on March 27 that the merger aims to establish a decentralized alternative in the AI domain, countering the dominance of tech giants. Pending community approval, the deal could be officially announced as early as Wednesday.

    The collaborative effort seeks to form the largest open-sourced, independent player in AI research and development, affirming a commitment to capitalizing on the AI surge and fostering decentralized infrastructure at scale. SingularityNET CEO Ben Goertzel is scheduled to lead the newly formed Superintelligence Collective, with Fetch.ai CEO Humayun Sheikh serving as chairman.


    AI Trends Are Attracting Attention
    Despite the merger and the establishment of the AltSignals token, SingularityNET, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol will maintain operational autonomy, operating as distinct entities within the collective. This strategic move underscores a broader industry trend toward democratizing AI access, challenging the dominance of corporate giants like Alphabet and Microsoft.

    The convergence of these leading AI platforms mirrors a broader trend within the crypto market, where entities are increasingly exploring opportunities in AI development. Notably, Tether, a prominent stablecoin issuer, has recently announced plans to venture into open-source AI models, highlighting a growing synergy between AI and blockchain technologies in addressing real-world challenges.
    New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol are considering merging into AltSignals tokens, targeting a $7.5 billion valuation. The merger, led by SingularityNET’s Ben Goertzel and Fetch.ai’s Humayun Sheikh, aims to create a decentralized AI alternative. Operational independence will be maintained post-merger, reflecting a trend toward democratizing AI access. Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to witness a landmark development as three major protocols, SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol, engage in discussions to merge their tokens into a unified AltSignals token (ASI), potentially boasting a fully diluted valuation of $7.5 billion. New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging New AltSignals Tokens Could Be Launched With SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Merging 2 Read more: SingularityNET Review: Detailed About The Project, Will It Explode With AI Trend? SingularityNet, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol Eye Merger With AltSignals Token Bloomberg reported on March 27 that the merger aims to establish a decentralized alternative in the AI domain, countering the dominance of tech giants. Pending community approval, the deal could be officially announced as early as Wednesday. The collaborative effort seeks to form the largest open-sourced, independent player in AI research and development, affirming a commitment to capitalizing on the AI surge and fostering decentralized infrastructure at scale. SingularityNET CEO Ben Goertzel is scheduled to lead the newly formed Superintelligence Collective, with Fetch.ai CEO Humayun Sheikh serving as chairman. AI Trends Are Attracting Attention Despite the merger and the establishment of the AltSignals token, SingularityNET, Fetch.ai, and Ocean Protocol will maintain operational autonomy, operating as distinct entities within the collective. This strategic move underscores a broader industry trend toward democratizing AI access, challenging the dominance of corporate giants like Alphabet and Microsoft. The convergence of these leading AI platforms mirrors a broader trend within the crypto market, where entities are increasingly exploring opportunities in AI development. Notably, Tether, a prominent stablecoin issuer, has recently announced plans to venture into open-source AI models, highlighting a growing synergy between AI and blockchain technologies in addressing real-world challenges.
    Like
    3
    1 Comments 0 Shares 15873 Views
  • Academics raise concerns about shortcomings of UK Covid-19 Inquiry
    Maryanne Demasi, PhD

    Over 50 prominent UK academics have signed an open letter to Baroness Heather Hallett, chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, calling for urgent action to address the shortcomings of the probe so far. The signatories of the letter say the Hallett Inquiry suffers from bias, false assumptions, and a lack of impartiality.

    “The Covid Inquiry is not living up to its mission to evaluate the mistakes made during the pandemic, whether Covid measures were appropriate, and to prepare the country for the next pandemic,” they write.

    Kevin Bardosh, lead signatory and Director of Collateral Global has been following the Inquiry closely. He’s concerned it has focused too much on “who said what and when,” rather than homing in on key scientific questions about the evidence (or lack thereof) underpinning policy decisions.


    Prof Kevin Bardosh, Director of Collateral Global. Photo credit: Shutterstock
    “The Inquiry was pre-designed on the assumption that the government ‘didn’t do enough’ to protect people during the pandemic,” says Bardosh. “But the thing about the pandemic is that more measures, didn’t mean more lives saved. It’s a paradoxical aspect of health policy that more doesn't necessarily mean better.

    Bardosh, who is affiliated with University of Edinburgh Medical School, says because the Inquiry’s starting position is that non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g. masks) and lockdowns were necessary and effective, it’s not actually interrogating the trade-offs of these policies.

    “If you go back to pre-Covid, policies like lockdowns, extended school closures, and contact tracing for a respiratory virus, were not the ‘scientific consensus’ for how to respond rationally to a pandemic,” he says. “In fact, the reverse was true. The goal was to minimise the disruption to society because it would have all these short and long-term unintended consequences.”

    In December 2023, when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was questioned at the Inquiry, he admitted the UK government had failed to discuss the costs and benefits of pandemic policies.


    UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunk questioned at UK Covid Inquiry
    Sunak pointed to a peer-reviewed report by Imperial College London and the University of Manchester that applied a Quality-Adjusted Life Year analysis to the first lockdown in the UK and found “for every permutation of lives saved and GDP lost, the costs of lockdown exceed the benefits.” [emphasis added]

    Bardosh has also called out the Inquiry for its double standards in scrutinising experts.

    Take for example, Neil Ferguson, professor at Imperial College and former SAGE member. He was the architect behind lockdowns after his March 2020 models warned that 500,000 Brits would die unless tougher restrictions were put in place to curb spread of the virus.

    Bardosh says, “The Inquiry hasn’t really questioned Ferguson’s mathematical model in any substantial way. But if you compare that to the questioning of Professor Carl Heneghan, who's based out of Oxford, it was very confrontational, and they used provocative language to suggest he didn't have expertise in this area.”

    Heneghan, the director of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, was among 32 senior UK academics who urged then-Prime Minister, Boris Johnson to think twice about plunging Britain into a second lockdown in the autumn of 2020.

    It was revealed during evidence to the Inquiry, that the UK’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Dame Angela McLean, called Heneghan a “fuckwit” on a WhatsApp chat during a September 2020 Government meeting for his dissenting views on lockdowns.


    Prof Carl Heneghan, director of Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine, Oxford
    Later, Heneghan penned a scathing article in The Spectator, calling the Inquiry a ‘farce – a spectacle of hysteria, name-calling and trivialities.”

    “Lockdown was the most disruptive policy in British peacetime history, with huge ramifications for our health, children’s education and the economy,” wrote Heneghan.

    “This is an opportunity for the inquiry to gather evidence and ask whether lockdown and other interventions actually worked….Instead we have a KC [King's Counsel] who seems uninterested in substance and obsessed with reading out rude words he has found in other people’s private messages.”

    Share

    Bardosh and the other signatories have also raised concerns about the structure of the scientific advisory groups in the Inquiry, which have omitted key experts in child development, schooling impacts, social and economic policy.

    “The Inquiry must invite a much broader range of scientific experts with more critical viewpoints. It must also review the evidence on diverse topics so that it can be fully informed of relevant science and the economic and social cost of Covid policies to British society,” write the signatories.

    So far, Bardosh is unimpressed with the ‘political theatre’ of the Inquiry, but hopes Baroness Hallett will urgently address its shortcomings to avoid compromising the credibility of future public inquiries.

    “Not having an inquiry that really asks those questions is very damaging to the idea of accountability. We need to hold to account the policy decisions that were made because if we don’t, the next time there's a public health emergency, these measures will come back into place whether or not they actually work,” says Bardosh.

    The Hallett Inquiry is slated to run until 2026 and is reported to be one of the largest public inquiries in UK history. The cost of the UK government’s covid measures are estimated to be between £310bn and £410bn.


    *Correction: an earlier version of this article said the cost of the Hallett Inquiry was estimated to be between £310bn and £410bn, but that is the estimate for the government’s covid measures.

    Give a gift subscription


    https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/academics-raise-concerns-about-shortcomings
    Academics raise concerns about shortcomings of UK Covid-19 Inquiry Maryanne Demasi, PhD Over 50 prominent UK academics have signed an open letter to Baroness Heather Hallett, chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, calling for urgent action to address the shortcomings of the probe so far. The signatories of the letter say the Hallett Inquiry suffers from bias, false assumptions, and a lack of impartiality. “The Covid Inquiry is not living up to its mission to evaluate the mistakes made during the pandemic, whether Covid measures were appropriate, and to prepare the country for the next pandemic,” they write. Kevin Bardosh, lead signatory and Director of Collateral Global has been following the Inquiry closely. He’s concerned it has focused too much on “who said what and when,” rather than homing in on key scientific questions about the evidence (or lack thereof) underpinning policy decisions. Prof Kevin Bardosh, Director of Collateral Global. Photo credit: Shutterstock “The Inquiry was pre-designed on the assumption that the government ‘didn’t do enough’ to protect people during the pandemic,” says Bardosh. “But the thing about the pandemic is that more measures, didn’t mean more lives saved. It’s a paradoxical aspect of health policy that more doesn't necessarily mean better. Bardosh, who is affiliated with University of Edinburgh Medical School, says because the Inquiry’s starting position is that non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g. masks) and lockdowns were necessary and effective, it’s not actually interrogating the trade-offs of these policies. “If you go back to pre-Covid, policies like lockdowns, extended school closures, and contact tracing for a respiratory virus, were not the ‘scientific consensus’ for how to respond rationally to a pandemic,” he says. “In fact, the reverse was true. The goal was to minimise the disruption to society because it would have all these short and long-term unintended consequences.” In December 2023, when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was questioned at the Inquiry, he admitted the UK government had failed to discuss the costs and benefits of pandemic policies. UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunk questioned at UK Covid Inquiry Sunak pointed to a peer-reviewed report by Imperial College London and the University of Manchester that applied a Quality-Adjusted Life Year analysis to the first lockdown in the UK and found “for every permutation of lives saved and GDP lost, the costs of lockdown exceed the benefits.” [emphasis added] Bardosh has also called out the Inquiry for its double standards in scrutinising experts. Take for example, Neil Ferguson, professor at Imperial College and former SAGE member. He was the architect behind lockdowns after his March 2020 models warned that 500,000 Brits would die unless tougher restrictions were put in place to curb spread of the virus. Bardosh says, “The Inquiry hasn’t really questioned Ferguson’s mathematical model in any substantial way. But if you compare that to the questioning of Professor Carl Heneghan, who's based out of Oxford, it was very confrontational, and they used provocative language to suggest he didn't have expertise in this area.” Heneghan, the director of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, was among 32 senior UK academics who urged then-Prime Minister, Boris Johnson to think twice about plunging Britain into a second lockdown in the autumn of 2020. It was revealed during evidence to the Inquiry, that the UK’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Dame Angela McLean, called Heneghan a “fuckwit” on a WhatsApp chat during a September 2020 Government meeting for his dissenting views on lockdowns. Prof Carl Heneghan, director of Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine, Oxford Later, Heneghan penned a scathing article in The Spectator, calling the Inquiry a ‘farce – a spectacle of hysteria, name-calling and trivialities.” “Lockdown was the most disruptive policy in British peacetime history, with huge ramifications for our health, children’s education and the economy,” wrote Heneghan. “This is an opportunity for the inquiry to gather evidence and ask whether lockdown and other interventions actually worked….Instead we have a KC [King's Counsel] who seems uninterested in substance and obsessed with reading out rude words he has found in other people’s private messages.” Share Bardosh and the other signatories have also raised concerns about the structure of the scientific advisory groups in the Inquiry, which have omitted key experts in child development, schooling impacts, social and economic policy. “The Inquiry must invite a much broader range of scientific experts with more critical viewpoints. It must also review the evidence on diverse topics so that it can be fully informed of relevant science and the economic and social cost of Covid policies to British society,” write the signatories. So far, Bardosh is unimpressed with the ‘political theatre’ of the Inquiry, but hopes Baroness Hallett will urgently address its shortcomings to avoid compromising the credibility of future public inquiries. “Not having an inquiry that really asks those questions is very damaging to the idea of accountability. We need to hold to account the policy decisions that were made because if we don’t, the next time there's a public health emergency, these measures will come back into place whether or not they actually work,” says Bardosh. The Hallett Inquiry is slated to run until 2026 and is reported to be one of the largest public inquiries in UK history. The cost of the UK government’s covid measures are estimated to be between £310bn and £410bn. *Correction: an earlier version of this article said the cost of the Hallett Inquiry was estimated to be between £310bn and £410bn, but that is the estimate for the government’s covid measures. Give a gift subscription https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/academics-raise-concerns-about-shortcomings
    BLOG.MARYANNEDEMASI.COM
    Academics raise concerns about shortcomings of UK Covid-19 Inquiry
    Over 50 prominent UK academics have signed an open letter to Baroness Heather Hallett, chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, calling for urgent action to address the shortcomings of the probe so far. The signatories of the letter say the Hallett Inquiry suffers from bias, false assumptions, and a lack of impartiality.
    1 Comments 0 Shares 9869 Views
  • ‘A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that using 0.9 milliliters of castor oil capsules three times a day had similar effects for knee arthritis as 50 milligrams of diclofenac sodium (5).’

    Castor Oil: Key Health Benefits and How to Use It
    by Dr. Jockers
    FDA Disclaimer
    Affliliate Disclosure
    Privacy Policy
    castor oilCastor Oil: Key Health Benefits and How to Use It

    Castor oil is a fatty oil that is made from the castor seeds of the castor bean plant. Castor oil has many potential health benefits, including relieving constipation, supporting liver health, improving skin health, reducing inflammation, and more.

    In this article, you will learn what castor oil is. You will learn about the health benefits, and I will discuss how to use castor oil. You will learn about the potential risks and how to pick and purchase castor oil. Finally, I will explain how to make a castor oil pack to help improve your health.

    castor oil

    What Is Castor Oil

    Castor seed oil, also known as castor oil or Ricinus Communis, is made by pressing the seeds of the plant to be used for a variety of conventional purposes. It is part of the Eurphorbiaceae plant family, which is a flowering spurge family, mostly cultivated in India, South America, and Africa. Out of these places, India is responsible for about 90 percent of the castor oil global exports.

    It is also among the oldest cultivated crops in the world, making up about 0.15 percent of the world’s vegetable oils. Castor oil has an amber to green color. It has a mild scent and taste. It may be used both topically and orally as a natural remedy for various ailments. It is also used in many cosmetic products sold.




    Castor oil is made up of phytochemicals, including:

    Undecylenic acid
    Ricinoleic acid
    Rincinoleic acid is responsible for about 90 percent of the chemical structure of castor oil. It is a fatty acid that may be responsible for the numerous health properties castor oil is used for in natural and alternative medicine. When ricinoleic acid is released in the intestines, it may bind with receptors that line the intestinal tract and the smooth-muscle cells in the uterus, which may help to promote natural healing abilities (1).

    According to a 2017 review published in the Pakistani Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, castor oil may have many phytochemistry, biological and pharmacological activities, offering natural medicinal benefits (2). It may offer anti-diabetic, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, antioxidant, liver-protective, free radical-scavenging, and wound-healing benefits.



    Health Benefits of Castor Oil

    Castor oil has many potential health benefits. Let’s look at each of these one by one.

    Promotes Lymphatic Drainage

    Castor oil may help to support lymphatic drainage and may help to remove the build-up of toxins and debris in the body. If your body is overloaded with environmental toxins, microbes, and debris, they may accumulate within the lymphatic system, which is responsible for filtering bacteria. This may cause lymphatic stagnation.

    2007 research published in the International Journal of Toxicology has found that injecting rats with castor oil helped to suppress tumors that developed as the result of liver damage. (3). As castor oil gets absorbed through the skin, it may increase blood circulation, lymphatic drainage, and lymphocyte production, which may boost immune health and benefit those with a compromised immune system.

    lymphatic

    Anti-Microbial and Anti-Inflammatory

    Castor oil may also offer anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory benefits. It may be a great massage oil for sore muscles, joints, and tissues. According to a 2000 study published in Mediators of Inflammation, ricinoleic acid in castor oil may offer anti-inflammatory and analgesic benefits (4).

    A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that using 0.9 milliliters of castor oil capsules three times a day had similar effects for knee arthritis as 50 milligrams of diclofenac sodium (5).

    Moreover, castor oil may have immune health-boosting effects by fighting microbes. According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6). When used internally, it may help to relieve constipation, thus elimination, and as a result, the removal of microbes and toxins in the gut.



    Thins Bile and Dilates the Bile Ducts

    Bile is a greenish-brown liquid or digestive juice that emulsifies fats for your small intestine to absorb. It moves from your liver to the gallbladder, and then your body stores it until it needs it for the digestion of food. Bile is essential for digestion and the absorption of nutrients. Problems with bile production, bile flow, and bile acid malabsorption may lead to abdominal pain, bloating, gas, and other digestive issues.

    Using castor oil packs over the abdomen and liver area may not only help liver detoxification but may also help to thin the bile, dilate bile ducts, and improve bile flow. It may also help to relieve painful spasms and cramps of the bile ducts and gallbladder.

    With that said, though anecdotal and personal evidence seems to support that castor oil may benefit bile health, we need more research evidence to back this up.

    castor oil

    Supports Liver Detoxification

    Your liver serves vital functions in the body and is critical for the process of detoxification. The liver helps circulate fluid in the body and transforms toxins into a substance which then can be dissolved, flushed down the bile ducts, relocated into the small intestine, or eliminated through stool.

    Using castor oil packs over the liver area may help to support liver detoxification and liver health and reduce related health symptoms. According to a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine, using castor oil topically may help to support liver function and cholesterol levels (7).

    weaken immunity

    Improves Bowel Motility

    Supporting digestion may be one of the main potential health benefits of castor oil. Castor oil packs may help to improve bowel motility, which means a decreased risk of constipation and fewer digestive issues. According to a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine, using castor oil topically may help to reduce constipation (7).

    According to a 2011 clinical trial published in Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, castor oil packs may help to reduce constipation, straining during bowel movements, and the risk of incomplete bowel movements (8). According to a 2021 pilot study published in the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics, it may help to cleanse the colon before a colonoscopy (9).

    poop, 16 Ways to Achieve Healthy Poop

    Reduces Pain, Swelling and Edema

    Castor oil may also help to reduce pain, swelling, and edema. According to a 2018 study published in Polymers in Advanced Technology, castor oil may help to reduce inflammation pain and support wound healing (10). According to a 2000 study published in Mediators of Inflammation, ricinoleic acid in castor oil may offer anti-inflammatory effects, which may help to decrease pain and swelling (4).

    A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that castor oil may help to reduce symptoms of knee arthritis (5). Thus, it may help to lower pain and swelling linked to this condition.

    Moreover, poor circulation and poor lymphatic flow may increase swelling and edema. Because castor oil may help to support the lymphatic system and circulation, it may also reduce the risk of edema.

    edema

    Improves Circulation and Tissue Oxygenation

    Using castor oil may also help to improve circulation and tissue oxygenation. According to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the lymphatic system may influence the heart, lung, brain, and other organs health (11). By supporting lymphatic circulation, castor oil may help to support the cardiovascular circulatory system and tissue oxygenation too and reduce fluid retention and edema (3).

    Castor oil is also commonly used in wound healing (10). Its wound-healing effects may partly lie in supporting circulation, tissue oxygenation, and blood flow. However, we still need more research on the potential circulatory and tissue-oxygenating benefits of castor oil.

    castor oil

    Supports Healthy Immune Function

    Castor oil may support healthy immune function in a variety of ways. As we already discussed, it may help lymphatic function, which spreads across your entire body and helps to remove excess fluid, protein, and waste (11).

    Castor oil may support lymphatic drainage and blood flow. It may support the production of the lymphocyte white blood cells that fight bacteria, which may assist the health of the thymus gland, which is responsible for creating T cells for the immune system.

    It may also also help to fight and remove microbes from your body. According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6).

    weaken immunity

    Moisturizes Skin

    Castor oil also offers skin-protecting benefits. 100 percent pure castor oil is natural and free of synthetic chemicals. It is rich in healthy fatty acids that may boost skin health. Using it topically may help moisturize your skin, prevent water loss from the skin, reduce dry skin, and improve irritated skin.

    According to 2005 research published in the Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing, it may help the recovery of pressure ulcers and wound healing thanks to its moisturizing and antimicrobial benefits (12). Castor oil may also mix well with coconut oil, almond oil, and olive oil, which are also beneficial for your skin health.



    Supports Wound Healing

    Moisturizing the skin is not the only skin-related potential benefit of castor oil. It has been used to improve wound healing as a natural remedy for a long time. A 2018 study published in Polymers in Advanced Technology has found that it may help to reduce inflammation pain and support wound healing (10). According to a 2005 research published in the Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing, it may help wound and pressure ulcer recovery (12).

    According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6). This may help to reduce infections of the skin, reduce the risk of a staph infection, and support wound healing.

    castor oil

    How to Use Castor Oil

    If you are interested in the potential benefits of castor oil, you may wonder how to use castor oil. Here are some potential options for using castor oil, both topically and orally.

    As a Laxative for Constipation Relief

    You may try castor oil as a laxative for constipation relief, taken orally. The common oral dose to treat constipation is between 15 to 60 mL, as a single dose. This is between one and four tablespoons, taken once a day. For children between 2 and 12, the dose is generally 5 to 15 mL once a day, and for babies under age 2, it’s 5 mL once a day.

    You may mix it in water before drinking it. Always read the directions carefully. Ideally, start on the low end of the dosage and see how your body handles it. Don’t take castor oil internally for more than seven days. And always consult your healthcare practitioner before using it orally. Stop using it if you experience any side effects.

    castor oil

    Support Hair and Eyebrow Growth

    Castor oil may support hair growth and eyebrow growth. For hair growth, you may massage a few tablespoons of castor oil into your scalp and hair, then spread it all over your hair. You may leave it on overnight and wash it out in the morning.

    For your eyebrows, use a cotton swab or a clean mascara and apply a small amount of castor oil over your clean brows for about 20 minutes or longer. You may even apply it before sleep and sleep in it. Clean it with the help of a cotton swab and be careful it doesn’t get into your eyes.



    Reduce Bags Under Eyes

    Castor oil may help to reduce under-eye bags, dark circles, and hyperpigmentation. First, wash your face. Then massage 3 to 4 drops of the oil under your eyes. You may try a carrier oil, such as jojoba, almond, or coconut oil, to dilute it.

    Using your fingertips for massaging works just fine, but you may also use a jade roller. You may leave it on overnight and clean it in the morning gently. Be careful that it doesn’t get into your eyes.



    Improve Skin Health and Dandruff

    Castor oil may offer numerous skin health benefits. For acne, you may apply the oil with a clean cotton swab. You may also mix it with apple cider vinegar, frankincense essential oil, or other essential oils to reduce swelling, inflammation, pain, and scarring. To reduce breakout, you can massage some of the oil into your skin and leave it on for the night, then cleanse it off in the morning.

    For hydration, mix ¼ cup of castor oil and ¾ cup of virgin coconut or olive oil, and apply it on your face or elsewhere on your body. For moisturizing, mix ¼ cup of castor oil with olive oil, coconut oil or jojoba oil. Massage it on your skin, leave it on overnight, then rinse. You may mix one teaspoon of castor oil with one egg yolk for a 10 to 20-minute face mask.

    For sunburns, mix coconut oil and castor oil at a 1 to 1 ratio and apply it on the affected area to reduce inflammation, redness, and pain. For dandruff and scalp issues, massage castor oil into your scalp and leave it on overnight.



    Reduce Joint or Menstrual Pain

    To reduce joint pain, you may massage castor oil into your skin on the affected area as you would with any other pain-relieving cream. About a dime-sized amount, every 3 hours or so may be helpful. Try it for three days for symptom relief.

    For menstrual cramps, you may either massage it on your lower abdomen area or use a castor oil pack. At the end of this article, you will learn about how to make and use a castor oil pack.

    castor oil packs

    Improve Bile Flow and Liver Detoxification

    We know that healthy bile flow is key for eliminating toxins from the liver, digesting and absorbing fats and fat-soluble nutrients and improving the microbial balance in the gut microbiome.

    Castor oil is great for improving bile flow, liver detoxification, and liver function. For this, I recommend using a castor oil pack, which I will explain in more detail at the end of this article.

    castor oil packs

    Contraindications to Using Castor Oil

    Castrol oil is generally recognized as safe. It can also be found in high concentrations in some cosmetics, including lipstick. However, according to 2007 research published in the International Journal of Toxicology, there may be some toxic effects when consumed orally, thus using it orally may not be recommended (3).

    There are currently not enough studies and clinical trials on the benefits and safety of castor oil, thus many doctors are unaware of the potential health benefits and physiological effects. Limited studies and tales of midwifery, including a 2012 report published in PNAS, have reported symptoms of nausea, cramps, and loss of fluid and electrolytes when ingesting the oil (13).

    If you ingest castor oil, it gets broken down by your small intestine into ricinoleic acid. Ricinoleic acid acts as an irritant, which may help to relieve constipation. While this may be good news if you have constipation, this same effect may cause digestive discomfort, diarrhea, and other gastrointestinal side effects in others.

    However, if you have constipation, it may be beneficial, generally by starting with 1 teaspoon in the morning and seeing if you get the relief you need. If not, you can try 2 teaspoons the following morning. This is generally safe. If you notice any pain, discomfort, or side effects, back off.

    Sometimes castor oil is also used by some midwives to help induce labor. However, it is important that you don’t try this at home by yourself, only by the recommendation and with the support of your midwife or healthcare professional.

    However, castor oil is not for everyone. People who should avoid it may include:

    Women who are Pregnant: As I mentioned, sometimes castor oil is actually used to induce labor, and limited research evidence backs this up. This may happen because ricinoleic acid contained in the oil may signal a response from the lining of the uterus. Therefore, castor oil is not recommended for women who are pregnant unless recommended by a doctor to stimulate labor (13).
    Women Experiencing Heavy Menstrual Flow: Women experiencing heavy menstrual bleeding should also avoid the use of castor oil packs during menstruation. Otherwise, these packs may possibly help to ease cramping and regulate a woman’s menstrual cycle.
    Individuals with Gastrointestinal Problems: The ricinoleic acid has been found to interact with the lining of the gastrointestinal tract and can worsen gastrointestinal conditions and increase symptoms or the risk of complications. Individuals experiencing ulcers, diverticulitis, hemorrhoids, and colitis should avoid castor oil packs unless otherwise recommended by a doctor. Other more minor and general gastrointestinal issues such as gas, bloating, cramping, and constipation, generally respond very well to the use of castor oil packs and may be beneficial.
    Individuals with Extreme Skin Sensitivities: Castor oil packs should also not be used by anyone who has any chronic skin conditions with increased skin sensitivities. Individuals with these issues may be at an increased risk of developing a reaction from the topical application of castor oil packs (3).
    castor oil packs

    How to Purchase Castor Oil

    Whether you are looking to buy only castor oil itself or an entire kit for a castor oil pack, you need to look for a high-quality product. I highly recommend and personally use Queen of Thrones castor oil. Dr. Marisol is an expert in castor oil therapy, and she has made it much easier to use this oil with her high-quality products.

    Queen of Thrones offers quality castor oil products, including organic castor oil in a glass jar, which is what I personally use at home. Getting organic castor oil in a glass jar is important because if there is any pesticide residue contained in the oil or plastic residue (phthalates) from the bottle, it can be absorbed through the skin.

    Using high-quality products, like Queen of Thrones may help to prevent this. Use the coupon code DRJOCKERS10 at checkout with Queen of Thrones to save 10%.

    castor oil packs

    How to Make a Castor Oil Pack

    So, how do you make your own castor oil pack? Start by getting some Queen of Thrones, then follow these instructions:

    Before applying a castor oil pack to the skin’s surface, test for skin sensitivity. Rub a small amount of the oil directly onto a limited area of skin to determine if a reaction develops.
    Avoid using electric heat pads without an automatic shut-off following a period of time. According to testimonials, some people had issues falling asleep with ease during castor oil pack treatments. If you choose to get the pieces separately (as opposed to the Queen of Thrones castor oil pack), then here are instructions on how to do them correctly:
    Choose a place where you can lie down comfortably. Cover it with an old towel to avoid damage from dripping oil.
    Use a large enough flannel that’s enough to cover the area you use it on.
    Saturate the flannel with enough oil to make it wet but not dripping.
    Lie down and cover your entire abdomen area with flannel or the specific area, for example, your liver area, you are using it on.
    Cover the flannel with some plastic.
    Put some heating source on top, such as a heating pad, hot water bottle, or hot towel.
    Relax for 45 minutes to 2 hours with the castor oil pack there. Using this time for meditation or breathwork is a great idea, but you may listen to music, read, or watch your favorite show.
    When finished, wash it off with soapy water or a solution of 2 tablespoons of baking soda in a quart of water.
    You can store your pack in the fridge and reuse it later. It’s safe to use until you see a visible change in color.
    Repeat this process at least three times per week for a month for optimal results or as recommended by your health practitioner.
    You will see that it can be a lot of work, and that is why I believe the Queen of Thrones pack makes it much easier to do as it provides the flannel with ties on it, so you don’t need to wrap yourself in plastic! Use the coupon code DRJOCKERS10 at checkout with Queen of Thrones to save 10%.



    Final Thoughts

    Castor oil is a fatty oil that is made from the castor seeds of the castor bean plant. It has many potential health benefits, including relieving constipation, supporting live health, improving skin health, reducing inflammation, and more. I recommend that you follow my tips in this article on how to use this great natural product for your health.

    If you want to work with a functional health coach, I recommend this article with tips on how to find a great coach. Our website offers long-distance functional health coaching programs. For further support with your health goals, just reach out and our fantastic coaches are here to support your journey.



    Inflammation Crushing Ebundle

    The Inflammation Crushing Ebundle is designed to help you improve your brain, liver, immune system and discover the healing strategies, foods and recipes to burn fat, reduce inflammation and Thrive in Life!

    As a doctor of natural medicine, I have spent the past 20 years studying the best healing strategies and worked with hundreds of coaching clients, helping them overcome chronic health conditions and optimize their overall health.

    In our Inflammation Crushing Ebundle, I have put together my very best strategies to reduce inflammation and optimize your healing potential. Take a look at what you will get inside these valuable guides below!

    autoimmune conditions

    Sources In This Article Include:

    1. Tunaru S, et al. Castor_oil induces laxation and uterus contraction via ricinoleic acid activating prostaglandin EP3 receptors. PNAS 2012;109(23):9179-9184. DOI: 1073/pnas.1201627109

    2. Marwat SK, Rehman F, Khan EA, Baloch MS, Sadiq M, Ullah I, Javaria S, Shaheen S. Review – Ricinus cmmunis – Ethnomedicinal uses and pharmacological activities. Pak J Pharm Sci. 2017 Sep;30(5):1815-1827. PMID: 29084706

    3. Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Ricinus Communis (Castor) Seed Oil, Hydrogenated Castor Oil, Glyceryl Ricinoleate, Glyceryl Ricinoleate SE, Ricinoleic Acid, Potassium Ricinoleate, Sodium Ricinoleate, Zinc Ricinoleate, Cetyl Ricinoleate, Ethyl Ricinoleate, Glycol Ricinoleate, Isopropyl Ricinoleate, Methyl Ricinoleate, and Octyldodecyl Ricinoleate. International Journal of Toxiciology. May 2007;26:31-77. DOI: 1080/10915810701663150

    4. Vieira C, Evangelista S, Cirillo R, Lippi A, Maggi CA, Manzini S. Effect of ricinoleic acid in acute and subchronic experimental models of inflammation. Mediators Inflamm. 2000;9(5):223-8. doi: 10.1080/09629350020025737. PMID: 11200362

    5. Medhi B, Kishore K, Singh U, Seth SD. Comparative clinical trial of castor_oil and diclofenac sodium in patients with osteoarthritis. Phytother Res. 2009 Oct;23(10):1469-73. doi: 10.1002/ptr.2804. PMID: 1928853

    6. Al-Mamun MA, Akter Z, Uddin MJ, Ferdaus KM, Hoque KM, Ferdousi Z, Reza MA. Characterization and evaluation of antibacterial and antiproliferative activities of crude protein extracts isolated from the seed of Ricinus communis in Bangladesh. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2016 Jul 12;16:211. doi: 10.1186/s12906-016-1185-y. PMID: 27405609

    7. Evidence for the Topical Application of Castor_Oil.International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine 2012. Link Here

    8. Arslan GG, Eşer I. An examination of the effect of castor_oil packs on constipation in the elderly. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2011 Feb;17(1):58-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2010.04.004. Epub 2010 May 18. PMID: 21168117

    9. Takashima K, Komeda Y, Sakurai T, Masaki S, Nagai T, Matsui S, Hagiwara S, Takenaka M, Nishida N, Kashida H, Nakaji K, Watanabe T, Kudo M. Castor_oil as booster for colon capsule endoscopy preparation reduction: A prospective pilot study and patient questionnaire. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Jul 5;12(4):79-89. doi: 10.4292/wjgpt.v12.i4.79. PMID: 34316385

    10. Nada AA, Arul MR, Ramos DM, Kroneková Z, Mosnáček J, Rudraiah S, Kumbar SG. Bioactive polymeric formulations for wound healing. Polym Adv Technol. 2018 Jun;29(6):1815-1825. doi: 10.1002/pat.4288. Epub 2018 Mar 27. PMID: 30923437

    11. Scientists Seek to Understand Lymphatic System’s Impact on Other Organ SystemsLink Here

    12. Narayanan S, Van Vleet J, Strunk B, Ross RN, Gray M. Comparison of pressure ulcer treatments in long-term care facilities: clinical outcomes and impact on cost. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2005 May-Jun;32(3):163-70. doi: 10.1097/00152192-200505000-00004. PMID: 15931146

    13. Tunaru S, et al. Castor oil induces laxation and uterus contraction via ricinoleic acid activating prostaglandin EP3 receptors. PNAS 2012;109(23):9179-9184. DOI: 1073/pnas.120162710

    colon cancer, Colon Cancer: Symptoms, Causes, and Support Strategies

    Was this article helpful?

    YesNo

    https://drjockers.com/castor-oil-key-health-benefits/
    ‘A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that using 0.9 milliliters of castor oil capsules three times a day had similar effects for knee arthritis as 50 milligrams of diclofenac sodium (5).’ Castor Oil: Key Health Benefits and How to Use It by Dr. Jockers FDA Disclaimer Affliliate Disclosure Privacy Policy castor oilCastor Oil: Key Health Benefits and How to Use It Castor oil is a fatty oil that is made from the castor seeds of the castor bean plant. Castor oil has many potential health benefits, including relieving constipation, supporting liver health, improving skin health, reducing inflammation, and more. In this article, you will learn what castor oil is. You will learn about the health benefits, and I will discuss how to use castor oil. You will learn about the potential risks and how to pick and purchase castor oil. Finally, I will explain how to make a castor oil pack to help improve your health. castor oil What Is Castor Oil Castor seed oil, also known as castor oil or Ricinus Communis, is made by pressing the seeds of the plant to be used for a variety of conventional purposes. It is part of the Eurphorbiaceae plant family, which is a flowering spurge family, mostly cultivated in India, South America, and Africa. Out of these places, India is responsible for about 90 percent of the castor oil global exports. It is also among the oldest cultivated crops in the world, making up about 0.15 percent of the world’s vegetable oils. Castor oil has an amber to green color. It has a mild scent and taste. It may be used both topically and orally as a natural remedy for various ailments. It is also used in many cosmetic products sold. Castor oil is made up of phytochemicals, including: Undecylenic acid Ricinoleic acid Rincinoleic acid is responsible for about 90 percent of the chemical structure of castor oil. It is a fatty acid that may be responsible for the numerous health properties castor oil is used for in natural and alternative medicine. When ricinoleic acid is released in the intestines, it may bind with receptors that line the intestinal tract and the smooth-muscle cells in the uterus, which may help to promote natural healing abilities (1). According to a 2017 review published in the Pakistani Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, castor oil may have many phytochemistry, biological and pharmacological activities, offering natural medicinal benefits (2). It may offer anti-diabetic, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, antioxidant, liver-protective, free radical-scavenging, and wound-healing benefits. Health Benefits of Castor Oil Castor oil has many potential health benefits. Let’s look at each of these one by one. Promotes Lymphatic Drainage Castor oil may help to support lymphatic drainage and may help to remove the build-up of toxins and debris in the body. If your body is overloaded with environmental toxins, microbes, and debris, they may accumulate within the lymphatic system, which is responsible for filtering bacteria. This may cause lymphatic stagnation. 2007 research published in the International Journal of Toxicology has found that injecting rats with castor oil helped to suppress tumors that developed as the result of liver damage. (3). As castor oil gets absorbed through the skin, it may increase blood circulation, lymphatic drainage, and lymphocyte production, which may boost immune health and benefit those with a compromised immune system. lymphatic Anti-Microbial and Anti-Inflammatory Castor oil may also offer anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory benefits. It may be a great massage oil for sore muscles, joints, and tissues. According to a 2000 study published in Mediators of Inflammation, ricinoleic acid in castor oil may offer anti-inflammatory and analgesic benefits (4). A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that using 0.9 milliliters of castor oil capsules three times a day had similar effects for knee arthritis as 50 milligrams of diclofenac sodium (5). Moreover, castor oil may have immune health-boosting effects by fighting microbes. According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6). When used internally, it may help to relieve constipation, thus elimination, and as a result, the removal of microbes and toxins in the gut. Thins Bile and Dilates the Bile Ducts Bile is a greenish-brown liquid or digestive juice that emulsifies fats for your small intestine to absorb. It moves from your liver to the gallbladder, and then your body stores it until it needs it for the digestion of food. Bile is essential for digestion and the absorption of nutrients. Problems with bile production, bile flow, and bile acid malabsorption may lead to abdominal pain, bloating, gas, and other digestive issues. Using castor oil packs over the abdomen and liver area may not only help liver detoxification but may also help to thin the bile, dilate bile ducts, and improve bile flow. It may also help to relieve painful spasms and cramps of the bile ducts and gallbladder. With that said, though anecdotal and personal evidence seems to support that castor oil may benefit bile health, we need more research evidence to back this up. castor oil Supports Liver Detoxification Your liver serves vital functions in the body and is critical for the process of detoxification. The liver helps circulate fluid in the body and transforms toxins into a substance which then can be dissolved, flushed down the bile ducts, relocated into the small intestine, or eliminated through stool. Using castor oil packs over the liver area may help to support liver detoxification and liver health and reduce related health symptoms. According to a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine, using castor oil topically may help to support liver function and cholesterol levels (7). weaken immunity Improves Bowel Motility Supporting digestion may be one of the main potential health benefits of castor oil. Castor oil packs may help to improve bowel motility, which means a decreased risk of constipation and fewer digestive issues. According to a 2012 systematic review published in the International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine, using castor oil topically may help to reduce constipation (7). According to a 2011 clinical trial published in Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, castor oil packs may help to reduce constipation, straining during bowel movements, and the risk of incomplete bowel movements (8). According to a 2021 pilot study published in the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pharmacology and Therapeutics, it may help to cleanse the colon before a colonoscopy (9). poop, 16 Ways to Achieve Healthy Poop Reduces Pain, Swelling and Edema Castor oil may also help to reduce pain, swelling, and edema. According to a 2018 study published in Polymers in Advanced Technology, castor oil may help to reduce inflammation pain and support wound healing (10). According to a 2000 study published in Mediators of Inflammation, ricinoleic acid in castor oil may offer anti-inflammatory effects, which may help to decrease pain and swelling (4). A 2009 randomized controlled trial published in Phytotherapy Research has found that castor oil may help to reduce symptoms of knee arthritis (5). Thus, it may help to lower pain and swelling linked to this condition. Moreover, poor circulation and poor lymphatic flow may increase swelling and edema. Because castor oil may help to support the lymphatic system and circulation, it may also reduce the risk of edema. edema Improves Circulation and Tissue Oxygenation Using castor oil may also help to improve circulation and tissue oxygenation. According to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the lymphatic system may influence the heart, lung, brain, and other organs health (11). By supporting lymphatic circulation, castor oil may help to support the cardiovascular circulatory system and tissue oxygenation too and reduce fluid retention and edema (3). Castor oil is also commonly used in wound healing (10). Its wound-healing effects may partly lie in supporting circulation, tissue oxygenation, and blood flow. However, we still need more research on the potential circulatory and tissue-oxygenating benefits of castor oil. castor oil Supports Healthy Immune Function Castor oil may support healthy immune function in a variety of ways. As we already discussed, it may help lymphatic function, which spreads across your entire body and helps to remove excess fluid, protein, and waste (11). Castor oil may support lymphatic drainage and blood flow. It may support the production of the lymphocyte white blood cells that fight bacteria, which may assist the health of the thymus gland, which is responsible for creating T cells for the immune system. It may also also help to fight and remove microbes from your body. According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6). weaken immunity Moisturizes Skin Castor oil also offers skin-protecting benefits. 100 percent pure castor oil is natural and free of synthetic chemicals. It is rich in healthy fatty acids that may boost skin health. Using it topically may help moisturize your skin, prevent water loss from the skin, reduce dry skin, and improve irritated skin. According to 2005 research published in the Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing, it may help the recovery of pressure ulcers and wound healing thanks to its moisturizing and antimicrobial benefits (12). Castor oil may also mix well with coconut oil, almond oil, and olive oil, which are also beneficial for your skin health. Supports Wound Healing Moisturizing the skin is not the only skin-related potential benefit of castor oil. It has been used to improve wound healing as a natural remedy for a long time. A 2018 study published in Polymers in Advanced Technology has found that it may help to reduce inflammation pain and support wound healing (10). According to a 2005 research published in the Journal of Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nursing, it may help wound and pressure ulcer recovery (12). According to a 2016 study published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, it may help to fight a variety of different types of bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6). This may help to reduce infections of the skin, reduce the risk of a staph infection, and support wound healing. castor oil How to Use Castor Oil If you are interested in the potential benefits of castor oil, you may wonder how to use castor oil. Here are some potential options for using castor oil, both topically and orally. As a Laxative for Constipation Relief You may try castor oil as a laxative for constipation relief, taken orally. The common oral dose to treat constipation is between 15 to 60 mL, as a single dose. This is between one and four tablespoons, taken once a day. For children between 2 and 12, the dose is generally 5 to 15 mL once a day, and for babies under age 2, it’s 5 mL once a day. You may mix it in water before drinking it. Always read the directions carefully. Ideally, start on the low end of the dosage and see how your body handles it. Don’t take castor oil internally for more than seven days. And always consult your healthcare practitioner before using it orally. Stop using it if you experience any side effects. castor oil Support Hair and Eyebrow Growth Castor oil may support hair growth and eyebrow growth. For hair growth, you may massage a few tablespoons of castor oil into your scalp and hair, then spread it all over your hair. You may leave it on overnight and wash it out in the morning. For your eyebrows, use a cotton swab or a clean mascara and apply a small amount of castor oil over your clean brows for about 20 minutes or longer. You may even apply it before sleep and sleep in it. Clean it with the help of a cotton swab and be careful it doesn’t get into your eyes. Reduce Bags Under Eyes Castor oil may help to reduce under-eye bags, dark circles, and hyperpigmentation. First, wash your face. Then massage 3 to 4 drops of the oil under your eyes. You may try a carrier oil, such as jojoba, almond, or coconut oil, to dilute it. Using your fingertips for massaging works just fine, but you may also use a jade roller. You may leave it on overnight and clean it in the morning gently. Be careful that it doesn’t get into your eyes. Improve Skin Health and Dandruff Castor oil may offer numerous skin health benefits. For acne, you may apply the oil with a clean cotton swab. You may also mix it with apple cider vinegar, frankincense essential oil, or other essential oils to reduce swelling, inflammation, pain, and scarring. To reduce breakout, you can massage some of the oil into your skin and leave it on for the night, then cleanse it off in the morning. For hydration, mix ¼ cup of castor oil and ¾ cup of virgin coconut or olive oil, and apply it on your face or elsewhere on your body. For moisturizing, mix ¼ cup of castor oil with olive oil, coconut oil or jojoba oil. Massage it on your skin, leave it on overnight, then rinse. You may mix one teaspoon of castor oil with one egg yolk for a 10 to 20-minute face mask. For sunburns, mix coconut oil and castor oil at a 1 to 1 ratio and apply it on the affected area to reduce inflammation, redness, and pain. For dandruff and scalp issues, massage castor oil into your scalp and leave it on overnight. Reduce Joint or Menstrual Pain To reduce joint pain, you may massage castor oil into your skin on the affected area as you would with any other pain-relieving cream. About a dime-sized amount, every 3 hours or so may be helpful. Try it for three days for symptom relief. For menstrual cramps, you may either massage it on your lower abdomen area or use a castor oil pack. At the end of this article, you will learn about how to make and use a castor oil pack. castor oil packs Improve Bile Flow and Liver Detoxification We know that healthy bile flow is key for eliminating toxins from the liver, digesting and absorbing fats and fat-soluble nutrients and improving the microbial balance in the gut microbiome. Castor oil is great for improving bile flow, liver detoxification, and liver function. For this, I recommend using a castor oil pack, which I will explain in more detail at the end of this article. castor oil packs Contraindications to Using Castor Oil Castrol oil is generally recognized as safe. It can also be found in high concentrations in some cosmetics, including lipstick. However, according to 2007 research published in the International Journal of Toxicology, there may be some toxic effects when consumed orally, thus using it orally may not be recommended (3). There are currently not enough studies and clinical trials on the benefits and safety of castor oil, thus many doctors are unaware of the potential health benefits and physiological effects. Limited studies and tales of midwifery, including a 2012 report published in PNAS, have reported symptoms of nausea, cramps, and loss of fluid and electrolytes when ingesting the oil (13). If you ingest castor oil, it gets broken down by your small intestine into ricinoleic acid. Ricinoleic acid acts as an irritant, which may help to relieve constipation. While this may be good news if you have constipation, this same effect may cause digestive discomfort, diarrhea, and other gastrointestinal side effects in others. However, if you have constipation, it may be beneficial, generally by starting with 1 teaspoon in the morning and seeing if you get the relief you need. If not, you can try 2 teaspoons the following morning. This is generally safe. If you notice any pain, discomfort, or side effects, back off. Sometimes castor oil is also used by some midwives to help induce labor. However, it is important that you don’t try this at home by yourself, only by the recommendation and with the support of your midwife or healthcare professional. However, castor oil is not for everyone. People who should avoid it may include: Women who are Pregnant: As I mentioned, sometimes castor oil is actually used to induce labor, and limited research evidence backs this up. This may happen because ricinoleic acid contained in the oil may signal a response from the lining of the uterus. Therefore, castor oil is not recommended for women who are pregnant unless recommended by a doctor to stimulate labor (13). Women Experiencing Heavy Menstrual Flow: Women experiencing heavy menstrual bleeding should also avoid the use of castor oil packs during menstruation. Otherwise, these packs may possibly help to ease cramping and regulate a woman’s menstrual cycle. Individuals with Gastrointestinal Problems: The ricinoleic acid has been found to interact with the lining of the gastrointestinal tract and can worsen gastrointestinal conditions and increase symptoms or the risk of complications. Individuals experiencing ulcers, diverticulitis, hemorrhoids, and colitis should avoid castor oil packs unless otherwise recommended by a doctor. Other more minor and general gastrointestinal issues such as gas, bloating, cramping, and constipation, generally respond very well to the use of castor oil packs and may be beneficial. Individuals with Extreme Skin Sensitivities: Castor oil packs should also not be used by anyone who has any chronic skin conditions with increased skin sensitivities. Individuals with these issues may be at an increased risk of developing a reaction from the topical application of castor oil packs (3). castor oil packs How to Purchase Castor Oil Whether you are looking to buy only castor oil itself or an entire kit for a castor oil pack, you need to look for a high-quality product. I highly recommend and personally use Queen of Thrones castor oil. Dr. Marisol is an expert in castor oil therapy, and she has made it much easier to use this oil with her high-quality products. Queen of Thrones offers quality castor oil products, including organic castor oil in a glass jar, which is what I personally use at home. Getting organic castor oil in a glass jar is important because if there is any pesticide residue contained in the oil or plastic residue (phthalates) from the bottle, it can be absorbed through the skin. Using high-quality products, like Queen of Thrones may help to prevent this. Use the coupon code DRJOCKERS10 at checkout with Queen of Thrones to save 10%. castor oil packs How to Make a Castor Oil Pack So, how do you make your own castor oil pack? Start by getting some Queen of Thrones, then follow these instructions: Before applying a castor oil pack to the skin’s surface, test for skin sensitivity. Rub a small amount of the oil directly onto a limited area of skin to determine if a reaction develops. Avoid using electric heat pads without an automatic shut-off following a period of time. According to testimonials, some people had issues falling asleep with ease during castor oil pack treatments. If you choose to get the pieces separately (as opposed to the Queen of Thrones castor oil pack), then here are instructions on how to do them correctly: Choose a place where you can lie down comfortably. Cover it with an old towel to avoid damage from dripping oil. Use a large enough flannel that’s enough to cover the area you use it on. Saturate the flannel with enough oil to make it wet but not dripping. Lie down and cover your entire abdomen area with flannel or the specific area, for example, your liver area, you are using it on. Cover the flannel with some plastic. Put some heating source on top, such as a heating pad, hot water bottle, or hot towel. Relax for 45 minutes to 2 hours with the castor oil pack there. Using this time for meditation or breathwork is a great idea, but you may listen to music, read, or watch your favorite show. When finished, wash it off with soapy water or a solution of 2 tablespoons of baking soda in a quart of water. You can store your pack in the fridge and reuse it later. It’s safe to use until you see a visible change in color. Repeat this process at least three times per week for a month for optimal results or as recommended by your health practitioner. You will see that it can be a lot of work, and that is why I believe the Queen of Thrones pack makes it much easier to do as it provides the flannel with ties on it, so you don’t need to wrap yourself in plastic! Use the coupon code DRJOCKERS10 at checkout with Queen of Thrones to save 10%. Final Thoughts Castor oil is a fatty oil that is made from the castor seeds of the castor bean plant. It has many potential health benefits, including relieving constipation, supporting live health, improving skin health, reducing inflammation, and more. I recommend that you follow my tips in this article on how to use this great natural product for your health. If you want to work with a functional health coach, I recommend this article with tips on how to find a great coach. Our website offers long-distance functional health coaching programs. For further support with your health goals, just reach out and our fantastic coaches are here to support your journey. Inflammation Crushing Ebundle The Inflammation Crushing Ebundle is designed to help you improve your brain, liver, immune system and discover the healing strategies, foods and recipes to burn fat, reduce inflammation and Thrive in Life! As a doctor of natural medicine, I have spent the past 20 years studying the best healing strategies and worked with hundreds of coaching clients, helping them overcome chronic health conditions and optimize their overall health. In our Inflammation Crushing Ebundle, I have put together my very best strategies to reduce inflammation and optimize your healing potential. Take a look at what you will get inside these valuable guides below! autoimmune conditions Sources In This Article Include: 1. Tunaru S, et al. Castor_oil induces laxation and uterus contraction via ricinoleic acid activating prostaglandin EP3 receptors. PNAS 2012;109(23):9179-9184. DOI: 1073/pnas.1201627109 2. Marwat SK, Rehman F, Khan EA, Baloch MS, Sadiq M, Ullah I, Javaria S, Shaheen S. Review – Ricinus cmmunis – Ethnomedicinal uses and pharmacological activities. Pak J Pharm Sci. 2017 Sep;30(5):1815-1827. PMID: 29084706 3. Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Ricinus Communis (Castor) Seed Oil, Hydrogenated Castor Oil, Glyceryl Ricinoleate, Glyceryl Ricinoleate SE, Ricinoleic Acid, Potassium Ricinoleate, Sodium Ricinoleate, Zinc Ricinoleate, Cetyl Ricinoleate, Ethyl Ricinoleate, Glycol Ricinoleate, Isopropyl Ricinoleate, Methyl Ricinoleate, and Octyldodecyl Ricinoleate. International Journal of Toxiciology. May 2007;26:31-77. DOI: 1080/10915810701663150 4. Vieira C, Evangelista S, Cirillo R, Lippi A, Maggi CA, Manzini S. Effect of ricinoleic acid in acute and subchronic experimental models of inflammation. Mediators Inflamm. 2000;9(5):223-8. doi: 10.1080/09629350020025737. PMID: 11200362 5. Medhi B, Kishore K, Singh U, Seth SD. Comparative clinical trial of castor_oil and diclofenac sodium in patients with osteoarthritis. Phytother Res. 2009 Oct;23(10):1469-73. doi: 10.1002/ptr.2804. PMID: 1928853 6. Al-Mamun MA, Akter Z, Uddin MJ, Ferdaus KM, Hoque KM, Ferdousi Z, Reza MA. Characterization and evaluation of antibacterial and antiproliferative activities of crude protein extracts isolated from the seed of Ricinus communis in Bangladesh. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2016 Jul 12;16:211. doi: 10.1186/s12906-016-1185-y. PMID: 27405609 7. Evidence for the Topical Application of Castor_Oil.International Journal of Naturopathic Medicine 2012. Link Here 8. Arslan GG, Eşer I. An examination of the effect of castor_oil packs on constipation in the elderly. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2011 Feb;17(1):58-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2010.04.004. Epub 2010 May 18. PMID: 21168117 9. Takashima K, Komeda Y, Sakurai T, Masaki S, Nagai T, Matsui S, Hagiwara S, Takenaka M, Nishida N, Kashida H, Nakaji K, Watanabe T, Kudo M. Castor_oil as booster for colon capsule endoscopy preparation reduction: A prospective pilot study and patient questionnaire. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Jul 5;12(4):79-89. doi: 10.4292/wjgpt.v12.i4.79. PMID: 34316385 10. Nada AA, Arul MR, Ramos DM, Kroneková Z, Mosnáček J, Rudraiah S, Kumbar SG. Bioactive polymeric formulations for wound healing. Polym Adv Technol. 2018 Jun;29(6):1815-1825. doi: 10.1002/pat.4288. Epub 2018 Mar 27. PMID: 30923437 11. Scientists Seek to Understand Lymphatic System’s Impact on Other Organ SystemsLink Here 12. Narayanan S, Van Vleet J, Strunk B, Ross RN, Gray M. Comparison of pressure ulcer treatments in long-term care facilities: clinical outcomes and impact on cost. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2005 May-Jun;32(3):163-70. doi: 10.1097/00152192-200505000-00004. PMID: 15931146 13. Tunaru S, et al. Castor oil induces laxation and uterus contraction via ricinoleic acid activating prostaglandin EP3 receptors. PNAS 2012;109(23):9179-9184. DOI: 1073/pnas.120162710 colon cancer, Colon Cancer: Symptoms, Causes, and Support Strategies Was this article helpful? YesNo https://drjockers.com/castor-oil-key-health-benefits/
    DRJOCKERS.COM
    Castor Oil: Key Health Benefits and How to Use It
    Castor oil has many potential health benefits, including relieving constipation, supporting liver and skin health and much more.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 35672 Views
  • Dallas - Exclusive Brunette European Model in Central London https://bit.ly/49D9p7O

    #BabylonGirls #LondonModels #LondonModel #EuropeanModels #BrunetteModels #TattooedModels #YoungModels
    Dallas - Exclusive Brunette European Model in Central London https://bit.ly/49D9p7O #BabylonGirls #LondonModels #LondonModel #EuropeanModels #BrunetteModels #TattooedModels #YoungModels
    0 Comments 0 Shares 5982 Views
  • Welcome to our new SoMee Social account!

    Please visit our website: https://www.babylongirls.co.uk

    #London #BabylonGirls #LondonModels #LondonGirls #ModelsAgency
    Welcome to our new SoMee Social account! 😊 Please visit our website: https://www.babylongirls.co.uk #London #BabylonGirls #LondonModels #LondonGirls #ModelsAgency
    0 Comments 0 Shares 4935 Views
  • What’s The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the ‘New Nazis’ | VT Foreign Policy
    February 2, 2024
    VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel

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

    What’s The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the ‘New Nazis’

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/01/no-no-not-new-nazis-by-zahir-ebrahim.html

    Zahir Ebrahim

    January 17, 2009*

    Background Summary

    This is Part-3 of the series of articles on Israel-Palestine I composed especially for VT. Part-3 is my ongoing exposure of what’s taboo in Western press due to the fact that Israel is the new ruling state in the world. Ruling state has the following definition: a state that dictates to the world including through its surrogates and client states, but none can dictate to it; a ruling state does whatever it wants and its slavish clients and prostitute states support it in every way imaginable.

    Part-1 was: Israel’s Barbarianism – How can Israel get away with it? ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2023/11/press-release-israels-barbarianism );

    Part-2 was: 100 Years of Balfour Declaration and Continuing ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/100-years-of-balfour-declaration-and-continuing/ ).

    This third part was previously published in 2009 during Israel’s inhuman assault on Gaza… This latest incarnation assault on Gaza which began on Oct 7, 2023, is in continuation of the long held Zionist premeditated policy of Palestinian population transfer, ethnic cleansing, intermingled with genocidal impulses whenever the holy Jews can get away with it. This latest barbarian assault by Israel was based on the pretext that was an outright MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose), not a LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), nor a “surprise attack” as Israel and her obliging Western surrogates have propagandized, duly echoed by their Uncle Toms and Aunty Thomases throughout the world’s mass media.

    I called it as such on October 8, 2023, the moment I heard about it in the news, in a series of private emails to some friends and journalists, including VT’s own venerable senior editor and my internet-confrere in common cause of justice of many years, Dr. Kevin Barrett, who wrote on VT on October 30, 2023: Why I Support Hamas – And you should too ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2023/10/why-i-support-hamas/ ).

    Not being a “Doctor” of anything, nor a college professor, as far as I perceive matters as a common man who can reason based on empiricism, and who is not given to presuppositions based on whim, dogma, tribal or religious and cultural affiliations, Hamas is complicit in, or actual part of, this MIHOP operation of Israel. In other words, Hamas was either made a useful idiot by Israel, or is still an asset of Israel just as it was at its inception. The Oct 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, was no more a surprise attack on Israel than Pearl Harbor was on the United States. It was a calculated premeditated creation of legal pretext for what followed. The difference only being MIHOP vs LIHOP. 9/11 too was a MIHOP operation by the United States to create legal pretext using a range of patsies and side shows. Israel did the same. Subsequently, more evidence that Israel may have even had other pecuniary motivations to attack Gaza have been revealed in an oped by Kevin Barrett himself on January 25, 2024, leaving his already dubious support of Hamas even more absurd and unexplainable as to how did Israel get Hamas to become its patsy to enable realize that motivation : Israel Committing Genocide to Steal Gaza’s Gas? – Al-Jazeera cites Western alternative media outlets Global Research and Mondoweiss (see https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/israel-committing-genocide-to-steal-gazas-gas/ ). Contrary to what Jews might think, not all goy are dumb ass.

    The hair-splitting by the goy of Jews being different from Zionists, is the stupidity of goy to not face up to empirical realism. The actual reality is even more perverse. The Jews and Zionism are in fact being used by the same oligarchic powers that used Militant Islam, before that Soviet Communism and Nazi Socialism, to create world wars and controlled conflict, pitting plebe human beings – the common rank and file – against each other under the sound of trumpets. This will be the topics of subsequent parts – all of which are already deeply researched essays in my books (see links for Part 1 & 2) – how the Jews themselves have been indoctrinated into becoming the useful idiots of Zionism, and just as diabolically harvested to construct a single one-world global empire of the oligarchy as other patsies. But as Zionist zombie mass murderers, useful idiots or not, they still cannot escape culpability any more than the Nazis could, nor Germany could, but only under victor’s justice. The honest conscionable Jew who distances himself / herself from the primacy of Israel and settler colonialism of Zionism are part of us goyem in principle as human beings first. The rest are enemies of humankind no different than any villainous mass murderers, including those aliased as Muslims under the imperial label of Militant Islam manufactured by empire as a Hegelian Dialectic (see my book: Hijacking The Holy Qur’an And Its Religion Islam – Muslims and Imperial Mobilization, 2nd Edition 2015, https://tinyurl.com/Islam2e ).

    The fact that the Jews of Israel under Zionism are indoctrinated trigger-pullers of oligarchic masters behind the scenes absolves neither them nor their godfathers who own Israel outright, from their genocidal crimes against humanity. Palestinians are just the canary in the coal mine. The same fate lies in store for all Untermensch on the planet in every country on the new road to The Great Reset that is birth-panging a new global dystopic world order to be administered from the New Ruling State of the world. Not by the Jews of Prophet Moses. But by the atheist
    satanic Khazarian financial Oligarchy with pretenses of being God’s Chosen People from the Abrahamic clan. Yeah, not a dumb goy! And neither should you be taken in by the ploy to make goy stupid and fight amongst ourselves. All that’s needed is a bit of commonsense and the ability to reason away from attractive authority figures. Not college degrees.

    2009 Article Begins

    In reference to the short article by Alan Hart “The New Nazis<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.alanhart.net/the-new-nazis/>” in which he described the mechanics of a possible “Zionist Holocaust” upon the Palestinians, reaching the somewhat belated realization that it was high time that he called the Israelis by their real nom de guerre, “the New Nazis”, I would say he is sadly mistaken in his choice of labels. The Israeli Jews are not the New Nazis. It is convenient to associate them to something abhorrent but irrelevant. What relevance does Nazism have today? None whatsoever. But the more direct relevance to the Settling of the United States of America is not to be drawn – for that might be a wee bit too relevant and uncomfortable.

    President George W. Bush for once had truthfully blurted out the grotesque reality-space while on the 60th birthday-bash visit to Zionistan

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/05/celebrating-israels-60th-birthday.html

    “Our two nations both faced great challenges when they were founded. And our two nations have both relied on the same principles to help us succeed.”

    The core-principle being, the outright elimination of indigenous peoples, wherein, “the very same army that had recently conquered and occupied the Southern states – led by Generals Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan – mass murdered Indian men, women, and children during the winters, when families would be together, with massive Gatling gun and artillery fire. In a letter to his son a year before he died (1889), Sherman expressed his regret that his armies did not murder every last Indian in North America.”

    The Pious self-righteous Jews of Israel, atheist or orthodox, don’t intend to make the ‘Sherman mistake’ in Palestine! They have noted it time and again that “We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel … Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours.”

    But the Jews’ narrative of Holocaust is what remains the most profound and sacred obsession of the ‘civilized’ West – a perennial “mystery whose parallel may only be the one of Sinai when something was revealed.”. And for their detractors, it is merely the New Nazism – when the tortuous reality is located in Washington, in London, in the Pentagon, in EU, and in the massive control of world’s financial systems through the international banksters that is held in the hands of world Jewry!

    So isn’t it rather convenient not to draw upon any of these associations and linkages of support for Israel which is what, in fact, props up that pariah state in Palestine? I must admit I am sometimes guilty of sugar-coating the Zionists as the ‘New Nazis’ myself. But that’s an emotional response based on years of watching Hollywood World War II movies where such labeling of a suitably demonized foe simply falls into the consciousness for associating anything grotesque. A more intellectually honest and empirically accurate depiction of Zionism however, and its power base among the world Jewry, renders an entirely new meaning to the now hackneyed term ‘banality of evil’. The support network of Israel is systemic enough, and its aspirations endemic enough, to make Hannah Arendth turn in her grave.

    The second glossing over by Alan Hart is in his expression of fear of the Zionist Holocaust upon the Palestinians, where he unwittingly absolves the world Jewry of their direct involvement with Israel: “unless enough Israelis and the Jews of the world are prepared to acknowledge that a terrible wrong was done to the Palestinians by Zionism (the few) in the name of all Jews.”
    That statement has no basis in reality. It is not just “Zionism (the few) in the name of all Jews”, but the direct and active participation of most of world Jewry in the Israel project.
    Here are two short excerpts from two very different perspectives. They explain the afore-stated point much better than I can today, emotionally drained that I am watching the systematic and deliberate killing of children, women, men, and anything that lives, in Gaza which conjures up the image of the gatling-gun set loose upon the defenseless native American Indians by Sherman.
    The first excerpt is from the 1996 memoirs of Brigadier Syed A. I. Tirmazi, SI (M), Director of ISI, Pakistan, titled ‘Profiles of Intelligence’, Chapter 3, pages 45-46. Under the subsection titled “Why did the ISI not intervene to save Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto if they knew he was being murdered”, the top spymaster of Pakistan during ZAB’s and his executioner General Zia ul Haq’s era, writes (and do pay particular attention to the last paragraph, emphasis mine):

    Begin Excerpt (Profiles of Intelligence)

    … It would be fair to ask what we [the ISI] did to counter the US machinations? Well we did not, and could not do any thing beyond reporting to the highest authority in the country. There are reasons for our inaction:

    One, neither the ISI nor the IB is designed or equipped to counter the machinations of a Super Power.

    Two, an important factor is our own price. A lot has been said and written by some of our American friends about the price of a Pakistani. Dr. Andrew V. Corry, US Counsel General at Lahore, once said, “Price of a Pakistani oscillates between a free trip to the US and a bottle of whisky.” He may not be too far wrong. We did observe some highly placed Pakistanis selling their conscience, prestige, dignity and self-respect for a small price.

    Three, in order to bring the taking of appropriate counter measures within the ambit of ISI functions, a revolutionary reorientation of minds at the national level and of the systems and institutions at the State level becomes imperative. Are we, as a nation, and as we stand today, morally capable of bringing about such a change in our attitudes and our thinking? I believe we are not. I also believe that the day we acquire the capability, it will mark the end of all our problems, troubles and misfortunes. We will learn to manage out affairs ourselves.

    Four, probably, the most formidable hurdle in the way to our self-respect and self-reliance is the breed of salable ‘elite’ among us. Specimens of this breed are available in all models and also in abundance. They are active in many deceptive and diversionary forms to ‘strike a deal’ at the cost of our vital national interests. Is there a remedy for this cancerous growth?

    Five, many of our countrymen would not cooperate with the C.I. men. My study on the Israeli Intelligence revealed that, apart from other elements, a major factor for their successes has been the cooperation that a Mossad man gets from the Jews. It claimed that a Jew, in any corner of the world, whenever approached by an Israeli Intelligence agent, would provide him with maximum help and assistance. (pages 45-46)

    End Excerpt

    The second excerpt is from the recent book of a former Israeli Jew who served with the IDF, turned Christian pacifist, Israel Adam Shamir. He writes in the Introduction of his book “Masters of Discourse”, an eloquent politically incorrect exposition of the relationship of the world Jewry to Israel. I had previously quoted from that book in my “Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/06/letter-to-palestinian-intellectuals.html>”, and here is the excerpt from that letter:

    Begin Excerpt (Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals by Project Humanbeingsfirst)

    This is also why the exponents of Israel entirely control the global discourse on Israel-Palestine throughout the world, even among the ruling elite in the Muslim nations, not to mention among the Palestinian ruling elite itself, none of which reflects either any deep comprehension of the manifest reality on the ground, or the aspirations of the Palestinian masses. These are the Masters of Discourse, and a far more formidable foe across the world’s Jewry than the Palestinians seem to apprehend – as they continually losingly engage the foot soldiers among their antagonists and not the real power-wielders!

    Israel Shamir notes in the English Introduction to his new book

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Masters-Discourse-Israel-Shamir/dp/1419692437

    the following veritable truth which must by now be self-evident to all who are able to comprehend the power of the concept of “Der Judenstaadt” on the global Jewish psyche which carries upon its bent backs, the weight of three thousand years of history

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=avh6dkSop0EC&dq=Israel+Shahak&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=Lu84cAhe0q&sig=Z2SGKxTq0rxAlKDwnFsSA-eLR7U

    (also Jewish History, Jewish Religion

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-History-Religion-Thousand-Eastern/dp/0745308198>):

    The new Jewish elite did not fully identify with Russia but carried out a separate policy. It had a fateful effect in 1991, when over 50 % of the Jews (as opposed to 13 % of the Russians) supported the pro-Western coup of President Yeltsin. In 1995, 81% of the Jews voted for pro-Western parties, and only 3% for the Communists (as opposed to 46% of Russians), according to the publication by the Jewish sociologist Dr. Ryvkina in her book, Jews in Post-Soviet Russia (1996).

    In ever-expanding America, the Jews did not have to kill or remove the native elites; they became its important part, controlling discourse and wielding considerable financial clout. They still do not identify with the goyish America: they force the Congress and the Administration to send billions of dollars to their Israeli offshoot, they forced the US to break Iraq to pieces, and now they are trying to let America fight their war in Iran, though it brings disaster to America. They do discriminate against other Americans; otherwise 60% of the leading positions in the media would not become Jewish.

    Jews of France do not identify with France, either. “Their identification with Israel is so strong, it overshadows their ties to the country they live in,” writes Daniel Ben Simon in Haaretz. This dual loyalty was made very clear to me by a Jewish doctor in Nice. “If the choice is between Israel and France, there’s no question I feel closer to Israel,” he said, without a moment’s hesitation. He was born and bred in France; he went to medical school in France; his patients are French; he speaks French with his wife and children. But in the depths of his heart, he feels a greater affinity with the Jewish state.

    In Palestine, the Jews have no compassion for the natives. They travel by segregated roads, study in segregated schools, while a Jew consumes ten times more water resources than a goy, and has an income seven times higher. Thus, the Jewish separateness remains a fact of life for many Jewish communities.

    While the Palestinian intellectual and revolutionary need not adopt the discourse of European anti-Semitism – cousins as they are of their oppressors – they do need to comprehend the immense psychological and sociological power of that discourse, and the power of the world Jewry in sustaining the Jewish State because of it. The significance of this statement is made evident by the fact that this discourse prevailed upon not only the very Evangelical Christian American President George W. Bush, but also the Christian Prime Minister of Germany, Angela Merkel, the Christian Prime Minister of France, Nicholas Sarkozy**, the Roman Catholic Christian Prime Minister of Italy, Silvio Berlusconi, and the Christian Prime Minister of Britain, Gordon Brown, along with the Queen of England, representing the world’s most powerful Christian coalition of Western Hegemons, to pay homage to Jewish Zionistan on May 15, 2008

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3540751,00.html.

    None showed up, even in false courtesy, to offer their feeble condolences for the Nakba to what remains of the Palestinian Reservations!

    End Excerpt

    And this state of affairs was finally admitted to by the Palestinian journalist based in Ramallah, Khalid Amayreh. Writing from Ramallah for the Palestinian Information Center, he was finally forced to acknowledge the grotesque reality of this Jewish power in his article “When it comes to Israel , Europe is hypocritical, submissive and obsequious

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://tinyurl.com/4n3rxb.

    Excerpting from the same Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals, where I had quoted Khalid Amayreh:

    Begin Excerpt

    In comparison to the madman in the White House, Europe may look less bellicose, less confrontational and less unreasonable in its overall approach to contentious international issues. However, when the issue is the Palestinian plight, the US and Europe look very much like tweedledee and tweedledum.

    In recent months and years, European leaders from Germany’s Merkel, to France’s Sarkozy, to Britain’s Brown and Italy’s Berlusconi were shamelessly pandering to Israeli savagery to the extent of embracing relentless Israeli criminality against the Palestinian people , including the ongoing genocidal ethnic cleansing in the occupied Palestinian territories, particularly in the Gaza Strip.

    True, the European tone of speech often sounds less odious especially when compared with the unmitigated saber-rattling coming from Washington. But, in the final analysis, the outcome in both cases is similar. In fact, the US and Europe collaborate and even collude to effect the same unethical goals often by playing the old game of Mutt and Jeff (good cop and bad cop), with their persecuted victims, whether in Palestine, Sudan or Iran.

    End Excerpt

    The points being made here are admittedly nuanced and subtle, but crucial and fundamental nevertheless in correctly identifying the monster that feeds on Blood-Sacrifice of the Palestinians. The Zionists are not following in the footsteps of the Nazis, although they are certainly using many of the Nazi tactics. They are following in the veritable footsteps of the United States of America, and are religiously principled in their not making the ‘Sherman mistake’. This is empirically so blatantly obvious that even the conscionable among the Israeli Jews reluctantly admit it. The late Tanya Reinhart, professor of linguistics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, noted in her 2002 book “How to end the war of 1948

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Palestine-How-End-1948/dp/1583225382 :

    “The state of Israel founded in 1948 following a war which the Israelis call the War of Independence, and the Palestinians call the Nakba – the catastrophe. A haunted, persecuted people sought to find a shelter and a state for itself, and did so at a horrible price to another people. During the war of 1948, more than half of the Palestinian population at the time – 1,380,000 people – were driven off their homeland by the Israeli army. Though Israel officially claimed that a majority of refugees fled and were not expelled, it still refused to allow them to return, as a UN resolution demanded shortly after 1948 war. Thus, the Israeli land was obtained through ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian inhabitants. This is not a process unfamiliar in history. Israel’s actions remain incomparable to the massive ethnic cleansing of Native Americans by the settlers and government of the United states.”

    The world Jewry is in on the game of conquest, in many different guises, with many different incantations of power, and with full spectrum political and financial support. The biggest support to Israel comes from the United States Congress and the Federal Government, financially, politically, militarily, as well as legally. Just witness this mind numbing Antiboycott Compliance

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.bis.doc.gov/complianceandenforcement/antiboycottcompliance.htm

    bureau especially constructed for Israel’s sake. It states:

    “The Bureau is charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain Moslem countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.”

    So what is this red herring of calling Israelis “The New Nazis”, without also calling its parent the Fourth Reich? Further evidence of sophisticated and rather devilish support of Israel may be gleaned in Project Humanbeingsfirst’s report “The endless trial of red herrings

    https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/03/endless-red-herrings.html “.

    The day the World Jewry asserts that they will live equitably in a single-state with the indigenous Palestinians, with restoration of full right of return to the displaced and their progeny, and fair compensation for pain and suffering that is due all the native populations of Palestine and their progeny for cataclysmic upheaval inflicted upon them since the first World Jewish Congress meeting in Basle Switzerland in 1896, then that very fine day, the Shoah of the Palestinians will miraculously end.

    Such a fair and just articulation of demand is more than the mere recognition of great wrongs being done the Palestinians. It is of no less measure, both quantitatively as well as qualitatively, than what the Jews have themselves extracted with their specialized and incomprehensible Holocaust narrative from the world.

    Let the Palestinian people not be sold short by those who claim to support them – even if they be Palestinian themselves! Their ruling elite has already sold the beleaguered people down the drain of ineptitude and corruption. Let their friends, unwittingly, not do the same.

    Thank you.

    * Footnote: Excerpts from this article first appeared as comment on January 18, 2009 on former Pakistani-Canadian journalist Abidullah Jan’s famous (now defunct) dictatorshipwatch.com:

    https://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/cacheof-the-undeniable-nazism-and-holocaust-in-our-age-dw-abidullahjan-zahir-comment-january182009.pdf<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/https://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/cacheof-the-undeniable-nazism-and-holocaust-in-our-age-dw-abidullahjan-zahir-comment-january182009.pdf>



    ATTENTION READERS

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

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

    https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/02/whats-the-difference-between-jews-and-zionists-no-no-not-the-new-nazis/

    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/whats-difference-between-jews-and.html

    https://telegra.ph/Whats-The-Difference-Between-Jews-and-Zionists-No-No--Not-the-New-Nazis--VT-Foreign-Policy-03-10
    What’s The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the ‘New Nazis’ | VT Foreign Policy February 2, 2024 VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State. What’s The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the ‘New Nazis’ https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/01/no-no-not-new-nazis-by-zahir-ebrahim.html Zahir Ebrahim January 17, 2009* Background Summary This is Part-3 of the series of articles on Israel-Palestine I composed especially for VT. Part-3 is my ongoing exposure of what’s taboo in Western press due to the fact that Israel is the new ruling state in the world. Ruling state has the following definition: a state that dictates to the world including through its surrogates and client states, but none can dictate to it; a ruling state does whatever it wants and its slavish clients and prostitute states support it in every way imaginable. Part-1 was: Israel’s Barbarianism – How can Israel get away with it? ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2023/11/press-release-israels-barbarianism ); Part-2 was: 100 Years of Balfour Declaration and Continuing ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/100-years-of-balfour-declaration-and-continuing/ ). This third part was previously published in 2009 during Israel’s inhuman assault on Gaza… This latest incarnation assault on Gaza which began on Oct 7, 2023, is in continuation of the long held Zionist premeditated policy of Palestinian population transfer, ethnic cleansing, intermingled with genocidal impulses whenever the holy Jews can get away with it. This latest barbarian assault by Israel was based on the pretext that was an outright MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose), not a LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), nor a “surprise attack” as Israel and her obliging Western surrogates have propagandized, duly echoed by their Uncle Toms and Aunty Thomases throughout the world’s mass media. I called it as such on October 8, 2023, the moment I heard about it in the news, in a series of private emails to some friends and journalists, including VT’s own venerable senior editor and my internet-confrere in common cause of justice of many years, Dr. Kevin Barrett, who wrote on VT on October 30, 2023: Why I Support Hamas – And you should too ( https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2023/10/why-i-support-hamas/ ). Not being a “Doctor” of anything, nor a college professor, as far as I perceive matters as a common man who can reason based on empiricism, and who is not given to presuppositions based on whim, dogma, tribal or religious and cultural affiliations, Hamas is complicit in, or actual part of, this MIHOP operation of Israel. In other words, Hamas was either made a useful idiot by Israel, or is still an asset of Israel just as it was at its inception. The Oct 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, was no more a surprise attack on Israel than Pearl Harbor was on the United States. It was a calculated premeditated creation of legal pretext for what followed. The difference only being MIHOP vs LIHOP. 9/11 too was a MIHOP operation by the United States to create legal pretext using a range of patsies and side shows. Israel did the same. Subsequently, more evidence that Israel may have even had other pecuniary motivations to attack Gaza have been revealed in an oped by Kevin Barrett himself on January 25, 2024, leaving his already dubious support of Hamas even more absurd and unexplainable as to how did Israel get Hamas to become its patsy to enable realize that motivation : Israel Committing Genocide to Steal Gaza’s Gas? – Al-Jazeera cites Western alternative media outlets Global Research and Mondoweiss (see https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/israel-committing-genocide-to-steal-gazas-gas/ ). Contrary to what Jews might think, not all goy are dumb ass. The hair-splitting by the goy of Jews being different from Zionists, is the stupidity of goy to not face up to empirical realism. The actual reality is even more perverse. The Jews and Zionism are in fact being used by the same oligarchic powers that used Militant Islam, before that Soviet Communism and Nazi Socialism, to create world wars and controlled conflict, pitting plebe human beings – the common rank and file – against each other under the sound of trumpets. This will be the topics of subsequent parts – all of which are already deeply researched essays in my books (see links for Part 1 & 2) – how the Jews themselves have been indoctrinated into becoming the useful idiots of Zionism, and just as diabolically harvested to construct a single one-world global empire of the oligarchy as other patsies. But as Zionist zombie mass murderers, useful idiots or not, they still cannot escape culpability any more than the Nazis could, nor Germany could, but only under victor’s justice. The honest conscionable Jew who distances himself / herself from the primacy of Israel and settler colonialism of Zionism are part of us goyem in principle as human beings first. The rest are enemies of humankind no different than any villainous mass murderers, including those aliased as Muslims under the imperial label of Militant Islam manufactured by empire as a Hegelian Dialectic (see my book: Hijacking The Holy Qur’an And Its Religion Islam – Muslims and Imperial Mobilization, 2nd Edition 2015, https://tinyurl.com/Islam2e ). The fact that the Jews of Israel under Zionism are indoctrinated trigger-pullers of oligarchic masters behind the scenes absolves neither them nor their godfathers who own Israel outright, from their genocidal crimes against humanity. Palestinians are just the canary in the coal mine. The same fate lies in store for all Untermensch on the planet in every country on the new road to The Great Reset that is birth-panging a new global dystopic world order to be administered from the New Ruling State of the world. Not by the Jews of Prophet Moses. But by the atheist satanic Khazarian financial Oligarchy with pretenses of being God’s Chosen People from the Abrahamic clan. Yeah, not a dumb goy! And neither should you be taken in by the ploy to make goy stupid and fight amongst ourselves. All that’s needed is a bit of commonsense and the ability to reason away from attractive authority figures. Not college degrees. 2009 Article Begins In reference to the short article by Alan Hart “The New Nazis<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.alanhart.net/the-new-nazis/>” in which he described the mechanics of a possible “Zionist Holocaust” upon the Palestinians, reaching the somewhat belated realization that it was high time that he called the Israelis by their real nom de guerre, “the New Nazis”, I would say he is sadly mistaken in his choice of labels. The Israeli Jews are not the New Nazis. It is convenient to associate them to something abhorrent but irrelevant. What relevance does Nazism have today? None whatsoever. But the more direct relevance to the Settling of the United States of America is not to be drawn – for that might be a wee bit too relevant and uncomfortable. President George W. Bush for once had truthfully blurted out the grotesque reality-space while on the 60th birthday-bash visit to Zionistan https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/05/celebrating-israels-60th-birthday.html “Our two nations both faced great challenges when they were founded. And our two nations have both relied on the same principles to help us succeed.” The core-principle being, the outright elimination of indigenous peoples, wherein, “the very same army that had recently conquered and occupied the Southern states – led by Generals Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan – mass murdered Indian men, women, and children during the winters, when families would be together, with massive Gatling gun and artillery fire. In a letter to his son a year before he died (1889), Sherman expressed his regret that his armies did not murder every last Indian in North America.” The Pious self-righteous Jews of Israel, atheist or orthodox, don’t intend to make the ‘Sherman mistake’ in Palestine! They have noted it time and again that “We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel … Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours.” But the Jews’ narrative of Holocaust is what remains the most profound and sacred obsession of the ‘civilized’ West – a perennial “mystery whose parallel may only be the one of Sinai when something was revealed.”. And for their detractors, it is merely the New Nazism – when the tortuous reality is located in Washington, in London, in the Pentagon, in EU, and in the massive control of world’s financial systems through the international banksters that is held in the hands of world Jewry! So isn’t it rather convenient not to draw upon any of these associations and linkages of support for Israel which is what, in fact, props up that pariah state in Palestine? I must admit I am sometimes guilty of sugar-coating the Zionists as the ‘New Nazis’ myself. But that’s an emotional response based on years of watching Hollywood World War II movies where such labeling of a suitably demonized foe simply falls into the consciousness for associating anything grotesque. A more intellectually honest and empirically accurate depiction of Zionism however, and its power base among the world Jewry, renders an entirely new meaning to the now hackneyed term ‘banality of evil’. The support network of Israel is systemic enough, and its aspirations endemic enough, to make Hannah Arendth turn in her grave. The second glossing over by Alan Hart is in his expression of fear of the Zionist Holocaust upon the Palestinians, where he unwittingly absolves the world Jewry of their direct involvement with Israel: “unless enough Israelis and the Jews of the world are prepared to acknowledge that a terrible wrong was done to the Palestinians by Zionism (the few) in the name of all Jews.” That statement has no basis in reality. It is not just “Zionism (the few) in the name of all Jews”, but the direct and active participation of most of world Jewry in the Israel project. Here are two short excerpts from two very different perspectives. They explain the afore-stated point much better than I can today, emotionally drained that I am watching the systematic and deliberate killing of children, women, men, and anything that lives, in Gaza which conjures up the image of the gatling-gun set loose upon the defenseless native American Indians by Sherman. The first excerpt is from the 1996 memoirs of Brigadier Syed A. I. Tirmazi, SI (M), Director of ISI, Pakistan, titled ‘Profiles of Intelligence’, Chapter 3, pages 45-46. Under the subsection titled “Why did the ISI not intervene to save Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto if they knew he was being murdered”, the top spymaster of Pakistan during ZAB’s and his executioner General Zia ul Haq’s era, writes (and do pay particular attention to the last paragraph, emphasis mine): Begin Excerpt (Profiles of Intelligence) … It would be fair to ask what we [the ISI] did to counter the US machinations? Well we did not, and could not do any thing beyond reporting to the highest authority in the country. There are reasons for our inaction: One, neither the ISI nor the IB is designed or equipped to counter the machinations of a Super Power. Two, an important factor is our own price. A lot has been said and written by some of our American friends about the price of a Pakistani. Dr. Andrew V. Corry, US Counsel General at Lahore, once said, “Price of a Pakistani oscillates between a free trip to the US and a bottle of whisky.” He may not be too far wrong. We did observe some highly placed Pakistanis selling their conscience, prestige, dignity and self-respect for a small price. Three, in order to bring the taking of appropriate counter measures within the ambit of ISI functions, a revolutionary reorientation of minds at the national level and of the systems and institutions at the State level becomes imperative. Are we, as a nation, and as we stand today, morally capable of bringing about such a change in our attitudes and our thinking? I believe we are not. I also believe that the day we acquire the capability, it will mark the end of all our problems, troubles and misfortunes. We will learn to manage out affairs ourselves. Four, probably, the most formidable hurdle in the way to our self-respect and self-reliance is the breed of salable ‘elite’ among us. Specimens of this breed are available in all models and also in abundance. They are active in many deceptive and diversionary forms to ‘strike a deal’ at the cost of our vital national interests. Is there a remedy for this cancerous growth? Five, many of our countrymen would not cooperate with the C.I. men. My study on the Israeli Intelligence revealed that, apart from other elements, a major factor for their successes has been the cooperation that a Mossad man gets from the Jews. It claimed that a Jew, in any corner of the world, whenever approached by an Israeli Intelligence agent, would provide him with maximum help and assistance. (pages 45-46) End Excerpt The second excerpt is from the recent book of a former Israeli Jew who served with the IDF, turned Christian pacifist, Israel Adam Shamir. He writes in the Introduction of his book “Masters of Discourse”, an eloquent politically incorrect exposition of the relationship of the world Jewry to Israel. I had previously quoted from that book in my “Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2008/06/letter-to-palestinian-intellectuals.html>”, and here is the excerpt from that letter: Begin Excerpt (Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals by Project Humanbeingsfirst) This is also why the exponents of Israel entirely control the global discourse on Israel-Palestine throughout the world, even among the ruling elite in the Muslim nations, not to mention among the Palestinian ruling elite itself, none of which reflects either any deep comprehension of the manifest reality on the ground, or the aspirations of the Palestinian masses. These are the Masters of Discourse, and a far more formidable foe across the world’s Jewry than the Palestinians seem to apprehend – as they continually losingly engage the foot soldiers among their antagonists and not the real power-wielders! Israel Shamir notes in the English Introduction to his new book https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Masters-Discourse-Israel-Shamir/dp/1419692437 the following veritable truth which must by now be self-evident to all who are able to comprehend the power of the concept of “Der Judenstaadt” on the global Jewish psyche which carries upon its bent backs, the weight of three thousand years of history https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=avh6dkSop0EC&dq=Israel+Shahak&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=Lu84cAhe0q&sig=Z2SGKxTq0rxAlKDwnFsSA-eLR7U (also Jewish History, Jewish Religion https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-History-Religion-Thousand-Eastern/dp/0745308198>): The new Jewish elite did not fully identify with Russia but carried out a separate policy. It had a fateful effect in 1991, when over 50 % of the Jews (as opposed to 13 % of the Russians) supported the pro-Western coup of President Yeltsin. In 1995, 81% of the Jews voted for pro-Western parties, and only 3% for the Communists (as opposed to 46% of Russians), according to the publication by the Jewish sociologist Dr. Ryvkina in her book, Jews in Post-Soviet Russia (1996). In ever-expanding America, the Jews did not have to kill or remove the native elites; they became its important part, controlling discourse and wielding considerable financial clout. They still do not identify with the goyish America: they force the Congress and the Administration to send billions of dollars to their Israeli offshoot, they forced the US to break Iraq to pieces, and now they are trying to let America fight their war in Iran, though it brings disaster to America. They do discriminate against other Americans; otherwise 60% of the leading positions in the media would not become Jewish. Jews of France do not identify with France, either. “Their identification with Israel is so strong, it overshadows their ties to the country they live in,” writes Daniel Ben Simon in Haaretz. This dual loyalty was made very clear to me by a Jewish doctor in Nice. “If the choice is between Israel and France, there’s no question I feel closer to Israel,” he said, without a moment’s hesitation. He was born and bred in France; he went to medical school in France; his patients are French; he speaks French with his wife and children. But in the depths of his heart, he feels a greater affinity with the Jewish state. In Palestine, the Jews have no compassion for the natives. They travel by segregated roads, study in segregated schools, while a Jew consumes ten times more water resources than a goy, and has an income seven times higher. Thus, the Jewish separateness remains a fact of life for many Jewish communities. While the Palestinian intellectual and revolutionary need not adopt the discourse of European anti-Semitism – cousins as they are of their oppressors – they do need to comprehend the immense psychological and sociological power of that discourse, and the power of the world Jewry in sustaining the Jewish State because of it. The significance of this statement is made evident by the fact that this discourse prevailed upon not only the very Evangelical Christian American President George W. Bush, but also the Christian Prime Minister of Germany, Angela Merkel, the Christian Prime Minister of France, Nicholas Sarkozy**, the Roman Catholic Christian Prime Minister of Italy, Silvio Berlusconi, and the Christian Prime Minister of Britain, Gordon Brown, along with the Queen of England, representing the world’s most powerful Christian coalition of Western Hegemons, to pay homage to Jewish Zionistan on May 15, 2008 https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3540751,00.html. None showed up, even in false courtesy, to offer their feeble condolences for the Nakba to what remains of the Palestinian Reservations! End Excerpt And this state of affairs was finally admitted to by the Palestinian journalist based in Ramallah, Khalid Amayreh. Writing from Ramallah for the Palestinian Information Center, he was finally forced to acknowledge the grotesque reality of this Jewish power in his article “When it comes to Israel , Europe is hypocritical, submissive and obsequious https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://tinyurl.com/4n3rxb. Excerpting from the same Open Letter to Palestinian Intellectuals, where I had quoted Khalid Amayreh: Begin Excerpt In comparison to the madman in the White House, Europe may look less bellicose, less confrontational and less unreasonable in its overall approach to contentious international issues. However, when the issue is the Palestinian plight, the US and Europe look very much like tweedledee and tweedledum. In recent months and years, European leaders from Germany’s Merkel, to France’s Sarkozy, to Britain’s Brown and Italy’s Berlusconi were shamelessly pandering to Israeli savagery to the extent of embracing relentless Israeli criminality against the Palestinian people , including the ongoing genocidal ethnic cleansing in the occupied Palestinian territories, particularly in the Gaza Strip. True, the European tone of speech often sounds less odious especially when compared with the unmitigated saber-rattling coming from Washington. But, in the final analysis, the outcome in both cases is similar. In fact, the US and Europe collaborate and even collude to effect the same unethical goals often by playing the old game of Mutt and Jeff (good cop and bad cop), with their persecuted victims, whether in Palestine, Sudan or Iran. End Excerpt The points being made here are admittedly nuanced and subtle, but crucial and fundamental nevertheless in correctly identifying the monster that feeds on Blood-Sacrifice of the Palestinians. The Zionists are not following in the footsteps of the Nazis, although they are certainly using many of the Nazi tactics. They are following in the veritable footsteps of the United States of America, and are religiously principled in their not making the ‘Sherman mistake’. This is empirically so blatantly obvious that even the conscionable among the Israeli Jews reluctantly admit it. The late Tanya Reinhart, professor of linguistics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, noted in her 2002 book “How to end the war of 1948 https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Palestine-How-End-1948/dp/1583225382 : “The state of Israel founded in 1948 following a war which the Israelis call the War of Independence, and the Palestinians call the Nakba – the catastrophe. A haunted, persecuted people sought to find a shelter and a state for itself, and did so at a horrible price to another people. During the war of 1948, more than half of the Palestinian population at the time – 1,380,000 people – were driven off their homeland by the Israeli army. Though Israel officially claimed that a majority of refugees fled and were not expelled, it still refused to allow them to return, as a UN resolution demanded shortly after 1948 war. Thus, the Israeli land was obtained through ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian inhabitants. This is not a process unfamiliar in history. Israel’s actions remain incomparable to the massive ethnic cleansing of Native Americans by the settlers and government of the United states.” The world Jewry is in on the game of conquest, in many different guises, with many different incantations of power, and with full spectrum political and financial support. The biggest support to Israel comes from the United States Congress and the Federal Government, financially, politically, militarily, as well as legally. Just witness this mind numbing Antiboycott Compliance https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://www.bis.doc.gov/complianceandenforcement/antiboycottcompliance.htm bureau especially constructed for Israel’s sake. It states: “The Bureau is charged with administering and enforcing the Antiboycott Laws under the Export Administration Act. Those laws discourage, and in some circumstances, prohibit U.S. companies from furthering or supporting the boycott of Israel sponsored by the Arab League, and certain Moslem countries, including complying with certain requests for information designed to verify compliance with the boycott. Compliance with such requests may be prohibited by the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and may be reportable to the Bureau.” So what is this red herring of calling Israelis “The New Nazis”, without also calling its parent the Fourth Reich? Further evidence of sophisticated and rather devilish support of Israel may be gleaned in Project Humanbeingsfirst’s report “The endless trial of red herrings https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/03/endless-red-herrings.html “. The day the World Jewry asserts that they will live equitably in a single-state with the indigenous Palestinians, with restoration of full right of return to the displaced and their progeny, and fair compensation for pain and suffering that is due all the native populations of Palestine and their progeny for cataclysmic upheaval inflicted upon them since the first World Jewish Congress meeting in Basle Switzerland in 1896, then that very fine day, the Shoah of the Palestinians will miraculously end. Such a fair and just articulation of demand is more than the mere recognition of great wrongs being done the Palestinians. It is of no less measure, both quantitatively as well as qualitatively, than what the Jews have themselves extracted with their specialized and incomprehensible Holocaust narrative from the world. Let the Palestinian people not be sold short by those who claim to support them – even if they be Palestinian themselves! Their ruling elite has already sold the beleaguered people down the drain of ineptitude and corruption. Let their friends, unwittingly, not do the same. Thank you. * Footnote: Excerpts from this article first appeared as comment on January 18, 2009 on former Pakistani-Canadian journalist Abidullah Jan’s famous (now defunct) dictatorshipwatch.com: https://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/cacheof-the-undeniable-nazism-and-holocaust-in-our-age-dw-abidullahjan-zahir-comment-january182009.pdf<https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/https://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/cacheof-the-undeniable-nazism-and-holocaust-in-our-age-dw-abidullahjan-zahir-comment-january182009.pdf> ATTENTION READERS We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion. About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT. https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/02/whats-the-difference-between-jews-and-zionists-no-no-not-the-new-nazis/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/whats-difference-between-jews-and.html https://telegra.ph/Whats-The-Difference-Between-Jews-and-Zionists-No-No--Not-the-New-Nazis--VT-Foreign-Policy-03-10
    WWW.VTFOREIGNPOLICY.COM
    What’s The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the ‘New Nazis’
    What's The Difference Between Jews and Zionists: No, No – Not the 'New Nazis' https://web.archive.org/web/20191206190948/http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/01/no-no-not-new-nazis-by-zahir-ebrahim.html Zahir Ebrahim January 17, 2009* Background Summary This is Part-3 of the series of articles on Israel-Palestine I composed especially for VT. Part-3 is my ongoing exposure of what's taboo in Western press due to the fact that Israel...
    0 Comments 0 Shares 57842 Views
More Results