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

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

Destroying Super Immunity & Getting Rid of That Annoying Cough Dr. Syed Haider I made it through multiple upper respiratory illnesses affecting my wife and kids over the last year without getting sick myself. The biggest difference maker seemed to be spending a lot of time outdoors in sunny Puerto Rico. It’s not just about the vitamin D that you get in the afternoons, it’s also about the lack of blue light toxicity you get the rest of the day from glass filtered indoor sunlight (or artificial lights). Blue light in the visible spectrum needs to be balanced by the naturally present infrared and UV spectrum in natural sunlight. Unfortunately both are blocked by typical window glass. Anyway, my long run of seemingly bulletproof immunity came to an inglorious end when I finally succumbed to what had been plaguing my nuclear family for a couple weeks: it began with a tickle in my throat, then progressed to a mild sore throat, stuffy and runny nose, bad a cough, and fatigue. It was rough going for a day or two. Hard to sleep with all the coughing. My post mortem analysis of what went wrong: I visited family overseas, where they live in an apartment full of artificial light and not much direct sun. I did my best to get outside, but couldnt do it anywhere near as much as I used to at home. Then (perhaps more or less important?) I started including once a week “stress test days” (nee cheat days) on my carnivore diet. That turned into a general laxity during my regular carnivore diet days, including eating out and being exposed to ubiquitous seed oils. Then one day I was enjoying my meat dish at a local restaurant and decided spur of the moment (always a mistake) to try the side dish I would have normally skipped. Unfortunately it was probably the worst possible side I could have indulged in: a nightshade veggie bomb comprising tomatoes, potatoes, eggplant and various kinds of peppers. Nightshade vegetables are notoriously toxic (despite mainstream claims that the toxins are neutralized by cooking), especially for those with a history of autoimmune disease, or leaky gut. They are also problematic for anyone with a history of allergic disorders or MCAS. It doesn’t help that traditional methods of picking and preparation that minimized the toxicity for otherwise healthy people are no longer followed. Pin on Hold the tomato Almost immediately after consuming this side dish I started to feel that first tickle in my throat and it was a slow downhill roll from there. Took 2-3 days, during which I had enough of a chance to head it off with some high dose vitamin C, but I’m one of those people who usually prefers to let nature take its course (maybe don’t do this in our current environment of repeated COVID infections, with all the problems they can bring). Once the illness got started I began to notice very clearly that what I ate had an almost immediate impact on how I felt. I think it probably required the sensitization of having been strictly carnivore for weeks beforehand. Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share I could tell when I ate high histamine fruits or vegetables that my symptoms would worsen significantly, I might get an instant headache, stuffy nose, worsening cough, fatigue, dizziness, and even occasional anger outbursts that had plagued me before the carnivore experiment. All these can be due to histamine intolerance. When you’re sick or already exposed to something that lowers your histamine tolerance, adding histamine-containing foods or those that tend to liberate histamine is just added fuel for the fire. Histamine Intolerance Doctor Gilbert AZ Anyway this has been going around (not surprising since it is winter). Some people get bad diarrhea, for others it’s the cough that’s the worst. If you treat this early in the first day or two you can usually cut it short within the first week. If not then many people end up being somewhat under the weather for a couple weeks and the unlucky ones have lingering symptoms for many weeks. It’s not necessarily anything new, it happened before COVID too. Now people are hyperaware of it, and for good reason, because the current iterations are often due to the COVID bioweapon which damages every organ system. Whether or not COVID was diagnosed you can usually treat a cough heavy post viral syndrome with key lifestyle changes like avoiding airway irritants (eg use an air filter) low or even no carb (but first try a good quality medicinal honey 1-3 teaspoons dissolved in warm water 1-3 times a day), avoiding trigger foods, plenty of direct sunlight, good sleep; supplements from mygotostack.com like vitamin C, D, zinc, quercetin, turmeric, nigella sativa; and prescription meds from mygotodoc.com like: ivermectin and LDN (we can’t prescribe codeine for cough online since its a controlled substance). Other effective treatments include IV vitamin C, IV ozone, HBOT, or what’s easier and nearly as effective: a home oxygen concentrator a couple hours a day, However one of the best and most underappreciated ways to get rid of a lingering non productive (dry) cough is simple breathwork. That’s because it’s not always just a persistent infection or inflammation that leads to a persistent cough, it may be that, but it is also often a disordered breathing pattern that can develop after just a couple days of illness. This pattern becomes imprinted on the nervous system and can be hard to shake. The longer you leave it unaddressed the longer it may continue. The more you cough the more likely you are to keep coughing, and the less you cough the more likely you are to stop coughing. Now, when most people think of breathwork they think of deep breathing exercises. But deep breathing is usually a trigger for a coughing fit rather than any kind of solution (during my long COVID illness I also found it can also worsen anxiety). The real fix for a persistent cough (and anxiety) due to a disordered nervous system is often in breathing less, while becoming aware of the impending urge to cough and trying to head it off and suppress it. Practitioners of the Buteyko breathing method have a great exercise for stopping a persistent dry cough. Share When you feel the urge to cough you press your hand over your mouth, swallow and hold your breath for 5 seconds while telling yourself you don’t need to cough. Then start breathing slow and shallow through the nose, keeping your hand over your mouth. Imagine the air going in one nostril and out the other in a circle (obviously this is not actually happening it just helps keep the breathing light and not irritating to the throat, partly a psychological phenomenon). Do this whenever you feel the urge to cough during the day, and you’ll see that it often works rather well and makes you more aware of what triggers the coughing. Unless there is something more serious going on (don’t nocebo yourself, just assume there is not) it usually only takes 1-3 days of this to retrain your nervous system and end the cough for good. You can also check out other Buteyko and pranayama yoga breathing methods (like alternate nostril breathing) for stopping a cough on YouTube: If there is residual inflammation, often manifested by a post nasal drip irritating the throat leading to coughing fits (easy to test if you have this, just lie down flat and see if you start coughing, or get worse, within a minute or so), it’s also important to avoid trigger foods that raise histamine or lead your own body to release histamine. Some common ones include: the nightshades I mentioned (tomatoes, potatoes, eggplant, all peppers), bananas, strawberries, mangoes, citrus fruits, avocado, chocolate, dairy, preserved or canned meats and fish, leftover meat and fish, lentils, beans, alcohol, tea, coffee and there may be some that are individual specific (think of any foods that in small or large quantities have caused you problems in the past). If you don’t go low or no carb, then also avoid grains until better as they tend to be pro inflammatory. Fish oil supplements have a short term anti-inflammatory effect that may lead to a longer term proinflammatory outcome. I’m not clear on all the science and implications here, but you can check out Chris Masterjohn’s work on the topic. Generally speaking it seems to be fine to eat fatty fish for the Omega 3s, but most people should probably avoid the high dose supplementation currently recommended by some groups. Another key lifestyle measure that works great for the post nasal drip is lifting your head at night using 2-3 pillows (or a wedge pillow - also helps with chronic reflux), and even propping yourself up against the headboard or wall behind your bed. Might be uncomfortable at first, but it’s better than a night of hacking up your lungs. Manage Acid Reflux & more: EZsleep Wedge| EQUANIMO I’ve also used pieces of chewed and softened licorice root to help cover up the irritating sensation of a post nasal drip while sleeping. Using a neti pot a few times a day may also help with this, and you can add things like turmeric, hydrogen peroxide, iodine, or just go with the usual salt water flush. If there is a persistent infection then more drastic measures will be needed including the IV methods mentioned above, and you can consider nebulization of peroxide. Promising studies have been done on more exotic methods of relieving a cough such as nebulizing honey, drinking a mixture of honey and coffee syrup dissolved in water, and inhaling a very dilute mixture of capsaicin (from cayenne peppers - which can help with both cough and post nasal drop, and other than snorting or otherwise breathing it in, you can also mix it with honey or water and take it orally as an antihistamine). Finally, the most powerful herb I know of for insomnia and anxiety is the sedative-hypnotic mulungu bark, and it is also effective in treating various kinds of coughs. Let me know below if you’ve gotten sick this winter, and what you swear by to get better, especially what works for a prolonged dry nagging cough. https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/destroying-super-immunity-and-getting 👉https://telegra.ph/Destroying-Super-Immunity--Getting-Rid-of-That-Annoying-Cough-03-20

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

One Conspiracy Theory to Rule Them All! Kevin Barrett, Senior EditorJanuary 28, 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. Video link Originally Published October 1, 2023 right here on VTForeignPolicy.com The new False Flag Weekly News with Brett Redmayne-Titley references many conspiracy theories (ungood!) and even some anti-Semitic conspiracy theories (double-plus ungood!!) Many such theories, which might be more neutrally termed “non-mainstream interpretations,” represent attempts to make sense of one or more aspects of what Brett’s book’s subtitle terms “A World Gone Mad.” Are we mad if we try to make sense of a mad world? That is what a well-funded sector of the consent manufacturing industry insists. There is no easier way for a mediocre academic intellect to rake in grant money than by jumping on the anti-conspiracy-theory bandwagon. This scholarly cottage industry begins its Soviet-style “disabling” of dissidents a.k.a. conspiracy theorists by claiming that we believe things like “COVID was a bioweapon and the response was an unfreedom drill” or “mRNA vaccines have not been proven safe and effective, nor have many other vaccines for that matter” or “US election outcomes are sometimes rigged” or “the Biden Administration blew up Nordstream” or “the JFK assassination and 9/11 were coups” or “the government is either covering up UFOs or running a huge disinfo program” or “Zionist Jews are heavily overrepresented in media and finance and work together to advance their own interests” and so on because those beliefs are so warm and fuzzy and comforting. How’s that?! Well, according to the anti-conspiracy industry, the fact that stuff just happens, without rhyme or reason, terrifies us conspiracy theorists into spurious dot-connecting. In other words, we conspiracy theorists comfort ourselves by imposing meaning on a meaningless universe. For example, Joseph Uscinski his book American Conspiracy Theories (read my review) argues that conspiracy theories “offer a sense of control and order in a world that often feels chaotic and unpredictable.” The fact that mainstreamers cling to vastly more comforting (if less well-supported) interpretations, and that if all we wanted was comfort we too would take the blue pill, somehow does not register with the likes of Uscinski. It is far more disturbing to try to make sense of the madness all around us than to ignore it, deny it, roll with it, or explain it away by embracing mainstream narratives. Conspiracy theorizing is a dirty, disturbing job, but somebody’s gotta do it. So let’s go all-out and see if we can string together a bunch of this week’s False Flag Weekly News stories into some sort of grand unified theory making at least a minimum of sense about where the world is going and why. Demography, Destiny, and Degeneracy We’ll begin with a story that came out too late to make this week’s list: Eugene Kusmiak’s “Population Explosion or Population Collapse?” Kusmiak’s point is that the world is entering a state of demographic contraction, but it won’t last forever. Why not? People who are culturally/genetically predisposed to having few or no children if given the chance, now have the chance, thanks to advanced birth control. So they are weeding their genes and memes out of humanity’s garden, leaving the world to those who continue having large families (and their descendants who will also tend to have large families). That minority will soon become a majority, and population growth will resume. That’s all very interesting, you say. So how can we turn this into a grand conspiracy theory, preferably an anti-Semitic one?* Let’s start by considering the relationship between Zionism, Western sexual degeneracy, and demographics. Take Thomas Donnelly, PNAC’s token goy and lead author of Rebuilding America’s Defenses, the September 2000 document calling for a “New Pearl Harbor.” Thomas Donnelly became “Giselle Donnelly” in 2018. The image of ultra-Zionist PNAC’s 9/11-forecasting spokesperson, who also happens to be the group’s Shabbos goy, cutting “his” militarist balls off and becoming a (sterile) “her” is, shall we say, pregnant with symbolism. After all, America’s media and academic elites seem to want straight white males to abjure their erstwhile role as paterfamilias and either (A) cut off their balls literally and join the tranny revolution, or (B) embrace sexual degeneracy and hedonism and devote themselves to a frivolous life of fun-and-games, without the burden of children and the projection of male authority children so desperately crave and need. The polemical war on patriarchy and the role of fathers, alongside the feminist war on motherhood, suggests that the propaganda apparatus doesn’t want people, especially white/Western people, to reproduce. But contrary to the claims of white nationalists, it doesn’t want Muslims to reproduce, either. And that is where 9/11 comes in. The spectacularly telegenic 2001 false flag attack on New York and Washington was basically one gigantic anti-Islam public relation stunt. The 9/11 wars reduced the global Muslim population by around 30 million, according to Australian expert Dr. Gideon Polya. But far more demographically important was 9/11’s effect on Muslims’ religious élan, or what Ibn Khaldun called asabiyyah. Before 9/11, the mood of the global Muslim umma was confident, even triumphalist. The psychological effect of 9/11’s equating Islamic religiosity with “terrorism” not only took the wind out of the sails of Islamic political movements, but also contributed to slowing Muslim birthrates, which have collapsed spectacularly since the late 1990s. (9/11 injected Muslim communities with an “anti-extremism” meme that made intense religiosity uncool rather than cool, presumably leading to less intense-religiosity-driven family formation and reproduction.) Thomas Friedman has repeatedly employed neocon doublespeak—sometimes with remarkable vulgarity—to crow about the success of his tribe’s 9/11 false flag. Friedman has hinted that 9/11 was necessary to puncture the rising Muslim élan of the 1990s, which he and others saw as an existential threat to Israel. So “they” don’t want Muslims to inherit the earth. And “they” don’t want Americans and Westerners in general to inherit the earth either. “They” have used 9/11 and the promotion of sexual degeneracy and hedonism to help knock down the birth rates, and the asabiyyah, of those groups. So who do “they” want to inherit the earth? Here’s were we get into a classic “anti-Semitic conspiracy trope”—one that I don’t believe, I hasten to add, but am willing to entertain. That is the notion, asserted with various degrees of certainty by some of my radio guests, that the real purpose of the Ukraine war is to exterminate the Slavs who currently occupy the real Jewish homeland in Ukraine so that Jews can return to rule that homeland. Call it the Zionist Kaganate of Khazaria. Naturally Neo-Khazaria would be ruled by Kagans, with the Grand Kagan role going to Robert and his Kaganite Queen, Vicki Nudelman. When I first heard this theory from legendary NASA whistleblower Richard Cook, I thought it ridiculous. When are the Zionists planning to leave Israel? Not any time soon, that’s for sure. And are there even enough of them to fill Khazaria/Ukraine? Israel has such a hard time finding actual Jews to make aliyah that it has to import millions of fake Jews, most of the Russian. If they’re trying to kill off the Slavs and fill Khazaria with Jews, where are all those Jews going to come from? Enough Jews to Fill Khazaria In “Population Explosion or Population Collapse?” Eugene Kusmiak hints at an answer. He points out that Israel is on the upswing of a population boom thanks almost entirely to the exploding ultra-religious orthodox Jewish population. In this “ultra-religious ultra-fertile minority becomes the majority” effect, he says, Israel is far ahead of the rest of the world. Long before the West and the Muslims and the Rest finally reach the point of population rebound, Israel’s (and to some extent New Jersey’s) ultra-orthodox Jews will have been exponentially exploding their populations for decades. So with the Slavs removed by war and demoralization alongside vodka, porn, and other forms of hedonism, and with tens or (before long) hundreds of millions of Orthodox Jews looking for places to live, maybe Ukraine really could become a “big Israel.” This “anti-Semitic conspiracy theory” is not unproblematic. If the Kagans and their ilk covet their ancient homeland of Khazaria, and plan to move there, why are they poisoning the place with DU and strewing it with landmines? More pertinently, do ultra-secular barely-breeding ashkenazim like the Kagans and the rest of the Western/Zionist Straussian elite really love their hyperreligious and largely sephardic ultra-orthodox coreligionists so much that they will go to such extraordinary lengths to help them inherit the earth, or at least as much of it as possible? I don’t know. But I do know that there really is a ”Jewish plot to take over the world.” It’s called eschatology. Whereas Islamic and Christian eschatologies are universalist and center on that universal prophet of love and brotherhood, Jesus, Jewish eschatology posits their messiah as a military conqueror who will subjugate the non-Jewish nations or goyim to the Jews. The Jews’ return to Israel, according to the mainstream traditional Jewish perspective, is part of this end-times process by which Yahweh will finally compensate the Jews for millennia of persecution by making them the world rulers and the goyim their slaves. Benjamin Netanyahu’s father Benzion Netanyahu, like the rest of Zionism’s brain trust, was, as his New York Times obituary put it, “a secular Jew who was deeply committed to the Jewish people and the State of Israel.” What The New York Times didn’t say was that Netanyahu Sr., though an atheist, was nonetheless deeply committed to the traditional eschatological project of conquering the world for the Jews and subjugating the goyim. Netanyahu Sr.’s biography of Abarbanel celebrates that great rabbi, who proposed tricking the Muslims and the Christians into killing each other off in an apocalyptic war so the Jews could inherit the earth, as a forerunner of modern atheistic Zionist realpolitik. It’s conceivable that rabidly Zionist atheist Jews like Thomas Friedman and the Kagans and the Netanyahus are attracted to, or even participating in, the traditional Jewish eschatological project. If so, crashing the demography of rival groups, while celebrating and encouraging the demographic explosion of hyperreligious Orthodox Jews, even while secretly despising them as untermenschen, would be a strategy one might expect them to pursue. *I like anti-Semitic conspiracy theories not because I have anything against Jews—I don’t—but because those are the only kind that ever get me noticed by the ADL. And in the alternative media, earning an ADL fatwa is like winning the Pulitzer Prize. Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. He is the host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard-driving weekly radio show funded by listener subscriptions at Substack and the weekly news roundup FALSE FLAG WEEKLY NEWS (FFWN). He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host. Archived Articles (2004-2016) www.truthjihad.com 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/2024/01/one-conspiracy-theory-to-rule-them-all/

‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 111: Hospitals under siege, UNRWA shelter bombed in southern Gaza Leila WarahJanuary 25, 2024 A view of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) school in Nuseirat, used as a shelter for displaced Palestinians, November 25, 2023. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images) A view of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) school in Nuseirat, used as a shelter for displaced Palestinians, November 25, 2023. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images) Casualties 25,700+ killed* and at least 63,740 wounded in the Gaza Strip. 387+ Palestinians killed in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem Israel revises its estimated October 7 death toll down from 1,400 to 1,147. 556 Israeli soldiers killed since October 7, and at least 3,221 injured.** *This figure was confirmed by Gaza’s Ministry of Health. Some rights groups put the death toll number at more than 33,000 when accounting for those presumed dead. ** This figure is released by the Israeli military. Key Developments Israeli forces are bombing Gaza’s perimeter in order to facilitate future land grab, buffer zone. ICJ: Verdict on South Africa genocide case against Israel to be announced Friday. Palestinian man shot dead at point blank-range south of Jenin in occupied West Bank. Israeli forces re-arrest 17-year-old Youssef al-Khatib, whom Israel freed in November swap deal with Hamas. Nasser Hospital and al-Amal hospitals in Khan Younis subjected to siege by Israeli military, hundreds of lives at risk. UN: Israel bombs UNRWA Shelter, killing at least 12, injuring 75 Egypt’s President accuses Israel of delaying Gaza aid deliveries as a pressure tactic. 5,000 Israeli protestors call for immediate deal to return all Israeli captives. Netanyahu allegedly criticizes Qatar mediating role as “problematic,” despite facilitating return of over 100 Israeli captives. Gaza Hospitals have a target on their back. In Khan Younis, Palestinians continue to face constant Israeli attacks, including those on medical centers, further crippling Gaza’s healthcare infrastructure and institutions. Advertisement Help Mondoweiss reach 100,000 subscribers on YouTube! The Israeli military has put several medical complexes under siege in Khan Younis, the second-largest city in Gaza, located in the southern district. At Nasser Hospital, The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) reports that “no one can enter or exit” because of the nearby bombardment . In addition to about 400 dialysis patients at Nasser Hospital who cannot access treatment, hundreds of wounded people, sick patients, and maternity cases are facing serious complications as a result of the lack of access to the hospital. “Health staff is reported to be digging graves on hospital grounds due to the large numbers of fatalities anticipated and the need to manage burials,” the UNOCHA report continued. The Israeli army has also surrounded the al-Amal Hospital and the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) headquarters in Khan Younis. Israeli troops are “enforcing restrictions on movement around both the building and the hospital,” PRCS said in a post on X. “The intense shelling around the hospital, gunfire, and the military vehicles approaching from all directions are ongoing violations of international laws and the Geneva Conventions,” PRCS added. “The occupation prohibits the movement of humanitarian teams, including ambulances, in blatant disregard for established norms.” In al-Amal Hospital, medical staff are running out of blood due to the inability to access the blood bank as a result of the ongoing siege. To combat the shortage, groups of displaced people sheltering at the hospital are donating blood. William Schomburg, head of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), warns that immediate action is required to prevent a complete shutdown of medical services in Gaza. “Every functioning hospital in the Gaza Strip is overcrowded and short on medical supplies, fuel, food and water. Many are housing thousands of displaced families. And now two more facilities risk being lost due to the fighting,” Schomburg said in a statement. “The cumulative impact on the health system is devastating and urgent action must be taken.” Israel attacks UN shelter, kills 12 Israeli forces attacked a UN shelter housing thousands of displaced people in the city of Khan Younis on Wednesday during the intensified fighting at and around the center. According to UNOCHA, at least 12 people were killed and 75 wounded, including 15 people who are in critical condition. “It seems that three shells have been landed inside the…training centre of Khan Younis that belongs to UNRWA,” UNRWA spokesman Adnan Abu Hasna, who is based in Rafah, told Al Jazeera on Wednesday. “The building has been set on fire,” he said, adding that “there are many casualties.” Asked if there had been any warning, he replied: “No.” “We have not been able to get in and from the compound in the last 48 hours because the Israeli tanks actually [were] very close to the compound,” he said, describing the situation as “very dangerous.” Abu Hasna said this was far from the first time that an UNRWA facility in Gaza had been hit, but noted that it was “maybe the first time that we see such a huge fire.” “People are screaming, crying, asking for help. We hope that we will not find so many people to have been killed and injured.” “Another horrific day in Gaza. The number of those killed is likely higher. Khan Younis vocational training centre is one of the largest UNRWA facilities sheltering nearly 30,000 displaced people,” UNRWA leader Philippe Lazzarini said in a social media post. “The compound is a clearly marked UN facility and its coordinates were shared with Israeli Authorities as we do for all our facilities. Once again a blatant disregard of basic rules of war.” “Persistent attacks on civilian sites in Khan Younis are utterly unacceptable and must stop immediately,” Thomas White, the Director of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip, said in a statement on behalf of UNOCHA. “The situation in Khan Younis underscores a consistent failure to uphold the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law: distinction, proportionality, and precautions in carrying out attacks. This is unacceptable and abhorrent and must stop,” stated White. About 800 displaced people were sheltering in the center, White added. Teams from UNRWA and the WHO are trying to reach the building via a route agreed upon with the Israeli army, but they have been blocked, he continued. Food used as a ‘weapon of war’ As the situation in Gaza continued to deteriorate amid Israel’s ongoing attacks on civilians, residents of the enclave are still facing extreme shortages of basic necessities due to the Israeli ongoing blockade. Although the Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza is open 24/7, Israeli procedures hamper the entrance of lifesaving humanitarian aid. Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has accused Israel of delaying aid deliveries into Gaza as a pressure tactic. “This is a form of pressure on the Gaza Strip and its people over the conflict and the release of hostages. They are using this as a pressure tool on the people of the Strip,” Sisi said, as cited by Reuters. Meanwhile, at the Israel-controlled Karem Abu Salem (Kerem Shalom) between Gaza and Israel, Israeli protests, including family members of captives in Gaza, gathered on Wednesday to prevent aid trucks from entering Gaza. The protestors, who are part of a group known as Order Nine Movement, are calling for an end to all aid from entering Gaza, including medical supplies, until all Israeli captives are released, reported Al Jazeera. Over the last two weeks, only 80 trucks a day have been allowed to enter the Gaza Strip due to Israel’s lengthy process of clearance and security checks, Al Jazeera added. UN agencies and humanitarian organizations working on the ground say that the aid that gets through is “a drop in the ocean” of what is needed amid the unfolding crisis in Gaza, which is said to be on the brink of famine. For context, before October 7, about 500 delivery trucks would enter Gaza every day. Mads Gilbert, a Norwegian physician and humanitarian activist, told Al Jazeera that Israel is weaponizing aid restrictions against Gaza. “It is a deliberate governmental plan to eradicate the people of Gaza — through disease, through bombing and through non-availability of medical supplies and medical services, and famine and the lack of water,” Gilbert said. “This is one of the most gruesome, concerted attacks on public health that I have ever seen.” He added that the humanitarian catastrophe is man-made. “This is a war crime. This is a weapon of mass destruction used deliberately by Israel.” British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said he told Netanyahu that more aid trucks must be able to enter Gaza and that an immediate “humanitarian pause” is needed to help those trapped in a “desperate situation.” “The scale of suffering in Gaza is unimaginable. More must be done faster to help people trapped in this desperate situation,” Cameron continued. “We have trebled our assistance for Gaza…But our efforts will only make a difference if aid gets to those who need it most. “As I said to Netanyahu … far more trucks need to be able to enter Gaza and more crossings need to open. We need an immediate humanitarian pause to get aid in and hostages out, followed by a sustainable ceasefire.” UN chief Guterres has once again called for “rapid, safe, unhindered, expanded & sustained humanitarian access throughout Gaza” in a post on X. Netanyahu disparages Qatari mediating role in prisoner exchange negotiations As Israel’s attacks on Gaza continue, Israeli society is growing increasingly frustrated with the Netanyahu administration’s lack of regard for the Israeli captives held in Gaza. On Wednesday night in Tel Aviv, 5,000 Israeli anti-government protestors gathered to call for an immediate deal to return all the hostages and chanting, “Stop the world, our brothers are there.” “We came to say to the government, ‘It’s enough. We want all the hostages back home, we want a ceasefire now,'” said protester Sapir Sluzker Amran, Al Jazeera reported. “There is no military solution, only a diplomatic solution — only agreements will bring the hostages back,” Amran continued. However, Netanyahu is adamant the war will continue. The Israeli Prime Minister said on Tuesday that Israel “will not stop fighting until absolute victory,” advocating for an additional six months of Israel’s aggression on Gaza. In response, the Palestinian Authority (PA) Foreign Ministry has said Israel is demonstrating a disregard for the UN and international calls for an immediate ceasefire. In a statement on Wednesday, the PA Foreign Ministry said Netanyahu’s comments mean “the continuation of genocide and forced displacement of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip.” “Netanyahu derives his courage from the failure of the international institutions to bear their legal and moral responsibilities to end the occupation,” the statement added. The Israeli Prime Minister has also allegedly criticized Qatar’s role as a mediator between Israel and Hamas as “problematic,” despite the Gulf country’s facilitation of the return of over 100 Israeli captives. In response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Majed al-Ansari, said, “We are appalled by the alleged remarks attributed to the Israeli Prime Minister in various media reports about Qatar’s mediation role. These remarks, if validated, are irresponsible and destructive to the efforts to save innocent lives, but are not surprising.” “If the reported remarks are found to be true, the Israeli PM would only be obstructing and undermining the mediation process, for reasons that appear to serve his political career instead of prioritizing saving innocent lives, including Israeli hostages,” al-Ansari added. On Wednesday, Israeli forces rearrested 17-year-old Youssef al-Khatib, whom Israel freed in a swap deal with Hamas in November, sparking outrage by Palestinian groups. The Palestinian Prisoners’ Society called the arrest a “blatant violation” of the terms of the swap agreement and a “dangerous” indicator that Israel is willing to re-arrest freed prisoners, according to Al Jazeera. Hamas has warned of the “ramifications” of the teen’s rearrest while also calling on the mediators of the November deal to interfere and pressure Israel to “live up to what was agreed upon.” Preparing for land grabs As the death toll in Gaza rises, the Israeli military is making space for its occupation of Gaza. The army demolished hundreds of buildings in Gaza within 1km of the fence, seeking to create a buffer zone, The Wall Street Journal reports, citing a new Hebrew University study. According to the study, about 40 percent of the 2,824 buildings in Gaza located within 1km of the border have been razed since October 7. “Everything has been flattened. It was mostly agriculture. Now it’s a military zone, a complete no man’s land,” one soldier is quoted as saying. Around Khan Younis city in southern Gaza, which has been under constant Israeli attacks for weeks, 67 percent of buildings within 1km of the border have been destroyed. Al Jazeera’s Stefanie Dekker says Israel claims the plan is needed to “establish security” and prevent attacks. But this risks “diminishing an already tiny strip of Gaza, whose population has been stuck between walls and the sea” for years. The United States has opposed the creation of a buffer zone, saying there should be no permanent change to Palestinian territory. “However, it’s happening, Israel is executing it, and this of course is something the Palestinians and the wider international community does see as a land grab,” said Dekker. BEFORE YOU GO – At Mondoweiss, we understand the power of telling Palestinian stories. For 17 years, we have pushed back when the mainstream media published lies or echoed politicians’ hateful rhetoric. Now, Palestinian voices are more important than ever. Our traffic has increased ten times since October 7, and we need your help to cover our increased expenses. Support our journalists with a donation today. https://mondoweiss.net/2024/01/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-111-hospitals-under-siege-unrwa-shelter-bombed-in-southern-gaza/

German Scientists Uncover Evidence that EU Pfizer-BioNTech Batches Included Placebos Robert Kogon German scientists have uncovered startling evidence that a substantial portion of the batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine deployed in the European Union may in fact have consisted of placebos – and hence were not even subjected to quality-control testing by the German agency which was in principle responsible for approving their release. The scientists, Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor of Organic Chemistry at the Ruhr University Bochum, and Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor of Analytical Chemistry at the University of Leipzig, are part of a group of five German-speaking scientists who have been publicly raising questions about the quality and safety of the BioNTech vaccine (as it is known in Germany) for the last year and a half. They recently appeared on the Punkt.Preradovic online program of the German journalist Milena Preradovic to discuss batch variability. Their starting point was the recent Danish study showing enormous variation in the adverse events associated with different batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or BNT162b2 per its scientific codename. The below figure from the Danish study illustrates this variation. It shows that the batches used in Denmark, which are represented by the points in the graph, essentially break down into three groups. The “green batches” clustered around the green line have a moderate or moderately-high level of adverse events associated with them. In the discussion with Preradovic, Gerald Dyker takes the example of the green point furthest to the right. As he explains, it represents the batch that was used the most in Denmark, with somewhat over 800,000 doses having been administered. These 800,000 doses are associated with around 2,000 suspected adverse events, which gives a reporting rate of one suspected adverse event per approximately 400 doses. As Dyker puts it, “That’s not a small amount if we compare to what we know otherwise from influenza vaccines.” According to Dyker’s calculation, the green batches account for more than 60 percent of the Danish sample. There are then the “blue batches” clustered around the blue line, which are obviously associated with an extraordinarily high level of adverse events. As Dyker notes, no more than 80,000 doses of any of the blue batches were administered in Denmark – suggesting that these especially bad batches may perhaps have been quietly pulled from the market by public health authorities. Nonetheless, these batches had as many as 8,000 suspected adverse events associated with them. Eight thousand out of 80,000 doses would give a reporting rate of one suspected adverse event for every ten doses – and Dyker notes that some of the blue batches are indeed associated with a reporting rate of as high as one suspected adverse event for every six doses! On Dyker’s calculation, the blue batches represent less than 5 percent of the total number of doses included in the Danish study. Nonetheless, they are associated with nearly 50 percent of the 579 deaths recorded in the sample. Finally, we have the “yellow batches” clustered around the yellow line, which, as can be seen above, barely gets off the x-axis. On Dyker’s calculation, the yellow batches represent around 30 percent of the total. Dyker notes that they include batches comprising some 200,000 administered doses which are associated with literally zero suspected adverse events. As Dyker puts it, “malicious” observers might note that “this is how placebos would look.” And malicious observers might be right. For Dyker and Matysik compared the batch numbers contained in the Danish study with publicly available information on the batches approved for release, and they made the startling discovery that almost none of the harmless batches, unlike the very-bad and not-so-bad batches, appear to have been subject to any quality-control testing at all. Unbeknownst to most observers, it is precisely the German regulatory agency, the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), which is, in principle, responsible for quality control of all the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine supply in the EU. (The institute is named after the German immunologist and Nobel Prize winner Paul Ehrlich, not, of course, the Stanford biology professor of the same name.) This reflects the fact that the actual legal manufacturer of the vaccine, as well as the marketing authorization holder in the EU, is the German company BioNTech, not its more well-known American partner Pfizer. (See here for related documentation.) Dyker and Matysik found that the PEI had tested and approved for release all the very bad “blue” batches, the overwhelming majority of the not-so-bad “green” batches, but almost none of the harmless “yellow” batches – as if the PEI knew in advance that these batches were unproblematic. This is shown in the below slide from Dyker’s presentation during the Punkt.Preradovic interview. The title reads: “Which batches from the Danish study did the Paul Ehrlich Institute test and approve for release?” In the PEI column of each of the tables, “ja” means, of course, that the batch was tested, “nein” means that it was not. Note that only the first batch in the “yellow” table was tested. The caption under that table reads: “The PEI did not generally regard testing of the harmless ‘yellow batches’ as necessary.” As Dyker put it, with notable restraint, “this would support the initial suspicion that they are maybe in fact something like placebos.” Or, in short, to paraphrase the German scientists’ findings on the variability of the Pfizer-BioNTech batches, it would appear that the good was bad, the bad was very bad, and the very good was saline solution. (The full Punkt.Preradovic interview with Gerald Dyker and Jörg Matysik is available here in German with English subtitles. The above translations are by the author.) Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author Robert Kogon is the pen name of a widely-published journalist covering European affairs. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. 'German scientists have uncovered startling evidence that a substantial portion of the batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine deployed in the European Union may in fact have consisted of placebos – and hence were not even subjected to quality-control testing by the German agency which was in principle responsible for approving their release.' "The scientists, Dr. Gerald Dyker, Professor of Organic Chemistry at the Ruhr University Bochum, and Dr. Jörg Matysik, Professor of Analytical Chemistry at the University of Leipzig, are part of a group of five German-speaking scientists who have been publicly raising questions about the quality and safety of the BioNTech vaccine (as it is known in Germany) for the last year and a half.  They recently appeared on the Punkt.Preradovic online program of the German journalist Milena Preradovic to discuss batch variability. Their starting point was the recent Danish study showing enormous variation in the adverse events associated with different batches of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or BNT162b2 per its scientific codename." https://brownstone.org/articles/scientists-uncover-evidence-eu-pfizer-biontech-batches-included-placebos/ ➡️ Boost RobinMG 🚀

Is Gaza Genocide Just Your “Anti-Semitic Imagination”? Kevin Barrett, Senior EditorJanuary 18, 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. Rumble link Bitchute link This week’s False Flag Weekly News featured J. Michael Springmann and I discussing the historic story “Israel Busted For Genocide.” Needless to say, we sided with the prosecution. Then last night I appeared on Charles Moscowitz’s podcast and heard Charles’ brief for the defense. Though I like Charles Moscowitz, and have a fair bit in common with him both philosophically and politically, I find his take on Zionism infuriating. Moscowitz’s new book The Anti-Semitic Imagination goes over a long list of “conspiracy theories” and absolves organized Jewry of involvement in pretty much all of them. Even the conspiracy to invade, occupy, and ethnically-cleanse Palestine, according to Moscowitz, is really the Palestinians’ fault. It’s also the fault of “radical jihadist Islam.” (Eyeball roll.) Below are excerpts from the two conversations. Kevin Barrett and J. Michael Springmann on Zionist genocide Kevin Barrett: Here’s the top war crime story this week: South Africa is leading the prosecution of Israel for genocide in The Hague. Sam Husseini (listen to our interview) has been tirelessly pushing this idea for months. Now it finally happened. Shout out to South Africa for making it happen. South Africa presented the case for the prosecution last Thursday, and then Friday was Israel’s response. The prosecution’s five-point accusation included mass killings of Palestinians, bodily and mental harm, forced displacement, a food blockade, destruction of the health care system, and preventing Palestinian births. All of these fit the definition of genocide under international law. J. Michael Springmann: I think South Africa has it right. Genocide was defined at the convention in 1948, which the Israelis signed and which they got because of the way the Europeans treated the Jews. Now they’re claiming that the Palestinians are engaging in genocide against them, when in actual fact the definition is along the lines of trying to wipe out or displace or remove by threats, by statements, by actions and by killings, a people or an ethnic group or a religious group. That it pretty much fits the Palestinians. They’re Muslims. They’re a coherent group of people. The Zionists have been working on this since the 20s and 30s with Plan Dalet cooked up by David Ben-Gurion, one of the terrorist leaders of the Haganah. He became a prime minister and he pushed through the genocide, the Nakba, the Holocaust against the Palestinians, in 1948 and subsequently. So I think the case is strong. The court has jurisdiction. The only problem is that it doesn’t have any power to enforce its decisions. Kevin Barrett: That’s right. But every nation on earth can say that it is enforcing international law once the decision gets handed down. So that means that, for example, the Yemeni government led by the Houthis would have a strong case that it has the right to impose a blockade on the Zionist entity to stop the genocide. And of course, that story has been heating up this week. We have had more drone attacks on Israeli oil tankers. And then the Americans went just yesterday and started bombing Yemen. There have been two rounds of bombings. They’ve hit dozens of targets in Yemen. And the Yemenis are up in arms. There is drone footage of millions of people titting the streets. Messing with Yemen is not a smart move, as the Saudis learned to their chagrin about seven or eight years ago. So is this going to be another case of a relatively poor and not that heavily armed country like Afghanistan kicking Uncle Sam’s butt? J. Michael Springmann: I think so. They’ve done a good job of flooding the Red Sea, which may become the Iron Bottom Sea if they hit enough ships with their missiles and drones. The foolish Americans and the British and the Canadians and the Australians and the Dutch have got themselves in the middle of a hornet’s nest. The Yemenis are battle-tested. Tor 10 years they’ve been fighting the Saudis, backed by the United States, and the Saudis couldn’t win, even though they bombed school buses and funeral processions and wedding receptions and so forth. So the Yemenis are tough, they have weapons, they’re not stupid, they’ve repurposed some Scud missiles to improve them and fire them at the Saudis. And of course the lamestream media controlled by the Zio-Nazis—that’s an insult to the Nazis actually—they keep claiming that the Iranians are doing all this, the Iranians somehow are backing Hamas and Hezbollah and the Ansar Allah freedom fighters and the people in Iraq and people in Syria. And you think that Iran is this great octopus, but in fact the Americans and the British are creating more problems for themselves, and sooner or later the Houthis are going to hit some very expensive warships and kill a lot of sailors Kevin Barrett: Yeah, and then all bets are off. It could be World War III for all we know. And one of the real shameful things about this is that the United States is officially at war, conducting an act of aggression against Yemen, bombing Yemen, killing people. They already killed Yemenis last week. And they’re doing this to protect a genocide. That makes them war criminals of the highest order. And every American leader with any responsibility whatsoever for this needs to be tried, convicted, sentenced and hanged until dead. Israel’s Massacre of Journalists Kevin Barrett: The Washington Post is the Anglo-Zionist Empire’s propaganda organ, and even they admit that there’s a horrific massacre of journalists going on. Wael Al-Dahdouh just lost his son. He lost most of his family a month and a half ago. And now the Zionists just targeted a car that his son was riding in and murdered him, too. There was a really touching film of his wedding video, the son’s wedding video, with Wael the Father celebrating the wedding. And now here he is with his son’s corpse. The Zionists have murdered over 100 journalists, according to the Palestinian authorities, and at least 79 according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. About one out of every 10 reporters in Gaza has been murdered by the Zionists. I guess maybe there’s something they’re trying to hide. J. Michael Springmann: Yeah, they’re trying to hide the truth. And if you notice in the picture there, as in all the other pictures, the journalists that have been murdered, like the Al Mayadeen journalist and her cameraman, were all wearing “PRESS” emblazoned across their their flak vest in English and Arabic on their helmets, and yet somehow that this makes them targets instead of protecting them from the crazed creatures that are occupying Palestine and attempting to destroy the rest of the world. Kevin Barrett on Charles Moscowtiz’s Podcast (Excerpts) Podcast link Charles Moscowitz: Kevin, thanks for joining me. Kevin Barrett: Hey, it’s good to be with you, Charles. Charles Moscowitz: So before we get into the subjects of the day, I wouldn’t mind hearing a little bit about your story and how you arrived at where you are in terms of writing a book like Truth Jihad, your point of view, how it is you became Muslim. Kevin Barrett: It’s kind of a long, convoluted story, but basically, I came from a family of lapsed Unitarians, and that’s as lapsed as it gets. We didn’t even go to church to sing Kumbaya. Charles Moscowitz: Can I just interject briefly here, because I did, when I was on conventional radio, I used to do a segment on religions, and I’d have various people from all religions join me, and I had someone from the Unitarian Church join me. And I asked her, could you give me a thumbnail sketch on what it is that the Unitarians believe in? Are there any basic principles? And she said to me, funny, you should mention that we have a convention next month, we’re going to be figuring that out. Kevin Barrett: Well, I think they figured it out. And they said, “we don’t have any principles.” They actually have an atheist minister now in Madison, Wisconsin, where I went to church maybe two or three times at the Frank Lloyd Wright designed church in Madison when I was a kid. So I grew up in a very secular materialistic family, and I had spiritual experiences as a teenager, and knew there was a lot more to life than what the materialist paradigm was presenting. I read widely, looked into Buddhism as well as all sorts of other things when I was young, but I never really got monotheism. When my parents sent me to go to church with a Catholic next door neighbor to see what the Catholics do, it didn’t make any sense to me at all. The notion of this patriarchal God with Jesus as his son who died as redemption for everybody else’s sins, this whole story didn’t make any sense to me. But at the same time, I understood that there’s a real spiritual dimension to life. And so I looked into Buddhism, which did make a fair bit of sense. And then in 1989 through the grace of God, what many would call a coincidence or synchronicity, I happened to walk into a class taught by Dr. Jacob Needleman (and wound up reading Traditionalist authors like Guénon, Schuon and Lings, who became Muslims because they understood that Islam was the best-preserved authentic revealed religion as well as the one that is most rationally defensible). And the more I looked into it, the more I was convinced that that was the case. Islam also happened to have a very powerful mystical tradition and Sufism is a big part of that. And I very much related to that as well. So that’s how I came to Islam. I said, I better go study Arabic and Islamic studies to figure out what the heck I got myself into. So I went back to graduate school at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and spent years learning Arabic and studying comparative religion and mostly Islam in the context of North Africa and Sufism. I’d probably still be teaching that stuff today, except 9/11 happened. And in late 2003, I heard David Ray Griffin, one of my great heroes—he’s a brilliant scholar, not so much a theologian as a guy who studies empirical reality and tries to figure out scientific questions—looked into 9/11. I looked into it, and I saw they (the 9/11 truthers) were right. And so I was very angry and upset again, and I flashed back to my JFK days and said, am I going to spend 6 or 7 years getting tenure and just let this thing go? Hell no. So I started doing teach-ins on the University of Wisconsin campus, became locally notorious. I had the first three mainstream pro-9/11 truth op-eds published in a mainstream newspaper in Madison, the Capital Times, and got involved in 9-11 Truth, brought Dr. Griffin to speak in Madison in 2005. I became kind of a figure in the 9/11 Truth movement. And then in 2006, when the opposition research guys decided to try to shut down 9/11 truth, because they couldn’t ignore it anymore, they came after me. And so I was basically beat up in mainstream media as “that evil 9/11 truth professor who’s corrupting the youth of Athens.” That made me permanently unemployable in the American academy. I lost a tenure-track job as well as any other possibility of employment. And so since then I’ve just been a freelance troublemaker and alternative media type guy like you. Charles Moscowitz: Exactly. And I think that people generally are coming around to viewing 9/11 as having more to it than what we were conventionally fed by the media. And in my own experience, when I ran for Congress in 2004 against Barney Frank, I discovered that he had authored this amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act, which basically forbade the United States from denying visas to people who were involved in terrorist activities. And it also had the effect of preventing all of our various so-called national security agencies from talking to each other and exchanging information, which, you know, led me to think that there’s something bigger going on here. There was some kind of an establishment agenda… I discovered… there is a peaceful element, or at least an element within Islam, as expressed by the Mufti of Rome, Palasi, who says that Islamic texts, including the Quran and the Hadith, they recognize the, quote, people of the book, which is the Islamic word for the Jews, as being sovereign in that tiny little swath of beachfront known as Israel. And that there’s a religious side to that in that such sovereignty will result in the… I mean, I suppose it’s similar to Christianity in the coming of the Mahdi or the coming of the final prophet and the ushering in of a messianic era. And his work has not been refuted by Islamic scholars. I don’t think it’s certainly the mainstream. But I’m wondering what you think of that, and will you lie, will you come down on that question? Kevin Barrett: Well, you and I actually, Charles, are on totally polar opposite sides of that question, even though maybe our philosophical framework isn’t so different. That is, your ideas about the core values of Judaism, which I respect as the core values of Islam and indeed all monotheism… (But) I couldn’t come up with somebody who more exemplifies what I would say is the absolutely, just utterly wrong position on Zionism, as you. My view of it—and I realize this is probably going to sound shocking or strange to you— agrees with Sheikh Imran Hussein’s interpretation of eschatology. And essentially, as I see it, Charles, Zionism is Antichrist or Dajjal. It’s a false messiah. I think that it began with Shabtai Zvi and Jacob Frank, who you agree are false messiahs and false prophets. And I agree with the Neturei Karta people from the Jewish viewpoint that God is asking all of us to be the best people that we can and to offer complete and perfect justice to everybody regardless of their nominal faith or ethnicity or religious affiliation or what have you. And I think Zionism is an expression of a pernicious and toxic Jewish supremacism that has been part of the shadow side of the Jewish faith. And from a Muslim perspective, we would say that emerges in part because of what we see as inaccuracies in the Torah, leading to abominations in the Talmud. And I think that the notion of a chosen people is, well, problematic. Of course, it can be interpreted in a way that encourages good behavior, which is your interpretation, and I honor that. But it also lends itself to interpretations that basically create a kind of supremacism that denies the rights of others and denies the viewpoints of others. And I think your book’s approach to Zionism horrifically denies the viewpoint and the rights and the human dignity of others, non-Zionists and non-Jews, especially Palestinians, who are the victims of genocide. And they didn’t start being the victims of genocide on October 7th. The’ve been victims of genocide nonstop ever since the earliest Zionists, who were mostly atheists and satanists, showed up in Palestine with a supremacist attitude. Rather than being immigrants who were going to work with the local people and help them and be part of their community, these people were supremacists who said, “it’s going to be a Jewish state. Jews are going to rule. Jews are the chosen people here. And we’re ultimately going to have to expel these native Palestinians.” And all the founders of Zionism knew they were going to have to commit genocide, that is expel, destroy, the local Palestinian community. Now that’s unacceptable, Charles. And I’ll tell you one of the reasons why. Not only because it requires genocide against the Palestinians, but also because that holy land is holy to all of us. It’s holy to Christians, to Jews, and to Muslims. Whoever has custody over that land has to administer it with perfect justice for all faiths. No special dispensations for any faith. The monotheists today consist of about 15 million Jews, 2 billion Muslims, and 3 billion Christians. So there are five billion monotheists today (who honor Abraham and the prophets) who are Muslim and Christian. And there are 15 million who are Jewish. All of those five billion plus people have equal rights to being equal citizens in every possible sense in that holy land. If I said, “it should be a Muslim state in which only Muslims are allowed to immigrate there, only Muslims are allowed to have the best property, Muslims are going to put up checkpoints so all the non-Muslims basically have to go through apartheid checkpoints to go to the store every day, Muslims are going to be shooting non-Muslim children for sport, which happens on a regular basis in Israel as the Israeli Defense Forces literally murder Palestinian children for sport on a constant basis and never face any consequences… If the Muslims acted like this against the Jews and the Christians in that holy land, it would be an abomination. So, the fact that this grotesquely deluded and egotistical and egocentric and arguably tribally psychopathic group of 15 million of the world’s 5 billion monotheists has seen fit to invade the Holy Land and commit genocide against the people who live there and erect a supremacist, apartheid, genocidal entity there and call it some kind of quasi-messianic entity and bow down and worship this genocidal entity as a golden calf–that’s Antichrist, that’s Dajjal, that’s the False Prophet, that’s another Shabtai Zvi. So I think that you’ve made a terrible mistake. I think you’re a good man, I think your basic values are good. But I think you’ve made a horrific mistake by grossly misinterpreting Israel, reading the history from a very, very biased viewpoint, an utterly one-sided viewpoint, that denies the story of the other, denies the humanity of the other, denies the facts that we all should be agreeing on, and instead replaces them with big lies and propaganda that are completely false about the history of what’s happened there. (How did Charles Moscowitz respond? Listen to the full podcast) Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. He is the host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard-driving weekly radio show funded by listener subscriptions at Substack and the weekly news roundup FALSE FLAG WEEKLY NEWS (FFWN). He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host. Archived Articles (2004-2016) www.truthjihad.com 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/2024/01/is-gaza-genocide-just-your-anti-semitic-imagination/

Screening for Silent Spike Toxicity Spike levels build up over time with repeated exposures and eventually the dam breaks. Here's how to detect toxicity before it causes symptoms. Dr. Syed Haider Pet Toxin Safety - Mill Creek Animal Hospital This post will provide a deep dive on tests for spike toxicity, including the best screening tests for those who have no symptoms, but have been exposed. These tests detect specific spike-induced inflammation, clotting, AIDS, turbo cancer, etc, and can help get ahead of disease developing underneath the surface. In a future post I plan to cover the best tests for fine tuning a healing protocol. There are now hundreds if not thousands of physicians treating spike toxicity with varying protocols and degrees of success. In my experience most hesitate to escalate ivermectin enough. At high enough doses it almost always helps (at mygotodoc.com I usually start where others end, at 0.2mg/kg/day and then may gradually escalate as high as 10 times more than that ie 2mg/kg/day in some patients over the course of 5-10 weeks). Most physicians treating spike toxicity also refrain from much or any testing. This makes sense on a budget, and I often come across patients who can’t afford testing and we skip it as well, but if it can be afforded then it can be helpful in fine tuning the protocol and sometimes uncovering key missing ingredients, like nutritional deficiencies, or particularly stubborn micro clotting requiring escalated dosing and varied types of anticoagulants. The other place for testing is in screening of the general population without symptoms, both vaxxed and unvaxxed (though when you really press you often do find new symptoms have sprouted up since the beginning of the pandemic). But even in those who truly have no new symptoms and feel perfectly fine, it seems that it may simply be a matter of time before spike toxicity catches up with them, especially if, like so many people, they can’t detox quickly enough, can’t break up the atypical microclots fast enough, and then are reexposed to a new variant, or a big shedding bolus, and that tips the scales and sends them into outright long haul. People find it hard to believe that they could feel fantastic and yet there could be something brewing inside that is just 1 straw away from breaking their backs. Yet almost everyone was in this very situation even before the pandemic. We all have a health span and a lifespan, and for most in the modern world the overlap between them has been dramatically shrinking for generations, and it has only gained speed with each passing year, and especially the last 3 years since the pandemic hit. Health is wealthqbak - http://asianpin.com/health-is-wealthqbak/ | Funny cartoons jokes, Funny cartoon pictures, Funny cartoons source In plain English, we often gradually become chronically ill and then debilitated starting decades before we finally die. In the worst cases spending the last years of our lives in nursing homes, oblivious to our surroundings and infrequently visiting loved ones. The reason for this is a chronic mismatch between our bodies and our environments - not just lack of exercise and poor diets, but also the chemical soup we find ourselves in, the toxins in the air, water and soil, the lack of fresh air and sunlight throughout the day, the lack of grounding, and too much toxic blue light at night that is soaked up by our eyes and very skin while we lounge in front of our screens, greatly stressing ourselves, while thinking we’re relaxing, followed by restless, unfulfilling sleep. Most of us are drawing down on our health savings accounts - not the tax free HSA - but a metaphorical account that represents our life force. Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share Just like a regular bank account, if it isn’t managed properly and wealth is overused, it will eventually get close to zero, by which time we will be liable to illness at the drop of a hat - anything that is too taxing can overdraw the account since what’s flowing into it can’t overcome what’s flowing out. And then some of us become chronically overdrawn, living on credit, and in the toxic embrace of chronic illness because of it, dragging us into the depths, while we struggle vainly to get back above the surface. This is why when you finally realize you have to change your ways to get better, it makes no sense to give up those changes as soon as you break free of illness. You are just above zero, still liable to dipping below the surface again. You need to build up your reserves of health over time and not overdraw your account again. You have to become a good steward of your body and resources. And over time you can get to the point where you’re on solid ground again and can put up with small and large stressors without backsliding. But you should always keep in mind how bad it can get to motivate you to stay on the straight and narrow going forward. To get back to the topic, the spike protein builds up in our bodies over time and causes detectable changes to our immune and vascular systems. There is an immune fingerprint of various cytokine markers, there are the microclots, there are alterations to the red blood cell zeta potential, there are predictable decreases of various micronutrients. There may be early warning signs of AIDS, or cancer or organ dysfunction. Nowadays almost all new patients with Long COVID or Vax injury made it through a few shots, or a few rounds of COVID without getting long haul, but the final infection or shot put them over the edge. If they had come before they got that last shot or infection I could have detected their susceptibility in the lab and we could have worked to correct it. This is the epidemic of Silent Spike Toxicity. And these are the tests we have available to screen for it: The Microclot Test: only available from 1 lab in the US (mail order). Detects abnormal clotting not seen on any other test. The single most specific spike toxicity test. The Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel: includes imaging tests: EKG, CXR, Echo. Blood tests that detect damage to the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys. Checks zeta potential. Can show the immune fingerprint of spike. Detection of AIDS. Typical gut microbiome changes. Advanced cancer screening (blood & whole body MRI), and more. The Masterjohn-Schilling Spike Healing Panel: detects neuroinflammation, free radicals, mitochondrial dysfunction, autoantibodies, reactivated viruses and bacteria, MCAS, specific micronutrients that are depleted by spike toxicity, and more. Masterjohn’s Deep Dive Nutrition Panel goes beyond nutrients depleted by spike toxicity to provide a complete snapshot of functional nutrition and is indispensable for deep healing when half measures don’t work. source A quick note on tests in general: There is no perfect test. Tests are evaluated by their sensitivity and specificities, but we don’t have research on any of these for spike toxicity diseases. Sensitivity is how good a test is at ruling out a diagnosis and specificity is how good it is at ruling in a diagnosis. The best screening tests would be 100% specific - meaning if you have the diagnosis it will be detected 100% of the time, but in order to gain that level of specificity they often have to cast a wide net and give up some sensitivity. What this means practically is that if the diagnosis is present you will test positive, but there will also be some people who don’t have the diagnosis who also test positive. Highly specific tests are usually paired with confirmatory tests that are hopefully highly sensitive. Meaning they can weed out the people who were including in the first round of screening, but don’t actually have the diagnosis in question. In the absence of research into spike toxicity diseases and optimal screening regimens we have to fall back on expert opinion. It seems that the microclot test is likely the best screening test, because those treating spike toxicity have never come across someone with the clinical symptoms of the disease who doesn’t have elevated microclots. Unfortunately microclots can be elevated by other conditions. So a confirmatory test like the incelldx Incellkyne panel might be ordered from the Comprehensive Spike Screening panel, along with other tests we’ll discuss below. If the diagnosis of spike toxicity is made then the Masterjohn-Schilling panel is the best next step for fine tuning the protocol, ensuring that the right micronutrients are topped up and the right treatments are prescribed. If not improving after targeted and sustained treatment, then the Deep Dive Nutrition panel is indicated to uncover rare and unusual nutritional deficits that could be holding you back. Here I’ll cover the primary screening tests: The Microclot Test and the Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel. In a future article I may cover the more expansive and complicated panels that are used primarily in treatment. Share The Microclot Test figure 3 source Typical microclots are usually found in the elderly and those with chronic illnesses like diabetes. Spike induced atypical amyloid fibrin microclots are found in those with spike induced blood toxicity. The difference between typical and atypical are that spike induced microclots are very difficult to break down, so difficult that they often do not break down at all. This explains why the D-dimer isn’t helpful for detecting spike toxicity. D-dimer is always trapped inside of clots. Typical clots are always being broken down on the margins - at the edge of a typical clot there will be breakdown. Sometimes the breakdown happens slower than the growth of the clot, but there is always a battle going on between clot growth and clot destruction which will release D-dimer into the blood stream. Since it is virtually always elevated in the presence of clotting it is a very specific test, and is used as a screening test when a physician suspects a clotting disorder, but isn’t sure. For example if someone shows up with chest pain and it could be a pulled muscle or a pulmonary embolism (clot in the pulmonary veins), a D-dimer is a simple ad very cheap test that can be done to determine if further confirmatory, but more expensive more risky testing should be considered, like a CT Angiogram of the chest. For this reason every doctor going through residency comes to consider a positive D-dimer as indicative of clotting and a negative D-dimer as indicative of no clotting. figure 4 source The D-dimer is often elevated during severe acute COVID-19 infection, and during a severe acute injection reaction, but it is not usually elevated in chronic spike toxicity, including chronic long haul and vaccine injured patients. The reason it isn’t elevated is that most people cannot break down the atypical microclots caused by spike protein without some additional help from medications and supplements. Once medications like aspirin (and sometimes prescriptions ones like plavix and eliquis), supplements like nattokinase, serrapeptase, lumbrokinase, bromelain and NAC are started the atypical microclots start to be broken down and D-dimer goes up, which in this case is usually reason for celebration. So the microclot test is the only test in America today that can detect elevated atypical microclots. It’s only available from one lab in the country via mail order (request it from mygotodoc.com), and it helps detect spike toxicity as well as helping track treatment. If initial treatment for microclots with aspirin and supplements doesn’t bring the levels down then we escalate to using higher doses, or add plavix and then later eliquis. And we can also consider plasma donation, or even therapeutic plasmapheresis, if available. DETOX [spike buster] PRE-ORDER NOW: initial stock is limited! Shipping late November 2023. The Comprehensive Spike Screening Panel This set of tests includes an EKG, CXR, Echo. It includes blood tests to screen for daamage to the major organs including the heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys. It checks for zeta potential in the blood, which is affected by spike toxicity. It detects an immune fingerprint of spike. It can detect AIDS. It covers stool testing for the gut microbiome as well as advanced cancer screening (via blood & whole body MRI), and more. Tests Included in the Panel: Spike antibody test: Measures your B cell’s response to the spike protein. In the absence of a direct test for spike protein this helps indirectly detect and track the spike protein levels in your body. Your body produces antibodies in response to the spike protein, and this test measures those antibodies. Generally speaking the more spike protein in your body, the higher the antibody levels. However, what's considered a problematic level varies by individual. The goal is to lower this level as much as possible. The test can also help detect those individuals who might be transmitting the spike protein to others. This is by no means a perfect test, but in the right setting it is helpful as a red flag for further workup, or as a way of monitoring response to therapies over time. Incellkyne Panel from Incelldx - provides an immune fingerprint of spike protein, a combination of elevated cytokine markers that are typically seen in spike protein disease. There are other immune fingerprints they have identified on this same test that indicate non spike Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Lyme disease. If CCL-5/RANTES and/or VEGF are elevated (VEGF is almost always elevated) then the medication Maraviroc can be helpful. VEGF indicates vascular inflammation and omega-3s, infrared light exposure, and a number of other approaches can be particularly helpful to deal with that. Other inflammatory markers tested are TNF-alpha, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-13, GM-CSF, SCD40L, CCL3, CCL-4, and IFN-Gamma. Ivermectin is known to decrease IL-6, which is commonly elevated in Long Haul and Vax injury. Lymphocyte Subset Panel or Cyrex Lymphocyte MAP: The subset panel is the standard test for AIDS and tests for these immune subsets: CD3, CD19,CD20, CD4, CD8, CD56+. The primary pathognomic feature of AIDS would be a CD4 T cell count lower than 200, though there are other red flags such as NK cell activity <10%, or a deficit of T helper cells (CD4+), as well as these others that would only be found on the Cyrex Lymphocyte MAP test: TH1 insufficiency, Increased T-Reg (CD4+ CD25+), deficits of cytotoxic cells (CD8+, CD56+), increased TGF-beta, etc. The Lymphocyte subset panel is cheaper and available at any standard lab and may be covered by insurance, the Cyrex test is more expensive and is a mail order blood test only that has to be paid in cash up front. The Cyrex test can detect 14 different immunotypes and reveal immune under or overactivity, infections, inflammation, autoimmunity, allergies, asthma, hypersentivities and some cancers. It also helps determine what further immune tests can be done to fine tune a healing protocol. Galleri Cancer Screening is an advanced test for 50+ types of common cancers based on a genetic marker found in the blood. It is a good screening test because it is 99.5% specific. This might be a good option for someone with a family or personal history of cancer as it can detect occurance at a the earliest microscopic stage, far before any visual test like an MRI or CT scan would show a mass. If cancer is found ivermectin, fenbendazole, vitamin C, baking soda and many other of label easily available substances are very promising for treatment. Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer? Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer? Cancer rates have skyrocketed in the past century for a number of reasons not least of which is the incredibly large number of toxins spewed into the environment and incorporated into our food supplies. And now with most of humanity exposed to the cancerous spike protein there is likely to be even further acceleration. Those exposed to the fallout from … Read full story Complete Blood Count (CBC) Measures various components and features of the blood, including red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets. Amongst the white blood cells we can see various abnormalities - they can be high or low, and subsets like basophils, neutrophils and eosinophils might be off. For example a patient started aspirin which is a cornerstone of most treatments of spike toxicity, but in this case raised the eosinophil level and caused some histaminergic symptoms. The symptoms were the same as her usual disease symptoms so initially were written off as a normal fluctuation in symptomatology over time, but in light of the elevated eosinophil level we finally determined that the aspirin was triggering a problem, since that is possible side effect of aspirin. Once off aspirin the symptoms and the eosinophils normalized. Comprehensive Metabolic Panel (CMP) Measures 14 different substances in the blood. It provides information about kidney and liver function, electrolyte levels, and blood sugar. Blood sugar can be high or low in spike toxicity, and that would indicate a pancreatic issue requiring further workup. Liver function often needs to be tracked in those on ivermectin and many other medications. Potassium balances sodium and usually needs to be supplemented in long haul, since most people don’t get enough, especially if blood pressure is rising. Cystatin C is a more specific marker of kidney dysfunction than the creatinine level that is included on the CMP. D-dimer: as mentioned earlier this is a product of the breakdown of clots, it’s often elevated in the acute phase of spike injury or disease, but over time the microclots being inherently difficult to break down stop releasing D-dimer unless the patient is taking a combination of supplements and/or medications to trigger this. Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) Decoding ESR Test: What Your Results Could Reveal About Your Health | Pathkind Labs Blog Measures the rate at which red blood cells settle in a standardized tube over one hour. It is a nonspecific marker of inflammation in the body. It is also an indication of the zeta potential, which is a measure of the normal negative charge on red cells that prevents them from clumping together. Spike protein lowers the normal zeta potential which usually causes ESR to rise. Potassium citrate can help reverse this trend, as can sunlight and grounding. hs-CRP Test (C-Reactive Protein High-Sensitivity) is another non specific marker of inflammation in the body and if found require further workup. It can be elevated in myo-pericarditis. Troponin T is a protein relatively specific to heart muscle cells, leaked into the blood. This is a cardiac biomarker that indicates myocardial injury and along with an EKG is. one of the primary screening tests for a heart attack as well as for myocarditis/pericarditis. Pro BNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) is produced by the heart in response to strain, particularly heart failure. Electrocardiogram (EKG) EKG: What is it and what does it mean? – JP Stroke Foundation Non-invasive medical test that records the heart's electrical activity. Can be used to diagnose myocarditis/pericarditis, heart attack, and various rhythm abnormalities like atrial fibrillation, SVTs and more that can raise the risk of sudden cardiac arrest, such as that seen in some athletes who have been vaxxed. Echocardiogram (ECHO) Provides valuable information about the heart's structure, function, and blood flow and is an important test for helping visualize the inflammatory changes of myocarditis-pericarditis, such as fluid leaking into the sack around the heart. Chest X-ray source Non-invasive imaging test that uses X-rays to visualize the structures and organs within the chest, including the lungs, heart, ribs, diaphragm, and large arteries. Anyone with shortness of breath should have a Chest Xray as a first screening test looking for pneumonia, inflammation, scarring, nodules/cancer, etc. Whole Body MRI The Latest Quantified Self Trend: Whole-Body MRI Another imaging modality that can turn up hidden cancers and a whole host of other abnormalities and might be ordered for someone where the Galleri test was negative but there was still some suspicion present (here is always the risk of over diagnosis with imaging tests like this, which can lead to otherwise unnecessary stress and procedures that can themselves cause harm). Microbiome testing: Microbiomix Metagenomic Sequencing of Stool by Genova or Sabine Hazan’s Whole Genome Deep Sequencing by Progenabiome. Spike toxicity leads to depletion of beneficial gut bacterials species such as Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Roseburia inulinivorans, and Roseburia hominis all of which are associated with long COVID complications. Presence of 'unfriendly' bacterial species is linked to poor performance on the 6-minute walk test among long COVID patients. Microbiomix is cheaper because it uses a less thorough sequencing technique, but can show some changes found due to spike toxicity. Sabine Hazan’s test is better if budgeting allows, both because it does a whole genome sequencing, but also because it benefits from her proprietary and private knowledge base (essentially studies and findings that have not yet been published). There are some supplements that can help correct deficits, and in stubborn cases a stool transplant can be transformative, though this is somewhat difficult to get done as it usually requires travel. And that’s a wrap! Next time We’ll look at the Masterjohn-Schilling panel which is our go to for optimizing treatment of long haul/vax injury and perhaps the Comprehensive Nutrition panel, which is important for anyone who has a chronic illness resistant to treatment, including long haul syndromes. https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/screening-for-silent-spike-toxicity?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/screening-for-silent-spike-toxicity.html

Ten New Year’s Resolutions to Restore Medical Freedom Clayton J. Baker, MD As 2023 staggers to its conclusion, leaving behind a world of brutal wars, tenuous economies, corrupt governments, and tyrannical elites, perhaps the most unsettling aspect of the year’s end is a strange silence. Some things always generate plenty of noise. The 2024 US Presidential election promises to be even more hysterical than the last two. It will probably be a rematch, pitting a widely hated octogenarian incumbent President with obvious, rapidly progressing dementia against a widely hated late-septuagenarian former President facing dozens of felony indictments. Still almost a year away, the commotion surrounding this impending showdown of the senescent is already continuous, cacophonous, and confounding. However, regarding the most important historical event since World War II, there is almost total silence. The Covid-19 debacle is the defining event of the 21st century. It is at once the worst act of biological warfare in human history and the greatest mass violation of civil liberties since the Iron Curtain. Even more importantly, it is the self-evident template for the establishment of the technocratic soft-core totalitarianism advocated by globalist entities such as the World Health Organization and the World Economic Forum. And yet virtually no one in the mainstream will discuss it. The legacy media shows near zero curiosity regarding Covid’s origins, the disastrous response, or the toxic vaccines. Both the Biden and Trump camps pretend it never happened. Out of the 4 Republican debates held to date, only one question has been asked about Covid vaccines. And that single exchange, between journalist Megyn Kelly and candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, was mysteriously blacked out, even from supposedly “free speech” platform Rumble’s livestream of the event, with Rumble’s CEO later blaming the blackout on “the source feed from a 3rd party” which he did not name. Nothing to see here. Among the other presidential candidates, former Democrat Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Republican Ron DeSantis have spoken up repeatedly and honestly about Covid. As a result, they have both been aggressively reviled and ostracized by both the mainstream media and the establishments of both political parties. Advocates for civil rights in general, and for medical freedom in particular, should be deeply disturbed by this attempt to cast the whole Covid-19 catastrophe down the memory hole. Medical freedom is rapidly developing as a philosophical, intellectual, and ethical concept. However, theoretical efforts to promote medical freedom – and by extension, to re-enforce all fundamental civil liberties – will come to naught if the greatest assault on freedom in modern history is allowed to be forgotten, and the perpetrators are allowed to continue as if nothing happened. As a prominent man once asked: “What is to be done?” In my attempt to answer that question, here are 10 New Year’s Resolutions for Medical Freedom advocates. 1. Speak the Truth About Covid at Every Opportunity. Honest and informed citizens, politicians, and public figures must plainly tell truthful narratives about Covid every chance they get. A brief, factual account might sound something like this: a. SARS CoV-2 is a man-made bioweapon developed through US Government funding, which got out of the lab and into the human population. b. The mRNA Covid vaccines are essentially pre-planned antidotes to that bioweapon, which were hastily produced and aggressively pushed on the population for profit, with an appalling and criminal disregard for safety. c. The lockdowns, masking, school closures, mandates, censorship, scapegoating, etc., were deliberate and illegal assaults on citizens’ civil rights – blatant power grabs that governments made under the pretense of a declared emergency. Medical freedom advocates must explain to people that they have been repeatedly lied to for the past 4 years, by virtually every authority. Then, tell them the truth – coolly, rationally, and politely. If they don’t want to hear it, tell them anyway. For decades, every citizen in modern Western society has been browbeaten with leftist and globalist propaganda, ranging from countless Global Warming false prophecies, to risible DEI nonsense, to Baskin-Robbinsesque gender insanity, to fascistic vaccine absolutism. Then came Covid. At this late date, it is reasonable and salutary to present one’s neighbor with a brief smattering of truth. 2. Encourage and Petition Politicians to Commit to Medical Freedom Policies. The Pharma industry spent a reported $379 million on political lobbying in 2022 alone. It’s going to take a lot of grassroots work with politicians to combat the pernicious influence of that much purchased influence. There is evidence that this can be done. People such as Dr. Mary Talley Bowden in Texas are leading the way in this regard. As of December 23, 2023, Bowden and colleagues have convinced 40 candidates and 25 elected officials from 17 states to publicly state that “the Covid shots must be pulled off the market.” Per Dr. Bowden, “many of these are also pledging not to take donations from Big Pharma.” Those committed to medical freedom should set all their elected officials and relevant appointed government bureaucrats on speed dial. These individuals in positions of power – at all levels, local to national – must hear regularly from their constituents. Constituents must tell these people exactly what they know, as well as what they want. It is now up to constituents to teach their officials the facts about the world. As Andrew Lowenthal has demonstrated in detail, the Censorship Industrial Complex is real, and because of it, many elected officials and bureaucrats suffer from the same lack of accurate information on policy matters as the majority of their constituents. 3. Work to Outlaw all Gain-of-Function Research. All research regarding the genetic manipulation of viruses needs to end. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and others have pointed out that such research is really bioweapons research, in which our tax dollars are misused to fund the development of a bioweapon and its antidote vaccine in concert. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis and the state legislature have passed laws banning gain-of-function research in that state. The Covid era displayed in high relief the disastrous wages of such “research.” It needs to be completely outlawed everywhere, and all labs involved in such work, from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, to the Ralph Baric lab at the University of North Carolina, to illegal labs in the rural USA or allegedly in places like the Ukraine, need to be permanently shut down. Key to achieving this is not falling prey to the intentionally confusing semantic arguments about what technically constitutes “Gain-of-function” and what doesn’t. The word games Anthony Fauci played with Congress need to be called out as the dishonest prevarications they are, and rejected as a defense for those involved in such wicked “research.” (Of note, the Florida laws included language to prevent this deception, outlawing all “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen research.”) 4. Work to Get the USA out of the World Health Organization. The WHO’s newly proposed pandemic agreement and amendments to the existing International Health Regulations (IHR) unfortunately are bald-faced, bad-faith attempts to usurp power from sovereign nations by an unelected globalist elite, all in the nebulous name of “global health.” As David Bell and Thi Thuy Van Dinh have written, despite claims by WHO Director General Tedros Ghebreyesus that “no country will cede any sovereignty to [the] WHO,” in fact The documents propose a transfer of decision-making power to the WHO regarding basic aspects of societal function, which countries undertake to enact. The WHO Director-General will have sole authority to decide when and where they are applied. The proposals are intended to be binding under international law. Furthermore, the proposed amendments to the IHR will change WHO directives during declared health emergencies from non-binding recommendations to dictates with the force of international law. As Bell and Dinh state, “It seems outrageous from a human rights perspective that the amendments will enable the WHO to dictate countries to require individual medical examinations and vaccinations whenever it declares a pandemic.” And the potential incursions to medical freedom hardly end there, potentially including all the items in Article 18 of the existing IHR, which already directly contradict the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights in multiple places. Most current debate on the matter surrounds the question of whether individual countries should accept or reject these proposals. However, in the wake of the Covid disaster, the WHO’s current proposals reveal that its intention is not to step back, learn from the catastrophe, and account for the mistakes it and other authorities made. Rather, it seeks to consolidate its own power by permanently encoding the top-down, public-health-by-totalitarian-diktat approach that caused so much destruction. Not only these policies, but the organization proposing them should be categorically rejected. The WHO is a classic wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is an unelected globalist cabal of profiteering elites, heavily funded by Bill Gates and closely associated with the World Economic Forum. It is engaged in blatant political power-grabbing while masquerading as a benevolent public health institution. It is insufficient for nations to merely reject the WHO’s proposed pandemic agreement and amendments to its IHR. The USA and every sovereign nation should leave the WHO entirely, and medical freedom advocates should lead the way in the struggle to make this happen. 5. Join the Fight to Remove the Covid mRNA Vaccines From the Market. The Covid-19 mRNA vaccines have demonstrated toxicities far more common, more varied, and more severe than numerous conventional medicines that have been appropriately pulled from the market in the past. Dr. Peter McCollough and numerous other leaders in the fight for medical freedom have rightly called for the Covid mRNA vaccines to be removed from the market. Despite the intense efforts of Big Pharma, the growing Censorship Industrial Complex, and captured government agencies, public awareness of the numerous and often deadly toxicities of the Covid mRNA injections is growing. This is reflected in both reduced public “uptake” for recurrent “boosters” per CDC data and the falling stock price of Pfizer, Inc. A small but growing number of politicians, as described above, are committing to the fight to remove the vaccines from the market, demonstrating that this is becoming a tenable and perhaps winning political position to hold. Encouraging as these trends may be, they are insufficient on their own. Medical freedom advocates should speak out supporting the removal of the Covid mRNA vaccines from the market. They should recruit, support, and vote for elected officials and candidates taking this position, and support legal actions toward this goal. 6. Push for a Moratorium on the mRNA-Based Pharmaceutical Platform as a Whole. Even if the Covid mRNA vaccines are removed from the market, a widely overlooked corollary question remains: how much of the toxicity from these products is Covid-specific, i.e. due to the spike protein, and how much is due to the deeply problematic and incompletely understood mRNA platform itself? There is certainly plenty of toxicity to go around, as numerous mechanisms of injury have been identified from these injections. These include toxicities to the heart, immune system, skin, reproductive organs, blood clotting cascade, and cancer promotion, among others. It is willful denial at best and criminal negligence at worst to assume that the mRNA platform does not contribute to these problems. mRNA vaccines are currently in use in food animals, notably swine. Furthermore on its own website, Moderna describes a pipeline of mRNA vaccines currently in development for Influenza, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), Cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV), Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), Norovirus, Lyme disease, Zika virus, Nipah virus, Monkeypox, and others. Meanwhile, the trial for its EBV vaccine has reportedly been halted in adolescents due to a case of – you guessed it – myocarditis. The human population will soon be inundated with mRNA-based drugs on a scale and with an imposed intensity that will make the Covid era seem positively quaint. The safety record for the sole mRNA product currently in human use – the Covid vaccines – is abysmal. A moratorium of at least several years, combined with an open, thorough, and publicly debated inquiry into the likely and possible toxicities inherent to the mRNA platform is essential to human safety, and if done, will save countless lives in coming years. 7. Work to Have the 1986 Vaccine Act Repealed. The toxicity of vaccines was so well-established even decades ago, that a Federal law – the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) was passed to specifically exempt vaccine manufacturers from product liability, based on the legal principle that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” products. Since the 1986 NCVIA act protecting vaccine manufacturers from liability, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of vaccines on the market, as well as the number of vaccines added to the CDC vaccine schedules, with the number of vaccines on the CDC Child and Adolescent schedule rising from 7 in 1986 to 21 in 2023. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 should be repealed, returning vaccines to the same liability status as other drugs. 8. Work to End Vaccine Mandates at Every Level of Society. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in the 2019-20 academic year there were 3,982 degree-granting colleges and universities in the United States. In the fall of 2021, all but approximately 600 of these institutions mandated Covid-19 vaccination for their students. Since then, nearly all such institutions have dropped their student Covid vaccine mandates. However, at this writing, 71 colleges and universities, or approximately 1.7%, continue to mandate the Covid vaccines for students to attend. The number of mandating schools reduced gradually, largely through the intense, extremely labor intensive work of a very few small, newly-formed, grassroots organizations like No College Mandates. While the effectiveness of such efforts is undeniable, the 71 holdouts (which include “elite” institutions such as Harvard and Johns Hopkins) demonstrate just how deeply entrenched the mandating of vaccines remains in certain segments of society. As a result of the hubris and abuse it displayed during Covid, the entire vaccine mega-industry has suffered tremendous (and richly deserved) damage to its formerly unquestioned, “safe and effective” image. However, from education to healthcare to the military, gains made against vaccine mandates have been partial and temporary at most. A concerted effort to further educate the public about the immense problems with vaccines and to restore individual choice must be joined by a great many more people if this fundamental imposition on basic bodily autonomy is to be overcome. 9. Work to End Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Pharmaceuticals. The United States is one of only 2 countries in the world that allows direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals. The dangers of this utterly ill-advised policy are multiple. First, as we all can see by simply turning on the television, Big Pharma abuses this privilege to aggressively yet seductively hawk every product it feels it can make a buck off of. The “pill for every ill” mindset shifts into hyperdrive, with an expensive, proprietary, pharmacological cure for everything from your morbid obesity to your “bent carrot.” The situation on social media is, if anything, even worse. It is no coincidence that black markets for overhyped, purported wonder drugs such as semaglutide develop, nor that dangerous misuse, such as thousands of reported overdoses have been reported. Perhaps more importantly, direct-to-consumer advertising provides Big Pharma with a convenient and legal way to capture media. Big Pharma was the second-largest television advertising industry in 2021, spending $5.6 billion. No legacy media outlet dares to go against the wishes of those providing that level of funding. This effectively muzzles any and all dissenting voices from appearing on those platforms. A free society requires freedom of the press and media. The Covid era has demonstrated that direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising stifles freedom of the press and media to a dangerous and unacceptable degree. 10. Play Offense. If all you do is play defense, the best result you can hope for is a draw. During the lockdowns, with courts closed, businesses shuttered, and citizens isolated from one another, it was extremely difficult to mount even a solid defense against the gross incursions on our civil rights. A few courageous individuals, often acting alone and at tremendous personal cost, managed to counterpunch effectively. Their contributions to saving our “free” societies (if indeed they are eventually saved) will perhaps never be adequately recognized. Today, despite the mainstream silence, the tide is turning in favor of medical freedom and civil liberties in multiple areas. It is time for the masses to join in and help those who managed to make these early advances, and who continue to fight on behalf of all citizens. For example, New York attorney Bobbie Anne Cox continues her David v. Goliath legal struggle to defeat Governor Kathy Hochul’s extralegal and grossly unconstitutional quarantine camp order. This case may eventually reach the Supreme Court. I don’t want to declare that Ms. Cox can’t do it alone, because that’s pretty much what she has done so far, and having followed that case, I wouldn’t bet against her. But hell, even Hercules had a sidekick. Medical freedom advocates would do well by actively and generously supporting her. After surviving his own trial by fire, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has announced a lawsuit against Pfizer for “unlawfully misrepresenting the Covid-19 vaccine’s effectiveness, and attempting to censor public discussion of the product.” Citizens of other states would do well to aggressively petition their attorneys general to take similar action, including removing the mRNA vaccines from the market in their states on the grounds of their demonstrated adulteration with potentially harmful DNA. If medical freedom advocates want the concept to prevail, they must go on offense. Get involved. There is no need to reinvent the wheel at this point. Adopt one or more of the organizations or causes above as your personal project, join, and contribute. Add your light to the sum of light, and the darkness will not overcome it. In summary, those of us seeking to secure and ensure medical freedom for ourselves and future generations must become vocal, persistent advocates, as well as courageous people of action. Furthermore, we must not allow the abuses and evils of the Covid era to vanish down the memory hole, which of course is exactly what every politician, bureaucrat, Deep State apparatchik, and globalist elite who perpetrated those deeds wants to happen. Some cliches are true, and this is one of them: if we allow ourselves to forget history, we will be doomed to repeat it. Covid-19 was the defining event of the century. It was a destructive, deadly catastrophe, but it does have one remarkable silver lining. It peeled the veneer off our governments, institutions, corporations, and society as a whole. It revealed how the powerful plan to strip us of our freedoms – medical and otherwise. We now know what we face. May we, the ordinary citizens, have the courage and intelligence to act effectively to regain and retain our freedoms, dignity, and fundamental human rights. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author C.J. Baker, M.D. is an internal medicine physician with a quarter century in clinical practice. He has held numerous academic medical appointments, and his work has appeared in many journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine. From 2012 to 2018 he was Clinical Associate Professor of Medical Humanities and Bioethics at the University of Rochester. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/ten-new-years-resolutions-to-restore-medical-freedom/

Ten New Year’s Resolutions to Restore Medical Freedom Clayton J. Baker, MD As 2023 staggers to its conclusion, leaving behind a world of brutal wars, tenuous economies, corrupt governments, and tyrannical elites, perhaps the most unsettling aspect of the year’s end is a strange silence. Some things always generate plenty of noise. The 2024 US Presidential election promises to be even more hysterical than the last two. It will probably be a rematch, pitting a widely hated octogenarian incumbent President with obvious, rapidly progressing dementia against a widely hated late-septuagenarian former President facing dozens of felony indictments. Still almost a year away, the commotion surrounding this impending showdown of the senescent is already continuous, cacophonous, and confounding. However, regarding the most important historical event since World War II, there is almost total silence. The Covid-19 debacle is the defining event of the 21st century. It is at once the worst act of biological warfare in human history and the greatest mass violation of civil liberties since the Iron Curtain. Even more importantly, it is the self-evident template for the establishment of the technocratic soft-core totalitarianism advocated by globalist entities such as the World Health Organization and the World Economic Forum. And yet virtually no one in the mainstream will discuss it. The legacy media shows near zero curiosity regarding Covid’s origins, the disastrous response, or the toxic vaccines. Both the Biden and Trump camps pretend it never happened. Out of the 4 Republican debates held to date, only one question has been asked about Covid vaccines. And that single exchange, between journalist Megyn Kelly and candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, was mysteriously blacked out, even from supposedly “free speech” platform Rumble’s livestream of the event, with Rumble’s CEO later blaming the blackout on “the source feed from a 3rd party” which he did not name. Nothing to see here. Among the other presidential candidates, former Democrat Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Republican Ron DeSantis have spoken up repeatedly and honestly about Covid. As a result, they have both been aggressively reviled and ostracized by both the mainstream media and the establishments of both political parties. Advocates for civil rights in general, and for medical freedom in particular, should be deeply disturbed by this attempt to cast the whole Covid-19 catastrophe down the memory hole. Medical freedom is rapidly developing as a philosophical, intellectual, and ethical concept. However, theoretical efforts to promote medical freedom – and by extension, to re-enforce all fundamental civil liberties – will come to naught if the greatest assault on freedom in modern history is allowed to be forgotten, and the perpetrators are allowed to continue as if nothing happened. As a prominent man once asked: “What is to be done?” In my attempt to answer that question, here are 10 New Year’s Resolutions for Medical Freedom advocates. 1. Speak the Truth About Covid at Every Opportunity. Honest and informed citizens, politicians, and public figures must plainly tell truthful narratives about Covid every chance they get. A brief, factual account might sound something like this: a. SARS CoV-2 is a man-made bioweapon developed through US Government funding, which got out of the lab and into the human population. b. The mRNA Covid vaccines are essentially pre-planned antidotes to that bioweapon, which were hastily produced and aggressively pushed on the population for profit, with an appalling and criminal disregard for safety. c. The lockdowns, masking, school closures, mandates, censorship, scapegoating, etc., were deliberate and illegal assaults on citizens’ civil rights – blatant power grabs that governments made under the pretense of a declared emergency. Medical freedom advocates must explain to people that they have been repeatedly lied to for the past 4 years, by virtually every authority. Then, tell them the truth – coolly, rationally, and politely. If they don’t want to hear it, tell them anyway. For decades, every citizen in modern Western society has been browbeaten with leftist and globalist propaganda, ranging from countless Global Warming false prophecies, to risible DEI nonsense, to Baskin-Robbinsesque gender insanity, to fascistic vaccine absolutism. Then came Covid. At this late date, it is reasonable and salutary to present one’s neighbor with a brief smattering of truth. 2. Encourage and Petition Politicians to Commit to Medical Freedom Policies. The Pharma industry spent a reported $379 million on political lobbying in 2022 alone. It’s going to take a lot of grassroots work with politicians to combat the pernicious influence of that much purchased influence. There is evidence that this can be done. People such as Dr. Mary Talley Bowden in Texas are leading the way in this regard. As of December 23, 2023, Bowden and colleagues have convinced 40 candidates and 25 elected officials from 17 states to publicly state that “the Covid shots must be pulled off the market.” Per Dr. Bowden, “many of these are also pledging not to take donations from Big Pharma.” Those committed to medical freedom should set all their elected officials and relevant appointed government bureaucrats on speed dial. These individuals in positions of power – at all levels, local to national – must hear regularly from their constituents. Constituents must tell these people exactly what they know, as well as what they want. It is now up to constituents to teach their officials the facts about the world. As Andrew Lowenthal has demonstrated in detail, the Censorship Industrial Complex is real, and because of it, many elected officials and bureaucrats suffer from the same lack of accurate information on policy matters as the majority of their constituents. 3. Work to Outlaw all Gain-of-Function Research. All research regarding the genetic manipulation of viruses needs to end. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and others have pointed out that such research is really bioweapons research, in which our tax dollars are misused to fund the development of a bioweapon and its antidote vaccine in concert. In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis and the state legislature have passed laws banning gain-of-function research in that state. The Covid era displayed in high relief the disastrous wages of such “research.” It needs to be completely outlawed everywhere, and all labs involved in such work, from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, to the Ralph Baric lab at the University of North Carolina, to illegal labs in the rural USA or allegedly in places like the Ukraine, need to be permanently shut down. Key to achieving this is not falling prey to the intentionally confusing semantic arguments about what technically constitutes “Gain-of-function” and what doesn’t. The word games Anthony Fauci played with Congress need to be called out as the dishonest prevarications they are, and rejected as a defense for those involved in such wicked “research.” (Of note, the Florida laws included language to prevent this deception, outlawing all “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen research.”) 4. Work to Get the USA out of the World Health Organization. The WHO’s newly proposed pandemic agreement and amendments to the existing International Health Regulations (IHR) unfortunately are bald-faced, bad-faith attempts to usurp power from sovereign nations by an unelected globalist elite, all in the nebulous name of “global health.” As David Bell and Thi Thuy Van Dinh have written, despite claims by WHO Director General Tedros Ghebreyesus that “no country will cede any sovereignty to [the] WHO,” in fact The documents propose a transfer of decision-making power to the WHO regarding basic aspects of societal function, which countries undertake to enact. The WHO Director-General will have sole authority to decide when and where they are applied. The proposals are intended to be binding under international law. Furthermore, the proposed amendments to the IHR will change WHO directives during declared health emergencies from non-binding recommendations to dictates with the force of international law. As Bell and Dinh state, “It seems outrageous from a human rights perspective that the amendments will enable the WHO to dictate countries to require individual medical examinations and vaccinations whenever it declares a pandemic.” And the potential incursions to medical freedom hardly end there, potentially including all the items in Article 18 of the existing IHR, which already directly contradict the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights in multiple places. Most current debate on the matter surrounds the question of whether individual countries should accept or reject these proposals. However, in the wake of the Covid disaster, the WHO’s current proposals reveal that its intention is not to step back, learn from the catastrophe, and account for the mistakes it and other authorities made. Rather, it seeks to consolidate its own power by permanently encoding the top-down, public-health-by-totalitarian-diktat approach that caused so much destruction. Not only these policies, but the organization proposing them should be categorically rejected. The WHO is a classic wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is an unelected globalist cabal of profiteering elites, heavily funded by Bill Gates and closely associated with the World Economic Forum. It is engaged in blatant political power-grabbing while masquerading as a benevolent public health institution. It is insufficient for nations to merely reject the WHO’s proposed pandemic agreement and amendments to its IHR. The USA and every sovereign nation should leave the WHO entirely, and medical freedom advocates should lead the way in the struggle to make this happen. 5. Join the Fight to Remove the Covid mRNA Vaccines From the Market. The Covid-19 mRNA vaccines have demonstrated toxicities far more common, more varied, and more severe than numerous conventional medicines that have been appropriately pulled from the market in the past. Dr. Peter McCollough and numerous other leaders in the fight for medical freedom have rightly called for the Covid mRNA vaccines to be removed from the market. Despite the intense efforts of Big Pharma, the growing Censorship Industrial Complex, and captured government agencies, public awareness of the numerous and often deadly toxicities of the Covid mRNA injections is growing. This is reflected in both reduced public “uptake” for recurrent “boosters” per CDC data and the falling stock price of Pfizer, Inc. A small but growing number of politicians, as described above, are committing to the fight to remove the vaccines from the market, demonstrating that this is becoming a tenable and perhaps winning political position to hold. Encouraging as these trends may be, they are insufficient on their own. Medical freedom advocates should speak out supporting the removal of the Covid mRNA vaccines from the market. They should recruit, support, and vote for elected officials and candidates taking this position, and support legal actions toward this goal. 6. Push for a Moratorium on the mRNA-Based Pharmaceutical Platform as a Whole. Even if the Covid mRNA vaccines are removed from the market, a widely overlooked corollary question remains: how much of the toxicity from these products is Covid-specific, i.e. due to the spike protein, and how much is due to the deeply problematic and incompletely understood mRNA platform itself? There is certainly plenty of toxicity to go around, as numerous mechanisms of injury have been identified from these injections. These include toxicities to the heart, immune system, skin, reproductive organs, blood clotting cascade, and cancer promotion, among others. It is willful denial at best and criminal negligence at worst to assume that the mRNA platform does not contribute to these problems. mRNA vaccines are currently in use in food animals, notably swine. Furthermore on its own website, Moderna describes a pipeline of mRNA vaccines currently in development for Influenza, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), Cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV), Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), Norovirus, Lyme disease, Zika virus, Nipah virus, Monkeypox, and others. Meanwhile, the trial for its EBV vaccine has reportedly been halted in adolescents due to a case of – you guessed it – myocarditis. The human population will soon be inundated with mRNA-based drugs on a scale and with an imposed intensity that will make the Covid era seem positively quaint. The safety record for the sole mRNA product currently in human use – the Covid vaccines – is abysmal. A moratorium of at least several years, combined with an open, thorough, and publicly debated inquiry into the likely and possible toxicities inherent to the mRNA platform is essential to human safety, and if done, will save countless lives in coming years. 7. Work to Have the 1986 Vaccine Act Repealed. The toxicity of vaccines was so well-established even decades ago, that a Federal law – the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) was passed to specifically exempt vaccine manufacturers from product liability, based on the legal principle that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” products. Since the 1986 NCVIA act protecting vaccine manufacturers from liability, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of vaccines on the market, as well as the number of vaccines added to the CDC vaccine schedules, with the number of vaccines on the CDC Child and Adolescent schedule rising from 7 in 1986 to 21 in 2023. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 should be repealed, returning vaccines to the same liability status as other drugs. 8. Work to End Vaccine Mandates at Every Level of Society. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in the 2019-20 academic year there were 3,982 degree-granting colleges and universities in the United States. In the fall of 2021, all but approximately 600 of these institutions mandated Covid-19 vaccination for their students. Since then, nearly all such institutions have dropped their student Covid vaccine mandates. However, at this writing, 71 colleges and universities, or approximately 1.7%, continue to mandate the Covid vaccines for students to attend. The number of mandating schools reduced gradually, largely through the intense, extremely labor intensive work of a very few small, newly-formed, grassroots organizations like No College Mandates. While the effectiveness of such efforts is undeniable, the 71 holdouts (which include “elite” institutions such as Harvard and Johns Hopkins) demonstrate just how deeply entrenched the mandating of vaccines remains in certain segments of society. As a result of the hubris and abuse it displayed during Covid, the entire vaccine mega-industry has suffered tremendous (and richly deserved) damage to its formerly unquestioned, “safe and effective” image. However, from education to healthcare to the military, gains made against vaccine mandates have been partial and temporary at most. A concerted effort to further educate the public about the immense problems with vaccines and to restore individual choice must be joined by a great many more people if this fundamental imposition on basic bodily autonomy is to be overcome. 9. Work to End Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Pharmaceuticals. The United States is one of only 2 countries in the world that allows direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceuticals. The dangers of this utterly ill-advised policy are multiple. First, as we all can see by simply turning on the television, Big Pharma abuses this privilege to aggressively yet seductively hawk every product it feels it can make a buck off of. The “pill for every ill” mindset shifts into hyperdrive, with an expensive, proprietary, pharmacological cure for everything from your morbid obesity to your “bent carrot.” The situation on social media is, if anything, even worse. It is no coincidence that black markets for overhyped, purported wonder drugs such as semaglutide develop, nor that dangerous misuse, such as thousands of reported overdoses have been reported. Perhaps more importantly, direct-to-consumer advertising provides Big Pharma with a convenient and legal way to capture media. Big Pharma was the second-largest television advertising industry in 2021, spending $5.6 billion. No legacy media outlet dares to go against the wishes of those providing that level of funding. This effectively muzzles any and all dissenting voices from appearing on those platforms. A free society requires freedom of the press and media. The Covid era has demonstrated that direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising stifles freedom of the press and media to a dangerous and unacceptable degree. 10. Play Offense. If all you do is play defense, the best result you can hope for is a draw. During the lockdowns, with courts closed, businesses shuttered, and citizens isolated from one another, it was extremely difficult to mount even a solid defense against the gross incursions on our civil rights. A few courageous individuals, often acting alone and at tremendous personal cost, managed to counterpunch effectively. Their contributions to saving our “free” societies (if indeed they are eventually saved) will perhaps never be adequately recognized. Today, despite the mainstream silence, the tide is turning in favor of medical freedom and civil liberties in multiple areas. It is time for the masses to join in and help those who managed to make these early advances, and who continue to fight on behalf of all citizens. For example, New York attorney Bobbie Anne Cox continues her David v. Goliath legal struggle to defeat Governor Kathy Hochul’s extralegal and grossly unconstitutional quarantine camp order. This case may eventually reach the Supreme Court. I don’t want to declare that Ms. Cox can’t do it alone, because that’s pretty much what she has done so far, and having followed that case, I wouldn’t bet against her. But hell, even Hercules had a sidekick. Medical freedom advocates would do well by actively and generously supporting her. After surviving his own trial by fire, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has announced a lawsuit against Pfizer for “unlawfully misrepresenting the Covid-19 vaccine’s effectiveness, and attempting to censor public discussion of the product.” Citizens of other states would do well to aggressively petition their attorneys general to take similar action, including removing the mRNA vaccines from the market in their states on the grounds of their demonstrated adulteration with potentially harmful DNA. If medical freedom advocates want the concept to prevail, they must go on offense. Get involved. There is no need to reinvent the wheel at this point. Adopt one or more of the organizations or causes above as your personal project, join, and contribute. Add your light to the sum of light, and the darkness will not overcome it. In summary, those of us seeking to secure and ensure medical freedom for ourselves and future generations must become vocal, persistent advocates, as well as courageous people of action. Furthermore, we must not allow the abuses and evils of the Covid era to vanish down the memory hole, which of course is exactly what every politician, bureaucrat, Deep State apparatchik, and globalist elite who perpetrated those deeds wants to happen. Some cliches are true, and this is one of them: if we allow ourselves to forget history, we will be doomed to repeat it. Covid-19 was the defining event of the century. It was a destructive, deadly catastrophe, but it does have one remarkable silver lining. It peeled the veneer off our governments, institutions, corporations, and society as a whole. It revealed how the powerful plan to strip us of our freedoms – medical and otherwise. We now know what we face. May we, the ordinary citizens, have the courage and intelligence to act effectively to regain and retain our freedoms, dignity, and fundamental human rights. Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author C.J. Baker, M.D. is an internal medicine physician with a quarter century in clinical practice. He has held numerous academic medical appointments, and his work has appeared in many journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine. From 2012 to 2018 he was Clinical Associate Professor of Medical Humanities and Bioethics at the University of Rochester. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/ten-new-years-resolutions-to-restore-medical-freedom/

🛑 The only mistake Israeli minister Amichai Eliyahu made was to voice out loud the genocidal policy of his government. Following his comments that the Israeli military should drop a nuclear bomb on Gaza, the politician was publicly reprimanded by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other members of the cabinet for making statements “not based on reality”. “Israel and the [Israel Defense Forces] are operating in accordance with the highest standards of international law to avoid harming innocents. We will continue to do so until our victory,” Netanyahu said. The suggestion of using nuclear weapons was also seemingly rebuked by Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who previously referred to Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip as “human animals”. The apparent attempt to make a distinction within Israel’s fanatical regime is absurd. Netanyahu’s “war cabinet” is carrying out a genocide against Palestinians. The intensity of the killing is accelerating. The clumsy call for using nuclear weapons on Gaza by a fanatical Israeli politician was only problematic because it articulated what the U.S.-Israeli state policy is. Genocide ❌ 💬 Read more by Finian Cunningham #GazaStrip #genocide #Israel #NuclearWeapons #Palestine #WarCrimes 🇵🇸 More on Gaza 📍Subscribe 📍Join us on VK

Cruise robotaxis have been extremely problematic in California, so much so that in August GM reduced its fleet by 50% and robotaxi opponents held a protest on Labor Day. #automation

https://curitibaeparanaemfotosantigas.blogspot.com/2023/05/o-problema-teorico-da-civilizacao-hitita.html