• Moscow vs the WHO: This time for real?
    Probably not. But maybe?

    Edward Slavsquat
    Last week, Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov wrote some very rude things about the World Health Organization on his Telegram channel. RIA Novosti then published these very uncouth comments. What does this mean?

    Does this mean that Moscow’s obscenely abusive relationship with the WHO is finally coming to an end? There’s been several false alarms over the past two years but maybe this time it’s not fake news spread by Aussie Cossack? Maybe this time it’s different?

    Maybe. Anything is possible. Let’s have a look together.


    source: ria.ru
    Take the wheel, RIA Novosti:

    “The WHO is an organization that should be feared. It can plunge the world into panic in the blink of an eye—there is no control over it. Its connections with the most active supporters of the ‘thinning’ of humanity are shrouded in darkness,” Pushkov wrote.

    The senator noted that all WHO failures are “covered up through powerful PR.”

    “As it turned out, the WHO management paid influencers for presenting the ugly work of the WHO during Covid in a favorable light,” says Pushkov.

    Dang.

    Before I type another sentence, allow me to state the following: I agree with everything Pushkov wrote on Telegram and it’s very cool that RIA Novosti used its state media platform to disseminate his hate speech against Dr. Tedros (The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, every NATO state, and other weirdos and sworn enemies of humanity who fund the WHO’s ruthless campaign of global health murder).

    But Pushkov is also a senior-ranking member of Russia’s upper house of parliament, which means that if he really thinks the World Health Organization poses an existential threat to Russia, he could always … I dunno … introduce legislation calling for Moscow’s immediate withdrawal? Or at least politely commission a report about why Moscow should leave the WHO post-haste? These are things he could definitely do, or at least recommend, as a Senator.

    Telegram rants are fun but is Pushkov a Russian Senator or a manlet blogger? Because “complaining on Telegram about Russia’s WHO membership” is something Edward Slavsquat would do; one would hope that a powerful alpha male Senator would be able to do more than that?


    source: The Best Telegram Channel Ever You Should Definitely Subscribe Right Now
    All of these questions are irrelevant, actually, because Pushkov doesn’t oppose health terrorism; he just resents the fact that Moscow isn’t getting a bigger piece of the WHO’s health terrorism pie.

    For example: Here is another fiery Telegram post from Pushkov dated March 14, 2021:

    The “safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine” against the backdrop of deaths and thrombosis—is this what they are trying to convince people of? Half of Europe has stopped using it, there is a scandal in the European Commission, and the company gets off with standard excuses.


    source: Telegram
    Pushkov’s solution to this public health scandal? Europe should use Sputnik V, an experimental genetic slurry developed in collaboration with AstraZeneca, which, coincidentally, is also linked to thrombosis and blood clots.


    source: news.ru
    Here’s something else to consider: As Pushkov was writing Telegram tirades against AstraZeneca’s safety record in March 2021, Russian pharmaceutical company R-Pharm was producing AstraZeneca’s “vaccine” and exporting it abroad. This business arrangement continued until September 2022, when R-Pharm suspended production of the British-Swedish clot-shot due to “lack of demand”:


    source: tass.ru
    YOUR EYES ARE NOT DECEIVING YOU: RUSSIA WAS PRODUCING ASTRAZENECA’S GENETIC THROMBOSIS GOO UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2022.

    Furthermore, the Russian government partnered with AstraZeneca to create the Ultimate Clot-Shot, and has repeatedly defended the “safety and efficacy” of the British-Swedish slurry:


    source: interfax-russia.ru
    “The British media and government need to do a better job of protecting the reputation of AstraZeneca's safe and effective vaccine, which competitors are constantly attacking through the media with facts taken out of context,” the Russian Direct Investment Fund, which financed Sputnik V, and partnered with AstraZeneca, and is also headed by a WEF Young Global Leader, said in October 2021. Yeah, leave AstraZeneca alone you monsters!

    Russia pushes for AstraZeneca/Sputnik V cocktail

    Russia pushes for AstraZeneca/Sputnik V cocktail
    Pushkov is not against forcing unproven, barely tested genetic slurries on the world’s population. No, he is perfectly fine with that. He just wants Russia’s unproven, barely tested genetic slurry to have a bigger market share.

    Anyway, no one could accuse Moscow of being unsportsmanlike during the Race to Protect Public Health. Putin even wished the CEO of AstraZeneca “success not only in the Russian market, but also in global markets.”


    source: tass.ru
    Curiously, I can’t find a single comment from Pushkov—on Telegram or while pontificating in the Senate chambers—about the fact that Russia hopped into bed with AstraZeneca, or that Sputnik V is a crude AstraZeneca clone whose clinical trial data has been classified by the Russian Health Ministry as a “trade secret”. Not a single word about any of this—very weird.

    It’s nice that Pushkov was so concerned about the safety and well-being of EU citizens subjected to AstraZeneca’s untested genetic sludge, but why weren’t the same safety standards applied to his assessment of Sputnik V? If you’re a Russian Senator, shouldn’t you be focusing your energies on protecting the health of Russians? It’s charming that Pushkov took time out of his busy Russian senator schedule to worry about Westerners being exposed to thrombosis, but what about Russians being needlessly exposed to thrombosis? Oh right, anyone who talked about that was threatened with arrest or losing their right to practice medicine. I don’t know why Moscow and the Collective West are arch-enemies—they’re so similar.

    Sputnik V is an unlawful experiment, patient advocacy group says

    Sputnik V is an unlawful experiment, patient advocacy group says
    Here’s another illustrative example of Pushkov public health worldview: When Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba called Sputnik V a “hybrid weapon” in December 2020, Pushkov responded by saying that Kiev was murdering its own citizens by not allowing them to get injected with Russia’s safe and effective AstraZeneca clone:


    source: lenta.ru
    Do you see the problem here?

    It’s great that Pushkov is so critical of Western clot-shots. But if he is unable to extend this criticism to Russian clot-shots—which are nearly identical to Western clot-shots—then it’s not clear how Russians benefit from their senator’s based-and-red-pilled takedowns of AstraZeneca (which the Russian government partnered with and repeatedly defended, even as people were dropping dead from horrific post-vaccination AstraZeneca side effects).

    So, returning to Pushkov’s hatred of the WHO: Is he advocating for public health policies that don’t rely on unproven genetic injections? Or is he just annoyed that Moscow’s unproven genetic injection—which is identical to the Collective West’s unproven genetic injections—isn’t being injected into more arms?

    Meanwhile, Moscow continues to enjoy friendly relations with the WHO—and there is literally zero evidence of the federal government even toying with the idea of withdrawing from this awful organization. Zero. None. If you have such evidence, please, please email me and share it. I’m serious.

    Hey, look: There is even an Important Russian Government Medical Authority-Expert who serves on the WHO’s One Health (lol) committee-thing:

    He studied in London, of course:


    source: who.int
    Is Pushkov fighting the space lizards or is he promoting a false clot-shot dichotomy? Are we trapped in a Hegelian clot-shot dialectic, in which the thesis (AstraZeneca) locks horns with the antithesis (Sputnik V), a clot-shot battle that resolves in clot-shot synthesis (they are literally the same clot-shot)?

    And what is even the point of opposing the WHO if you support the worst policies promoted by the WHO? It’s just sort of weird.

    I guess what I’m trying to say is…

    PUPPIES


    THEY OPENED THEIR EYES, FINALLY. THEY ARE NOT BLIND. THAT’S GOOD

    MOSTLY THEY JUST DO THIS, THOUGH


    UNTIL NEXT TIME.




    Last week, Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov wrote some very rude things about the World Health Organization on his Telegram channel. RIA Novosti then published these very uncouth comments. What does this mean?

    https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/moscow-vs-the-who-this-time-for-real

    https://telegra.ph/Moscow-vs-the-WHO-This-time-for-real-04-02
    Moscow vs the WHO: This time for real? Probably not. But maybe? Edward Slavsquat Last week, Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov wrote some very rude things about the World Health Organization on his Telegram channel. RIA Novosti then published these very uncouth comments. What does this mean? Does this mean that Moscow’s obscenely abusive relationship with the WHO is finally coming to an end? There’s been several false alarms over the past two years but maybe this time it’s not fake news spread by Aussie Cossack? Maybe this time it’s different? Maybe. Anything is possible. Let’s have a look together. source: ria.ru Take the wheel, RIA Novosti: “The WHO is an organization that should be feared. It can plunge the world into panic in the blink of an eye—there is no control over it. Its connections with the most active supporters of the ‘thinning’ of humanity are shrouded in darkness,” Pushkov wrote. The senator noted that all WHO failures are “covered up through powerful PR.” “As it turned out, the WHO management paid influencers for presenting the ugly work of the WHO during Covid in a favorable light,” says Pushkov. Dang. Before I type another sentence, allow me to state the following: I agree with everything Pushkov wrote on Telegram and it’s very cool that RIA Novosti used its state media platform to disseminate his hate speech against Dr. Tedros (The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, every NATO state, and other weirdos and sworn enemies of humanity who fund the WHO’s ruthless campaign of global health murder). But Pushkov is also a senior-ranking member of Russia’s upper house of parliament, which means that if he really thinks the World Health Organization poses an existential threat to Russia, he could always … I dunno … introduce legislation calling for Moscow’s immediate withdrawal? Or at least politely commission a report about why Moscow should leave the WHO post-haste? These are things he could definitely do, or at least recommend, as a Senator. Telegram rants are fun but is Pushkov a Russian Senator or a manlet blogger? Because “complaining on Telegram about Russia’s WHO membership” is something Edward Slavsquat would do; one would hope that a powerful alpha male Senator would be able to do more than that? source: The Best Telegram Channel Ever You Should Definitely Subscribe Right Now All of these questions are irrelevant, actually, because Pushkov doesn’t oppose health terrorism; he just resents the fact that Moscow isn’t getting a bigger piece of the WHO’s health terrorism pie. For example: Here is another fiery Telegram post from Pushkov dated March 14, 2021: The “safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine” against the backdrop of deaths and thrombosis—is this what they are trying to convince people of? Half of Europe has stopped using it, there is a scandal in the European Commission, and the company gets off with standard excuses. source: Telegram Pushkov’s solution to this public health scandal? Europe should use Sputnik V, an experimental genetic slurry developed in collaboration with AstraZeneca, which, coincidentally, is also linked to thrombosis and blood clots. source: news.ru Here’s something else to consider: As Pushkov was writing Telegram tirades against AstraZeneca’s safety record in March 2021, Russian pharmaceutical company R-Pharm was producing AstraZeneca’s “vaccine” and exporting it abroad. This business arrangement continued until September 2022, when R-Pharm suspended production of the British-Swedish clot-shot due to “lack of demand”: source: tass.ru YOUR EYES ARE NOT DECEIVING YOU: RUSSIA WAS PRODUCING ASTRAZENECA’S GENETIC THROMBOSIS GOO UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2022. Furthermore, the Russian government partnered with AstraZeneca to create the Ultimate Clot-Shot, and has repeatedly defended the “safety and efficacy” of the British-Swedish slurry: source: interfax-russia.ru “The British media and government need to do a better job of protecting the reputation of AstraZeneca's safe and effective vaccine, which competitors are constantly attacking through the media with facts taken out of context,” the Russian Direct Investment Fund, which financed Sputnik V, and partnered with AstraZeneca, and is also headed by a WEF Young Global Leader, said in October 2021. Yeah, leave AstraZeneca alone you monsters! Russia pushes for AstraZeneca/Sputnik V cocktail Russia pushes for AstraZeneca/Sputnik V cocktail Pushkov is not against forcing unproven, barely tested genetic slurries on the world’s population. No, he is perfectly fine with that. He just wants Russia’s unproven, barely tested genetic slurry to have a bigger market share. Anyway, no one could accuse Moscow of being unsportsmanlike during the Race to Protect Public Health. Putin even wished the CEO of AstraZeneca “success not only in the Russian market, but also in global markets.” source: tass.ru Curiously, I can’t find a single comment from Pushkov—on Telegram or while pontificating in the Senate chambers—about the fact that Russia hopped into bed with AstraZeneca, or that Sputnik V is a crude AstraZeneca clone whose clinical trial data has been classified by the Russian Health Ministry as a “trade secret”. Not a single word about any of this—very weird. It’s nice that Pushkov was so concerned about the safety and well-being of EU citizens subjected to AstraZeneca’s untested genetic sludge, but why weren’t the same safety standards applied to his assessment of Sputnik V? If you’re a Russian Senator, shouldn’t you be focusing your energies on protecting the health of Russians? It’s charming that Pushkov took time out of his busy Russian senator schedule to worry about Westerners being exposed to thrombosis, but what about Russians being needlessly exposed to thrombosis? Oh right, anyone who talked about that was threatened with arrest or losing their right to practice medicine. I don’t know why Moscow and the Collective West are arch-enemies—they’re so similar. Sputnik V is an unlawful experiment, patient advocacy group says Sputnik V is an unlawful experiment, patient advocacy group says Here’s another illustrative example of Pushkov public health worldview: When Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba called Sputnik V a “hybrid weapon” in December 2020, Pushkov responded by saying that Kiev was murdering its own citizens by not allowing them to get injected with Russia’s safe and effective AstraZeneca clone: source: lenta.ru Do you see the problem here? It’s great that Pushkov is so critical of Western clot-shots. But if he is unable to extend this criticism to Russian clot-shots—which are nearly identical to Western clot-shots—then it’s not clear how Russians benefit from their senator’s based-and-red-pilled takedowns of AstraZeneca (which the Russian government partnered with and repeatedly defended, even as people were dropping dead from horrific post-vaccination AstraZeneca side effects). So, returning to Pushkov’s hatred of the WHO: Is he advocating for public health policies that don’t rely on unproven genetic injections? Or is he just annoyed that Moscow’s unproven genetic injection—which is identical to the Collective West’s unproven genetic injections—isn’t being injected into more arms? Meanwhile, Moscow continues to enjoy friendly relations with the WHO—and there is literally zero evidence of the federal government even toying with the idea of withdrawing from this awful organization. Zero. None. If you have such evidence, please, please email me and share it. I’m serious. Hey, look: There is even an Important Russian Government Medical Authority-Expert who serves on the WHO’s One Health (lol) committee-thing: He studied in London, of course: source: who.int Is Pushkov fighting the space lizards or is he promoting a false clot-shot dichotomy? Are we trapped in a Hegelian clot-shot dialectic, in which the thesis (AstraZeneca) locks horns with the antithesis (Sputnik V), a clot-shot battle that resolves in clot-shot synthesis (they are literally the same clot-shot)? And what is even the point of opposing the WHO if you support the worst policies promoted by the WHO? It’s just sort of weird. I guess what I’m trying to say is… PUPPIES THEY OPENED THEIR EYES, FINALLY. THEY ARE NOT BLIND. THAT’S GOOD MOSTLY THEY JUST DO THIS, THOUGH UNTIL NEXT TIME. Last week, Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov wrote some very rude things about the World Health Organization on his Telegram channel. RIA Novosti then published these very uncouth comments. What does this mean? https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/p/moscow-vs-the-who-this-time-for-real https://telegra.ph/Moscow-vs-the-WHO-This-time-for-real-04-02
    Like
    Love
    2
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 4508 Views
  • The Shedding Disease
    What's going on and what to do about it

    Dr. Syed Haider

    Back in the 1300s during the Black Death plague outbreak in Europe, people were dropping like flies from this mystery illness. No one knew how it spread or how to protect themselves.

    Imagine their shock when some folks started getting sick without ever coming into direct contact with a plague victim!

    Turns out, the plague was spreading through fleas hitching a ride on rats. Even if you never touched a sick person, a plague-carrying flea could jump off a rat and bite you, infecting you with the deadly disease.

    Image
    Huge rat > truly gigantic flea > normal or tiny (?) peasant
    Crazy, right?

    Fast forward to today, and as most of you already know we might be facing a somewhat similar situation with the clot shots.

    For the FOBs (Fresh off the Boat from normie land), hear me out…

    So there's been a ton of stories popping up lately about unvaxxed people, mostly women, having all sorts of weird health issues after being around recently vaccinated folks.

    We're talking things like wacky periods, miscarriages, crazy autoimmune flares, cancers, strokes, etc, all in people who never got the jab themselves.

    At first it seemed like coincidence, but the reports kept piling up.

    It got many doctors scratching their heads (others like me didn’t scratch, we just knew) and wondering, could there be something to this?

    Image
    Man scratches head, Not me.
    Could vaccinated people be "shedding" something that's making unvaccinated people sick?

    There's a few theories flying around.

    One is that the spike proteins made by the vaccines are hitching a ride in tiny bubbles called exosomes that are released in breath, sweat, and other bodily fluids. So an unvaxxed person breathes in these exosomes and boom(!), the toxic spike proteins get into their body and start wreaking havoc. Some people seem super sensitive and react to even tiny amounts.

    Image
    Exosomes are just little bits of our cells membranes that bud off, and can carry anything inside them. In a way viruses are just a class of exosomes, but carrying genetic material that originated outside us (and then multiplied inside us).
    Another idea is that the vaccines are turning people into stealthy virus super-spreaders without them even knowing it. They might feel fine, but they could be carrying and shedding high amounts of virus to everyone around them. So it's not really something in the shot that's being shed, its that they catch COVID, have no symptoms and then just go around spreading COVID everywhere and it’s the COVID that causes the problem (sounds like Big Pharma cope to me, kind of like: it's all in their heads! So yeah, I’m not buying it either).

    Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it.

    Share

    There's even studies showing the vaccines contain DNA junk from the manufacturing process that might be messing with our microbiome and turning vaxxed people into walking bio-hazards (this is more like it).

    Some theories are farther out there, like it’s some kind of energetic imbalance, or it’s graphene oxide, or even some kind of nanotech (all your cells are belong to us! not very convincing imo).

    Image
    This is not real! My take on the "flashing lights" in the nanotech videos: spinning particulate crystals dispersing incident light from the microscope? The apparently self-assembling structures: chemical gardens? The broadcasted MAC addresses? Put that sample in a Faraday cage and check it again.
    Anyway, regardless of the mechanism there’s something strange going on.

    The science is still new (there's not much of a career in studying this stuff), but evidence is beginning to stack up suggesting that this "vaccine shedding" stuff might be legit.

    Researchers are finding vaccine cooties like mRNA, spike proteins, and weird DNA bits in saliva, vaginal secretions, sperm, breast milk, even the air around vaxxed people.

    Image
    For the love of God don’t vax the kiddos.
    So what to do?

    Figure out your personal risk level. Some folks seem to be more sensitive than others, especially if you already have health issues (or had spike toxicity before). Might be smart to take extra precautions.

    Rain check: avoid swapping saliva or other Fun Time Activities with vaxxed people if you can, at least for a few weeks to months after they get the shot.

    Feed your body the good stuff to beef up your natural defenses. We're talking clean eats, plenty of Zzz's, and immune-boosting supps like the sunshine vitamin (I mean actual sunshine), as well as actual supplements like C, D, zinc, and quercetin.

    Consider adding some anti-shedding supplements to your arsenal, like

    DETOX [spike buster] to bust up clots or ivermectin to nuke those spike proteins. Work with a dialed in doc (i.e. me) to find the right combo for you.

    If you got mega-dosed with someone's shed, you might need to pull out the big detox guns like plasma donation (which is better tho the paid, or more expensive, less available therapeutic plasmapheresis), ozone therapy, ultraviolet blood irradiation, low-dose naltrexone, microbiome restoration (i.e. stool transplants, probably somewhere in South America or maybe Australia), or IV exosomes. We can help with a custom detox plan at mygotodoc.com (that's me).

    Don't forget to clean your space! Some have reported you can detoxify a room where shedding occurred using hypochlorous acid (Danolyte) or Chlorine Dioxide. UV light systems may also be able to zap any shed cooties floating around (plus they kills normal COVID too, bonus!)

    Share

    Bottom line, we need way more research on this shedding stuff ASAP. But until we know for sure it's not a thing, better safe than shedding or shed upon.

    We all have the right to choose what goes in our bodies, and that includes not getting stealth dosed with someone else's vaccine gunk.

    The health bigwigs need to step up and take this seriously stat (yea right - someone needs to take them to the woodshed, or just shed on them).


    Until then (forever?), keep your eyes open, trust your gut, and do what you gotta do to stay safe out there!

    And if you think you got shed upon, speak up and find a doc who will actually listen (again: moi).

    Shedding is no joke, but together we'll get through this and come out stronger on the other side.

    Drop a comment below and let me know if you’ve been shed upon, what you know works and what else we should do (Nuremberg 2.0, anyone?).

    https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/the-shedding-disease

    https://telegra.ph/The-Shedding-Disease-03-20
    The Shedding Disease What's going on and what to do about it Dr. Syed Haider Back in the 1300s during the Black Death plague outbreak in Europe, people were dropping like flies from this mystery illness. No one knew how it spread or how to protect themselves. Imagine their shock when some folks started getting sick without ever coming into direct contact with a plague victim! Turns out, the plague was spreading through fleas hitching a ride on rats. Even if you never touched a sick person, a plague-carrying flea could jump off a rat and bite you, infecting you with the deadly disease. Image Huge rat > truly gigantic flea > normal or tiny (?) peasant Crazy, right? Fast forward to today, and as most of you already know we might be facing a somewhat similar situation with the clot shots. For the FOBs (Fresh off the Boat from normie land), hear me out… So there's been a ton of stories popping up lately about unvaxxed people, mostly women, having all sorts of weird health issues after being around recently vaccinated folks. We're talking things like wacky periods, miscarriages, crazy autoimmune flares, cancers, strokes, etc, all in people who never got the jab themselves. At first it seemed like coincidence, but the reports kept piling up. It got many doctors scratching their heads (others like me didn’t scratch, we just knew) and wondering, could there be something to this? Image Man scratches head, Not me. Could vaccinated people be "shedding" something that's making unvaccinated people sick? There's a few theories flying around. One is that the spike proteins made by the vaccines are hitching a ride in tiny bubbles called exosomes that are released in breath, sweat, and other bodily fluids. So an unvaxxed person breathes in these exosomes and boom(!), the toxic spike proteins get into their body and start wreaking havoc. Some people seem super sensitive and react to even tiny amounts. Image Exosomes are just little bits of our cells membranes that bud off, and can carry anything inside them. In a way viruses are just a class of exosomes, but carrying genetic material that originated outside us (and then multiplied inside us). Another idea is that the vaccines are turning people into stealthy virus super-spreaders without them even knowing it. They might feel fine, but they could be carrying and shedding high amounts of virus to everyone around them. So it's not really something in the shot that's being shed, its that they catch COVID, have no symptoms and then just go around spreading COVID everywhere and it’s the COVID that causes the problem (sounds like Big Pharma cope to me, kind of like: it's all in their heads! So yeah, I’m not buying it either). Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share There's even studies showing the vaccines contain DNA junk from the manufacturing process that might be messing with our microbiome and turning vaxxed people into walking bio-hazards (this is more like it). Some theories are farther out there, like it’s some kind of energetic imbalance, or it’s graphene oxide, or even some kind of nanotech (all your cells are belong to us! not very convincing imo). Image This is not real! My take on the "flashing lights" in the nanotech videos: spinning particulate crystals dispersing incident light from the microscope? The apparently self-assembling structures: chemical gardens? The broadcasted MAC addresses? Put that sample in a Faraday cage and check it again. Anyway, regardless of the mechanism there’s something strange going on. The science is still new (there's not much of a career in studying this stuff), but evidence is beginning to stack up suggesting that this "vaccine shedding" stuff might be legit. Researchers are finding vaccine cooties like mRNA, spike proteins, and weird DNA bits in saliva, vaginal secretions, sperm, breast milk, even the air around vaxxed people. Image For the love of God don’t vax the kiddos. So what to do? Figure out your personal risk level. Some folks seem to be more sensitive than others, especially if you already have health issues (or had spike toxicity before). Might be smart to take extra precautions. Rain check: avoid swapping saliva or other Fun Time Activities with vaxxed people if you can, at least for a few weeks to months after they get the shot. Feed your body the good stuff to beef up your natural defenses. We're talking clean eats, plenty of Zzz's, and immune-boosting supps like the sunshine vitamin (I mean actual sunshine), as well as actual supplements like C, D, zinc, and quercetin. Consider adding some anti-shedding supplements to your arsenal, like DETOX [spike buster] to bust up clots or ivermectin to nuke those spike proteins. Work with a dialed in doc (i.e. me) to find the right combo for you. If you got mega-dosed with someone's shed, you might need to pull out the big detox guns like plasma donation (which is better tho the paid, or more expensive, less available therapeutic plasmapheresis), ozone therapy, ultraviolet blood irradiation, low-dose naltrexone, microbiome restoration (i.e. stool transplants, probably somewhere in South America or maybe Australia), or IV exosomes. We can help with a custom detox plan at mygotodoc.com (that's me). Don't forget to clean your space! Some have reported you can detoxify a room where shedding occurred using hypochlorous acid (Danolyte) or Chlorine Dioxide. UV light systems may also be able to zap any shed cooties floating around (plus they kills normal COVID too, bonus!) Share Bottom line, we need way more research on this shedding stuff ASAP. But until we know for sure it's not a thing, better safe than shedding or shed upon. We all have the right to choose what goes in our bodies, and that includes not getting stealth dosed with someone else's vaccine gunk. The health bigwigs need to step up and take this seriously stat (yea right - someone needs to take them to the woodshed, or just shed on them). Until then (forever?), keep your eyes open, trust your gut, and do what you gotta do to stay safe out there! And if you think you got shed upon, speak up and find a doc who will actually listen (again: moi). Shedding is no joke, but together we'll get through this and come out stronger on the other side. Drop a comment below and let me know if you’ve been shed upon, what you know works and what else we should do (Nuremberg 2.0, anyone?). https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/the-shedding-disease https://telegra.ph/The-Shedding-Disease-03-20
    BLOG.MYGOTODOC.COM
    The Shedding Disease
    What's going on and what to do about it
    Angry
    1
    0 Reacties 1 aandelen 3481 Views
  • CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for Covid-19 but Recommended Them Anyway
    Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness

    World Council for Health
    This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website.

    cdc masks ineffective covid feature
    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker.

    The investigation, published this week in two parts on The Disinformation Chronicle, details how CDC leadership openly questioned the findings of CDC scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness.

    During the pandemic, mask advocates “shifted goalposts and demanded N95 respirators,” Thacker said, claiming they perform better than surgical masks at stopping the virus.

    If this content is important to you, share it!

    Share

    However, Thacker said CDC scientists found no difference between N95 and surgical masks in the ability to stop the spread of respiratory viruses. The findings of the CDC studies are consistent with other peer-reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19, according to Thacker.

    “But the CDC responded by saying people can’t say that,” Thacker told The Defender.

    To shut down the controversy, the CDC, in its Jan. 23 post on preventing the transmission of pathogens in healthcare settings, warned researchers that to suggest facemasks and respirators are the same “is not scientifically correct,” Thacker wrote.

    CDC ignores own studies questioning N95, mask effectiveness

    According to Thacker, CDC guidance for controlling the spread of infections had not been updated since 2007. This prompted the CDC, in 2022, to select “a bunch of science experts,” and ask them “to update the agency’s scientific guidance to hospitals on how to control infections.”

    In November 2023, the experts produced an 80-page systematic review and meta-analysis, examining whether N95 respirators were more effective than surgical masks. The review found that while N95 respirators are better at filtering particles, the finding that they are more effective at stopping viruses “has been less conclusive.”

    The systematic review also examined the “effectiveness” of N95 respirators and surgical masks “under ‘real world’” conditions and found “no difference” between the two.

    The review also found numerous symptoms reported by N95 mask users, including: “difficulty breathing, headaches, and dizziness; skin barrier damage and itching; fatigue; and difficulty talking.”

    According to Thacker, the CDC is not pleased with these findings, suggesting in its recent update that its own scientists were wrong.

    “Although masks can provide some level of filtration, the level of filtration is not comparable to NIOSH Approved respirators,” the CDC said.

    The post also stated, “The COVID-19 pandemic has forever changed the approach we take in healthcare settings to protect healthcare personnel, patients, and others from transmission of respiratory infections.”

    More evidence contradicting the CDC’s public position came at a June 2023 CDC meeting in Atlanta, when Erin Stone, MPH, a public health analyst in the agency’s Office of Guidelines and Evidence Review, presented the findings of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of N95 respirators and surgical masks.

    According to Stone, the data “suggests no difference” in their effectiveness.

    Yet, in November 2023 testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, CDC Director Mandy Cohen sidestepped questions regarding mask effectiveness and refused to deny she would reinstate mask mandates for children.

    According to Thacker, in December 2023, just six days after Cohen’s testimony, The BMJ’s Archives of Disease in Childhood journal published a study finding that “mask recommendations for children are not supported by scientific evidence.”

    “Recommending child masking does not meet the accepted practice of promulgating only medical interventions where benefits clearly outweigh harms,” the study authors noted.

    Thacker: CDC guidance based on politics, not science

    Thacker said the CDC contradicted its own findings on mask efficacy even in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “Soon after the pandemic started, the CDC began promoting masks to stop the spread of COVID,” Thacker wrote. “And it did so despite CDC publishing a May 2020 policy study in their own journal, ‘Emerging Infectious Diseases,’ that did not find a ‘substantial effect’ for masks in stopping the transmission of respiratory viruses.”


    twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1378462317109731334
    That same month, the CDC began publicly promoting N95 respirators as a more effective means of controlling the spread of COVID-19.

    However, on its webpage promoting the superiority of N95 respirators, the CDC admitted “there’s not a whole lot of evidence that N95 respirators do in fact work better than masks at stopping viruses,” Thacker wrote.

    “Laboratory studies have demonstrated that FFRs [filtering facepiece respirators] provide greater protection against aerosols compared with surgical masks … however, the results of clinical studies have been inconclusive,” the CDC wrote, citing a 2019 study in JAMA comparing N95 respirators to masks.

    “Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza,” the JAMA study noted.


    twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1256655451195715585
    According to Thacker, the results of these studies confirm the widely accepted pre-COVID-19 scientific consensus on the ineffectiveness of masks of any kind in stopping the spread of viruses. Thacker cited statements the World Health Organization made in 2019 and the CDC’s guidance on virus control.

    In a 2020 appearance on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Dr. Anthony Fauci said that while a mask might “block a droplet” and “make people feel a little better,” it does not provide “the perfect protection that people think it is.”



    According to Thacker, “For some reason, a ‘masks work’ political movement began to grow,” despite Fauci’s statements and the findings of these studies.

    “I’m not really sure what happened or what we do next,” Thacker wrote. “But something weird took place in America where liberal elites began messaging among themselves ‘masks work.’ They then grew this into a crusade.”

    The movement was effective in getting the CDC on board with issuing mask guidance, Thacker said.

    Four years after the onset of the pandemic, the CDC now openly cheerleads for masks, despite research the agency published showing that masks don’t really protect people from catching viruses, he said.

    “And this is why the experts advising the CDC are getting all this pushback: they didn’t tell the CDC what the CDC wanted to hear,” Thacker wrote.

    Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor emeritus and senior research scientist in epidemiology (chronic diseases) at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Disinformation Chronicle the CDC “has succumbed to political influences.”

    Risch said:

    “It made policies for school closures in order to please the teachers’ union. Its charitable organization allows pharma to feed it hundreds of millions of dollars that would be illegal to go directly to the agency, and this gives pharma major influence on CDC policies.”

    According to Thacker, the CDC has continued to double down on guidance promoting mask efficacy. A Jan. 23 letter the agency sent to its own advisers appears to encourage them to add more mask guidance to the agency’s new guidelines for the spread of pathogens, based on the conclusion that N95 respirators are effective.

    “Too much science is forcing CDC to request a science do over,” Thacker wrote, referring to the CDC’s Jan. 23 post, which states that its new recommendations should not “be misread to suggest equivalency between facemasks and NIOSH Approved respirators, which is not scientifically correct nor the intent of the draft language.”

    Thacker said his investigation shows that “in their guidance to the CDC, experts do recommend masks as part of what they call ‘transmission-based guidance’ which the CDC defines as a second tier of infection control.” However, the CDC’s own guidance also finds that masks are effective only for “source control” — preventing an already infected person from infecting others.

    “But this isn’t what the CDC wants,” Thacker wrote. “They want the experts to write guidelines that recommend healthy people wear masks, even though research shows masks won’t really stop healthy people from getting sick.”

    “The CDC has caught the ‘masks work’ political wave and is now demanding that independent experts conform to their preferred mask dictates,” he added.

    In doing so, the CDC is rejecting science it doesn’t like, including several other non-CDC studies that have questioned mask effectiveness.

    A study published in Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2022 found no difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in stopping the spread of COVID-19. These findings were mirrored in a January 2023 Cochrane meta-analysis on mask effectiveness.

    According to the Cochrane report, “The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection.”

    A May 2023 study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety suggests N95 respirators may expose wearers to dangerous levels of toxic compounds linked to seizures and cancer.

    A September 2023 meta-analysis published in Clinical Research Study examined mask studies published since 2019 in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).

    According to the findings of the meta-analysis:

    “MMWR publications pertaining to masks drew positive conclusions about mask effectiveness >75% of the time despite only 30% testing masks and <15% having statistically significant results. No studies were randomized, yet over half drew causal conclusions.

    “The level of evidence generated was low and the conclusions were most often unsupported by the data. Our findings raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy.”

    Real-world examples also call into question narratives regarding mask efficacy.

    Sweden, for instance, did not mandate or recommend masks for the general public during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and only did so in certain situations in the later stages of the pandemic, according to The Conversation. Yet, its total excess deaths during the first two years of the pandemic were among the lowest in Europe.”

    In 2020, Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell said, “We see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” adding there were “at least three heavyweight reports … which all state that the scientific evidence is weak.”

    A Swedish government commission noted low levels of excess mortality in 2020 and 2021 and said that, at most, masks should have been “recommended.”

    Soon after the report was released, a Feb. 25, 2022, Boston Herald op-ed stated that Sweden “got it right.”

    “I don’t understand what is driving the ‘masks work’ political movement,” Thacker told The Defender. “There were plenty of stories written pointing out that there isn’t much scientific evidence that masks stop respiratory virus spread.”

    “Maybe people were just scared and wanted to believe masks provide protection?” he said.

    Thacker also cited the historical precedent of the Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918, when the Red Cross campaigned for masks all across America.

    “California’s state board of health ran a study comparing towns that had mask mandates against those that did not. They found that there was no difference and published the study in the American Journal of Public Health in 1920,” Thacker said.

    “Maybe these mask campaigners need to read a little history,” he added.

    Thacker is now calling on whistleblowers inside the CDC to contact him “to discuss what is going on inside the agency.”

    “I’m talking to CDC people and hope to learn what is going on inside the agency. I plan to write more on this,” Thacker told The Defender.

    “CDC Director Mandy Cohen wants to restore trust in the agency, but that won’t happen if she keeps putting politics ahead of scientific evidence,” he said.

    If this content is important to you, share it with your network!

    Share

    This article was written by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. and originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.


    If you find value in this Substack and have the means, please consider making a contribution to support the World Council for Health. Thank you.

    Upgrade to Paid Subscription

    Refer a friend

    Donate Subscriptions

    Give Direct to WCH

    https://worldcouncilforhealth.substack.com/p/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks-ineffective

    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks_16.html
    CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for Covid-19 but Recommended Them Anyway Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness World Council for Health This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website. cdc masks ineffective covid feature The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker. The investigation, published this week in two parts on The Disinformation Chronicle, details how CDC leadership openly questioned the findings of CDC scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness. During the pandemic, mask advocates “shifted goalposts and demanded N95 respirators,” Thacker said, claiming they perform better than surgical masks at stopping the virus. If this content is important to you, share it! Share However, Thacker said CDC scientists found no difference between N95 and surgical masks in the ability to stop the spread of respiratory viruses. The findings of the CDC studies are consistent with other peer-reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19, according to Thacker. “But the CDC responded by saying people can’t say that,” Thacker told The Defender. To shut down the controversy, the CDC, in its Jan. 23 post on preventing the transmission of pathogens in healthcare settings, warned researchers that to suggest facemasks and respirators are the same “is not scientifically correct,” Thacker wrote. CDC ignores own studies questioning N95, mask effectiveness According to Thacker, CDC guidance for controlling the spread of infections had not been updated since 2007. This prompted the CDC, in 2022, to select “a bunch of science experts,” and ask them “to update the agency’s scientific guidance to hospitals on how to control infections.” In November 2023, the experts produced an 80-page systematic review and meta-analysis, examining whether N95 respirators were more effective than surgical masks. The review found that while N95 respirators are better at filtering particles, the finding that they are more effective at stopping viruses “has been less conclusive.” The systematic review also examined the “effectiveness” of N95 respirators and surgical masks “under ‘real world’” conditions and found “no difference” between the two. The review also found numerous symptoms reported by N95 mask users, including: “difficulty breathing, headaches, and dizziness; skin barrier damage and itching; fatigue; and difficulty talking.” According to Thacker, the CDC is not pleased with these findings, suggesting in its recent update that its own scientists were wrong. “Although masks can provide some level of filtration, the level of filtration is not comparable to NIOSH Approved respirators,” the CDC said. The post also stated, “The COVID-19 pandemic has forever changed the approach we take in healthcare settings to protect healthcare personnel, patients, and others from transmission of respiratory infections.” More evidence contradicting the CDC’s public position came at a June 2023 CDC meeting in Atlanta, when Erin Stone, MPH, a public health analyst in the agency’s Office of Guidelines and Evidence Review, presented the findings of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of N95 respirators and surgical masks. According to Stone, the data “suggests no difference” in their effectiveness. Yet, in November 2023 testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, CDC Director Mandy Cohen sidestepped questions regarding mask effectiveness and refused to deny she would reinstate mask mandates for children. According to Thacker, in December 2023, just six days after Cohen’s testimony, The BMJ’s Archives of Disease in Childhood journal published a study finding that “mask recommendations for children are not supported by scientific evidence.” “Recommending child masking does not meet the accepted practice of promulgating only medical interventions where benefits clearly outweigh harms,” the study authors noted. Thacker: CDC guidance based on politics, not science Thacker said the CDC contradicted its own findings on mask efficacy even in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. “Soon after the pandemic started, the CDC began promoting masks to stop the spread of COVID,” Thacker wrote. “And it did so despite CDC publishing a May 2020 policy study in their own journal, ‘Emerging Infectious Diseases,’ that did not find a ‘substantial effect’ for masks in stopping the transmission of respiratory viruses.” twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1378462317109731334 That same month, the CDC began publicly promoting N95 respirators as a more effective means of controlling the spread of COVID-19. However, on its webpage promoting the superiority of N95 respirators, the CDC admitted “there’s not a whole lot of evidence that N95 respirators do in fact work better than masks at stopping viruses,” Thacker wrote. “Laboratory studies have demonstrated that FFRs [filtering facepiece respirators] provide greater protection against aerosols compared with surgical masks … however, the results of clinical studies have been inconclusive,” the CDC wrote, citing a 2019 study in JAMA comparing N95 respirators to masks. “Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza,” the JAMA study noted. twitter.com/CDCgov/status/1256655451195715585 According to Thacker, the results of these studies confirm the widely accepted pre-COVID-19 scientific consensus on the ineffectiveness of masks of any kind in stopping the spread of viruses. Thacker cited statements the World Health Organization made in 2019 and the CDC’s guidance on virus control. In a 2020 appearance on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Dr. Anthony Fauci said that while a mask might “block a droplet” and “make people feel a little better,” it does not provide “the perfect protection that people think it is.” According to Thacker, “For some reason, a ‘masks work’ political movement began to grow,” despite Fauci’s statements and the findings of these studies. “I’m not really sure what happened or what we do next,” Thacker wrote. “But something weird took place in America where liberal elites began messaging among themselves ‘masks work.’ They then grew this into a crusade.” The movement was effective in getting the CDC on board with issuing mask guidance, Thacker said. Four years after the onset of the pandemic, the CDC now openly cheerleads for masks, despite research the agency published showing that masks don’t really protect people from catching viruses, he said. “And this is why the experts advising the CDC are getting all this pushback: they didn’t tell the CDC what the CDC wanted to hear,” Thacker wrote. Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor emeritus and senior research scientist in epidemiology (chronic diseases) at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Disinformation Chronicle the CDC “has succumbed to political influences.” Risch said: “It made policies for school closures in order to please the teachers’ union. Its charitable organization allows pharma to feed it hundreds of millions of dollars that would be illegal to go directly to the agency, and this gives pharma major influence on CDC policies.” According to Thacker, the CDC has continued to double down on guidance promoting mask efficacy. A Jan. 23 letter the agency sent to its own advisers appears to encourage them to add more mask guidance to the agency’s new guidelines for the spread of pathogens, based on the conclusion that N95 respirators are effective. “Too much science is forcing CDC to request a science do over,” Thacker wrote, referring to the CDC’s Jan. 23 post, which states that its new recommendations should not “be misread to suggest equivalency between facemasks and NIOSH Approved respirators, which is not scientifically correct nor the intent of the draft language.” Thacker said his investigation shows that “in their guidance to the CDC, experts do recommend masks as part of what they call ‘transmission-based guidance’ which the CDC defines as a second tier of infection control.” However, the CDC’s own guidance also finds that masks are effective only for “source control” — preventing an already infected person from infecting others. “But this isn’t what the CDC wants,” Thacker wrote. “They want the experts to write guidelines that recommend healthy people wear masks, even though research shows masks won’t really stop healthy people from getting sick.” “The CDC has caught the ‘masks work’ political wave and is now demanding that independent experts conform to their preferred mask dictates,” he added. In doing so, the CDC is rejecting science it doesn’t like, including several other non-CDC studies that have questioned mask effectiveness. A study published in Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2022 found no difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in stopping the spread of COVID-19. These findings were mirrored in a January 2023 Cochrane meta-analysis on mask effectiveness. According to the Cochrane report, “The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection.” A May 2023 study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety suggests N95 respirators may expose wearers to dangerous levels of toxic compounds linked to seizures and cancer. A September 2023 meta-analysis published in Clinical Research Study examined mask studies published since 2019 in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). According to the findings of the meta-analysis: “MMWR publications pertaining to masks drew positive conclusions about mask effectiveness >75% of the time despite only 30% testing masks and <15% having statistically significant results. No studies were randomized, yet over half drew causal conclusions. “The level of evidence generated was low and the conclusions were most often unsupported by the data. Our findings raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy.” Real-world examples also call into question narratives regarding mask efficacy. Sweden, for instance, did not mandate or recommend masks for the general public during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and only did so in certain situations in the later stages of the pandemic, according to The Conversation. Yet, its total excess deaths during the first two years of the pandemic were among the lowest in Europe.” In 2020, Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell said, “We see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” adding there were “at least three heavyweight reports … which all state that the scientific evidence is weak.” A Swedish government commission noted low levels of excess mortality in 2020 and 2021 and said that, at most, masks should have been “recommended.” Soon after the report was released, a Feb. 25, 2022, Boston Herald op-ed stated that Sweden “got it right.” “I don’t understand what is driving the ‘masks work’ political movement,” Thacker told The Defender. “There were plenty of stories written pointing out that there isn’t much scientific evidence that masks stop respiratory virus spread.” “Maybe people were just scared and wanted to believe masks provide protection?” he said. Thacker also cited the historical precedent of the Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918, when the Red Cross campaigned for masks all across America. “California’s state board of health ran a study comparing towns that had mask mandates against those that did not. They found that there was no difference and published the study in the American Journal of Public Health in 1920,” Thacker said. “Maybe these mask campaigners need to read a little history,” he added. Thacker is now calling on whistleblowers inside the CDC to contact him “to discuss what is going on inside the agency.” “I’m talking to CDC people and hope to learn what is going on inside the agency. I plan to write more on this,” Thacker told The Defender. “CDC Director Mandy Cohen wants to restore trust in the agency, but that won’t happen if she keeps putting politics ahead of scientific evidence,” he said. If this content is important to you, share it with your network! Share This article was written by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. and originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense. If you find value in this Substack and have the means, please consider making a contribution to support the World Council for Health. Thank you. Upgrade to Paid Subscription Refer a friend Donate Subscriptions Give Direct to WCH https://worldcouncilforhealth.substack.com/p/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks-ineffective https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks_16.html
    WORLDCOUNCILFORHEALTH.SUBSTACK.COM
    CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for Covid-19 but Recommended Them Anyway
    Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 17679 Views
  • CDC'S own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by Paul D. Thacker.


    CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for COVID — But Agency Recommended Them Anyway
    According to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker published this week in The Disinformation Chronicle, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness

    Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.
    cdc masks ineffective covid feature
    Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker.

    The investigation, published this week in two parts on The Disinformation Chronicle, details how CDC leadership openly questioned the findings of CDC scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness.

    During the pandemic, mask advocates “shifted goalposts and demanded N95 respirators,” Thacker said, claiming they perform better than surgical masks at stopping the virus.

    However, Thacker said CDC scientists found no difference between N95 and surgical masks in the ability to stop the spread of respiratory viruses. The findings of the CDC studies are consistent with other peer-reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19, according to Thacker.

    “But the CDC responded by saying people can’t say that,” Thacker told The Defender.

    To shut down the controversy, the CDC, in its Jan. 23 post on preventing the transmission of pathogens in healthcare settings, warned researchers that to suggest facemasks and respirators are the same “is not scientifically correct,” Thacker wrote.

    CDC ignores own studies questioning N95, mask effectiveness

    According to Thacker, CDC guidance for controlling the spread of infections had not been updated since 2007. This prompted the CDC, in 2022, to select “a bunch of science experts,” and ask them “to update the agency’s scientific guidance to hospitals on how to control infections.”

    In November 2023, the experts produced an 80-page systematic review and meta-analysis, examining whether N95 respirators were more effective than surgical masks. The review found that while N95 respirators are better at filtering particles, the finding that they are more effective at stopping viruses “has been less conclusive.”

    The systematic review also examined the “effectiveness” of N95 respirators and surgical masks “under ‘real world’” conditions and found “no difference” between the two.

    The review also found numerous symptoms reported by N95 mask users, including: “difficulty breathing, headaches, and dizziness; skin barrier damage and itching; fatigue; and difficulty talking.”

    According to Thacker, the CDC is not pleased with these findings, suggesting in its recent update that its own scientists were wrong.

    “Although masks can provide some level of filtration, the level of filtration is not comparable to NIOSH Approved respirators,” the CDC said.

    The post also stated, “The COVID-19 pandemic has forever changed the approach we take in healthcare settings to protect healthcare personnel, patients, and others from transmission of respiratory infections.”

    More evidence contradicting the CDC’s public position came at a June 2023 CDC meeting in Atlanta, when Erin Stone, MPH, a public health analyst in the agency’s Office of Guidelines and Evidence Review, presented the findings of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of N95 respirators and surgical masks.

    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax
    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax”

    Order Now

    According to Stone, the data “suggests no difference” in their effectiveness.

    Yet, in November 2023 testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, CDC Director Mandy Cohen sidestepped questions regarding mask effectiveness and refused to deny she would reinstate mask mandates for children.

    According to Thacker, in December 2023, just six days after Cohen’s testimony, The BMJ’s Archives of Disease in Childhood journal published a study finding that “mask recommendations for children are not supported by scientific evidence.”

    “Recommending child masking does not meet the accepted practice of promulgating only medical interventions where benefits clearly outweigh harms,” the study authors noted.

    Thacker: CDC guidance based on politics, not science

    Thacker said the CDC contradicted its own findings on mask efficacy even in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “Soon after the pandemic started, the CDC began promoting masks to stop the spread of COVID,” Thacker wrote. “And it did so despite CDC publishing a May 2020 policy study in their own journal, ‘Emerging Infectious Diseases,’ that did not find a ‘substantial effect’ for masks in stopping the transmission of respiratory viruses.”


    That same month, the CDC began publicly promoting N95 respirators as a more effective means of controlling the spread of COVID-19.

    However, on its webpage promoting the superiority of N95 respirators, the CDC admitted “there’s not a whole lot of evidence that N95 respirators do in fact work better than masks at stopping viruses,” Thacker wrote.

    “Laboratory studies have demonstrated that FFRs [filtering facepiece respirators] provide greater protection against aerosols compared with surgical masks … however, the results of clinical studies have been inconclusive,” the CDC wrote, citing a 2019 study in JAMA comparing N95 respirators to masks.

    “Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza,” the JAMA study noted.


    According to Thacker, the results of these studies confirm the widely accepted pre-COVID-19 scientific consensus on the ineffectiveness of masks of any kind in stopping the spread of viruses. Thacker cited statements the World Health Organization made in 2019 and the CDC’s guidance on virus control.

    In a 2020 appearance on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Dr. Anthony Fauci said that while a mask might “block a droplet” and “make people feel a little better,” it does not provide “the perfect protection that people think it is.”



    According to Thacker, “For some reason, a ‘masks work’ political movement began to grow,” despite Fauci’s statements and the findings of these studies.

    “I’m not really sure what happened or what we do next,” Thacker wrote. “But something weird took place in America where liberal elites began messaging among themselves ‘masks work.’ They then grew this into a crusade.”

    The movement was effective in getting the CDC on board with issuing mask guidance, Thacker said.

    Four years after the onset of the pandemic, the CDC now openly cheerleads for masks, despite research the agency published showing that masks don’t really protect people from catching viruses, he said.

    “And this is why the experts advising the CDC are getting all this pushback: they didn’t tell the CDC what the CDC wanted to hear,” Thacker wrote.

    Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor emeritus and senior research scientist in epidemiology (chronic diseases) at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Disinformation Chronicle the CDC “has succumbed to political influences.”

    Risch said:

    “It made policies for school closures in order to please the teachers’ union. Its charitable organization allows pharma to feed it hundreds of millions of dollars that would be illegal to go directly to the agency, and this gives pharma major influence on CDC policies.”

    According to Thacker, the CDC has continued to double down on guidance promoting mask efficacy. A Jan. 23 letter the agency sent to its own advisers appears to encourage them to add more mask guidance to the agency’s new guidelines for the spread of pathogens, based on the conclusion that N95 respirators are effective.

    “Too much science is forcing CDC to request a science do over,” Thacker wrote, referring to the CDC’s Jan. 23 post, which states that its new recommendations should not “be misread to suggest equivalency between facemasks and NIOSH Approved respirators, which is not scientifically correct nor the intent of the draft language.”

    Thacker said his investigation shows that “in their guidance to the CDC, experts do recommend masks as part of what they call ‘transmission-based guidance’ which the CDC defines as a second tier of infection control.” However, the CDC’s own guidance also finds that masks are effective only for “source control” — preventing an already infected person from infecting others.

    “But this isn’t what the CDC wants,” Thacker wrote. “They want the experts to write guidelines that recommend healthy people wear masks, even though research shows masks won’t really stop healthy people from getting sick.”

    “The CDC has caught the ‘masks work’ political wave and is now demanding that independent experts conform to their preferred mask dictates,” he added.

    In doing so, the CDC is rejecting science it doesn’t like, including several other non-CDC studies that have questioned mask effectiveness.

    A study published in Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2022 found no difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in stopping the spread of COVID-19. These findings were mirrored in a January 2023 Cochrane meta-analysis on mask effectiveness.

    According to the Cochrane report, “The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection.”

    A May 2023 study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety suggests N95 respirators may expose wearers to dangerous levels of toxic compounds linked to seizures and cancer.

    A September 2023 meta-analysis published in Clinical Research Study examined mask studies published since 2019 in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).

    According to the findings of the meta-analysis:

    “MMWR publications pertaining to masks drew positive conclusions about mask effectiveness >75% of the time despite only 30% testing masks and <15% having statistically significant results. No studies were randomized, yet over half drew causal conclusions.

    “The level of evidence generated was low and the conclusions were most often unsupported by the data. Our findings raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy.”

    Real-world examples also call into question narratives regarding mask efficacy.

    Sweden, for instance, did not mandate or recommend masks for the general public during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and only did so in certain situations in the later stages of the pandemic, according to The Conversation. Yet, its total excess deaths during the first two years of the pandemic were among the lowest in Europe.”

    In 2020, Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell said, “We see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” adding there were “at least three heavyweight reports … which all state that the scientific evidence is weak.”

    A Swedish government commission noted low levels of excess mortality in 2020 and 2021 and said that, at most, masks should have been “recommended.”

    Soon after the report was released, a Feb. 25, 2022, Boston Herald op-ed stated that Sweden “got it right.”

    “I don’t understand what is driving the ‘masks work’ political movement,” Thacker told The Defender. “There were plenty of stories written pointing out that there isn’t much scientific evidence that masks stop respiratory virus spread.”

    “Maybe people were just scared and wanted to believe masks provide protection?” he said.

    Thacker also cited the historical precedent of the Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918, when the Red Cross campaigned for masks all across America.

    “California’s state board of health ran a study comparing towns that had mask mandates against those that did not. They found that there was no difference and published the study in the American Journal of Public Health in 1920,” Thacker said.

    “Maybe these mask campaigners need to read a little history,” he added.

    Thacker is now calling on whistleblowers inside the CDC to contact him “to discuss what is going on inside the agency.”

    “I’m talking to CDC people and hope to learn what is going on inside the agency. I plan to write more on this,” Thacker told The Defender.

    “CDC Director Mandy Cohen wants to restore trust in the agency, but that won’t happen if she keeps putting politics ahead of scientific evidence,” he said.

    DETAILS ⬇️
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/cdc-scientists-masks-ineffective-covid-agency-recommended/

    Join ➡️ @ShankaraChetty


    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks.html
    CDC'S own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by Paul D. Thacker. CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for COVID — But Agency Recommended Them Anyway According to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker published this week in The Disinformation Chronicle, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. cdc masks ineffective covid feature Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker. The investigation, published this week in two parts on The Disinformation Chronicle, details how CDC leadership openly questioned the findings of CDC scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness. During the pandemic, mask advocates “shifted goalposts and demanded N95 respirators,” Thacker said, claiming they perform better than surgical masks at stopping the virus. However, Thacker said CDC scientists found no difference between N95 and surgical masks in the ability to stop the spread of respiratory viruses. The findings of the CDC studies are consistent with other peer-reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19, according to Thacker. “But the CDC responded by saying people can’t say that,” Thacker told The Defender. To shut down the controversy, the CDC, in its Jan. 23 post on preventing the transmission of pathogens in healthcare settings, warned researchers that to suggest facemasks and respirators are the same “is not scientifically correct,” Thacker wrote. CDC ignores own studies questioning N95, mask effectiveness According to Thacker, CDC guidance for controlling the spread of infections had not been updated since 2007. This prompted the CDC, in 2022, to select “a bunch of science experts,” and ask them “to update the agency’s scientific guidance to hospitals on how to control infections.” In November 2023, the experts produced an 80-page systematic review and meta-analysis, examining whether N95 respirators were more effective than surgical masks. The review found that while N95 respirators are better at filtering particles, the finding that they are more effective at stopping viruses “has been less conclusive.” The systematic review also examined the “effectiveness” of N95 respirators and surgical masks “under ‘real world’” conditions and found “no difference” between the two. The review also found numerous symptoms reported by N95 mask users, including: “difficulty breathing, headaches, and dizziness; skin barrier damage and itching; fatigue; and difficulty talking.” According to Thacker, the CDC is not pleased with these findings, suggesting in its recent update that its own scientists were wrong. “Although masks can provide some level of filtration, the level of filtration is not comparable to NIOSH Approved respirators,” the CDC said. The post also stated, “The COVID-19 pandemic has forever changed the approach we take in healthcare settings to protect healthcare personnel, patients, and others from transmission of respiratory infections.” More evidence contradicting the CDC’s public position came at a June 2023 CDC meeting in Atlanta, when Erin Stone, MPH, a public health analyst in the agency’s Office of Guidelines and Evidence Review, presented the findings of a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of N95 respirators and surgical masks. RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax” Order Now According to Stone, the data “suggests no difference” in their effectiveness. Yet, in November 2023 testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, CDC Director Mandy Cohen sidestepped questions regarding mask effectiveness and refused to deny she would reinstate mask mandates for children. According to Thacker, in December 2023, just six days after Cohen’s testimony, The BMJ’s Archives of Disease in Childhood journal published a study finding that “mask recommendations for children are not supported by scientific evidence.” “Recommending child masking does not meet the accepted practice of promulgating only medical interventions where benefits clearly outweigh harms,” the study authors noted. Thacker: CDC guidance based on politics, not science Thacker said the CDC contradicted its own findings on mask efficacy even in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. “Soon after the pandemic started, the CDC began promoting masks to stop the spread of COVID,” Thacker wrote. “And it did so despite CDC publishing a May 2020 policy study in their own journal, ‘Emerging Infectious Diseases,’ that did not find a ‘substantial effect’ for masks in stopping the transmission of respiratory viruses.” That same month, the CDC began publicly promoting N95 respirators as a more effective means of controlling the spread of COVID-19. However, on its webpage promoting the superiority of N95 respirators, the CDC admitted “there’s not a whole lot of evidence that N95 respirators do in fact work better than masks at stopping viruses,” Thacker wrote. “Laboratory studies have demonstrated that FFRs [filtering facepiece respirators] provide greater protection against aerosols compared with surgical masks … however, the results of clinical studies have been inconclusive,” the CDC wrote, citing a 2019 study in JAMA comparing N95 respirators to masks. “Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza,” the JAMA study noted. According to Thacker, the results of these studies confirm the widely accepted pre-COVID-19 scientific consensus on the ineffectiveness of masks of any kind in stopping the spread of viruses. Thacker cited statements the World Health Organization made in 2019 and the CDC’s guidance on virus control. In a 2020 appearance on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Dr. Anthony Fauci said that while a mask might “block a droplet” and “make people feel a little better,” it does not provide “the perfect protection that people think it is.” According to Thacker, “For some reason, a ‘masks work’ political movement began to grow,” despite Fauci’s statements and the findings of these studies. “I’m not really sure what happened or what we do next,” Thacker wrote. “But something weird took place in America where liberal elites began messaging among themselves ‘masks work.’ They then grew this into a crusade.” The movement was effective in getting the CDC on board with issuing mask guidance, Thacker said. Four years after the onset of the pandemic, the CDC now openly cheerleads for masks, despite research the agency published showing that masks don’t really protect people from catching viruses, he said. “And this is why the experts advising the CDC are getting all this pushback: they didn’t tell the CDC what the CDC wanted to hear,” Thacker wrote. Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor emeritus and senior research scientist in epidemiology (chronic diseases) at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Disinformation Chronicle the CDC “has succumbed to political influences.” Risch said: “It made policies for school closures in order to please the teachers’ union. Its charitable organization allows pharma to feed it hundreds of millions of dollars that would be illegal to go directly to the agency, and this gives pharma major influence on CDC policies.” According to Thacker, the CDC has continued to double down on guidance promoting mask efficacy. A Jan. 23 letter the agency sent to its own advisers appears to encourage them to add more mask guidance to the agency’s new guidelines for the spread of pathogens, based on the conclusion that N95 respirators are effective. “Too much science is forcing CDC to request a science do over,” Thacker wrote, referring to the CDC’s Jan. 23 post, which states that its new recommendations should not “be misread to suggest equivalency between facemasks and NIOSH Approved respirators, which is not scientifically correct nor the intent of the draft language.” Thacker said his investigation shows that “in their guidance to the CDC, experts do recommend masks as part of what they call ‘transmission-based guidance’ which the CDC defines as a second tier of infection control.” However, the CDC’s own guidance also finds that masks are effective only for “source control” — preventing an already infected person from infecting others. “But this isn’t what the CDC wants,” Thacker wrote. “They want the experts to write guidelines that recommend healthy people wear masks, even though research shows masks won’t really stop healthy people from getting sick.” “The CDC has caught the ‘masks work’ political wave and is now demanding that independent experts conform to their preferred mask dictates,” he added. In doing so, the CDC is rejecting science it doesn’t like, including several other non-CDC studies that have questioned mask effectiveness. A study published in Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2022 found no difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in stopping the spread of COVID-19. These findings were mirrored in a January 2023 Cochrane meta-analysis on mask effectiveness. According to the Cochrane report, “The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection.” A May 2023 study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety suggests N95 respirators may expose wearers to dangerous levels of toxic compounds linked to seizures and cancer. A September 2023 meta-analysis published in Clinical Research Study examined mask studies published since 2019 in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). According to the findings of the meta-analysis: “MMWR publications pertaining to masks drew positive conclusions about mask effectiveness >75% of the time despite only 30% testing masks and <15% having statistically significant results. No studies were randomized, yet over half drew causal conclusions. “The level of evidence generated was low and the conclusions were most often unsupported by the data. Our findings raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy.” Real-world examples also call into question narratives regarding mask efficacy. Sweden, for instance, did not mandate or recommend masks for the general public during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and only did so in certain situations in the later stages of the pandemic, according to The Conversation. Yet, its total excess deaths during the first two years of the pandemic were among the lowest in Europe.” In 2020, Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell said, “We see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” adding there were “at least three heavyweight reports … which all state that the scientific evidence is weak.” A Swedish government commission noted low levels of excess mortality in 2020 and 2021 and said that, at most, masks should have been “recommended.” Soon after the report was released, a Feb. 25, 2022, Boston Herald op-ed stated that Sweden “got it right.” “I don’t understand what is driving the ‘masks work’ political movement,” Thacker told The Defender. “There were plenty of stories written pointing out that there isn’t much scientific evidence that masks stop respiratory virus spread.” “Maybe people were just scared and wanted to believe masks provide protection?” he said. Thacker also cited the historical precedent of the Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918, when the Red Cross campaigned for masks all across America. “California’s state board of health ran a study comparing towns that had mask mandates against those that did not. They found that there was no difference and published the study in the American Journal of Public Health in 1920,” Thacker said. “Maybe these mask campaigners need to read a little history,” he added. Thacker is now calling on whistleblowers inside the CDC to contact him “to discuss what is going on inside the agency.” “I’m talking to CDC people and hope to learn what is going on inside the agency. I plan to write more on this,” Thacker told The Defender. “CDC Director Mandy Cohen wants to restore trust in the agency, but that won’t happen if she keeps putting politics ahead of scientific evidence,” he said. DETAILS ⬇️ https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/cdc-scientists-masks-ineffective-covid-agency-recommended/ Join ➡️ @ShankaraChetty https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/cdcs-own-scientists-found-masks.html
    CHILDRENSHEALTHDEFENSE.ORG
    CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for COVID — But Agency Recommended Them Anyway
    According to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker published this week in The Disinformation Chronicle, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness
    Angry
    1
    0 Reacties 1 aandelen 14118 Views
  • ENTRY #10 - Get a Grounding Sheet
    New opinion: grounding is super powerful.

    Schoolboy Macgregor
    Hi everyone, I’ve been given cause to return to the subject of grounding, on which I gave a short introduction in Entry #7, and reason to think that it’s more powerful than I first suspected.

    In Entry #3, where I presented a case for the use of tobacco in this fight, I reported that I had suffered from shedding related heart problems last year. Going through that wasn’t much fun but my issues eventually subsided and after being alright for about a year, they returned last week.

    A shortness of the breath came over me one night. I noticed that my pulse had become much lower, and coldness in the body and extremities soon onset. My heart, which also felt cold, was beset by a tightness and spasming as though it was trying to shift some form of blockage, and I felt like I needed to fight to retain consciousness. I thought I might be able to jumpstart myself by going for a walk, but that didn’t work and the winter chill fast pushed me back inside.

    Here we go again, I thought. If I make it out I’m back to the medicines, back to macrodosing the sauna, and back in the woods, but since I’m already using tobacco - I can’t smoke my way out like the last time.

    But then, two mornings later, I was completely fine. Having braced myself for a long struggle, everything was back to normal. That was weird - last year this lasted for weeks. Managing to sleep helped, and the day following the relapse I’d been to the sauna, feeling better for it but with the issue undefeated. But how come I’m better all of a sudden? That evening the answer hit me - the night prior I had slept grounded.

    After looking into grounding I got one of these mattress sheets that earth when plugged into an electrical socket. Initially I wasn’t hugely confident in its effectiveness. I didn’t register much difference in the quality of my sleep, and didn’t know if the reason I felt more relaxed when I lied on it wasn’t a placebo. Furthermore, you’re meant to check that the socket you plug it into is grounded - and since I didn’t do this, I couldn’t say that any sensation I felt wasn’t the result of me being wired into the mains. So generally, I gave the sheet a miss.

    The night that these problems returned I didn’t use the sheet. But the following night, as opposed to covering it with a bed sheet, I slept directly atop it for the first time. And miraculously, I woke up in a state of blessed normality.

    A potential stifling effect of the overlaying bed sheet, or that I lacked problems for the sheet to fix when I first used it, may both have been the cause of my doubts. But it’s suffice to say that my doubts are gone, and that the socket works just fine. What I had felt initially wasn’t a result of being plugged into the grid overnight but rather, being plugged into the earth.

    Lying on it now, I can feel my blood vessels relax and open up, my breath become deeper, and tension drain from the body. Bits of you start to tingle and there’s a pleasant sensation to relax into as the body is nourished by electrons.

    How, precisely, my symptoms came to manifest - I don’t know. And how many of grounding’s array of healing properties were responsible for sorting me out - I also can’t say. It is, however, the case that blood becomes less viscous in a grounded state, whereby the red blood cells are coated with electrons, and charged such that they repel one another, causing the blood to thin and become easier for the heart to pump. That, I imagine, probably had a lot to do with it.


    Red blood cells before and after grounding. Source.
    Other effects of grounding include but are not limited to: the arrest of excess inflammation, excess electrical charge removal, free radical neutralisation, a ‘calming impact on brain electrical activity’, ‘muscle tension normalisation’, and, as I suspect, improvement to bodily pH levels.

    Grounding’s similarity to ASEA Redox Molecules

    I’ve noticed that the effects of grounding are striking in their similarity to those of ASEA Redox Molecules, the bedrock supplement to Dr Ariyana Love’s detox protocol.

    Over and over, when I see the studied effects of ASEA, I think grounding. EMF mitigation, reduced blood viscosity, mitochondrial support, the fact that it helps with autism. This could of course be two medicines, as it were, sharing the same effects, but the clue is in the name.

    ‘Redox’ is short for ‘reduction-oxidation’. Reduction-oxidation, if I understand this correctly, being the reactions whereby molecules are either ‘oxidised’, where they lose electrons, or are ‘reduced’, where they gain them (yeah it’s confusing). For us, we’re after the reduction side of the story. Electrons are good for us and we need them. That’s what grounding does, and by the sounds of it, what ASEA does as well.

    Though this ASEA stuff works (laboratory and testimonial evidence abound), it’s brutally expensive for most people. If you’re about to die - you don’t care how much it costs, but it does cost enough to price out many who would purchase it, and enough to repel the unconvinced. If it were the case that ASEA could be supplemented, or even replaced by grounding, then that would be a huge move forward for the accessibility of detox.

    Get a grounding sheet!

    I thought to write this article to relay the message that grounding sheets work, and that I believe them to be more powerful than you might think. It went a bit off piste with the ASEA stuff - further questions will have to be investigated here, for instance - if the effects are the same, what amount of grounding is equal to what dose of ASEA?

    But, putting that to one side for now, go and get a grounding sheet!

    The one I have is made by the company ‘Rowland Earthing’ - and it may or may not work when used with a bedsheet.

    And in other news, subscriber payments are now live❗Donations are like rocket fuel for this publication. As well as being extremely motivating, each one brings me closer to the threshold where I’ll be able to go full time into this project. If you’re able to support me, I would be very grateful 🙏😌

    But if you’re on a budget, get the grounding sheet first.

    Share THIS SUBSTACK IS ABOUT COVID VACCINE DETOX

    1
    2
    3
    4
    I’m going to have to check that all at some point, but I’m pretty sure it’s on the right lines.


    Here's one of my clients sharing his testimony with Grounding technology, a clear example of combining nature with technology for a healing effect.

    https://open.substack.com/pub/covidvaccinedetox/p/entry-10-get-a-grounding-sheet?r=1s7u2n&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web


    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/entry-10-get-grounding-sheet-new.html
    ENTRY #10 - Get a Grounding Sheet New opinion: grounding is super powerful. Schoolboy Macgregor Hi everyone, I’ve been given cause to return to the subject of grounding, on which I gave a short introduction in Entry #7, and reason to think that it’s more powerful than I first suspected. In Entry #3, where I presented a case for the use of tobacco in this fight, I reported that I had suffered from shedding related heart problems last year. Going through that wasn’t much fun but my issues eventually subsided and after being alright for about a year, they returned last week. A shortness of the breath came over me one night. I noticed that my pulse had become much lower, and coldness in the body and extremities soon onset. My heart, which also felt cold, was beset by a tightness and spasming as though it was trying to shift some form of blockage, and I felt like I needed to fight to retain consciousness. I thought I might be able to jumpstart myself by going for a walk, but that didn’t work and the winter chill fast pushed me back inside. Here we go again, I thought. If I make it out I’m back to the medicines, back to macrodosing the sauna, and back in the woods, but since I’m already using tobacco - I can’t smoke my way out like the last time. But then, two mornings later, I was completely fine. Having braced myself for a long struggle, everything was back to normal. That was weird - last year this lasted for weeks. Managing to sleep helped, and the day following the relapse I’d been to the sauna, feeling better for it but with the issue undefeated. But how come I’m better all of a sudden? That evening the answer hit me - the night prior I had slept grounded. After looking into grounding I got one of these mattress sheets that earth when plugged into an electrical socket. Initially I wasn’t hugely confident in its effectiveness. I didn’t register much difference in the quality of my sleep, and didn’t know if the reason I felt more relaxed when I lied on it wasn’t a placebo. Furthermore, you’re meant to check that the socket you plug it into is grounded - and since I didn’t do this, I couldn’t say that any sensation I felt wasn’t the result of me being wired into the mains. So generally, I gave the sheet a miss. The night that these problems returned I didn’t use the sheet. But the following night, as opposed to covering it with a bed sheet, I slept directly atop it for the first time. And miraculously, I woke up in a state of blessed normality. A potential stifling effect of the overlaying bed sheet, or that I lacked problems for the sheet to fix when I first used it, may both have been the cause of my doubts. But it’s suffice to say that my doubts are gone, and that the socket works just fine. What I had felt initially wasn’t a result of being plugged into the grid overnight but rather, being plugged into the earth. Lying on it now, I can feel my blood vessels relax and open up, my breath become deeper, and tension drain from the body. Bits of you start to tingle and there’s a pleasant sensation to relax into as the body is nourished by electrons. How, precisely, my symptoms came to manifest - I don’t know. And how many of grounding’s array of healing properties were responsible for sorting me out - I also can’t say. It is, however, the case that blood becomes less viscous in a grounded state, whereby the red blood cells are coated with electrons, and charged such that they repel one another, causing the blood to thin and become easier for the heart to pump. That, I imagine, probably had a lot to do with it. Red blood cells before and after grounding. Source. Other effects of grounding include but are not limited to: the arrest of excess inflammation, excess electrical charge removal, free radical neutralisation, a ‘calming impact on brain electrical activity’, ‘muscle tension normalisation’, and, as I suspect, improvement to bodily pH levels. Grounding’s similarity to ASEA Redox Molecules I’ve noticed that the effects of grounding are striking in their similarity to those of ASEA Redox Molecules, the bedrock supplement to Dr Ariyana Love’s detox protocol. Over and over, when I see the studied effects of ASEA, I think grounding. EMF mitigation, reduced blood viscosity, mitochondrial support, the fact that it helps with autism. This could of course be two medicines, as it were, sharing the same effects, but the clue is in the name. ‘Redox’ is short for ‘reduction-oxidation’. Reduction-oxidation, if I understand this correctly, being the reactions whereby molecules are either ‘oxidised’, where they lose electrons, or are ‘reduced’, where they gain them (yeah it’s confusing). For us, we’re after the reduction side of the story. Electrons are good for us and we need them. That’s what grounding does, and by the sounds of it, what ASEA does as well. Though this ASEA stuff works (laboratory and testimonial evidence abound), it’s brutally expensive for most people. If you’re about to die - you don’t care how much it costs, but it does cost enough to price out many who would purchase it, and enough to repel the unconvinced. If it were the case that ASEA could be supplemented, or even replaced by grounding, then that would be a huge move forward for the accessibility of detox. Get a grounding sheet! I thought to write this article to relay the message that grounding sheets work, and that I believe them to be more powerful than you might think. It went a bit off piste with the ASEA stuff - further questions will have to be investigated here, for instance - if the effects are the same, what amount of grounding is equal to what dose of ASEA? But, putting that to one side for now, go and get a grounding sheet! The one I have is made by the company ‘Rowland Earthing’ - and it may or may not work when used with a bedsheet. And in other news, subscriber payments are now live❗Donations are like rocket fuel for this publication. As well as being extremely motivating, each one brings me closer to the threshold where I’ll be able to go full time into this project. If you’re able to support me, I would be very grateful 🙏😌 But if you’re on a budget, get the grounding sheet first. Share THIS SUBSTACK IS ABOUT COVID VACCINE DETOX 1 2 3 4 I’m going to have to check that all at some point, but I’m pretty sure it’s on the right lines. Here's one of my clients sharing his testimony with Grounding technology, a clear example of combining nature with technology for a healing effect. https://open.substack.com/pub/covidvaccinedetox/p/entry-10-get-a-grounding-sheet?r=1s7u2n&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/entry-10-get-grounding-sheet-new.html
    OPEN.SUBSTACK.COM
    ENTRY #10 - Get a Grounding Sheet
    New opinion: grounding is super powerful.
    Like
    1
    1 Reacties 1 aandelen 11837 Views
  • I recently discovered something very weird.

    Bill Gates invested a whopping $55 MILLION in BioNTech that made the Pfizer mRNA injection.

    You will never believe the date that this happened...

    Is this just a coincidence?

    You know, the company that partnered with Pfizer to make their mRNA covid vaccine and drove Pfizer's revenue to a record $100 billion in 2022.

    Well, I had a look and found something very interesting indeed. When did Bill Gates invest this large sum of money?

    Turns out that it was on the 4th of September 2019.

    Covid was discovered just two months later in November 2019 (at least the first time we got to hear about it).

    This turned out to be very profitable for Bill Gates, his investment increasing by 10 times. The original $55 million was worth over $550 million just a few years later.

    "the collaboration will fund the identification of potential HIV and tuberculosis vaccine and immunotherapy candidates and their pre-clinical development. It will further enable BioNTech to build out its infectious disease infrastructure, including platform development" - it says in the press release from BioNTech.

    Guess what?

    Bill Gates has also donated some $20 million to the BBC.

    Now it is being reported that the BBC misrepresented the risk of covid in order to boost public support for lockdown.

    other words, the mainstream media deliberately mislead the public and scared them into supporting draconian lockdown measures, and also probably scared people into rushing to get the brand new mRNA injections.

    Meanwhile Bill Gates investment grew and grew...

    "One example is that they gave the impression that hospitals were being overwhelmed during the first wave. Some (mainly in London) were, but overall hospital bed occupancy was at an all-time low during that period" said Professor Mark Woolhouse.

    Remember when we were told that the hospitals were completely full and we had all the dancing nurses on TikTok? Remember how some peopel were labelled "conspiracy theorists" for questioning this?

    Turns out that the so called "conspiracy theorists" were right once again. The hospitals were not full. We were being lied to.

    What do you think about all of this, surely it is just a coincidence that Bill Gates just happened to invest large amounts of money into BioNTech just two months before covid?

    Join: @RevealedEye
    I recently discovered something very weird. Bill Gates invested a whopping $55 MILLION in BioNTech that made the Pfizer mRNA injection. You will never believe the date that this happened... Is this just a coincidence? You know, the company that partnered with Pfizer to make their mRNA covid vaccine and drove Pfizer's revenue to a record $100 billion in 2022. Well, I had a look and found something very interesting indeed. When did Bill Gates invest this large sum of money? Turns out that it was on the 4th of September 2019. Covid was discovered just two months later in November 2019 (at least the first time we got to hear about it). This turned out to be very profitable for Bill Gates, his investment increasing by 10 times. The original $55 million was worth over $550 million just a few years later. "the collaboration will fund the identification of potential HIV and tuberculosis vaccine and immunotherapy candidates and their pre-clinical development. It will further enable BioNTech to build out its infectious disease infrastructure, including platform development" - it says in the press release from BioNTech. Guess what? Bill Gates has also donated some $20 million to the BBC. Now it is being reported that the BBC misrepresented the risk of covid in order to boost public support for lockdown. other words, the mainstream media deliberately mislead the public and scared them into supporting draconian lockdown measures, and also probably scared people into rushing to get the brand new mRNA injections. Meanwhile Bill Gates investment grew and grew... "One example is that they gave the impression that hospitals were being overwhelmed during the first wave. Some (mainly in London) were, but overall hospital bed occupancy was at an all-time low during that period" said Professor Mark Woolhouse. Remember when we were told that the hospitals were completely full and we had all the dancing nurses on TikTok? Remember how some peopel were labelled "conspiracy theorists" for questioning this? Turns out that the so called "conspiracy theorists" were right once again. The hospitals were not full. We were being lied to. What do you think about all of this, surely it is just a coincidence that Bill Gates just happened to invest large amounts of money into BioNTech just two months before covid? Join: @RevealedEye
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 3294 Views
  • Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer?
    Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, Vit C and Sodium Bicarb. But don't worry your cancer is safe because the FDA would never allow it.

    Dr. Syed Haider
    Cancer Treatment Options | Houston Methodist
    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 the East Palestine Ohio train wreck, which may spread quite widely along the eastern seaboard, are particularly at risk of developing cancer in the coming months and years from the ingition of the vinyl chloride cargo and it’s toxic breakdown products, especially dioxins.

    This post is not meant to be an exhaustive treatise on the prevention and treatment of cancer, but only to explain as simply as possible the scientific theory behind Adam Gaertner’s anti-cancer protocol, which combines 4 simple and cheap therapies that have been separately used and studied for a wide variety of human cancers with mixed results, but together have powerful synergistic effects that may, it is hoped, effectively eliminate any cancer. And at the end his simple 3 week protocol is included.

    Before we begin I also have to say that I have seen many people beat end stage cancer using drastic elimination diets and a modifed Gerson juicing protocol. And of course I have known many who decided on chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. Both paths are extremely difficult and require a lot of commitment and sacrifice. Perhaps the following protocol can help more people more easily overcome cancer.

    And after cancer is beaten, it pays to address the root causes because those who overcome cancer are often prone to an even more aggressive recurrence, especially if they persist in the unhealthy exposures and lifestyle habits that triggered it in the first place.

    WHAT IS CANCER?

    All tissues are made up of individual cellular building blocks that work together to accomplish a joint function. For example liver cells are like millions of workmen that all together make up the liver. Normally tissues maintain just the right amount of helpful worker cells. As old cells die off, new ones take their place.

    Cancers arise from cells in normal tissues that start to grow uncontrollably - the old workmen don't want to die and instead find a way to become immortal. They also don't want to work anymore and begin using up resources like the nutrients and oxygen coming into the tissue via the blood. These immortal cells also multiply very quickly and if left unchecked can destroy the normal cells and then the entire organ ceases to function. Not only that but they also enter the bloodstream and travel to other distant organs and take up new residence and continue to multiply out of control.


    Just as there are a tiny percentage of psychopaths and criminals in every society, who attempt to murder others and appropriate all the resources for themselves, there are cancer cells in everyone's bodies all the time that would like nothing better than to take over.

    Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it.

    Share

    And just as nations utilize a police force and military to maintain the peace, our bodies utilize specialized immune system processes and immune cells to keep the cancer cells in check - to continuously search them out and put them to death.

    However, when these defenses fail due to exposure to various carcinogens or simply old age, cancerous cells can gain a foothold and destroy us.

    DEFENSES AGAINST CANCER

    Intracellular Cytosolic Immunity

    Think of a cell like a 3D sphere. Inside the sphere there is another smaller sphere, which is the nucleus and holds the genetic material or DNA. Everything outside the nucleus is called the cytoplasm.

    Steph's Nature and Science
    Each individual cell has an internal immune system, called the cytosolic immune system that will monitor the cells health, and if the cell becomes cancerous will kill it in a process of cellular suicide termed apoptosis.

    You can imagine this as a person's conscience.

    Think of a horror movie scenario where someone becomes bitten by a mindless zombie and begins to change into a zombie themselves, feeling the first stirrings of hunger for the blood of those around them. Knowing they are doomed and wanting to preserve the lives of their loved ones they commit suicide rather than becoming a monster.

    In this way our own first line of defense against cancer is a system of internal checks and balances that will lead to cellular suicide or apoptosis.

    The checks and balances are a system of pro-suicide (pro-apoptotic) and anti-suicide (anti-apoptotic) pathways: p53 tumor suppressor gene, G1/S checkpoint, Hippo, TGF-β, Wnt signaling, Notch signaling, and PI3K/AKT signaling.

    Within these extremely complex pathways made up of numerous interacting chemical messengers there are just a small handful of signals that can lead to cellular death: caspases, apoptosis inducing factor (AIF), endonucleases, granzymes, BH3-interacting domain death agonist (Bid), Death receptor 5 (DR5), Fas-associated protein with death domain (FADD).

    A vast majority of cancers arise due to mutations affecting these critical cytosolic immunity pathways.

    So the conscience of the cell, its own internal checks and balances, become distorted and do not trigger suicide as they should when the cell begins transforming into a cancer cell.

    2 Zombie Stocks Coming Back from the Dead | Nasdaq
    The mutations work by producing malformed proteins that do not do their usual job of triggering cellular suicide.

    Usually malformed proteins would themselves be destroyed by the intracellular “chaperone” and “proteasome” systems - these are both meant to protect our cells from mutations.

    The reason this does not happen in the case of most cancers is that most cancers also stimulate an internal process that makes them more resistant to the chaperone and proteasome systems - by way of the production of heat shock protein 90 (hsp90).

    Ivermectin

    Doctors Sue FDA For Prohibiting Use Of Ivermectin To Treat Covid
    Ivermectin, the horse and cow and human drug, has traditionally been used as an antiparasitic (e.g. scabies), but also has antiviral and anti-inflammatory activities. It binds to hsp90 and other heat shock proteins blocking their ability to stabilize mutated checkpoint proteins. It likewise suppresses a number of the anti-apoptotic pathway especially TGF-β, as well as increasing the expression of p53 tumor suppressor gene pro-apoptotic pathway.

    So in effect ivermectin helps the cancer cell reestablish the ability to detect that it is cancerous and thereby trigger an internal process of suicide.

    Unfortunately not every cancer utilizes the pathways ivermectin targets.

    And as a result of the relatively rapid replication rate of cancerous cells, and the evolutionary imperative to survive, additional mutations are often present across the tumor mass. As a result, ivermectin may be effective against only 90% of a given tumor mass; however, if the 90% is killed in this way, the remaining 10% will, by default, not be able to be corrected, leading to relapse, with the remainder becoming harder to treat - as the 10% left over multiplies and becomes the entire 100% of tumor.

    Extracellular Natural Killer Cell Immunity

    Immense Immunology Insight: Girl, if we were lymphocytes... You'd be a ...
    Another arm of the immune system that protects against cancer is outside the cancer cell itself. We can think of this like the police force that keeps an eye out for dangerous cancer cells.

    Our internal police force uses markers to identify healthy cells and unhealthy cells as well as foreign intruders like bacteria and viruses.

    The markers our immune system uses for identification are called antigens - little bits of cells.

    Most of our immune cells are trained to recognize foreign particles that do not belong and destroy them - like crazy immigration agent death squads.

    But the Natural Killer (NK) cells are trained to check for what is supposed to be present - self-antigens - markers that indicate normal cells, kind of like ID cards.

    In policing terms: NK cells wander the streets and demand everyone's papers, regardless of any evidence of a crime, and immediately execute anyone who cannot prove they belong.

    "Ihre Papiere, bitte!" (Episode 48) | #FSCK 'Em All!
    The rapid rate of replication of cancerous cells places them under heavy evolutionary pressure; those cells that do not express self-antigens will be targeted and destroyed by the NK cells, whereas those that do may not be - so some cancer cells develop the ability to forge their own papers and pass themselves off as normal law abiding residents, rather than dangerous alien invaders.

    Those wily ones will multiply while the others die off, and eventually the entire tumor mass is comprised of cells that can trick the NK cells into leaving them alone by presenting proper identification, even though they will still be presenting other signs of being foreign - like devil horns growing out of their heads - “it’s just part of my mardi gras outfit officer”.

    While this is very bad news it does open up an avenue of treatment via T cell activation.

    T cell Immunity

    CD 4 T cells are also called helper T cells, they aid other immune cells via the release of cytokine messengers. CD 8 T cells are also called cytotoxic T cells. Cyto for cell, toxic for toxic - i.e. they kill cancer cells.

    T cells like NK cells detect self antigens and will ignore those that present them, but they also look for non self antigens (like those devil horns) as well as an additional costimulatory signal to trigger their death squad role.

    It’s like they not only check your papers, but they check to make sure those horns are actually real and they make you pass a lie detector test. If they find real horns and sense signs of stress during the lie detector test they have enough evidence to declare you guilty and execute you.

    Geek Comic for November 17th - You can Beat the Lie Detector Test Because…
    If they just find the horns, but no signs of stress, they let you go on your way.

    Cancer cells can’t avoid making weird mutated horn-like proteins, but they can figure out how to pass the lie detector test by muting their stress signals.

    The way to bypass that is by subjecting them to so much stress that their ability to mute the signs of stress breaks down, and at the same time triggering more foreign proteins and stopping proliferation would also be helpful, which brings us to the other 3 therapies.

    Fenbendazole, Sodium Bicarbonate & Vitamin C

    Fenbendazole

    Panacur Granules 22.2% [Fenbendazole] (1 lb)
    Humans are not listed on the side panel
    Fenbendazole is not FDA approved for use in humans, but is commonly used as an antiparasitic medication in animals, and has been studied in some human cancer studies, where it appears to be safe. It has multiple effects against cancer cells. Most significantly, it can lead to the influence the MAPK pathway to activate cellular suicide or apoptosis.

    It destabilizes cellular protein structures called microtubules that are essential to cell division.

    It also disrupts cancer cell energy production by blocking the breakdown of sugar (glycolysis) which is like crude oil for cells and also blocking the ability of mitochondria, the energy refining factories of cells from using the crude oil to produce the cellular equivalent of electricity, i.e. ATP - the universal bioenergy molecule.

    This collection of actions may not be applicable for all cancers, however a sizable proportion are affected; as such metabolic disruption occurs which then leads to production of cellular stress signals.

    An important manifestation of this is CD80, a costimulatory signal that in combination with T Cell Receptor binding to a foreign antigen, activates CD8 T-cells; alternatively if the antigen is self, it will inhibit them, as well as activate dormant NK cells in the area.

    Share

    So what’s happening here is if the cancer cell has non self antigens (those devil horns) the stress signals (failed lie detector test) will activate CD8 cytotoxic T cells to kill it.

    If however the cancer cell shows a normal self antigen to the T cell along with the stress signals, the T cell will stand down but the same stress signals may still activate nearby NK cells.

    Thereby some of the tumor cells will be destroyed releasing many new antigens into the area, both self and non self. These new antigens will be recognized by nearby immune cells and train them to better detect the remaining tumor cells. This triggers a far more robust immune activation and ends up in effectively nuking the area - destroying all remaining tumor as well as some friendlies and innocent bystanders mixed up in the fray.

    Sodium Bicarbonate

    Alkaline Diet for Cancer : Comprehensive Nutrional Guide to Cure and ...
    The mechanism of sodium bicarbonate action is easy to understand, based on the Warburg effect: decreasing acidity (increasing the pH or alkalinity) outside the cancer cells impairs their ability to maintain a highly alkaline environment within themselves. That alters cancer cells' metabolism, prompting similar immune system reactions as previously discussed and igniting further cascades.

    Unfortunately, if sodium bicarbonate is used without other agents from the protocol, tumors promptly become resistant and cancer-fighting benefits decrease to mere prolongation of life expectancy instead of complete elimination.

    Vitamin C

    Best Linus Pauling Cancer Vitamin C - Your Best Life
    When ascorbic acid is used in large quantities, along with the reduced form dehydroascorbate (DHA), it induces intense oxidative stress within cancerous cells; if that stress is insufficient to destroy the cell outright, it triggers the release of numerous cytokines, including our friend CD80, which initiates the cascade described above involving CD8 cytotoxic T cells.

    Not all forms of cancer are responsive to this pathway and sodium bicarbonate is capable of directly counteracting it.

    As a potent immunomodulator vitamin C even has the potential to disrupt the inflammatory response involved in targeting a significant-sized tumor.

    So it’s important to carefully balance the two options, and not use both simultaneously. The alkalization brought about by sodium bicarbonate won't last for particularly long; therefore, employing one after another in alternating fashion will likely provide more benefits than using just one of them at a time.

    In a Nutshell

    The following are four therapeutic pathways that, when used together, cause cancerous cells to undergo both apoptosis and loss of immune evasion features so the immune system can identify and attack them.

    Ivermectin inhibits mutant checkpoint and cascade transduction proteins, particularly PI3K, reduces TAM anti-apoptotic signaling, and increases expression of the tumor suppressor p53 by binding to the hsp90 protein.

    In addition to modulating the MAPK pathway, fenbendazole destabilizes microtubules, inhibits glycolytic metabolism, inhibits mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, and reduces anti-apoptotic PD-L1 expression feedback loops.

    Through alkalization of the cytosolic tumor environment, sodium bicarbonate induces metabolic stress.

    Vitamin C triggers oxidative stress and cytokine production.

    In this method, cytosolic apoptosis signaling cascades are promoted, and effector CD8 and NK cells are infiltrated into a tumor mass through adaptive recognition of foreign antigens and inhibition of anti-apoptotic pathways in order to achieve complete remission through both self-destruct signaling pathways as well as inflammatory immune destruction of cancerous cells.

    The Proposed Protocol

    Unlike most traditional cytotoxic cancer therapies that destroy both cancer cells as well as regular cells and especially the body's immune system cells, this protocol stimulates the body's own innate and adaptive immune system to fight off cancer.

    NLRP3 and STING enhance immune attack on cancer | Cancer Biology
    This protocol should not be used in combination with most mainstream cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy, due to their ability to impair the immune system that the protocol depends on.

    It is likely to be most potent at the early stages of disease; further progress of the condition will prolong duration of treatment needed.

    A healthy immune system takes time to ramp up the necessary response, so the protocol is based on the time required for each drug to take effect, safety data, bioavailability, and elimination time.

    Day 1:

    Ivermectin: 1 mg/kg by mouth

    Fenbendazole: 1000mg by mouth

    Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water

    Day 2:

    Ascorbic acid: 50 mg/kg by mouth, two doses, 8 hours apart or 20g IV, once

    Day 3:

    Repeat Day 1

    Day 4:

    Repeat Day 2

    Days 5 to 10:

    Fenbendazole, 200mg by mouth daily

    Alternate sodium bicarbonate and ascorbic acid every other day beginning with sodium bicarb on day 5, then vitamin C on day 6, etc.

    Day 11:

    Ivermectin: 1 mg/kg by mouth

    Fenbendazole: 1000 mg by mouth

    Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water

    Days 12 to 20:

    Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water

    Day 20:

    Imaging: Check progress. Significant reduction or complete elimination of tumor mass should have occurred by this time, if not repeat the protocol.

    At this time the US FDA has not approved this protocol for study or for use in humans.

    It is unlikely that any pharmaceutical company will spend the millions of dollars it would take to prove this protocol in large randomized controlled trials because none of the four therapeutics are under patent and therefore cannot be effectively monetized.

    Even if some billionaire decided to back this protocol, Big Pharma would move heaven and earth to prove it doesn’t work as they did with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID.

    Let me know below if you know of anyone who has utilized these 4 therapeutics together.

    And finally beating cancer inside us is a great first step to healing our world, but next we need to beat the cancerous psychopaths who are destroying our societies. If not we will go the way of Rome and a new civilization will rise from our ashes.


    I believe in the Judeo Christian ethic of working hard and giving back without big government. My online clinic, mygotodoc.com, exemplifies that by charging a fee that is well worth the service, but also offering free medical answers and (asynchronous) care for anyone that needs it.

    The same applies at my free online Summit Long COVID Reset, exclusive weekly content, including live Q&As and much more released on my video subscription platform, and in my course, Phoenix for Healing Long Haul and Lean Vitality - all are available for a fee or for free by request.

    So thank you to everyone who finds this written content valuable and supports it by being a paid subscriber (even though there are currently no paid subscriber benefits aside from a warm fuzzy feeling that you did something good). You are helping enable the significant amount of time and effort it takes to write. If you have the means also please consider donating to help support the care of those cannot afford it at mygotodoc.com/donation.

    If you are a free subscriber thanks for being here, and please also consider supporting my efforts in any way you can, but especially by sharing my posts widely.

    https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/can-2-cheap-meds-1-vitamin-and-baking
    Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer? Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, Vit C and Sodium Bicarb. But don't worry your cancer is safe because the FDA would never allow it. Dr. Syed Haider Cancer Treatment Options | Houston Methodist 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 the East Palestine Ohio train wreck, which may spread quite widely along the eastern seaboard, are particularly at risk of developing cancer in the coming months and years from the ingition of the vinyl chloride cargo and it’s toxic breakdown products, especially dioxins. This post is not meant to be an exhaustive treatise on the prevention and treatment of cancer, but only to explain as simply as possible the scientific theory behind Adam Gaertner’s anti-cancer protocol, which combines 4 simple and cheap therapies that have been separately used and studied for a wide variety of human cancers with mixed results, but together have powerful synergistic effects that may, it is hoped, effectively eliminate any cancer. And at the end his simple 3 week protocol is included. Before we begin I also have to say that I have seen many people beat end stage cancer using drastic elimination diets and a modifed Gerson juicing protocol. And of course I have known many who decided on chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. Both paths are extremely difficult and require a lot of commitment and sacrifice. Perhaps the following protocol can help more people more easily overcome cancer. And after cancer is beaten, it pays to address the root causes because those who overcome cancer are often prone to an even more aggressive recurrence, especially if they persist in the unhealthy exposures and lifestyle habits that triggered it in the first place. WHAT IS CANCER? All tissues are made up of individual cellular building blocks that work together to accomplish a joint function. For example liver cells are like millions of workmen that all together make up the liver. Normally tissues maintain just the right amount of helpful worker cells. As old cells die off, new ones take their place. Cancers arise from cells in normal tissues that start to grow uncontrollably - the old workmen don't want to die and instead find a way to become immortal. They also don't want to work anymore and begin using up resources like the nutrients and oxygen coming into the tissue via the blood. These immortal cells also multiply very quickly and if left unchecked can destroy the normal cells and then the entire organ ceases to function. Not only that but they also enter the bloodstream and travel to other distant organs and take up new residence and continue to multiply out of control. Just as there are a tiny percentage of psychopaths and criminals in every society, who attempt to murder others and appropriate all the resources for themselves, there are cancer cells in everyone's bodies all the time that would like nothing better than to take over. Thank you for reading Dr. Syed Haider. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share And just as nations utilize a police force and military to maintain the peace, our bodies utilize specialized immune system processes and immune cells to keep the cancer cells in check - to continuously search them out and put them to death. However, when these defenses fail due to exposure to various carcinogens or simply old age, cancerous cells can gain a foothold and destroy us. DEFENSES AGAINST CANCER Intracellular Cytosolic Immunity Think of a cell like a 3D sphere. Inside the sphere there is another smaller sphere, which is the nucleus and holds the genetic material or DNA. Everything outside the nucleus is called the cytoplasm. Steph's Nature and Science Each individual cell has an internal immune system, called the cytosolic immune system that will monitor the cells health, and if the cell becomes cancerous will kill it in a process of cellular suicide termed apoptosis. You can imagine this as a person's conscience. Think of a horror movie scenario where someone becomes bitten by a mindless zombie and begins to change into a zombie themselves, feeling the first stirrings of hunger for the blood of those around them. Knowing they are doomed and wanting to preserve the lives of their loved ones they commit suicide rather than becoming a monster. In this way our own first line of defense against cancer is a system of internal checks and balances that will lead to cellular suicide or apoptosis. The checks and balances are a system of pro-suicide (pro-apoptotic) and anti-suicide (anti-apoptotic) pathways: p53 tumor suppressor gene, G1/S checkpoint, Hippo, TGF-β, Wnt signaling, Notch signaling, and PI3K/AKT signaling. Within these extremely complex pathways made up of numerous interacting chemical messengers there are just a small handful of signals that can lead to cellular death: caspases, apoptosis inducing factor (AIF), endonucleases, granzymes, BH3-interacting domain death agonist (Bid), Death receptor 5 (DR5), Fas-associated protein with death domain (FADD). A vast majority of cancers arise due to mutations affecting these critical cytosolic immunity pathways. So the conscience of the cell, its own internal checks and balances, become distorted and do not trigger suicide as they should when the cell begins transforming into a cancer cell. 2 Zombie Stocks Coming Back from the Dead | Nasdaq The mutations work by producing malformed proteins that do not do their usual job of triggering cellular suicide. Usually malformed proteins would themselves be destroyed by the intracellular “chaperone” and “proteasome” systems - these are both meant to protect our cells from mutations. The reason this does not happen in the case of most cancers is that most cancers also stimulate an internal process that makes them more resistant to the chaperone and proteasome systems - by way of the production of heat shock protein 90 (hsp90). Ivermectin Doctors Sue FDA For Prohibiting Use Of Ivermectin To Treat Covid Ivermectin, the horse and cow and human drug, has traditionally been used as an antiparasitic (e.g. scabies), but also has antiviral and anti-inflammatory activities. It binds to hsp90 and other heat shock proteins blocking their ability to stabilize mutated checkpoint proteins. It likewise suppresses a number of the anti-apoptotic pathway especially TGF-β, as well as increasing the expression of p53 tumor suppressor gene pro-apoptotic pathway. So in effect ivermectin helps the cancer cell reestablish the ability to detect that it is cancerous and thereby trigger an internal process of suicide. Unfortunately not every cancer utilizes the pathways ivermectin targets. And as a result of the relatively rapid replication rate of cancerous cells, and the evolutionary imperative to survive, additional mutations are often present across the tumor mass. As a result, ivermectin may be effective against only 90% of a given tumor mass; however, if the 90% is killed in this way, the remaining 10% will, by default, not be able to be corrected, leading to relapse, with the remainder becoming harder to treat - as the 10% left over multiplies and becomes the entire 100% of tumor. Extracellular Natural Killer Cell Immunity Immense Immunology Insight: Girl, if we were lymphocytes... You'd be a ... Another arm of the immune system that protects against cancer is outside the cancer cell itself. We can think of this like the police force that keeps an eye out for dangerous cancer cells. Our internal police force uses markers to identify healthy cells and unhealthy cells as well as foreign intruders like bacteria and viruses. The markers our immune system uses for identification are called antigens - little bits of cells. Most of our immune cells are trained to recognize foreign particles that do not belong and destroy them - like crazy immigration agent death squads. But the Natural Killer (NK) cells are trained to check for what is supposed to be present - self-antigens - markers that indicate normal cells, kind of like ID cards. In policing terms: NK cells wander the streets and demand everyone's papers, regardless of any evidence of a crime, and immediately execute anyone who cannot prove they belong. "Ihre Papiere, bitte!" (Episode 48) | #FSCK 'Em All! The rapid rate of replication of cancerous cells places them under heavy evolutionary pressure; those cells that do not express self-antigens will be targeted and destroyed by the NK cells, whereas those that do may not be - so some cancer cells develop the ability to forge their own papers and pass themselves off as normal law abiding residents, rather than dangerous alien invaders. Those wily ones will multiply while the others die off, and eventually the entire tumor mass is comprised of cells that can trick the NK cells into leaving them alone by presenting proper identification, even though they will still be presenting other signs of being foreign - like devil horns growing out of their heads - “it’s just part of my mardi gras outfit officer”. While this is very bad news it does open up an avenue of treatment via T cell activation. T cell Immunity CD 4 T cells are also called helper T cells, they aid other immune cells via the release of cytokine messengers. CD 8 T cells are also called cytotoxic T cells. Cyto for cell, toxic for toxic - i.e. they kill cancer cells. T cells like NK cells detect self antigens and will ignore those that present them, but they also look for non self antigens (like those devil horns) as well as an additional costimulatory signal to trigger their death squad role. It’s like they not only check your papers, but they check to make sure those horns are actually real and they make you pass a lie detector test. If they find real horns and sense signs of stress during the lie detector test they have enough evidence to declare you guilty and execute you. Geek Comic for November 17th - You can Beat the Lie Detector Test Because… If they just find the horns, but no signs of stress, they let you go on your way. Cancer cells can’t avoid making weird mutated horn-like proteins, but they can figure out how to pass the lie detector test by muting their stress signals. The way to bypass that is by subjecting them to so much stress that their ability to mute the signs of stress breaks down, and at the same time triggering more foreign proteins and stopping proliferation would also be helpful, which brings us to the other 3 therapies. Fenbendazole, Sodium Bicarbonate & Vitamin C Fenbendazole Panacur Granules 22.2% [Fenbendazole] (1 lb) Humans are not listed on the side panel Fenbendazole is not FDA approved for use in humans, but is commonly used as an antiparasitic medication in animals, and has been studied in some human cancer studies, where it appears to be safe. It has multiple effects against cancer cells. Most significantly, it can lead to the influence the MAPK pathway to activate cellular suicide or apoptosis. It destabilizes cellular protein structures called microtubules that are essential to cell division. It also disrupts cancer cell energy production by blocking the breakdown of sugar (glycolysis) which is like crude oil for cells and also blocking the ability of mitochondria, the energy refining factories of cells from using the crude oil to produce the cellular equivalent of electricity, i.e. ATP - the universal bioenergy molecule. This collection of actions may not be applicable for all cancers, however a sizable proportion are affected; as such metabolic disruption occurs which then leads to production of cellular stress signals. An important manifestation of this is CD80, a costimulatory signal that in combination with T Cell Receptor binding to a foreign antigen, activates CD8 T-cells; alternatively if the antigen is self, it will inhibit them, as well as activate dormant NK cells in the area. Share So what’s happening here is if the cancer cell has non self antigens (those devil horns) the stress signals (failed lie detector test) will activate CD8 cytotoxic T cells to kill it. If however the cancer cell shows a normal self antigen to the T cell along with the stress signals, the T cell will stand down but the same stress signals may still activate nearby NK cells. Thereby some of the tumor cells will be destroyed releasing many new antigens into the area, both self and non self. These new antigens will be recognized by nearby immune cells and train them to better detect the remaining tumor cells. This triggers a far more robust immune activation and ends up in effectively nuking the area - destroying all remaining tumor as well as some friendlies and innocent bystanders mixed up in the fray. Sodium Bicarbonate Alkaline Diet for Cancer : Comprehensive Nutrional Guide to Cure and ... The mechanism of sodium bicarbonate action is easy to understand, based on the Warburg effect: decreasing acidity (increasing the pH or alkalinity) outside the cancer cells impairs their ability to maintain a highly alkaline environment within themselves. That alters cancer cells' metabolism, prompting similar immune system reactions as previously discussed and igniting further cascades. Unfortunately, if sodium bicarbonate is used without other agents from the protocol, tumors promptly become resistant and cancer-fighting benefits decrease to mere prolongation of life expectancy instead of complete elimination. Vitamin C Best Linus Pauling Cancer Vitamin C - Your Best Life When ascorbic acid is used in large quantities, along with the reduced form dehydroascorbate (DHA), it induces intense oxidative stress within cancerous cells; if that stress is insufficient to destroy the cell outright, it triggers the release of numerous cytokines, including our friend CD80, which initiates the cascade described above involving CD8 cytotoxic T cells. Not all forms of cancer are responsive to this pathway and sodium bicarbonate is capable of directly counteracting it. As a potent immunomodulator vitamin C even has the potential to disrupt the inflammatory response involved in targeting a significant-sized tumor. So it’s important to carefully balance the two options, and not use both simultaneously. The alkalization brought about by sodium bicarbonate won't last for particularly long; therefore, employing one after another in alternating fashion will likely provide more benefits than using just one of them at a time. In a Nutshell The following are four therapeutic pathways that, when used together, cause cancerous cells to undergo both apoptosis and loss of immune evasion features so the immune system can identify and attack them. Ivermectin inhibits mutant checkpoint and cascade transduction proteins, particularly PI3K, reduces TAM anti-apoptotic signaling, and increases expression of the tumor suppressor p53 by binding to the hsp90 protein. In addition to modulating the MAPK pathway, fenbendazole destabilizes microtubules, inhibits glycolytic metabolism, inhibits mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, and reduces anti-apoptotic PD-L1 expression feedback loops. Through alkalization of the cytosolic tumor environment, sodium bicarbonate induces metabolic stress. Vitamin C triggers oxidative stress and cytokine production. In this method, cytosolic apoptosis signaling cascades are promoted, and effector CD8 and NK cells are infiltrated into a tumor mass through adaptive recognition of foreign antigens and inhibition of anti-apoptotic pathways in order to achieve complete remission through both self-destruct signaling pathways as well as inflammatory immune destruction of cancerous cells. The Proposed Protocol Unlike most traditional cytotoxic cancer therapies that destroy both cancer cells as well as regular cells and especially the body's immune system cells, this protocol stimulates the body's own innate and adaptive immune system to fight off cancer. NLRP3 and STING enhance immune attack on cancer | Cancer Biology This protocol should not be used in combination with most mainstream cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy, due to their ability to impair the immune system that the protocol depends on. It is likely to be most potent at the early stages of disease; further progress of the condition will prolong duration of treatment needed. A healthy immune system takes time to ramp up the necessary response, so the protocol is based on the time required for each drug to take effect, safety data, bioavailability, and elimination time. Day 1: Ivermectin: 1 mg/kg by mouth Fenbendazole: 1000mg by mouth Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water Day 2: Ascorbic acid: 50 mg/kg by mouth, two doses, 8 hours apart or 20g IV, once Day 3: Repeat Day 1 Day 4: Repeat Day 2 Days 5 to 10: Fenbendazole, 200mg by mouth daily Alternate sodium bicarbonate and ascorbic acid every other day beginning with sodium bicarb on day 5, then vitamin C on day 6, etc. Day 11: Ivermectin: 1 mg/kg by mouth Fenbendazole: 1000 mg by mouth Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water Days 12 to 20: Sodium Bicarbonate: 1 tsp morning and evening dissolved in 1 quart of water Day 20: Imaging: Check progress. Significant reduction or complete elimination of tumor mass should have occurred by this time, if not repeat the protocol. At this time the US FDA has not approved this protocol for study or for use in humans. It is unlikely that any pharmaceutical company will spend the millions of dollars it would take to prove this protocol in large randomized controlled trials because none of the four therapeutics are under patent and therefore cannot be effectively monetized. Even if some billionaire decided to back this protocol, Big Pharma would move heaven and earth to prove it doesn’t work as they did with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID. Let me know below if you know of anyone who has utilized these 4 therapeutics together. And finally beating cancer inside us is a great first step to healing our world, but next we need to beat the cancerous psychopaths who are destroying our societies. If not we will go the way of Rome and a new civilization will rise from our ashes. I believe in the Judeo Christian ethic of working hard and giving back without big government. My online clinic, mygotodoc.com, exemplifies that by charging a fee that is well worth the service, but also offering free medical answers and (asynchronous) care for anyone that needs it. The same applies at my free online Summit Long COVID Reset, exclusive weekly content, including live Q&As and much more released on my video subscription platform, and in my course, Phoenix for Healing Long Haul and Lean Vitality - all are available for a fee or for free by request. So thank you to everyone who finds this written content valuable and supports it by being a paid subscriber (even though there are currently no paid subscriber benefits aside from a warm fuzzy feeling that you did something good). You are helping enable the significant amount of time and effort it takes to write. If you have the means also please consider donating to help support the care of those cannot afford it at mygotodoc.com/donation. If you are a free subscriber thanks for being here, and please also consider supporting my efforts in any way you can, but especially by sharing my posts widely. https://blog.mygotodoc.com/p/can-2-cheap-meds-1-vitamin-and-baking
    BLOG.MYGOTODOC.COM
    Can 2 Cheap Meds, 1 Vitamin & Baking Soda Kill Any Cancer?
    Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, Vit C and Sodium Bicarb. But don't worry your cancer is safe because the FDA would never allow it.
    Angry
    1
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 19901 Views
  • The Corbett Report unveils the BBC, a coincidence theory broadcaster – Must read!
    Rhoda WilsonOctober 15, 2023
    James Corbett’s hit piece about the BBC in the style of the BBC’s own hit pieces featuring Marianna Spring, the BBC’s disinformation and social media correspondent. As he says – enjoy!

    Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

    The Beeb: Inside the UK’s coincidence theory broadcaster that shares violence and hate

    By James Corbett, The Corbett Report

    Remember ‘Who Will Fact Check the Fact Checkers? I Will!!!’, where I shone the spotlight of shame on Marianna Spring, the BBC’s “specialist disinformation correspondent” who was recently busted for having lied about her own work history on her CV?

    And remember my recent Solutions Watch episode on ‘The Newspaper Revolution’, wherein I picked apart ‘The Light: Inside the UK’s conspiracy theory newspaper that shares violence and hate’, a Spring-penned hit piece on Darren Nesbit of The Light newspaper?

    And remember when, in the course of dissecting Spring’s article, I mused that I should write a parody of her style, demonstrating how mindless and risible that flavour of establishment hatchet job “journalism” really is?

    Well, this week I present to you exactly that: a hit piece about the BBC in the style of the BBC’s own hit pieces! Enjoy!

    (Note: All ridiculous grammatical constructions, pompous journalistic syntax and awkward, clunky turns of phrase have been copied directly from Spring’s propaganda piece. Blame her, not me!)


    Marianna Spring, BBC disinfo specialist, got her start in the business by lying on her CV
    The Corbett Report anti-disinformation special correspondent

    A UK coincidence theory broadcaster sharing calls for censoring their journalistic competition, debanking their domestic opposition and executing their foreign opposition and even innocent civilians has links with the British government and with intelligence agencies involved in coups and assassination attempts around the world, The Corbett Report can reveal.

    The BBC, which is seen by at least 1,000 octogenarians who never learned how to change the channel on their 1960s television set and which boasts more than 100 followers on its social media site BBC Online, grew to be a focal point of the UK coincidence theory movement with its pro-vaccine, pro-lockdown stance during the scamdemic.

    In its pages and on its corresponding streaming platform, the BBC has shared hateful and violent rhetoric towards journalists, medics and Members of Parliament, as well as platforming hereditary psychopaths accused of participating in The Great Reset.

    The broadcaster is funded by a tax on televisions masquerading as a “TV licence” and would NEVER be promoted by volunteers in dozens of towns across the country, where local leaders rely on it to promote their false and misleading claims about vaccines, the financial system and climate change, amid other more mundane articles on local politics, health and wellness.

    Articles and content shared by the BBC have called for the government, doctors, nurses and journalists to be punished for refusing to participate in the globalists’ crimes against humanity.

    Recent articles declare “The haters and conspiracy theorists [are] back on Twitter” (despite being unable to back up that claim) and fret about how poor (read: rich), beleaguered (read: pampered) Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is “grappling with Western war fatigue” (read: average people realising that their government is more concerned with keeping the military-industrial gravy train rolling than with keeping their own government functioning).

    Other posts shared by the BBC on Tumblr (WARNING: do NOT search “bbc” on Tumblr!) have featured hard-hitting news about a 700 year-old vampire skeleton on display in Bulgaria and a deep-dive investigation of a 75-year-old grandma bodybuilder. (And who can forget that classic, award-worthy exemplar of journalism, “Woman wan troway poo-poo, come trap for window“?)

    On Twitter, the broadcaster has also shared and endorsed content from utter psychos and nutjobs, gloating about the death of their rivals and making up fake stories about their political enemies, whilst simultaneously deleting tweets from staffers who admitted that scenes of chemical weapons attacks in Syria were staged for Western media.

    It has also consistently harboured, protected and promoted sexual deviants, including one of the most infamous (royally connected) paedophiles and neocrophiles in modern history.

    Marianna Spring, the BBC’s disinformation and social media correspondent, defended her broadcaster’s history of promoting and defending paedophiles before telling The Light newspaper that these matters are “above my pay grade.”


    If the BBC published a paper, how many people do you think would be volunteering to buy them in bulk and hand them out to people on the street?
    Spring says she isn’t in charge of the BBC’s newsroom, although acknowledges that everyone in said newsroom thinks exactly alike and believes themselves to be arbiters of truth who can tell the little people when they are guilty of wrongthink. Posts are sometimes published uncredited and sometimes appear under the author’s byline.

    Ms. Spring acknowledges that BBC Media Action does indeed receive funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but stresses that BBC Media Action is totally separate from BBC News and how dare you conflate the two. She has published content endorsing the Gates Foundation’s aim of combatting vaccine “hesitancy” by deceiving others about how safe and effective they are.

    The British government has boasted about its use of the BBC as a proxy for controlling news and information abroad, noting that its interests are “well served” by its collaboration with the broadcaster.

    Referring to concerns about the wider coincidence theory movement more generally, the UK’s chief forensic researcher of mainstream propaganda narratives, Iain Davis, has written on his Substack that “[t]he narratives she spring has presented to her BBC audience are riddled with inconsistencies and factual errors” and that “she has routinely ignored evidence without justification and has offered risible supposed ‘facts’ to support, what is clearly, propaganda”. [<-Yes, dear grammar Nazis, it’s the BBC that puts the period outside of the quotation marks, not me! Check the original!]

    Set up in 1922 as a government mouthpiece, the BBC is distributed in about 30 places across the UK such as Brighton, Thetford, Stroud, Plymouth, Oxford, Bristol, Manchester and Glastonbury. Local coincidence theory groups gather at the corner pub several nights a week to discuss the most recent propaganda blared at them through the tele.

    In the Devon town of Totnes, a demotivated minority have been leaving the BBC on in the background while they do the washing up for years. Its former town Mayor Ben Piper says he first became a key target of the conspiracy realist movement there because of his role enforcing draconian, anti-human lockdown policies, as dictated by his globalist overlords.


    Former mayor of Totnes Ben Piper says everything bad that happens to him (including when he stubbed his toe yesterday) is probably the result of things that weren’t written about him by those independent journalist meanies.
    He fears that every unpleasant incident that happens in his personal life is now a direct result of the free flow of information enabled by independent media platforms and implies that the world will not be safe until every last citizen journalist has been jailed and news can be delivered only via the mockingbird repeaters of the BBC.

    “There was an aggression that bled through the editorial that was not as innocent as it was making out to be,” he says about an unflattering piece about him that appeared in The Light, apparently unaware that his statement is an admission that the article didn’t actually say anything aggressive in the first place and that he can only construe it as incitement by reading what was not written on the page.

    The BBC’s disinformation specialist, Marianna Spring, comes from a posh London family and claims that her experience watching BBC World News on holiday was what set her on her path to becoming a “brilliant reporter” who can’t even tell the truth about her own work background in a job application. She agreed to speak to Darren Nesbit of The Light, only on the condition that she can ask him questions and record the interview too.

    For her, everything from financial turmoil to climate change and 9/11 terror attacks in the US are random things that happen for absolutely no reason whatsoever and anyone who disbelieves whatever the TV tells them about these issues is a loony who deserve to be denounced, debanked and depersoned. She thinks the scamdemic was just one step towards doing that.

    The BBC has featured multiple radio and television series presented by Jimmy Savile, perhaps the most notorious paedophile of the 20th century. Savile abused his BBC connections to rape children all across Britain for decades with complete impunity, receiving a knighthood from Queen Elizardbeast in the process. Upon his death, the BBC lauded Savile as an “established showbusiness figure” and a “leading charity worker,” praising his “benevolent persona” and gushing over all the money he raised for charity.

    “It’s my job to report on the areas that I do and there are teams at the BBC who specialise in covering health, for example,” Ms. Spring says. She reiterates again and again that “I’m not a health reporter”. (<-Again, that damn period outside the quotation marks. Come on, BBC style guide, you’re killing me here!)

    “I think we have to weaponise those same tactics [of emotional manipulation] in the journalism we do and bring stuff to life so that people understand the impact it has and so that we can engage them in a range of formats.”

    Spring directly defended a comically fake scene known as the BBC Syrian Zombie footage (ref: 34:20 mark), which was staged for the BBC cameras by the terrorists attempting to overthrow the Syrian government.


    BBC Panorama – Saving Syria’s Children: The infamous Panorama documentary broadcast on 30 September 2013 which included faked sequences purporting to show the aftermath of an incendiary bomb attack on a school in Aleppo, Syria, on 26 August 2013. See further information HERE.
    Marianna Spring believes this footage is real. Let that sink in.

    Ms. Spring asserts that “those people are not acting”, maintaining that “it’s actually quite disturbing, if I’m honest”.

    Nesbit asks her whether she thinks BBC censorship of dissenting opinions about the safety of covid vaccines could result in harm.

    She replies, “They’ve covered the vaccine rollout. They’ve covered the side effects. They’ve covered all kinds of things”.

    She tells Nesbit that the BBC doesn’t deny that a teeny-weeny eeny-meenie totally insignificant fraction of a sliver of a percentage point of people might have a slight reaction to (read: die suddenly from) the clot shots. But, Ms. Spring also says, “the number of people that would and could have died of Covid 19 is really, really high”.

    Nesbit directly asks her, “imagine if you found out that everything that you’ve been doing is wrong. Everything that the BBC was doing is wrong. How would that feel?”

    She replies, “I mean, but that’s just not the case”.

    Throughout the interview, Ms. Spring claims to be on the side of truth and accuracy—and then gives cryptic answers, which seem to contradict that.

    YouTube has not responded to the TCR’s request for comment about why it has allowed the BBC and other coincidence theory broadcasters to share violent and hateful rhetoric.

    Research carried out by multiple ratings agencies backs up the idea that calls to action endorsed by coincidence theory media like the BBC are now being ignored by nearly everyone.

    Recent data shows audiences are abandoning the BBC in droves, with every BBC radio station losing audience share last year, its TV news network losing a million viewers this year, and the broadcaster now facing an “existential crisis” over the mass of people who are refusing to pay their TV licence extortion fee. The average Brit is more likely to care what Karl Pilkington thinks about the news of the week than what that sex pest Huw Edwards or any of the other weirdos employed by Auntie Beeb think about it.

    “The BBC is part of a system of thought control complicit in the deaths of millions of people abroad, in severe political oppression at home, and in the possible termination of human life on this planet,” write Media Lens contributors David Edward and David Cromwell, who have studied the BBC.

    “In truth, the BBC’s relationship with the establishment was accurately summarised long ago, in a single diary entry made by the BBC’s own founder, Lord Reith: ‘They know they can trust us not to be really impartial.’”


    Marianna Spring defends the broadcaster’s right to publish opinions associated with the deep state.
    As well as links with the British foreign office and intelligence services (but I repeat myself), the BBC has counterpart government-funded mouthpiece broadcasters in Canada and Australia.

    Many media whistleblowers have spoken about their concerns over how extreme the BBC’s propaganda has become.

    They say some of the BBC’s key trustees and personnel are directly connected to intelligence agencies, government offices and corporate and financial executives.

    One of the whistleblowers, journalist Tony Gosling, who stopped working for the Beeb in 1993, writes, “Today’s broadcasting executives are being drafted in straight from the Temple of Mammon,” citing the BBC’s takeover by banking executives, an apparent reference to their 2014 appointment of former HSBC director Rona Fairhead as chair of the BBC Trust.

    As of press time, Eric Blair was unavailable for comment on how far the BBC has devolved into outright propaganda, warmongering and disinformation, but a strange rolling sound could be heard coming from his grave.

    [Related: James Corbett: The BBC was clearly exposed as part of the propaganda machine in 2013 and BBC wants to be the sole source of truth and it’s getting roasted for it.]

    The Corbett Report: The BBC Exposed (2013), 7 October 2023 (54 mins)
    About the Author

    The Corbett Report is an independent, listener-supported alternative news source. It operates on the principle of open-source intelligence and provides podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more.

    It is edited, web mastered, written, produced and hosted by award-winning investigative journalist James Corbett. To support The Corbett Report and receive its newsletter, sign up to become a member of the website HERE.

    Featured image: Marianna Spring (left). Book cover for ‘Is That True or Did You Hear It on the BBC?: Disinformation and the BBC’ by David Sedgwick (right).



    https://expose-news.com/2023/10/15/bbc-coincidence-theory-broadcaster/
    The Corbett Report unveils the BBC, a coincidence theory broadcaster – Must read! Rhoda WilsonOctober 15, 2023 James Corbett’s hit piece about the BBC in the style of the BBC’s own hit pieces featuring Marianna Spring, the BBC’s disinformation and social media correspondent. As he says – enjoy! Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… The Beeb: Inside the UK’s coincidence theory broadcaster that shares violence and hate By James Corbett, The Corbett Report Remember ‘Who Will Fact Check the Fact Checkers? I Will!!!’, where I shone the spotlight of shame on Marianna Spring, the BBC’s “specialist disinformation correspondent” who was recently busted for having lied about her own work history on her CV? And remember my recent Solutions Watch episode on ‘The Newspaper Revolution’, wherein I picked apart ‘The Light: Inside the UK’s conspiracy theory newspaper that shares violence and hate’, a Spring-penned hit piece on Darren Nesbit of The Light newspaper? And remember when, in the course of dissecting Spring’s article, I mused that I should write a parody of her style, demonstrating how mindless and risible that flavour of establishment hatchet job “journalism” really is? Well, this week I present to you exactly that: a hit piece about the BBC in the style of the BBC’s own hit pieces! Enjoy! (Note: All ridiculous grammatical constructions, pompous journalistic syntax and awkward, clunky turns of phrase have been copied directly from Spring’s propaganda piece. Blame her, not me!) Marianna Spring, BBC disinfo specialist, got her start in the business by lying on her CV The Corbett Report anti-disinformation special correspondent A UK coincidence theory broadcaster sharing calls for censoring their journalistic competition, debanking their domestic opposition and executing their foreign opposition and even innocent civilians has links with the British government and with intelligence agencies involved in coups and assassination attempts around the world, The Corbett Report can reveal. The BBC, which is seen by at least 1,000 octogenarians who never learned how to change the channel on their 1960s television set and which boasts more than 100 followers on its social media site BBC Online, grew to be a focal point of the UK coincidence theory movement with its pro-vaccine, pro-lockdown stance during the scamdemic. In its pages and on its corresponding streaming platform, the BBC has shared hateful and violent rhetoric towards journalists, medics and Members of Parliament, as well as platforming hereditary psychopaths accused of participating in The Great Reset. The broadcaster is funded by a tax on televisions masquerading as a “TV licence” and would NEVER be promoted by volunteers in dozens of towns across the country, where local leaders rely on it to promote their false and misleading claims about vaccines, the financial system and climate change, amid other more mundane articles on local politics, health and wellness. Articles and content shared by the BBC have called for the government, doctors, nurses and journalists to be punished for refusing to participate in the globalists’ crimes against humanity. Recent articles declare “The haters and conspiracy theorists [are] back on Twitter” (despite being unable to back up that claim) and fret about how poor (read: rich), beleaguered (read: pampered) Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is “grappling with Western war fatigue” (read: average people realising that their government is more concerned with keeping the military-industrial gravy train rolling than with keeping their own government functioning). Other posts shared by the BBC on Tumblr (WARNING: do NOT search “bbc” on Tumblr!) have featured hard-hitting news about a 700 year-old vampire skeleton on display in Bulgaria and a deep-dive investigation of a 75-year-old grandma bodybuilder. (And who can forget that classic, award-worthy exemplar of journalism, “Woman wan troway poo-poo, come trap for window“?) On Twitter, the broadcaster has also shared and endorsed content from utter psychos and nutjobs, gloating about the death of their rivals and making up fake stories about their political enemies, whilst simultaneously deleting tweets from staffers who admitted that scenes of chemical weapons attacks in Syria were staged for Western media. It has also consistently harboured, protected and promoted sexual deviants, including one of the most infamous (royally connected) paedophiles and neocrophiles in modern history. Marianna Spring, the BBC’s disinformation and social media correspondent, defended her broadcaster’s history of promoting and defending paedophiles before telling The Light newspaper that these matters are “above my pay grade.” If the BBC published a paper, how many people do you think would be volunteering to buy them in bulk and hand them out to people on the street? Spring says she isn’t in charge of the BBC’s newsroom, although acknowledges that everyone in said newsroom thinks exactly alike and believes themselves to be arbiters of truth who can tell the little people when they are guilty of wrongthink. Posts are sometimes published uncredited and sometimes appear under the author’s byline. Ms. Spring acknowledges that BBC Media Action does indeed receive funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but stresses that BBC Media Action is totally separate from BBC News and how dare you conflate the two. She has published content endorsing the Gates Foundation’s aim of combatting vaccine “hesitancy” by deceiving others about how safe and effective they are. The British government has boasted about its use of the BBC as a proxy for controlling news and information abroad, noting that its interests are “well served” by its collaboration with the broadcaster. Referring to concerns about the wider coincidence theory movement more generally, the UK’s chief forensic researcher of mainstream propaganda narratives, Iain Davis, has written on his Substack that “[t]he narratives she [Spring] has presented to her BBC audience are riddled with inconsistencies and factual errors” and that “she has routinely ignored evidence without justification and has offered risible supposed ‘facts’ to support, what is clearly, propaganda”. [<-Yes, dear grammar Nazis, it’s the BBC that puts the period outside of the quotation marks, not me! Check the original!] Set up in 1922 as a government mouthpiece, the BBC is distributed in about 30 places across the UK such as Brighton, Thetford, Stroud, Plymouth, Oxford, Bristol, Manchester and Glastonbury. Local coincidence theory groups gather at the corner pub several nights a week to discuss the most recent propaganda blared at them through the tele. In the Devon town of Totnes, a demotivated minority have been leaving the BBC on in the background while they do the washing up for years. Its former town Mayor Ben Piper says he first became a key target of the conspiracy realist movement there because of his role enforcing draconian, anti-human lockdown policies, as dictated by his globalist overlords. Former mayor of Totnes Ben Piper says everything bad that happens to him (including when he stubbed his toe yesterday) is probably the result of things that weren’t written about him by those independent journalist meanies. He fears that every unpleasant incident that happens in his personal life is now a direct result of the free flow of information enabled by independent media platforms and implies that the world will not be safe until every last citizen journalist has been jailed and news can be delivered only via the mockingbird repeaters of the BBC. “There was an aggression that bled through the editorial that was not as innocent as it was making out to be,” he says about an unflattering piece about him that appeared in The Light, apparently unaware that his statement is an admission that the article didn’t actually say anything aggressive in the first place and that he can only construe it as incitement by reading what was not written on the page. The BBC’s disinformation specialist, Marianna Spring, comes from a posh London family and claims that her experience watching BBC World News on holiday was what set her on her path to becoming a “brilliant reporter” who can’t even tell the truth about her own work background in a job application. She agreed to speak to Darren Nesbit of The Light, only on the condition that she can ask him questions and record the interview too. For her, everything from financial turmoil to climate change and 9/11 terror attacks in the US are random things that happen for absolutely no reason whatsoever and anyone who disbelieves whatever the TV tells them about these issues is a loony who deserve to be denounced, debanked and depersoned. She thinks the scamdemic was just one step towards doing that. The BBC has featured multiple radio and television series presented by Jimmy Savile, perhaps the most notorious paedophile of the 20th century. Savile abused his BBC connections to rape children all across Britain for decades with complete impunity, receiving a knighthood from Queen Elizardbeast in the process. Upon his death, the BBC lauded Savile as an “established showbusiness figure” and a “leading charity worker,” praising his “benevolent persona” and gushing over all the money he raised for charity. “It’s my job to report on the areas that I do and there are teams at the BBC who specialise in covering health, for example,” Ms. Spring says. She reiterates again and again that “I’m not a health reporter”. (<-Again, that damn period outside the quotation marks. Come on, BBC style guide, you’re killing me here!) “I think we have to weaponise those same tactics [of emotional manipulation] in the journalism we do and bring stuff to life so that people understand the impact it has and so that we can engage them in a range of formats.” Spring directly defended a comically fake scene known as the BBC Syrian Zombie footage (ref: 34:20 mark), which was staged for the BBC cameras by the terrorists attempting to overthrow the Syrian government. BBC Panorama – Saving Syria’s Children: The infamous Panorama documentary broadcast on 30 September 2013 which included faked sequences purporting to show the aftermath of an incendiary bomb attack on a school in Aleppo, Syria, on 26 August 2013. See further information HERE. Marianna Spring believes this footage is real. Let that sink in. Ms. Spring asserts that “those people are not acting”, maintaining that “it’s actually quite disturbing, if I’m honest”. Nesbit asks her whether she thinks BBC censorship of dissenting opinions about the safety of covid vaccines could result in harm. She replies, “They’ve covered the vaccine rollout. They’ve covered the side effects. They’ve covered all kinds of things”. She tells Nesbit that the BBC doesn’t deny that a teeny-weeny eeny-meenie totally insignificant fraction of a sliver of a percentage point of people might have a slight reaction to (read: die suddenly from) the clot shots. But, Ms. Spring also says, “the number of people that would and could have died of Covid 19 is really, really high”. Nesbit directly asks her, “imagine if you found out that everything that you’ve been doing is wrong. Everything that the BBC was doing is wrong. How would that feel?” She replies, “I mean, but that’s just not the case”. Throughout the interview, Ms. Spring claims to be on the side of truth and accuracy—and then gives cryptic answers, which seem to contradict that. YouTube has not responded to the TCR’s request for comment about why it has allowed the BBC and other coincidence theory broadcasters to share violent and hateful rhetoric. Research carried out by multiple ratings agencies backs up the idea that calls to action endorsed by coincidence theory media like the BBC are now being ignored by nearly everyone. Recent data shows audiences are abandoning the BBC in droves, with every BBC radio station losing audience share last year, its TV news network losing a million viewers this year, and the broadcaster now facing an “existential crisis” over the mass of people who are refusing to pay their TV licence extortion fee. The average Brit is more likely to care what Karl Pilkington thinks about the news of the week than what that sex pest Huw Edwards or any of the other weirdos employed by Auntie Beeb think about it. “The BBC is part of a system of thought control complicit in the deaths of millions of people abroad, in severe political oppression at home, and in the possible termination of human life on this planet,” write Media Lens contributors David Edward and David Cromwell, who have studied the BBC. “In truth, the BBC’s relationship with the establishment was accurately summarised long ago, in a single diary entry made by the BBC’s own founder, Lord Reith: ‘They know they can trust us not to be really impartial.’” Marianna Spring defends the broadcaster’s right to publish opinions associated with the deep state. As well as links with the British foreign office and intelligence services (but I repeat myself), the BBC has counterpart government-funded mouthpiece broadcasters in Canada and Australia. Many media whistleblowers have spoken about their concerns over how extreme the BBC’s propaganda has become. They say some of the BBC’s key trustees and personnel are directly connected to intelligence agencies, government offices and corporate and financial executives. One of the whistleblowers, journalist Tony Gosling, who stopped working for the Beeb in 1993, writes, “Today’s broadcasting executives are being drafted in straight from the Temple of Mammon,” citing the BBC’s takeover by banking executives, an apparent reference to their 2014 appointment of former HSBC director Rona Fairhead as chair of the BBC Trust. As of press time, Eric Blair was unavailable for comment on how far the BBC has devolved into outright propaganda, warmongering and disinformation, but a strange rolling sound could be heard coming from his grave. [Related: James Corbett: The BBC was clearly exposed as part of the propaganda machine in 2013 and BBC wants to be the sole source of truth and it’s getting roasted for it.] The Corbett Report: The BBC Exposed (2013), 7 October 2023 (54 mins) About the Author The Corbett Report is an independent, listener-supported alternative news source. It operates on the principle of open-source intelligence and provides podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more. It is edited, web mastered, written, produced and hosted by award-winning investigative journalist James Corbett. To support The Corbett Report and receive its newsletter, sign up to become a member of the website HERE. Featured image: Marianna Spring (left). Book cover for ‘Is That True or Did You Hear It on the BBC?: Disinformation and the BBC’ by David Sedgwick (right). https://expose-news.com/2023/10/15/bbc-coincidence-theory-broadcaster/
    EXPOSE-NEWS.COM
    The Corbett Report unveils the BBC, a coincidence theory broadcaster – Must read!
    James Corbett’s hit piece about the BBC in the style of the BBC’s own hit pieces featuring Marianna Spring, the BBC’s disinformation and social media correspondent. As he says &#8…
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 17825 Views
  • Seri Skin healthy skin lips body
    "I never expected the 'younger woman' lying naked in bed with my husband...
    would be my older sister!"
    How Ann Jacob’s humiliating moment sparked a journey to discover the “youth protein” that lets ANYONE visibly reverse the appearance of aging in as little as one week.Ivy League Discovery https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ


    I never expected the “younger woman” to be my older sister...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ

    But when I came home to find her in bed with my husband, I was forced to acknowledge what I had ignored for too long, that...

    Deep wrinkles covered every corner of my face...

    Fine lines encircled my eyes and mouth...

    My skin had become dry, crinkled, and weathered...

    Dark spots were peppered across my cheeks...

    And if all that wasn’t bad enough, my sister – who is 7 years older than me – looked a decade younger.

    The worst part is...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ

    I blamed myself for my husband's wandering eye...

    I spent two years seeing the disappointment in his eyes whenever he looked at me.

    Disappointed I didn’t look like the same twenty-year-old he fell in love with.

    But as strange as it is to say, I’m grateful it happened, because...Catching My Sister & Husband In The Act Led Me To Uncover A Simple But Incredibly Powerful Anti-Aging Discovery
    This discovery is a mysterious “youth protein”...

    That can help anyone, regardless of age, health, or life circumstances...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ

    Visibly slow down the signs of aging – and start enhancing their youthful glow.

    After just a few weeks of discovering this “youth protein”...

    My friends started asking me what I was using on my skin...

    And called me a complete liar when I told them “absolutely nothing!”

    But it’s true.

    I don’t use any creams or harsh, synthetic treatments.

    Actually, I warn every woman I meet against trying those chemical peels...

    My skin was red and blotchy for months after that! Instead...

    Humbled and in complete shock by how a simple evening routine featuring a mysterious “youth protein”...

    Can help erase the appearance of unsightly lines and wrinkles...

    Boost your skin's elasticity for a revitalized, youthful firmness...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ

    Improve age spots for more evenly-toned skin...

    And make you feel like you stopped aging 10+ years ago.


    This Strange “Youth Protein” Is The Sole Reason I Now Look 15 Years Younger Than I Actually Am!

    As you'll see shortly...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ

    It’s a lost remedy as close to the fountain of youth as one can possibly imagine.https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ


    Something I discovered during a strange encounter with an age-defying woman in Hunza Valley, Pakistan.

    This “youth protein” isn’t some weird superfood pill or powder.https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ
    Seri Skin healthy skin lips body "I never expected the 'younger woman' lying naked in bed with my husband... would be my older sister!" How Ann Jacob’s humiliating moment sparked a journey to discover the “youth protein” that lets ANYONE visibly reverse the appearance of aging in as little as one week.Ivy League Discovery https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ I never expected the “younger woman” to be my older sister...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ But when I came home to find her in bed with my husband, I was forced to acknowledge what I had ignored for too long, that... Deep wrinkles covered every corner of my face... Fine lines encircled my eyes and mouth... My skin had become dry, crinkled, and weathered... Dark spots were peppered across my cheeks... And if all that wasn’t bad enough, my sister – who is 7 years older than me – looked a decade younger. The worst part is...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ I blamed myself for my husband's wandering eye... I spent two years seeing the disappointment in his eyes whenever he looked at me. Disappointed I didn’t look like the same twenty-year-old he fell in love with. But as strange as it is to say, I’m grateful it happened, because...Catching My Sister & Husband In The Act Led Me To Uncover A Simple But Incredibly Powerful Anti-Aging Discovery This discovery is a mysterious “youth protein”... That can help anyone, regardless of age, health, or life circumstances...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ Visibly slow down the signs of aging – and start enhancing their youthful glow. After just a few weeks of discovering this “youth protein”... My friends started asking me what I was using on my skin... And called me a complete liar when I told them “absolutely nothing!” But it’s true. I don’t use any creams or harsh, synthetic treatments. Actually, I warn every woman I meet against trying those chemical peels... My skin was red and blotchy for months after that! Instead... Humbled and in complete shock by how a simple evening routine featuring a mysterious “youth protein”... Can help erase the appearance of unsightly lines and wrinkles... Boost your skin's elasticity for a revitalized, youthful firmness...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ Improve age spots for more evenly-toned skin... And make you feel like you stopped aging 10+ years ago. This Strange “Youth Protein” Is The Sole Reason I Now Look 15 Years Younger Than I Actually Am! As you'll see shortly...https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ It’s a lost remedy as close to the fountain of youth as one can possibly imagine.https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ Something I discovered during a strange encounter with an age-defying woman in Hunza Valley, Pakistan. This “youth protein” isn’t some weird superfood pill or powder.https://shorturl.at/ikyHZ
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 5120 Views
  • Man Claiming To Be Former Driver For Zelensky’s Wife’s Foundation Makes Video Accusing The Foundation of Involvement In Child Sex Trafficking

    A wild story out of Ukraine claims the wife of the nation’s puppet President Volodymyr Zelensky is operating a sex trafficking network where displaced Ukrainian children are offered to known pedophiles worldwide.

    Olena Zelenska is Zelensky’s wife, who launched the foundation in New York City back in September 2022 alongside suspected human trafficker Hillary Clinton, celebrities Matt Damon, Jimmy Fallon, and others.

    A man who claims to be a former employee of Ukrainian First Lady Olena Zelenska’s foundation says that the Olena Zelenska Foundation was involved with child sex trafficking. As a driver of supposedly war-endangered children, the man says that he was forced to drive children from cities in Ukraine and deliver them to pedophiles elsewhere in Europe, including in extremely wealthy and well-connected areas in London and Berlin.

    A little-seen video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dK4kKP65O0&t=281s)

    on Youtube entitled “La Fondation Olena Zelenska est impliquée dans le trafic d’enfants” reveals the claims of a masked man who says that he transported children out of Ukraine for Olena Zelenska’s foundation, and at least one of the children made him believe that the foundation was engaging in child sex trafficking. The video was uploaded by the account “Daniel Schmidt.”

    As noted by TheIntelDrop.org (https://www.theinteldrop.org/2023/11/05/preying-on-children-olena-zelenska-foundation-involved-in-child-trafficking-schemes/), the whistleblower provided photos of Olena Zelenska Foundation documents and his personal work identification card to lend credibility to his accusations. Also acknowledged, the Olena Zelenska Foundation launched in New York City in September 2022 with a star-studded event. The launch of Olena’s foundation was hosted by the Metropolitan Opera and the guests included Democrat politician Hillary Clinton and celebrities Matt Damon and Jimmy Fallon, among others.

    The Zelenska Foundation takes a special interest in overseeing “war orphans,” with the Ukraine government accusing Russia of kidnapping thousands of kids (https://t.me/g3news/16031).

    The man in the video makes his claims over the course of more than eight minutes speaking in French. The quotes below come word for word from the English closed captioning translation service on Youtube.

    “So, here I am recording this video to tell you about what happened in Olena Zelenska’s Foundation when I worked there. After I finish, I’ll send you this video via email together with the documents, all the facts of what had happened. To start my story, it was here in France. I had a friend there who worked with different foundations. And he was the one who told me that there is a foundation that pays well in Ukraine, which offers good conditions. And so, I thought, why not? So, I contacted this foundation and then I prepared my documents and I went to Ukraine. When I came, I came to work there as a driver. They offered me this job and I signed the contract. Even the contract was something bizarre. There were clauses, for example, in the contract, that said we must not talk with children, we must not ask questions about host families, things like that. For me it was weird, but I thought, well, I’m a driver it’s not my business. I signed the contract. After signing the contract, I was given the pass. This one. Here’s the pass,” the man said in the video, before showing documentation.

    🔗SOURCE ➡️ National File (https://nationalfile.com/man-claiming-to-be-former-driver-for-zelenskys-wifes-foundation-makes-video-accusing-the-foundation-of-involvement-in-child-sex-trafficking/), Infowars (https://www.infowars.com/posts/whistleblower-claims-ukrainian-president-zelenskys-wife-running-child-trafficking-network/)

    RELATED READING: 10/3/23 — Zelensky Requests Marina Abramovic To be Ambassador for Rebuilding Ukraine's Schools

    https://themcgwire.substack.com/p/zelensky-requests-marina-abramovic #marinaAbramovic #ukraine #sextrafficking #zelensky #News
    Man Claiming To Be Former Driver For Zelensky’s Wife’s Foundation Makes Video Accusing The Foundation of Involvement In Child Sex Trafficking A wild story out of Ukraine claims the wife of the nation’s puppet President Volodymyr Zelensky is operating a sex trafficking network where displaced Ukrainian children are offered to known pedophiles worldwide. Olena Zelenska is Zelensky’s wife, who launched the foundation in New York City back in September 2022 alongside suspected human trafficker Hillary Clinton, celebrities Matt Damon, Jimmy Fallon, and others. A man who claims to be a former employee of Ukrainian First Lady Olena Zelenska’s foundation says that the Olena Zelenska Foundation was involved with child sex trafficking. As a driver of supposedly war-endangered children, the man says that he was forced to drive children from cities in Ukraine and deliver them to pedophiles elsewhere in Europe, including in extremely wealthy and well-connected areas in London and Berlin. A little-seen video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dK4kKP65O0&t=281s) on Youtube entitled “La Fondation Olena Zelenska est impliquée dans le trafic d’enfants” reveals the claims of a masked man who says that he transported children out of Ukraine for Olena Zelenska’s foundation, and at least one of the children made him believe that the foundation was engaging in child sex trafficking. The video was uploaded by the account “Daniel Schmidt.” As noted by TheIntelDrop.org (https://www.theinteldrop.org/2023/11/05/preying-on-children-olena-zelenska-foundation-involved-in-child-trafficking-schemes/), the whistleblower provided photos of Olena Zelenska Foundation documents and his personal work identification card to lend credibility to his accusations. Also acknowledged, the Olena Zelenska Foundation launched in New York City in September 2022 with a star-studded event. The launch of Olena’s foundation was hosted by the Metropolitan Opera and the guests included Democrat politician Hillary Clinton and celebrities Matt Damon and Jimmy Fallon, among others. The Zelenska Foundation takes a special interest in overseeing “war orphans,” with the Ukraine government accusing Russia of kidnapping thousands of kids (https://t.me/g3news/16031). The man in the video makes his claims over the course of more than eight minutes speaking in French. The quotes below come word for word from the English closed captioning translation service on Youtube. “So, here I am recording this video to tell you about what happened in Olena Zelenska’s Foundation when I worked there. After I finish, I’ll send you this video via email together with the documents, all the facts of what had happened. To start my story, it was here in France. I had a friend there who worked with different foundations. And he was the one who told me that there is a foundation that pays well in Ukraine, which offers good conditions. And so, I thought, why not? So, I contacted this foundation and then I prepared my documents and I went to Ukraine. When I came, I came to work there as a driver. They offered me this job and I signed the contract. Even the contract was something bizarre. There were clauses, for example, in the contract, that said we must not talk with children, we must not ask questions about host families, things like that. For me it was weird, but I thought, well, I’m a driver it’s not my business. I signed the contract. After signing the contract, I was given the pass. This one. Here’s the pass,” the man said in the video, before showing documentation. 🔗SOURCE ➡️ National File (https://nationalfile.com/man-claiming-to-be-former-driver-for-zelenskys-wifes-foundation-makes-video-accusing-the-foundation-of-involvement-in-child-sex-trafficking/), Infowars (https://www.infowars.com/posts/whistleblower-claims-ukrainian-president-zelenskys-wife-running-child-trafficking-network/) RELATED READING: 10/3/23 — Zelensky Requests Marina Abramovic To be Ambassador for Rebuilding Ukraine's Schools https://themcgwire.substack.com/p/zelensky-requests-marina-abramovic #marinaAbramovic #ukraine #sextrafficking #zelensky #News
    Like
    1
    1 Reacties 0 aandelen 6491 Views
  • I sold my Campervan today so now I grabbed some #HEX after the 44% crash. Weird how timely that was!
    I sold my Campervan today so now I grabbed some #HEX after the 44% crash. Weird how timely that was!
    Like
    14
    1 Reacties 0 aandelen 1727 Views
  • What in the ocean is this!? Contemplating our next dish w/ @iamthejungle ... ????????
    Wear our new shirt from @mahaloshoots
    .
    #reactionvideos #seacreatures #seafood #weirdfood #somee #awesme
    What in the ocean is this!? Contemplating our next dish w/ @iamthejungle ... ???????? Wear our new shirt from @mahaloshoots . #reactionvideos #seacreatures #seafood #weirdfood #somee #awesme
    Like
    13
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 2908 Views 6
  • I think I'm done with traditional social media. I'm one of the few people I know who never had a Facebook account. Well, in a moment of weakness last month, I decided to create an account for Marketplace and reselling. I used the account for a week, didn't post anything though, and just didn't like anything about it. Facebook actually gave me a really bad feeling, like I just shouldn't be there. It was really weird. By the end of the week, I deactivated the account. It just didn't seem worth it and I felt like a sell-out.
    The truly strange part was how wrong it felt. I tend to trust my instincts and my instincts told me to get the hell out of there! That's really strange to me. I've never received those sorts of vibes from a social platform or anything internet related.

    I know some people love Facebook for sharing family photos and keeping in contact with loved ones. It's a great platform for long-distance friends and relatives. There's certainly nothing wrong with that and I totally get it. I really think these social media companies are getting way to powerful though and I'm more than a little concerned about their ability to control narratives and select what we may or may not see. How anyone abides by that, is incredibly alarming to me.
    My one Facebook post read, &quot;Here for Marketplace if we haven't talked in 20-something years, let's keep it that way.&quot;
    It's a bit cold but truthful. There are very few people from my past I wish to reconnect with. On top of that, I found all kinds of weird stipulations for using Marketplace. I'll stick with Craigslist. I hope it never gets to a point where we have to have one of these social accounts to buy and sell online.

    Last night, I decided to deactivate my Twitter account. For some reason, I thought you could delete the account when Jack ran the company. Now that Elon took over, I only saw an option to deactivate the account. Is anyone else getting the feeling like these are nothing more than government spy programs? Why can't I delete my data? Pretty sure Facebook is the same way.
    I've had a love-hate relationship with Twitter for a really long time. It was really my first mainstream social media app. The only reason I signed up was for Crypto Twitter. I instantly fell in love with the community. Plus there was a ton of good trading information on there back in 2013 up until around 2017. I think after 2018, the growth of the crypto community brought with it a ton of scammers, bots, and shady people.
    The weird thing was that with over 43K followers I've interacted with the same 10 or 15 people for the last couple of years. Rarely would I get a comment or reply from anyone new. My follower counts also hovered between 42K and 45K followers. A couple of times during crypto hype cycles, the account grew to just UNDER 50K. I found that really weird. The account would come super close to 50K then suddenly lose 5K to 10K followers. This kept happening from the start as the account grew in popularity. Definitely strange, and far too coincidental.
    The Final Straw
    So I quit Twitter several times over the last couple of months. Each time, I'd just check back in when there was something happening in the crypto market. I really use it as a source of crypto news and a way to gauge market sentiment. I'd end up striking up a conversation or two, laugh at a few memes, and start using it daily again. Then get pissed off by all the propaganda in my feed and quit again. Only to return in the next week or so and repeat the entire cycle over again.
    Last night, like much of America, I watched Donald Trump give his speech after his indictment hearing or whatever it was. Just shameful, this is going to be a post for another day, probably tomorrow. After his speech, however, I decided to log into Twitter to see what other people thought. I should state right now, I'm an anarchist, I don't really believe in government but politics affect us all and I do like to stay current and up-to-date on things. My point is, I'm NO Trump lover. I think the guy is a bafoon and really bad for our country. He's his own worst enemy, and even if he could be a good president they just won't allow him to succeed. My feelings for Trump aside, I logged into Twitter to see how others felt about the speech. I'll post my thoughts on his indictment tomorrow.

    When I logged into Twitter I was shocked to see EVERY SINGLE POST being anti-Trump. Pro arrest. There was one post the algo missed that talked about what a dangerous precedent this was setting. ONE POST... Everything else was extremely negative, nothing positive, and just a massive echo chamber.
    Seriously, I wasn't looking for people to agree or disagree with my opinions and thoughts. What I was looking for was a balance of opinions. Twitter was a very PRO-MAGA platform for a really long time. Many of my followers were MAGA people. Maybe they all left the platform, I can't say, I rarely use Twitter for politics. I do know the last time I checked Twitter for politics it wasn't anywhere near as one-sided as what I witnessed last night.
    Keep in mind, this is the front-runner for the Republican party. He still has a ton of supporters in this country. What bothered me, wasn't all the negativity but the fact that there was nothing else. This just isn't possible. It was at that moment that I said, &quot;I'm done&quot; and then went into settings and clicked the deactivate button. It wasn't about the stance, it was about everyone having THE EXACT SAME STANCE in the thread I was looking at and no alternative points of view AT ALL. Not what I signed up for. NOT TO MENTION, THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE!
    Danger

    So many people rely on social media for news and to keep current. I have a huge problem with censorship and an even bigger problem with propaganda, data manipulation, and narrative manipulation. The idea that a social media company can control the narrative is outrageous to me. The idea that some people are OK with this is even more horrifying. I can no longer participate. In some ways, I think the manipulation of Covid posts was a test run for future narrative control and censorship.
    Covid was actually when I first realized how manipulated narratives were on social media sites. Until then, I assumed it was all conspiracy theories. I just can't participate anymore. I really hope everyone comes to their senses soon and walks away from these social platforms. They farm our data, spy on us, share it with governments around the world, and sell the data to the highest bidders for profit.
    The irony is, it looks like people will soon begin paying for the privilege of having their data and political narratives manipulated for them. I don't get it... We have alternatives like Hive that allow us to speak freely. Instead of selling our data, we're rewarded in crypto. Yet, people would rather pay a faceless corporation owned by one of the world's wealthiest men, rather than post somewhere that rewards them for their content and allows them to say pretty much whatever they want.
    I'm never going to understand the current times we're living in. I have an Instagram page for my Tarot site. Besides that, I think I'm done with Youtube too. I'm going to try and focus entirely on Hive-centric social media like #SoMee, #DBuzz, #LeoThreads, and Peakd.
    It's time to walk away from these mainstream social manipulators. Frankly, I think they're doing way more harm than good!
    I think I'm done with traditional social media. I'm one of the few people I know who never had a Facebook account. Well, in a moment of weakness last month, I decided to create an account for Marketplace and reselling. I used the account for a week, didn't post anything though, and just didn't like anything about it. Facebook actually gave me a really bad feeling, like I just shouldn't be there. It was really weird. By the end of the week, I deactivated the account. It just didn't seem worth it and I felt like a sell-out. The truly strange part was how wrong it felt. I tend to trust my instincts and my instincts told me to get the hell out of there! That's really strange to me. I've never received those sorts of vibes from a social platform or anything internet related. I know some people love Facebook for sharing family photos and keeping in contact with loved ones. It's a great platform for long-distance friends and relatives. There's certainly nothing wrong with that and I totally get it. I really think these social media companies are getting way to powerful though and I'm more than a little concerned about their ability to control narratives and select what we may or may not see. How anyone abides by that, is incredibly alarming to me. My one Facebook post read, &quot;Here for Marketplace if we haven't talked in 20-something years, let's keep it that way.&quot; It's a bit cold but truthful. There are very few people from my past I wish to reconnect with. On top of that, I found all kinds of weird stipulations for using Marketplace. I'll stick with Craigslist. I hope it never gets to a point where we have to have one of these social accounts to buy and sell online. Last night, I decided to deactivate my Twitter account. For some reason, I thought you could delete the account when Jack ran the company. Now that Elon took over, I only saw an option to deactivate the account. Is anyone else getting the feeling like these are nothing more than government spy programs? Why can't I delete my data? Pretty sure Facebook is the same way. I've had a love-hate relationship with Twitter for a really long time. It was really my first mainstream social media app. The only reason I signed up was for Crypto Twitter. I instantly fell in love with the community. Plus there was a ton of good trading information on there back in 2013 up until around 2017. I think after 2018, the growth of the crypto community brought with it a ton of scammers, bots, and shady people. The weird thing was that with over 43K followers I've interacted with the same 10 or 15 people for the last couple of years. Rarely would I get a comment or reply from anyone new. My follower counts also hovered between 42K and 45K followers. A couple of times during crypto hype cycles, the account grew to just UNDER 50K. I found that really weird. The account would come super close to 50K then suddenly lose 5K to 10K followers. This kept happening from the start as the account grew in popularity. Definitely strange, and far too coincidental. The Final Straw So I quit Twitter several times over the last couple of months. Each time, I'd just check back in when there was something happening in the crypto market. I really use it as a source of crypto news and a way to gauge market sentiment. I'd end up striking up a conversation or two, laugh at a few memes, and start using it daily again. Then get pissed off by all the propaganda in my feed and quit again. Only to return in the next week or so and repeat the entire cycle over again. Last night, like much of America, I watched Donald Trump give his speech after his indictment hearing or whatever it was. Just shameful, this is going to be a post for another day, probably tomorrow. After his speech, however, I decided to log into Twitter to see what other people thought. I should state right now, I'm an anarchist, I don't really believe in government but politics affect us all and I do like to stay current and up-to-date on things. My point is, I'm NO Trump lover. I think the guy is a bafoon and really bad for our country. He's his own worst enemy, and even if he could be a good president they just won't allow him to succeed. My feelings for Trump aside, I logged into Twitter to see how others felt about the speech. I'll post my thoughts on his indictment tomorrow. When I logged into Twitter I was shocked to see EVERY SINGLE POST being anti-Trump. Pro arrest. There was one post the algo missed that talked about what a dangerous precedent this was setting. ONE POST... Everything else was extremely negative, nothing positive, and just a massive echo chamber. Seriously, I wasn't looking for people to agree or disagree with my opinions and thoughts. What I was looking for was a balance of opinions. Twitter was a very PRO-MAGA platform for a really long time. Many of my followers were MAGA people. Maybe they all left the platform, I can't say, I rarely use Twitter for politics. I do know the last time I checked Twitter for politics it wasn't anywhere near as one-sided as what I witnessed last night. Keep in mind, this is the front-runner for the Republican party. He still has a ton of supporters in this country. What bothered me, wasn't all the negativity but the fact that there was nothing else. This just isn't possible. It was at that moment that I said, &quot;I'm done&quot; and then went into settings and clicked the deactivate button. It wasn't about the stance, it was about everyone having THE EXACT SAME STANCE in the thread I was looking at and no alternative points of view AT ALL. Not what I signed up for. NOT TO MENTION, THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE! Danger So many people rely on social media for news and to keep current. I have a huge problem with censorship and an even bigger problem with propaganda, data manipulation, and narrative manipulation. The idea that a social media company can control the narrative is outrageous to me. The idea that some people are OK with this is even more horrifying. I can no longer participate. In some ways, I think the manipulation of Covid posts was a test run for future narrative control and censorship. Covid was actually when I first realized how manipulated narratives were on social media sites. Until then, I assumed it was all conspiracy theories. I just can't participate anymore. I really hope everyone comes to their senses soon and walks away from these social platforms. They farm our data, spy on us, share it with governments around the world, and sell the data to the highest bidders for profit. The irony is, it looks like people will soon begin paying for the privilege of having their data and political narratives manipulated for them. I don't get it... We have alternatives like Hive that allow us to speak freely. Instead of selling our data, we're rewarded in crypto. Yet, people would rather pay a faceless corporation owned by one of the world's wealthiest men, rather than post somewhere that rewards them for their content and allows them to say pretty much whatever they want. I'm never going to understand the current times we're living in. I have an Instagram page for my Tarot site. Besides that, I think I'm done with Youtube too. I'm going to try and focus entirely on Hive-centric social media like #SoMee, #DBuzz, #LeoThreads, and Peakd. It's time to walk away from these mainstream social manipulators. Frankly, I think they're doing way more harm than good!
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 4421 Views
  • The biggest Custom motor show in northern Europe was is in my city this weekend. It is door-to-door with my bathhouse, so just to go swimming I get caught up in traffic jams, police blockades and 4G on the phone didn’t even work.
    So I went for a swim and saw alot of weird homemade looking cars from the visitors just funneling themselves in. https://www.custommotorshow.se/
    The biggest Custom motor show in northern Europe was is in my city this weekend. It is door-to-door with my bathhouse, so just to go swimming I get caught up in traffic jams, police blockades and 4G on the phone didn’t even work. So I went for a swim and saw alot of weird homemade looking cars from the visitors just funneling themselves in. https://www.custommotorshow.se/
    Like
    9
    0 Reacties 0 aandelen 2639 Views 0
  • I started a new Youtube channel where I will try to post some weird stuff. Maybe some truth bombs that will get me flagged and banned but it is crucial at this moment to educate people since I see so many in my surroundings still buying into massmedia’s lies.
    But first I would like to open up soft and give an homage to my lovely Philippines :) https://youtu.be/lBR89V2_HLg
    I started a new Youtube channel where I will try to post some weird stuff. Maybe some truth bombs that will get me flagged and banned but it is crucial at this moment to educate people since I see so many in my surroundings still buying into massmedia’s lies. But first I would like to open up soft and give an homage to my lovely Philippines :) https://youtu.be/lBR89V2_HLg
    Like
    Love
    13
    1 Reacties 0 aandelen 907 Views
Zoekresultaten