1

Just How Powerful Is Big Pharma?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Spending on pharmaceutical industry lobbying also reached a record amount in 2020, at more than $306 million, compared to $299 million in 2019
  • There were 1,502 pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020, 63.58% of whom were former government employees
  • The top pharmaceutical lobbyist in 2020 was the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which spent $25.9 million, making them the third top lobbying spender overall
  • The marketing of prescription drugs, health services, laboratory tests, and disease awareness rose to $29.9 billion in 2016
  • The Wellcome Trust is a top funder of health research globally and has been a major player in the COVID-19 pandemic, even though it’s invested heavily in companies making COVID-19 treatments

While much of the world slowed to a halt during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, one thing remained steady — lobbying efforts. Spending on lobbying reached $3.48 billion in 2020, which is just under 2019’s record of $3.5 billion.1 The numbers were revealed by OpenSecrets.org, which tracks federal campaign contributions and lobbying data.

The health sector spent the most on lobbying in 2020 — a record $615 million. The efforts paid off, and, Open Secrets reported, “Congress delivered massive windfalls to hospitals and the federal government awarded lucrative contracts to pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers.”2

Spending on pharmaceutical industry lobbying also reached a record amount in 2020, at more than $306 million, compared to $299 million in 2019.3

PhRMA: Top Pharmaceutical Lobbyist for 2020

There were 1,502 pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020, 63.58% of whom were former government employees.4 A revolving door, in which government employees and former members of Congress take jobs with lobbying firms, is common among lobbyists, and the reverse also occurs, in which people from the private sector end up in government positions.

The top pharmaceutical lobbyist in 2020 was the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which spent $25.9 million,5 making them the third top lobbying spender overall, behind only the National Association of Realtors and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.6 PhRMA also runs the nonprofit PhRMA Foundation, which gives grants for research that can be funneled all the way to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The FDA does not accept corporate money, but it does receive money funneled to them via nonprofit foundations, which may receive money from other nonprofits funded by private interests, including PhRMA. Take, for instance, the Reagan-Udall Foundation, a nonprofit foundation created by Congress in 2007 to support scientific research that is of interest to the FDA.

The Reagan-Udall Foundation said it would only accept grants from the government, individual donors, and other nonprofits, not industry, but in 2010 it received a $150,000 grant from the PhRMA Foundation which, being a nonprofit, technically fit the definition of an acceptable funding source, even though it’s founded and funded by drug companies.7

Other Top Big Pharma Lobbyists in 2020

After PhRMA, other top pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020 included:8

Biotechnology Innovation Organization — $12.56 million Amgen — $11.15 million
Pfizer — $10.87 million Roche Holdings — $10.87 million
AbbVie — $7.07 million Gilead Sciences — $7.03 million
Merck — $6.98 million Pharmaceutical Care Management Association — $6.92 million
Bayer — $6.70 million Novartis — $6.15 million
Eli Lilly & Co. — $5.83 million Horizon Therapeutics — $5.76 million
Johnson & Johnson — $5.57 million Bristol-Myers Squibb — $5.39 million
Medtronic — $5 million

Lobbying was heavy during the first quarter when industries were eager to influence the first COVID-19 stimulus package.9 Many of the lobbyists also had close ties to congressional leaders. According to Open Secrets:10

“Over 1,000 clients dispatched lobbyists with close ties to the White House or congressional leaders through the first half of 2020. About 40 percent of those clients reported lobbying on issues related to the pandemic.

Pharmaceutical companies that received massive windfalls from the federal government to swiftly develop COVID-19 vaccines deployed Washington insiders. So did firms tasked with producing ventilators, and businesses in hard-hit industries angling for government aid. Companies that had not lobbied during the … administration — or ever before — signed contracts with K Street firms.

The vast majority of these clients are businesses or trade associations, which make up nearly 90 percent of lobbying spending this year. The success of revolving door lobbyists indicates that powerful interests saw former aides to top officials as their best chance to influence high-level negotiations that mostly sidelined rank-and-file lawmakers.”

Big Pharma Lobbying on the Rise

Annual lobbying on pharmaceuticals and health products has been on the rise since 2013,11 and in 2019 the pharmaceutical industry was the top lobbying group in Washington, spending far more than any other industry. Among their top priorities, that year was fiercely opposing a bill that would reduce drug costs.12

From 2018 to 2019, some major increases were noted, including for Akebia Therapeutics, which manufactures drugs for kidney disease. Their spending increased from $110,000 in 2018,13 to $1.8 million in 2019,14 and $1.6 million in 2020.15 AbbVie, which manufactures Humira, has also steadily increased spending, from $4.3 million in 2018 to $5.4 million in 2019,16 reaching over $7 million in 2020.17

“That spending,” Open Secrets noted, “comes on top of the industry’s many ad campaigns designed to influence lawmakers and the general public. The industry fights threatening legislation in creative ways, including funding prominent but unrelated associations to push pro-industry messages on the airwaves.”18

PhRMA, for instance, funds the Partnership for Safe Medicines, which is a nonprofit group that claims to be in place to protect Americans from the sale of dangerous counterfeit drugs. In reality, it’s another industry front group, which in 2019 used at least $900,000 in grants to pay for a series of television commercials aimed at stopping the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from other countries.

The ads featured sheriffs warning people of the “dangers” of importing drugs with “loose foreign safeguards,” and claimed to be paid for by the National Sheriffs’ Association. They falsely gave the impression that law enforcement was widely against the less expensive drug imports but, in reality, the Partnership for Safe Medicines, funded by PhRMA, had given the National Sheriffs’ Association the grants to fund the industry-backed commercials.19

$30 Billion Spent on Medical Marketing

The marketing of prescription drugs, health services, laboratory tests, and even disease awareness is big business in the U.S., and spending has been on a steady uphill climb since 1997. That year, spending on medical marketing was $17.7 billion, which rose to $29.9 billion in 2016.20

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) spending increased the most rapidly, from 11.9% of total spending to 32%. DTC prescription drug ads accounted for $6 billion in spending alone in 2016, which amounted to 4.6 million ads, including 663,000 television commercials, mostly for high-cost biologics and cancer immunotherapies.

Disease awareness campaigns, meanwhile, are actually marketing campaigns run by pharmaceutical companies geared at diseases treated by their drugs. Such campaigns rose in numbers from 44 in 1997 to 401 in 2016, with spending increasing from $177 million to $430 million over the same period.

DTC marketing for health services also rose from $542 million to $2.9 billion, with spending increases particularly notable for hospitals, dental centers, cancer centers, mental health and addiction clinics and medical services, such as home health care.21

Aside from DTC advertising, Big Pharma is still marketing directly to health professionals — an area that accounted for the most professional spending, according to a JAMA study on medical marketing in the U.S.22

“Pharmaceutical marketing to health professionals accounted for most spending and remains high even with new policies to limit industry influence,” the researchers, from The Dartmouth Institute’s Center for Medicine in the Media, noted. “Despite the increase in marketing over 20 years, regulatory oversight remains limited.”23

Gates and Wellcome Trust Use WHO to Swindle the World

The Wellcome Trust is a top funder of health research globally and has been a major player in the COVID-19 pandemic, including co-leading a WHO program to develop new COVID-19 therapeutics.24 However, the Wellcome Trust25 is part of the technocratic globalist network. Wellcome is the largest charity in the U.K. that funds “innovative biomedical research.” It was formed in 1936 after the death of Sir Henry Wellcome, a pharmaceutical pioneer, and progressive industrialist.

Their board consists of present or former bankers, insurance executives, and investment board members. Sir Henry Wellcome, while still alive, founded the company that went on to become GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), so the Wellcome Trust is essentially the “philanthropic arm” of GSK.

In a BMJ investigation, journalist Tim Schwab points out that the charity’s Big Pharma investments overlap with its research efforts, such that, “The major funder of health research stands to gain financially from the pandemic, raising questions about transparency and accountability.”26

While leading the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator project to deliver COVID-19 treatment options, Wellcome has invested heavily in the companies making the treatments. This includes $389 million in Novartis, which manufactures dexamethasone, and $347 million in Roche, which is manufacturing monoclonal antibodies.

“Both Roche and Novartis report having had conversations with WHO’s ACT Accelerator about their therapeutic drugs,” BMJ reported, adding:27

“Wellcome’s financial interests have been published on the trust’s website and through financial regulatory filings but do not seem to have been disclosed as financial conflicts of interest in the context of Wellcome’s work on covid-19, even as they show that the trust is positioned to potentially gain from the pandemic financially.”

Profiting From the Pandemic Response

Wellcome’s director, Jeremy Farrar, also has a position on the U.K.’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, which advises the government on COVID-19, as well as a board seat with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which gave $1 billion to COVID-19 vaccine development.

While Farrar has spoken publicly on the benefits of specific COVID-19 drugs, Wellcome is heavily invested in companies manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics, and reported gains of $4.5 billion from its investments in 2020, which the BMJ notes is “three times more money than the trust gave away in charity.”28

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is also in line to profit from its role in the pandemic response, as it has more than $250 million invested in COVID-19-related companies. Despite their financial interests in the “solutions” they’re touting, the Gates Foundation and Wellcome have been regarded favorably in the media for their role in pandemic response efforts.

The BMJ quoted Joel Lexchin, Professor Emeritus of York University’s school of health policy and management in Toronto, who stated:29

“What the pandemic is doing is buffing the reputation of organisations like Gates and Wellcome and the drug companies, when I don’t think they really deserve that buffing up.

I think they’re acting the way they always have, which is, from the drug companies’ point of view, looking after their own financial interests, and from the point of view of the foundations is pursuing their own privately developed objectives without being responsible to anybody but their own boards of directors.”

The fact remains that, via their extensive lobbying efforts and marketing, Big Pharma is continuing to grow ever more powerful, as are the foundations connected to them.




Stroke Victims to Be Given Psychedelic Drug DMT in First-Ever US Clinical Trials

By | TheMindUnleashed.com

The hallucinogenic drug DMT (dimethyltryptamine) could provide crucial aid to stroke victims by minimizing the damage inflicted on victims’ brains as they are rushed to the hospital, according to researchers.

Canadian company Algernon Pharmaceuticals has laid out plans to microdose participants in the first clinical trial of its kind in hopes to help stroke victims’ brains recover faster through a “rewiring” process, reports Metro.

A stroke occurs when blood supplies to a part of the brain are drastically reduced or interrupted, starving the vital organ of fresh oxygen and nutrients and setting in motion the death of crucial nerve cells. In some cases, stroke can even lead to death. About 795,000 people suffer from strokes annually in the U.S.

However, researchers at Algernon argue that DMT could play a key role in staving off the worst effects of stroke by sparking the growth of new neurons, effectively turbo-charging the healing process.

In the first-ever clinical trials of this kind in the U.S., DMT will soon be administered to stroke patients in the back of ambulances. While the doses will be far too small to trigger any sort of hallucinations, scientists are claiming that the microdoses will still be sufficient for conferring benefits.

The Phase 1 trials could begin as soon as next month if they receive a green light from authorities. It could still take years before the drug receives approval for human use.

Algernon CEO Christopher Moreau is hopeful that the drug will prove its ability to help heal the brains of those who suffer from a stroke.

“Since we’re dealing with stroke patients, we will be using the sub-hallucinogenic dose, which in pre-clinical studies has still shown to improve neuroplasticity,” Moreau explained.

It will help the brain heal even though patients aren’t having the psychedelic experience, and we really don’t want that if your patient has just had a stroke,” he continued. “The sooner you can start to treat post-injury the better.”

However, the drug could likely have its limits.

“DMT may not benefit hemorrhagic (stroke victims), we don’t know, but we’re hoping it won’t cause them any problems because then we don’t have to wait for the CT scan, we can treat in the ambulance,” Moreau added.

DMT – also known as the “spirit molecule” for its extremely potent hallucinogenic properties – is one of the main psychoactive compounds found in ayahuasca, a brew consumed in shamanistic rituals that have been used for centuries in South America before finding its way into North America and Europe as a recreational drug popular at music festivals.

Experts and users of DMT have said that the drug has a similar impact to other psychedelic drugs as LSD and psilocybin or “magic” mushrooms. However, the psychedelic experience or so-called “trip” from DMT is much shorter in duration than either of the other psychedelic drugs.

Studies of DMT have shown that it does have the ability to improve motor functions, and in tests, on brain-damaged rats, it helped trigger the formation of new brain cells.

Moreau claims that studies have shown that within hours of a stroke, the brain attempts to rewire itself – and that DMT may potentially accelerate the process.

At present, patients have little recourse in the immediate aftermath of a stroke because doctors seldom know what type of stroke someone may be suffering from. While ischemic strokes involving blood clots require blood thinner as treatment, hemorrhagic strokes require more invasive treatment.

However, the wrong type of treatment for a stroke could be fatal for patients.

Algernon hopes that if the first phase of trials proves successful, regulators will approve the more widespread usage of the treatment. In the second and third phases of the trial, Algernon hopes to continue DMT treatments over the short and long term to prove the efficacy of the treatment.




Big Pharma Already Developing COVID 2.0 Vaccines For New ‘Mutant’ Strain

The vaccine industry is already hard at work concocting the next wave of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, which will purportedly be used to fight a new “mutant” strain of the virus that officials claim is circulating in the United Kingdom.

British drug giant AstraZeneca will soon release a jab that chief executive Pascal Soriot says is fully capable of warding off the newest strain of the China Virus. Calling it a “winning formula,” Soriot says the injection will be just as effective as those offered by rivals like Pfizer and Moderna.

As soon as this week, U.K. authorities are expected to approve the AstraZeneca shot, which was developed in partnership with scientists from the University of Oxford. The jab is supposedly 70 percent effective, though the true figure is only about 62 percent when considering the “dosing error” that occurred during clinical trials.

“We think we have figured out the winning formula and how to get efficacy that, after two doses, is up there with everybody else,” Soriot told the media, insisting that AstraZeneca’s WuFlu vaccine is just as effective as the rival vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.

“I can’t tell you more because we will publish at some point,” he added mysteriously as an almost gimmick.

More than 600,000 people were already vaccinated with Pfizer’s jab before Christmas

By as soon as the first week of January, Brits could be getting shot up with chemical blends that AstraZeneca says will keep them protected against infection with the novel coronavirus, including the newest strain that is supposedly making the rounds.

“So far, we think the vaccine should remain effective,” Soriot believes. “But we can’t be sure, so we’re going to test that.”

This newest strain is said to be far more infectious than earlier strains, though this does not mean that it is more harmful. Still, AstraZeneca wants people to get jabbed for it, and millions of them will likely obey.

The alleged rapid spread of this new disease variant prompted Prime Minister Boris Johnson to lock down the country just before the holidays, with threats of fine or arrest for those who attempted to travel in violation.

Nearly half of Great Britain, or around 24 million people, were told to stay home in isolation over the Christmas holiday, and many of these same folks will also be barred from doing anything fun for New Year’s.

All “non-essential” stores are now closed in these regions, as are restaurants and pubs. The only “essential” activity that is allowed is getting food for takeout – no indoor dining or socializing allowed, says Johnson.

While most of the attention has been on the U.K., other countries are also now claiming that this new “mutant” strain of the China Flu has spread within their borders as well.

As of Dec. 24, public health officials say that more than 600,000 people have already received the first of two doses of Pfizer’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine. Many are starting to get Moderna’s vaccine as well, this one having been approved not long after Pfizer’s and just in time for the holidays.

“How many ‘we think’ and ‘we can’t be sure’ does this article need to contain before anyone with common sense would reject this outright?” asked one Headline USA commenter about Soriot’s repeated use of uncertain verbiage to describe the alleged effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

“Any of these vaccines supposedly have an effective rate of 95 percent for a virus that has its own cure rate of 99.6 percent. Hmmm … what to do, what to do?”

By Ethan A Huff | Science.News

Ethan Huff is a Staff Writer for Natural News and a freelance writer and health enthusiast who loves exploring the vast world of natural foods and health, digging deep to get to the truth. He runs an online health publication of his own at wholesomeherald.blogspot.com. He is also a staff writer for Naturalnews.com and a writer for Align Life.com.




COVID-19 Vaccination May Be Difficult to Avoid

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • According to a November 17, 2020, Gallup poll, 58% of Americans now say they’re willing to take the vaccine. However, a recent Lancet paper estimates 75% to 90% must take the vaccine in order to achieve “herd immunity”
  • As a result, we’re now seeing all sorts of tricks being employed to increase vaccine uptake: among them, a proposal to pay each vaccine recipient $1,500. Others have suggested the U.S. government make a $1,000 pandemic stimulus payment incumbent on COVID-19 vaccination
  • If you are injured by a pandemic vaccine, you cannot sue any of the parties involved in getting the vaccine to you. Within one year of vaccination, you would have to file a claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), run by the Department of Health and Human Services, which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program
  • The maximum CICP payout is $250,000 per person; however, you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy first. CICP will only pay the difference between what your insurance covers and the total CICP payout amount established for your case
  • To boost vaccine uptake, companies are also encouraged to make COVID-19 vaccination a condition of employment. Yet another trick used is an entirely semantic one. By renaming adverse reactions as “immune responses,” they hope people will be less likely to be concerned if they get sick from the shot

While there’s considerable resistance against mandatory COVID-19 vaccination, it appears avoiding it will be more than a little difficult for most. As detailed in “Global Vaccine Passport Will Be Required for Travel,” The Commons Project, the World Economic Forum, and The Rockefeller Foundation have joined forces to create the CommonPass,1 a digital “health passport” framework expected to be adopted by most if not all nations.

The CommonPass will eventually be integrated with personal health apps such as Apple Health and CommonHealth, and if you want to travel, your personal health record will be evaluated and compared to a country’s entry requirements. If you don’t meet them, you’ll be directed to an approved testing and vaccination location.

The groundwork for CommonPass was laid out in an April 21, 2020, white paper2 by The Rockefeller Foundation, and based on this paper, it’s clear that proof of vaccination is part of permanent surveillance and social control structure — one that severely limits personal liberty and freedom of choice across the board.

There’s absolutely no indication that proof of vaccination status will become obsolete once the COVID-19 pandemic is declared over, and the reason for this is because the pandemic is being used as a justification for the Great Reset, which will usher in a new system of technocracy that relies on digital surveillance and social engineering to control the population. Proof of vaccination allows for the rollout of a highly invasive form of tracking that will undoubtedly expand with time.

Tricks Used to Increase Vaccine Uptake

They have a significant problem, however, and that is how to get a majority of the global population to agree to this novel, fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine. According to a November 17, 2020, Gallup Poll,3 58% of Americans now say they’re willing to take the vaccine. In September, that percentage was only 50%.

Still, 58% is unlikely to satisfy the technocrats’ hell-bent on global control of resources and people. Typically, a much larger percentage of the population — probably between 75% and 90%, according to a November 2020 Lancet paper4 — would need to be vaccinated in order to achieve what is wrongfully described as herd immunity (a concept that only applies to natural infection, not vaccination).

As a result, we’re now seeing all sorts of tricks being employed to increase vaccine uptake: among them, a proposal to pay each vaccine recipient $1,500.5 The suggestion was raised by U.S. Representative John Delaney.

“The faster we get 75% of this country vaccinated, the faster we end COVID and the sooner everything returns to normal,” Delaney told Alabama news site AL.com.6 “We have to create, in my judgment, an incentive for people to really accelerate their thinking about taking the vaccine.

If you’re still afraid of the vaccine and don’t want to take it, that’s your right. You won’t participate in this program. But guess what? You’re going to benefit anyhow, because we’ll get the country to herd immunity faster, which benefits you. So I think everyone wins.”

Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang and economic adviser N. Gregory Mankiw have made similar propositions, suggesting the government make a $1,000 pandemic stimulus payment incumbent on COVID-19 vaccination.7,8

Is Risking Your Health Worth $1,500?

If this sounds unfair to you, you’re not alone. I’m sure there are many out there who are struggling to survive right now and could use that stimulus check, yet aren’t keen on playing Russian roulette with their long-term health to get it. As explained by Dr. Meryl Nass in a December 4, 2020, blog post:9

“If you are injured by a vaccine or other ‘countermeasure’ designated by the DHHS Secretary as intended for a pandemic or bioterrorism threat (COVID-19, pandemic flu, anthrax, smallpox) your options for receiving any financial benefit are very limited.

First, everyone involved with getting the vaccine to you has had their liability waived under the PREP Act … Congress did create a program to compensate some victims, but it is much less generous than the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). (And no one ever accused the NVICP of being generous.) It is called the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).”

CICP Payments Are Insignificant and Hard to Get

As noted by Nass, the CICP is administered within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), which is also sponsoring the COVID-19 vaccination program. This conflict of interest makes the CICP less than likely to find fault with the vaccine.

Your only route of appeal is within the DHHS, where your case would simply be reviewed by another employee. The DHHS is also responsible for making the payment. “DHHS therefore essentially acts as the judge, jury, and defendant,” Nass writes.10

While the NVICP pays some of the costs associated with any given claim, the CICP does not. This means you’ll also be responsible for attorney fees and expert witness fees, for example.

According to the CICP director, the maximum payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person; however, you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP gives you a dime. CICP will only pay the difference between what your insurance covers and the total payout amount established for your case.

For permanent disability, even $250,000 won’t go far, let alone a one-time payment of $1,000 or $1,500. The CICP also has a one-year statute of limitations, so you have to be quick. Of course, a significant problem with the COVID-19 vaccine is that no one really knows what injuries might arise, or when, making tying the injury to the vaccination a difficult prospect. For all of these reasons, I agree with Nass when she says:11

“If you become injured after receiving a designated ‘countermeasure’ vaccine, do not anticipate that you will get help from the government nor from the manufacturers. Please inform yourself of the benefits and risks beforehand.”

Compulsory Vaccination as a Condition of Employment

To boost vaccine uptake, companies are also encouraged to make COVID-19 vaccination a condition of employment. Rogge Dunn, a labor and employment attorney in Dallas, Texas, told CNBC that “Under the law, an employer can force an employee to get vaccinated, and if they don’t, fire them.”12

For years, I and others have warned that unless you get involved in protecting vaccine choice, even if and when it doesn’t affect you personally, eventually it will indeed affect you and it’ll be too late to do anything about it.

We’re now at that point. This affects everyone, not just teachers and health care workers. It affects all ages. Any company can implement compulsory COVID-19 vaccination. No one is automatically excluded. Anyone could soon have to face the choice of vaccination or unemployment.

According to CNBC,13 anti-discrimination laws might enable some employees to get an exemption, but I would not count on it. Union workers may also have enough clout to prevent a mandate, provided the union is willing to take a stand against it. Dunn claims some of his corporate clients are already considering mandatory vaccination, including restaurant owners.

“They think it gives them a competitive advantage. They could say to their customers, ‘Hey, our restaurant is safe. All of our employees have been vaccinated,’” Dunn said.

Keep in mind that if your employer mandates the vaccine, they will not be liable for side effects. According to the experts CNBC spoke to, “claims would be routed through worker’s compensation programs and treated as an on-the-job injury.”

In the absence of a mandate, some companies are baiting staff to get voluntarily vaccinated by promising vaccinated employees will be able to forgo temperature checks and/or other PPE requirements. Others are considering giving out cash bonuses to those who get vaccinated.

Reducing Vaccine Hesitancy by Relabeling Side Effects

Yet another trick used to reduce vaccine hesitancy is an entirely semantic one. By renaming adverse reactions and referring to them as “immune responses” instead, they hope people will be less likely to be concerned if they end up feeling horrible after the shot.

A December 1, 2020, CNBC article,14 which looked at the frequency of adverse reactions, noted that 10% to 15% of participants in the Pfizer and Moderna trials reported “significantly noticeable” side effects.

Buried way down at the bottom of the article is a suggestion from a past advisory committee member, who proposes the nomenclature of “serious adverse reaction” be changed to “immune response,” so they can reprogram how people think about these side effects, even if they end up having to stay home from work because of them.

Dr. Eli Perencevich, a professor of internal medicine and epidemiology at the University of Iowa Health Care, has suggested essential workers should be granted three days of paid leave after they’re vaccinated, as many will feel too sick to work.15 Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warns that the vaccine’s side effects are “no walk in the park.”16

No Vaccine, No Entry — How Far Can It Go?

In related news, Canadians who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine should be prepared to comply with a mandatory mask rule and to be restricted in their ability to move about society, according to Ontario’s chief medical officer, Dr. David Williams. As reported by Summit News December 4, 2020:17

“Williams acknowledged that ‘we can’t force someone to take a vaccine,’ but [went] on to explain how people who didn’t take it would have their freedom of mobility severely restricted …

‘What may be mandatory is proof of … vaccination in order to have latitude and freedom to move around … without wearing other types of personal protective equipment’ … As we previously highlighted, governments do not have to make the vaccine mandatory, they can simply make life unlivable for people who refuse to take the vaccine.

If bars, restaurants, cinemas, sports venues, airlines, employers and others all make the vaccination a mandatory condition of service, anyone who refuses to take it will be reduced to a personal form of de facto lockdown with their social lives and mobility completely stunted.”

Indeed, if vaccination is a condition both for employment and enjoyment, just how voluntary is it? The tactic of restricting personal freedom to coerce people into getting vaccinated is no different from a vaccine mandate that has no exceptions.

It’s blackmail, pure and simple, and it will disproportionally affect the middle and lower classes who can’t afford to remain unemployed for any length of time and can’t pay for the care that might be needed should something go wrong.

Overall, this kind of coercion is a disaster in the making, and it’s particularly egregious considering SARS-CoV-2 infection poses a minuscule risk to the vast majority of the population, as detailed in “The Greatest Hoax Ever Perpetuated on an Unsuspecting Public.”

What Can You Do?

If this information in this article concerns you, as I believe it should, then I would strongly encourage you to consider joining the NVIC vaccine portal.

join nvic vaccine portal

This is a large number of dedicated individuals that you can connect with within your local community to make a difference with your local legislature. It is the best shot you have to make a difference in preventing these draconian tyrannical short-sighted mandates that will inevitably devastate the health of many and take many other lives prematurely.

One of the Most Powerful Videos I’ve Ever Seen

The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.

There are a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that result in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.

https://youtu.be/xEcYQydhY9E

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it’s critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in-state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community.

Think Globally, Act Locally

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations, and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

JOIN THE NVIC ADVOCACY PORTAL

Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury, or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call into a radio talk show that is presenting only one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you: You have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

  • Vaccine Requirements and Exemptions by State — Vaccine laws vary from one U.S. state to another. By knowing the specific policies where you live, you’ll learn how you can get exemptions and better protect your right to make informed vaccine choices.
  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims — View descriptions and photos of children and adults who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries, and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions — Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall — View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, and school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.
  • Vaccine Failure Wall — View or post descriptions about vaccines that have failed to work and protect the vaccinated from disease.



Doctors Around the World Issue Dire WARNING: DO NOT GET THE COVID VACCINE!!

Video Source: Bitchute

Article Source: Brian Shilhavy, Editor for Health Impact News ~ December 8, 2020

In an effort to combat Big Pharma Corporate Media and Big Tech censorship, doctors around the world are frantically trying to warn the masses of the devastating effects of the experimental COVID vaccines about to be mass injected into the unsuspecting public assisted by military forces around the world.

What could possibly motivate these doctors, nurses, scientists, and other health professionals to make such an impassioned plea? What do they have to gain by taking the time to educate the public on the hidden dangers of a new class of vaccine about to be inflicted upon the citizens of countries around the world?

They have NOTHING TO GAIN, and much to lose, including their careers, and possibly even their lives.

So why are they doing this? Why are these doctors and professionals being censored so much if the new COVID vaccines are in fact “safe and effective”? What is it that the media and the government are hiding that they don’t want the public to know?

They are doing this because they are doctors and scientists who actually understand the REAL science here, and who know the devastating potential consequences of those who choose to get this very toxic and dangerous vaccine, and they are trying to save as many people as possible from the carnage this vaccine is going to cause, which will include DEATH, brain injuries, life-long autoimmune disease, infertility, and more.

Please watch the above video and their urgent pleas, and then share it with as many people as you can, because time is short!




COVID Vaccine: What We Don’t Know

By ANH-USA | Alliance for Natural Health

An FDA committee is meeting next week to review the first COVID vaccine. We must demand that full transparency is given to the American public. Action Alert!

Pfizer has applied for emergency use authorization (EUA) for its COVID-19 vaccine, and an FDA advisory committee will meet in an open session on December 10 to review Pfizer’s data; Moderna recently announced that it, too, has filed for an EUA. We’re being told by the manufacturers that both of these vaccines have above 90% efficacy and serious adverse events are low. That’s all well and good, but we cannot rely on the word of vaccine makers that their products are safe. We need the data, and so far, we are not even close to getting it. This is completely unacceptable.

The chart below shows that BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna have fallen pitifully short of demonstrating the full transparency that we and ANH-International have been calling for. Out of ten areas, full transparency has been provided in zero categories. In 6 of 10 categories, none or very little of the data is in the public domain.

Table. Current status of transparency on BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna mrna vaccines
(19th November 2020)

Courtesy of ANH-International

We should not even think about receiving a COVID vaccine, nor should the FDA grant an EUA to a COVID vaccine, until these companies show us their cards and let all of their data be independently analyzed. Only then can we know the true risk/benefit of these vaccines and be able to make informed choices, for ourselves and our families.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




A Doctor Gives A Very Careful Answer About The Safety of a New COVID-19 Vaccine

covid-19 vaccine safety

Image Courtesy of CottonBro at Pexels 

Dr. Malcolm Kendrick | RT

The type of vaccine being developed against the virus has never – outside of Ebola – been used before. The trials have been extremely rushed & involved testing only small numbers. What could possibly go wrong?

Since the first positive results on vaccines have come out, a lot of people have asked me if I think everyone should take them? For some reason, a number of people out there trust my judgement on such things.

I noticed that the Daily Mail recently ran a poll, which showed that three quarters of Britons would agree to have a jab – although 40 percent wanted politicians to take it first to prove it was safe. Frankly, I pity any vaccine injected into certain politicians, as I am not certain it would survive.

Anyway, are the majority of Daily Mail readers right to be so enthusiastic about vaccination? I must admit that I write this article with some caution, because I am acutely aware that the slightest hint of criticism of a vaccine, any vaccine, is risky.

As I remarked to a friend recently, the moment anyone says ‘vaccine’, the only acceptable response is to leap to your feet and salute, whilst singing Ode to Joy. Followed by fifteen minutes of enthusiastic clapping. Failure to do so, means you are taken out and shot for thought crimes. Doubleplusgood, indeed.

The first thing I want to say here is that the type of vaccine being developed against Covid-19 has never been used before, outside of Ebola. Some people feel that they should not really be called vaccines, because they are completely different from anything that has gone before.

Up to now, vaccination has meant injecting a dead virus (or bacteria), or one that has been weakened and can only poorly replicate, or parts of the virus, or suchlike. Once inside the body, the immune system spots this ‘alien’ material, and creates a response against it, which will hopefully be remembered for years and years.

The next time the dangerous virus appears, the body will use the immune memory of something very similar, to wipe out the virus (or bacteria) at high speed, giving it no chance to do damage. The first ever ‘vaccine’ worked by using the cowpox virus to immunise against smallpox.

It had been noticed that milkmaids who caught cowpox, a relatively mild disease in humans, did not then get smallpox. It was Edward Jenner who wondered how, or why, this happened. In 1796, he scraped material from cowpox sores, and then scratched it into the skin of people uninfected with smallpox, to see if they would be protected.

His first volunteer was a young boy, who he ‘immunised’ with cowpox scrapings. Jenner then tried to infect the boy with smallpox scrapings. A form of research that would be rather frowned upon today. Luckily, the young boy survived, and vaccination was born. Everything since has been a variation on this theme, of using a less dangerous ‘thing’ to create a defence against a damaging infection. Until now.

Now, we have a thing called a messenger RNA vaccine (mRNA). RNA is, effectively, a single strand of DNA – the double helix that sits within our cells and makes up our genetic code. Many viruses are made up of a single strand of RNA, surrounded by a protein sphere.

They enter the cell, take over the replication systems, make thousands of copies of themselves, then exit the cell. Sometimes killing the cell as they do so, sometimes exiting more gently. Covid19 (Sars-Cov2) is an RNA virus.

Knowing this, rather than attempting to create a weakened virus, which can take years, or break the virus into bits, the vaccine researchers decided to use Sars-Cov2’s RNA against itself. To do this, they isolated the section of RNA which codes for the ‘spike’ protein – which is the thing the virus uses as a ‘key’ to enter cells.

They then worked out how to insert this small section of RNA, messenger RNA, into the cell, where it takes over a part of the protein replication mechanisms that sit inside all cells. They turn the mechanism into a 3D printer, churning out copies of the spike protein.

These spike proteins then leave the cell – somehow or other, this bit is unclear. The immune system comes across them, recognises them as ‘alien’ and attacks. In doing so, antibodies are created, and the immune memory system kicks into action. If, later on, a Sars-Cov2 virus gets into the body, the immune system fires up and attacks the remembered spike protein. Hopefully killing the entire virus.

This is all, certainly very clever stuff. What, as they say, could possibly go wrong?

The first thing to say is that, with something this new, we don’t really know. It could be that it is absolutely 100 percent safe. We are told that none of the mRNA can get into the nucleus of the cell, where it could become incorporated into the DNA. I hope so. Could it trigger an immune cascade? I hope not.

I know that the researchers will be looking very, very, closely at the novel safety issues that could emerge. If they are not, they damned well should be. However, the timelines here are very short. It normally takes many years to create safe and effective vaccines. Here is it happening in, effectively, weeks.

The early stage human safety studies have been crammed very tightly together. In addition, we will also have very little information on such things as whether or not the vaccine actually reduces serious infections or death, as noted by Professor Haseltine in a recent article: “These [vaccine] protocols do not emphasize the most important ramifications of COVID-19 that people are most interested in preventing: overall infection, hospitalization, and death.”  Prof. Haseltine also argues that the trials have all been “designed to succeed.”

The reality is that we are rushing and rushing. There are very good reasons for this rush, but I advise caution. Should everyone take the vaccine? Probably yes for those at highest risk of serious infection and death, where the potential benefit is high. As for anyone healthy, under the age of sixty, I would wait. As I shall be.

 

Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, doctor and author who works as a GP in the National Health Service in England. His blog can be read here and his book, ‘Doctoring Data – How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense,’ is available here.

 




Oxycontin Maker Pleads Guilty And Shuts Down

opioid prescription pills

Dr. Mercola | Waking Times

In March 2019, facing an estimated 2,600 lawsuits1,2 relating to its role in creating the opioid epidemic, Purdue Pharma — the maker of OxyContin — announced the company was considering filing for bankruptcy protection.

Around that same time, New York expanded its lawsuit against the company to include allegations that company funds had been fraudulently transferred into trusts and offshore accounts owned by members of the Sackler family in an effort to shield assets from litigation.3,4 In all, court documents reveal the Sacklers transferred more than $10 billion of the company’s funds into family trusts.5

How this does not fall under the fraudulent conveyance statutes, which is attempting to avoid a debt by moving assets to another person or legal entity, boggles my mind. It appears the only reason they got away with this is they found the loophole of transferring their assets offshore.

The New York complaint also charged Purdue with secretly setting up a new company, Rhodes Pharma, in 2007 while the company was being investigated by federal prosecutors, as a way to protect the Sacklers from the mounting OxyContin crisis and continue their profit scheme.6 Rhodes Pharma makes generic opioids, allowing the Sacklers to benefit from the opioid epidemic both in terms of brand name sales and generic sales.7

Rhodes Pharma and Richard Sackler also hold the patent to a new, faster-dissolving form of buprenorphine, a mild opioid drug used in the treatment of opioid addiction,8 allowing the Sacklers to further profit from the addiction crisis they helped instigate, the economic burden of which is costing the U.S. an estimated $504 billion a year.9

Indeed, according to a lawsuit filed in Massachusetts,10 Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers sought to increase opioid prescriptions while simultaneously developing overdose treatment to boost its profits.

US Government Enters Opioid Business

Purdue finally filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2019.11 At the end of October 2020, Purdue Pharma agreed to plead guilty to three federal criminal charges relating to its role in the opioid crisis, including violating a federal anti-kickback law, conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government and violating the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.12,13

To settle the charges, Purdue is supposed to pay $8.3 billion in fines, forfeiture of past profits and civil liability payments.14 However, the company doesn’t have enough cash to cover the payments so, instead, Purdue Pharma will be dissolved, and its assets used to erect a “public benefit company,” in other words, a government-owned and controlled drug company.

“The estimated financial cost of opioid addiction and death in the U.S. was $504 billion in 2015. In addition to health care costs, criminal justice costs and lost productivity due to addiction or incarceration, this figure also takes into account projected lost earnings and the value of statistical life for people who died prematurely.”

This new company will reportedly be controlled by a trust that will “balance the trust’s interests against those of the American public and public health.”15 Future earnings from this public benefit company will be used to pay off the $8.3 billion penalty, which in turn is supposed to be used to combat the opioid crisis.

This is a remarkable development, and one wonders just how functional this setup is going to be. In essence, the government will now be in the business of making and selling opioids, the profits from which will then be used to combat opioid addiction. It seems like a circular and rather illogical setup. According to CNN:16

Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, who announced the settlement, defended the plans for the new company to continue to sell that drug, saying there are legitimate uses for painkillers such as OxyContin.”

Sackler Family Walk Away Scot-Free, Again

The Sackler family, meanwhile, have reached a separate settlement in which they will pay $225 million in civil liability for causing false claims about OxyContin to be made to Medicare and other government health care programs.17

While the agreement does not release the Sacklers from potential criminal liability, it seems the family will walk away scot-free. And, considering they already transferred some $10 billion into their family trusts, the $225 million fine is a very small fraction, so they won’t end up wanting financially either.

Proving they have no remorse, Sackler family members, in a recent statement, shifted blame for the company’s illegal activities on its managers, saying they “relied on management assertions the company acted lawfully.”18 This, even though several Sackler family members sat on the company board and were intimately familiar with the company’s marketing strategy.

It’s unclear whether this DOJ agreement affects or includes the Sacklers’ other opioid company, Rhodes Pharmaceuticals. If not, it falls short in that respect too, since they would then be able to continue their opioid business. Between 2009 and 2016, Rhodes’ market share of opioid sales actually exceeded that of Purdue itself.19

Aside from Purdue and Rhodes, the Sacklers have also profited from Napp Pharmaceuticals, a Cambridge-based drug company that manufactures — you guessed it — opioids.20 In 2018, seven family members resigned from their directors’ posts at Napp following a string of bad publicity relating to alleged tax evasion schemes.

Mortimer Sackler, since deceased, was found to have avoided paying income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance taxes in the U.K. by falsely claiming non-domiciled status. The family was also accused of using a Bermuda-based company to avoid paying corporate taxes for Napp Pharmaceuticals.21

Penalties Still Won’t Cover States’ Claims

Even though $8.3 billion is a record-breaking settlement, states have filed claims exceeding $2 trillion in Purdue’s bankruptcy case, and according to a November 2017 report22 by the White House Council on Economic Advisers, the estimated financial cost of opioid addiction and death in the U.S. was $504 billion in 2015.

In addition to health care costs, criminal justice costs and lost productivity due to addiction or incarceration, this figure also takes into account projected lost earnings and the value of statistical life for people who died prematurely.

In response to the Justice Department’s settlement with Purdue Pharma, 25 state attorneys general sent a letter23 to U.S. Attorney General William Barr, in which they object to the settlement and argue against the government getting involved in the opioid business. The letter, dated October 14, 2020, reads in part:24

We write to ask you to revise a proposed DOJ settlement agreement that reportedly would wrongly mandate that Purdue Pharma’s infamous OxyContin business be preserved as a public trust.

A business that killed thousands of Americans should not be associated with government. Instead, the business should be sold to private owners, so the government can enforce the law against it with the same impartiality as for any other company …

The role of government in any OxyContin business should be to enforce the law, just as against any other company. The public deserves assurance that no opioid business is given the special protection of being placed under a public umbrella.

Although it may take time to find a private sector buyer, the public should be confident that public officials are seeking to avoid having special ties to an opioid company, conflicts of interest, or mixed motives in an industry that caused a national crisis.”

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong also told CNN:25

“This settlement provides a mere mirage of justice for the victims of Purdue’s callous misconduct. The federal government had the power here to put the Sacklers in jail, and they didn’t. Instead, they took fines and penalties that Purdue likely will never fully pay.

Every dollar paid here is one dollar less for states like Connecticut trying to maximize money from Purdue and the Sacklers to abate the opioid epidemic. Preserving Purdue’s ability to continue selling opioids as a public benefit corporation is simply unacceptable.”

How Purdue Launched and Fueled the Opioid Epidemic

In previous articles, I’ve discussed the role false advertising played in the creation of the opioid crisis.26 To recap, a single paragraph in a 1980 letter to the editor27,28 (not a study) in The New England Journal of Medicine — which stated that narcotic addiction in patients with no history of addiction was very rare — became the basis of a drug marketing campaign that has since led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people.

Purdue Pharma used this letter to the editor as the basis for its claim that opioid addiction affects less than 1% of patients treated with the drugs. In reality, opioids have a very high rate of addiction and have not been proven effective for long-term use.29

Research30 published in 2018 also shows opioids (including morphine, Vicodin, oxycodone and fentanyl) fail to control moderate to severe pain any better than over-the-counter drugs such as acetaminophen, ibuprofen and naproxen.

Various court cases have demonstrated how Purdue systematically misled doctors about OxyContin’s addictiveness to drive up sales. The inevitable result of Purdue Pharma’s ruthless and immoral marketing campaign has been skyrocketing opioid addiction, which killed 46,802 Americans in 2018 alone.31

Adding insult to injury, when it became clear that people were dying in droves from opioid overdoses, Purdue launched an extensive damage-control operation that included the suggestion that those dying from opioids were already addicts, and that this wouldn’t happen to patients who were not already addicted to drugs. The company also sought to cash in on the rising addiction trend twice by getting into the business of creating overdose treatments.

Opioid Misuse Paves Way for Heroin Addiction

Perhaps most egregious of all has been the reckless prescribing of opioids to young people. Here, dentists have been a major part of the problem, as opioids are frequently prescribed when extracting wisdom teeth.

Insurance claims data from 2016 and 2017 reveal 60% of children between the ages of 1 and 18 with private insurance filled one or more opioid prescriptions after surgical tonsil removal,32,33 and dentists wrote a staggering 18.1 million prescriptions for opioids in 2017.34

As noted by Ronnie Cohen in a March 2019 article35 in The Washington Post, “until recently, dentists seemed to have had no idea they may have been helping to feed an epidemic that resulted in a record 70,237 U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2017.”36

But contribute they have, and according to data37 from the University of Michigan, 31.8%, or just over 1 in 3 people who misused opioids during their high school years ended up using heroin by age 35. Data from the National Institute on Drug Abuse also confirms that prescription opioid use is a significant risk factor for subsequent heroin use:38

  • Incidence of heroin use was 19 times higher among those who had used opioids nonmedically than among those who had not used an opioid
  • 86% of young, urban injection drug users had used opioid pain relievers nonmedically before starting heroin. The three primary sources of opioids were family, friends and personal prescriptions. This is the reverse trend from the 1960, when more than 80% of those who started abusing opioids had started with heroin
  • Of those who began abusing opioids in the 2000s, 75% reported that their first opioid was a prescription drug
  • Nearly 80% of heroin users reported using prescription opioids prior to heroin

Struggling With Opioid Addiction? Please Seek Help

Regardless of the brand of opioid, it’s important to realize they are extremely addictive drugs and not meant for long-term use for nonfatal conditions. Chemically, opioids are similar to heroin, so if you wouldn’t consider shooting up heroin for a toothache or backache, seriously reconsider taking an opioid to relieve this type of pain.

The misconception that opioids are harmless pain relievers has killed hundreds of thousands, and destroyed the lives of countless more. In many cases, you’ll be able to control pain without using medications.

In my previous article, “Billionaire Opioid Executive Stands to Make Millions More on Patent for Addiction Treatment,” I discuss several approaches — including nondrug remedies, dietary changes and bodywork interventions — that can be used separately or in combination to control pain, both acute and chronic.

If you’ve been on an opioid for more than two months, or if you find yourself taking a higher dosage or taking the drug more often than you initially did, you may already be addicted. Resources where you can find help include the following.

You can also learn more in “How to Wean Off Opioids.” I also recommend keeping an eye out for my upcoming article about how low dose naltrexone (LDN), an opioid antagonist, is being used at ultra-low micro doses of 1 microgram to successfully treat opioid addiction.

 




Parents of Brain-Injured Child Sue Pesticide Maker for ‘Selfish, Greedy, Malicious’ Manipulation of Science

By Children’s Health Defense Team

For the second time in under a month, parents of a brain-injured child have sued the maker of the pesticide chlorpyrifos, claiming the company not only caused their child’s injuries but did so despite knowing its product could cause brain damage in children, including unborn children whose mothers had come in contact with the chemical.

On Tuesday, Carmela Zamora Avila and Reymundo Arciniega Herrara sued Corteva, Inc. (formerly Dow) in California Superior Court. In the complaint, the parents, both farmworkers, allege their daughter Britney, now 13, was exposed to chlorpyrifos in utero and that as a result, she now has autism, obesity, and vision problems.

Chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate linked to neurological damage in children and fetuses, is widely used on common fruits and vegetables.

Last year, California banned the chemical. In February 2020, Corteva said it would no longer sell the pesticide — citing financial, not safety reasons. Other manufacturers, however, including Gharda Chemicals, continue to make and sell chlorpyrifos-based pesticides.

According to the lawsuit filed by Avila and Herrara, six years before their daughter Britney was conceived, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted a thorough review of data submitted by Dow and determined that chlorpyrifos is toxic to the developing nervous system and brain of mammals and children and that, “therefore, an additional safety factor was required for uses that might expose children to chlorpyrifos.”

The EPA subsequently banned chlorpyrifos for residential use but continued to allow its use for commercial agriculture. That’s how Britney’s mother was exposed — she picked grapes and cleaned grapefruit fields as agricultural fieldwork and as a packing house worker during her pregnancy, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleges that for decades, Dow knew that chlorpyrifos could harm children:

“Beginning in the 1980s and continuing into the 1990s and 2000s, Dow engaged in a pattern of conduct designed to hide the dangers of chlorpyrifos from its customers and the general public. At best, this conduct could be characterized as the negligent failure to test for certain specific harms or to appreciate and take appropriate measures to protect from those harms associated with chlorpyrifos. At worst, it amounted to selfish, greedy, malicious, and willful manipulation of the scientific data and the public’s perception of the harms of Lorsban—that is, chlorpyrifos and chlorpyrifos oxon.”

“For years, the EPA and state and federal lawmakers have chosen to protect Big Chemical’s profits over the health of our children,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense. “This leaves parents no choice but to pursue justice through the legal system for children whose lives have been devastated by Dow’s chlorpyrifos, a known neurotoxin.”

In September, parents of another child, also in California, sued Corteva alleging their son suffered “severe neurological injuries … as a result of his in utero, infant and ongoing exposure to the pesticide chlorpyrifos and its more toxic oxygen analog, chlorpyrifos oxon.”

Environmental activists have for years fought for a federal ban on chlorpyrifos. Near the end of the Obama administration, they won a legal battle that resulted in a decision-forcing the EPA to ban the chemical. But in the first year of the Trump administration, newly appointed EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt revoked the ban, despite the lack of any new scientific assessment to justify his decision, according to an article in the National Law Review.

In 2019, EU countries banned chlorpyrifos. In the U.S., Hawaii passed a ban that will take effect in 2022. As the Washington Post reported earlier this year, New York lawmakers also approved legislation to ban the pesticide by late 2021. Gov. Andrew Cuomo vetoed that legislation late last year but directed the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation to phase in a ban in the coming months through public rulemaking.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.




MUST WATCH: International Message for Freedom and Hope | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpMWDCX1yMI

Source: Children’s Health Defense

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. gives one of the most important speeches ever given regarding humanity’s right and fight for freedom, including a plan.

Full transcript below, which you can also download HERE:

Hey everybody, it’s Robert F Kennedy Jr. here. And I cannot tell you how happy I am to be able to have this opportunity to talk to thousands of citizens in 15 countries on all the continents in the world, who have come together today to protest this coup d’etat by Big Data, by big Telecom, by big Tech, by the big oil and chemical companies, and by this global Public Health cartel led by Bill Gates and the W.H.O. that now amounts to two trillion dollars. And wants to magnify and amplify its wealth and its power over our lives, over our liberties, that wants to subvert our democracies, that want to destroy our sovereignty and our control over our lives and our children’s health.

And I want to remind you, those of you who are not Americans, of something that every American child learns when we’re growing up in this country about our history. During the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt, who was one of the greatest presidents in American history, said to the American people the only thing that we have to fear is fear itself.

And we grow up hearing that, but people don’t really understand what it means. But it was a very, very profound warning by Roosevelt because he saw what the Great Depression was doing in Eastern Europe, in Italy, in Germany, and Spain where that crisis was turning people towards Fascism. And the Eastern countries where the same crisis was turning citizens and governments towards communism, and also causing the collapse of governments all over the world.

And in our country, in the United States, it’s hard for people to remember today, then that almost a third of the people in our country were completely disillusioned with capitalism and wanted to turn to Communism. And another third wanted to turn to Fascism. And Franklin Roosevelt wanted to preserve our country for democracy, for free market capitalism, for civil rights and to preserve our Constitution. And he recognized that the weapon of authoritarian control was going to be fear.

And when I spoke a few weeks ago in Berlin, I reminded the people of Germany of a very famous story that happened during the Nuremberg trials after World War II when Hitler’s closest Lieutenant, the head of the Luftwaffe, Hermann Goering was asked by one of the prosecutors: How did you get the German people (the German people were the most educated people in the world, they were some of the most tolerant people in the world, the Weimar Republic was one of the strongest democracies in the world) – how did you take these people who were so well educated and so awakened and so tolerant and turn them into obedient slaves who committed some of the worst atrocities in human history.

And Goering said, oh that’s a simple thing. And any of you can look up his quote and I urge you to do so. And he said it works not just for a fascist government, but it works in a democracy in a monarchy in a communist government, and any government that you want: the job of the government is to put the people in fear and if you can keep them in fear, you can get them to do anything that you want them to do – that they will turn into sheep.

And there’s a famous book by Naomi Klein that all of us should read called “Disaster Capitalism.” And that book shows – it’s a historical chronology of all of the times during American history, and in the history of the world, during the Great Depression, and during the financial collapse in 2008, during the financial collapse in Chile for example in 1973, during the time of the World Trade Center bombing – that authoritarian elements in a society, and large corporations, and wealthy plutocrats and oligarchs, wealthy families and individuals, use crises to shift wealth upward, to obliterate the middle classes of those countries, and to clamp down totalitarian controls.

And of course, it’s an obvious thing that people who are used to voting for their governments are not going to vote for policies that make the rich people richer, that give corporations even more power over their lives, that reduce democracy and reduce civil rights. These are not good vessels for populism.

In order to transform the government so that it will reward the rich with even more wealth, the people who want to do that are large corporations who want to orchestrate that kind of change – have to get rid of civil rights. And the first civil right they begin with is freedom of speech. They need to clamp down censorship because censorship is the most important right. In our country, we put it number one, the First Amendment of the Constitution, because all the other rights depend on it.

If a government can hide what it’s doing, it can get away with anything it wants. If a corporation can a lie to you and conceal information, if there’s no transparency in a democracy, you do not have a democracy. So if you want to get rid of all the other rights like freedom of assembly, which you are exercising today, some of you are exercising at great threats. Some of you will suffer. Some of you will be jailed. Some of you will suffer injuries.

But that is a basic right: the right to freedom of expression, the right to jury trial, the right to freedom of religion, the right to privacy, the right to have governments that don’t spy on you and keep your information. All of those other rights can only be subverted if they begin imposing censorship, by being able to silence people who want to speak.

The coup d’etat that we are all fighting today is a coup d’etat that starts with a conspiracy between the government agencies and the big technology companies, the Silicon Valley billionaires – people like Zuckerberg and Bill Gates – and the people who run Google and Facebook and Pinterest and all of these other Silicon Valley corporations who are now in this conspiracy to make sure that we cannot talk about our grievances.

We cannot say bad things about pharmaceutical products. We cannot question government policies that make no sense to us. And I’m going to say a few things about some of those government policies.

Number one. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I follow the facts. I don’t know that the COViD illness was laboratory generated in Wuhan. There is plenty of evidence that it was, but not enough evidence for me to say that it’s a fact. My question is why don’t we know the answer to that? Why is Tony Fauci not being asked that question? Why is President Trump not launching an investigation? Or president Xi Jinping or the presidents of any of these countries? Saying, “Where did this come from?” Because we need to know that, the Global Citizens.

This is the worst calamity in history. And nobody seems curious about where this actually comes from. We know it didn’t come from a bat in the wet Market iin Wuhan. That story was a fable that has no basis in fact. And we have Nobel laureates, and we have large institutions, and investigative agencies, and prosecutorial agencies are saying, “We think it came from the Wuhan lab. And we think that it may have come from studies that were funded by Bill Gates and Tony Fauci.”
I don’t know if this is true. But why are our government officials not asking that as the number one question? Why instead of sending the police to suppress dissent are they not sending the police to question people who may know the answer to that question?

There are many other questions that I’d like to know the answer. Questions about masks. I’m very willing to accept if the masks work. And I want to wear them if they’re going to protect other people from transmissibility, then I want to wear them.
But the studies that I’ve seen indicate that they do not work against viral transmission for the most part. There are some that say they may work under limited circumstances. What I don’t want to be told is: they work, and you’re going to wear them, and you better not ask questions about it.

Most Americans and most of the people on this planet – we want leadership, but we don’t want bullying. And we know the difference between bullying and leadership.

We want to know the truth about hydroxychloroquine. We want to know why are we spending $18 billion dollars on vaccines and $1.4 billion on therapeutic drugs. What is the sense of that?

There are many many other questions that we in a democracy have a right to have answered without being called conspiracy theorists, without being vilified as being “inconsiderate” or being “bad citizens.” Everybody who’s part of these demonstrations are people who are striving with their lives to become good citizens.

Now, let me tell you what we need to do to win this battle. The only way we can win it is with democracy. We need to fight the get our democracy back, to reclaim our democracy from these villains who are stealing it from us.
And you notice the people who are getting richest from this quarantine are the same people who are censoring criticism of the quarantine. Who’s becoming the richest? Jeffrey Bezos. $83 billion dollars he’s made. He owns Amazon, and he is censoring books that criticize the quarantine.

Zuckerberg, who owns Facebook, who’s made tens of billions of dollars by this quarantine and he is censoring information that is critical of the quarantine. He censors my Instagram. He censors my Facebook. My Twitter page is also censored. And all of these people are the people who are making billions of dollars on the quarantine.
And what I want to know is a simple question: Is the quarantine actually effective?

You know, we’ve had plenty of pandemics in the past.n 1969, we had a Hong Kong Flu pandemic that killed a hundred thousand people in the United States. It’s the equivalent of two hundred thousand people today. That’s the same number of people who have been killed by coronavirus. Did we go into lockdown? No!

Did we wear masks? No!. We went to Woodstock. We went to the Democratic Convention in Chicago and had huge crowds of people. Nobody was told to lock down, and don’t see your girlfriend, and wear a mask. And don’t go out of your house and shut down your business and bankrupt every business in the country.

Last year there were 1.6 million people in the world who died from tuberculosis. We have 1.6 million people die every year from tuberculosis. We’re not wearing masks. We’re not on lockdown. What’s the difference between tuberculosis and coronavirus? Tuberculosis has a vaccine and the vaccine cost about $3.

And that’s why we’re not on lockdown, because nobody is making $39 a vaccine or $300 a vaccine the way that Moderna and AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson are making from this catastrophe. And that is the only reason that I can think of. And I’m happy if somebody tells me there’s another reason, but let’s hear it. Don’t just shut me up. Don’t just tell me that I can’t debate.
Here’s what we need to do we need to do exactly what you’re doing today. We need to come out on the street and we need to stick together. What the Big Tech villains and scoundrels and Mark Zuckerberg and Jeffrey Bezos and Bill Gates and Tony Fauci want you to do is they want us fighting with each other. They want blacks fighting against whites. They want Republicans fighting against Democrats. They want everybody polarized.

They want to everybody fragmented because they know that if we all get together, we’re going to start asking questions. And those are questions that they can’t answer. Why are you getting rich and why are we all getting poor? And what’s the difference between tuberculosis and coronavirus. And why are we not wearing masks with tuberculosis, but we are for the coronavirus. And where did it all come from?

And all of those questions that we deserve an answer to and we’re not getting answers. We need to stick together. If you’re a Republican or Democrat, stop talking about that. Stop identifying yourself. The enemy is Big Tech, Big Data, Big Oil, Big Pharma, the medical cartel, the government totalitarian elements that are trying to oppress us, that are trying to rob us of our liberties, of our democracy, of our freedom of thought, of our freedom of expression, of our freedom of assembly, and all of the freedoms that give dignity to humanity.

And the last thing that all of us need to do is we need to stay educated and informed. One of the things that I want to announce to you today is that Children’s Health Defense, my organization, with the help of many of you who are in these crowds is launching a journal, a Daily Journal, and we are going to weaponize information for you. We’re going to tell you what the newest science is. We’re going to take all the information that is censored everywhere else, and we’re going to reprint it in our publication. And you can get that every day.

So if you see something that is censored, we want to hear about it because we want to put it up. We are going to be the enemies of censorship. We are going to be the refuge. And we’re going to allow debate. We’re gonna make sure it’s civil debate. We’re going to encourage people to be nonpartisan. We’re going to allow people to comment and have different opinions than us. We are not scared of debate the way pharmaceutical companies and Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeffrey Bezos, and Tony Fauci are terrified of debate.

We welcome debate. We want to hear if you’ve got a different opinion than me. I want to hear about it. And I want to see your science. And I want the public to hear us talking about it and debating about it, because the free flow of information, the cauldron of debate is the only thing that allows governments to develop rational policies in which self-governance will actually work and triumph.

You are on the front line of most important battle in history. And it is the battle to save democracy and freedom and human liberty and human dignity from this totalitarian cartel that is trying to rob us simultaneously, in every nation in the world, of the rights that every human being is born with.

Thank you for your courage. Thank you for your commitment. And thank you for your brotherhood. And I can pledge to you that I will go down dying with my boots on fighting side by side with all of you to make sure that we return these rights and preserve them for our children. And I will see all of you on the barricades. Thank you.




When Will Defenders Of ‘Science’ Face Up To The Destruction The U.S. Medical System Is Causing?

By Jon RappoportWaking Times

Millions of masked people, who border on hysteria, believe they know COVID science.

On closer examination, these people believe what their television sets tell them. They believe Fauci because he’s on television, and he’s talking from the White House, and he disagrees with Trump. These elements are not exactly what Galileo had in mind when he challenged the Roman Church on the issue of the Earth revolving around the sun.

Of the millions who believe in Fauci television science, there are many who will say science is “studies.” They are quite sure these studies back up what Fauci and Redfield are spouting, and any contradictory studies would be artifacts dreamed up by secret minions of Trump. This sort of argument is not exactly what Galileo had in mind, either.

I recently analyzed COVID-19 from the point of view of false data.

COVID case numbers and death numbers are being fraudulently inflated to the skies. That’s an enormous crime because the lockdowns and the economic devastation have been based on these data.

Now I want to apply that same direct analysis to the entire US medical system. In this instance…

True data are buried, hidden, and ignored.

What data? Actual numbers of deaths and maiming CAUSED by medical treatment.

When you see the dimensions of this crime and this mass human tragedy, you’ll also see further implications—titanic insurance fraud, tax fraud, and, indeed, millions upon millions of work-hours irretrievably lost to the nation’s economy.

Insurance companies are paying out billions of dollars for medical treatment that is destructive, not helpful.

Insurance companies are also paying billions in death benefits as a result of doctors, not diseases, killing people.

And all this medical destruction is being subsidized by the taxpayer.

No one has calculated the $$ cost. No one can calculate the tragic human cost.

Now here is the analysis. Understand that the vital data in these mainstream reports have been briefly revealed, then hidden.

ONE: “The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs.” The author is Donald Light, who teaches at Rowan University, and was the 2013 recipient of ASA’s [American Sociological Association’s] Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology. Light is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University.

Donald Light: “Epidemiologically, appropriately prescribed, prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death, tied with stroke at about 2,460 deaths each week in the United States. About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the United States and Europe. They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about 20 times more hospitalizations [6.6 million annually], as well as falls, road accidents, and [annually] about 80 million medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others. Deaths and adverse effects from overmedication, errors, and self-medication would increase these figures.” (ASA publication, “Footnotes,” November 2014)

TWO: Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998: “Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients.”

The authors, led by Jason Lazarou, culled 39 previous studies on patients in hospitals. These patients, who received drugs in hospitals, or were admitted to hospitals because they were suffering from the drugs doctors had given them, met the following fate:

Every year, in the US, between 76,000 and 137,000 hospitalized patients die as a direct result of the drugs.

Beyond that, every year 2.2 million hospitalized patients experience serious adverse reactions to the drugs.

The authors write: “…Our study on ADRs [Adverse Drug Reactions], which excludes medication errors, had a different objective: to show that there are a large number of ADRs even when the drugs are properly prescribed and administered.”

So this study had nothing to do with doctor errors, nurse errors, or improper combining of drugs. And it only counted people killed who were admitted to hospitals. It didn’t begin to tally all the people taking pharmaceuticals who died as a consequence of the drugs, at home.

THREE: July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association; author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health; “Is US health really the best in the world?”

Starfield reported that the US medical system kills 225,000 Americans per year. 106,000 as a result of FDA-approved medical drugs, and 119,000 as a result of mistreatment and errors in hospitals. Extrapolate the numbers to a decade: that’s 2.25 million deaths. You might want to read that last number again.

I interviewed Starfield in 2009. I asked her whether she was aware of any overall effort by the US government to eliminate this holocaust. She answered a resounding NO. She also said her estimate of medically caused deaths in America was on the conservative side.

FOUR: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer. Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It [the Institute] calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

The report called this “one of the most significant perils to humans resulting from human activity.”

The report was compiled by outside researchers who went into the FDA’s own database of “serious adverse [medical-drug] events.”

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because the FDA certifies, as safe and effective, all the medical drugs that are routinely maiming and killing Americans. Every public health agency knows the truth.

FIVE: None of the above reports factor in death or injury by a vaccine.

The US system for reporting severe adverse effects of vaccines is broken.

Barbara Loe Fisher, of the private National Vaccine Information Center, has put together a reasonable analysis:

“But how many children have [adverse] vaccine reactions every year? Is it really only one in 110,000 or one in a million who are left permanently disabled after vaccination? Former FDA Commissioner David Kessler observed in 1993 that less than 1 percent of doctors report adverse events following prescription drug use. [See DA Kessler, ‘Introducing MEDWatch,’ JAMA, June 2, 1993: 2765-2768]”

“There have been estimates that perhaps less than 5 or 10 percent of doctors report hospitalizations, injuries, deaths, or other serious health problems following vaccination. The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act contained no legal sanctions for not reporting; doctors can refuse to report and suffer no consequences.”

“Even so, each year about 12,000 reports are made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System [VAERS]; parents as well as doctors can make those reports. [See RT Chen, B. Hibbs, ‘Vaccine safety,’ Pediatric Annals, July 1998: 445-458]”

“However, if that number represents only 10 percent of what is actually occurring, then the actual number may be 120,000 vaccine-adverse events [per year]. If doctors report vaccine reactions as infrequently as Dr. Kessler said they report prescription-drug reactions, and the number 12,000 is only 1 percent of the actual total, then the real number may be 1.2 million vaccine-adverse events annually.”

Medical crimes.

Medically caused deaths of friends, family members, loved ones, who are buried along with the truth.

No criminal investigations, no prosecutions, no guilty verdicts, no prison sentences.

But of course, you can believe everything leading lights of the US medical system tell you about COVID.

You can believe everything the press—who buries the truth about this medical holocaust—tells you about COVID.

Given the reports on medically caused death and maiming I’ve just cited and described in this article, it’s obvious that…

Leading medical journals around the world, which routinely publish glowing accounts of clinical trials of medical drugs…

Are spilling over with rank fraud, on the page after page.

Indeed, here is a stunning quote from a woman who has quite probably read and analyzed more medical-drug studies than any doctor in the world:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

Compare that quote with one from “the father of COVID science,” Tony Fauci. In an interview with the National Geographic, Fauci stated: “Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about…If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”

Sure, Tony, sure.

Now put on your mask and get lost.

About the Author

Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrixclick here.)

This article (When Will Hysterical Defenders Of “Science” Face Up To The Destruction The US Medical System Is Causing?) was originally created and published by Jon Rappaport’s Blog and is re-posted here with permission.




In Possible Major Breakthrough, Researchers Develop Drug That Completely Neutralizes COVID

By Unattributed | CBSNewYork
There is a possible major breakthrough in the battle against COVID-19.
Researchers in Pittsburgh have developed a drug that completely neutralizes the coronavirus.LINK: More Coverage From Our Colleagues At CBS PittsburghThe potential drug is called AB-8, a small piece of the anti-COVID antibodies that have been used to treat COVID patients by blocking or neutralizing the coronavirus. But this very small molecule appears to have major advantages over other drugs, and perhaps even vaccines.The wide range of antibodies contained in convalescent plasma – plasma from recovered COVID patients – have variable effectiveness in COVID patients. Now researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center have found the precise piece of the effective antibody that blocks coronavirus.

The way antibodies work against COVID is by attaching to and blocking the so-called spike protein that the coronavirus uses to attach to specific receptors on human cells. Through painstaking molecular analysis, the UPMC scientists identified a tiny piece of those neutralizing antibodies. Called AB-8, it’s the part that actually performs most of the virus blocking. Its small size, about one-tenth that of full-size antibodies, gives many advantages.

“It’s small, it’s potent, it’s part of a human antibody and its size means that it can even be given by inhalation,” said Dr. John Mellors of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

AB-8 doesn’t produce a wide range of antibodies as a vaccine does that might cause side effects, and it doesn’t have to be given by IV infusion. It could be given both to treat a COVID infection and to prevent COVID in high risk populations.

While AB-8 has only been tested in animals, most were mice that have the same corona receptors as humans and was shown to be safe.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




Moderna’s Covid Vaccine Patent Warned of “Deliberate Coronavirus Release” 9 Month’s Before COVID-19 | Ben Swann

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msykwjpwG6Q

Video Source: Ben Swann

Ben Swann reports on newly unearthed documents from Moderna Pharmaceuticals COVID patent application include a claim of concern about a “deliberate release of SARS coronavirus” 9 months before the official emergence of Covid-19. In addition, it turns out that Moderna may not have the legal right to even release its vaccine in the next few weeks because the company appears to be infringing on an existing patent for the core technology. Is this why Moderna’s executives are selling their stock?



RFK, Jr. and CHD Take Action on Safety Concerns over Moderna’s COVID Vaccine

By the Children’s Health Defense Team | Children’s Health Defense

On August 26, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) wrote a letter to Dr. Jerry Menikoff, Director of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP), asking for an investigation into serious safety concerns with the COVID-19 vaccine being developed by Moderna. Moderna’s version of the vaccine, championed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and funded with $500 million in taxpayer dollars through Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, contains polyethylene glycol (PEG), a molecule to which approximately 72% of the American population have antibodies and 8% have highly elevated levels of antibodies.  People who have pre-existing PEG antibodies could experience life-threatening anaphylaxis if injected with PEG-containing substances such as the Moderna COVID vaccine. Additionally, antibodies to PEG can both decrease the effectiveness of the vaccine and increase the risk of side effects.

CHD’s letter to OHRP

Below is RFK, Jr.’s letter to Dr. Fauci:

August 26th, 2020

Anthony Fauci, MD, Director

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease

RE: Phase III Moderna mRNA-1273 Vaccine

Dear Dr. Fauci,

We urge you to require Moderna to inform clinical trial participants of the unique risks associated with polyethylene glycol (PEG), an ingredient in the NIAID funded Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine. As you know, approximately 72% of Americans may have antibodies to PEG with 8% of those individuals having highly elevated levels of antibodies, >500ng/ml.

Injecting a PEG-containing vaccine into individuals with pre-existing PEG antibodies could lead to life-threatening anaphylaxis.  The presence of anti-PEG antibodies in approximately 7 out of 10 Americans led to the authors conclusion that  “…sensitive detection and precise quantitation of anti-PEG Ab levels in a clinical setting will be essential to ensuring the safe use of PEGylated drugs in all target patient populations going forward.”

In its prospectus, Moderna acknowledges the potential for its proprietary lipid nanoparticles and PEG to produce “systemic side effects”.  The company has nevertheless refused to prescreen individuals participating in the clinical trials for preexisting PEG antibodies, despite FDA’s strong recommendations that it do so.

For those participating in the Moderna clinical trials, the uptick in parenteral exposure to PEG will be unprecedented—potentially disastrous and life-threatening.  Moderna reported results from the Phase 1 open-label trial in 45 healthy adults acknowledged that over half (23 out of 45) of the participants experienced a vaccine adverse event, including one volunteer who withdrew from the trial due to urticaria (hives), a condition often associated with drug allergies and life-threatening anaphylaxis.  We worry that Moderna’s failure to inform the trial participants of the PEG allergy risks not only endangers their lives, but also may have caused clinicians and volunteers to dismiss telltale allergic reactions as “unrelated” to the vaccine.

Children’s Health Defense has grave safety and efficacy concerns about the use of PEG in vaccines due to the high percentage of the population having preexisting antibodies to PEG. While it’s unlikely that everyone with pre-existing PEG antibodies will have a severe reaction to a vaccine containing PEG, it is criminally reckless to assume that none will. It is our hope that you will make the appropriate public assurances that NIAID will promptly inform the volunteers of this risk.

Moderna answers critics of its dangerous failure to warn trial subjects by dismissing the well-documented fact that a high percentage of people have anti-PEG antibodies as merely “hypothetical”. Moderna’s justification is disingenuous, at best. There is no serious dispute about PEG’s ubiquity across the population. Moderna’s refusal to screen for PEG is dangerous to the trial participants and violates 45 CFR 46.116(b)(2). That regulation requires manufacturers to disclose any reasonably foreseeable risks or discomforts to clinical trial subjects. Another provision, 45 CFR 46-111(a) (1) mandates that manufacturers minimize risks to clinical trial participants by using procedures that are consistent with sound research design and that do not unnecessarily expose subjects to risk.

The world is aware of NIAID’s deep institutional commitment to the Moderna Vaccine. Moderna’s novel MRNA vaccine is a career vanity project for certain powerful NIAID officials who have nurtured the platform for years. NIAID apparently owns half of Moderna’s patent. At least six NIAID officials also share patent ownership and apparently stand to collect personal royalties of up to $150,000 annually on vaccine sales. NIAID has committed billions of dollars of public monies to the project and placed the Moderna vaccine at the front of the line. As you know, critics have suggested that NIAID’s conflicts have engendered a posture, among NIAID regulators, of ignoring emerging safety signals because the Moderna Vaccine is “too big to fail”. But, NIAID’s peculiar interest in Moderna is no excuse for short cuts. To the contrary, it is critical that NIAID’s regulatory scrutiny of Moderna be beyond reproach, since other manufacturers will look to Moderna as a role model for their own safety studies. NIAID’s pet vaccine should be a template for rigorous protocols that unambiguously elevate safety above monetary considerations. We urge that you give priority to your agency’s duty to protect public health and the rights of trial participants to genuine informed consent. We ask you to order Moderna to immediately inform all trial participants of the risk for allergic reactions from PEG, and to carefully monitor and publicly disclose allergic reactions potentially associated with PEG.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




The Anti-Vitamin ‘New Science’ Myth

By Rosanne Lindsay, ND | Nexus Newsfeed

Recently, scientists published “new science” that claims to address the growing problem of drug-resistant bacteria known as Superbugs. Never mind that overuse of antibiotics (i.e., antilife) has caused the proliferation of these Superbugs. Scientists have found “an alternative way,” moving from antibiotics to anti-vitamins. And they are not using the term “alternative” to suggest anything natural.

Scientists have to admit they’ve been duped by the microbes. Traditional antibiotics have targeted a bacteria’s protective cell wall and have subsequently been made obsolete in short order. That’s because in Nature, microbes have amazing abilities to acquire genes from each other, and from their environment” to show that they are highly adaptive in favor of life.

The ‘New Science’ Myth

In the August 2020 journal Nature Chemical Biology, microbiologist Fabian von Pappenheim and colleagues decided to write new science. Their work interferes with  the bacteria’s need for vitamins, as an extermination strategy. Vitamins are vital to all living things for building cellular components, tissue bits and running cell processes. The anti-vitamin experiments are featured in an August 2020 Science Alert article:

Their theory is that anti-vitamins are similar enough to their vitamin equivalents that they fool biological systems into thinking they’re the same molecules, but slightly different in a way that makes them catastrophically faulty substitutes, thereby inhibiting the function of vitamins and becoming toxic to those bacteria that ingested them. Specifically, “it knocks off the protein glutamate from the rest of its molecule, which leads to glutamates sticking to each other and prevents them from participating in reactions.”

Using B1 (Thiamine), scientists replaced the methyl part of the molecule (CH3) with a methoxy group (O-CH3), which is bigger and disrupts the metabolic reactions in which B1 plays a role. Three anti-vitamins have been synthesized: roseoflavin (RoF) which works against vitamin B2 (riboflavin), ginkgotoxin (GT) the antivitamin of B6 (pyridoxine) and 2′-methoxy-thiamine (MTh), which can be mistaken for B1 (thiamine)..

The scientists hypothesize that their tools “mess up the critical functions of their corresponding vitamins in bacteria while leaving human systems intact.” Is that true?

Anti-vitamin Equals Anti-Science

Scientists have gone awry in their understanding of ‘human’ if they fail to acknowledge that humans are 10:1 more bacteria than human cells. As such, humans are no greater than their smallest inhabitants, their bacteria. Therefore, killing off microbes will kill off  humans, eventually. Moreover, the idea that anti-vitamins can mimic real vitamins and fool the body into anything, shows that scientists have not learned anything from their short, failed run with antibiotics.

Just because someone publishes an idea and calls it “science” does not necessarily make it so. There is science and there is Scientism, or anti-science.  How do you know whether to believe that scientists are legitimate or mad? Deconstruct the science….

Role of Glutamate

The Anti-Vitamin strategy removes the glutamate molecule without asking if it is important to the body. Glutamate is a neurotransmitter in the central nervous system (CNS) and interacts with a range of specific receptor and transporter systems to establish a functional synapse. In a normally functioning synapse, glutamate regulates pathways that control the influx of Na and Ca ions, and ultimately, an action potential in neurons.

In star-shaped connective tissue cells of the nervous system called astrocytes, glutamate, converts into glutamine, and can be released and made available for neurons to convert it back to glutamate through a glutamine-reuptake systemGlutamine does so many good things in the body, such as preventing infections that often follow endurance exercise, reducing symptoms of overtraining syndrome, improving nutrition in critical illness, alleviating allergies, and treating digestive problems by fueling the cells of the intestines.

Particularly in autistic children, glutamine has had some success in improving health and language processing by acting as a “brain food.” It also helps manage inflammation, and readily crosses the blood-brain barrier to stimulate alertness, improve intelligence, sooth erratic behavior, aid in memory recall and most importantly, helps with behavioral problems in autistic children.

Question the Science

Science cannot prove anything. Science can merely ask a question based on a theory. Testing a theory involves choosing certain variables, and using experimentation and observation. Change one variable in the experiment, or change the observer, and you will get a different outcome. In testing theories, there is no such thing as “scientific proof.” Proofs exist in mathematics and logic. Provings exist in homeopathy. But neither proof, nor provings, exist in science. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory’ is evidence, not proof.  Scientists prefer theories for which there is more and better evidence to theories for which there is less and worse evidence. If science is anything, it resembles a moving scale.

Mycoplasma Rising

Nature would point to the overuse of antibiotics as the cause of antibiotic-resistant bacteria on the rise. That’s because Nature always finds a way to adapt. Superbugs show us how microbes not only survive, but thrive. Because antibiotics work to destroy the cell wall, new microbes such as mycoplasma pneumonia are appearing. Mycoplasma is an atypical, very small bacterium in the class Mollicutes, a parasitic bacterium without a cell wall…. hence the plasma coating. Mycoplasma comes from mykes meaning fungus, and plasma, meaning formed. It is derived from the fungal-like growth of some mycoplasma species, whose symptoms mimic ‘walking pneumonia.’

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.