The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

The Most Revolutionary Act

Author Archives: stuartbramhall

Unknown's avatar

About stuartbramhall

Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.

The New Watergate: Post-Jab Disease Spike Coverup

Posted on by
Reply

Misinformation by health board member ...

Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • In the wake of the COVID jab rollout and additional boosters, a number of health conditions are on the rise, including cancer, most notably cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers, and very aggressive blood and brain cancers
  • Cancer has been on the rise for decades, thanks to dietary factors, but the COVID jabs appear to dramatically accelerate the disease process. Many doctors report cancer patients with stable disease, and those who have been in remission for years, will suddenly and rapidly develop Stage 4 disease
  • A military whistleblower has come forward with data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) database showing dramatic increases in medical visits for cancers and other conditions, post-jab
  • For neurological side effects of the shot, four remedies that can be very helpful are fluvoxamine (an antidepressant that blocks cytokine production in neural tissues), pharmaceutical grade methylene blue (improves mitochondrial respiration and repair), near-infrared light (triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria) and hyperbaric oxygen therapy (boosts mitochondrial function, decreases inflammation and much more)
  • The COVID jabs also downregulate toll-like receptors 7 and 8, which allows latent viruses such as herpes EBV4 — Epstein-Barr, aka, mononucleosis — to flourish that would otherwise have been kept in check

Dr. Ryan Cole, an anatomic clinical pathologist with a subspecialty in skin pathology and postgraduate Ph.D. training in immunology, has been on the frontlines exposing the fraudulent COVID narrative.

Since 2004, he’s been operating his own business, a pathology laboratory, which gives him rare freedom and flexibility to comment on what he’s seeing. Most others would lose their jobs for speaking out the way Cole has.

Truth Telling Is a Risky Business

That doesn’t mean he hasn’t paid a price for speaking out about and defending real science though. He’s triple board certified and has 12 state licenses, and because of his stance against COVID recommendations, some of the credentialing organizations have taken action against him.

“I’ve seen 500,000 patients diagnostically in my career through the microscope. So, I have a long track record of diagnostics. I have not had a patient care complaint against me in 26 years of being a physician,” he says. “I still don’t, and this is what’s fascinating.

Of those 12 licenses, four were under attack, three are still under attack — in Washington, Arizona and Minnesota — [yet there’s] not a single patient care complaint. All the attacks against me have been political complaints to boards of medicine, which is not legal for them to do. Not a single one of those complaints is from a patient.

And then — really the most egregious thing — was ex parte, without me being present, without even sending a certified letter, the College of American Pathologists removed my fellowship status, which is defamatory.

I went back and found their complaint and looked at what they did, and I actually have a wonderful defamation lawsuit against them, because everything they did was anti-scientific. So, they can either restore [my fellowship] now, or just pay me a big check down the road. One or the other.”

He’s also lost about half of his business, as two insurance companies canceled him for “unprofessional behavior,” i.e., for sharing and discussing the science of COVID, and one of his best friends, whom he’s worked with for 12 years, canceled their business relationship as he didn’t want Cole’s outspokenness to affect his business. “All because of the defamation by the media, so to tell the truth in this day and age is a dangerous thing,” he says.

Suspicions Arose Early On

From his Ph.D. work in immunology, Cole was very aware of SARS-CoV-1 and MERS, having studied both, so when the warp speed program to develop a pandemic SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was announced, he became immediately suspicious.

“I thought, wait a minute, you can’t vaccinate against corona viruses!” he says. “This family of viruses is not amenable to vaccination, based on mutation rates. So, my concern was very high, early on.”

[…]

Post-Jab Cancer Explosion

One of the apparent side effects of the COVID jab that Cole has been warning and talking about is cancer. He explains:

“Obviously, during COVID, we saw some parameters change in blood tests. There was a concern about clotting. We saw elevated clotting factors. We know that the early variants were pretty severe in terms of inducing clotting, which was a shame because the whole world should have been simply using anti-inflammatories, steroids and anti-clotting agents, and so many more people would’ve lived.

My colleague, Dr. [Shankara] Chetty in South Africa, was having phenomenal success with antihistamine steroids and anti-clotting agents. So anyway, that first year, we saw drops in white blood cell counts, we saw decreases in certain subsets of T-cells. But when the shots rolled out, things changed.

At first I noticed kind of an innocuous little bump that we see usually in children. It’s a little virus called molluscum contagiosum [that causes] a little white bump.

Usually, by the time you’re a tween or early teen, you’ve built immunity to that and you never get them again, or rarely get them again. But after the shots rolled out, all of a sudden, in 80-year-olds, 70-year-olds, 60-year-olds, 50-year-olds, I started seeing literally a 20-fold increase in this little innocuous viral bump. And I thought, ‘Uh oh, this means they’ve lost immune memory’ …

Those subsets of T-cells that keep viruses in check are very important for keeping cancer in check. And this is where immunology jumps into the picture. All of us have some atypical cells, and we have the ‘Marines’ of our immune system, our natural killer (NK) cells. They’re on the frontline circulating. We have about 30 billion T-cells circulating in our blood, many of which are killer cells and NK cells.

Our other innate cells are our macrophages, monocytes and dendritic cells. They’re on that frontline. They’re shaking hands with every cell in your body all day long saying, ‘Friend or foe? Friend or foe? Oh gosh, this one has some mutations, it’s now a foe.’ They’ll poke a little hole in it, throw in a little enzyme called a grandzyme — a ‘hand grenade’ — blow up that cell, and we’re good.

But what happened after these shots rolled out is that many of those cell subsets started decreasing in number. The first cancer I saw uptick was cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers. Usually, I would see maybe two endometrial cancers a month. All of a sudden, a few months after the rollout of the shots, I was seeing two or three a week.

[…]

Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/07/03/dr-ryan-cole-explains-covid-jab-effects

Eradicating cardiovascular disease with vitamin C

Posted on by
4

Paul Anthony

Dr Rath Foundation

Among the general public, arguably the best known of the above-listed vitamins is vitamin C. Discovered by Hungarian scientist Albert Szent-Györgyi, who was rewarded with a Nobel prize in 1937, its use as a therapy for fighting the common cold became popularized by two-time Nobel prizewinner Linus Pauling in the 1970s. Pauling went on to become an early proponent for the use of high-dose vitamin C in the treatment of cancer. As important as his pioneering efforts were, however, it was Pauling’s later collaboration with Dr. Matthias Rath on the role of vitamin C in preventing cardiovascular disease that was ultimately to prove transformational.

A series of key scientific papers coauthored with Pauling in the early 1990s outlined Dr. Rath’s revolutionary scientific discovery that the primary cause of cardiovascular disease in humans is a deficiency of vitamin C. As these papers described, ensuring optimum daily intakes of vitamin C can ultimately pave the way towards abolishing human cardiovascular disease as a cause for human mortality.

Building on this groundbreaking work, in a study published in 2015 scientists at the Dr. Rath Research Institute definitively proved that cardiovascular disease is essentially an early form of the vitamin C deficiency disease scurvy. Notably, therefore, in parallel with a growing worldwide awareness of Dr. Rath’s scientific discovery, recent decades have seen a significant decline in cardiovascular mortality. This development opens up the tantalizing possibility that in the years ahead, the eradication of cardiovascular disease – or, at least, its near-eradication – can be achieved.

Reaching this monumental goal for global health is as much a political challenge as it is a scientific one. Reducing the influence of the trillion dollar a year pharmaceutical ‘business with disease’ will be vital. So too will the need to educate open-minded politicians regarding the facts about vitamins and health.

[…]

Let’s Celebrate ‘World Vitamin Day’

Post-Vaccine Wipeout of Children’s Immune Systems?

Posted on by
3

The post-vaccine WIPEOUT of children’s immune systems has arrived

Dr Eddy Betterman

The United Kingdom-based news outlet Daily Mail reports that these babies are getting sick and dying because they have “no immunity.” This points to the children’s parents, and mainly their “fully vaccinated” mothers, not conferring to them proper immunity.

Reports indicate that these little ones are developing a mysterious respiratory illness that requires critical medical intervention. The media is calling the disease respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV.

Every year, some 120,000 young children are said to die from RSV. And in NSW, rates of it exploded from just 355 cases per week just three weeks ago to 3,775 cases per week currently.

The United Kingdom-based news outlet Daily Mail reported that these babies are getting sick and dying because they have “no immunity.” This points to the children’s parents, and mainly their “fully vaccinated” mothers, not conferring to them proper immunity.

Recognizing that Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” destroy the reproductive process, it only makes sense that those babies who somehow make it through alive will more than likely be defenseless immune-wise, as we are now seeing.

Babies with RSV are also testing “positive” for covid

Doctors familiar with the disease say that children born with it develop serious illnesses “from encountering viruses they haven’t come across before,” such as influenza and covid, which are said to be in the same family as RSV.

Dr. Philip Britton from the Children’s Hospital at Westmead says that an analysis of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions across Australia show that babies with RSV are testing positive for both influenza and covid, all at the same time.

“Over the last month or so, we have seen four times the admissions to hospital for flu in children as for covid,” he told The Daily Telegraph.

Right now, about five percent of all children presenting with these co-infections are having to be admitted to the ICU. Britton says this is “very concerning” and out of the ordinary.

“About half of the children had no pre-existing health conditions, with the elevated number of admissions putting pressure on the hospital system,” the Daily Mail adds.

“Some of the ‘pandemic babies’ are presenting with inflammation of the chest, brain and heart caused by influenza, Covid, and RSV.”

RSV, which has technically been around for a while, has not seen a surge like this since, you guessed it: right around the time when Operation Warp Speed was launched.

“Among that group who are previously well … It’s not just a chest infection, some of these children can be impacted with the flu affecting the heart and the brain,” Britton further warned about the severity of the disease as it is now being seen in tiny babies.

Reports indicate that around 20 percent of the babies developing RSV in Australia also develop potentially lethal bronchiolitis. Some 40 percent of these end up having to be admitted to the hospital.

[…]

Via https://dreddymd.com/2022/07/02/post-vaccine-wipeout-of-childrens-immune-systems-has-arrived/

Pfizer’s Puppet President Biden Gives $9 Billion Taxpayer Funds for Millions More COVID Vaccines Nobody Wants

Posted on by
Reply
Big Pharma Whines to Biden: 'We're Not ...

 

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

Is there any more doubt that the COVID-19 plandemic, which was used to transfer America’s wealth to Big Pharma with literally TRILLIONS of taxpayer funds transferred into their accounts, has now allowed Pfizer to have complete control of the country by buying the White House and President of the United States?

It began with fellow billionaire Donald Trump, of course, in 2020 who strong-armed the FDA into giving fast-track emergency use authorization to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. (This is from our Bitchute channel.)

Then Biden was installed as President and kept the coffers full, and now that 80% of Americans have already received a COVID-19 vaccine and demand is waning, with 98 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine currently sitting unused due to lack of demand, the call was put in to Joe this week to keep the faucet running, and the White House obliged and pledged another $9 BILLION for 300 million more doses of the deadly COVID-19 shots.

Trump and Biden might disagree on a lot of things, but Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines ain’t one of them. (This is also on our Bitchute channel.)

The top three firms who hold the most stock in Pfizer are Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street (source), and there probably are very few investment firms who do NOT own some Pfizer stock, so when you see officials with the FDA, CDC, and others promoting Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, they are probably all shareholders and cashing in, as are most members of Congress (unfortunately, these records at opensecrets.org only go through 2018; it would be interesting to see from 2020 and later.)

Of course we’ve known for a long time that Pfizer owns most of the corporate media:

And they are the largest criminal organization in the world, based on settled criminal cases with the Department of Justice.

[…]

Via https://healthimpactnews.com/2022/pfizers-puppet-president-biden-gives-9-billion-taxpayer-funds-for-millions-more-covid-vaccines-that-nobody-wants/

The Role of the Seljuk Turks in Triggering the First Crusade

Posted on by
1

Episode 22: The Turks in Anatolia and India

Barbarian Empires of the Steppes (2014)

Dr Kenneth Harl

Film Review

This lecture covers the conquest of the Anatolia peninsula by Seljuk Turks and the conquest of northern India by the Ghaznavid Turks.

After the Seljuk Turks took control of Baghdad (see 9th Century AD: Mass Migration of Uighur Turks to China Lead to Rise of Seljuk Turks on the Steppes), their biggest political/military challenge was the Shi’a caliphs operating out Cairo. Following the withdrawal of the Seljuk army from Baghdad in 1057, opponents to Seljuk rule sought support from the Fatimid (Shi’ar)my in Cairo. The latter occupied Baghdad for 40 days before being expelled by the Seljuk army. To suppress the Fatimid regime, the Seljuks subsequently invaded Cairo, the Byzantine Empire (allied with the Fatimid regime), Syria, Medina and Mecca.

This ongoing conflict caused major disruption in the Christian pilgrimage routes to Jerusalem (agreed between the Byzantines and the Abassid Caliphate), inspiring Pope Urban II to launch the first Crusade in 1095, nominally to restore Christian access to Jerusalem.

This is the time line Harl presents:

1071 Seljuks open up the eastern Anatolia peninsula to Turkish settlers, cutting the area controlled by the Byzantine Empire in half.

1081 Byzantine Emperor calls on western Europe to send mercenaries to help liberate eastern Anatolia. Pope Urban II “mistakenly” interprets this as a call to “liberate” Jerusalem and mobilizes 50,000 European mercenaries to join the first Crusade. Totally unprepared to confront European cavalry, the Turks suffer initially suffer stunning defeat. Nevertheless the Crusaders are ultimately unsuccessful in driving the Turks, who created a Turkish homeland in eastern Anatolia, from the Anatolian plateau. Christian farmers Initially pay tribute to Seljuk Turk rulers, but ultimately most of eastern Anatolia reverts to grasslands and nomadic pastoralism.

1204 Europeans Crusaders respond by sacking Constantinople. This backfires, shifting the balance of power in Anatolia to the Seljuk Turks.

On the southeaster steppes, Ghaznavad Turks repeatedly invade India during the 12th century. Beginning in 1101, they gradually brring first Lahore, Peshawar and other Indian cities under Turkish (Muslim) control. By 1192, the Turks have conquered Dehli.

Unlike the Seljuk conquest of eastern Anatolia, the Turkish occupation of India is purely military. With no grasslands to support pastoral nomadic tribes, northern India never attracted Turkish settlers.

The film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/video/5694984/5695032

BMJ: Big Pharma Money ‘Permeates’ World’s Drug Regulatory Agencies

Posted on by
8

By  Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

Over the past decades, regulatory agencies have seen large proportions of their budgets funded by the industry they are sworn to regulate, according to an investigative report published Thursday by The British Journal of Medicine.

Over the past decades, regulatory agencies have seen large proportions of their budgets funded by the industry they are sworn to regulate, according to an investigative report published Thursday by The BMJ.

The report examines whether drug regulators in six countries, including the U.S., “have sufficient independence from the companies they are meant to regulate.”

Investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi found significant conflicts of interest have developed between drugmakers and the agencies charged with drug regulation, resulting in a negative impact on the quality of pharmaceutical products that reach the public.

In all 6 countries, ‘Big Pharma’ provided bulk of drug regulator funding

The issue of conflicts of interest between pharmaceutical regulators and “Big Pharma” is not new. Demasi referred to a 2005 example from the U.K., where the House of Commons health committee investigated the drug industry’s influence on health policy, including the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the U.K. equivalent of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The committee expressed concern that pharma’s funding of the MHRA and similar agencies could lead them to “lose sight of the need to protect and promote public health above all else as it seeks to win fee income from the companies.”

“Nearly two decades on, little has changed,” Demasi reported. “Industry funding of drug regulators has become the international norm.”

Demasi based her conclusion on interviews with regulators in Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, the U.K. and the U.S.

She asked them about their funding, the level of transparency in their decision-making and data and their drug approval processes.

According to Demasi, her findings broadly indicate, “industry money permeates the globe’s leading regulators, raising questions about their independence, especially in the wake of a string of drug and device scandals.”

Demasi said “industry money saturates the globe’s leading regulators,” with the majority of their budgets — “particularly the portion focused on drugs” — coming from the pharmaceutical industry.

For instance, the FDA, despite being the most highly funded of the six regulatory authorities studied, receives 65% of its funding for drug evaluation from industry user fees.

In 1995, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) received just 20% of its funding from industry fees. Today, that figure is 89%.

At the high end, 96% of Australia’s regulatory budget comes from industry monies, while even the regulatory authority with the smallest percentage of the six — Canada (50.5%) — still receives the majority of its funding from pharma companies.

Australia’s regulatory authority, during the 2020-2021 time period, approved more than 90% of drug applications.

Pharma funding contributes to lower-quality drugs and healthcare

Demasi references several academic studies which, over a span of several decades, “have raised questions about the influence funding has on regulatory decisions,” especially in the context of a series of “drug and device scandals,” involving “opioids, Alzheimer’s drugs, influenza antivirals, pelvic mesh, joint prostheses, breast and contraceptive implants, cardiac stents, and pacemakers.”

Focusing on the U.S., Demasi cited the example of a 1992 law, the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), passed in the aftermath of the AIDS crisis.

The legislation permitted the pharmaceutical industry to directly fund the FDA through “user fees,” which were “intended to support the cost of swiftly reviewing drug applications” via the funding of “additional staff to help speed the approval of new treatments.”

What in fact happened, according to Demasi, is that “the FDA moved from a fully taxpayer-funded entity to one supplemented by industry money.”

Over time, PDUFA user-fee funding has increased thirty-fold — from around $29 million in 1993 to $884 million in 2016, Demasi said.

This has contributed to “a decline in evidentiary standards, ultimately harming patients,” due to practices such as the creation of “PDUFA dates” — referring to deadlines for the review of applications by the FDA, as well as “a host of ‘expedited pathways’ for speeding drugs to market” —- a practice Demasi describes as having become “a global norm.”

The BMJ article quotes Donald Light, a sociologist based at Rowan University in New Jersey, who has extensively studied drug regulation. He told BMJ:

“Like the FDA, the [Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) was founded to be an independent institute.

“However, being largely funded by fees from the companies whose products it is charged to evaluate is a fundamental conflict of interest and a prime example of institutional corruption.

“It’s the opposite of having a trustworthy organisation independently and rigorously assessing medicines. They’re not rigorous, they’re not independent, they are selective, and they withhold data.”

Light said doctors and patients “must appreciate how deeply and extensively drug regulators can’t be trusted so long as they are captured by industry funding.”

Industry funding helps ‘green light’ new medications

Demasi presents figures showing the high percentage of drug approvals across the six regulatory agencies studied.

For instance, 68% of new drugs in the U.S. are approved by the FDA via an “expedited pathway,” as are 50% in Europe.

In the U.K., 98.5% of new medicines are approved by the MHRA.

All six regulators offered an expedited process for the approval of new medicines. Accelerated approval processes have, according to Demasi, “resulted in new drugs which were more likely to be withdrawn for safety reasons, more likely to carry a subsequent black box warning, and more likely to have one or more dosage forms voluntarily discontinued by the manufacturer.”

This is partly due to the lower burden of proof required for accelerated approvals.

The BMJ article quotes Aaron Kesselheim, professor of medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, who, along with two others, resigned from an FDA advisory committee in 2021, in protest over the FDA’s approval of Aduhelm, a controversial Alzheimer’s drug.

Kesselheim told The BMJ:

“The accelerated approval pathway explicitly changes the underlying efficacy ‘standard’ in that it allows approval based on changes to a surrogate measure that is not well-validated, and is only reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit.”

In June 2021, NPR reported that Aduhelm was approved by the FDA “against the wishes of nearly every member on the [advisory] panel,” leading Kesselheim to tweet “Accelerated Approval is not supposed to be the backup that you use when your clinical trial data are not good enough for regular approval.”

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/big-pharma-drug-regulators/

“One Of The Worst Downturns In Recent History”: Zuck Warns Facebook Employees To Brace For Layoffs

Posted on by
2

Zero Hedge

One month ago we showed that while the BLS still revels in its seasonally-adjusted statistical nonsense to divine the monthly level of payrolls, the real world is seeing a wave of mass layoff the likes of which have not been seen since the covid crash

Fast forward to today when it appears that we are about to hit the motherlode of mass layoffs, after none other than Zuck sounded the alarm. According to Reuters, Facebook-owner Meta Platforms (which will likely be undoing its name change just as bitcoin bottoms) has cut plans to hire engineers by at least 30% this year, CEO Mark Zuckerberg told employees on Thursday, as he warned them to brace for a deep economic downturn.

“If I had to bet, I’d say that this might be one of the worst downturns that we’ve seen in recent history,” Zuckerberg told workers in a weekly employee Q&A session, audio of which was heard by Reuters.

And while Zuck emphasized the lack of hiring – noting that it has reduced its target for hiring engineers in 2022 to around 6,000-7,000, down from an initial plan to hire about 10,000 new engineers, which comes amid a hiring paused announced month – he confirmed that layoffs are also coming saying the company was “turning up the heat” on performance management to weed out staffers unable to meet more aggressive goals.

“Realistically, there are probably a bunch of people at the company who shouldn’t be here,” Zuckerberg said, adding that “part of my hope by raising expectations and having more aggressive goals, and just kind of turning up the heat a little bit, is that I think some of you might decide that this place isn’t for you, and that self-selection is OK with me.”

Others made the message even more forcefully, with Chief Product Officer Chris Cox saying that the company must “prioritize more ruthlessly” and “operate leaner, meaner, better executing teams.”

“I have to underscore that we are in serious times here and the headwinds are fierce. We need to execute flawlessly in an environment of slower growth, where teams should not expect vast influxes of new engineers and budgets,” Cox wrote.

Via https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-worst-downturns-recent-history-zuck-warns-facebook-employees-brace-layoffs

Most People Consume Plastic on a Daily Basis

Posted on by
1

Microplastics are in our food and water ...Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • The world produces about 360 million tons of plastics annually, and up to 12 million tons of it ends up in our oceans each year
  • Estimates suggest that by 2050, our oceans will contain more plastic than fish by weight. Already, in some ocean waters’ plastic exceeds plankton by a factor of 6-to-1
  • Research suggests the average person swallows up to 68,415 plastic fibers each year just from the plastic dust particles landing on their plates during meals
  • The average person also ingests about 100 plastic particles each year from shell fish — remnants of microplastic water pollution
  • Tests have revealed bottled water contains on average 325 pieces of microplastic particles per liter — contamination thought to originate from the manufacturing process of the bottles and caps

This article was previously published May 2, 2018, and has been updated with new information.

Discarded plastic — both large and microscopic — circles the globe, choking our oceans and harming wildlife, ultimately finding its way onto your plate and into your body, where it can accumulate over time. A number of studies have now revealed we are both eating and drinking microplastic particles.

For example, one-third of the fish caught in the English Channel contain microbeads, as do 83% of scampi sold in the U.K.1 Except for Himalayan, most sea salt also contains plastic fragments.2

What the consequences might be are still largely unknown, but it’s unlikely to be entirely harmless, considering plastic may not be thoroughly eliminated from your body and cannot degrade inside your system. Many of the chemicals used in the manufacture of plastics are also known to disrupt embryonic development, dysregulate hormones and gene expression, cause organ damage, and have been linked to obesity, heart disease and cancer.

Plastic — A Most Harmful Convenience

The world produces about 360 million tons of plastics annually, and up to 12 million tons of it ends up in our oceans each year.3 Polycarbonate, polystyrene and polyethylene terephthalate damage the ocean floor, and plastic that floats, such as low-density polyethylene, high-density polyethylene, polypropylene and foamed plastics accumulate into massive floating islands of trash, known as “garbage patches.”4

Microfibers5 from clothing pose a serious threat to marine life and migrate into fields and onto our plates. These plastic fibers are released most readily during washing, to the tune of 1 million tons a year, and the irregular shape of these plastic particles renders them more difficult for marine life to excrete than other microplastics.

Microbeads, the tiny plastic pellets found in body washes, facial scrubs and toothpaste, also wreak havoc, traveling right through wastewater treatment plants, clogging waterways and filling the bellies of sea animals with plastic that acts as a sponge for other toxins.

According to a Cosmetics Europe report,6 an estimated 4,360 tons of microbeads were used in personal care products sold in the European Union in 2012, all of which were flushed down the drain.

One 2015 study7 estimated there may be as much as 236,000 tons of microbeads filling the water columns of our oceans. Whether you look at environmental or biological effects, our careless use of plastics really needs immediate attention and revision. After that study came out, the U.S. Congress enacted the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, banning products with microbeads as of July 1, 2019.8

A report by the U.K. Government Office for Science warns plastic debris littering the world’s oceans — 70% of which does not biodegrade — is likely to triple by 2025 unless radical steps are taken to curb pollution.9 At the rate we’re going, estimates suggest that by 2050, our oceans will contain more plastic than fish by weight.10 Already, in some ocean waters plastic exceeds plankton by a factor of 6-to-1.11

Other research12,13 suggests the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — a 1.6 million square kilometers (nearly 618,000 square miles) area of ocean between Hawaii and California — may actually contain anywhere from four to 16 times more plastic than estimated by earlier studies.

In all, this single garbage patch alone is thought to contain over 78,082 tons (79,000 metric tons) of plastic trash, and possibly as much as 142,198 tons (129,000 metric tons) — about 8% of which is thought to be microplastics.

[…]

Research Suggests You’re Eating Plastic Daily

With this much plastic debris polluting our ecosystem — and our homes — is it any wonder researchers are now finding humans are ingesting plastic particles on a regular basis? By placing Petri dishes with sticky dust traps next to the plates at dinner time, a team of researchers from Heriot-Watt University were able to capture up to 14 pieces of plastic at the end of each meal. The source? Household dust.

According to this study, the average person swallows an estimated 68,415 plastic fibers each year just from the dust landing on their plates during meals. The same team also concluded the average person ingests about 100 plastic particles each year from shell fish — remnants of microplastic water pollution.

Senior author Ted Henry, professor of environmental toxicology at Heriot-Watt University, commented on the findings,15 “These results may be surprising to some people who may expect the plastic fibers in seafood to be higher than those in household dust. We do not know where these fibers come from, but it is likely to be inside the home and the wider environment.”

According to Julian Kirby, lead campaigner against plastics at Friends of the Earth in England, Wales and Northern Ireland:16

“Plastic microfibers found in the dust in our homes and the air we breathe can come from car tires, carpets and soft furnishings, as well as clothes such as fleece jackets. These are regularly shedding tiny bits of plastic into the environment as they are worn away.”

Bottled Water Contaminated With Microscopic Plastic

Recent tests have also revealed most bottled water contains microplastic pollution17 — contamination thought to originate from the manufacturing process of the bottles and caps. Researchers at the State University of New York tested 259 bottles of 11 popular bottled water brands — including Aquafina, Nestle Pure Life, Evian, Dasani and San Pellegrino — finding, on average, 325 pieces of microplastic per liter.

[…]

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/06/30/plastic-pollution-in-food.aspx

FDA Panel Advisor Admits Agency “LOST” Clinical Trial Data for Placebo Group Before Approving Experimental Vaccine for Babies and Toddlers

Posted on by
1

Posted BY: Julian Conradson

NWO Report

Earlier this month the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the mRNA vaccine for emergency use in young children, aged six months to five years old, after its advisory committee voted in favor of the experimental treatment, claiming that it has passed its clinical hurdles and is effective in preventing symptomatic infection without causing worrisome side effects.

However, in addition to ignoring the mountain of evidence showing the vaccines are regularly causing life-threatening injuries – especially in healthy children and young people, the FDA ‘experts’ have routinely skipped crucial steps in the testing process, allowing them to manipulate the data in order to suit their desired outcomes.

This inexcusable act of criminal malpractice was confirmed this month by the team leader of the FDA’s clinical review staff, Rachel Zhang, who explained during an advisory panel zoom call that the agency had lost the results from the placebo group during its clinical trials related to the decision to approve the experimental jab for America’s youngest children.

Without this data from the placebo group, the effectiveness of the vaccine cannot be measured against those who did not receive the treatment. Therefore, the clinical trial is meaningless. But the gaping hole in the results apparently doesn’t matter to the ‘experts’ at the FDA, who went ahead with the EUA approval anyway.

“There is no efficacy data,” Zhang explained. “I guess it will have to come from real-world effectiveness,” she added glibly.

In other words, babies and toddlers are essentially vaccine guinea pigs that will provide the lost data. Remember, Zheng is the team leader of the FDA’s clinical review staff, which oversees the approval of new medical treatments.

From Zheng:

“…We have lost the placebo groups, so we cannot really say anything about the duration of vaccine efficacy after that.

There’s no more efficacy data, basically, after that time point. So, unfortunately, we are limited to – in this study – would be the results that we have shown you in the slide with the data cut off. The latest one [placebo group data] would be the May 31st one, and that still is, unfortunately, very few cases…

…I guess it will have to come from real-world effectiveness.”

Watch, via The Vigilant Fox:

Considering the horrible results of the vaccine across the board when it comes to the basic job of preventing the spread of the virus, it is awfully convenient that the data which would confirm natural immunity in healthy young children is better than the failed experimental jab just happens to disappear.

Nevertheless, despite the myriad of issues, the FDA dutifully approved the vaccine for babies and toddlers just days after Zheng admitted the agency had “no efficacy data.” Because sCiEnCe!

Keep in mind that children have an astonishing 99.995% recovery rate from the virus. The vaccine itself is more than likely worse than the virus itself, as some estimates have pegged the number of children who have died from Covid, as opposed to with it, at zero.

Not only are children effectively in zero danger from this virus, but recent data has shown that they are actually more susceptible to long-term vaccine injury after taking the experimental mRNA jab, especially among young boys. Cases of myocarditis have exploded among young Americans, hitting unprecedented levels ever since the vaccine was made available to those aged 12-17.

Via https://nworeport.me/2022/07/01/fda-panel-advisor-admits-agency-lost-clinical-trial-data-for-placebo-group-before-approving-experimental-vaccine-for-babies-and-toddlers-video/

They’re coming for your backyard chickens…

Posted on by
5

This chicken is a threat to the system

Kit Knightly

Offguardian

Since the “bird flu outbreak” first hit the headlines OffG has been predicting how the inevitable agenda would unfold.

The first impact was as obvious as it was predictable – the price of chicken and eggs went up, this was just another front in the war on food.

The second planned impact was less immediate, but just as predictable if you know how to read the media, and potentially far more harmful in the longterm – clamping down on alternative chicken farming. This includes both organic farms and individuals keeping their own chickens in their garden.

It didn’t take long for the media to prove us right. In fact the Guardian has done it twice in the last ten days.

Firstly, last Thursday, the Guardian ran this article: “Spread of ‘free-range’ farming may raise risk of animal-borne pandemics – study”

Sponsored by the NGO Open Philanthropy, this piece reports that organic and free-range farming could increase the risk of a zoonotic disease outbreak, and quotes the authors of this new study:

If we can’t dramatically cut meat consumption then intensive ‘factory farming’ may be comparatively less risky

…yes. they’re actually arguing that the corporate mega-farms are better at preventing pandemics than free-range or organic farms because they have “tighter biosecurity controls” (meaning their animals never go outside or interact with nature in anyway whatsoever).

Then, in this piece from June 19th, The Guardian asked…

Bird flu is on the rise in the UK. Are chickens in the back garden to blame?

Which quotes the head of virology at the government’s Animal and Plant Health Agency (Apha):

The more humans are in contact with birds in an uncontrolled way, the greater is the theoretical risk that people can get infected,”

“Uncontrolled” is very much the key word there.

This scare campaign is not new. Three weeks ago an outbreak of salmonella in the US was blamed on people keeping their own chickens.

Back in January, when there were barely any bird flu cases to report, The Conversation was already hosting articles claiming…

Bird flu: domestic chicken keepers could be putting themselves – and others – at risk

And calling for a new policy on backyard chickens:

This is why it will be important in the future for Defra and APHA to provide specific policy for backyard chicken keeping.

It’s pretty easy to see where this is going, isn’t it?

But why take aim at ordinary people keeping a handful of chickens in their back garden?

Well, partly because they simply want to cut the amount of natural food people eat – most especially meat, but also eggs and other dairy produce. They want people entirely reliant on mega-corporations for their processed cubes of “food”.

But they also want people entirely reliant on the state for permission to do…almost everything. And in, some ways, the Covid pandemic narrative was counterproductive in that cause.

One of the unintentional effects of Covid in general and lockdown specifically was re-awakening in people an urge to go their own way. The powers-that-be are keen to reverse that trend.

As the above Guardian article points out [emphasis added]:

This may be due to the growing number of people keeping chickens or ducks, Brown said. Many of these keepers do not have to register with any authority because of the small numbers of birds involved.

During lockdown there was a spike in people keeping their own chickens.

Under UK law, it is illegal to keep a flock of fifty or more chickens without obtaining a license from the Poultry Register (yes, that’s a real thing) – but the vast majority of private flocks are much less than fifty birds, and therefore totally unregistered.

This scare-mongering on “spreading disease” is preparing the ground for “regulation” of these small private flocks.

Will that mean an outright ban? Maybe. But at the very least, I would expect the minimum number requiring a license to begin dropping from 50, and the cost of obtaining a license to rise.

We have already seen an example of this process with homeschooling.

Nations all over the world saw huge spikes in homeschooling through 2020-2021, this surge continued even after schools re-opened.

Tens of thousands more people are homeschooling in the UK than were before the lockdown started. The government response has been to re-open their years-old war on homeschooling by creating a national register of homeschooled children, and threatening parents with fines or unspecified “sanctions” for refusing to sign-up for it.

The same exact process will likely be seen with backyard poultry.

That’s the specific and practical part of it.

More poetically put, the state resents them because they are free.

Keeping a few chickens in your garden may be a small, fragile, kind of freedom…but its freedom nonetheless, and power structures are easily petty enough to destroy even that modicum of independence.

At its heart, self-reliance of any kind is the antithesis of everything driving us toward the “new normal”.

No freedom. No independence. No living outside the carefully controlled machinery of the state. That’s their aim.

As we phase out of “Covid time” and career towards “world war 3 times” or “climate change times” or whatever the next stage of the grand narrative is, the gears of the state are intent on grinding up those pockets of resistance their relentless overreach has accidentally cultivated.

The good news here is that their ever-more tyrannical efforts to control people will only end up driving more and more people away.

Via https://off-guardian.org/2022/06/29/theyre-coming-for-your-backyard-chickens/