The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has come under fire for its decision to route Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests through a biometric identification system provided by ID.me. This arrangement requires users who wish to file requests online to undergo a digital identity verification process, which includes facial recognition technology.
Concerns have been raised about this method of identity verification, notably the privacy implications of handling sensitive biometric data. Although the IRS states that biometric data is deleted promptly—within 24 hours in cases of self-service and 30 days following video chat verifications—skeptics, including privacy advocates and some lawmakers, remain wary, particularly as they don’t believe people should have to subject themselves to such measures in the first place.
Criticism has particularly focused on the appropriateness of employing such technology for FOIA requests. Alex Howard, the director of the Digital Democracy Project, expressed significant reservations. He stated in an email to FedScoop, “While modernizing authentication systems for online portals is not inherently problematic, adding such a layer to exercising the right to request records under the FOIA is overreach at best and a violation of our fundamental human pure right to access information at worst, given the potential challenges doing so poses.”
Although it is still possible to submit FOIA requests through traditional methods like postal mail, fax, or in-person visits, and through the more neutral FOIA.gov, the IRS’s online system defaults to using ID.me, citing speed and efficiency.
An IRS spokesperson defended this method by highlighting that ID.me adheres to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines for credential authentication. They explained, “The sole purpose of ID.me is to act as a Credential Service Provider that authenticates a user interested in using the IRS FOIA Portal to submit a FOIA request and receive responsive documents. The data collected by ID.me has nothing to do with the processing of a FOIA request.”
Despite these assurances, the integration of ID.me’s system into the FOIA request process continues to stir controversy as the push for online digital ID verification is a growing and troubling trend for online access.
There is an apochryphal phrase that, despite its disputed source, probably everyone can agree with: “Control the Food and You Control the People.”
Our grandparents and great grandparents produced much of their own food in their gardens or on their farms. Food choices in stores were limited, with little frozen food available and fewer fresh and canned foods for sale.
In 1850, 64% of American workers worked on farms.1 In 1900 there were still 6 million US farms, with an average size of 150 acres.2 By 1920, 30% of US workers still did farm work.3 But after World War 2, the US government adopted policies to reduce the number of farmers and expand the size of farms–for more efficiency, it was said.4 5 6 Today, only 1% of Americans work on farms7 and the number of farms has dropped by 2/3.
Most US farmland belongs to farms that are over 2,000 acres in size, or more than 3 square miles. But along with efficiency came worsening food quality. The so-called “Green Revolution” allowed farmers to apply chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides while ignoring the overall fertility, quality and texture of their soils. Depleted soils subsequently produced less nutritious foods, while accumulating low levels of neurotoxins and carcinogens.
Decades of consolidation of food production, processing and distribution has steadily increased the size and power of a small group of global agricultural corporations. Most of those companies are in turn members of the World Economic Forum (WEF) or its Food Action Alliance, and they are wielding unelected power to influence food production and distribution in the name of climate change, sustainability,8 health, and equity.9
For example, the WEF had this to say about food systems in 2022:
“In the face of volatile global shocks from conflicts such as the war in Ukraine, the COVID-19 pandemic, and extreme weather events, it has become more urgent than ever to transition food systems to a net-zero, nature-positive infrastructure that nourishes and feeds everyone.10
Net zero means “removing an equal amount of CO2 from the atmosphere as we release into it.”11 This has never been accomplished by any food system, and the implications could drastically reduce the food supply–yet it is said to be the reason we must change the way we produce food.
The WEF and other international entities have recently increased the intensity of this concerted push, most visibly in policies targeting the reduction or elimination of livestock and related farming activities.
Climate change as a justification to attack food production
Advocates of climate change urgency have steadily honed their concerns about agriculture. The WEF boldly proclaims:
With the food system responsible for a third of overall global CO2 emissions, attention on ‘climate-beneficial’ foods has been slowly but steadily increasing.
The US EPA disagrees with the WEF that agriculture plays such a large role in global CO2 emissions.12 Nor are the many CO2-lowering effects of regenerative agriculture (like sinking CO2 into the soil from the air) mentioned as offsets.
Organic and regenerative agriculture, in which topsoil is rebuilt through composting, “green manure” plantings that enrich the soil, and good forestry practices, can sequester more CO2 in the soil and trees than is lost through other agricultural processes. These could potentially achieve ‘net zero’– and increase the production of more nutritious foods and healthier soils, but are not being touted as solutions. One must ask then, is the goal really “net-zero” or is there another goal?
Numerous international agencies and NGOs have converged to accuse cows and farming of harming the climate. They offer technological rescues, to be provided by corporate WEF members. These include the United Nations Environment Program and AIM for Climate.
Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that is said to contribute to global warming. Over 150 nations have signed the “Global Methane Pledge” to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 203013–and some are reducing dairy and beef cows because the gas produced in their intestines contains methane. (Humans also expel methane.14) Methane is released naturally from cracks in the earth, as well as from fracking and oil drilling–which were recently shown to release 5x as much methane as earlier estimates suggested.15 But it is the gas produced by cows that is the current target for methane reduction.
Issues that have not been satisfactorily addressed include:
whether our methods for measuring temperature in comparison to past decades provide accurate comparative results,
how the doomsday targets for temperature and CO2 were arrived at,
how members of the IPCC, an unaccountable body responsible for climate targets and projections were selected and retained,
since scientists worried about a coming ice age during the 1970s, doesn’t that suggest considerable changes in climate (both up and down) over relatively short periods of time,
what is the evidence that increased heat and increased CO2 are dangerous when both contribute to increased growth of plants,
while it was claimed that sea level rises would be catastrophic, what we are seeing in fact is evidence of small changes in sea level in both directions.
Health
WHO’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that “a transformation of the world’s food systems is needed urgently, based on a One Health approach that protects and promotes the health of humans, animals and the planet.” We all want to protect animals and environment, as well as our own health, but it seems the obvious way to do that is to address the evils of factory farming and excess chemical additives used for crops and livestock, rather than a major transformation of what we eat. Consuming large amounts of insect proteins, or lab-grown ‘meat,’ for example, will have unpredictable effects on health. Do we really want to perform these experiments on billions of people at once?
“One Health” is also being used as the justification to vaccinate fur farm workers against bird flu in Finland,16 even though there have been no human cases in Finland, the disease does not spread person-to-person, and everyone in the US who has developed bird flu in the past 2 years has had an extremely mild illness: conjunctivitis +/- symptoms of a cold. None were hospitalized or died. The excuse is that vaccinating people will allow continued farming of mink and foxes, which were culled last year due to alleged bird flu infections. Here is how Finland’s health department draws from “One Health” to wordsmith the need to give experimental vaccines, never before tested in humans, to farmworkers in expectation that an outbreak of bird flu might occur:
“This issue must be evaluated within a framework which considers the intricate interplay between the environment, animals, and humans. Recognising this interconnectedness and the vast array of environmental impacts of human activity is crucial, and our protective measures should consider the overarching goal of maintaining and enhancing planetary health.”17
Equity
Equity is repeatedly embraced as the justification to change the way food is allocated. The roster of corporate players at AIM for Climate proclaims “Diversity, gender equity, and inclusion are critical to the success of the mission.” But real equity is allowing people to choose the food they eat, without interference, rather than restricting populations from accessing the foods they prefer and imposing new foods on them.
Animal Rights
The World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) joined the plan to balance environmental demands against human needs for food through adherence to the loose “One Health” approach. At the same time, WOAH admits, “More than 75% of the billion people who live on less than $2 per day depend on subsistence farming and raising livestock to survive.”18
The world’s largest food producers, processors, and retail sellers are joined with governments and NGOs through the WHO, UN, WEF, and a plethora of interconnected organizations. Yet all these supposedly charitable organizations have become focused on reducing or eliminating livestock, despite the fact that the poorest peoples as well as the wealthiest rely on livestock for meat, dairy and for enriching the soil. The multinational organizations and food conglomerates want humans to convert to a state-specified diet comprised instead of synthetic meats, insects, and other novel food products manufactured by these companies, which have not previously been known for their concerns about our health.
Many question whether a group of global industrialists and politicians have either the expertise or desire to “improve the state of the world,” but there is no question that the proposed intention is to consolidate and control food production and distribution, thereby improving the state of member corporations’ profits. GMO crops and related chemical applications will be increased under the pretense of climate rescue, and synthetic meats will be favored in government food programs. Even more small farms will be shuttered.
This coordinated justification for global/government food control is presented in the name of sustainability, reducing global temperature, improving animal welfare, nurturing human health, and improving equity. However, there is no evidence it does even one of these things.
We do not intend to allow a small group of globalists to control global food production and thereby achieve control of the population.
This is why Door to Freedom will place a major focus on turning this agenda around. We will encourage government (at all levels) to support small farmers rather than industrial giants, to improve animal husbandry practices, to incentivize enhancing the soil and to achieve a much healthier food supply for all.
Our methods include education, policy development, and working for change at all levels of government. We will use the same strategy we used to stop the WHO’s agenda. Basically, once people understand what is happening and what is at stake, they refuse to go along–whether they are citizens or political leaders.
Our first large project will be a 2-day Symposium September 6-7 (online only, and I put in the wrong dates earlier) titled The Attack on Food and Agriculture, 2nd Annual. Please join us, support us, and work with us to heal our food systems and our planet.
Outside of being a horse dewormer, Ivermectin has been scientifically found to treat a list of various ailments in humans.
Ivermectin, a drug derived from a soil microbe, is perhaps best known for it’s treatment of Covid which made it a controversial prescription during the era when health officials were trying to get the Covid death numbers up.
One such case of ivermectin aiding a Covid patient was with 80-year-old Judith Smemthiewicz who got better after taking the drug in early 2021.
“…[she] was placed on a ventilator in late December,” an article by ABC’s WKBW said. “Initially doctors gave her one dose of the controversial drug Ivermectin, and she improved.”
A study published in 2022 has found that Ivermectin inhibits tumor metastasis.
“Tumor metastasis is the major cause of cancer mortality; therefore, it is imperative to discover effective therapeutic drugs for anti-metastasis therapy. In the current study, we investigated whether ivermectin (IVM), an FDA-approved antiparasitic drug, could prevent cancer metastasis. Colorectal and breast cancer cell lines and a cancer cell-derived xenograft tumor metastasis model were used to investigate the anti-metastasis effect of IVM,” the study said in the ‘Abstract’ section. “Our results showed that IVM significantly inhibited the motility of cancer cells in vitro and tumor metastasis in vivo. Mechanistically, IVM suppressed the expressions of the migration-related proteins via inhibiting the activation of Wnt/β-catenin/integrin β1/FAK and the downstream signaling cascades. Our findings indicated that IVM was capable of suppressing tumor metastasis, which provided the rationale on exploring the potential clinical application of IVM in the prevention and treatment of cancer metastasis.”
Another study chronicled how Ivermectin can help prevent neurological disorders such as multiple sclerosis.
“The results evidenced that IVM and nano-IVM administration is capable of reducing demyelination in mice,” the study said in the ‘Conclusion’ section.
Demyelination is the loss of myelin in nervous system tissue. The study aimed to analyze ivermectin’s effects on the phenomenon.
“Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system (CNS) and its cause is unknown. Several environmental and genetic factors may have roles in the pathogenesis of MS,” the study said in the ‘Objectives’ section. “The synthesis of solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) for ivermectin (IVM) loading was performed to increase its efficiency and bioavailability and evaluate its ability in improving the behavioral and histopathological changes induced by cuprizone (CPZ) in the male C57BL/6 mice.”
One study chronicled the history of the drug, its technical characteristics, as well as a long list of ailments it has been documented to treat.
Myiasis, trichinosis, malaria, leishmaniasis, leishmaniasis, American trypanosomiasis, schistosomiasis, bedbugs, rosacea, asthma, epilepsy, neurological diseases, HIV, tuberculosis, buruli ulcer and anti-cancer properties have all been document with Ivermectin treatment, according to the study.
“There is a continuously accumulating body of evidence that ivermectin may have substantial value in the treatment of a variety of cancers. The avermectins are known to possess pronounced antitumor activity,107 as well as the ability to potentiate the antitumor action of vincristine on Ehrlich carcinoma, melanoma B16 and P388 lymphoid leukemia, including the vincristine-resistant strain P388,” the study said. “Over the past few years, there have been steadily increasing reports that ivermectin may have varying uses as an anti-cancer agent, as it has been shown to exhibit both anti-cancer and anti-cancer stem cell properties. An in silico chemical genomics approach designed to predict whether any existing drugs might be useful in tackling glioblastoma, lung and breast cancer, indicated that ivermectin may be a useful compound in this respect.”
Electromagnetic frequencies disrupt physiology and psychology, particularly in the Covid-vaccinated, but ivermectin has been found to remedy some of that disruption.
“Recognizing that humans in the modern age are regularly bombarded with electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) and other toxins that disrupt proper nervous system function, ivermectin might be worth taking for preventative purposes to keep the nervous system optimized through stabilization of P2X4 receptors,” Ethan Huff wrote for Natural News. “Stabilizing P2X4 receptors is important because expression of P2X4 is a major driving factor in ALS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, chronic neuropathic pain, migraines, epilepsy, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and anxiety.”
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis is spreading fear by declaring an “emergency disaster” in response to reports about the alleged spread of highly pathogenic bird flu in northeastern Weld County.Polis “verbally” declared the disaster after “an avian flu outbreak in a commercial poultry facility in Weld County,” reads an official statement from Polis’ office on July 8. The statement does not name the facility that was allegedly impacted by H5N1.
The emergency disaster declaration allows Polis and his regime to use emergency powers to “take all necessary and appropriate state actions to assist with response, recovery, and mitigation efforts.”
The Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) confirmed that 1.78 million chickens were “impacted” by the bird flu strain, which of course means that the food fowl were slaughtered to keep everyone “safe.”
On July 3, CDA announced that a dairy worker in northeastern Colorado supposedly became infected with H5N1 after having “direct exposure” to cattle supposedly sick with the virus. The worker’s only symptom was mild conjunctivitis, also known as “pink eye.”
“He has recovered,” the agency said in a follow-up statement about the worker. “This case is an employee at a dairy farm in northeast Colorado who had direct exposure to dairy cattle infected with avian flu. To protect patient privacy, additional details are not being provided.”
(Related: Did you know that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation gave $9.5 million to UW-Madison to make H5N1 bird flu transmissible from animals to humans?)
We are building the infrastructure of human freedom and empowering people to be informed, healthy and aware. Explore our decentralized, peer-to-peer, uncensorable Brighteon.io free speech platform here. Learn about our free, downloadable generative AI tools at Brighteon.AI. Every purchase at HealthRangerStore.com helps fund our efforts to build and share more tools for empowering humanity with knowledge and abundance.
Bird flu: the new COVID
Early on, it seemed as though the powers that be (TPTB) were going to try to hawk up monkeypox, also known as mpox, as the new Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “pandemic.” Since monkeypox is primarily an LGBT disease, it seems they switched to H5N1 instead.
H5N1 has “not adapted to spread from person to person,” the establishment still claims. However, H5N1 can supposedly now transfer from animals to humans, which is why (or so they say) government bureaucrats are slaughtering food animals like chickens with haste.
“Right now, the most important thing to know is that people who have regular exposure to infected animals are at increased risk of infection and should take precautions when they have contact with sick animals,” said Colorado state epidemiologist Rachel Herlihy.
Already, we are hearing calls for people exposed to animals, i.e., farm workers, to slap on a mask, wear eye protection and gloves, and live in fear that they might catch a bird flu virus from their flocks and herds.
Over the past month, Colorado reported that about two dozen commercial dairy herds were impacted by H5N1, this after no cases being reported all throughout 2023. In 2022, eight commercial poultry flocks are said to have been impacted by H5N1.
So far in 2024, three dairy workers in multiple states, including Texas and Michigan, are said to have become infected with bird flu, this after one became infected in Colorado back in 2022. Two of the cases resulted in pink eye while one saw a cough, eye discomfort and a “watery discharge.”
Michigan, like Colorado, is trying to scare its residents about bird flu. Another prominent dairy state, Michigan has allegedly seen 26 herds affected by H5N1. Authorities there are urging farms not to share equipment and to also take other mitigatory measures, i.e., masking, to keep farm workers “safe.”
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is using the opportunity to tout the allege merits of milk pasteurization, which the federal agency says is “effective at inactivating [the virus].”
“In each of the total of nine repeated (pasteurization) experiments, the virus was completely inactivated,” the agency added.
Looks like another manufactured “outbreak” that will soon turn into another “pandemic” to oppress the world. Find out more at Outbreak.news.
Know that we are seeing much in the way of cosmic turmoil on all levels.There will be some surprises in your politics, and there will be upheavals —- things unexpected.No one will be able to predict the outcome because in these cases, the strings are being pulled by others that those who think they are in control.This is very much a wait and see time because the upheavals on your planet are merely indicative of upheavals on the larger cosmic level.
There have been many disturbances cosmologically that are raining down throughout the galaxies.Yes, this is not just limited to your planet, but to a larger system and systemic world.It is as those all the gears on the clocks throughout the universe are being programmed to a new frequency, a new mode of ticking away . And there will be much made of things happening that cannot be understood and much made of trivial explanations by the media who are trying to use what they do not understand to keep the narrative that they have (had) shaped (for them) going.Unfortunately, those who are their narrative creators are in a state of flux for they no longer understand what is going on.
What does this mean for you there on this planet?It means the coming forth of many conflicting narratives.Moreover the stories will change almost on a daily basis.There will be upheavals in those cities who have taken in the foreigners.Know that that was a very bad policy for it had the makings of revolution.Be grateful that it has only gone so far.The plan was to bring in more and more until the revolution was inevitable and the outcome was set.Now their proposed outcome cannot be predicted for the time is too early.This will end up with many of those self proclaimed leaders falling down and coming apart.They will be spinning tales that are baseless, and the fact that these things are baseless will be coming forth more and more until they will find themselves dealing with a kind of incongruity that even they can no longer believe.
They are only secure in their power as long as those around them kowtow, and they are only secure so long as their dictums are put forth by the media.Ah, the media, it is dying a painful death and revolution is in the air —- on every level.Revolution in itself does not have to be bloody, but revolution in itself must bring about change.There are up front revolutions and revolutions behind the surface, and these are the revolutions that have been fomenting for quite some time now.
There comes a time when things are too much, when the plate is tipped too far, and people realize that in order to keep things (even), it is necessary to change position and no longer allow themselves to be blinded by the lies of those in power.
These days are pivotal and there is much in the air.You will see changes happening, not because they have been designed, but because they have to.They have to because the force and energy of the cosmos is shifting, and with those shifts, old ways fall apart.
On a wisp of land in the Indian Ocean, two hops by plane and one bumpy speedboat ride from the nearest continent, the sublime blue waves lapping at the bone-white sand are just about all that breaks the stillness of a hot, windless afternoon.
The very existence of low-slung tropical islands seems improbable, a glitch. A nearly seamless meeting of land and sea, peeking up like an illusion above the violent oceanic expanse, they are among the most marginal environments humans have ever called home.
And indeed, when the world began paying attention to global warming decades ago, these islands, which form atop coral reefs in clusters called atolls, were quickly identified as some of the first places climate change might ravage in their entirety. As the ice caps melted and the seas crept higher, these accidents of geologic history were bound to be corrected and the tiny islands returned to watery oblivion, probably in this century.
Then, not very long ago, researchers began sifting through aerial images and found something startling. They looked at a couple dozen islands first, then several hundred, and by now close to 1,000. They found that over the past few decades, the islands’ edges had wobbled this way and that, eroding here, building there. By and large, though, their area hadn’t shrunk. In some cases, it was the opposite: They grew. The seas rose, and the islands expanded with them.
Scientists have come to understand some but not all of the reasons for this. Which is why a team of them recently converged in the Maldives, on an island they’d spend weeks outfitting with instruments and sensors and cameras.
They were there to learn more about how the steady collision of blue waves and white sand does surprising and seemingly magical things to coastlines, both destroying land and extending it. Really, though, they were trying to answer a bigger question: If atoll nations aren’t facing certain and imminent erasure, then what are they facing? For having a future is not the same thing as having a secure future.
If, for instance, some of their islands become difficult to live on but others do not, then atoll governments will have to make hard choices about which places to save and which to sacrifice. In the places they save, they will have to plan for the long term about supplying fresh water, about creating jobs, about providing schools and health care and infrastructure. They will have to invent the best future they can with the limited resources they have.
In short, atolls might not be such outliers in this world after all. Look hard enough, and they start to look a lot like everywhere else…
To understand what had happened to the atolls since this acceleration began, two researchers, Arthur Webb and Paul Kench, decided to look down at them from above. The scientists collected aerial photos of 27 Pacific islands from the middle of the 20th century. Then, they compared them to recent satellite images. “I’m not sure we really knew what we would find,” Dr. Kench recalled.
Their findings caused an uproar.
The seas had risen an inch or so each decade, yet the waves had kept piling sediment on the islands’ shores, enough to mean that most of them hadn’t changed much in size. Their position on the reef might have shifted. Their shape might be different. Whatever was going on, it clearly wasn’t as simple as oceans rise, islands wash away.
Dr. Webb and Dr. Kench’s study, which came out in 2010, inspired other scientists to hunt for more old photos and conduct further analysis. The patterns they’ve uncovered in recent years are remarkably consistent across the 1,000 or so islands they’ve studied: Some shrank, others grew. Many, however, were stable. These studies have also added to the intrigue by revealing another pattern: Islands in ocean regions where sea level rise is fastest generally haven’t eroded more than those elsewhere…
People want names, so let’s start here. This is a big part of the hierarchy, leaving some unknowns hidden behind the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). In Corey Lynn’s 3-part report on Laundering with Immunity, it explains in explicit detail as to how and when BIS came about and how BIS and 63 central banks devised a plan to hold immunities and privileges. Shortly thereafter, in 1945 the UN was manifested by some of the plotters for this grand takeover, and immunities and privileges came right along with it the following day. This was the beginning of the control framework and how they would be able to carry out their agendas while operating entirely outside the law. All arms of the UN have these immunities and can extend them to organizations working with them. Long before the UN being established, the Organization of American States (OAS) was created. They too were the first to receive immunities and privileges, alongside the UN, as they work in conjunction with one another. And, they too can extend these immunities to organizations they work with. In addition to the banks, the UN and OAS, the Global Fund, Gavi, and WEF were also given these immunities, and numerous other key international organizations as well. In total, there are 76 international organizations that hold these immunities and privileges, and that’s on top of BIS and the central banks.
Whereas the UN and OAS hold treaties with a slew of countries giving them ironclad layers of protections, the other international organizations hold immunities, privileges, and headquarters agreements independently with each country who opted to do so, and there are many! The U.S. set the stage for this, doling them out to 76 organizations throughout every presidency except for Trump and Biden.
Read Laundering with Immunity to grasp the full scope of what these immunities and privileges entail. For starters, all of their archives are inviolable, their property and assets are immune from search and seizure, they are exempt from every kind of tax regular people pay, including property taxes, officers and employees are exempt from legal suits, employees and their family members can travel the world without checks from customs, military and police are not allowed to enter their headquarters, and much more.
Once people understand that THIS is the control framework – the structure that was created nearly 80 years ago so that they can operate outside the law and never be held accountable, it’s easy to see how all of the other pieces fall into place.
Who is THEY? That alone is the key list of 76 organizations, BIS, and 63 central banks at the top of the pyramid, bearing in mind there are wealthy, strategic players behind this pyramid whose names we may never know. Those leading these organizations are the key names purposefully put in a position of power to carry out specific agendas. Those key players move around within that group of organizations and sometimes head up affiliated organizations in order to maintain their strategy. Some of those agendas come straight from the pyramid organizations, while others are contracted out to their affiliates at NGOs, corporations, universities, lawmakers, governments, 3-letter agencies, news media, and private equity firms. For example, CIA agents often move into news media positions, FDA directors often move over to big pharma, CDC directors move over to Rockefeller Foundation or Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and so on.
They keep their key players in positions they need them in at specific times and then move them around to other leadership positions when they need certain actions carried out. Jim Yong Kim is a prime example of this, from co-founding Partners in Health to advising the Director-General of the WHO and Director of HIV/AIDS department, then fulfilling outcomes required at Harvard in various positions, on to President of Dartmouth College then to President of the World Bank – coincidentally resigning early in 2019, and now a partner at Global Infrastructure Partners. Kim has been instrumental in nefarious actions in Haiti, the AIDS agenda, vaccines, Covid contact tracing, pressuring countries in order to receive funding from the World Bank, and the climate agenda, and each position was timed right. It is no coincidence that BlackRock is acquiring Global Infrastructure Partners in the 3rd quarter of 2024. You can read more about Jim Yong Kim’s connections and involvement in Corey Lynn’s reports here, hereand here. They have done an incredible job trying to bury his childhood and family. CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, also went above and beyond to hide his family connections and childhood, with a father who would appear to be a ghost. It’s understandable to want to keep family from the public eye when in high profile positions, but there is far more than meets the eye with these cats.
There are countless smaller companies who have had good intentions to provide great products and services to people or the land, but as they began to grow and gain attention, these corrupt organizations stepped in trying to co-opt them and eventually acquiring them. Whole Foods being gobbled up by Amazon is a good example of this. These organizations, including so-called billionaire philanthropists, are behind every major industry and “reimagining” it to essentially cut out everyone else from financial prosperity so that everyone can fall prey to their planned enslavement system.
Ultimately, Congress needs to revoke these immunities and privileges. Any lawmaker saying that the U.S. needs to defund the WHO (part of the UN) or the UN itself, clearly isn’t aware of this control framework because if they were, they would know that defunding isn’t going to solve anything…
Frankenfoods v2: Exploiting the Bioequivalence Principle
By ANH-USAOn 7 Comments
Share This Article
Powerful forces are trying to shift our food system away from the soil-based farming systems and towards genetically engineered, lab-grown food. We can’t let them succeed.
THE TOPLINE
Bored Cow, a cow and animal free whey-containing, cultured milk, is one of a growing number of foods being produced through synthetic biology and ‘precision fermentation’—the health risks of which are largely unknown.
We’re told products like Bored Cow are fine—even desirable—because they’re biologically the same as their natural counterparts without the toll on the environment purportedly caused by livestock and dairy farming.
Yet the evidence indicates that these products are far from biologically equivalent, but regulators don’t seem to care.
Got Milk GE-yeast-fermented-whey-protein drink?
You may have heard about the new “animal-free dairy milk” called Bored Cow. It’s being billed as a more animal and environmentally friendly option to traditional milk that comes from a ruminant’s udders. It all sounds great until you dig a bit deeper to learn that it is produced using synthetic biology (synbio), using genetically engineered (GE) yeast that is then put into a so-called ‘precision fermentation’ system. While the whey protein in it is the same as that found in cow’s milk, that’s only a small part of the overall story. Emerging data from some scientists, like John Fagan from the Health Research Institute(HRI), says the fermentation isn’t as precise as claimed, and there’s a lot of other compounds in the milk, some of which have never been recorded by science before. That might mean that drinking Bored Cow ‘milk’ on a daily basis could have unknown and potentially dangerous human health implications. This might just be one product, but it matters because powerful special interests are working to make synbio the tech platform of our food system moving forward—where farms are replaced with fermentation tanks—in the name of protecting the environment.
What’s happening here is an effort to get consumers to believe they can enjoy all the flavor, mouth feel, and nutrition of real cow’s milk…without the involvement of any cows (hence the “Bored Cow” name). Bored Cow is made with whey protein produced through a process called “precision fermentation,” a form of synbio. This involves taking a gene for whey protein and inserting it into a GE yeast. The yeast is put into fermentation tanks with other nutrients to help it grow. At the end the GE yeast is supposed to be filtered out, leaving only the milk protein. Bored Cow takes this protein and adds vitamins, minerals, and other ingredients to mimic the taste, consistency, and nutritional content of real cow’s milk.
Far from ‘bioequivalent’
The marketing hype behind Bored Cow starts falling apart when you learn that it’s not even close to being equivalent to real milk from pasture. HRI’s independent testing found 92 unknown compounds in this synbio milk. Fagan, HRI’s chief scientist, said these compounds are “completely novel to our food…They are nutritional dark matter.”
The FDA must be on top of this, right? Wrong. Bored Cow has not undergone safety testing at the FDA. Perfect Day, the manufacturer of the synbio whey protein, determined it was “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) and voluntarily notified the FDA of this determination; in response the FDA said it had no questions. Given how rife the GRAS process is with conflicts of interest, this is akin to taking the company’s word for it that its novel synbio whey protein is safe.
Nor is it very likely that Bored Cow is nutritionally equivalent to real milk. Just as meat is more than just protein, milk is far more than a simple combination of whey and various vitamins and minerals. Milkfat contains 400 different fatty acids. Milk has two types of proteins, whey and casein—and there are several different types of these two proteins contained in milk, and a whole bundle of other compounds like lactoferrin and bioactive peptides that help prime the immune system.
Bored Cow is representative of a whole new generation of GE foods that are in development, some of which we’ve written about previously. Older genetically modified (GM) foods were created by modifying the genome of a living plant by inserting, for example, an herbicide-resistance trait. That was nothing compared to what’s going on now. GE yeast or fungi are being used as little factories to manufacture food components that regulators say are biologically equivalent to their natural counterparts, so, they say, no additional testing is required because the foods have been shown to be safe through their long history of consumption. But, as we’ve seen, getting a yeast to make one protein found in milk, fermenting it, then adding nutrients, and slapping “milk” on the label doesn’t make it milk. Nor, for that matter, is lab-grown meat biologically equivalent to pasture-raised meat.
And herein lies the problem. The entire framework for dealing with genetically engineered foods in the US is fundamentally broken. That’s because the federal government decided decades ago that the final product is all that matters, not the process used to create that product. This was codified in the 1986 Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology, which was updated in 1992 and again in 2017. Astoundingly, it wasn’t updated to install more robust safety measures to protect Americans from new and previously unthinkable forms of food. It was updated in large part to remove or mitigate “unnecessary costs and burdens” that “limit the ability of technology developers” to “navigate the regulatory process” which also “hamper economic growth, innovation, and competitiveness.” That is, the Framework was updated to make it easier for the biotech industry to ger their frankenfoods onto our dinner plates!
We’re worried that what’s coming are further “updates” to this framework that allow GE foods and those developed using synbio technologies to be considered “bioequivalent” to their natural counterparts—in essence, drinking the lab-grown food industry’s Kool-Aid. If regulators determine that synbio milk is equivalent to real milk, will consumers be allowed to make their own choices, or will we be sold out as we were with the sham GMO labeling law that allowed companies to hide the GM contents of their food in scannable codes?
Some countries are already moving in that direction: Costa Rica just adopted new regulations which treat a wide-range of gene edited products as equivalent to conventionally-bred products. This is something we have to keep a keen eye on.
The advent of lab-grown meat, plant-based meat, and products like Bored Cow show how inadequate our current laws are in dealing with these foods. Of course it matters how these foods are made! CRISPR, the gene-editing technology, is known to produce unintended outcomes. What evidence is there that eating food grown in laboratories from genetically modified yeast—food that is significantly different than the food we have evolved to eat over human history—is safe, much less healthy?
Put simply, the fake meat and milk synbio manufacturers are exploiting old rules never intended for synbio products so they can escape doing any safety testing before their products hit the market. They’re using all-too-familiar revolving doors with the FDA to get their way, and they want to deceive us into thinking they’re saving the planet from those nasty, carbon dioxide-producing animals while offering us foods that are as safe and healthy as those produced on real farms with the help of real animals—without any of it.
We’re watching these developments closely, and we’ll alert you as soon as we see an opportunity to take political action on this critical issue. In the meantime, please share this article widely, as we need a lot more awareness of how synbio makers are using the principle of ‘bioequivalence’ to get their questionable foods into our mouths.
Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvQxtotEX-M
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The internet has enabled connections across the globe to be easier and cheaper, but at a psychological and physical cost that may increase your stress and anxiety
Large software companies, such as Google and Apple, enjoy greater profits the longer you stay on your devices and so engineer programs to offer positive feedback, encouraging your engagement and even dependence
Research identified physical symptoms associated with separation from your digital devices that may be driven by rising levels of cortisol and anxiety; consider using EFT to reduce your anxiety levels and your dependence
Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published June 14, 2017.
The internet has made connecting with new business partners, discovering health information and finding long lost friends, easier and cheaper. However, while digital connections have distinct advantages, digital dependence does not. You’ve likely seen — or have been part of — a family outing where one by one, everyone pulls out their phone to check notifications, text messages or email.
It happens in restaurants, on busy streets and commuter trains. The desire to be rewarded by your phone may have even been so great that you endangered your life by attempting to read a text or send one while driving. Toddlers get their own devices to keep them busy and 10-year-old children are carrying their own phones.1 Where once children talked on the phone, set up face-to-face time and engaged with real people in real situations, they now spend hours keeping a “streak” alive.
Dependence on digital communication presents several physical and emotional health challenges. Mitochondrial damage, exposure to electromagnetic radiation and failing social skills are just the tip of an iceberg that may have deeper roots than anticipated. Research has identified immediate physical symptoms that occur when your digital devices are just out of reach.
Digital Dependence Affecting More Than Teens
Cellphone ownership has reached 97% in America, up from 68% measured in 2015. Of those owners, 90% use a smartphone.2 The people who own the smartphones are distributed equally across gender, age and ethnicity, with the lowest number of people owning smartphones being over the age of 65.
Dependence or addiction to a digital device hooked to the internet affected 6% of the world population in 2014.3 This number may not appear to be significant on the surface, but consider that 6% of the world population was over 420 million people.4 Comparatively speaking, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 3.5% to 7% of the world population between 15 and 64 years had used an illicit drug in the past year.5
The percentage of those addicted to the internet may actually be higher as only 39% of the world in 2014 had access to the internet,6 driving the real percentage of those addicted to 15%. Symptoms of addiction are similar to other types of addiction, but are more socially acceptable. The authors of the study found an internet addiction (IA) is:7
“… [G]enerally regarded as a disorder of concern because the neural abnormalities (e.g., atrophies in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex) and cognitive dysfunctions (e.g., impaired working memory) associated with IA mimic those related to substance and behavioral addiction. Moreover, IA is often comorbid with mental disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and depression.”
Reach Out Recovery identifies conditions that may trigger internet addiction or compulsions, including anxiety, depression, other addictions, social isolation and stress.8 Internet activity may stimulate your brain’s reward system, much like drugs and alcohol, providing a constant source of information and entertainment. While each person’s internet use is different, the results may be the same. Long-term effects may include:
Irritation when someone interrupts your interaction online
Difficulty completing tasks
Increasing isolation
Experiencing euphoria while online
Inability to stop despite the consequences
Increasing stress
Physical Effects of Internet Withdrawal
The physical and mental effects of addiction, coupled with the physical effects of withdrawal, may increase your risks for long-term health conditions. In a study involving 144 people between the ages of 18 and 33, researchers discovered both heart rate and blood pressure are affected in those who report spending extended periods of time online.9
Past research has associated cold turkey withdrawal of the internet from heavy users will produce anxiety type symptoms, similar to those experienced by people addicted to drugs or alcohol.10 The current study also linked physiological changes, including an average of a 3% to 4% increase in blood pressure and heart rate of the participants.11 Some participants experienced up to an 8% increase.
This was the first controlled demonstration of physiological changes triggered by internet use.12 The increases noted during the study were not enough to be immediately life-threatening; however, these types of changes are associated with anxiety and a reduction in the function of the immune system.
The changes in anxiety levels may also be a physiological trigger for users to re-engage with their digital devices in order to reduce the physical response and anxiety level. Dr. Lisa Osborne, co-author of the study from Swansea University, commented:13
“A problem with experiencing physiological changes like increased heart rate is that they can be misinterpreted as something more physically threatening, especially by those with high levels of anxiety, which can lead to more anxiety, and more need to reduce it.”
In other words, especially in people who may experience anxiety more frequently, the physical symptoms of internet withdrawal may increase their anxiety and lead to behaviors to reduce it — namely, going back to using the internet.
Putting Down Your Phone May Raise Your Anxiety Level
Forty percent of the participants in this study admitted they had some level of an internet-related problem and acknowledged they spent too much time online. Participants reportedly spent an average of five hours each day on the internet and 20% spent over six hours a day. By far the most common reasons for engaging online were social media and shopping.
Previous studies from this same group of researchers have demonstrated study participants would experience short-term increases in anxiety levels when their digital devices were removed.14 When those devices were removed for longer periods of time, they reported increases in loneliness and depression, with some researchers finding changes to the actual structures in the brain.
Research psychologist Larry Rosen, Ph.D., and his colleagues at California State University looked at the effect technology has had on our anxiety levels. They have found the typical person checks their phone every 15 minutes, whether or not they heard a notification from the device. In his words you may be thinking:15
“Gee, I haven’t [checked] in [on] Facebook in a while. I haven’t checked on this Twitter feed for a while. I wonder if somebody commented on my Instagram post.”
These thoughts generate increased secretion of cortisol, which begins to increase your anxiety levels. Eventually, you notice the rising anxiety and seek a way to reduce the experience. Checking in to your social network on your phone may be one of the ways you’ve found to reduce your anxiety.
The authors of the study from Swansea University speculate that internet use is driven by more than short-term excitement or the joy of using technology. Instead, it may produce negative physiological and psychological changes, such as anxiety that may drive you back to the device that is causing the problem in the first place.16
Multiple studies from around the world have demonstrated overuse of the internet and digital devices leads to physical and psychological symptoms of addiction17 and family dysfunction.18 Poor health, unhappiness and depression were found in men and women who report overuse of the internet, but depressed girls demonstrate a higher rate of internet addiction than boys.19 Overall, those with an addiction to the internet have lower impulsivity control.20
Google Would Like You to Keep on Using
It should come as no surprise that companies that make money when more people spend more time and money on the internet are consciously trying to manipulate your behavior. Former Google product manager Tristan Harris revealed how digital giants are engineering smartphone apps and social media feedback to get you checking and double-checking online.21
However, while internet use is more socially acceptable, digital companies aren’t the only businesses using neurological and psychological strategies to increase their profit margins.22 Behavior patterns are often etched into neural pathways,23 and when those behaviors are also linked to hormone secretion and physiological responses, they become even more powerful.
In fact, Harris describes the reward process of using a smartphone as “playing the slot machine.”24 And, Google has discovered a way to embed that reward system as you use the apps on your phone. This process is so important to digital corporations that Apple turned down a smartphone app for their store that would help people to reduce their use of the internet and their smartphones.
The goal of any corporation is to increase your use of their product and the potential you will spend more money with them. In the case of smartphone devices, these companies are contributing to programing your actions, and how you think and feel. This is how companies satisfy their advertisers, who are paying for the privilege of your eyes on their ads.
Have You Been ‘Brain Hacked?’
Some programmers call this process “brain hacking,” as they incorporate more information from neuropsychology into the development of digital interfaces that increase your interaction with the program. For instance, getting likes on Facebook and Instagram, the “streaks” on Snapchat or cute emojis on text messaging, are all designed to increase your engagement and desire to return.
The continual scroll on Facebook keeps you engaged on the page longer, with a greater chance you’ll click an advertisement on the page. Keeping a “streak” alive on Snapchat keeps you coming back to the app, especially when you have multiple streaks going with multiple people.
Harris describes it as a race to the bottom of the brainstem where fear and anxiety live, two of the most powerful motivators known to advertisers. Both advertisers and computer software developers are using these techniques to write code that will engage your attention.25
More Physical Effects From Your Digital Devices
Unfortunately, your engagement is not the only physiological or psychological change these techniques trigger in your brain and your body. This short video highlights several changes you may experience after hours of digital use. However, there are also permanent changes that occur to the structure of your brain after watching a flickering screen for hours.
One of the functional changes you may have noticed is a reduced ability to think deeply about one subject.26 The focus of gathering information online often results in you flitting from one website to another as the topic of your research changes, as portrayed in the video above. Another way of saying this is a constant state of distraction, disruption and interruption from notifications and website engagement.
Nicholas Carr, author of the book, “The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains,” finds in the years after publication, with rising use of digital devices, millennials are experiencing even greater problems with forgetfulness than seniors.27 This is the “dark side” of neurological plasticity that allows your brain to adapt to changes in your environment. This type of plasticity is one way your brain recovers after a stroke has permanently damaged one area.
The truth is, as your brain is plastic, most everything you do and practice will change your brain.28 Using the internet may damage your ability to remember facts, but it also appears to improve your ability to research information. However, a few positive changes may not outweigh the negative aspects of long-term internet overuse. For instance, brain scans indicate those who use the internet consistently have a reduced amount of gray matter.29,30
A loss of white matter,31,32 reduced cortical thickness33,34 and impaired cognitive functioning35 are other brain structure and functional changes that have been demonstrated from long-term internet use. It is impossible to ignore that these devices are changing your brain structure, and the experience is also increasing your exposure to microwave radiation and large amounts of blue light at night, thereby impacting your body’s ability to produce melatonin.
In 2011, the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer declared cellphones a Group 2b “possible human carcinogen”36 related to the microwave radiation emitted from the phone. Even cellphone manufacturers place warnings on their products to keep them at least 1 inch from your body.37
Yet another challenge to using digital devices is the blue light emitted from the screens, which reduce your melatonin and signal your body to wake up. You may be able to reduce this effect by wearing blue-blocking sunglasses after sundown, and turning off your digital devices at the same time.
Meditation May Reduce Your Withdrawal Symptoms
Consider setting a goal to reduce your screen time and digital communication. In the video above, Julie Schiffman demonstrates the use of Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) to reduce stress and anxiety.
These are strategies you may easily use in public or private to assist your efforts to reduce your screen time — whether on your phone, computer or on your tablet. Remember, the physiological, structural and psychological changes occur no matter what type of device you’re using.
Fearmongering around bird flu mirrors COVID-19 responses, with calls for testing, social distancing, and vaccination in the agricultural sector. New RFID tagging requirements for dairy cows represent potential government overreach, aimed at increased animal tracking and control
Development of mRNA vaccines for bird flu in both humans and animals raises concerns about potential mandatory vaccinations and their impact on the food supply
FDA warnings against raw milk consumption lack evidence of foodborne transmission of bird flu to humans and may serve to protect industrial dairy interests. The centralization of the food system has led to a 72% decrease in small farms over the last 90 years, emphasizing the need to support small-scale farmers directly
The H5N1 virus may have origins in gain-of-function research, potentially emerging from a lab rather than occurring naturally in wild birds
Mass culling of poultry in response to outbreaks has led to over 92 million chickens being slaughtered since 2022, often using inhumane methods
Let the fearmongering begin (again)! Propaganda efforts are making people believe humans can die from the bird flu and that we must “do our part” in preventing the next global pandemic. Wear masks, social distance, sanitize everything, get tested, get vaccinated … It’s kind of like “COVID-19,” but now in dairy cows!
Similar to “wear masks, stay home, practice social distancing and sanitize everything,” the United States Department of Agriculture is now encouraging farmers to regularly test animals, test the milk weekly, register livestock, step up the use of personal protective equipment, limit traffic onto their farms, and increase cleaning and disinfection practices.
“The most important step we can take today is biosecurity. I am calling on producers to use our resources to enhance their biosecurity measures and states and producers to opt in to our support programs and herd monitoring programs, which are designed to limit the spread of this disease in dairy cattle.” — Secretary of the USDA Tom Vilsack.
Image from www.desmoinesregister.com. Article written by the secretary of the USDA (Tom Vilsack), spreading the message that it is up to the farmers to comply to biosecurity methods to stop the spread.
Similar to “toilet paper shortages,” now there are limitations on number of egg cartons purchased at some stores in Australia as bird flu spreads rapidly across large poultry farms. (Are meat and dairy products next?)
Figure: Coles is one of the two largest supermarket chains in Australia.
Similar to summer event cancellations in 2020 and 2021, state fairs and livestock events are requiring testing1 and some are even being canceled this summer due to the bird flu.2
What’s next?
Lock downs of cows and chickens inside barns to reduce the spread?
Mandatory avian influenza testing?
Mandatory mRNA vaccination of all livestock to “solve the problem?”
Force farm employees to wear personal protective equipment (PPE)?
This is all a little déjà vu, isn’t it? Can you believe they are trying this again? And all of this may be obvious to you, but when you tune into any mainstream media account right now, people ARE buying it! And there is a massive amount of fearmongering and discussions on “why we should be concerned,” “what to do to prevent a spread.”
For example, Dr. Sanjay Gupta on CNN produced an “Are We Prepared for Bird Flu” fearmongering special.3 The CDC is now predicting that the next pandemic will be from the bird flu.
“Once the virus gains the ability to attach to the human receptor and then go human to human, that’s when you’re going to have the pandemic … I think it’s just a matter of time.” — Dr. Redfield, former CDC director.
News agencies from across the country are saying the exact same thing. So, is that really “news?” Or has it become propaganda again? Reporting what they want us to hear to spread fear. So in this article, let’s discuss how this bird flu “pandemic” is an attempt to obtain complete control of the food system.
“Who controls the food supply controls the people.” — Henry Kissinger
I will also touch on what YOU can do to help stop spread the fearmongering — helping others better understand why these types of events are occurring can hopefully help prevent people from falling for this. (AGAIN!)
What Is ‘Bird Flu’
According to According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “H5N1 is one of several influenza viruses that causes a highly infectious respiratory disease in birds called avian influenza (or ‘bird flu’).” The “bird flu” is not new — it is something agriculture has dealt with for a long time. The CDC actually outlines the history of Avian Influenza from 1880 — 2024 here.
Dr. Mercola wrote about this in 2006 in his book “The Great Bird Flu Hoax:” “The U.S. government is now practically screaming that a new avian super-flu will likely kill millions of Americans. The mainstream media is entirely onboard, as are drug companies and other corporations poised to benefit immensely off the paranoia. But there is NO coming bird flu pandemic.
It’s an elaborate scheme contrived by the government and big business for reasons that boil down to power and money.” Are they really trying this again?
GOF Origins?
While I do not think humans should be concerned, there is no denying that H5N1 can cause problems for birds. Many people say that H5N1 comes from wild birds — but is Nature really something we should be fearing or trying to separate ourselves from? Where did the strain come from and why is it so problematic? Are there other origins?
Gain-of-function (GOF) research seeks to alter the functional characteristics of a virus to “help” public health experts better understand how viruses can spread and better plan for future pandemics.
In 2010, there was controversial GOF research on avian flu viruses where strains of the H5N1 bird flu viruses were intentionally made to be transmissible via respiratory droplets among ferrets. These studies were funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) under Dr. Anthony Fauci. Bill Gates has also funded gain-of-function research on H5N1.4
In 2011, the scientists reported that they were successful in modifying the avian H5N1 virus so that it was transmissible between mammals, making the entire situation riskier for humans.5
After being put on pause for a period of time, federal funding for these controversial research projects quietly resumed in 2019.6 And GOF critics have repeatedly discussed the human risks if the virus escaped (or released) from a lab.
Did the current H5N1 strain come from a lab? Were migrating birds infected, which then traveled across the world and country infecting a number of poultry and livestock facilities around the world? There are individuals investigating potential lab origins of HPAI through gain of function research.7
“Genetic analysis indicates that genotype B3.13 emerged in 2024 and exhibits genetic links to genotype B1.2, which was identified to have originated in Georgia in January 2022 after the start of serial passage research with H5Nx clade 2.3.4.4 in mallard ducks at the USDA Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory (SEPRL) in Athens, Georgia in April 2021.”
Us humans will NEVER win the war against Mother Nature, as She will ALWAYS outsmart us. Image from www.theatlantic.com
Unfortunately, there is now troubling censorship that was recently instated to better control the narrative. Robert Malone reported that in June of this year, amendments to the WHO IHR (International Health Regulations) were illegally approved and prepared behind closed doors.8
“Although the ‘Article 55’ rules and regulations for amending the IHR explicitly require that ‘the text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration,’ the requirement of four months for review was disregarded in a rush to produce some tangible deliverable from the Assembly …
The IHR amendments retain troubling language regarding censorship. These provisions have been buried in Annex 1,A.2.c., which requires State Parties to ‘develop, strengthen and maintain core capacities … in relation to … surveillance … and risk communication, including addressing misinformation and disinformation.'”9
Now Cows and Humans Get Bird Flu
But the bird flu now involves more than just birds … this year marks the first “bird to cow” and “cow to human” transmission.
A multi-state outbreak of H5N1 bird flu in dairy cows was first reported on March 25, 2024. And according to the CDC, there are now 12 states with outbreaks in dairy cows with a total of 126 dairy herds affected.10
According to the Ohio Department of Agriculture, however, most sick cows recover within a few days.
The first reported human case in the US was a dairy farmer in Texas who developed pinkeye earlier this year. “Swab testing” was used to determine this dairy farmer had the same strain of bird flu, H5N1, that is supposedly circulating in dairy cows.
Altogether, there have been four human cases in the U.S., and none involved person-to-person spread — all were infected after exposure to animals presumed to have bird flu. With the goal of spreading fear, the World Health Organization reported that the first human has died from the avian influenza in Mexico on April 24th.
A few important details they do not include in headlines is that this individual had many pre-existing conditions, had no exposure to poultry or other animals, and was bedridden for three weeks prior to the onset of avian flu symptoms.
This accusation by WHO that this man died from the bird flu was denied by the Mexican Health Secretary Jorge Alcocer.11 Jorge Alcocer said the 59-year-old man died from other causes, mainly kidney and respiratory failure, NOT the bird flu.
“I can point out that the statement made by the World Health Organization is pretty bad, since it speaks of a fatal case (of bird flu), which was not the case.” — Jorge Alcocer
While the individual who died may have tested positive for H5N2, the current “fear” in the U.S. is the spread of the H5N1 strain in dairy cows. In 2008, scientists documented how testing positive for H5N2 may just be a result of seasonal flu vaccines or antiviral medications.
“A history of seasonal influenza vaccination might be associated with H5N2-neutralizing antibody positivity.12These results suggest that the administration of Tamiflu (an antiviral) may affect the results of HI tests for H5N2 virus.”13
Again, doesn’t all of this sound so familiar? Pre-existing conditions, false positive faulty testing, fear, misinformation …
False Testing
Just like with COVID, government agencies are relying on PCR tests as they ramp up testing for bird flu. But PCR tests are extremely inaccurate and lead to significant levels of false positives.14
PCR testing works by replicating tiny fragments of DNA or RNA until they become large enough to identify. The fragments are replicated in cycles, and each cycle doubles the amount of genetic material in the sample. The number of cycles required to create an identifiable sample is the “cycle threshold” (CT). A high CT means many cycles were required to “detect” a virus.
“A persistent sticking point with the PCR test is that it picks up dead viral debris, and by excessively magnifying those particles with CTs in the 40s, noninfectious individuals are labeled as infectious and told to self-isolate.
In short, media and public health officials have conflated ‘cases’ — positive tests — with the actual illness.” — Dr. Mercola, written about PCR testing with COVID. But now we this can be applied to the current bird flu situation.
In December 2020, even the WHO warned that using a high CT would lead to false-positive results. Moreover, Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR test, has said it is inappropriate to use the test as a diagnostic tool to detect a viral infection.15
Yet the government is mass producing and encouraging PCR testing with no reporting on CTs. A big part of the CDCs new $93 million plan to reduce the impact of bird flu involves testing.16 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) did not respond to “The Defender’s” inquiry about which CTs are used to test animals for bird flu.17
False positives can help them spread fear, encourage vaccinations, and mandate the mass killing of cattle herds of chicken flocks.
Proposed Solutions
Former CDC Director Tom Frieden, outlined how he thinks the US should respond:18
1)Rapid response — Test, isolate, cull livestock
2)Trust the government and comply, with this type of messaging — “It’s up to our farmers to comply and report testing”
3)Coordination amongst state and federal agencies to monitor more farms
The USDA requires that infected farms depopulate (kill) their flocks to better contain the virus and stop the spread. “The virus, however, is fatal to birds, and state and federal officials require all poultry in infected flocks to be killed to prevent its spread.”19 These mass killings (or “depopulations”) are paid for with public dollars through a USDA Program.20
On June 25, the Feds have paid Michigan farms $81 million to recoup the loss of having to cull millions of birds.21 More than $73 million of that $81 million was provided to the state’s largest egg producer, Herbruck’s Poultry Ranch. Nearly 6.5 million chickens (more than 40% of the state’s egg layers) were depopulated in early 2024.
Roughly $1 billion has been paid out nationwide since the highly pathogenic avian influenza, H5N1, started spreading in January 2022. Nationwide, large corporate egg producers have received some of the biggest payments to cover the cost of culling their flocks. For example, Jennie-O was provided $105 million, Tyson Foods was provided $29 million, and Cal-Main Foods $22 million.22
More than 92 million chickens have been slaughtered since the recent outbreak began in 2022. And in June of this year, 4.2 million birds were killed at a farm in Sioux County, Iowa. (Why were there 4.2 million chickens at a single farm?)
Corporations are compensated for the mass killings despite the utilization of inhumane depopulation methods that are not approved by animal welfare organizations. More than 80% of the mass culling here in the US use VSD+ (ventilation shut down plus), which is a cheaper option and is banned in other countries. Air is closed off to the barns and heat is pumped in until the temps rise above 104 °F, essentially cooking the birds alive.
In a mass killing of 5 million birds in March 2022 at Remembrandt Foods, some employees reported that it took about a month to pull the dead poultry from the cages and dump them into carts before piling the birds into nearby fields and buried in huge pits.
Is the massacre of millions of birds really the best way to handle this situation? (It isn’t working, as “avian flu” outbreaks continue to pop up!) What if flocks are massacred due to a single false positive test? What about the concept of “natural immunity?”
The “cull the whole flock with one positive test” approach of approach will just lead to a reduction in the nation’s food supply (or even food shortages) and will lead to even more centralization and regulation in the food supply that is getting worse each year.
Dairy Cow Tracking
The USDA used the H5N1 fearmongering to push a ruling through on April 26th of this year that RFID ear tags are now required for dairy cattle for an “efficient animal disease traceability system.”
Or … is it a way to monitor, track and control the total number of and movement of dairy cows? A way to keep records of mRNA vaccinations, pharmaceuticals and other protocols to maintain in control?
RFID (radio-frequency identification) tagging involves small devices that use radio frequencies to transfer data, mainly to track and identify objects, animals and people.
R-CALF USA is speaking out against this new ruling: “[T]he beneficiaries of this rule are not cattle producers or consumers. Instead, this rule is intended to benefit multinational beef packers and multinational ear tag manufacturers who will profit at the expense of cattle producers and consumers.
In fact, because the rule is cost-prohibitive for independent cattle producers, the agency is using millions of taxpayer dollars to give millions of their unnecessary EID ear tags away … We will fight against the implementation of this disastrous rule that infringes on the freedoms and liberties of our nation’s independent cattle farmers and ranchers. This is government overreach at its worst.” — R-CALF CEO Bill Bullard.
The CDC still says, “the human health risk assessment remains low,” yet there is extensive vaccine development.
Finland is now the first country to roll out the experimental bird flu vaccine and purchased vaccines for 10,000 people in mid-June,23 from manufacturer CSL Seqirus. This first round is intended for those “most at risk,” including farm workers and veterinarians. This purchase is part of the 40 million vaccine deal the EU has secured with CSL Seqirus.
This “Zoonotic Influenza vaccine Seqirus” (a two-dose vaccine, given 3 weeks apart) was authorized by European regulators based on immunogenicity studies showing that it elicited immune responses that scientists THINK would be protective against avian influenza.24 (How is “we think so” enough?)
The flu vaccine is traditionally made with eggs, and this has scientists worried. “A majority of the approved vaccines are created by incubating doses in chicken eggs, but the [bird flu’s] rate of fatality among poultry poses an issue for these vaccines.”25 So, many manufacturers are shifting towards more mRNA vaccine development.
“The bird flu outbreak in U.S. dairy cows is prompting development of new, next-generation mRNA vaccines — akin to COVID-19 shots — that are being tested in both animals and people.”26
The University of Pennsylvania is developing an mRNA vaccines for the bird flu using the same techniques that produced the COVID vaccines. According to a May 28th report from the Global Center for Health Security, “[a]n experimental mRNA vaccine against the H5N1 avian flu is highly effective in preventing severe illness and death in lab animals, researchers report.”27
Moderna and Pfizer are also competing for federal contracts to build a national stockpile of mRNA vaccines targeted toward the new bird flu.28
24 different companies are working towards the development of a bird flu vaccine for cows.29 Mandatory chicken and dairy cow mRNA vaccinations would then mean we are exposed to mRNA vaccines through our food.
We definitely do not need more vaccines, as more and more studies are coming out documenting that health complications skyrocketed shortly after the Covid vaccinations were released in 2020.30,31,32 From Dr. Joseph Sansone:
“Dr. Francis Boyle, the Harvard educated law professor that drafted the 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act, which passed both houses of Congress unanimously, provided an affidavit stating that Covid 19 injections and mRNA nanoparticle injections violate the law he wrote.
Dr. Boyle asserted that ‘COVID 19 injections,’ ‘COVID 19 nanoparticle injections,’ and ‘mRNA nanoparticle injections’ are biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction and violate Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023).”33
War on Raw Milk
There also seems to be a war on raw milk amidst all this fearmongering. The FDA is now encouraging states to discourage and stop sales of raw milk to prevent human bird flu spread.34 If you tune into various news reports from across the country, the message is similar:
“Eggs and pasteurized milk and dairy products from the store are safe to consume. But the FDA warns against the consumption of raw milk.”
The suggestion to avoid raw milk is listed twice on the list of CDC recommendations:
People should avoid exposures to sick or dead animals, including wild birds, poultry, other domesticated birds, and other wild or domesticated animals (including cows), if possible.
People should also avoid exposures to animal poop, bedding (litter), unpasteurized (“raw”) milk, or materials that have been touched by, or close to, birds or other animals with suspected or confirmed A(H5N1) virus, if possible.
People should not drink raw milk. Pasteurization kills A(H5N1) viruses, and pasteurized milk is safe to drink.
People who have job-related contact with infected or potentially infected birds or other animals should be aware of the risk of exposure to avian influenza viruses and should take proper precautions. People should wear appropriate and recommended personal protective equipment when exposed to an infected or potentially infected animal(s). CDC has recommendations for worker protection and use of personal protective equipment (PPE).
There is no evidence supporting foodborne transmission of HPAI to humans. In fact, the FDA and USDA concluded in 2010 that “HPAIV is not considered to be a foodborne pathogen.”35 HPAI in humans is linked to transmission via animal contact, not by foods.36
The only demonstrated transmission is direct contact with animals — not a single human has developed bird flu from milk.
“Recent risk communications from CDC, FDA, and USDA regarding transmission of influenza A sub-type H5N1 (highly pathogenic avian influenza virus or HPAI) to humans via raw milk include no supporting evidence of viral transmission from raw milk to humans in the peer-reviewed literature …
An extensive body of scientific evidence from the peer-reviewed literature introduced herein does not support the assumption by these US government agencies that HPAI transmits to humans via milkborne or foodborne routes and causes disease. Nor does the scientific evidence support the recommendation that consumers should avoid raw milk and raw milk products.”37
And something that the FDA really doesn’t want you to know is that there is no guarantee that pasteurization truly kills the virus.
When explaining why raw milk is not safe, many government agencies use this study with mice, saying heat treatment to the milk significantly reduces the HPAI virus titers. But the conclusion of the study is very, very important “bench-top experiments do not recapitulate commercial pasteurization processes.”
Enter this study that the FDA and mainstream media isn’t talking about which demonstrates that standard pasteurization protocols in the US for milk isn’t enough to actually inactivate the virus since this virus seems to handle heat surprisingly well.
And on top of that, raw milk has a number of antiviral properties and pasteurized milk does not contain.38
The “pasteurized milk at the store is safe, and raw milk is very unsafe and is filled with bird flu” messaging encourages consumers to continue supporting these MEGA CAFO dairy farmers, and discourages consumers from supporting smaller dairy farms raising cows in synchronicity with Mother Nature.
So no, avoiding raw milk won’t stop human spread. But it will encourage more of a centralized food system.
The FDA’s messaging to avoid consumption of raw milk and raw milk products do not appear to be based on scientific evidence, but instead seem to be stemming from the desire to protect the centralized dairy industry.
FDA and USDA will never do anything to compromise the dairy industry, as the dairy industry spends millions of dollars on lobbying each year to keep control.
Confinement Operations Aren’t Working
With the repeated “outbreaks” occurring in poultry flocks year after year, isn’t it obvious that the current industrial agriculture system IS NOT working?
Why aren’t government agencies discussing how diseases easily spread when animals are stuffed in buildings, overcrowded and locked in confinement? Can you imagine if you were stuffed into a home with thousands of people — wouldn’t it be hard not to get sick?
In CAFOs, animals are often regularly on antibiotics due to the close living conditions. Can a body with a wiped-out gut microbiome handle any amount of disease?
Mega confinement barns, extreme biosecurity, separation from nature, vaccinations and antibiotics — it doesn’t work! But it does help them maintain food control and is a profitable business model for big ag, big pharma, and big food companies.
The development of a vaccine and culling birds is much more profitable path for addressing bird flu relative to the natural immunity path.
What You Can Do
The solution is clear — stop supporting their system. Buy from farmers. Remember, the messaging and fearmongering around the bird flu is intentional, with the goal of developing even more food control. Everything through their centralized food system is “safe” — so you can trust the food at grocery stores is safe from HPAI. (So they say …)
Instead, the messaging should be “know where your food comes from, know your farmer and know how the animals are raised.” This discussion on food sourcing and knowing your food comes from is not profitable for industrial ag because they get $0 from that sale, so it isn’t brought up.
The centralization of the food system and shift in farming styles has been somewhat successful in benefiting the big corporations and maintaining food control, while hurting farmers. The size of farms has increased, while the number of farms has shrunk (opposite of what we want for low toxin, nutrient-dense food production.)
In fact, the number of small farms has decreased by over 72% in the last 90 years — in 1935 there were 6.8 million farms, and in 2023 there were 1.89 million farms.
“It is very hard as a farmer to be profitable in the conventional system, so more and more farms are going out of business. And many farms that are in business require an off the farm job to pay the bills.”
We are losing small scale farmers more and more each year, and they need your support to stay in business!
Moral of the story — whenever you can, buy directly from farmers, Cooperatives, or buyers’ clubs — these type of food systems support small-scale, toxin free farming. The prices may be more expensive, but farmers are paid a fair wage and produce higher quality food products.
Plus, with these type of transactions, the big agriculture companies get $0 of this sale, funneling less money into their system. And on top of that, remain grounded and maintain common sense as we head into the next round of bird flu fearmongering.
About the Author
Ashley Armstrong is the cofounder of Angel Acres Egg Co., which specializes in low-PUFA (polyunsaturated fat) eggs that are shipped to all 50 states (join waitlist here), and Nourish Cooperative, which ships low-PUFA pork, beef, cheese, A2 dairy and traditional sourdough to all 50 states. Waitlists will reopen shortly.
