Tag Archives: Dr. Mercola

What’s Up With The World Health Organization

Posted on by

We’re in the Middle of a Global Coup — Here’s How We Stop It

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

Video Link:  https://www.bitchute.com/video/xOTsDuvmgsI5/

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization’s upcoming pandemic treaty and the International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments are part of a global “soft coup” to strip nations of their sovereignty and people of their bodily autonomy and freedom
  • The WHO wants to put into law a requirement that nations must censor their citizens, so that only public health messages aligned with the WHO’s recommendations can be shared
  • The IHR amendments specify that the WHO will dictate which drugs countries must use, and which they cannot, in the event of a pandemic — and possibly outside of pandemics as well
  • The IHRs have been in existence since 1969, but in the current draft of the IHR amendments — the WHO’s recommendations — become edicts that must be followed rather than recommendations that nations can ignore at will
  • The treaty demands the fast-tracking of vaccines, along with liability waivers for vaccine manufacturers. The EU, U.S. and CEPI have already proposed a plan to develop vaccines in 100 days
  • The treaty will apply to all nations that sign on, all the time, even when there are no pandemics

In this interview board-certified internist and biological warfare epidemiologist Dr. Meryl Nass discusses the dangers posed by the World Health Organization’s upcoming pandemic treaty and the International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments. She also wrote about this in a recent article titled “The WHO’s Proposed Treaty Will Increase Manmade Pandemics.”1

“I’ve been reading the different drafts of the amendments and the Pandemic treaty that have been put forward,” she says. “They’re a mix of things, different ideas put forward by the different [member] countries. And then there’s a group within the WHO that tries to harmonize them, and also make sure that what the WHO wants is in them.

I had finally read through, line by line, the June 2nd, most recent draft of a pandemic treaty, and it had things that were much worse and more explicit in it than before, and I felt compelled to start writing about it.

Then, after I’d written a short piece, I realized it was too important and I needed to write a long piece with background and links, and try to get the message out to a lot of people.

Because the only reason these documents and the plan — the biosecurity agenda through the pandemic treaty and the International Health Amendments — have gotten as far as they have is because nobody has read them. [People] don’t understand what the plan is, and may not understand the backstory.”

Converging Agendas With Identical Goals

It’s important to realize that many different aspects of the grand plan are being put into motion by a variety of sectors and globalist organizations at the same time, and while they may appear independent of each other, they’re all leading us in the same direction, toward a unified goal, namely the enslavement of mankind and the centralization of control over the world’s population.

We have development of a new financial apparatus involving the rollout of a central bank digital currency (CBDC), for example.

“At the same time, the U.N. also wants into the action,” Nass says. “It wants to be able to declare global shocks and manage them. And those could be the ones that the WHO wants to manage, which is biological warfare and pandemics that occur in more than one country.

So, the U.N. has listed those two, but also all sorts of other potential global shocks, like climate change, supply chain interruptions, cyber events, and even events in outer space. And they finalize it with black swan events, which means anything the U.N. wants to designate as a global shock can be one, and then the U.N. will come out with its management of that event.

So, the secretary general of the U.N. is asking its members … at the annual meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, to give it permission to create this global emergencies platform … which will give the secretary general and the U.N. authority to manage global shocks.

Also at that meeting, the WHO and the U.N. are coming together to try to divvy up how things are going to go for biological warfare and pandemics that affect more than one country. So, look for information coming out on that on September 20.”

Why Was the Pandemic Treaty Introduced?

The WHO proposed the initial plan to grant itself the power to issue global emergency instructions in 2021. The claim was that nations had handled the COVID pandemic so poorly, we need a centralized organization to manage the next pandemic better.

“Of course, it was laid out in terms of equity, like the rich countries didn’t give the poor countries enough vaccines, etc … and so many people died. What is never said is that, in fact, almost all the countries of the world were following the WHO’s guidance, and that is what caused this last pandemic to be so devastating.

The economic implications were all as a result of the lockdowns, the resulting supply chain interruptions, the closure of schools, etc. So, although the WHO wants this great power, it hasn’t said that it’s going to do anything differently.

Nobody at the level of the WHO, the U.N., or the United States public health authorities or the president has said they did anything wrong. What they want to do is more of the same, and I mean more, lots more,” Nass says

WHO Wants To Be a Centralized Ruler of All

For example, they want to put into law the requirement that nations must censor their citizens, so that only public health messages aligned with the WHO’s recommendations can be shared. Already, YouTube has announced they will henceforth censor all health information that does not conform to the WHO’s narrative. But that censorship is nothing compared to what’s to come.

The amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs) also specify that the WHO will dictate which drugs countries must use, and which they cannot, in the event of a pandemic — and possibly outside of pandemics as well. As explained by Nass:

“The pandemic treaty … is a completely new document, and each draft has been different than the one before. In the current draft, the director general of the WHO doesn’t even need to declare a pandemic. The pandemic treaty will be in effect all the time.”

The IHRs have been in existence since 1969, but in the current draft of the IHR amendments, the WHO’s recommendations become edicts that must be followed rather than recommendations that nations can ignore at will.

In their current form, the amendments do require the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) before he can start giving orders, but there are no standards for what a PHEIC is. It could be anything. He would also have the power to declare a “potential” pandemic, even with limited or no evidence.

All Vaccines Will Be Fast-Tracked and Untested

The treaty also demands the fast-tracking of vaccines, along with liability waivers for vaccine manufacturers. According to Nass, the EU, U.S. and CEPI have already proposed a plan to develop vaccines in 100 days and manufacture enough for everyone in the country in another 30 days.

“It’s a completely crazy idea because you don’t have time to test the vaccines in human beings if you’re developing them in 100 days,” Nass says. “The COVID vaccines were developed in 326 days … That was the Pfizer vaccine. And the median testing in humans was only two months or less.

We gave the vaccines to billions of people, and we only found out later what the side effects were. We still don’t have a totally clear view of all the side effects and how often they occur, because our countries have hidden the data …

Today, when FDA is letting things get through right and left without good tests, still only 29% of the vaccines presented to the FDA are given a license; 71% are rejected. It’s hard to make a good vaccine. Many have to be thrown away before you get to a safe and effective one.

That is, unless you have a complete waiver of liability, and then you can inject people with anything. And there are no manufacturing standards, no safety standard, no efficacy standard. The only ‘standard’ is that the FDA commissioner needs to hope that the benefits outweigh the risks.”

Never-Ending Pandemics Ahead

Both the treaty and the IHR amendments require nations to perform extensive biosurveillance, year-round, and perform genomic sequencing on all pathogens collected. Well, if we’re testing people, livestock, wild animals, farms and factories all the time, we’ll always be able to find pathogens with pandemic potential.

So, this will give rise to a never-ending series of pandemic and “potential pandemic” declarations. Any and all of these declarations could then result in lockdowns and new vaccine requirements. And, importantly, these documents will supersede all domestic laws if implemented, so not even the U.S. Constitution will be able to save us.

Door To Freedom

To prevent this nightmare, Nass has founded a new organization called Door To Freedom (doortofreedom.org), which seeks to educate people around the world about what the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments are, and how they will change life as we know it, and strip us of every vestige of freedom.

Door To Freedom has created a poster to explain the impacts the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments will have. Please download this poster and share it with everyone you know. Also put it up on public billboards and places where communities share information.

“The WHO appears to be nervous about the fact that some of these bits of information are in fact making it into the mainstream,” Nass says, “and so they themselves have made little short videos with Tedros and other people at the WHO denying that this is a sovereignty grab — claiming that the WHO is not even going to be a party of the treaty, etc.

Most of their claims are lies. So, it will be confusing. But the WHO is definitely a party to this treaty. The WHO intends — in the June 2, 2023, version, which is called the Bureau Draft — to take management of certain aspects of pandemic control.”

Who Will Vote on the Treaty and IHR Amendments?

The IHR amendments will only require a 50% vote of whoever is in the room at the time of the vote, which will take place at the World Health Assembly’s annual meeting in May 2024.2 Countries will then have only 10 months to send a formal opt-out to the WHO if the amendments pass. Barring an opt-out, all countries will then be required to comply with WHO directives.

Nations that have not officially opted out will then be bound by the new terms laid out in the amendments. The pandemic treaty will also be voted on during that meeting. It will require two-thirds vote in favor by the members that are in the room and will go into effect one month after 30 nations have ratified it. The amendments require an active opt-out, while the treaty requires an active opt-in.

Any nation that has not signed the treaty will be excluded from its terms. Those who sign the treaty must wait three years before they can get out.

“That’s important to remember, because I don’t think too many people want to give the WHO three years of directing them how to manage public health emergencies before they can can say no,” Nass says.

It is important to be aware that the treaty will be in force all the time. It won’t require a pandemic to give the WHO director-general the power to surveil and censor the entire world, 24/7. Furthermore, as currently drafted, the treaty has essentially blank pages, to be filled in later.

New committees will form, and they will determine how the treaty provisions will be carried out and enforced. They can add new provisions too. This is like giving a blank check to the WHO to impose whatever it wants on the world’s people.

Action Items

While the situation seems incredibly bleak, Nass insists there are many things we can do to prevent the WHO’s power grab, including the following:

•Call your congressman or congresswoman and urge them to sponsor H.R.79 — The WHO Withdrawal Act,3 introduced by Rep. Andy Biggs, which calls for defunding and exiting the WHO. At the time of this writing, it has 51 cosponsors, all of them Republicans. We cannot get this bill passed without Democrats, so we need to get them to understand what’s at stake. As noted by Nass:

“That means 51 congressmen have already been convinced about how bad this is. We the people have to get educated and then push it out to more members of Congress.

These provisions are so terrible, if you stand up in front of a room and say, ‘My congresswoman is voting to give away our sovereignty, to have the WHO take away our medications, to transfer our intellectual property to other nations,’ everyone will say ‘That person is terrible.’

So, there’s a lot of opportunity to embarrass your members of Congress if they don’t understand what this is and vote to get out. I think that’s our best bet.”

The Sovereignty Coalition is making it easier for everyone to make their voices heard. Its Help the House Defund the WHO page will allow you to contact all of your elected representatives with just a few clicks. Simply fill out the required field, click submit, and your contact information will be used to match you with your elected representatives.

•Also urge your congressman or congresswoman to sponsor H.R.1425,4 which would require the pandemic treaty to be approved by the Senate. It currently has 27 cosponsors.

•Call your senator and urge them to sponsor the Senate version of H.R.1425, which is S.444, the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act.5 It currently has 47 cosponsors.

•Share Door To Freedom’s educational poster6 everywhere you can, and direct them to doortofreedom.org for more information.

•Also share, share, share information about the IHR amendments and how they will destroy national sovereignty, and increase surveillance and censorship. You can find a quick summary here.

In 2021, the U.S. introduced several new amendments that were rejected by other nations, so when it came to a vote in 2022, the U.S. rescinded most of them.

If we can make enough noise and get a wellspring of people to push back, saying we will not accept these terms, many of the amendments may simply be withdrawn before they come to a vote in 2024.

The WHO is trying to achieve this soft coup on the sly, and exposing how these amendments will eliminate human rights and bodily autonomy, and strip our nation of its sovereignty, will force them to take a step back, because while they are tyrants, they don’t want to be identified as such.

We Must Stop the Funding of Our Demise

Also be sure to sign up for Door To Freedom’s newsletter so that you can take action when WHO-related bills come up. We need to oppose all funding of the global biosecurity agenda, and Door To Freedom will alert you when it’s time to call on your representatives to oppose funding measures that will further the biosecurity agenda.

Other newsletters that will help you stay abreast on this issue are Children’s Health Defense and Stand for Health Freedom.

The U.S. has already contributed money to a financial intermediary fund set up through the WHO and the World Bank. But that fund is still many billions short of what it wants, so the WHO is looking for member states to dramatically increase their contributions.

The U.S. also committed $5 billion over five years to the global biosecurity agenda when it passed the National Defense Authorization Act in December 2022. So, those contributions are now part of U.S. law, and they’re part of Biden’s proposed budget for 2024.

Another $20 billion in mandated spending by the Department of Health and Human Services has been requested in the president’s FY 2024 budget request to Congress for International Pandemic Preparedness. More money will also be allocated for this purpose by the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security. Additional funds may also be allocated through the State Department, USAID, the Department of Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In all, the U.S. is already set to spend some $30 billion a year on global pandemic preparedness, and part of that is for surveillance of our social media and the internet, and biosurveillance for pathogens with pandemic potential.

It seems that with so much money sloshing around, a large number of vested interests support the WHO plan. However, when we citizens reach out en masse, politicians oftentimes are compelled to appease their constituents, especially when it comes to turning over state and federal authority for health to unelected officials of the WHO, an organization well-known for corruption, which unabashedly caters to its biggest donors, particularly Bill Gates. A recent example is offered by Nass:

“There’s a group called the Sovereignty Coalition that we are part of. They have the ALIGN Act software and this enables people going to their website, with two or three clicks, to send needed messages to the president, your congressman, senators, governors, etc., and that was used.

So, when the funding bill came up a month or two ago for the State Department — and funding for the WHO is in that bill — the Republicans had cut funding in their markup, because … we got over 4,000 calls and emails to every member of the committee the night before.”

So, thanks to that outreach, the State Department Foreign Operations appropriations bill draft now has zero funding for the WHO in it. As noted by Nass:

“Now that is extraordinary. I’m sure they’re going to try to sneak it in somewhere else, but right now the United States has defunded the WHO in the pending legislation, which needs to be voted on, I believe by the end of October.

Stand for Health Freedom also has something like that, and Children’s Health Defense also has ALIGN Act software. So, we can make this happen. When bills are coming up, when important things are happening, we can get out the action alerts and get people to take action. That’s already in place. It’s tremendously important, and we’ll continue to do that.”

We Must Connect the Dots for People

A common question is who is responsible for this global coup? Also, who’s in charge of it? And why are they doing it, exactly?

“The answer is, we don’t know who’s doing it,” Nass says, “but we know there are some very evil, rich people that are [part of it]. We know that Klaus Schwab is part of their apparatus. We know that the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders —that Schwab has raised up for the last 30 years — are a big part of implementing these things in their countries …

They’re like a large Skull and Bones club where they work together. They come together for meetings, and their job is to elevate each other into powerful positions in industry and government … So, we have to make people aware of the role of these secret societies, and how they are being used to bring in bad programs.

People are already noticing the terrible inflation in the United States, and that’s due to the money printing. They had to do the money printing to bribe the schools, the hospitals, the industries, the pharmaceutical makers, and the media in particular, to push this whole pandemic narrative through and make us do what they wanted.

Now everybody thinks we’re coming up for another pandemic soon. The FDA is pushing out a new COVID vaccine in the middle of September. What are they going to do to us next? Are they going to be able to print money again and dole out $10 trillion of our grandchildren’s money?

I think people are starting to understand this money printing inflationary spiral, and how it impoverishes us for the benefit of a small group. Those are bits of information — what is needed is connecting the dots. So, in my article, I tried to connect a lot of dots …

Everything in our lives is changing at the same time and people are so confused. We need those who are paying close attention and know how to write to start explaining how these things are connected. We’ve got nine months until the WHO will vote on these two documents …

At the beginning of May, I was invited to the International COVID Summit at the European Parliament in Brussels, and my talk was on the IHR amendments. I prepared a 10-minute talk … but at the last minute the sponsors said, ‘Look, you only have five minutes because we’ve run over’ … So, I’m like, ‘Oh my God, what do I do?’ I looked at my slides; what are the main points? And I gave a five-minute talk. I thought it must be terrible …

Well, somebody made a three-minute, and somebody made a four-minute, and a five-minute little video of it and sent it around on Twitter and TikTok. Now people have added sound and they’ve added images. The thing has garnered millions of views. It’s extraordinary.

But it’s because I start off saying, ‘We are experiencing a soft coup. This is what’s happening. This is what the WHO is doing.’ And it’s so short, people are able to watch it. They see this little old lady who is speaking in a very measured way, and they see the European Parliament insignia behind me, and they’re saying, ‘Oh my god, maybe this is real.’

So that little thing has gotten 5 million to 10 million views and TikTokers are now adding to it. So, I think this whole issue of the WHO trying to grab our sovereignty is very meaningful to people. We just have to figure out the right messages, get them out there, and we’ll win.”

Where to Learn More

Door To Freedom is unique in that it is trying to introduce these highly complex, interlocking aspects of the global power grab in bite-sized pieces. The website has dozens of short summary articles and videos, with longer in-depth pieces for those who want to dive deeper. We also publish each new draft of the IHR amendments and the treaty as they come out, and I encourage people to have a look at the actual documents.

So, to get a good grasp of what’s at stake, be sure to bookmark doortofreedom.org, and start sifting through it. Also, share the site with others and encourage them to learn more.

“We’ve put up the documents so people can read them,” Nass says. “We have about 30 two-minute reads about the documents, about what’s going on, about all sorts of things, trying to connect the dots on transhumanism, CBDCs, child sex education. And we have a large number of longer articles about related subjects.

So if you go to the site, it will give you an education about the massive global changes that the globalist cabal is bringing forward right now. As we speak, we’re in the middle of the coup. The coup isn’t next year. It’s not when these documents get voted on. We’re in the middle of it now. The documents are part of it.

Once we’ve completed everything on the website … we will start building a worldwide coalition of organizations to fight all of this. That’s the next step. Children’s Health Defense … are taking up this issue of the WHO, and there are many other organizations I’m working with: Stand for Health Freedom, organizations in England, in the European Union [and] South Africa …

We want to then start pushing regular messaging to the world that will be the same everywhere. Education is the answer, because even if we beat back the WHO, if we don’t beat back this entire agenda, the globalists will hit us with something else, either through the U.N. or through other multilateral organizations, or through national laws that are draconian.

[We must] make people understand what’s happened over these last few years, where it’s coming from, what led up to it and where it’s going. And I think that’s the best we can do. It’s really important that we retain our ethics, our morals. We don’t want to manipulate people.

We’ve all been manipulated, we’ve been mind-controlled. The media, the advertising, the education system have all been trying to limit the way people think … We want you to open your minds, be able to identify propaganda when you see it, so that you can learn to think clearly for yourself. That’s when we win.”

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/10/01/who-pandemic-treaty-ihr-amendments.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20231001_HL2&foDate=true&mid=DM1471299&rid=1926305205

Sooooo…. Ivermectin DOES Work -Safe AND Effective

Posted on by

Ivermectin Worked: New Peer-Reviewed Study Proves It

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
ivermectin worked peer reviewed study proves it

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru convinced a group of doctors that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in October 2020
  • Because the paper wasn’t yet peer-reviewed, it was brushed off; ivermectin for COVID-19 was vilified, as were those who dared to prescribe it
  • Now, the study has been peer-reviewed and published in Cureus, vindicating ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19
  • Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 Peru states where it was used most intensively
  • There was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths when ivermectin was readily available and then a 13-fold increase in excess deaths in the two months after ivermectin use was restricted

As the COVID pandemic wore on, with potential treatments supposedly unknown, New York pulmonologist Dr. Pierre Kory and others tried to get the word out about ivermectin. A widely used antiparasitic drug that’s listed on the World Health Organization’s essential medicines list1 and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, ivermectin is widely available, inexpensive and has a long history of safe usage.

In fact, since 1987, 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been used among humans worldwide,2 but it was quickly vilified — as were those who dared to prescribe it. Now, the tables have turned. Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 states where it was used most intensively.3

Ivermectin Dramatically Slashed COVID Deaths

Kory and other physicians with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC) had success early on treating patients with ivermectin and other therapies during the pandemic. His efforts to get the word out on this treatment protocol were stifled by censorship, ridicule and colleagues brainwashed by the official narrative and unwilling to accept the science.

A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru “was the final piece of evidence which convinced me, Paul [Marik] and the FLCCC that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in Oct of 2020,” Kory tweeted.4 “Took 2 years but now peer-reviewed & published in a major journal.”

That study, published in Cureus,5 vindicates ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. “Reductions in excess deaths over a period of 30 days after peak deaths averaged 74% in the 10 states with the most intensive IVM [ivermectin] use,” the study found.6 It used Peruvian national health data from Peru’s 25 states to evaluate ivermectin’s effects.

A natural experiment was set in motion in May 2020, when Peru authorized ivermectin for COVID-19. The significant reduction in excess deaths noted “correlated closely with the extent of IVM use,” the researchers noted.

Global Success Stories Highlight Ivermectin’s Potential

Few have heard about the astonishing success of ivermectin in Uttar Pradesh, India, which embraced large-scale prophylactic and therapeutic use of ivermectin for COVID-19 patients, close contacts of patients and health care workers.7

“The possibility of both preventative and treatment efficacies of IVM was raised by outcomes in another world region in which IVM was distributed to the population at risk for COVID-19 on a mass scale. This IVM distribution occurred in Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in India, having a population of 229 million,” the study added.8

There, widespread ivermectin distribution likely resulted in significantly lower COVID-19 deaths compared to areas not using the drug:9

“The cumulative total of COVID-19 deaths per million in population from July 7, 2021 through April 1, 2023 was 4.3 in Uttar Pradesh, as compared with 70.4 in all of India and 1,596.3 in the United States … The much lower number of COVID-19 deaths per population in all of India versus the United States in that period may reflect the use of these same home treatment kits containing IVM, doxycycline, and zinc in some other states of India.”

A similar series of events occurred in Itajai, Brazil, a city of 220,000 people. In June 2020, they implemented a prophylaxis program using ivermectin. The program was advertised throughout local media, and people were encouraged to participate and take ivermectin four times a month, on days 1, 2, 15 and 16.

On the appropriate days, they set up tents and centers where people could get the drug, and the entire program was carefully logged in an electronic database. In all, 159,000 Brazilians participated, of those 113,000 elected to take the ivermectin.

Kory and eight coauthors published a paper on the results, which showed “regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.”10

Those who used ivermectin had a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate, a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality and a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate compared to those who did not.11

Meanwhile, a study from Japan demonstrated that just 12 days after doctors were allowed to legally prescribe ivermectin to their COVID-19 patients, cases dropped dramatically.12 The chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association13 noticed the low number of infections and deaths in Africa, where many use ivermectin prophylactically and as the core strategy to treat river blindness.14D.

Government’s Ivermectin Restrictions Increased Deaths

In a striking revelation, ivermectin was used against COVID-19 in Peru for four months, before the new president put restrictions on its use. During that time, “there was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths and then a 13-fold increase in the two months following the restriction of IVM use.”15

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has towed the anti-ivermectin narrative all along, with its infamous tweet reading, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”16 While commanding the U.S. public and physicians not to use ivermectin for an off-label use, the irony stands that close to 40% of U.S. prescriptions are for off-label uses.17

But now, after years of vilification, it had no choice but to admit what’s been right all along — doctors have the authority to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Attorney Jared Kelson of Boyden Gray & Associates, who is representing physicians who have sued the FDA for interfering with their practice of medicine, including relating to ivermectin for COVID-19, explained:18

“The fundamental issue is straightforward. After the FDA approves a human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to influence or interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no.”

The FDA did just that, nonetheless, but finally admitted the truth on August 16, 2023, tweeting, “Health care professionals generally may choose to prescribe an approved human drug for an unapproved use when they judge that the unapproved use is medically appropriate for an individual patient.”19

In September 2021, the American Medical Association also told doctors to stop prescribing ivermectin for COVID-19. In a statement, AMA, along with the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), warned:20

“We are alarmed by reports that outpatient prescribing for and dispensing of ivermectin have increased 24-fold since before the pandemic and increased exponentially over the past few months. As such, we are calling for an immediate end to the prescribing, dispensing, and use of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 outside of a clinical trial.

In addition, we are urging physicians, pharmacists, and other prescribers — trusted health care professionals in their communities — to warn patients against the use of ivermectin outside of FDA-approved indications and guidance, whether intended for use in humans or animals, as well as purchasing ivermectin from online stores.”

How many died unnecessarily as a result of these commands? As noted by journalist Kim Iversen, even the FDA’s move advising doctors that they’re allowed to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 is too little, too late. “Now, two, three years later, too little, too late… ultimately, we now get this study that has been officially peer reviewed and published, and it shows significant, significant, significant reduction [of mortality] in COVID-19.”21

How Does Ivermectin Work Against COVID?

Ivermectin binds to SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein, limiting the virus’ morbidity and infectivity.22 The drug, while best known for its antiparasitic effects, also has demonstrated antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. An in vitro study demonstrated that a single treatment with ivermectin effectively reduced viral load 5,000 times in 48 hours in cell culture.23

Studies have shown that ivermectin helps to lower the viral load by inhibiting replication.24 A single dose of ivermectin can kill 99.8% of the virus within 48 hours.25 A meta-analysis in the American Journal of Therapeutics also showed the drug reduced infection by an average of 86% when used preventively.26

Ivermectin has also been shown to speed recovery, in part by inhibiting inflammation and protecting against organ damage.27 This pathway also lowers the risk of hospitalization and death. Meta analyses have shown an average reduction in mortality that ranges from 75%28 to 83%.29,30

Additionally, the drug also prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure.31 As the Cureus study noted, the latest data only adds further evidence that ivermectin has an important place in COVID-19 treatment:32

“These encouraging results from IVM treatments in Peru and similar positive indications from Uttar Pradesh, India, which have populations of 33 million and 229 million, respectively, offer promising models for further mass deployments of IVM, as needs may arise, for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19.”

It’s worth noting, too, that ivermectin has notable antitumor effects, which include inhibiting proliferation, metastasis and angiogenic activity in cancer cells.33 It appears to inhibit tumor cells by regulating multiple signaling pathways, which researchers explained in the Pharmacological Research journal, “suggests that ivermectin may be an anticancer drug with great potential.”34

Why Was Ivermectin Suppressed?

Download Interview Transcript | Video Link

The average treatment cost for ivermectin is $58.35 Do you think this has anything to do with ivermectin’s vilification? The authors of the Cureus study certainly do:36

“The exceptional safety profile and low cost of IVM certainly support its use as in Peru’s operation MOT [Mega-Operación Tayta] and in Uttar Pradesh as an attractive national policy for COVID-19 mitigation. These significant reductions in mortality as achieved in Peru and Uttar Pradesh suggest that the impact of such a national IVM deployment would be observable within a relatively short period.

However, generic drugs have often fared poorly in competition with patented offerings in past decades, based upon the unfortunate vulnerability of science to commodification and regulatory capture … Such a potential bias against IVM was suggested by a February 4, 2021 press release from Merck, which was then developing its own patented COVID-19 therapeutic, claiming that there was ‘a concerning lack of safety data’ for IVM.

However, IVM is Merck’s own drug, found safe at doses considerably higher than its standard dose in several studies, as cited in the section on the background on IVM treatments of COVID-19, and the Nobel Prize committee specifically noted IVM’s safety record in honoring the discovery of this drug in its 2015 prize for medicine.”

If you’d like to learn more about ivermectin’s potential uses for COVID-19, FLCCC’s I-CARE protocol can be downloaded in full,37 giving you step-by-step instructions on how to prevent and treat the early symptoms of COVID-19.

Hey, It’s Good Enough for the Golf Course

Posted on by

Are You Excited to Drink Treated Toilet Water?

Analysis by Tessa Lena
drink treated toilet water

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Our existing tap water is not as clean as we want to believe
  • All the usual suspects are trying to use the flaws of the existing water treatments systems, as well as the “climate” rhetoric, to push for the “extreme” use of recycled water on a massive scale
  • While some uses of recycled water, such as industrial reuse, make great sense, there is a significant social engineering effort to train us to accept treated “blackwater” for drinking and household use
  • There is also a strong regulatory push
  • The devil is always in the detail, and there is no guarantee at all that the new treatment systems designed to convert sewage to drinking water will consistently do a perfect job
  • There is more to us than “meat bags who consume drinking water,” we have dignity, and our dignity is what the overlords want to subvert

This story is about humiliation sold to the people as “fighting climate change.” To be specific, it’s about forcing the people to explicitly and inevitably use processed toilet water for drinking and other household use.

Yes, implicitly, we have all been ingesting “mystery” ingredients in our drinking water, in our air and food for years. Yes, industrial companies have been dumping their waste into rivers for God knows how long (and before the Clean Water Act of 1972, it was not even considered “bad”). But right now they are trying to make the humiliation official.

They desire for us to sheepishly nod and say that yes, we, little insignificant people, want to drink our own waste, eat bugs, etc. Our aspiring overlords are nostalgic about the good ol’ feudal days, and they are trying to put us, lowly peasants, back in our place. That’s my take on it, anyway.

A Little Bit of Philosophy

I feel sadness and grief. I am grieving the attack on the sacred, on the things that are very simple and timeless, on the joy that is ours. I grieving the insult as I look at the unnaturally white geoengineered sky, at the rain filled with chemicals, at the old trees being cut in my neighborhood park in the name of climate change.

I am grieving the ugly sight of sewage bits floating in the nearby river, it is just so wrong! How sad it is that for all the empty talk about using technology for “sustainable future,” they can’t even contain the feces and the waste overrunning water treatment facilities in New York.

And let’s not forget that when we talk about sewage water in the U.S., “some city sewer lines run right to the factories, allowing them to dump their waste into the city’s sewage treatment plants.” What we are dealing with here is more upside-down language.

They, the “they,” are trying to convince us that their new-ish lucrative water recycling is akin to the natural cycle of life and death that happens in nature (which is not the case, those are very much not the same, and their “systems” are full of sloppy holes — which works for them since every lucrative “solution” they sell comes with holes and problems they will lucratively “solve” at a later point).

They are also mixing up the reasonable with the absurd and packing both into the same basket. They are saying that the need for more water is due to population growth and climate change. Well, is it really so, or is it that their new so called “sustainable” model is a lie?

Is it maybe that their “sustainable” future requires massive data centers, insane “smart” tech everywhere (like this one), an army of robots, giant wind turbines, toxic solar panels, etc.? (And speaking of “climate,” would it maybe help to stop playing God and to cut their crazy geoengineering feats?)

Besides, there’s a big difference between sending treated waste water for industrial reuse (which I think is sensible) and making people drink it. But they are talking about it as if it were all one sustainable thing.

Our mobsters have funds printed on demand for them to push “vaccine” propaganda but they “save” on the sanitary standards for the peasants. In New York where I am at, there is even an attempt to dump large amount of radioactive materials from a decommissioned nuclear power plant straight into the Hudson river, close to where several of my friends live. In what world is this happening? Oh, in my world. How can I not feel grief?

New York, New York

Call me naive but I have not considered drinking my own waste or using it for laundry, in practical terms. I was aware of the talk about it. I knew about the long-standing plight of a Hopi nation in Arizona against the use of waste-generated artificial snow at a ski resort slapped on top of their sacred site.

But I didn’t know that in San Francisco, for example, there was a legal requirement for on-site waste water recycling in new development projects over 100,000 square feet. And I didn’t know that was an active and coordinated push for similar requirements in many American states.

Only recently, I learned that in New York, the New School and a couple of fancy building complexes were using “treated (knock on wood, fingers crossed) toilet water for washing clothes.” What?!

The New School

The New School is a trendy university in the heart of New York. The tuition runs between approximately 20K and 30K per semester. Using their own words, “whether you’re on our main campus in New York City or our Parsons Paris campus, the boundaries of the classroom dissolve as the city becomes your studio, rehearsal space, and research center.” [Another boundary evidently dissolved is between the toilet and the laundromat].

For giggles, I searched for “blackwater” (industry speak for liquid sewage waste) on their website, and found that “the New School’s University Center has won the Urban Land Institute 2017–2018 Global Award for Excellence,” and greywater and blackwater treatment are listed among the sustainability accomplishments, etc. This is the only mention of toilet water on their website I was able to find.

However, the wastewater recycling company that they have been working with, Natural Systems Utilities, is far more explicit in their tooting the toilet water horn:

“Working with NSU [Natural Systems Utilities], the New School installed conservation fixtures and an on-site water treatment and reclaimed water system at The New University Center on 5th Avenue. The systems are designed to reduce water use by 74% and reduce discharge into the combined sewer by 89%.

All wastewater (commonly referred to as “blackwater”) is collected and treated at The New University Center including water from toilets, sinks, showers, laundry, etc.

Stormwater is also included as a source of reclaimed water after being detained by the vegetated green roofs The University Center contains one of the largest in-building water recycling systems in New York City at 40,000 gallons per day (gpd). The University Center is one of the first buildings approved to reuse treated water for laundry [emphasis mine].”

A rhetorical question from this lowly peasant: Are prospective students and their parents being told this curious tidbit during school tours? And if so, do the people taking pride in washing their clothes in treated toilet water also wear masks on their faces to protect themselves from disease?

Battery Park City

In New York, The Battery City Park complex is another pioneer of water reuse:

“Sustainable urban development reaches new heights in downtown Manhattan with Battery Park. Battery Park City is a redevelopment area of 92 acres under the control of the NYC Battery Park City Authority (BPCA) of New York City.

Natural Systems Utilities (NSU) designed, built and currently operates the wastewater reuse systems and rainwater recycling systems within six Battery Park City Buildings.

These campus utilities systems have consistently achieved greater than 50% water consumption reduction and a greater than 60% reduction in wastewater discharge (compared to similar base residential buildings in NYC).

These water recycling project savings are the direct result of wastewater reuse and water conservation. Battery Park City has been developed as a model for scaling water conservation and reuse projects in urban redevelopment and campus-scale settings.”

New York City is a place where a beautiful park in Manhattan is being destroyed this very moment, and old, tall, dignified trees are being brutally cut down in the name of “climate change.” (I reckon, someone in a high chair is making bank on tearing down the existing park and putting an elevated novelty in its place to prepare for the rising seas).

Somehow, the city that is in danger of being submerged is simultaneously in danger of water shortages and needs the peasants to locally reuse their own toilet waste. Got it, dear overlords, thanks.

Domino

According to the New York Times, “on the Brooklyn waterfront, the 11-acre, roughly $3 billion Domino Sugar Refinery redevelopment will feature a more than $10 million black-water system designed not only to cut water use but to reduce pressure on storm-water systems.” Are we talking about Domino Sugar associated with trafficking, forced labor, and occasional contamination-related product recalls? Oh, thank goodness they are into sustainability now.

Trendsetters

According to the Christian Scient Monitor: San Francisco is “leading the charge in extreme water recycling. In 2015, the city mandated a decentralized approach, requiring the cleaning and reusing of water on-site for all new buildings larger than 100,000 square feet.

Researchers estimate that in five to 10 years, the technology, safety testing, and regulations will come together to enable water neutrality, achieved through circular systems that repeatedly reuse a set amount of water rather than pumping water in from outside sources.”

That same year, in 2015, Bill Gates drank what allegedly was a glass of recycled waste water, on camera. In the words of the NPR, “Bill Gates raised a glass to (and of) water from poop.”

“It’s a scientifically sound idea, and Bill Gates has a video to prove it. In the video, released this week, he stands in front of the Janicki Omniprocessor, a giant new machine that can turn human waste into clean drinking water in minutes. He waits patiently as Peter Janicki — the engineer who invented the contraption — fills his glass with crystal-clear water from the machine.

Without the slightest hesitation, Gates takes a sip. ‘The water tasted as good as any I’ve had out of a bottle,’ he wrote on his blog’ and having studied the engineering behind it, I would happily drink it every day. It’s that safe.’

The Omniprocessor is one of the latest projects funded by the Gates Foundation (which also supports NPR [emphasis mine, and lol]), and the philanthropist wants the rest of the world to back it up as well. The machine’s purpose is to help the 783 million [the live link now goes to a 404 page] people living without clean water and the nearly 2.5 billion who don’t have adequate sanitation.”

Recently, Yale published an article titled “Beyond the Yuck Factor: Cities Turn to ‘Extreme’ Water Recycling.” Here is what they have to say:

“While centralized water reuse for nonpotable purposes has been around for decades, a trend called the ‘extreme decentralization of water and wastewater’ — also known as ‘distributed water systems,’ or ‘on-site’ or ‘premise’ recycling — is now emerging as a leading strategy in the effort to make water use more sustainable.

It’s not just a pipe dream. Proof of concept is unfolding in San Francisco, which in 2015 required all new buildings of more than 100,000 square feet to have on-site recycling systems. So far, six blackwater and 25 graywater systems are using the technology, and many others are in the works. (Blackwater comes from toilets, dishwashers, and kitchen sinks; graywater comes from washing machines, showers, and bathtubs.) […]

To demonstrate its technology, Epic Cleantec, a water recycling company, has even brewed a beer called Epic OneWater Brew with purified graywater from a 40-story San Francisco apartment building.”

Santa Clara County

“Environmentally-friendly drought-proof supply”

San Diego

Here is a promotional bit from San Diego Coastkeeper, an environmental NGO.

“After years of research, advocacy, and legal action, San Diego Coastkeeper, along with our environmental partners at CERF, Surfrider Foundation San Diego, and San Diego Audubon Society, signed a cooperative agreement with the City of San Diego obligating the City to implement the region’s first large-scale wastewater recycling project.

By the full completion date in 2035, the Pure Water project will provide 83 million gallons of locally-sourced drinking water per day, meeting nearly one-third of San Diego’s drinking water needs. Additionally, this multi-benefit project will result in a substantial reduction in partially-treated wastewater discharges into the ocean, serving to protect the health and water quality of our coastal waters.”

Stanford: Hold My Beer

Stanford Engineering beat them all. “The cleanest drinking water is recycled,” they say. I am going to steal the sarcastic tone from Riley Waggaman and say that, according to Stanford, toilet water is what the peasants crave.

The Stanford Engineering take is based on this 2022 study whose conclusion was that the “cytotoxicity of potable reuse waters is lower than that of drinking waters derived from surface waters.”

My conclusion is that tap water is lamentably dirty (oh, surprise) but it doesn’t mean that the solution is to switch to treated toilet water. It just means that the facilities that process fresh water need to do a better job. Maybe it’s just me.

Dignity

What is missing from all this industry rhetoric is the intangible beauty, the dignity, the joy of life. What is missing is the fact that we are not meat bags and not machines who can be “cooled off” with treated sewage waste.

Now, if one wants to drink processed toilet water, fine, they can do whatever they want. That can be a choice. But the oligarchs hate it when we have choices! Human subjectivity, dignity, and free will are very scary things to them. So they want to subjugate our souls, steal our dignity in novel ways, and make us eat bugs (that we don’t want to eat) and drink toilet water (that we don’t want to drink). All of this has an S&M feel to it somehow.

Texas

So, California and New York are bragging about potable toilet water. What about Texas? The language on the Texas state government website is a lot more tame and reasonable, talking about the industrial reuse of recycled water, which makes sense. But it seems like the policies could potentially become somewhat similar. Time will tell!

water reclamation methods

“One of the latest examples in this trend is the 198,000-square-foot Austin Central Library, which has reduced its potable water use by 85 percent by capturing rainwater and air conditioning condensate and tapping into the city’s purple pipe network. (Purple is the standard color of pipes across the U.S. that carry recycled water.)

[The reclaimed water is used for “toilet flushing and irrigation,” not for drinking, but the devil is always in the detail, and it all depends on how clean the end product is, etc.]

In June, the city of Austin celebrated a rain and condensate catchment system along with a mini sewage treatment plant at the entrance to the city’s new Permitting and Development Center. The catchment system is named OSCAR (short for “on-site collection and reuse system”); the treatment plant, CLARA (“closed-loop advanced reclaimed assembly”).

By catching rainwater, collecting air conditioning condensate and treating sewage on-site for irrigation and non-potable uses like flushing toilets, the city estimates OSCAR and CLARA will reduce potable water demand for the 260,000-square-foot building by 75 percent, saving the city more than 1 million gallons of water each year.”

On a side note, here’s the official statement on the not-a-conspiracy-theory cloud seeding in Texas:

“It is crucial … for Texas to secure the water resources necessary to sustain its growth and provide for the future. To help supplement the state’s water supply, some areas are using periodic cloud seeding attempts to increase rainfall.

Cloud seeding (also called precipitation enhancement) is a form of weather modification used to stimulate clouds to produce more rain. The process involves using aircraft to spray clouds with small particles that have a structure like ice, such as silver iodide. The particles cause the moisture in the cloud to condense into water droplets until they are heavy enough to fall as rain.

Many countries have invested in weather modification technologies, including cloud seeding, in recent years to mitigate water shortages caused by population growth and drought. The United Arab Emirates, for example, has been a leader in exploring this technology within the dry Gulf region, operating a cloud seeding program since 2002.”

Phew, I can now finally take my tinfoil hat off.

Florida

No climate change language, possibly similar policies.

United Kingdom

Just the other day, the Guardian published a story about a class action lawsuit against water companies who had allegedly lied about the amount of partially treated and raw sewage they discharged into rivers, lakes, coastal waters, and other waterways:

“The public could receive hundreds of millions of pounds in compensation in the first class action against water companies which are alleged to have failed to reveal the true scale of raw sewage discharges, and abused their position as privatised monopolies,” the Guardian said.

Previously, the Guardian noted the following:

“British people need to be ‘less squeamish’ about drinking water derived from sewage, the boss of the Environment Agency has said …

He said: ‘Part of the solution will be to reprocess the water that results from sewage treatment and turn it back into drinking water – perfectly safe and healthy, but not something many people fancy.’ Bevan admitted the move would be ‘unpopular’ and reactions on social media have been mixed but he said there was a need to ‘change how we think about water.’”

There may be a bit of a story arc here, in addition to the obvious issue at hand. As it goes, the original “solution” wasn’t very good. So a new solution is proposed, and the logic is: “There is already waste in the water, and the treatment technologies aren’t great due to the faulty assumption is that there is no waste in the water processed … so why don’t we just process the waste knowingly, and this time around, the water will be clean?” Etc.

The Cynicism of It All

What is happening is that the super oligarchs decided that the peasants have gotten too well-fed and too dignified, and that they should be reinstated in their official status of property of the overlords. As property, the peasants are far more useful to the masters if they don’t take up too much space.

From the overlords’ perspective, it is rather perfect to make the people drink their own waste and eat the bugs that eat our waste, while also creating a whole new lucrative waste-processing market out of thin air.

Having deiced that, the super oligarchs got to work, funded the “right” research, bribed the right high-level influencers who then inspired the well-intended followers, and there it goes. And now this idea has a life of its own, its passionate proponents, consultants, profiteers … oh the cynicism of it all.

Another Word on Dignity

I think this challenge, like so many challenges today, is about remembering our dignity. It’s tough. How do you convey to a person who sees himself (and you) as a meat bag that it’s not dignifying for your soul to drink processed toilet water, even if it’s “clean”? How do you convey that the natural cycles of nature are not the same as Bill Gate’s plant?

The self-identifying meat bag probably won’t hear you and won’t understand what you mean. And so it’s fair to grieve. But the trick, I think, is to respect your grief but not feel dejected, and to remember the sacredness and the beauty of your soul no matter what. And to refuse to be turned into a dejected slave even if they try to do it to you. You are not a slave.

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

from:  https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/08/25/drink-treated-toilet-water.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20230825_HL2&foDate=true&mid=DM1454798&rid=1893364348

Guts, Enzymes, Serotonin, And Health — And a note about DNA

Posted on by

How Endotoxins and Estrogen Can Wreck Your Health

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
  • Endotoxin and mycotoxins play an important role in many chronic degenerative diseases
  • Endotoxin, also known as lipopolysaccharide (LPS), is produced by gram-negative bacteria in your gut. When complex carbs aren’t digested in your stomach, they travel down to the intestine where they feed these bacteria, and as the bacteria grow, multiply and die, the bacteria release LPS, which can result in leaky gut, allergic reactions, organ dysfunction and even sepsis
  • Endotoxin also catalyzes metabolic reactions that convert tryptophan in your gut to serotonin. You do not want high levels of serotonin because it’s antimetabolic. It suppresses your body’s ability to create energy in the electron transport chain, so you become tired and fatigued, your metabolic rate slows and you gain weight
  • Estrogen excess can produce symptoms that are identical to endotoxin toxicity, and an estimated 30% of endotoxin cases are misdiagnosed, and are related to excess estrogen
  • Estrogen is one of our biggest toxic threats today, as both men and women are exposed to high amounts of estrogenic compounds in their diet and environment. Most already have too much estrogen, which is a major driver of certain cancers

Today’s interview features Kashif Khan, founder and CEO of The DNA Company, which analyzes your DNA and keeps your data private, unlike 23andMe and other companies that sell your genetic data to third parties like drug companies.

Our discussion here is not about DNA analysis, however, but rather endotoxin and mycotoxin, which can play an important role in many chronic degenerative diseases, and estrogen excess, which can produce symptoms identical to endotoxin. Khan is quite knowledgeable in this area.

“The biggest area where we’re seeing a flood of people coming in, is in the female health world,” Khan says. “Not that this is an answer for everybody, but what we’re seeing is that all these women are concerned about how they feel and it’s been labeled as an endotoxin problem.

We’re diving in and seeing that about 30% of them are misdiagnosed. It’s actually an estrogen problem. They have the same symptoms, same complaints, same everything. We know that endotoxins are a concern, and so that concern is being taught in functional medicine … Mycotoxins are also being misdiagnosed.

So, a big area we end up supporting and helping is actually looking at the hormone pathway and seeing what toxic hormones are people making. This is one piece of the conversation, it’s one slice, but it’s a big slice where the most help is needed …

Whether it’s men producing DHT that’s causing inflammation, or women producing 4-hydroxy estrogen or 16-hydroxy estrogen as this constant trickle of inflammation, representing the same symptoms, same everything, they’re just not getting help. They’re not getting fixed because that’s what’s actually driving the symptoms. And we keep seeing this over and over again.”

What Are Endotoxin and Mycotoxin?

Endotoxin, also known as lipopolysaccharide (LPS), is produced by gram-negative bacteria in your gut. When complex carbs aren’t digested in your stomach, they travel down to the intestine where they feed these bacteria, and as the bacteria grow, multiply and die, the bacteria release LPS, which can result in leaky gut, allergic reactions, organ dysfunction and even sepsis.

Endotoxin also catalyzes a series of metabolic reactions that convert tryptophan in your gut to serotonin. Most people think serotonin is good, but mostly, especially higher levels, it is not good for your health. You do not want high levels of serotonin because it’s an antimetabolite.

This means it suppresses your body’s ability to create energy in your mitochondria in the electron transport chain, so you become tired and fatigued, your metabolic rate slows and you gain weight.

While endotoxin typically is related to gram-negative bacteria, mycotoxin is generated by things like fungi and yeast, such as candida. Mycotoxin such as mold can also have a volatile organic compounds (VOCs) aspect to it. This is the smell or odor, which can make you sick all by itself.

Toxic Reservoirs Must Be Addressed

As explained by Khan, when it comes to endotoxin and mycotoxin, it’s important to realize that you likely have a reservoir of toxin-producing bacteria in your system that will continue causing problems for as long as you keep feeding them. What’s more, within the metabolic pathway of endotoxin, a gene expression change occurs that is triggered by nutrition or environment.

“That triggers production of enzymes and proteins like amylase and cellulase to then convert the fuel that they’re consuming into the building blocks of the ensuing toxins, like mycotoxins, for example,” Khan explains.

“So, you have this internal combustion engine of making more and more, and the genes are being triggered in the actual toxin to make more of the outcome of this inflammatory toxin. And so, it’s happening on the inside too. That’s what people don’t get.

You’re binding and clearing, but if you’re not dealing with innate fungal overgrowth or toxin overload, you’re still making more of it. We often look at the gut as the source of what you need to work on, but it’s not just about what’s coming in. It’s also what you make on the inside. People need to think about that.”

How to Address Endotoxin and Mycotoxin

To address this vicious cycle, you need to heal and seal your gut. Beneficial bacteria, such as bifidobacteria and lactobacillus, and beneficial yeast like Saccharomyces boulardii can help repopulate your gut with beneficial microbes.

Saccharomyces boulardii is frequently prescribed by knowledgeable physicians to individuals who need to take antibiotics, because the saccharomyces are not killed by antibiotics. Intermittent use of binders such as activated charcoal, cholestyramine (a prescription drug), clays and chlorella can also be helpful to clear out some of the endotoxin.

In severe cases, you may even need to use antibiotics to sterilize your gut, although I don’t typically recommend this. Obviously, you also need to reduce the fuel source, so avoid complex carbs and resistant starches.

The strategies for mycotoxin are similar. However, as noted by Khan, most of the mycotoxin you’re exposed to comes from your food, and most of the mycotoxin in food is produced during shipping and storage. Generally, about 10% of the food supply is contaminated at the source, but once it’s reached its destination, the contamination level is 25%. So, to avoid mycotoxin, eating locally-grown food is part of the solution.

Humic and Fulvic Acids Help Clear Intracellular Toxins

If binders and beneficial bacteria and/or yeast don’t do the trick, you may have leaky gut. In that case, your gut also needs to be healed. Signs of leaky gut include constipation or diarrhea, and the route of elimination needs to be fixed before you can start to really move toxins out.

“One really cool thing we’re finding is there’s sometimes solutions that aren’t labeled for a particular problem, but they work. Humic and fulvic minerals are doing a really good job of drawing [out] intracellular [toxins], and healing the cellular membrane, because fulvic minerals have this unique attribute where they have this charge to be able to bring nutrients into the cell.

Once they do that, they flip their charge to draw toxins out. They bring them back out with them. And so, we’re finding people who are taking good minerals are healing much faster, if they’re taking the right stuff, because there’s this double whammy of healing the gut, taking out what’s in the blood, but also intracellular [and] cell membrane-wise.”

You may also need liver and bile support to ensure efficient detox. One thing to remember is that complete healing can take a long time. “It can take two years,” Khan says. “If you’re not just masking a symptom to feel better, it’s going to take time. It’s not a question of weeks.”

Serotonin Toxicity

Getting back to serotonin for a moment, this is a major problem that most people aren’t aware of. There’s a disease process called serotonin syndrome, caused by excess serotonin in the gut. One of the signs of serotonin syndrome is loose stools or diarrhea.

If you’re one of the 40% of adult women in the United States over 40 who are taking an SSRI antidepressant, consider finding a competent physician to help you wean yourself from that drug as soon as possible. There are other safer ways to address depression and anxiety.

Safer, and far more beneficial would be drugs like Benadryl or diphenhydramine, which is an antihistamine. It can block serotonin quite effectively, as can famotidine (Pepsid). Also reduce your intake of tryptophan-rich foods, as tryptophan converts into serotonin. Khan adds:

“When it comes to the serotonin issue, it’s not always about production. It’s more about utilization. We can predict somebody’s genetic propensity to use serotonin. It’s in the length of the receptor. When somebody has the shorter receptor, it’s not that they’re producing less, but they can’t use it. They can’t utilize it efficiently, and so these people are often constantly irritable.

They’re very distractible. It becomes hard for their brain to prioritize a stimulus because they don’t have the right receptor to bind and experience the stimulus as it should be. So, they appear to be irritable and distractible. If things annoy you a lot, if things bother you, if you have trouble staying asleep in the second half of night, those are traits of serotonin dysregulation.”

The Hazards of Estrogen

While estrogen replacement therapy is all the rage, this strategy is likely doing far more harm than good. I strongly recommend avoiding estrogen replacement therapy, even bioidentical, organic estrogen replacement therapy. You can go on other forms of hormone therapy, but not estrogen. Khan explains:

“[Estrogen] is certainly one of our biggest toxic threats today, especially given that you have to think of it contextually. Our context today is not grandma’s context. [Due to] the hormone disruption and estrogen mimics we’re dealing with [today], you already have too much, and you’re adding more through hormone replacement therapy or birth control pills.

So, we’re already in a context where it’s a threat, so you have to pay attention to it. The layers you have to look at are dominance. So, what do I make? Am I more androgenized, am I more estrogenized? And you can predict that through the genes that metabolize each step of the cascade … progesterone to testosterone, to estrogen. What do I do in each one of those steps?

Many women — and men, by the way — are estrogen-dominant and just produce way too much. It’s [due to] a conversion of CYP19A1 to testosterone and estrogen. That’s why aromatase-inhibitor inhibitors work well, because you are just flowing the gene expression down in that one location, and all of a sudden, you have more free flowing testosterone.

By the way, there are three pathways that your estrogens convert into, potentially, before you clear them, and these metabolites are 2-, 4- and 16-hydroxy estrogen. 2-hydroxy estrogen is the good clean stuff you want. 4- and 16-hydroxy estrogen are toxic.

We’ve seen over and over again, when we’re dealing with breast cancer patients, ovarian cancer patients, who were told, ‘You have BRCA, go cut your breasts off.’ And then they’re just getting ovarian cancer instead. Or vice versa. It’s because of this.

So, BRCAs are a repair tool. It’s just supposed to fix things. It doesn’t cause anything. But these two metabolites, the 4 and 16 [are] highly inflammatory, [and] we know all chronic conditions are rooted in inflammation. For men, the 16-hydroxy pathway is closely connected to testicular cancer. In the androgen pathway, dihydrotestosterone fuels prostate cancer.”

Detox and Clearance of Estrogen

To detox estrogen, the same detox pathways used for other toxins also apply here, such as the glutathione pathway, antioxidation, superoxide dismutase and COMT, which is the tail end of methylation. COMT, in particular, is really important for clearing toxic estrogens, whereas glucuronidation deals with some of the androgen toxins.

“If you take a hormone therapy and look at this cascade, what are most women getting? They’re getting estradiol, typically, which converts into 4-hydroxy estrogen, which is a cancer fuel.

If you have a woman who is already teetering on the edge of poor health because she converts into one of these buckets and you give her estradiol, you’ve just given the raw ingredients to fuel this, and then all of a sudden inflammation’s through the roof. And where did this breast cancer come from?

I’m dealing with a family where there’s breast cancer, and a woman that previously had ovarian cancer. And what happened in those two parts of her life? Two years prior to the breast cancer, in menopause, she started her hormone replacement therapy, and she took estradiol …

Keep in mind, in menopause you don’t have a menstrual cycle anymore, so you’re not clearing that toxin. It just gets stored in fat. That’s what your body does with it, which is why you have inflammation in the breast. That’s where you have a lot of fat as a woman.

Take it back a couple of decades, when she had the ovarian cancer, it’s because she was on the birth control pill for eight years. Same thing, she was fueling more estrogen into that bucket that she converted into 4-hydroxy estrogen, which caused ovarian cancer at that time. Same problem. The root is the estrogen dominance and toxicity.

In men, we see things like gynecomastia, loss of libido, hair loss. And you’re seeing that in numbers today more than ever before. There are no manly men. Where did they all go?

We have estrogens in our water. Estrogens don’t break down, they’re like forever chemicals. When a woman flushes her tampon in the toilet or her birth control pill that she peed out and some guy drinks it months later, once it gets past filtration and sanitation, he’s still taking the estrogens in.

They’re still there. The challenge is that the total load just keeps increasing, and we’re all exposed to it. We have to think about not only what we make and who we are, but in the context of this estrogen toxic soup, where it’s everywhere already, so the total load is far too much.”

How to Measure Estrogen Excess

There are two ways to measure or gauge potential estrogen excess. One is to look at your genetics to understand how you metabolize estrogen. The other is to take a standard DUTCH test, which is commonly used to monitor patients on hormone replacement therapy.

Unfortunately, many doctors are not trained on interpreting metabolites. They’re looking at estrogen alone, not understanding that there are genes that metabolize and turn the estrogen into different things.

“We work with a lot of NHL hockey players,” Khan says. “In 2019, a bunch of them were coming to us with man boobs, and we found out there was a new trend of taking this AndroGel pack.

It’s a gel that goes on your stomach. Androgens, testosterone, enters your bloodstream, and the thinking is, ‘I gave you testosterone, you should have more testosterone.’

But … some men had the fast CYP19A1 gene that converts it all into estrogen. So, I gave you testosterone, but your body’s saying, ‘Turn that into estrogen.’ And that’s what you’re doing with it. All those gentlemen needed was an aromatase inhibitor. Just block the estrogen conversion.

That’s where knowing where to intervene in that cascade makes things a lot easier. Most of the time, we already have the raw ingredients, we just need to plug into the right place with the right supplement, either speed something up or slow something down.”

Better Options

I’m not opposed to all hormone replacement therapy. The master precursor hormone, though, is pregnenolone. That is the base hormone that converts to all others, and it’s unlikely to aromatize. The ideal administration route is once a day in a cacao butter suppository. DHEA, which is a male hormone, at 5 to 10 mg can also be added.

Easier, but not as effectively absorbed, would be to swallow it as an oral pill, but it must be taken with a saturated fat to make sure it bypasses liver metabolism. Something like a teaspoon of butter or beef with fat in it would also work.

DHEA can easily aromatize and can form estrogen, which is not a good thing, so you need to be careful about using too much. Those are two base hormones that people can use rather safely. You can also use progesterone, which is anti-estrogen.

The oral route is only about 85% effective with the butter, compared to nearly 100% with the suppository route. Cacao butter works much better than coconut oil, as it is a longer chain saturated fat and does not melt at room temperature. If you do use suppositories, ideally, you should not have a bowel movement for three to four hours after insertion.

Estrogen, aside from increasing intracellular calcium concentration, is also antimetabolic, as it slows down your metabolic rate and inhibits your thyroid function, both of which are bad news. It’s toxic to your body in most cases. It is likely only second to excess LA intake as a factor that increases your risk of cancer.

You do need it sometimes, certainly for reproductive purposes and for wound healing, but most of the time you have more than enough to fill those roles, and it’s just an excess, especially with all the xenoestrogens we’re exposed to in the food supply.

“Menopause is a protective measure,” Khan says. “You’re past the fertility stage of your life and this toxin that you needed for that purpose, you don’t need anymore, so your body naturally goes into a state to protect you by not having so much of it. We break nature and try and maintain it, not understanding why the body does this. It’s to protect you. That’s why you go into menopause.”

More Information

If you’re interested in learning more about gene sequencing and genetic testing, which Khan’s company, The DNA Company, does, please listen to the entire interview. We segue into that toward the end.

We also discuss a new Canadian bill that could potentially eliminate most nutritional supplements on the market. This, even though there has not been a single reported death in Canada from a nutritional supplement since 1965. You can learn more about this bill in “Discussion Paper on 2023 Health Canada Initiatives.”1

Basically, they intend to license supplements as drugs, which means bringing a product to market will end up costing around $250,000 to $500,000. “If you go to your naturopath who’s compounding something … they don’t even sell $20,000 of that product per year, so how are they going to pay $500,000 to get it registered?”

And, there’s no grandfather clause. They intend to do this for all products, including existing ones. The bill has already passed, so now they’re just working on its implementation. As a result of this bill, naturopaths may not be able to remain in business either, since they’ll have virtually nothing to prescribe, other than whole foods. “The intention is to put [supplements] in allopathic health care control,” Khan says.

Perhaps the most important take-home from this dialogue is that we need to be prepared. This is already happening in Canada, which means it probably won’t be long before the same kind of legislation shows up in the U.S. When it does, we have to be prepared to push back with all our might.

In closing, if you’re interested in getting genetic testing, go to thednacompany.com/Mercola for 15% (the discount will show at checkout). If you just want to learn more, visit theDNAway.com. There you can also learn more about Khan’s book, “The DNA Way.” You can also follow him on Instagram

Think Your $$$ Is Safe in Big Banks? Think Again

Posted on by

Retail health company has Chase accounts suddenly terminated, owner critical of COVID vaccines, FDA

By Brendon Leslie

Published Jul. 25, 2023, 4:55 p.m. ET | Updated Jul. 26, 2023

Chase bank cancellation letter to Natural Health Partners.
Chase bank cancellation letter to Natural Health Partners.

Editor’s note: This story was updated to include a response from Chase.

Lydia Nusbaum co-authored this report.

CAPE CORAL, Fla. (FLV) – Employees of a Florida-based retail health company said JP Morgan Chase Bank suddenly terminated their personal and company bank accounts without an explanation.

One of the employees believes the account shutdowns were politically motivated and due to their employer’s controversial stance on COVID-19.

Another Mercola Market employee said the sudden decision to close her account is creating additional hurdles to help send money to her husband who is bedridden with dementia in the Philippines.

The owner of Mercola Market, Dr. Joseph Mercola, has criticized of COVID-19 vaccines and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Responding to the report, Chase told Florida’s Voice Wednesday that the accounts weren’t closed for political “affiliations.”

“For privacy reasons, we can’t discuss customer relationships, but we don’t close accounts because of political affiliations, and we didn’t do so in this case,” they said.

Mercola Market sells specialty beverages, food, supplements and other health items. A store is located in Cape Coral.

On July 13, Mercola Market, along with the CEO, CFO and some of their family members, all received similar letters from Chase Bank saying “[they] have decided to close” their individual personal and business accounts.

The letters obtained by Florida’s Voice did not provide a reason why the accounts were suddenly closed. Florida’s Voice reached out to Chase Bank for a response.

A voicemail from a Chase representative to CEO Steven Rye said the reason for closing his personal and wife’s accounts can’t be disclosed “for legal reasons.”

However, Rye believes his the accounts were suddenly shut down because of Dr. Joseph Mercola’s opinions on COVID-19.

“I believe they cancelled all of the accounts because of Dr. Mercola’s (our employer) opinions,” Rye told Florida’s Voice. “He has carried a contradictory view throughout the COVID narrative and co-authored the best selling book The Truth About COVID-19 which exposed the likelihood that this virus was engineered in a laboratory funded by the NIH.”

Rye said he was told his children would not be able to carry accounts with Chase Bank in the future.

“It’s just hard to believe that your family, your wife, your kids can’t have a bank account because of the opinions of your employer and they’ve never done anything wrong,” Rye said. “We all have completely clear records.”

A voicemail from a Chase Bank representative urged Rye to submit paperwork for their accounts to be reconsidered.

“We are going to try because you’re a good client of our institution,” the Chase representative said in a voicemail.

In an email from Chase to Rye Monday, a representative said he is “still trying to figure out what is going on.”

Amalia Legaspi, the CFO of Mercola Market, said both her personal and her son’s personal accounts were canceled. Her son is using the accounts to pay for college expenses.

“I received the letter during weekend and I was surprised that we received the same letters for business accounts with exact wordings,” Legaspi said.

Legaspi’s joint checking account with her husband, who has dementia and is bedridden in the Philippines, was also closed. She uses the account to send money for his medical needs and said she is not allowed to open another bank account in his name.

“I have to provide all the legal documentations including notarized physicians affidavit from the Philippines to prove that my husband is incapable of handling his finances and request the Federal to directly deposit the pension to my own personal account,” Legaspi said.

With regards to the company’s accounts, she said Chase will not give them a reason for the closure to protect the privacy of their clients.

Dr. Mercola said he published articles about the benefits of vitamin D, zinc and quercetin to boost the immune system. He also published testimony from a nurse who claimed patients were being “intentionally killed on ventilators.”

The FDA also sent a letter to Dr. Mercola telling him to take “immediate action” to address “violations” in the letter regarding supplement products the doctor said would aid in COVID-19, calling them “unapproved new drugs” that are “misbranded.”

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation in May to prohibit financial institutions from denying or canceling services based on political or religious beliefs.

from:    https://flvoicenews.com/retail-health-company-has-chase-accounts-suddenly-terminated-owner-critical-of-covid-vaccines-fda/

Autopsy Reports Reveal…..

Posted on by

Study: 74% of Post-Jab Deaths Caused by the Shot

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked 

VIDEO LINK;

https://rumble.com/v2ykrv8-doctors-censored-by-lancet-in-paper-that-found-74-mrna-vaccine-related-caus.html

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist, and colleagues published a systematic review of autopsy findings in people who died after receiving a COVID shot on The Lancet journal’s preprint server
  • The autopsy review found that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection
  • Preprints with The Lancet pulled the study in less than 24 hours
  • The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) also rejected the paper, as did the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The preprint server medRxiv and others also refused to post it
  • Belgian researchers report that two doses of the Pfizer mRNA COVID jab induced lethal “turbo cancers” in a mouse. Two days after receiving its second dose, one of the 14 injected mice (7%) died suddenly. No clinical signs of illness were present before its abrupt death. Upon post-mortem examination, the mouse was found to have lymphoma in several organs, including the heart, liver, kidneys, spleen and lungs

July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist, and several other colleagues published a systematic review of autopsy findings in people who died after receiving a COVID shot on The Lancet journal’s preprint server.1

Disturbingly, but not surprisingly, they concluded that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection. Previous autopsy reviews have also concluded that the mRNA COVID jabs are a causative factor in sudden cardiac deaths.2

Nearly Three-Quarters of Post-Jab Deaths Caused by the Shot

As explained by the authors:3

“The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis … We searched for all published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023.

We initially identified 678 studies and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case. Three physicians independently reviewed all deaths and determined whether COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to death.

The most implicated organ system in COVID-19 vaccine-associated death was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%), the respiratory system (8%), and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases.

The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination …

Among adjudicators, there was complete independent agreement (all three physicians) of vaccination causing or contributing to death in 203 cases (62.5%). The one necropsy case was judged to be linked to vaccination with complete agreement …

The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, their mechanisms, and related excess death, coupled with autopsy confirmation and physician-led death adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases.”

The Lancet Censors Paper

As has so often been the case over these past three years, the journal didn’t waste time censoring the paper. Preprints with The Lancet pulled it within 24 hours,4 stating “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.”5 In what way? They don’t say. As noted by McCullough, the methodology is as standard as it gets. Will Jones at the Daily Sceptic adds:6

“A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line …

Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-Chair of the HART pandemic advisory group, says that in her view the approach taken in the study is sound. She told the Daily Sceptic:

‘The VAERS system … is designed to alert to potential harms without necessarily being the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country.

However, this is imperfect as a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious. An alternative approach of auditing such deaths through autopsy is sound.

There may be a bias [in the study] towards reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation might be exaggerated by that bias. For example, 19 of the 325 deaths were due to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators’ willingness to acknowledge such deaths.

Nevertheless, it is important that attempts are made to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, rather than open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.”

Prior to this, The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) had also rejected the paper, as had the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). NEJM rejected it within a few days, and JAMA within about an hour of submission. The preprint server medRxiv and others also refused to post it.

In the video above, Naomi Wolf with Daily Clout interviewed McCullough about the censoring of his paper. According to McCullough, overnight, while the paper was still on the Preprint server, downloads of the paper were in the hundreds per minute, demonstrating there’s a clear demand for this information.

The paper is currently only available for download on the preprint server Zenodo.7 Ironically, by pulling the paper off the server, The Lancet magnified its existence, as news of the censorship went viral on social media.

Mechanisms of Action

In the featured Daily Clout interview, McCullough explains the jab’s mechanisms of action that appear to be responsible for a majority of post-jab heart-related deaths. The first is myocarditis (heart inflammation). The other is progression of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

In myocarditis, the electrical current can no longer conduct smoothly through the heart muscle, causing an abnormal heart rhythm. This abnormal heart rhythm can then lead to sudden cardiac death. This is one of the primary reasons behind many athletic deaths, where players have died on the field.

In a letter to the editor of the Scandinavian Journal of Immunology published in late 2022,8,9 McCullough compared the pre- and post-COVID jab cardiac death rates among athletes, finding that before the jab, there were an average of 29 cardiac-related deaths among pro athletes per year.

After the rollout of the jab, which was mandated on players, it shot up to 283 per year — a 10-fold increase. And, in many cases, players have no prior symptoms. Wolf points out that lipid nanoparticles have been found to damage electrical conduction in the myelin sheath, so why would it not also damage electrical conduction in the heart? It makes sense that it would.

McCullough adds that when lipid nanoparticles are taken up by human somatic cells — nonreproductive cells, found in the heart and other internal organs — it causes syncytia formation where cell membranes fuse together.

And, because the heart prefers lipids over glucose for fuel, it may preferentially take up lipid nanoparticles, more so than other tissues. On top of that, exercise increases blood flow, which draws more lipid nanoparticles to the heart.

He also cites research showing there are two primary periods of sudden cardiac death: during exercise and between 3 AM and 6 AM. The common factor between these two is adrenaline. Adrenaline surges during exercise and in the natural waking process. If you have myocarditis, this adrenaline surge can be enough to trigger sudden cardiac death.

Shining a Light on Possible Treatments

As noted by Wolf, by clearly identifying how the COVID jab is killing people, McCullough’s paper also helps shed light on potential treatments. The spike protein produced by your body in response to the mRNA shot is the primary culprit that needs to be degraded and eliminated.

The enzymes in your body that would normally do this job are unable to degrade the synthetic spike protein, but there are products that can get the job done. McCullough refers to Japanese research that found nattokinase can be very helpful in this regard. However, lumbrokinase is a much stronger fibrinolytic enzyme and would likely work better.

Bromelain, an enzyme derived from pineapple stems, also works, McCullough says, as does curcumin, the active ingredient in turmeric. We also know that both hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin aid in the elimination of spike protein.

As noted by McCullough, it’s interesting that while the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the spike protein produced by the mRNA jab are synthetic and wholly unnatural, most of the best remedies are turning out to be all-natural compounds.

Reprehensible Medical Censorship

At the end of the interview, McCullough says that if the current censorship trend continues, medical history may well state that the COVID shots are perfectly safe, even though there’s plenty of evidence to the contrary — evidence that was never allowed to be seen.

In a three-part series for TrialSite News, published in 2021, investigative journalist Sonia Elijah reviewed how scientific journals were censoring the science on COVID. July 7, 2023, she published a follow-up based on the most recent censoring of McCullough’s paper:10

“This is just another example of a paper with findings, not fitting in with the ‘very good safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccines,’ being expelled from a prominent journal,” she writes. “Dr. McCullough commented exclusively for TrialSite about this highly concerning issue. This is what he said:

‘This act of medical censorship occurred after the paper met all the criteria for listing on the Lancet PrePrint Server and appears to be triggered by very heavy worldwide interest and rapid downloading of the paper.

This speaks to the importance of our findings as the largest summary of autopsies after COVID-19 vaccination. Elsevier and Lancet are trying to suppress critical scientific observations on COVID-19 vaccine safety. Their actions are reprehensible.’

My own research11 in analyzing the Periodic Safety Update Reports compiled by Pfizer for the European Medicines Agency revealed damning data. As of June 2022, 161 children have died shortly after taking the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

What is even more shocking is that an overwhelming majority of autopsies were not performed or followed up by the pharmaceutical behemoth … This is why McCullough et al.’s study is so key because there is an incredible lack of laboratory data and post-mortem information on these post-vaccine deaths …

This begs the all-important question — has this scarcity been carefully orchestrated to prevent sufficient evidence of a causal association of COVID-19 vaccines with the reported deaths?”

Case Report of mRNA Jab-Induced Turbo Cancers

In related news, Belgian researchers report that two doses of the Pfizer mRNA COVID jab induced lethal “turbo cancers” in a mouse. Two days after receiving its second dose, one of the 14 injected mice (7%) died suddenly. No clinical signs of illness were present before its abrupt death.

Upon post-mortem examination, the mouse was found to have lymphoma in several organs, including the heart, liver, kidneys, spleen and lungs. The case report, published in Frontiers in Oncology May 1, 2023, noted:12

“Two days following booster vaccination (i.e., 16 days after prime), at only 14 weeks of age, our animal suffered spontaneous death with marked organomegaly and diffuse malignant infiltration of multiple extranodal organs (heart, lung, liver, kidney, spleen) by lymphoid neoplasm.

Immunohistochemical examination revealed organ sections positive for CD19, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase, and c-MYC, compatible with a B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma immunophenotyped …

Given the paucity of data on the long-term safety of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, it is vital that clinicians and scientists report any adverse event to establish potential correlations.

Our case adds to previous clinical reports on malignant lymphoma development following novel SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Interestingly, we are the first to report a B-LBL subtype …

Although strong evidence proving or refuting a causal relationship between SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination and lymphoma development or progression is lacking, vigilance is required, with conscientious reporting of similar cases and a further investigation of the mechanisms of action that could explain the aforementioned association.”

Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab

Aside from autopsy assessments, case reports of harms and various other studies, things like job statistics, disability claims, life insurance claims and all-cause mortality statistics also tell us that the COVID jabs are having a devastating effect.13 All have skyrocketed since the introduction of these COVID jabs.

If you got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, first and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your body.

The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects. Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.

When it comes to treatment, it seems like many of the treatments that worked against severe COVID-19 infection also help ameliorate adverse effects from the jab. This makes sense, as the toxic, most damaging part of the virus is the spike protein, and that’s what your whole body is producing if you got the jab.

As mentioned earlier, eliminating the spike protein is a primary task to prevent and/or address post-jab injuries. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine bind to and facilitate the removal of spike protein. According to McCullough, nattokinase, bromelain and curcumin also help degrade the spike protein.

For a comprehensive treatment plan, see the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) I-RECOVER protocol. It’s continuously updated as more data become available, so be sure to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com.14

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/18/post-covid-vaccination-deaths.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20230718_HL2&foDate=true&mid=DM1435273&rid=1858959125

Using The Excuse of HEALTH to Enslave Humanity

Posted on by

Launch of a New Doorway to Freedom

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

Here is the lnk for the Video with Dr. Meryl Nass:

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization is laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity”
  • A new organization called Door to Freedom is being set up as a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely
  • The global cabal that is trying to seize control over the world have access to loads of capital, but they’re also using our tax dollars. The U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response. Much of that money went to bribe media, hospitals, influencers, churches, medical groups and other social organizations to push the official narrative
  • Current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, federal government employees as well as many private organizations. Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified
  • We need to pass new laws that eliminate all of these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed

In this video, I interview repeat guest Dr. Meryl Nass, who has a monthly podcast with journalist James Corbett on Children’s Health Defense (CHD) TV. Their show is focused on the implementation of the World Health Organization’s efforts to install global tyranny with respect to health and global governance.

The implications for public health are enormous and extremely troubling. The WHO is basically laying the foundation to take control over all aspects of everyone’s lives, across the world, under the auspice of “biosecurity.”

In this interview, Nass explains how the WHO is being set up as a central governing body for the world, and what we can do to stop it. She also details the price she’s paid for taking a stand against the false COVID narrative and offering early treatment.

Sacrificial Lamb

Nass was one of the doctors who, during the COVID pandemic, offered patients early treatment in Maine and Maryland. As a result, her medical license was suspended and the medical board forced her to undergo psychiatric evaluation. Apparently, in the present era, doctors who think saving lives is more important than following unscientific medical advice created by bureaucrats is considered insanity. She comments:

“This whole pandemic, and the takeover of the world by ‘elites, (global cabal)’ has been orchestrated primarily through fear, and one thing that’s necessary is to make doctors cooperate. To do that, the best way is to scare them, and the best way to scare them is to threaten their medical licenses …

In July and August of 2021, there were national news reports of several doctors who were prescribing ivermectin and [who] were being investigated, but none of them actually lost their licenses.

Apparently, this was not enough to stop doctors from prescribing ivermectin, and in states where it was allowed, hydroxychloroquine. These are both licensed drugs and the federal government had no legal authority to take them off the menu.

Licensed doctors could prescribe licensed drugs, as could nurse practitioners, PAs [physician’s assistants], et cetera. Neither one had a black box warning, neither one was a controlled substance. They were both safe, and they both had been used for a number of decades.

So, instead, it had to be done through the states — because states regulate medical practice in the U.S., and pharmacy practice — so, about 30 states issued either guidelines or rules to pharmacists and doctors telling them whether they could prescribe these drugs and under what circumstances.

That had happened in early 2020. In my case, the board got an anonymous complaint against me saying I was spreading misinformation — another charge that the government really needed to control people on. They couldn’t have the truth coming out about COVID, the drugs, the vaccines, and about this whole takeover.

So, they created this baloney concept of ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation’ and ‘malinformation’ and pretended that it was the law, that people who spread misinformation could be charged, and had to stop. A whole huge system was created within the federal government to surveil our online presence and go after people [who went against the narrative].

So, I was accused, initially, not of using these drugs, because I used them legally, but of spreading misinformation. And I think that the feds were looking for an excuse to really scare doctors … I was fairly well known.

So they went after me and said, ‘Not only are we investigating you, but we find, even before an investigation goes forward, even before any hearing, before the medical board even gets to see you and you get to say one word to them, we’ve decided that you are such a danger to the people of Maine, we must immediately suspend your license.’ They did that on January 12, 2022.”

Kangaroo Court

Nass has not been able to practice medicine since. Before the first hearing, the state medical board tried to get her to plea bargain and surrender her license voluntarily. She refused. By then, she was already working with CHD, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who founded CHD, offered to pay for her legal defense.

Of course, before the first hearing, they realized they couldn’t possibly take Nass to court for misinformation. After all, the First Amendment allows her to say whatever she wants. So, they dropped the misinformation charges and charged her with using medications off-label instead — only, that’s perfectly legal as well.

So, they dropped that charge, and instead argued she’d been speaking ill of the COVID vaccines. But that wasn’t a winning strategy either, because, of course, they didn’t want to defend the shots in court.

“So, basically, they went through my records and they tried to find little piddly things, like my records weren’t neat enough. I had been doing telemedicine and I hadn’t written down the vital signs for a patient, things like that,” Nass says.

“So in the hearings that have gone on so far, we’ve managed to shoot down all of those charges. There’s nothing substantive, there’s nothing left for them. In fact, the attorney general didn’t even question my last witness, who was Harvey Risch, an emeritus professor and M.D., Ph.D., from Yale, who blew apart the part-time ER doctor’s testimony that I hadn’t done things correctly.

So, that’s where we are. They don’t have a case, so what they want to do instead is drag this out forever, which will do two things that are good for them: One, prevent me from being able to say I won my case and get national attention for that, because they managed to put me in the national news when they took my license;

No. 2, they want to cost Children’s Health Defense a whole lot of money by just dragging it out, and it doesn’t cost them anything to drag it out. They’ve got the assistant attorney generals who are already working for the state managing the case.

Somebody up there is pulling the strings and figured out how to make this as painful as possible for myself and CHD. Well, I want to assure them that it’s not painful at all because we’ve had up to 180,000 people watching each hearing in real time.

CHD and Epoch Times have streamed every one, so everyone has been able to see what kind of kangaroo court this is, and the state of Maine has a black eye already. So let’s go forward. Let’s give them some more black eyes.”

Most Doctors Are Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Unfortunately, threatening a doctor’s medical license is an exceptionally effective way to ensure compliance, and an effective coercion to follow the rules even though they are wholly unlawful. The reason for this is simple economics. Most doctors owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans, and unless they’re independently wealthy, they can’t afford to go into private practice.

That means they work as an employee for a hospital or big clinic, where the rules are being set by hospital administrators. In addition to that, medical education is wholly captured by Big Pharma, and has been for the last 100 years. As such, medical students are being brainwashed from Day One. On top of that, you have peer pressure.

“We’re in the middle of a war,” Nass says. “It’s a war about who gets control of people, and doctors just happened to be a necessary chess piece for them. By doing this to me and others, the state has been very successful at getting most doctors to keep their mouth shut and go along, and comply with what they want.”

Indeed, it takes enormous courage and commitment to patient welfare to buck a system that has all these built-in pressures. In my estimate, perhaps only 5% of the 1 million doctors in America took a stand against the COVID tyranny.

“More than 75% of doctors are employed by somebody else, and that means they don’t have a say,” Nass explains. “If they’re employed by a hospital, the hospital bean-counters said, ‘Look, everybody who comes in is getting remdesivir, that’s it, if they’re admitted with COVID.’ And they can’t fight back.

There was so much money involved that people who tried to fight back lost their jobs. And this was what hospitals and employers were told to do by government and so-called ethicists like Art Caplan. You fire people and then everybody else goes along. So that’s what happened.

The other thing is … you can’t expect someone to believe something if their salary depends on their not believing it. So there’s that. The peer pressure is huge, for several reasons. One is malpractice. If you don’t go along with everybody else, you are liable for malpractice if your patient doesn’t do well.

So if I give someone hydroxychloroquine for COVID and they wind up dying, I can be sued for malpractice because I wasn’t following the standard of care. But if I gave them remdesivir and they die, I was following the standard of care, and I can’t be sued for that.

These are terrible things. This means that the entire profession has been pushed — through these rules and standards — to do things wrong. And all of this was probably thought of, or even planned, long ago, so that it would be relatively easy to control all the doctors.”

The Global Takeover Is Well Underway

As noted by Nass, most of you who are paying attention will have noticed that all kinds of crazy things are now happening all at once. We were mandated to get fast-tracked “vaccines” that turned out to be both ineffective and extremely dangerous, and even though the proverbial cat is now out of the bag, government is still trying to pressure people into taking additional boosters.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized vaccine manufacturers to make a third, bivalent, version of the mRNA shot, to be rolled out in the fall in combination with the flu shots.

“Why would that be, when everyone knows that after a few weeks, [the shots] make you more susceptible to get the disease, as well as have heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, et cetera, and sudden death?” Nass asks.

We’re also facing the rollout of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) and an international digital vaccine passport. We also know that the U.S. government was funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) to design more lethal coronaviruses. Why did they do that? To what end?

We’ve also seen stupendous changes within our school system. Transgender ideology now trumps everything else. We’ve seen a rapid growth of online schooling and the lowering of educational standards at all levels, all while using the right pronoun has become incredibly important.

We’ve also seen a radical shift away from true environmentalism in favor of a “green” agenda that forces the poor and middle class to lower their standard of living while the wealthy profit. The fact is, the destruction of our environment and the raping of underdeveloped countries for their natural resources was done by the same globalists that now blame all of these problems on the public.

“What’s going on now is that the ‘elites’ (global cabal) have somehow gained control of enough pieces of our culture and our education system, and certainly our mass media and government, to roll out these cultural concepts and convince people of their validity,” Nass says.

“The elites have decided — they’ve got the ability now, through surveillance, through control of media and control of governments — to take over much of the world. The simplest and most legal way for them to do that, without having to fight wars, is to take over public health, and wrap the rest of the world into public health.

So public health is not just between you and your doctor. Public health now involves wild animals … They want to control the interactions of humans and wild animals.

They also want to control what happens with our livestock … so, livestock have become part of health. Ecosystems have also become part of health, and so has everything else. The name for this is ‘One Health.’

The WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) — the world organization on animal health — and the UN Environmental Program, are all pushing for these things to be part of One Health and public health.

This didn’t happen by chance. It’s a scheme … funded by the Rockefeller Foundation around 2009. Many U.S. federal agencies are supposed to be using the One Health approach. This means that health problems have to be solved with a whole committee of people, not just doctors, not just veterinarians, but you need the ecologists, the plant pathologists, the livestock people, et cetera.

Everybody has to work together. But that’s not enough. You also have to throw in the police. You also have to throw in governments and legislators and everyone else into this concept of One Health.”

As noted by Nass, One Health is already enshrined in U.S. law in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), so there’s no question that U.S. agencies are all on the same track as the WHO.

Who’s Part of the Global Cabal?

In the interview, Nass goes on to name some of the organizations that are part of the global cabal that is reworking society for their own aims. Named players include the Rhodes organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and Chatham House, which is the equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations in the U.K.

All these groups, and many more, are linked to each other. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger cofounded the Trilateral Commission and was a Rhodes scholar and member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Kissinger selected Klaus Schwab to create the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 1971, and they’ve been working together ever since.

In 1993, the WEF founded a Young Global Leaders program to groom international heads of state. Today, Germany, France, Canada, Finland and other countries are led by graduates of this program.

“It’s not exactly a secret society, but Klaus Schwab and his group have managed to identify people who would go along with their program,” Nass says. “I suspect these are people who are not the most intelligent, who lack imagination and are very obedient.

Therefore, they have been convinced that climate change is a dire emergency, and that they need to take extraordinary measures to deal with it — even if they have to reduce the population, even if they have to reduce our standard of living, even if they have to impose 15-minute cities, get rid of air travel and … eat bugs.”

How the WHO Is Being Set Up as the Central Authority

As explained by Nass, from its inception in 1948, the WHO has been an organization that transferred money from wealthier countries to poorer countries to help them with health problems like tuberculosis, AIDS and malaria.

During the COVID pandemic, the WHO and diplomats from member countries decided that a comprehensive pandemic treaty was necessary. The justification was that COVID had been mismanaged, hence we need a central decision-maker.

“Of course, what was never said is that things were managed so poorly because most countries were following the WHO advice, which was absolutely awful,” Nass says.

If this pandemic treaty goes through, either a regional epidemic or global pandemic would authorize the WHO to step in and dictate how the matter should be addressed. WHO members are also working on amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs), which would strip member nations of their sovereignty to make health-related decisions.

And, recall that “health” is being redefined to include all aspects of life, under the already existing One Health paradigm. As Nass explains:

“What has been proposed is that either a regional director-general or the WHO director-general can simply declare a public health emergency of international concern, or the potential for a public health emergency of international concern.

Once they make that declaration, all these powers would then accrue to the director-general of the WHO, if it’s for all countries, or if it’s regional, to that regional director-general.

That person could then say, ‘OK, medicines in your country need to be shipped to this other country.’ Intellectual property on how to make vaccines need to go away. Let’s say Abbott has a vaccine to combat whatever it is. They have to now give the recipe to Rwanda so they can make that vaccine in their own country and use it for their own people.

They can close borders. The WHO director-generals could basically take control of anything. If they say, ‘Oh, people are getting this from animals,’ they can stop contact with animals, stop you eating chicken or whatever, because One Health has taken jurisdiction over ecosystems.

The entire planet is ecosystems, and that’s part of One Health. Animals and plants are also part of One Health. So, they can tell you what to eat, they can tell you where to go and where not to go. They can lock you in your home. They can put masks on you, they can mandate vaccinations — if these [IHR] amendments and the pandemic treaty are passed.

They’re still being negotiated. The final versions are not out. But we have certainly criticized and analyzed the early versions, and they will be voted on next May [2024], and could potentially go into force on a provisional basis. The treaty could go into force almost immediately.”

How These Instruments Alter the WHO’s Existing Authority

In many ways, it seems the WHO was already exercising these powers, or at least attempting to, during the COVID pandemic. So, how do these two instruments — the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty — alter their existing authority? Nass explains:

“There are existing international health regulations and they’ve been in existence since at least 1969 … Although the WHO claims that part of the IHRs that exist right now are binding, they aren’t binding. So, countries followed them, but there was no legal requirement for them to do so.

The International Health Regulations stated very clearly that the way they were to be carried out was with ‘full respect for freedom of persons’ dignity and human rights.’ In the new version that is being negotiated, they have struck that out. There is no longer a need to respect human rights, dignity or freedom of persons.

And, they have specifically said that these new regulations will be binding on countries, and countries are required to have a focal point that is required to carry them out and report back to the WHO how they’ve been carried out.

There are additional new provisions that countries are required to perform surveillance of their populations. They want you to think this is surveillance of only bacteria or surveillance of only social media, but it’s both. So, the WHO could require people to be swabbed in your country, whether or not they’re crossing a border.

Say there’s an outbreak. Everybody has to line up and get swabbed to see if they’re infected with X. And animals have to be surveilled as well, because they’re looking for pathogens that have the potential to be become pandemics. So that is supposed to happen.

Now, there’s a huge problem with that, and that is, you can always find viruses that have the potential to become pandemics … So, if you start surveilling for them, you’re going to find them, which means that would allow the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health emergency anytime he or she wants.

The other surveillance is they require countries to surveil their social media and mainstream media, and censor anything that goes against the public health messaging of the WHO. So this is big. This is huge.”

Is Global Tyranny an Inevitability?

While it may seem there’s no way to derail this proverbial bullet train, Nass remains optimistic. “This is a dystopian future that actually is not good for anybody. Even the people who want it are going to find it’s not good for them either,” Nass says.

Now, the global cabal that is trying to seize control have access to essentially unlimited capital. But they’re also using our tax dollars. As noted by Nass, the U.S. government has spent some $5 trillion on the pandemic response.

“That’s our money, not theirs,” she says, “and a lot of that money, most likely, went to bribe media.” Hospitals were also paid to go along with the narrative, as were celebrities, churches, medical groups and other social organizations.

“These very wealthy people do not want to spend their own money to take over the world. They want to spend our money or put us in debt. But are these expenditures justified and legal?

If we get governments of people who are responsive to normal life, we can investigate where that money went. What are these public officials doing? We can put them on trial, and we can probably even claw back a lot of this money.

Now, to do that might require some new laws, but if we had really good people in office — like Bobby Kennedy — we could potentially create the laws, very quickly, that will allow us to try government officials and others, heads of media, et cetera, if they’re doing things that are against the law.”

Why We Need New Laws

The reason we need new laws is because current laws give immunity to a lot of bad actors, including the Federal Reserve, the Bank of International Settlements, everybody who works for the WHO and the UN, and federal government employees as well as many private organizations.

Vaccines and their manufacturers are also indemnified. We need to pass new laws that eliminate all these indemnifications, so that we can retroactively take them to court for the crimes they’ve committed.

“This whole thing goes against the principles of the Constitution, the principles of natural law. This is a dystopian nightmare that was figured out by some very clever people in public relations and in consulting groups. We know the French government paid something like €1 billion or €2 billion to McKinsey to help manage the pandemic response.

So we can identify organizations that have brought these things on us and go after them. We also need to tell our members of Congress, our parliamentarians, and legislators, we don’t want this dystopia. Government doesn’t give us rights. We have rights. We are giving government authority. Government doesn’t have authority and own us. We own the government.

We’ve been led to believe that it’s the other way around, but it isn’t. And we can fix all this. There are about 50 members of Congress already who have signed on as co-sponsors to HR79 [the WHO Withdrawal Act1]. We need to get out of these international organizations.

The UN is trying to do something similar. The WHO was simply pulled in because there was an opportunity to gain control legally through the WHO because of the way its constitution exists, because of several Supreme Court cases, et cetera, there was an ability to use the WHO. The cabal may try to use other international organizations or other means to gain control.

But look, there’s a few thousand of them. There’s 8 billion of us. This is like a million to one. We can beat them. We don’t have to go along with any of it. If everybody says no, if the police don’t enforce, if the Army doesn’t enforce, it’s not going to happen. So people just need to realize what’s going on.”

Door to Freedom

To that end, Nass is working with a new organization called Door to Freedom. Their website, which will launch shortly, will contain all the relevant WHO and UN documents, criticisms of those documents, and both long and short explanations of what’s going on.

It’ll be a one-stop shop where everyone can learn what the plan is and what we can do to stop it. Door to Freedom also hopes to align freedom organizations around the world to act in concert to get the word out more widely.

Personally, I’m skeptical about the likelihood of winning this battle through legislative efforts because this cabal has been working on this plan for decades, if not centuries. So, they already have everything buttoned up, or close to it. Perhaps someone like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could get it done, but it will take a small miracle to get him into office as well.

What I do hold out hope for is that public resistance will block attempts of implementation. So, the key, I think, is to educate people. Henceforth, most of the day-to-day choices you make will take the world either closer to freedom, or closer to slavery, so it’s crucial to understand where we are, where the cabal intends to take us, and how they intend to get us there.

That way, you can make decisions and take actions that will move us in the opposite direction. Door to Freedom will be able to help you understand all of that, so please bookmark doortofreedom.org, and check back regularly.

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/16/who-global-tyranny.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230716&foDate=true&mid=DM1433941&rid=1857121056

Aspartame – Not So Sweet After All

Posted on by

Top Sweetener Officially Declared a Carcinogen

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

July 14, 2023

aspartame carcinogenic effects

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization has finally gotten around to declaring the popular artificial sweetener aspartame a potential carcinogen
  • The ruling comes from sources with WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), who said aspartame will be listed as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in July 2023
  • I’ve been warning about aspartame’s cancer-causing potential since 2010, so you can see just how long this danger has been known
  • For over a decade, researchers have been warning of aspartame’s neurotoxicity and carcinogenicity, stating reevaluation of aspartame consumption is “urgent and cannot be delayed”
  • A 2022 large-scale cohort study found people who consumed higher levels of artificial sweeteners had higher risk of overall cancer compared to non-consumers

The World Health Organization has finally gotten around to declaring the popular artificial sweetener aspartame a potential carcinogen.1 I warned about aspartame’s cancer-causing potential on my site over 25 years ago, in my best-selling book, “Sweet Deception: Why Splenda, NutraSweet, and the FDA May Be Hazardous to Your Health,” in 2006, and in an article I wrote for The Huffington Post.2 It’s since been deleted — but you can see just how long this danger has been known.

The ruling comes from sources with WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), who said aspartame will be listed as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in July 2023.3 Additional findings from the Joint WHO and Food and Agriculture Organization’s Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), which is in the process of updating its aspartame risk assessment, are also expected.4

Donald Rumsfeld’s Hand in Aspartame’s Approval

JECFA has vouched for aspartame’s safety for decades, stating since 1981 that it’s safe when consumed within accepted daily limits.5 It was 1981 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration first approved aspartame.6 At the time, the late Donald Rumsfeld, former U.S. secretary of defense, was chairman of G.D. Searle, aspartame’s manufacturer, and he was reportedly instrumental in its approval.

At a 1980 FDA Board of Inquiry, the FDA had refused to approve aspartame due to concerns that it could induce brain tumors.7 The late John Olney, a renowned neuroscientist who tried to prevent aspartame’s approval, also wrote a letter to the Board of Inquiry in 1987, warning of aspartame’s neurotoxicity, including the potential for brain tumors and damage to children’s brains.8 As reported by Rense.com:9

“The FDA had actually banned aspartame based on this finding, only to have Searle Chairman Donald Rumsfeld … vow to ‘call in his markers,’10 to get it approved.

On January 21, 1981, the day after Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, Searle re-applied to the FDA for approval to use aspartame in food sweetener, and Reagan’s new FDA commissioner, Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr., appointed a 5-person Scientific Commission to review the board of inquiry’s decision.

It soon became clear that the panel would uphold the ban by a 3-2 decision, but Hull then installed a sixth member on the commission, and the vote became deadlocked. He then personally broke the tie in aspartame’s favor.

Hull later left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle.”

Aspartame’s Cancer Link Known for Decades

Despite aspartame’s approval, by 1987 a series of investigative reports raised concerns that the chemical’s approval was mired by conflicts of interest, poor quality industry-funded research and revolving-door relationships between the FDA and the food industry.11

By 1996, a team with the department of psychiatry at Washington University Medical School questioned whether increasing brain tumor rates had an aspartame connection. “An exceedingly high incidence of brain tumors” has been identified in aspartame-fed rats compared to rats not fed aspartame, they explained, adding:12

“Compared to other environmental factors putatively linked to brain tumors, the artificial sweetener aspartame is a promising candidate to explain the recent increase in incidence and degree of malignancy of brain tumors.”

Then, in 2006, a study led by Dr. Morando Soffritti, a cancer researcher from Italy who’s the head of the European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences, found that, even in low doses, animals were developing several different forms of cancer when fed aspartame.13

That year, the team concluded aspartame was a “multipotential carcinogenic agent, even at a daily dose of 20 mg/kg body weight, much less than the current acceptable daily intake” and stated a reevaluation of aspartame consumption was “urgent and cannot be delayed.”14

A 2007 follow-up study confirmed the findings of aspartame’s “multipotential carcinogenicity,” even at doses close to the acceptable daily intake for humans. Further, it also demonstrated that when lifespan exposure beginning in utero was assessed, aspartame’s “carcinogenic effects are increased.”15 In 2010, Soffritti and colleagues again warned that aspartame was a carcinogenic agent in rats and mice.16

Research Supporting Aspartame’s Carcinogenicity Is Widespread

These studies were only the beginning of the evidence showing aspartame’s cancer-causing potential. In 2012, Harvard researchers published a study in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, which found:17

“In the most comprehensive long-term epidemiologic study, to our knowledge, to evaluate the association between aspartame intake and cancer risk in humans, we observed a positive association between diet soda and total aspartame intake and risks of NHL [non-Hodgkin lymphoma] and multiple myeloma in men and leukemia in both men and women.”

Adding further concerns over aspartame’s safety, U.S. Right to Know reported:18

“In a 2014 commentary in American Journal of Industrial Medicine,19 the [Cesare] Maltoni [Cancer Research] Center researchers wrote that the studies submitted by G. D. Searle for market approval ‘do not provide adequate scientific support for [aspartame’s] safety.

In contrast, recent results of life-span carcinogenicity bioassays on rats and mice published in peer-reviewed journals, and a prospective epidemiological study, provide consistent evidence of [aspartame’s] carcinogenic potential.’”

A 2020 study further supports the Ramazzini Institute’s (RI) original findings, revealing a statistically significant increase in total hematopoietic and lymphoid tissue tumors (HLTs) and total leukemias and lymphomas in female rats exposed to aspartame.

“After the HLT cases re-evaluation, the results obtained are consistent with those reported in the previous RI publication and reinforce the hypothesis that APM [aspartame] has a leukemogenic and lymphomatogenic effect,” the researchers explained.20

Again in 2021, a review of the Ramazzini Institute data further confirmed that aspartame is carcinogenic in rodents. The researchers noted that their findings “confirm the very worrisome finding that prenatal exposure to aspartame increases cancer risk in rodent offspring. They validate the conclusions of the original RI studies.”21

In response, they called on national and international public health agencies to reexamine aspartame’s health risks, particularly prenatal and early postnatal exposures.22

WHO Warns Against Artificial Sweeteners for Weight Control

Aspartame’s cancer link is especially concerning given its prevalence in diet foods and drinks. Aspartame is used in 1,400 food products in France and more than 6,000 products around the globe. The chemical is commonly found in food products such as sugar-free gum, diet drink mixes and sodas, reduced-sugar condiments and tabletop sweeteners, including Equal and NutraSweet.26

Its high level of sweetness — 200 times greater than sugar27 — and low calories makes it popular among people looking to make their drinks and meals sweeter without the calories of a comparable amount of sugar.

But, in addition to labeling the artificial sweetener as possibly carcinogenic, in May 2023, even the beyond-corrupted WHO released a guideline advising not to use non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) for weight control because they don’t offer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children.28

Previously, WHO conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that revealed “there is no clear consensus on whether non-sugar sweeteners are effective for long-term weight loss or maintenance, or if they are linked to other long-term health effects at intakes within the ADI.”29

The systematic review also suggested “potential undesirable effects from long-term use of NSS, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mortality in adults.” Even cancer was called out in analysis, which included 283 studies and found artificial sweeteners are linked to an increased risk of:30

Obesity Type 2 diabetes
High fasting glucose All-cause mortality
Cardiovascular events Death from cardiovascular disease
Stroke High blood pressure
Bladder cancer Preterm birth and possible adiposity in offspring later in life

Further, according to the WHO study:31

“Mechanisms by which NSS as a class of molecules might exert effects that increase risk for obesity and certain NCDs [non-communicable diseases] have been reviewed extensively and include interaction with extra-oral taste receptors, possibly with alteration of the gut microbiome.

Because sugars and all known NSS presumably elicit sweet taste through the TAS1R heterodimeric sweet-taste receptor, which has been identified not just in the oral cavity but in other glucose-sensing tissues, it is not surprising that such a group of vastly different chemical entities could be responsible for similar effects on health.”

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/14/aspartame-carcinogenic-effects.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230714_HL2&foDate=true&mid=DM1432971&rid=1855621420

More Gene Rouletter

Posted on by

Pig Beans — The Latest GMO Frankenfood

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

July 13, 2023

pig beans gmo frankenfood

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • One of the latest GMO Frankenfoods is Piggy Sooy, a soybean genetically engineered to contain pig protein. One or more undisclosed pig genes are spliced into conventional soya to create a soybean with 26.6% animal protein
  • Moolec, the U.K.-based company that developed Piggy Sooy, is also working on developing a pea plant that produces beef protein. The company claims these transgenic hybrids will provide similar taste, texture and nutritional value as meat, without the high cost of cultured or lab-grown meat alternatives
  • June 21, 2023, the U.S. Department of Agriculture authorized the sale of cell-cultivated chicken from Good Meat and Upside Foods. Both plan on rolling out their synthetic chicken to “high-end” restaurants across the U.S. first, while they scale up production
  • Researchers have discovered that CRISPR-Cas gene editing wreaks havoc in the plant genome, causing several hundred unintended genetic changes to occur simultaneously “in a catastrophic event” that ripples across large parts of the genome
  • Because these changes are impossible to predict, gene edited plants cannot be assumed safe without extensive testing

As expected, more and ever-wilder transgenic foods are being produced. Among the latest is Piggy Sooy, a soybean genetically engineered to contain pig protein.1,2 According to Moolec, the U.K.-based company that developed this latest Frankenfood, pig genes were spliced into conventional soya to create a soybean with 26.6% animal protein.

The exact pig genes used is a trade secret. As a result of this genetic engineering, the interior flesh of the soybean is also a rosy flesh color. The company is also working on developing a pea plant that produces beef protein. Moolec claims these transgenic hybrids will provide similar taste, texture and nutritional value as meat, without the high cost of cultured or lab-grown meat alternatives. According to New Atlas:3

“Farmers will raise the plants via conventional agricultural practices. Once the beans have been harvested and processed — again, via conventional techniques — their proteins will go into meat substitutes and other products …

As is the case with lab-grown pork, it is hoped that commercial adoption of Piggy Sooy could ultimately eliminate the raising and slaughtering of pigs, along with the associated ethical and environmental concerns.

‘Moolec has developed a unique, successful, and patentable platform for the expression of highly valuable proteins in the seeds of economically important crops such as soybeans,’ says the company’s chief science officer, Amit Dhingra.

‘This achievement opens up a precedent for the entire scientific community that is looking to achieve high levels of protein expression in seeds via molecular farming.’ There’s currently no word on when foods containing the proteins may be available to consumers.”

US Authorizes Cultured Chicken

Lab-grown chicken is also heading toward our plates. June 21, 2023, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) authorized the sale of cell-cultivated chicken — meaning chicken meat grown from stem cells in a bioreactor — from Good Meat and Upside Foods.4,5

Both plan on rolling out their synthetic chicken to “high-end” restaurants across the U.S. first, while they scale up production. In addition to these two, more than 100 other companies are also working on different iterations of cultured meat, from cell-based ground beef and 3-D printed steak and fish (see video above), to synthetic foie gras and cultured seafood.

If you care about your health, I have but one recommendation. Stay clear of all these lab-grown concoctions. I don’t even want to call them food. There’s simply no telling how they may affect your health, and no one is studying it either. It could be decades before the effects become evident, and by then it may be far too late to roll things back.

On the one hand, the know-how of how to grow and raise real food might be lost. On the other, we might lose the ability to grow real food because there won’t be any unadulterated seeds left to work with unless we break open the doomsday seed vault at the North Pole.6

Gene Editing Causes Chaos in the Genome

As reported by GMWatch in June 2023, researchers have discovered7 that CRISPR-Cas gene editing ends up wreaking havoc in the plant genome:8

“Recent scientific findings have revealed chromothripsis-like effects after the application of CRISPR/Cas gene editing in the genome of tomatoes … Chromothripsis refers to a phenomenon in which often several hundred genetic changes occur simultaneously in a catastrophic event. Many sections of the genetic material can be swapped, recombined, or even lost if this occurs …”

Importantly, the same catastrophic cascades of gene swaps, recombination and loss also occurs in mammalian and human cells in response to gene editing. Actually, that’s been known for some time.

This is the first time they’ve found that CRISPRthripsis occurs in gene edited plants as well, and the unintended genetic alterations not only occur far more frequently than previously suspected, but they also occur across large parts of the genome.

Gene Edited Plants Cannot Be Regarded as Safe

As explained by Test Biotech:9

“… when both strands of DNA are cut, as is typically the case with the CRISPR/Cas, the ends of the chromosomes can lose contact with each other. If the repair of the break in the chromosomes fails, the severed ends can be lost, restructured or incorporated elsewhere.

Chromothripsis otherwise seems to be relatively rare in plants. CRISPR/Cas applications can frequently result also in changes at genomic sites that are particularly well-protected by natural repair mechanisms. The risks cannot generally be estimated, so they must be investigated thoroughly in each and every case …

The recent findings shed new light on the alleged ‘precision’ of gene scissors: although the new technology can be used to target and cut precise locations in the genome, the consequences of ‘cutting’ the genome are to some extent unpredictable and uncontrollable.

Plants obtained from new genetic engineering (New GE) cannot, therefore, be regarded as safe per se, and need to be thoroughly investigated for risks. Without exact genomic analyses, chromothripsis can be easily overlooked. It is, for example, not unlikely that it also occurred in plants obtained from New GE that were already deregulated in the US.”

Precision in Gene Editing Is Overrated

Those in favor of gene editing frequently stress the fact that it’s far more precise than natural breeding, the insinuation being that precision assures we only get the desired changes, nothing more and nothing less. But that’s clearly not true.

Precision does not guarantee safety, because hundreds of unintended genetic changes can occur from a single alteration, and unintended genetic rearrangements and/or the disruption of gene expression, in turn, can result in:

  • Alterations in the biochemical composition of the plant (or animal tissue)
  • Production of novel toxins
  • Production of novel allergens

Europe Seeks to Deregulate CRISPR Edited Plants

At present, the U.S. has no specific regulations for gene edited plants. The same regulations that apply for conventional crops apply for GMOs.10

That said, in late May 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule on “Pesticides and Exemptions of Certain Plant-Incorporated Protectants (PIPs) Derived from Newer Technologies,”11,12 which now requires GMO developers to submit data showing that plants that have been gene edited to resist pests are harmless to other components of the ecosystem, don’t contain pesticide levels beyond those found in conventional crops, and won’t cause negative health effects in consumers.

For years, Europe has had rather stringent restrictions on GMO plants, but they’re now seeking to deregulate as well. As reported by Test Biotech:13

“Attempts are currently being made in Europe to largely deregulate plants obtained from CRISPR/Cas applications. According to leaked documents, the EU Commission plans to give companies permission to release New GE plants into the environment and to market their products after only a short period of notification.

Similar to the USA, the proposed criteria exempting them from mandatory risk assessment would not require any investigation of unintended genetic changes, e.g. chromothripsis.

The new regulation would not only be applicable to plants used in agriculture, but also would allow the release of wild plants with no in-depth risk assessment. Testbiotech is warning that the planned deregulation and large scale releases of New GE organisms could threaten natural resources needed by future generations.”

Lab-Made Meats Are Ultraprocessed Junk Food

Between genetically altered produce and lab-created meats, we’re getting close to not having many real, unadulterated whole food options left. Importantly, many meat alternatives fall into the category of ultraprocessed foods, which we already have far too much of.

In 2018, Friends of the Earth (FOE), a grassroots environmental group, released a report that posed critical questions about the trend toward synthetic biology. In it, they stressed the highly processed nature of these products:14

“Various ‘processing aids’ are employed to make some of these products, including organisms (like genetically engineered bacteria, yeast and algae) that produce proteins, and chemicals to extract proteins.

For example, chemicals like hexane are used to extract components of a food, like proteins (from peas, soy, corn etc.) or compounds (from genetically engineered bacteria) to make xanthan gum … disclosure of these ingredients is not required.

Other processing aids (e.g. bacteria, yeast, algae), including those that are genetically engineered to produce proteins, are also not currently required to be disclosed on package labeling. The lack of transparency makes it difficult to assess the inputs and impact of their use.”

Can We End the Tyranny of Ultraprocessed Food?

In a June 2023 Wired article, Dr. Chris Van Tulleken, an expert in infectious diseases and author of “Ultra-Processed People: Why Do We All Eat Stuff That Isn’t Food … and Why Can’t We Stop?” made a heartfelt plea to policymakers and doctors to protect public health by leading the fight for real food:15

“Diet-related disease — which includes obesity, heart attack, strokes, cancer, and dementia — is the leading cause of early death in the UK. Driving it is a set of industrially processed products … known formally as ultraprocessed food (UPF).

This type of food is usually wrapped in plastic and has additives that you won’t find in a typical kitchen. In the US and the UK, we get on average 60% of our calories from UPF products like pizza, bread, breakfast cereals, biscuits, and nutritional drinks …

UPF is a byproduct of a complicated financial system that involves repurposing waste from animal food into human food.

To solve this problem, the first thing we need to do is include in the official UK guidance about nutrition the information that ultraprocessed foods are associated with weight gain and diet-related diseases, and that the recommendation for people is to avoid these foods.”

Unfortunately, while an admirable call to action, I don’t foresee governments issuing guidance to avoid ultraprocessed foods anytime soon, seeing how many countries, especially the U.S., are all-in on transitioning the entire food system to one that is wholly, or close to wholly, made up of genetically engineered and processed fare.

It’s part of the technocratic takeover known as The Great Reset. By replacing real animal foods with patented lab-made alternatives, globalists will have unprecedented power to control the world’s population. It’ll also grant them greater control over people’s health.

It’s well-known that the consumption of ultraprocessed food contributes to disease,16 and the benefactor of ill health is Big Pharma. The processed food industry has spent many decades driving chronic illness that is then treated with drugs rather than a better diet.

We’re now looking at more ultraprocessed foods being rolled out in the name of combating climate change, so don’t hinge your hopes on legislators. The financial and geopolitical forces against them are enormous. No, I believe the real power resides with each and every one of us. We need to ensure real food still has a place in the marketplace by spending our money on it and leaving all the processed and genetically engineered food on the store shelves.

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/13/pig-beans-gmo-frankenfood.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20230713&mid=DM1432461&rid=1854576364

Food Control

Posted on by

Get Your One Health Token From the World Health Organization

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The World Health Organization and their “One Health” approach are coming for the world’s food systems, aiming to meld them with health and medical fields
  • The outcome will be food tokens, medically tailored meals and prescription food programs that dictate what you eat
  • Part of this is a new “food is medicine” agenda, which is being put in place to ultimately screen, track and control people through food, according to investigative journalist Corey Lynn
  • The Rockefeller Foundation, the American Heart Association and Kroger have already partnered to develop and launch the Food is Medicine Research Initiative, which includes programs like produce prescriptions and medically tailored meals
  • Expect that as the Food is Medicine initiative ramps up, you’ll hear more about the “necessity” of bioengineered food, lab-grown meat and insects for “good” human health and to protect the planet

The World Health Organization and their “One Health” approach are coming for the world’s food systems, aiming to meld them with the health insurance and medical fields. The outcome will be food tokens, medically tailored meals and prescription food programs that both dictate what you eat and have the power to impose penalties if you stray too far off course.

“How do you get people to break? Control their food and money,” investigative journalist Corey Lynn explains. “What is the weapon? Controlling your identity through digital means. The smart phone, QR codes, digital identities, biometrics, AI, and chips are all weapons being used against humanity.”1 You can listen to Corey discuss this on Spotify by going to her channel Dig It! Episode #189.2

Are Food Tokens in Your Future?

It was October 2022 when the WHO announced its One Health Joint Plan of Action, launched by the Quadripartite, which, in addition to WHO, consists of the:3

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
  • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
  • World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH, founded as OIE)

“The Quadripartite will join forces to leverage the needed resources in support of the common approach to address critical health threats and promote the health of people, animals, plants and the environment,” according to a WHO press release.4

Echoing this statement, WHO 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.”

Part of this is a new “food is medicine” agenda, including from the White House,5 which isn’t nearly as holistic as it sounds. Instead, “food is medicine” is the phrase “being used to campaign, launch programs, change policies and financing, aggregate data, tie the health care industry in with the food supply, and ultimately screen, track and control people through food,” Lynn says.6

It’s a smokescreen, under which more people will be ushered into the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC), and similar initiatives so digital food tokens can be implemented. This allows for the tracking and control of people’s food purchases.

A number of big names have recently joined in the push to increase SNAP enrollment, including Google, which intends to make it easier to find out eligibility and apply for the program.

Other partners include Instacart, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food Industry Association. Benefits Data Trust is also working to help facilitate the enrollment of college students into SNAP, Medicaid and the Affordable Connectivity Program, which provides help to obtain internet access.

Again, these seemingly altruistic plans have an ulterior motive — surveillance and control. “Food, health care and internet may seem like a wonderful free benefit, until a college student tries to get their first cheeseburger, doesn’t get the Covid jab, or puts out ‘misinformation’ on the internet,” Lynn says. “Watch how quickly it’s all taken away. It’s like making a deal with the Devil.”7

It’s All a Trap

Once you’re locked into receiving food tokens, you’ve fallen into their trap. Who’s “their”? Lynn has previously described key organizations pulling strings behind the scenes, allowing them to “operate as ghosts without transparency or accountability.”8 These powerful organizations enjoy unrestricted privileges and layers of immunity, allowing them to exert control over the globe.

“These aren’t just ordinary organizations,” Lynn explains. “They happen to be the prime organizations that run the new world order globalists’ agendas against humanity, and they have hundreds of NGOs working with and through them.”9 The roll-out of “healthy eating tokens” isn’t just a possibility.

They’ve already been woven into key propaganda pieces, like this 2018 image below from the Illinois Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Task Force:10,11 “Whereas this example may be reflective of a welfare applicant,” Lynn says, “make no mistake, this is the goal all states are trying to accomplish for all people, not just those on welfare.”12

social benefits distribution

Pitfalls of White House’s $8 Billion Commitment

In line with WHO’s One Health, the White House laid out a Fact Sheet detailing its “transformational vision for ending hunger and reducing diet-related disease by 2030 – all while closing disparities among the communities that are impacted most.”13

The initiative intends to invest in “new businesses and new ways of screening for and integrating nutrition into health care delivery,” along with devoting at least $2.5 billion to startup companies “pioneering solutions to hunger and food insecurity.” Another $4 billion is earmarked for “philanthropy that improves access to nutritious food, promotes healthy choices and increases physical activity.”

Here again we have the smoke-and-mirrors effect, which masks the integration of food and health as a means to enact broad policies of control. As Lynn reports:14

“A helping hand is always nice, until it has ulterior motives. Sure, physical activity for all and the reduction of sugar in food items are both welcome approaches, but the rest of this agenda is not in the best interest of human beings.

The problem is, when reviewing this Fact Sheet it may seem like a good idea, just as while reviewing a single white paper from the WEF [World Economic Forum] could even sound like it has the potential to be a good thing.

However, when one takes the Fact Sheet with countless white papers, websites, funding, and other internal documents and puts it all together — it paints quite a different story. They know full well that most people won’t gather all of the pieces of the puzzle so they won’t be able to see the reality of the situation and discern the true agenda. That’s why it is so critical to do just that.”

The White House intends to work with a long list of private organizations to reach its goals. The American Heart Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, Joint Commission, National Grocers Association, Food Industry Association and the Rockefeller Foundation are among them.

Globalists Team Up to Tell You What to Eat

The Rockefeller Foundation, the American Heart Association and Kroger have already partnered to develop and launch the Food is Medicine Research Initiative.15 It includes programs like produce prescriptions and medically tailored meals,16 which sound good in theory. But entities like the Rockefeller Foundation aren’t looking to further the reach of small farmers producing real, healthy food.

Consider the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), which was launched in 2006 with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. With strategies centered on promoting biotechnology and chemical fertilizers, AGRA’s influence significantly worsened the situation in the 18 African nations targeted by this “philanthropic” endeavor. Hunger under AGRA’s direction increased by 30% and rural poverty rose dramatically.17

The Green Revolution is another Rockefeller Foundation-funded conversion of natural farming to a system dependent on chemicals, fossil fuels and industry. You can expect that under this Food is Medicine initiative, genetic engineering, lab-grown meat and, eventually, insects will take center stage. Plus, it’s another tool for integrating food under health care, so you can ultimately be tracked with one digital health passport. Lynn says:18

“Of course food is medicine, but that’s not the true intention of this initiative. By integrating food under medicine just imagine how this will change the landscape of the control mechanisms being put in place under the guise of health care.

This isn’t the only avenue the Rockefeller’s are using to orchestrate this shift in food control. They are also one of the major funders of the Center for Good Food Purchasing, along with W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Panta Rhea Foundation, Michael & Susan Dell Foundation, and the 11th Hour Project — the grant-making vehicle of the Schmidt Family Foundation — former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.

The stated goal of this “Center” is to manage the Good Food Purchasing Program, which is all about getting institutions to convert over to their “supply chain transparency from farm to fork and shift towards a values-based purchasing model.”

Converting schools, hospitals, and public administrations is a strong goal, for starters. They’ve established standards, certifications, and a point system as the first of its kind and are building local and national partners as quickly as they built the website.”

Meanwhile, they’re rolling out Food is Medicine courses at hospitals and universities in order to indoctrinate health care providers into this plan. Among the training will be “screening for nutrition” and instruction on how to refer patients to their community nutrition resources, likely along with education on the “benefits” of gene-edited foods and fake meat.19

What Happens if You Veer From Their Prescribed Diet?

Expect that as the Food is Medicine initiative ramps up, you’ll hear more about the necessity of bioengineered food, lab-grown meat and insects for “good” human health and to protect the planet. It’s important to share knowledge with your circle about the pitfalls of these foods and why traditional whole foods are truly what your body needs.

If the powers-that-be take control of the food supply and dictate what people can and can’t eat, humanity is threatened. Envision a world in which your weekly groceries are only released if you’ve met certain requirements, and even then, those groceries are made up of what they ration for your use.

“Imagine if one refuses to eat bugs — they may not receive proper health care,” Lynn says. “Or what happens if one refuses to go on the food token program and only eat as instructed? Did they just lose their ability to receive health care? … What happens if edible vaccines hit the market and they try to make it mandatory as part of one’s diet?”20

To fight back, continue to source food from small, local sources instead of multinational corporations — and pay for your food with cash. As Lynn reports:21

“Just as with their other agendas that all tie into this one, the narrative control is being piped out by universities, medical associations, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, and many others to bring a whole new outlook on what a nutritional diet should look like to prevent disease.

It’s as though a complete overhaul is being done on what’s ‘good’ for human beings to ingest, and gene-edited produce, insects, and cultured cells seem to be the top priority.

This may seem like a slow burn, but they are clicking multiple pieces of the structure into place simultaneously, and when that burn finally reaches inside people’s homes, in their cabinets, fridge, and wallets, it will be too late to rollback all of the policies and regulations that have locked into place.”

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/06/27/who-one-health-approach.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230627&mid=DM1423741&rid=1840084123