Health & Fitness

04/20/20

5 tiny, everyday habits to help look after your immunity

The Red Tape of Testing for Coronavirus

The U.S. has failed to effectively implement widespread testing for COVID-19, allowing rates of infection to climb and extended stay-at-home orders to persist. Other countries, such as South Korea and Singapore, responded with aggressive testing early on, minimizing further spread and suppressing transmission of the virus without widespread shutdowns.

Mike Ryan, head of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergencies Programme, told NPR, “We've seen examples in places like Singapore and [South] Korea, where governments haven't had to shut everything down. They've been able to make tactical decisions regarding schools, tactical decisions regarding movements, and been able to move forward without some of the draconian measures."¹

What happened in the U.S. to prevent COVID-19 testing may go down as one of the greatest debacles in history, triggered by bureaucratic red tape.

FDA Regulatory Barriers Delayed Widespread Testing in the US

In January 2020, German scientists developed the first diagnostic test for COVID-19. In early February 2020, WHO shipped about 250,000 tests to 159 laboratories around the world.² As noted by South Korea's foreign minister, Kang Kyung-wha, “Testing is central” to outbreak responses, as it “leads to early detection” and helps minimize spread, as those who test positive can be isolated.

Rather than use the WHO test, the U.S., under the direction of the CDC and FDA, decided to create its own, as it had done with tests during past outbreaks of Ebola and Zika. CDC adviser William Schaffner, told Business Insider:³

"The notion of accepting a test developed by someone else I think was a bit alien. There may have been other considerations of which I'm not aware, but I'm sure that pride was one of them: 'We know how to do this, thank you very much. We'll develop our own.'"

On February 4, the U.S. FDA approved the U.S. COVID-19 test, and the CDC shipped 90 of them to state public health labs days later. According to Business Insider, “By that point, the U.S. had only confirmed about a dozen coronavirus cases, including two cases of person-to-person transmission.”⁴

The New York Times summed up U.S. testing failures as “the lost month” — a time between late January and early March 2020 during which widespread testing may have changed the course of the pandemic in the U.S.:⁵

“[L]arge-scale testing of people who might have been infected did not happen — because of technical flaws, regulatory hurdles, business-as-usual bureaucracies and lack of leadership at multiple levels, according to interviews with more than 50 current and former public health officials, administration officials, senior scientists and company executives.

The result was a lost month, when the world’s richest country — armed with some of the most highly trained scientists and infectious disease specialists — squandered its best chance of containing the virus’s spread. Instead, Americans were left largely blind to the scale of a looming public health catastrophe.”

‘Unprecedented’ Testing Glitch Causes Testing Delays

After the initial test rollout, an “unprecedented” problem with a test ingredient caused inconclusive results in many of the tests. While the CDC manufactured new tests, labs had to send samples to the CDC for testing, which led to delays of up to 48 hours.⁶

Experts, including Christian Drosten, a researcher at the German Center for Infection Research, told Business Insider that multiple tests should be developed so that there’s a backup if a problem occurs with one of the tests. According to Drosten:⁷

"If we are in doubt about our test, or if there is something wrong with the test targets, the virus mutates or something, we could still switch to the test that another lab uses. These are all in the public domain, and it's quite easy to switch.”

What’s more, initially, the CDC only recommended testing people with symptoms and a history of travel to China or contact with a coronavirus (lab-confirmed) patient. “That meant the country's first case involving community spread, a patient in California, went untested for multiple days at two hospitals,” Business Insider noted.

It wasn’t until February 27 that the CDC testing criteria was revised to include hospitalized patients, but those with mild symptoms still did not get immediate testing.

In contrast, in Hong Kong and Singapore, testing occurred swiftly not only for hospitalized patients but also people with mild symptoms or suspected cases. Tens of thousands of people who were potentially exposed to those who tested positive were then quarantined, the vast majority being healthy people who ended up not getting sick.

“Tedros of the WHO refers to this as cutting off the virus at the bud — basically stopping the virus from spreading further and preventing community transmission,” according to NPR.⁸ In late February, the FDA began allowing laboratories certified to perform high-complexity testing to develop their own COVID-19 tests, but by March there still weren’t enough available tests to keep up with demand.

During the first week of March 2020, the U.S. had conducted an estimated 18 tests per million people, while South Korea had conducted 3,692 per million. By March 20, the U.S. continued to lag behind, having tested only 313.6 people per million, compared to 6,148 per million in South Korea, 12,738 per million in the United Arab Emirates and 26,772.3 per million in Iceland.⁹

As more cases spread among communities, there remained strict criteria of who could receive a test. Schaffner continued in March:¹⁰

"I still hear that the states have a criteria that you have to meet before your specimen can be accepted for testing, so doctors and other healthcare providers have to call the state health department. There may be a wait because there are a number of people who are calling in trying to get testing and figuring out how to get it done. That still is a bit cumbersome.”

FDA’s Role in Slowing the Testing Process

Other hurdles also stood in the way of widespread testing in the U.S. While laboratory developed tests typically do not require FDA pre-approval, the declared public health emergency triggered rules that required labs to receive an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the FDA in order to roll out tests for COVID-19.

As mentioned, this meant labs weren’t allowed to develop tests until late February. The Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH USA) reported:¹¹

“According to former FDA officials, in previous outbreaks EUAs could be obtained in a matter of days; but during this outbreak, the application process reportedly became so complicated it took weeks to receive the authorization. Initially, labs were not allowed to begin testing until they got approval from the FDA, even if the lab had confirmed internally that the test worked.

The FDA later relaxed this requirement, allowing certain accredited labs to begin testing as they awaited approval for an EUA — but not before weeks had passed when hospitals and labs were not able to use accessible COVID-19 tests.”

Some labs even developed at-home tests for COVID-19, but the FDA said it had not approved any at-home tests, leading companies to pause distribution and even destroy samples that had already been collected. South Korea, which has been producing 400,000 COVID-19 tests per week, has also been shipping the tests to U.S. states and private labs, but gaining FDA approval on the tests remains a significant hurdle.

There are two types of tests now available in the U.S. — one, known as the polymerase chain reaction test, which uses a nasopharyngeal swab, and the other, a serological test that uses blood samples to detect COVID-19 antibodies.

U.S. testing capacity has increased, but still lags behind most other developed countries. As of April 5, 2020, the U.S. had conducted 5,316.43 tests per million people, compared to 9,062.93 in South Korea and 81,228.8 per million in Iceland.¹²

Backlogs at laboratories are also creating bottlenecks. According to Vox, “As of April 6, Quest Diagnostics, one of the largest private testing facilities in the U.S., still had a backlog of roughly 80,000 tests as it faces more demand than it can handle.

Adjusted for population, the U.S. has tested at just 74 percent the rate of South Korea — where widespread testing has been credited with containing the country’s outbreak — and is even further behind Germany, Italy and Canada.”¹³ According to the Alliance for Natural Health USA, in a letter to Congress calling for the FDA to stop blocking access to COVID-19 testing, it’s noted:¹⁴

“The FDA's slow response time and its insistence on enforcing mindless bureaucracy is indefensible and has made this pandemic worse …

While we certainly do not want to open the door for fraudulent tests that do not give reliable results, companies should be allowed to innovate and create solutions where the federal government has failed so miserably at nearly every turn to meet the demand for tests during this pandemic.”

Widespread Testing Needed to End Social Distancing

With much of the U.S. still under stay-at-home orders and practicing social distancing, it’s revealing that in some countries where aggressive testing was successful in helping to contain the outbreak, widespread shutdowns have not occurred. In South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore, for instance, most restaurants, shopping malls and factories have remained open.

In Singapore, schools have also stayed open, with Singapore's minister of education, Ong Ye Kung, stating, “… evidence [is scarce] to show that the young are vectors or spreaders of the virus. The reverse appears to be the case, where the young get infected by adults at home."¹⁵

While the way COVID-19 spreads is still being explored, experts agree that widespread testing is needed for the U.S. to reopen its economy and get back to a sense of normalcy.

Speaking with Vox, Dr. Krutika Kuppalli, a fellow in the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security Emerging Leaders in Biosecurity program, said, “It’s one of those things that is absolutely astounding. Three and a half months into this outbreak, we’re still talking about the basic issue of we need to get testing up and going.”¹⁶

Multiple hurdles still stand in the way of COVID-19 testing, from lack of supplies like swabs and machines needed to run the tests, to labs losing revenue as fewer elective tests are being performed, yet being expected to ramp up COVID-19 tests, which have low reimbursement rates.

Current COVID-19 tests may also not be sensitive enough and could lead to false negatives, while the U.S. also lacks reliable tests to check people for COVID-19 immunity.¹⁷ In order to reopen society, access to rapid testing will be necessary so any cases that pop up can be quickly identified and contained. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told Vox:¹⁸

“You want to make sure that whatever cases that do occur after social distancing occur at a slow enough clip that it doesn’t overwhelm hospital capacity. It’s not a question of whether there’s going to be more cases after you lift social distancing. They are going to occur. We just want them to occur at a rate that is manageable. And the only way that’s going to happen is with testing.”

If you’d like to share a message with your senators, representative and the FDA urging them to remove barriers to COVID-19 testing, you can use ANH USA’s letter, which highlights the need for widespread testing and an FDA overhaul to protect Americans’ health and safety.¹⁹

from Articles https://ift.tt/34TDm3C
via IFTTT

Bill Gates — Most Dangerous Philanthropist in Modern History?

While philanthropy is considered noble, some philanthropists appear to be doing far more harm than good with their donated millions. Bill Gates, who cofounded Microsoft in 1975, is perhaps one of the most dangerous philanthropists in modern history, having poured billions of dollars into global health initiatives that stand on shaky scientific and moral ground.

Gates' answers to the problems of the world are consistently focused on building corporate profits through highly toxic methods, be it chemical agriculture and GMOs, or pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.¹ Rarely, if ever, do we find Gates promoting clean living or inexpensive holistic health strategies.

Gates Donates Billions to Private Companies

A March 17, 2020, article² in The Nation titled, "Bill Gates' Charity Paradox," details "the moral hazards surrounding the Gates Foundation's $50 billion charitable enterprise, whose sprawling activities over the last two decades have been subject to remarkably little government oversight or public scrutiny."

As noted in this article, Gates discovered an easy way to gain political power — "one that allows unelected billionaires to shape public policy" — namely charity. Gates has described his charity strategy as "catalytic philanthropy," one in which the "tools of capitalism" are leveraged to benefit the poor.

The only problem is that the true beneficiaries of Gates' philanthropic endeavors tend to be those who are already rich beyond comprehension, including Gates' own charitable foundation. The poor, on the other hand, end up with costly solutions like patented GMO seeds and vaccines that in some instances have done far more harm than good. (For a few examples, see the following references.^3,^4,⁵) The Nation reports:⁶

"Through an investigation of more than 19,000 charitable grants the Gates Foundation has made over the last two decades, The Nation has uncovered close to $2 billion in tax-deductible charitable donations to private companies … which are tasked with developing new drugs, improving sanitation in the developing world, developing financial products for Muslim consumers, and spreading the good news about this work.

The Gates Foundation even gave $2 million to Participant Media to promote Davis Guggenheim's previous documentary film 'Waiting for Superman,' which pushes one of the foundation's signature charity efforts, charter schools — privately managed public schools. This charitable donation is a small part of the $250 million the foundation has given to media companies and other groups to influence the news.

'It's been a quite unprecedented development, the amount that the Gates Foundation is gifting to corporations … I find that flabbergasting, frankly,' says Linsey McGoey, a professor of sociology at the University of Essex and author of the book 'No Such Thing as a Free Gift.'

'They've created one of the most problematic precedents in the history of foundation giving by essentially opening the door for corporations to see themselves as deserving charity claimants at a time when corporate profits are at an all-time high.'"

Companies that have received large donations from the Gates Foundation include GlaxoSmithKline, Unilever, IBM, Vodafone, Scholastic Inc. and NBC Universal Media.^7,⁸

Those Calling the Shots Stand to Gain the Most

In the video above, Spiro Skouras reviews how the global COVID-19 pandemic is being used to snatch freedom and liberty away from us, and the role Gates is playing in the process.

"We have been encouraged to sacrifice our liberty for a false sense of security, being conditioned more and more each day to rely on the state for protection and now many of us find ourselves relying on the state to pay our bills," Skouras says.⁹

"Some are beginning to see that there may be more to the official story than what we are led to believe. The very few may have seen this coming and are waiting for the next phase of what very well could be another step closer to global governance.

The exact same individuals and government agencies, in addition to global institutions who stand to benefit the most, are the ones calling the shots."

Gates, surely, fits the description of someone who is both calling the shots and stands to gain handsomely from the COVID-19 pandemic. How? First, by investing in the same industries he's giving charitable donations to and, second, by promoting a global public health agenda that benefits the companies he's invested in and supports.

How Gates' Foundation Benefits From Its Own Donations

For example, in 2014, a Mastercard affiliate, MasterCard Labs for Financial Inclusion, received a $19 million donation^10,¹¹ "to 'increase usage of digital financial products by poor adults' in Kenya," The Nation reports, adding:¹²

"The credit card giant had already articulated its keen business interest in cultivating new clients from the developing world's 2.5 billion unbanked people, McGoey says, so why did it need a wealthy philanthropist to subsidize its work? And why are Bill and Melinda Gates getting a tax break for this donation?"

Indeed, those are sensible questions that need serious review. The Mastercard donation also appears to have benefited the Gates Foundation, making an investigation into Gates' "philanthropy" all the more necessary.

As explained by The Nation, at the time of that donation, the Gates Foundation had "substantial financial investments in Mastercard through its holdings in Warren Buffett's investment company, Berkshire Hathaway."

That's not the only questionable donation on record. The Nation found "close to $250 million in charitable grants from the Gates Foundation to companies in which the foundation holds corporate stocks and bonds." In other words, the Gates Foundation is giving money to companies that it owns stocks in and will benefit financially from.

As a result, the Foundation and Gates himself continue to increase their wealth. Part of this growth in wealth also appears to be due to the tax breaks given for charitable donations. In short, it's a perfect money-shuffling scheme that limits taxes while maximizing income generation.

Companies that have received donations that in turn made money for the Gates Foundation include Merck, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Vodafone, Sanofi, Ericsson, LG, Medtronic, Teva and "numerous startups," The Nation writes, adding:

"A foundation giving a charitable grant to a company that it partly owns — and stands to benefit from financially — would seem like an obvious conflict of interest …

Tax scholars like Ray Madoff, a law professor at Boston College, indicate that multibillionaires see tax savings of at least 40 percent — which, for Bill Gates, would amount to $14 billion …

Madoff, like many tax experts, stresses that these billions of dollars in tax savings have to be seen as a public subsidy — money that otherwise would have gone to the U.S. Treasury to help build bridges, do medical research, or close the funding gap at the IRS …

If Bill and Melinda Gates don't pay their full freight in taxes, the public has to make up the difference or simply live in a world where governments do less and less (educating, vaccinating, and researching) and superrich philanthropists do more and more.

'I think people often confuse what wealthy people are doing on their own dime and what [they're] doing on our dime, and that's one of the big problems about this debate,' Madoff notes.

'People say, 'It's the rich person's money [to spend as they wish].' But when they get significant tax benefits, it's also our money. And so that's why we need to have rules about how they spend our money.'"

Take Action — Demand an Investigation

If donating to for-profit companies sounds oddly illegal to you, you'd be right. Gates is a tax evader for doing so — he's simply getting away with it. The nonprofit foundation is a disguise to avoid taxes while funding the research arms of for-profit organizations that his foundation is invested in.

In reality, Bill and Melinda Gates should be given federal prison sentences, and while not directly spelled out, I believe that's really the point of The Nation's article. Using nonprofit money to advance research for companies you're invested in is illegal.

If you are as repulsed by the fact that Gates is getting away with this illegal behavior as much as I am, then I encourage you to contact the IRS Whistleblower Office and ask them to investigate Gates' tax evasion. You can also file a consumer complaint with the Washington State Attorney General's office.

Gates' Pro-Patent Agenda Limits Reforms

That Gates philanthropic endeavors protect his own investments can also be seen in his pro-patent stance. James Love, director of the nonprofit Knowledge Ecology International pointed out to The Nation that Gates:¹³

"… uses his philanthropy to advance a pro-patent agenda on pharmaceutical drugs, even in countries that are really poor … He's undermining a lot of things that are really necessary to make drugs affordable … He gives so much money to [fight] poverty, and yet he's the biggest obstacle on a lot of reforms."

Gates is a staunch and longtime defender of the drug industry, and his intent to further the pharmaceutical agenda can clearly be seen in the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Gates' COVID-19 Plan — Vaccinate Global Population

As reported by Forbes,¹⁴ The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has committed $100 million to fight the global COVID-19 outbreak. As much as $20 million will reportedly go to agencies such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization to be used for front-line detection, containment and treatment efforts.

Another $20 million is earmarked for at-risk populations in Africa and South Asia while the remaining $60 million is to be used for vaccine development, diagnostics and other treatments.

Vaccines are clearly one of Gates' mainstay "solutions" to most diseases. Gates has gone on record saying the U.S. needs disease surveillance and a national tracking system¹⁵ that could involve vaccine records embedded on our bodies (such as invisible ink quantum dot tattoos described in a Science Translational Medicine paper.^16,¹⁷)

In fact, he's stated that life will not go back to normal until we have the ability to vaccinate the entire global population against COVID-19. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has echoed this exact sentiment as well, as if they're reading the same cue card.

It would not surprise me if they were, seeing how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation collaborates with both the NIAID and WHO "to increase coordination across the international vaccine community and create a Global Vaccine Action Plan."¹⁸

Fauci is on Gate's Leadership Council board charged with developing this vaccine action plan, as is WHO's former director general Dr. Margaret Chan. As explained in a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation press release:

"The Global Vaccine Action Plan will enable greater coordination across all stakeholder groups — national governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, the private sector and philanthropic organizations — and will identify critical policy, resource, and other gaps that must be addressed to realize the life-saving potential of vaccines."

Gates influence over global health policies has been criticized for years, yet nothing has been done to limit it. If anything, his power has only grown, and warnings that his corporate interests may undermine public health policy now appears to have come true. As reported by Politico in 2017:¹⁹

"Some billionaires are satisfied with buying themselves an island. Bill Gates got a United Nations health agency in Geneva. Over the past decade, the world's richest man has become the World Health Organization's second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom …

The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000 … This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda … The result, say his critics, is that Gates' priorities have become the WHO's …

Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation's money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO's role in setting standards and shaping health policies."

Vaccinate or Become a Social Outcast?

According to statements made by Gates, societal and financial normalcy may never return to those who refuse vaccination, as the digital vaccination certificate Gates is pushing for might ultimately be required to go about your day-to-day life and business.

An April 4, 2020, article by OffGuardian comments on Gates' March 24, 2020, interview with Chris Anderson, the curator of TED (which runs TED Talks) above:²⁰

"Shockingly, Gates … suggests people be made to have a digital ID showing their vaccination status, and that people without this 'digital immunity proof' would not be allowed to travel. Such an approach would mean very big money for vaccine producers."

Again, vaccine producers stand to make enormous amounts of money from any given pandemic, and the Gates Foundation is both funding and making investment profits from vaccine makers. Is it any wonder then that Gates is trying to indoctrinate people into thinking there are no other answers? When asked by Anderson about the economic ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic, Gates says:

"It is really tragic that the economic effects of this are very dramatic ... But … bringing the economy back … that's more of a reversible thing than bringing people back to life. So, we're going to take the pain in the economic dimension, huge pain, in order to minimize the pain in disease and death dimension."

As noted by OffGuardian, Gates' statement:²¹

"… goes directly against the imperative to balance the benefits and costs of the screening, testing and treatment measures for each ailment — as successfully promulgated for years by, for example, the Choosing Wisely campaign — to provide the maximum benefit to individual patients and society as a whole. Even more importantly … there may be dramatically more deaths from the economic breakdown than from COVID-19 itself …

Millions could potentially die from suicide, drug abuse, lack of medical coverage or treatment, poverty and lack of food access, on top of other predictable social, medical and public-health problems stemming from the response to COVID-19."

Gates Explains Economic Shutdown

At 33:45 in the interview, Gates goes on to reveal what appears to be a stunning insider's insight into the current economic shutdown:

"We don't want to have a lot of recovered people … To be clear, we're trying — through the shut-down in the United States — to not get to 1% of the population infected ... I believe we will be able to avoid that with having this economic pain."

In other words, if we are to believe Gates, we're sacrificing the financial stability and sanity of hundreds of millions of Americans in order to prevent the infection rate from hitting 1% of the population.

Keep in mind, the death rate for COVID-19 now appears to be on par with seasonal influenza, according to Fauci,²² so the vast majority of those infected end up recovering after mild illness, and have antibodies that should provide them with long-lasting immunity. Clearly, if you want to make money from a vaccine, you don't want people to develop immunity naturally, and this is precisely what Gates is admitting to. As noted by OffGuardian:²³

"Gates and his colleagues far prefer to create a vast, hugely expensive, new system of manufacturing and selling billions of test kits, and in parallel very quickly developing and selling billions of antivirals and vaccines.

And then, when the virus comes back again a few months later and most of the population is unexposed and therefore vulnerable, selling billions more test kits and medical interventions."

Gates Leads Medical Tyranny Agenda

The short video above summarizes some of the points I've touched on in this article so far and reviews how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation influences public health policy at the very highest levels through a vast web of personal and organizational interconnections.

Gates has a history of "predicting" global pandemics with vast numbers of deaths,²⁴ and with his call for a tracking system to keep tabs on infected/noninfected and vaccinated/unvaccinated individuals, he's ensuring an unimaginably profitable future for the vaccine makers he supports and makes money from via his Foundation investments.

In an April 9, 2020, Children's Health Defense article,²⁵ Robert F. Kennedy Jr. further details Gates' vaccine agenda. As noted by Kennedy:

"Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft's ambition to control a global vaccination ID enterprise²⁶) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy."

The vaccination ID enterprise Kennedy mentions refers to a program called ID2020, launched in 2019, which is designed to "leverage immunization as an opportunity to establish digital identity."²⁷

This digital identity system is said to carry "far-reaching implications for individuals' access to services and livelihoods," so to think that Gates' call for implantable COVID-19 vaccine certificates would be limited to that alone would likely be a grave mistake.

It's not so far-fetched to imagine a future in which your vaccine certificate simply replaces personal identifications such as your driver's license, state ID card, Social Security card and passport.

Wall Street Journal Wants Us to Pity Gates

As people are starting to see the truth, Gates’ social media accounts have been flooded with criticism, resulting in The Wall Street Journal publishing an article²⁸ trying to raise pity for him, saying he’s being attacked by “social media mobs.” April 17, 2020, Zero Hedge commented on the PR campaign to protect Gates:²⁹

“The Wall Street Journal's Deepa Seetharaman wants us to know that while poor billionaire Bill Gates has 'long been a target for online trolls' … 'the social-media attacks have intensified' as the Micrrosoft co-founder and World Health Organization (WHO) benefactor has become the left's de-facto coronavirus czar …

Perhaps the 'conspiracy theorists' are having a little trouble digesting the fact that Gates — whose vaccine efforts in India were blamed for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children — coincidentally hosted an October, 2019 high-level 'pandemic simulation' in New York called Event 201 which specifically focused on coronavirus …

Combine that with Gates' recent comments about mass vaccination and biometric identification in order to 'open up' the country and allow people to attend mass gatherings — an idea which Dr. Anthony Fauci said ‘has merit,’ and so-called conspiracy theorists have plenty of dots to connect.

According to the Journal, ‘social-media platforms remain fertile ground for virus-related conspiracies and online harassment, despite repeated pledges by the companies to crack down on such activity.’

So — Gates is being harassed and nobody is stopping these thought criminals with their menacing opinions. And of course, 'bots' are also being blamed for amplifying 'conspiracy claims' — since there can't be that many real humans with bad things to say about Mr. Gates.”

Far from being a force for good, Gates appears to have chosen to use his wealth and intellect to further a distasteful social control plan to benefit his own nefarious agendas, and people all over the world are finally starting to see his true colors.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2VNjF99
via IFTTT

Jessica Sepel’s healthy lentil bolognese will keep you going all week

Current ban on elective surgeries and IVF procedures could be lifted soon

Tighten and tone with Renee Scott’s signature Barre Attack class

Kick start your day with Ben Lucas’ 30-minute Tabata burn

Infant temperament predicts personality more than 20 years later

Researchers investigating how temperament shapes adult life-course outcomes have found that behavioral inhibition in infancy predicts a reserved, introverted personality at age 26. For those individuals who show sensitivity to making errors in adolescence, the findings indicated a higher risk for internalizing disorders (such as anxiety and depression) in adulthood. The study provides robust evidence of the impact of infant temperament on adult outcomes.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2zfiHel