Health & Fitness

Alex Tarnava, whom you may not have heard of before, is the inventor of the open-container molecular hydrogen tablets — my favorite supplement — thus making it widely available in a convenient form. In fact, I now carry Tarnava’s molecular hydrogen tablets in my store.

What Is Molecular Hydrogen?

Molecular hydrogen (H2) — two hydrogen atoms combined together — is a gas with very unique and selective antioxidant effects that specifically target the most harmful free radicals. It works primarily by improving and optimizing the redox status of the cell when needed.

As a result, you see improvements in superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione levels, for example. Not only does hydrogen selectively reduce the most toxic radicals, but it can help prevent an excess (which becomes toxic) of the free radicals from being produced in the first place. This is a very powerful prevention mechanism.

H2 also activates the Nrf2 pathway when needed. Nrf2 is a transcription factor that, when activated, goes into the cell’s nucleus and binds to the antioxidant response element in the DNA.

It then induces the transcription of further cytoprotective enzymes such as glutathione, superoxide dismutase catalase, glutathione peroxidase, phase II enzymes, heme-1 oxygenase and many others.

A landmark paper¹ on molecular hydrogen came out in Nature Medicine in 2007, showing 2% hydrogen gas was effective at preventing brain damage from ischemia reperfusion and, as an antioxidant, has powerful therapeutic applications. Hydrogen is the smallest molecule in the universe, and is neutral and nonpolar, which is why its bioavailability is so great.

Tarnava’s Journey of Discovery

As is so often the case, Tarnava’s interest in molecular hydrogen and his subsequent invention was born out of a personal health challenge that required him to dig deeper for a solution. He explains:

“I had another business that allowed me a lot of freedom for athletics and exercise. I was training six to eight hours a day. I was training in various martial arts and CrossFit. Then I got really sick. It materialized in sudden-onset narcolepsy. I had central nervous system shut down.

My heavy lifts weren’t altered but I couldn’t jump on a plate, whereas a couple of weeks before I had the 54-inch plyometric jump. I was sleeping 16 to 15 hours a day. I’d fall asleep if I sat down for about a minute. My bloodwork was bizarre … My C-reactive protein was 34 [mg/dL].”

Your C-reactive protein should ideally be below 1 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL), so Tarnava obviously had massive inflammation going on. He was also iron-deficient and anemic, despite eating a lot of red meat and leafy greens.

“It lasted for weeks. They couldn’t figure it out … When the dust settled, my shoulder was frozen. All the inflammation, the narcolepsy and the excess sleeping just went away, but I had a frozen left shoulder. I basically had arthritis in eight spots overnight. At that time, hydrogen was already on my radar, so I bought a machine for $5,000.”

Inventing Molecular Hydrogen Tablets

The problem was, the hydrogen water machine was only producing a very small amount of hydrogen gas. When he tested the water for its hydrogen content, Tarnava found it had a concentration of 0.03 parts per million (ppm), which is virtually nothing. In the end, this is what spurred Tarnava to develop molecular hydrogen tablets that can deliver a consistent concentrated dose when dissolved in water.

“I used a bit of a Ray Kurzweilian strategy when I was developing the tablets,” he says. ”I found experts. I found engineers. I found pharmaceutical formulation firms. I contracted a physicist, a chemist and biochemist …

Eventually [I succeeded in making the tablets]. I failed a couple thousand times … I was reading a lot of the studies. They’re using magnesium in different ways. I tried magnesium sticks. It wasn’t working …

I started looking to make powders and tablets … At first, the [metallic] magnesium was really hard to get. I had to go through the Department of Defense and the state department to be compliant with eight different government agencies to use the magnesium.

Usually when you’re buying a magnesium, it’s a salt … [Metallic magnesium] is reactive — it’s nonionic, elemental magnesium … It’s very hazardous to handle in production. We have very, very controlled production.

But it’s a very safe tablet. So, our hydrogen tablet is not HAZMAT (hazardous material). It’s not explosive. It’s not flammable. But it will split the hydrogen off your water …

We’re using a very special pharmaceutical grade magnesium that’s ground in very specific ways for us to get the nano bubbles … When I first started tinkering around, I had some of it tested. I was getting magnesium in from like Russia and China that was being mislabeled.

I later found they were illegal for export from both places. It’s heavily controlled in the U.S. Just to get it out to Canada, it was an eight-month process with the state department doing background checks, facility checks and in-person interviews to make sure I had a legitimate purpose for this stuff.”

Poor Quality Hydrogen Tablets May Be High in Contaminants

Tarnava’s tablets are also tested and compliant for heavy metals. Tarnava tells the tale of a competitor who did not bother going through the intricate certification processes Tarnava has followed and purchased magnesium from a fireworks reseller, which resulted in tablets that were high in lead.

“We’re ultra-compliant in our heavy metal levels. You need 16 tablets a day to hit the threshold for California Proposition 65, which is about 10 times stricter than the pharmaceutical regulations on it, which is even several times stricter than some regulations … For supplement regulations, I think you could take something like a couple of hundred tablets a day …

We went to great lengths to ensure purity and to ensure the framework was in place before we started [production], which is also why we’re pursuing so much research with public teams under no publication agreement.

We have five publications already in three years … We have seven more that are underway and six in the planning stage that are finishing up their ethics approvals and protocols. And we have four prominent universities conducting rodent trials using our tablets.

In total, we’re now working with nine or 10 public universities around the world to further the research and assist in any way we can, because we want to know more about how it works, what dose should be used and when it should be taken. The data is starting to come out. Things are definitely emerging. Higher dose, higher concentration and intermittent pulse seems to be the best for humans.”

The Problem With Molecular Hydrogen Water Generators

Before molecular hydrogen tablets, one of the most commonly used ways to generate molecular hydrogen water was through the use of water ionizers that purport to make hydrogen.

However, they won’t work unless you have total dissolved solids (TDS) such as minerals in the water. You cannot use reverse osmosis or distilled water. They will also stop working once the plates used to split the water get calcified from the TDS. Tarnava explains:

“What ends up happening is they’ll still make hydrogen, but it doesn’t dissolve because the bubbles are too big. It’ll still make the same amount of hydrogen, but it’s just in and out. It doesn’t dissolve in the water.

In a lab, when they’re using pure gas to dissolve through a beaker, it might take half an hour of bubbling. Liters and liters of hydrogen to get to 1.6 ppm … But the smaller in bubbles you go, the easier it is to dissolve.

What I figured out is when you even go into the low nano range, you can quasi-dissolve this cloud of gas that doesn’t fully dissolve without accompanying pressure, but it also doesn’t escape. So, you can get, in a half a liter, 8 to 10 ppm [of molecular hydrogen], instead of the 0.1 ppm that a lot of these ionizers give you.

This is critical because a lot of people look at the rodent research and fail to properly [calculate] … just how much more hydrogen mice are consuming per body weight than humans.

When you take a 25-gram mouse and convert it to an 80-kilogram person (that’s 176 pounds for American viewers; that’s the average weight of the American), that person would need to drink the equivalent of 12.8 liters of water a day to get the same amount [of hydrogen] that mouse drinks.

Consequently, it’s critical because you need to raise your cellular concentrations of hydrogen. If you’re only drinking half a liter or a liter a day, then you need to [raise] the concentration to get that proper dosage.”

Pulsing and Dosing

Molecular hydrogen is best taken cyclically or pulsed. If you take it continuously — say you’re drinking hydrogen water all day long — the effect seems to dissipate and can actually vanish altogether.

As noted by Tarnava, your body naturally produces about 10 liters (L) of hydrogen gas each day through bacteria that break down carbohydrates in your digestive system.

It may seem odd that taking a relatively small amount of supplemental hydrogen gas can make a difference, but when you look at the cellular response between ingestion and inhalation, drinking hydrogen water can double your cellular concentration of hydrogen gas. For about five minutes, your blood level peaks, and this is when beneficial changes in cell signaling and gene expression occur.

“Most of what hydrogen does is indirect response from altered cell signaling and changes in gene expression,” Tarnava explains. “We simply need that pulsed dose to alter all these things, [because the data shows] when they’ve given continuous gas administration, and constantly raised the cellular concentration, it’s had no benefit, even at a much higher dose, whereas when pulsed, the effect is good.”

In the interview, Tarnava discusses hydrogen gas dosing using both ppm and mg. To clarify, ppm and mg/L are identical and both refer to the concentration of hydrogen in the water. The mg refers to the actual dosage. As noted by Tarnava, getting the correct acute dosage is important for optimal benefits.

When you dissolve two molecular hydrogen tablets in 1 liter of water, you get 8 to 10 ppm of hydrogen gas concentration, which translates into an 8 to 10 mg dose if consumed while the water is “white.”

Ideally, you’d want to drink the full liter all at once. If it’s too much, you can divide it into two doses, with one tablet in half a liter of water taken in the morning and another half-liter (with one tablet) again in the afternoon.

While it may be tempting to simply put two tablets in half a liter of water, this will not give you the ideal dose. In essence, you’re getting a higher concentration of hydrogen, but at a lower dose. The problem with this is that the effects are not linear, and simply raising the concentration but reducing the dose will not provide you will the full effects.

How to Drink Your Hydrogen for Best Results

So, for best results, place two to three tablets in 1 liter (about 32 ounces) of water and drink it all in the morning. This will give you a very strong pulse, which will produce better results than a lower pulse twice a day.

Keep in mind that once the tablets are fully dissolved and the water has turned white — which can take anywhere from 30 seconds to a couple of minutes, depending on the temperature of the water — you’ll want to drink it as fast as possible. Room temperature water is best, allowing the tablets to dissolve in about 90 seconds.

Between 45 and 90 seconds, the water will have a stable concentration of hydrogen at or above 10 ppm. Between one and six minutes, it’ll drop from 10 ppm to 1.6 ppm. So, the faster you drink it the better. However, even if you let it sit for a few minutes, you’re still getting 1.6 ppm, which is far higher than what you’ll get from water ionizers that cost thousands of dollars.

As an added bonus, you’re also getting highly available magnesium — about 80 mg of elemental magnesium per tablet, which goes straight to where magnesium is needed. The elemental magnesium does not dissipate, so you’re getting that even if you forget to drink it before the hydrogen dissipates.

Blowup Leads to a Surprising Discovery

As Tarnava was creating the tablets, he was also using them on himself. Once he was able to make a tablet that provided 3 ppm in half a liter of water, his shoulder unfroze and the arthritis in his hip eased.

“I was drinking 1 liter in the morning, 1 liter in the afternoon and 1 liter before bed. Then I started getting a little bit more hardcore. I started [increasing] the pressure and was getting close to 5 ppm in taking this dose.

But I was needing to put the thermoses in vice grips to remove the caps because they were getting knocked off the threads. That was my first run-in with safety control, because one of my thermoses blew up in my fridge.”

The reason for this is because the molecular hydrogen converts to gas, which increases the pressure in a closed container. This eventually led Tarnava to develop an open-container tablet.

Most hydrogen tablets require using a closed container, or else the gas will simply escape. Tarnava’s product, on the other hand, can be dropped into an open glass, and the gas still stays put in the water and doesn’t escape.

“I think that’s really what sets us apart,” he says. “That’s the basis of most of our IP and what we’ve done. And it was an accident. We didn’t do it on purpose … Our initial goal was to get 3 to 4 ppm in half a liter in under five minutes in a sealed container …

But every time we’d unseal these fast-reacting tablets, the water went white. This would test very high and return down very quickly. The half-life didn’t make any sense. We’re beating our heads against the wall. After a few months, it just dawned on me, ‘Why are we fighting this? We’re getting higher levels by doing this … I wonder how we’d do in an open cup?’

It was higher. It was under two minutes at that time … It really didn’t make sense. Finally, when we did it in the open cup and we replicated it over and over again, it still didn’t make sense. I contacted Tyler LeBaron [a molecular hydrogen expert]. I told him what we were working on. He said, ‘I don’t believe you. Show me.’ I put him online …

Tyler failed to falsify what we were doing. He did multiple tests. He took them into testing in Japan and China, to different conferences and apparatuses. He asked me to do some tests and I did it. I’ve been through the same thing with Randy Shark who runs H2 Sciences …

He was as or more skeptical than Tyler, but he … [too] failed to falsify what we’re doing. Now, as we’re getting more data — we’re doing gas chromatography, we’re doing all these different things — every report … [is] indicating between 8 to 11 ppm in half a liter with one tablet … Nobody else comes close.”

From Illness to Health With Molecular Hydrogen

As Tarnava continued using the hydrogen water, his frozen shoulder and arthritic joints continued to improve to the point where he can now play soccer and work out. He also implemented better sleeping habits, which probably played a role as well, seeing how he was only sleeping about four hours — half of the recommended amount of sleep you need for optimal health.

He’s also doing my cyclical fasting protocol. “I’ve been doing that for months,” he says. “I fast 43 to 48 hours a week every week. Every fourth, I’m pushing it to 72 [hours]. I dropped 40 pounds from February to August.”

This brings up an important point: While molecular hydrogen is a fantastic supplement — I take it every day — it’s not a magic bullet by itself. It needs to be integrated with other elements of a healthy lifestyle. Tarnava was not doing that initially. Now that he’s sleeping more and doing time-restricted eating, and some longer fasting as well, his health is starting to significantly improve.

“That’s actually what excites me the most about hydrogen,” Tarnava says. “First, it’s shown to have this protective effect … The more damage someone has, typically, the more prominent hydrogen is working to bring them back to homeostatic function.

But on top of that … hydrogen is shown not just to cancel out and mitigate the stresses from other forms of hormesis, because it seems to be a form of hormesis itself … like exercise … but then, it has this rescuing effect to basically bring recovery faster.

In this really controlled rat study, the rats had higher stress, were swimming longer. But as their stress spiked more, their redox regulated faster and their inflammation was blunted. A really cool article I just read this weekend [showed] … it significantly improved exercise performance.

But what was interesting is it significantly lowered insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), whereas exercise raises IGF-1. [The rats] performed better, but they had IGF-1 lowered.”

The Importance of Cycling

As just mentioned, hydrogen works by a process called molecular hormesis, so there’s a delayed impact. If you’re going to go through oxidative stress, such as flying domestically across the country, for example, you’ll want to take it several hours or even days beforehand.

The reason for this is because it has to go through the process of activating your antioxidant genes. Tarnava also recommends cycling your use of hydrogen in order to keep its effectiveness. He explains:

“For instance, for my surgery, a month before I cycled off [hydrogen]. Every three to six months, I’ll stop taking hydrogen and let all my joints seize and deprive my body of the exogenous hydrogen. And then I change my dosing protocol to keep my body guessing. This seems to kick things into gear.

It seems that in the past, when I had the same dose of protocol for a year, that things started seizing back up again. When I get a wash-out period and change [the dosage] … I recover again. I’ve been telling most people to do the same.

Every time I change it, sometimes I’ll do it twice a day. Sometimes, I’ll do it three times a day … I’ll have a higher concentration or a lower dosage. Other times, I exercise five or six days a week and I was only taking them on days I exercise, five minutes before I exercise, which, anecdotally, is when we see the biggest benefit for exercise … especially on heart rate and modifying heart rate.”

Molecular Hydrogen Is a Powerful Health Aid

According to Tyler LeBaron, one of the preeminent experts on molecular hydrogen, more than 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific publications have collectively demonstrated that H2 has therapeutic potential in over 170 different human and animal disease models.

In fact, hydrogen is shown to benefit virtually every organ of the human body, and the reason for this is because hydrogen actually targets and mitigates the root causes of inflammation and oxidation.

As mentioned at the beginning, hydrogen has the ability to selectively target the most toxic radicals, and helps prevent their creation in the first place, which is a very powerful prevention mechanism.

For example, clinical studies have shown molecular hydrogen effectively prevents liver damage (fatty liver) caused by a high-sugar diet and metabolic syndrome. ^2,3 Animal research⁴ suggest hydrogen may actually induce GLUT4 translocation by a similar mechanism as insulin.

To learn more about molecular hydrogen, check out the Molecular Hydrogen Institute’s website. There, you’ll find research, video lectures and a variety of other resources, including a number of different certifications for those interested in working with and administering molecular hydrogen.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3aAJwXn
via IFTTT

Francis Boyle, a former advisory board member for the Council for Responsible Genetics, is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law.

His educational background¹ includes an undergraduate degree from the University of Chicago, a juris doctor (lawyer) degree from Harvard and a Ph.D. in political science. For decades, he’s advocated against the development and use of bioweapons, which he suspects COVID-19 is.

In fact, Boyle was the one who called for biowarfare legislation at the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, and the one who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and signed into law by George Bush Sr.

In our first, March 8, 2020, interview, Boyle shared his views on the origins of the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. Here, we continue our discussion, as more details have emerged about this virus. One of the criticisms raised since our last interview is that Boyle has no formal training in virology. When asked what makes him qualified to speak about this particular virus, he says:

“I went to the University of Chicago, which is one of the top five universities in the country, if not the world. There I took their bio pre-med sequence, which was biochemistry, population biology and genetics, and got straight A's.

I was in there competing with all the University of Chicago bio pre-med students for grades and my biochem lab partner went to Harvard Medical School.

I won the University of Chicago's Sigma Zi award and prize in biology for my graduating year. They gave out one per year and it usually went to seniors, but in my case, they had to make a special exception because I was a graduating junior.

So, yes, I'm not a scientist, but one of the reasons the Council for Responsible Genetics asked me to get involved was that my knowledge in this field was well-known to my life science friends there on the Harvard faculty, and that's how I got involved here.

I had basic rudimentary training, actually very good training, at the University of Chicago, and my professors there, professor friends at Harvard in the life sciences, I guess they vouched for me. So, when I was asked to join shortly after CRG was founded in 1983, I agreed to do so and they asked me to handle their biological warfare work.”

SARS-CoV-2 — A Biological Warfare Weapon

“Novel coronavirus” means it is a new virus not previously known to previously infect humans. The currently held conventional view is that SARS-CoV-2 was transmitted through animals (zoonotic transmission), specifically bats. Boyle dismissed this notion in our initial interview, and still refutes the idea.

While a widely-cited paper,² published in the Nature journal on February 3, 2020, claims to establish that SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus of bat origin that then jumped species, the work of one of the authors of that paper, Shi Zhengli, actually involved the weaponization of the SARS virus. (Another Nature paper³ published that same day reiterates the idea that the COVID-19 pandemic is zoonotically transmitted.)

However, according to Boyle, other scientific literature establishes that this is indeed an engineered synthetic virus that was not transmitted from animals to humans without human intervention.

For starters, a Lancet paper⁴ published February 15, 2020, by physicians who treated some of the first COVID-19 patients in China showed that patient zero, the one believed to have started the transmission, was nowhere near the Wuhan seafood market.

What’s more, there were no bats sold in or even close to the market. At least one-third of the patients reviewed also had no exposure or links to that market. This data supports the counter-hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 was not zoonotically transmitted but is in fact an engineered virus.

Even U.S. politicians and intelligence agencies are starting to say they believe the virus leaked from the Wuhan BSL4 lab.^5,6 In our first interview, Boyle discussed published research establishing that the novel coronavirus is SARS, which is a weaponized version of the coronavirus to begin with Wuhan BSL 4 lab, with added gain-of-function capabilities that increases its virulence (makes it spread easier and faster).

“I also went through the scientific article where the Australian health board working with Wuhan … genetically engineered HIV into SARS,” Boyle says. “So, that is all verified in scientific papers. In addition, it seems to me that they took that back to the [Wuhan] BSL4 and applied nanotechnology to it.

The size of the molecules are maybe 120 microns, which indicates to me we are dealing with nanotechnology. That's [something] you need to do in a BSL4. Biological weapons nanotechnology is so dangerous, people working with it have to wear a moon suit with portable air …

We also know that one of the cooperating institutions [to Wuhan BSL4] was Harvard, and that the chairman of the Harvard chemistry department, [Dr. Charles Lieber], a specialist in nanotechnology, set up an entire laboratory in Wuhan where [according to reports] he specialized in applying nanotechnology to chemistry and biology.

My guess is, based on what I've read in the literature, that they tried to weaponize all that together. And that is SARS-CoV-2 that we are dealing with now.

So, it's SARS, which is genetically engineered biowarfare agent to begin with. Second, it has gain-of-function properties, which makes it more lethal, more infectious. It has HIV in there. That was confirmed by an Indian scientist … and it looks like nanotechnology [has been used] … An MIT scientist who did a study found that it traveled 27 feet through the air. And that, I guess, was in lab conditions.

That, I think, is why it's so infectious, and that is what I believe we are dealing with here … [This is] why the 6-foot [social distancing recommendation] by the CDC … is preposterous. Even doubling that will do you no good. If there is nanotechnology, it floats in the air …

I am not saying that China deliberately released this, shooting itself in the foot. But it was clear they were developing an extremely dangerous unknown biological weapon that had never been seen before, and it leaked out of the lab.

And as you see in the Washington Post,⁷ U.S. State Department officials … [reported] back to Washington that there were inadequate safety precautions and procedures in that lab to begin with. We also know that SARS has leaked out of other Chinese biological warfare labs. So right now, I believe that is what happened here …

I personally believe that until our political leaders come clean with the American people, both at the White House and in Congress and our state government, and publicly admit that this is an extremely dangerous offensive biological warfare weapon that we are dealing with, I do not see that we will be able to confront it and to stop it, let alone defeat it.”

The Origin of SARS-CoV-2

While Boyle made the origin of SARS-CoV-2 clear in our initial conversation, as I started reading some of the literature it really was shocking because one of the primary investigators on the 2015 paper⁸ from the University of North Carolina — “A SARS-like Cluster of Circulating Bat Coronaviruses Shows Potential for Human Emergence” — was Dr. Shi Zhengli, a virologist who in 2010 had published a paper⁹ discussing the weaponization of the SARS virus.

Normally, while the coronavirus found in bats may be SARS,¹⁰ it typically does not infect humans as it does not target the ACE-2 receptor. The infectious agent causing the current pandemic is called SARS-CoV-2 — SARS standing for “serious acute respiratory infection” and CoV-2 indicating that it’s a second type of SARS coronavirus known to infect humans. 

SARS-CoV-2, of course, contains the genetic modification to attach to ACE2 receptors in human cells, which allows it to infect them. Zhengli’s publications show that she engineered this bat coronavirus into one that crosses species and infects humans. She has in fact been working on this for more than 10 years.

“That is why I said SARS was a bioengineered warfare weapon to begin with,” Boyle says. “And that is what … [the University of] North Carolina and … the Australian lab were trying to make even more dangerous with the gain-of-function and the HIV. So … SARS was a biological warfare [agent] to begin with, it leaked, and that is the origin of the [COVID-19] epidemic.”

In addition, an Indian paper^11,12 that ended up being withdrawn due to intense political pressure, shows a specific envelope protein from the HIV virus called GP41 was integrated in the RNA sequences of SARS-CoV-2. In other words, the implication is that the HIV virus was genetically engineered into SARS.

So, in summary, SARS-CoV-2 appears to be a bioengineered bat coronavirus¹³ — which was initially benign and nontransmittable to humans. Zhengli then genetically modified the virus to integrate spike proteins that allows the virus to enter human cells by attaching to ACE-2 receptors. That was the first modification.

The second modification was to integrate an envelope protein from HIV called GP141, which tends to impair the immune system. A third modification appears to involve nanotechnology to make the virus light enough to remain airborne for a long time, apparently giving it a range of up to 27 feet.¹⁴

Nanotech Expert With Wuhan Connection Arrested

While the BSL4 lab in Wuhan may have leaked the virus, its creation does not appear to be limited to the Chinese. As noted by Boyle in his comment above, the chairman of the Harvard department of chemistry, nanoscience expert Dr. Charles Lieber, was arrested earlier this year by federal agencies, suspected of illegal dealings with China.¹⁵ Lieber has denied the allegations.

The Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) allegedly paid him $50,000 a month from 2012 to 2017 to help establish and oversee the WUT-Harvard Joint Nano Key Laboratory. He also received another $150,000 a month in living expenses from China’s Thousand Talents program. The problem was, Harvard officials claim they had not approved the lab and didn’t know about it until 2015. Boyle comments:

“The cover story here — that Harvard didn't know what was going on — is preposterous. I spent seven years at Harvard. I have three degrees from Harvard. I spent two years teaching at Harvard.

Of course Harvard knew that its chair of the chemistry department had this lab in Wuhan, China, where he was working on nanotechnology with respect to chemical and biological materials. That's been reported. They didn't say what the materials were. In addition, it has now been reported that Harvard was a cooperating institution with the Wuhan BSL4.”

Researchers Working on Gain-of-Function to Spanish Flu

If you think SARS-CoV-2 is bad, be glad it’s not the weaponized version of Spanish flu, which has also been in the works, according to Boyle. He says:

“[The University of North Carolina’s] work was existentially dangerous and they knew it at the time. If you read the UNC scientific article¹⁶ [cowritten by] the Wuhan BSL4 scientist [Shi Zhengli] … it says, ‘Experiments with the full-length and chimeric SHC014 recombinant viruses were initiated and performed before the GOF research funding pause and have since been reviewed and approved for continued study by the NIH.’

It says recombinant … So, they admit it was gain-of-function [research]. [The research] was paused by NIH¹⁷ [National Institutes of Health]. Why was it paused by NIH? Because there was a letter put out by large numbers of life scientists at the time saying this type of gain-of-function work … could be existentially dangerous if it got out in the public. Therefore, it had to be terminated … [But] the NIH was funding this in the beginning …

A footnote here: I read the NIH’s pause letter to the University of North Carolina, and UNC was doing two gain-of-function research projects. The other one was with Dr. [Yoshihiro] Kawaoka from the University of Wisconsin, who had resurrected the Spanish flu virus¹⁸ for the Pentagon.

He, according to the pause letter, was also there doing gain-of-function work on the flu virus — one could only conclude it was the Spanish flu virus. It did not say the Spanish flu, but they also put a gain-of-function pause on that type of deadly research …

I mean, the Spanish flu, we all know what that is, so imagine giving the Spanish flu gain-of-function properties, making it even more lethal and more infectious. That's exactly what was going on there at that UNC lab …”

Disturbingly, while the NIH halted funding of this kind of gain-of-function research on lethal pathogens in 2014, it reauthorized it in December 2017,¹⁹ and Boyle suspects Kawaoka’s work may have been restarted as well, although he’s not found proof of it yet.

“So, this was existentially dangerous work that was going on at that UNC lab. Everyone knew it, NIH funded it, NIAID under Dr. Fauci funded it as well. They knew exactly how dangerous this was. They paused it and then they resumed it,” Boyle says.

Can Violations of Biowarfare Treaty Be Enforced?

As mentioned, Boyle is a professor of international law and drafted an international treaty on biowarfare agents and weapons. That law is still in force, and would provide life imprisonment for everyone involved in the creation and release of SARS-CoV-2, were it officially concluded to be a biowarfare agent.

“If you read that UNC article,²⁰ it says exactly it was dealing with synthetic molecules … And in my biological weapons anti-terrorism act of 1989, I specifically criminalized — by that name — synthetic molecules.

That is why, at first, the whole synthetic biology movement … was set up by the Pentagons DARPA. They funded the whole thing. And it's DARPA money that is behind synthetic biology, gene drive and all the rest of it.

And that is why at the first convention of synthetic biologists, in their final report, one of their key recommendations was the repeal of my biological weapons anti-terrorism act, because they fully intended to use synthetic biology to manufacture biological weapons …

The law still applies. It provides for life imprisonment for everyone who has done this … all the scientists involved at the University of North Carolina and everyone who funded this project, knowing that it was existentially dangerous — and that includes Fauci and [people at] the NIH … UNC, Food and Drug Administration … the Dana Harvard Cancer Institute at Harvard … the World Health Organization …”

So, just how would we get that process of justice going? Boyle explains:

“There are two ways. First, you're going to have to pressure the Department of Justice to prosecute these people. That might be very difficult to do. Federal statutes require indictments to be brought by U.S. attorneys. However, just with respect to North Carolina, state law applies there too. I haven't researched North Carolina law; however, I was originally hired here to teach criminal law and I taught it for seven or eight years …

To have criminal intent, one of the variants of criminal intent is the demonstration of grave indifference to human life. And that is the criminal intent necessary for homicide.

So in my opinion, and my advice would be, if we can't get [attorney general William Pelham] Barr to sign off on prosecuting these people, that the district attorney, state’s attorney, attorney general out there in North Carolina, institute and indict everyone involved in this North Carolina work for homicide.

And that could include up to and including murder, malice of forethought. Again, one of the elements can be manifestation of grave indifference to human life. And it's clear from this article [the 2015 UNC paper²¹], they knew it was gain-of-function, they paused it because it was existentially dangerous, it was then reapproved and they continued it.

So, I think a good case could be made, certainly, for indicting these people under North Carolina law by North Carolina legal authorities, if the federal government is not going to do it for us, under my law [the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989]. But again, I want to make it clear, I haven't research North Carolina law.”

Time to Shutter All BSL4 Laboratories?

Boyle is adamant that all BSL3 and BSL4 laboratories must be closed down and all biowarfare work with lethal pathogens ceased. “They are all existentially dangerous,” he says. “This is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And it is now happened. Here we are. It's staring us in the face.”

Certainly, COVID-19 is nowhere near as devastating as the Black Death or the Spanish flu of 1918, both of which exacted a shocking death toll, all without the aid of synthetic molecules and nanotechnology.

The very idea that any of these horrific illnesses might be brought back in turbo-charged form should be terrifying enough for the world to unite in saying “No thanks; we don’t want or need that kind of research going on.” What value have these dangerous laboratories provided to date compared to the risk they are exposing all of us to?

In closing, while Boyle believes COVID-19 has the ability to become a serious pandemic killer, I strongly disagree. Based on all the data I’ve seen so far, I believe he’s wrong on this point, and I suspect the death toll due to economic hardship and emotional stress will be far worse than the disease itself.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2W4vc4q
via IFTTT

Clear your mind and find a moment for yourself with Jacquie Fennel's 15 minute mediation.

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/2xbQUeg

Scientists investigated the long-term effects of dietary counseling on cardiovascular health. The individuals, who had participated in the trial between ages 7 months and 20 years, were invited to a follow-up study at the age of 26. The results show that the intervention group who received dietary counseling had lower serum cholesterol level and better insulin sensitivity than those in the control group.

from Diet and Weight Loss News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3eWhVDF

Scientists investigated the long-term effects of dietary counseling on cardiovascular health. The individuals, who had participated in the trial between ages 7 months and 20 years, were invited to a follow-up study at the age of 26. The results show that the intervention group who received dietary counseling had lower serum cholesterol level and better insulin sensitivity than those in the control group.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3eWhVDF