Health & Fitness

According to the Albany Herald,¹ two prominent spokesmen for the pro-vaccine movement are now expressing concerns about the messaging used when promoting Operation Warp Speed — the name given to the White House effort to manufacture and launch a COVID-19 vaccine (as well as other potential therapeutics) at a record-setting pace.

The two long-time pro-vaccine advocates, Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, and Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and professor of pediatrics at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, fear communication about the accelerated vaccine program may fuel safety concerns that could dampen vaccine uptake. Albany Herald writes:²

"The approach itself is not unreasonable, said Dr. Peter Hotez … But the way it's being communicated is scaring people, he told CNN. 'The way the message is coming out of Operation Warp Speed creates a lot of chaos and confusion. And it is enabling the anti-vaccine movement,' Hotez said …

'The way they are messaging it is a little frightening because they make a point of saying how quickly it is being done,' said Dr. Paul Offit … 'It makes people think there are steps being skipped.'"

Well, the fact of the matter is that steps are being skipped, and there can be serious ramifications when doing so. Simply changing the narrative will not change that.

Big Pharma Executives Rake in Millions

Hotez also criticized drug company executives for being too obvious in their greed. As reported by Albany Herald:³

"… vaccine makers send out news releases trumpeting incremental successes. Last month, Moderna, the US biotech company heavily promoted by the White House and the National Institutes of Health, announced promising early results, sending its share price up 30%. At the same time, two top executives sold $30 million worth of shares.

Lorence Kim, Moderna's chief financial officer, exercised 241,000 options for $3 million, filings show. He then immediately sold them for $19.8 million, creating a profit of $16.8 million.

The next day, Tal Zaks, Moderna's chief medical officer, spent $1.5 million to exercise options. He immediately sold the shares for $9.77 million, triggering a profit of $8.2 million. It was all legal, but looked bad, Hotez said. 'They are shooting themselves in the foot,' he said."

Indeed, the message sent by Zaks' and Kim's share sales is a terrible one that is not likely to garner public confidence in their product. According to Moderna, the sales were done under automated trading plans called 10b5-1, which means neither needed to take any action for the sales to occur.

But that hardly matters. What people see is Moderna leadership getting rich quick off vaccines that are being rushed through and skipping crucial safety checks. There's no evidence whatsoever right now that the company's novel vaccine will actually work, let alone be safe.

According to director of research services at Equilar, Andrew Gordon, the only way the trades would be deemed illegal would be if Zaks or Kim created or modified their 10b5-1 plans "while in possession of material insider information."⁴

Whatever the truth of that may be, what appears clear is the pair raked in nearly $25 million in the days between Moderna's press release⁵ announcing its phase 1 trial a success and vaccine safety experts pointing out just how troublesome the results actually were. Even Hotez said he's "not convinced that this is really a positive result."⁶ As reported by Fort Russ News:⁷

"The two executives pocketed almost $25 million in profits in a day's work before experts cast doubt on the vaccine's success and sent shares tumbling. FRN reported on the false reports, citing an article written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that the Moderna vaccine results were a failure.

Fake fact checkers working for social media firms tagged FRN's report as 'false information', insisting instead that the Moderna tests had been a success. Investors in biotech and pharma, and the virologists they depend on, apparently agreed with FRN's assessment."

Moderna's Phase 1 Trial Announcement

Moderna's phase 1 trial for its mRNA-1273 vaccine, which is being led by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and championed by NIAID chief Dr. Anthony Fauci, involved 45 healthy adults between the ages of 18 and 55. According to the company's May 18 press release:⁸

"Immunogenicity data are currently available for the 25 µg and 100 µg dose level … after two doses (day 43) and at the 250 µg level … after one dose (day 29) … All participants ages 18-55 (n=15 per cohort) across all three dose levels seroconverted by day 15 after a single dose.

At day 43, two weeks following the second dose, at the 25 µg dose level (n=15), levels of binding antibodies were at the levels seen in convalescent sera (blood samples from people who have recovered from COVID-19) tested in the same assay.

At day 43, at the 100 µg dose level (n=10), levels of binding antibodies significantly exceeded the levels seen in convalescent sera. Samples are not yet available for remaining participants.

At this time, neutralizing antibody data are available only for the first four participants in each of the 25 µg and 100 µg dose level cohorts. Consistent with the binding antibody data, mRNA-1273 vaccination elicited neutralizing antibodies in all eight of these participants … The levels of neutralizing antibodies at day 43 were at or above levels generally seen in convalescent sera."

1 in 5 Subjects Suffered Serious Systemic Events

However, two days later, May 20, 2020, vaccine safety advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warned "the clinical trial results … could not be much worse." He writes:⁹

"Fauci was so confident of his shot's safety that he waved ferret and primate studies (Moderna suspiciously reported no health data from its mouse studies). That appears to have been a mistake. Three of the 15 human guinea pigs in the high dose cohort (250 mcg) suffered a 'serious adverse event' within 43 days of receiving Moderna's jab.

Moderna did not release its clinical trial study or raw data, but its press release, which was freighted with inconsistencies, acknowledged that three volunteers developed Grade 3 systemic events defined by the FDA as 'Preventing daily activity and requiring medical intervention.'

Moderna allowed only exceptionally healthy volunteers to participate in the study. A vaccine with those reaction rates could cause grave injuries in 1.5 billion humans if administered to 'every person on earth.' That is the threshold that Gates has established for ending the global lockdown.

Moderna did not explain why it reported positive antibody tests for only eight participants. These outcomes are particularly disappointing because the most hazardous hurdle for the inoculation is still ahead; challenging participants with wild COVID infection.

Past attempts at developing COVID vaccines have always faltered at this stage as both humans and animals achieved robust antibody response then sickened and died when exposed to the wild virus."

A May 26, 2020, article¹⁰ in STAT news tells the harrowing story of Ian Haydon, one of the study participants who suffered severe side effects requiring hospitalization. While Haydon says he still has confidence in the vaccine, it's important to recognize that he is a healthy 29-year-old.

He recovered from the side effects, which included a raging fever, fainting, nausea, muscle pain and generally feeling "as sick as he'd ever felt." But just imagine what such side effects might do to an elderly person, an infant, young child or someone who is metabolically compromised or has an underlying condition such as a heart problem. For them, the reactions could be far worse.

Oxford Safety Trial Is Not Using Inert Placebo

A question worth asking here is, if there are no biologically plausible mechanisms for vaccine reactions, why do they always occur in trials? Importantly, as noted in The Daily Mail,¹¹ which reported the launch of Oxford University's vaccine trial for a vaccine known as ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, the COVID-19 vaccine is not being compared to a true placebo (an inert substance such as saline), as is the gold standard for drug safety research.

Instead, it's being compared to a meningitis vaccine. As discussed in "Dangerous Placebos Used in Medical Trials," using an active substance such as another vaccine can hide any number of side effects. This is just one way in which vaccine makers "cheat" in their safety studies to minimize the appearance of adverse effects.

All Previous Coronavirus Vaccines Have Failed

What Kennedy refers to in his May 20 article about Moderna's phase 1 trial results is coronavirus vaccines' well-recognized tendency to cause paradoxical immune enhancement. He explained this in my interview with him, featured in "Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Explains Well-Known Hazards of Coronavirus Vaccines." A short clip of that interview is included above.

Coronavirus vaccine development began after three SARS epidemics had broken out, starting in early 2002. Chinese, Americans and Europeans all started working on a coronavirus vaccine and around 2012 — after 10 years of development — there were about 30 promising candidates.

As explained by Kennedy, the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets, which are the closest analogue to human lung infections. Kennedy explained what happened next:

"The ferrets had an extraordinarily good antibody response, and that is the metric by which FDA licenses vaccines … Then something terrible happened. Those ferrets were then exposed to the wild virus, and they all died. [They developed] inflammation in all their organs, their lungs stopped functioning and they died.

The same thing had happened in the 1960s when they tried to develop an RSV vaccine, which is an upper respiratory illness very similar to coronavirus.

At the time, they did not test it on animals. They went right to human testing. They tested it on I think about 35 children, and the same thing happened. The children developed a champion antibody response — robust, durable.

It looked perfect, [but when] the children were exposed to the wild virus, they all became sick. Two of them died. They abandoned the vaccine. It was a big embarrassment to FDA and NIH."

Coronavirus Vaccines Are Known to Present Unique Hazards

The problem, it turns out, is that coronaviruses produce not just one but two different types of antibodies — neutralizing antibodies¹² that fight the infection, and binding antibodies¹³ that cannot prevent viral infection. 

Incapable of preventing viral infection, binding antibodies can instead trigger a "paradoxical immune response," or "paradoxical immune enhancement." What that means is that everything looks good until you get the disease, and then it makes the disease much, much worse. As noted by Kennedy: 

"Coronavirus vaccines can be very dangerous, and that's why even our enemies, people who hate you and me — Peter Hotez, Paul Offit, Ian Lipkin — are all saying, 'You got to be really, really careful with this vaccine.'"

Many of the COVID-19 vaccines currently in the running — including Moderna's vaccine — are using mRNA to instruct your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, the glycoprotein that attaches to the ACE2 receptor of the cell. This is the first stage of the two-stage process viruses use to gain entry into cells.

The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will commence production of antibodies, without making you sick in the process. You may have noticed Moderna's press release specifies "binding antibodies" and "neutralizing antibodies." It's important to remember the difference between those two when you read these trial results.

Again, the binding antibodies are the ones suspected of triggering paradoxical immune enhancement, and according to Moderna, it was the binding antibodies that were "seen at levels seen in blood samples from people who have recovered from COVID-19." At the time of that press release, data from 25 of 45 participants showed this "positive" binding antibody result.

Meanwhile, neutralizing antibody data were only available for eight of 45 participants, and the neutralizing antibodies are likely to be the most important, considering they are the ones that actually fight infection. Considering the problems caused by binding antibodies in previous coronavirus vaccine trials, these results are hardly comforting.

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

The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has been working tirelessly to end the addition of fluoridation chemicals to drinking water due to fluoride's neurotoxicity. Now, thanks to the support of readers like you, a groundbreaking trial is underway, challenging the U.S. water fluoridation program.

The lawsuit, filed by FAN, Food and Water Watch, Moms Against Fluoridation and five individuals against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), began June 8, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. The suit has been years in the making.

In 2016, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and coalition partners filed a petition asking the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to U.S. drinking water under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

Under the TSCA, the EPA evaluates risks from new and existing chemicals and is supposed to act to address any “unreasonable risks” such chemicals may pose to human health and the environment.¹

However, the EPA has maintained that because fluoride supposedly prevents cavities — a “benefit” that’s been disproven — it justifies adding the chemical to water, even though scientific research shows it poses significant risks.²

The EPA dismissed FAN’s petition, prompting the consumer advocacy group and partners to file a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s denial. Although the EPA filed a motion to dismiss the case, the motion was denied by the court in 2017.³

EPA’s ‘Go-To Man’ Provided Testimony on Fluoride’s Toxicity

According to FAN, the lawsuit represents the first time in its 44-year history that a suit has progressed to trial under TSCA. Paul Connett, Ph.D., executive director of FAN, stated:⁴

“This case may be groundbreaking for environmental legal cases and, at least as important, it is groundbreaking for the opposition to fluoridation. Opposition to fluoridation is now at least 70 years old, but for most of that time has been wrongly dismissed as a fringe and unscientific position.”

This may soon change, considering one of the neurotoxicity experts who testified during the trial was Dr. Bruce Lanphear, who was described in a news release as “the EPA's ‘go-to-man’ on lead's neurotoxicity, and his work shaped their lead standards.”⁵ Similar to fluoride, in 2016, a lawsuit against the EPA, brought by Earthjustice, called on the EPA to reduce the amount of lead allowed in household dust to protect children.

The suit resulted in a change to the EPA’s lead standards,⁶ and Lanphear’s research was instrumental in the process. Dr. Howard Hu, former founding dean of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto, who is now the chair of the department of preventive medicine at the Keck School of Medicine of USC, also testified regarding fluoride’s potential to lower IQ in children.

Twelve-Year Study Demonstrates Fluoride’s Risks to Children

Hu was the lead investigator on a 12-year study that showed higher exposure to fluoride while in utero is associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in childhood, at the age of 4 and 6 to 12 years.⁷

The study involved 299 pairs of women and their babies. Mexico does not fluoridate their drinking water, but the study participants were exposed to fluoride via fluoridated salt and varying levels of naturally occurring fluoride in drinking water.

While previous studies have used measurements of fluoride levels in drinking water to estimate a population’s exposure, Hu’s study used urine samples — in both the mothers and their children — to determine fluoride exposure.

The researchers then compared fluoride levels with each child’s intelligence, assessed using the General Cognitive Index (GCI) of the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities at age 4 and again between the ages of 6 and 12 years using the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI).⁸

While the children’s fluoride levels at ages 4 and 6 to 12 were not associated with their intelligence, the study found that exposure that occurs prenatally was linked to lower intelligence scores. In fact, women with higher levels of fluoride in their urine during pregnancy were more likely to have children with lower intelligence.

Specifically, each 0.5 milligram per liter increase in pregnant women’s fluoride levels was associated with a reduction of 3.15 and 2.5 points on the children’s GCI and WASI scores, respectively.

The EPA previously attempted to block FAN not only from obtaining internal EPA documents but also from using this new research on fluoride’s toxicity in the trial. Fortunately, the court denied the EPA’s motion, which meant the 12-year study could be used in the case. According to Connett:⁹

“The rapidly emerging science on developmental neurotoxicity, especially loss of IQ from early life exposure to fluoride, is a game-changer.

It has brought the world’s leading environmental health experts to not only engage in the science with the help of millions of dollars in National Institutes of Health funding, but also to conclude that the risk to children is too great to consider water fluoridation safe.”

Another EPA ‘Go-To Man’ Confirms Fluoride’s Toxicity

Dr. Philippe Grandjean, an internationally known expert in environmental epidemiology, with ties to both Harvard School of Public Health and the University of Southern Denmark, was the sole witness on the trial’s second day. According to FAN, Grandjean is the EPA’s go-to-person on mercury’s neurotoxicity¹⁰ and has warned about the risks of exposing children to neurotoxicants during early life and in utero.

Grandjean has also researched fluoride, including a 2012 meta-analysis that found a lowering in IQ among children with higher fluoride exposure.¹¹ During the trial, the Plaintiffs asked Granjean to review the literature since his 2012 meta-analysis. FAN reported:¹²

“For this analysis, Grandjean did what is called a Benchmark Dose (BMD) study (using methods that he and his colleagues have pioneered) and used by the EPA. He concluded that a safe reference dose (RfD) be no higher than 0.15 mg per day to protect against a loss of one IQ point …

A dose of 0.15 mg of fluoride day would be reached by a pregnant mother drinking just one glass of fluoridated tap water a day. No parent would agree that a loss of one IQ point or more is a reasonable risk to take in order to achieve a very small benefit to teeth later in their lives.

There are few scientists who now believe that any benefit accrues to the teeth during the fetal stage or early infancy when the greatest risks to the developing brain occur …

Grandjean found ‘no reasonable doubt that developmental neurotoxicity’ was ‘a serious human health risk associated with elevated fluoride exposure.’ That exposure, he said, is ‘occurring at the levels added to drinking water in fluoridated areas.’”

Dozens of Studies Link Fluoride Exposure to Lower IQ

Evidence presented at the trial will show not only that neurotoxicity is a hazard of fluoride exposure, but also that the hazard exists at the doses ingested in fluoridated areas.¹³ This risk is unreasonable and provides cause to prohibit the addition of fluoridation chemicals to public water systems in the U.S.

While the initial lawsuit complaint states that more than 50 studies link fluoride to cognitive deficits in humans, 15 more such studies were published since then, making it a total of 65 studies showing that elevated fluoride exposure is associated with reduced IQ in humans.¹⁴ A sample of the compelling research includes:¹⁵

In 2012, a meta-analysis funded by Harvard found that children who ingested higher levels of fluoride tested, on average, seven IQ points lower than children who ingested lower levels. Many of the children’s total fluoride exposures were at levels that millions of Americans are exposed to.16

In 2018, a Canadian study found that iodine-deficient adults, which make up close to 18% of the U.S. population, with higher fluoride levels were at an increased risk of hypothyroidism, which is linked to lower IQ.17

A JAMA Pediatrics study published in 2019 found that every 1 mg/L increase in fluoride in Canadian pregnant women’s urine was linked to a 4.5 decrease in IQ in their male children.18 According to FAN, “The physician editor of JAMA Pediatrics said ‘I would not have my wife drink fluoridated water’ if she was pregnant.”19

Children living in fluoridated areas has a nearly 300% higher risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared to children not living in fluoridated areas.20

A study funded by the National Institutes of Health found that babies fed formula mixed with fluoridated water had IQs that were an average of four points lower than babies fed formula mixed with nonfluoridated water.21 “Losses of nonverbal IQ were even more serious, an average of 9 points,” FAN noted.

A systematic review of 149 human studies and 339 animal studies, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, concluded, “fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans.”22

The Time Has Come to Stop Water Fluoridation

Drinking fluoridated water, which poses risks to your brain and overall health when ingested, makes little sense, especially since any benefits it provides to your teeth occur from topical exposure. When you drink fluoridated water, 99% of the fluoride goes down the drain and into the environment.²³

If you want fluoride for your teeth, use fluoridated toothpaste — don’t drink fluoridated water, trading your brain health for your teeth. That being said, I don’t recommend fluoridated toothpaste either, as there are ways to keep your teeth healthy that don’t involve neurotoxic agents like fluoride.

It’s worth noting that Japan and 97% of western Europe do not fluoridate their water, and in the U.S., more Americans drink fluoridated water than in the rest of the world combined.²⁴ It’s time for the U.S. to end this harmful and obsolete practice. Let’s hope that, with this lawsuit, FAN and partners get their victory in the form of fluoridated water finally being outlawed — a victory that would benefit children for generations to come.

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

During a June 8, 2020, press briefing, Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any symptoms “rarely” transmit the disease to others. In a dramatic about-face, WHO then backtracked on the statement just one day later.

In the video above, you can watch Van Kerkhove yourself, but she explains that in countries that are doing contact tracing, in which the contacts of infected people are traced, notified and quarantined, asymptomatic cases are being followed, and they’re not giving the disease to others:

“We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases, they’re following contacts, and they’re not finding secondary transmission … it’s very rare, and much of that is not published in the literature.

From the papers that are published, there’s one that came out from Singapore looking at a long-term care facility. There are some household transmission studies where you follow individuals over time and you look at the proportion of those that transmit onwards.

We are constantly looking at this data and trying to get more information from countries to truly answer this question. It still appears to be rare that an asymptomatic individual actually transmits onward.”

Ivor Cummins, biochemist and chief program officer for Irish Heart Disease Awareness, tweeted of the video:¹

“The WHO have spoken on #Coronavirus, based on recently published studies. Can't say I disagree with them on this one particularly. Those with symptoms should lie low until they are okay — a reasonable approach just like we use for any respiratory infection season.”

‘I Wasn’t Stating a Policy of WHO’

June 9, 2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s emergencies program, quickly backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s statement, saying the remarks were “misinterpreted or maybe we didn’t use the most elegant words to explain that.”² Van Kerkhove also stated that the data she mentioned only came from a “small subset of studies,” and added:³

“I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that. I was just trying to articulate what we know. And in that, I used the phrase ‘very rare,’ and I think that that’s misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare.”

The “official” response to the pandemic has been mired with controversies, contradictions and mix-ups, and this WHO response is no different. But when data suggest that the vast majority of COVID-19 cases may be asymptomatic,⁴ then suggesting that this subset of cases doesn’t spread the disease is significant, and would change the recommended rhetoric regarding proper social distancing, masks and lockdowns for those without symptoms.

For instance, between March 22, 2020, and April 4, 2020, 215 pregnant women admitted to a hospital in New York City were screened on admission for symptoms of COVID-19 and tested for the virus.

Only 1.9% of the women had fever or other COVID-19 symptoms, and all of them tested positive. Of the remaining women who were tested even though they had no symptoms, 13.7% were positive. This means that, overall, 87.9% of the women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms.⁵ At least one systematic review and meta-analysis further found that transmission among such cases may be “unlikely.”⁶

Asymptomatic Transmission Rates of Zero to 2.2%

A preprint systematic review and meta-analysis, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, noted, “The prevalence of true asymptomatic COVID-19 cases is critical to policy makers considering the effectiveness of mitigation measures against the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.”⁷

As such, they set out to analyze all available research on rates of asymptomatic disease and transmission. Overall, they screened 998 articles from six countries that tested 21,035 at-risk people. Of them, 559 were positive and 83 were asymptomatic. In this analysis, the proportion of asymptomatic cases ranged from 4% to 41%, with a fixed effect proportion of 15%.

While four of the studies showed evidence of asymptomatic forward transmission, they “suggested considerably lower rates than symptomatic cases.” Specifically, rates of transmission from asymptomatic cases ranged from none to 2.2%, compared to 0.8% to 15.4% for symptomatic cases.⁸ The researchers concluded:⁹

“Estimates of asymptomatic rate and transmission rate are vital parameters for modelling studies. Our estimates of the proportion of asymptomatic cases and their transmission rates suggest that asymptomatic spread is unlikely to be a major driver of clusters or community transmission of infection …”

WHO Says Asymptomatic Cases Less Likely to Transmit Virus

While WHO quickly distanced itself from the notion that asymptomatic cases aren’t likely to be a significant source of transmission, they stated as such in a June 5, 2020, update to guidance on the use of masks for COVID-19.

“Comprehensive studies on transmission from asymptomatic individuals are difficult to conduct, but the available evidence from contact tracing reported by Member States suggests that asymptomatically-infected individuals are much less likely to transmit the virus than those who develop symptoms,” WHO’s interim guidance states.¹⁰

Van Kerkhove also noted in the video that focusing on isolating symptomatic cases would lead to a drastic reduction in transmission.

"It [COVID-19] passes from an individual through infectious droplets. If we actually followed all of the symptomatic cases, isolated those cases, followed the contacts and quarantined those cases, we would drastically reduce — I would love to be able to give a proportion of how much transmission we would actually stop — but it would be a drastic reduction in transmission," she said.

A number of health organizations also clapped back at WHO’s initial statement, citing studies showing that asymptomatic patients can and do spread disease. However, even some of those studies may be misleading. In January 2020, for instance, The New England Journal of Medicine published an article suggesting the transmission of COVID-19 is possible from an asymptomatic carrier.¹¹

The writers reported a 33-year-old businessman had met with his business partner from Shanghai between January 19 and 22, 2020. January 24, 2020, the businessman developed a fever and productive cough. The next evening, he felt better and went back to work January 27.

The writers reported the partner had been "well with no signs or symptoms of infection, but had become ill on her flight back to China, where she tested positive for 2019-nCoV on January 26." From this case study, they theorized the virus could be transmitted from asymptomatic carriers. An important point was left out, which is that the researchers did not speak with the partner from Shanghai before publication.

However, Germany's public health agency, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), did speak with the woman on the phone, and she reported she did have symptoms while in Germany.¹² In response, the Public Health Agency of Sweden updated their website's FAQ page with the following information:¹³

"The sources that claimed that the coronavirus would infect during the incubation period lack scientific support for that analysis in their articles. This applies, among other things, to an article in NEJM that has subsequently proven to contain major flaws and errors. Statements by the Chinese authorities on infectiousness during the incubation period lack sources or other data to support it."

Walking Backward for Gates’ Vaccine

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest funder of WHO, and Bill Gates, along with Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID),¹⁴ are among those who have stated that life cannot return to normal until there is a vaccine against COVID-19.

“Humankind has never had a more urgent task than creating broad immunity for coronavirus,” Gates wrote on his blog in April 2020. “Realistically, if we’re going to return to normal, we need to develop a safe, effective vaccine. We need to make billions of doses, we need to get them out to every part of the world, and we need all of this to happen as quickly as possible.”¹⁵

Gates has even stated he “suspect[s] the COVID-19 vaccine will become part of the routine newborn immunization schedule.”¹⁶ In other words, a novel vaccine that alters your DNA and RNA — turning your body into an antigen-producing factory — will be given to newborns, if Gates has his way.

However, if the pandemic suddenly becomes less of a perceived threat to the public — such as if symptomatic cases, which are easier to spot, are the primary transmitters, or if transmission is “drastically reduced” just by isolating symptomatic cases and quarantining their contacts — the need for a vaccine becomes less obvious, and fewer people may be willing to act as guinea pigs to try out the experimental shot.

Many are not aware that, in 2017, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which was founded by the Gates Foundation in partnership with WHO, the World Bank and various vaccine manufacturers, decided to provide every child with a digital biometric identity, which would simultaneously store the child’s vaccination records. Without such a system, a 100% immunization rate simply cannot be reached, Gavi CEO Seth Berkley said.

Shortly thereafter, Gavi became a founding member of the ID2020 Alliance, alongside Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation. In 2019, Gates developed a novel vaccine delivery method using fluorescent microdot tags — essentially creating an invisible “tattoo” — that can then be read with a modified smartphone. As reported by investigative journalist James Corbett:

“It should be no surprise, then, that Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers — in their scramble to produce the coronavirus vaccine that, Gates assures us, is necessary to ‘go back to normal’ — have turned to a novel vaccine delivery method: a dissolvable microneedle array patch.

As in so many other aspects of the unfolding crisis, Gates’ unscientific pronouncement that we will need digital certificates to prove our immunity in the ‘new normal’ of the post-coronavirus world is now being implemented by a number of governments.”

Again, all of this grand plan hinges on the COVID-19 pandemic remaining a threat. 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.

So, it’s not surprising that WHO walked back their statement that asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 is “very rare” — what’s surprising is that they let it slip out in the first place.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3dnkP21
via IFTTT

The Net-A-Porter sale only happens twice a year, and we've found the best value buys. From sneakers to ski suits, there's plenty of chic athleisure wear to snap up for fraction of the usual rrp. 

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/3eqKd8v

The fitness influencer thought she had time before welcoming her baby son - but a series of photos proves things certainly didn't go to plan.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/317kvlJ

Need some inspiration to kickstart your health goals but don't know where to start? Dan Churchill’s simple diet, fitness and mental health tips are all you need to feel a big difference.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2Ys1s3Q

Want to get a natural facelift at home, without spending a cent? The answer lies in these four yoga poses.

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/3ev9Uoo

There's a good chance you can't even remember the last time you thought about caring for your pelvic floor, but it's one of your body's most important group of muscles. Here's why, according to a pelvic floor expert...

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3fSIfOj

Researchers have documented short-term environmental benefits during the COVID-19-related lockdown, but that silver lining could be far outweighed by a long-term decline on clean energy investments, a new study finds.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2V70kAz

Researchers uncovered in mice how a molecule involved in cells' response to stress determines whether macrophages promote inflammation in the tumor microenvironment. Inflammation is known to promote tumor growth, making this molecule an attractive target for drug development.

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

Patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to an intensive care unit were 10 times more likely than other hospitalized COVID-19 patients to suffer cardiac arrest or heart rhythm disorders, according to a new study.

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

The latest announcement from Apple sees some BIG changes to the everyday features of the Apple Watch, thanks to the watchOS 7 iOS update. The only catch? We'll have to wait until September for the update to roll out globally. Unless you want to try the beta version...?

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/3dmXeyt

New information from Harvard Medical School has likened the health detriments of a serving of white rice to white sugar, but how true is this? A dietitian weighs in...

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/3dpeoeQ

If you thought banana bread had to be high in sugar and carbs to be tasty, think again. This recipe is full of flavour and fibre, which means you'll be satisfied for longer.

from Nutrition | body+soul https://ift.tt/2YpUJal

Social distancing and limited access to contraceptive and abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting the sexual and reproductive health of adolescents and young adults according to a new study.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3fOdH0h

Researchers at a major Boston academic medical center designed, fabricated, tested, and implemented a reusable face shield for front-line medical staff within a couple of weeks.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2NndAg5

Clinicians should carefully monitor patients treated with chloroquine therapy, particularly elderly women and others at higher risk for heart rhythm abnormalities, investigators caution in new article.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3dprx7V

Certain patients who receive hospital care for coronavirus infection (COVID-19) exhibit clinical and neurochemical signs of brain injury, a new study shows. In even moderate COVID-19 cases, finding and measuring a blood-based biomarker for brain damage proved to be possible.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2YR9G4c

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic gut-brain disorder that can cause a variety of uncomfortable gastrointestinal symptoms including abdominal pain and diarrhea, constipation, or a mix of the two. IBS can reduce quality of life, often results in missed school or work, and can have a substantial economic impact.

Physicians diagnose IBS by identifying symptoms laid out in the Rome Criteria, a set of diagnostic measures developed by a group of more than 100 international experts. Limited diagnostic testing is also done, to help exclude other conditions that could present with similar symptoms.

Although the precise cause of IBS remains unknown, recent research suggests that an imbalance in intestinal microbiota (the microorganisms living in your digestive tract) and a dysfunctional intestinal barrier (which, when working properly, helps keep potentially harmful contents in the intestine while allowing nutrients to be absorbed into the bloodstream) may be involved in the development of IBS in some people. Because of this, methods to restore the microbiota have been explored as treatment for this condition.

Balance of bacteria is important for gut health

Many digestive processes rely on a balance of various bacteria, which are found naturally in the gastrointestinal tract. If these bacteria fall out of balance, gastrointestinal disorders may occur, possibly including IBS.

Probiotics, which are bacteria or yeast that are associated with health benefits, may help restore this balance. Most probiotics used in IBS treatment fall under two main groups: Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. These probiotics are thought to assist the digestive system. Among other functions, they may strengthen the intestinal barrier, assist the immune system in removing harmful bacteria, and break down nutrients.

Probiotics may relieve symptoms of IBS

The American College of Gastroenterology conducted a meta-analysis of more than 30 studies, which found that probiotics may improve overall symptoms, as well as bloating and flatulence, in people with IBS. However, the overall quality of evidence of studies included in the meta-analysis was low, and specific recommendations regarding use of probiotics for IBS remained unclear.

The probiotic strain Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 has been reported to adhere particularly well to intestinal cells, and therefore may have an advantage in altering the intestinal microbiota and increasing the intestinal barrier.

In a clinical trial published in Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, once-daily Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 significantly improved overall IBS symptoms, as well as individual IBS symptoms including abdominal pain, bloating, and fecal urgency.

Recent study finds inactive probiotics relieve IBS symptoms

More recently, Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 has been shown to improve symptoms of IBS, even in its inactivated form. For the eight-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial published in Lancet Gastroenterology, researchers studied whether the heat-inactivated form of Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 could alleviate IBS symptoms. (The heat-inactivated Bifidobacterium bifidum bacteria were nonviable, but retained their shape as well as their ability to adhere to intestinal cells.)

Overall, 443 patients (average age 41, 70% women) were randomized to receive heat-inactivated Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 or placebo once daily. A total of 377 patients (190 probiotic and 187 placebo) completed the trial. The primary endpoint was defined as a 30% or greater improvement of abdominal pain and at least “somewhat relieved” overall IBS symptoms for four or more weeks of the eight-week study duration. Significantly more patients receiving the Bifidobacterium probiotic met the primary endpoint compared to patients receiving placebo (34% versus 19%). In addition, a significantly greater percentage of patients receiving the probiotic also reported adequate relief of symptoms compared to placebo. Finally, individual symptoms including bloating, bowel movement satisfaction, and quality of life were also significantly improved with Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75 compared to placebo.

Advantages of inactive probiotics

Previously, general consensus held that only active, living bacteria may have beneficial effects. But these results suggest that heat-inactivated Bifidobacterium can play a significant role in relieving symptoms of IBS, a syndrome with typically limited options for relief.

This is important because inactive probiotics have several potential advantages over active probiotics. For example, they are more likely to be stable, particularly if exposed to excessive heat. Inactive probiotics are also easier to standardize than active probiotics. Active probiotics also raise concerns for patients who may be susceptible to infection; inactive probiotics should relieve these concerns. Whether other strains of heat-inactivated probiotics will also improve IBS symptoms remains unknown.

The post Probiotics — even inactive ones — may relieve IBS symptoms appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/2AYgCVr

A new study suggests that denser places, assumed by many to be more conducive to the spread of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, are not linked to higher infection rates.

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

Diabetic ketoacidosis is a common and potentially fatal complication in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, according to a new clinical perspective.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/312qTKV

A new study offers insights into the powerful anticoagulants contained in the saliva of leeches most often used in medical practice.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2V76NeG

A new study shows that residents of long-term care facilities with lower nurse staffing levels, poorer quality scores, and higher concentrations of disadvantaged residents suffer from higher rates of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths.

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

A simulation model details how different taxing strategies for sodas and other sugary drinks could impact health gains linked to heart attacks, strokes and diabetes while also lowering health care costs in the US. Three types of taxation on sugary drinks lower healthcare costs, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes, but some -- such as taxing sugar content -- perform even better than taxing based on the volume of the beverage.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2NjWX4T

If you've put on a few 'coronakilos', you're not alone. But body confidence advocate Taryn Brumfitt wants you to embrace those curves and love yourself - every last gram.

from Diet | body+soul https://ift.tt/37S4e5a

One in three Australian women experiences bladder leakage or incontinence, but most of us are embarrassed to talk about it - Jules Robinson is here to change that.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2NfhSGa

Struggling to book into your old favourite studio thanks to ongoing social distancing restrictions? Take advantage of the fantastic workout videos available online, invest in a few choice pieces, and you'll have your own at-home Pilates space up and running in no time. 

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/2Cvb2ub