You may be aware, and possibly have experienced firsthand, that antibiotics can cause diarrhea.
This is because antibiotics, by design, disrupt the balance of good and bad bacteria in your gastrointestinal tract, often killing off both beneficial and harmful microorganisms without distinction.
It is through this same mechanism that antibiotics may also be causing you to pack on extra pounds.
In fact, Dr. Martin Blaser, a professor of microbiology at New York University Langone Medical Center, suggests that antibiotics may permanently alter your gut bacteria and interfere with important hunger hormones secreted by your stomach, leading to increased appetite and body mass index (BMI).
Antibiotics Lead to Increases in Body Fat and Hunger Hormones
Research by Dr. Blaser has shown that 18 months after antibiotics are used to eradicate H. pylori bacteria, there is a:
6-fold increase in the release of ghrelin (the "hunger hormone") after a meal
20 percent increase in leptin levels (leptin is a hormone produced by fat tissue)
5 percent increase in BMI
Levels of ghrelin should ordinarily fall after a meal to signal your brain that you're full and ready to stop eating; an increase would therefore essentially tell your brain to continue eating, leading to weight gain. Further, the increase in leptin levels is concerning because overexposure to high levels of the hormone can lead to leptin resistance, which means your body is unable to properly hear leptin's signals.
The way your body stores fat is a highly regulated process that is controlled, primarily, by leptin. If you gain excess weight, the additional fat produces extra leptin that should alert your brain that your body is storing too much fat and needs to burn off the excess.
To do this, signals are sent to your brain to stop being hungry and to stop eating. When you become leptin-resistant, your body can no longer hear these messages -- so it remains hungry and stores more fat.
Interestingly, you can easily become leptin resistant by eating the typical American diet full of sugar (particularly fructose), refined grains and processed foods … which, like antibiotics, will upset the balance of bacteria in your gut.
Farmers Use Antibiotics to Fatten Up Livestock Quickly
"Continuous, low-dose administration of an antibiotic can increase the rate and efficiency of weight gain in healthy livestock. The presence of antibiotics likely changes the composition of the gut flora to favor growth. Debate is ongoing as to how gut flora are changed; change may simply be a reduction in numbers, a change in species composition or a combination of the two.
… Some antibiotics may also enhance feed consumption and growth by stimulating metabolic processes within the animal."
Unfortunately, this practice is also contributing to the alarming spread of antibiotic-resistant disease. As it pertains to your weight, there's ample reason to believe that this same phenomenon occurs in humans as well, figuratively turning Americans into fatted calves.
Your Gut Bacteria and Your Waistline Go Hand-in-Hand
Research by Dr. Blaser, for instance, found that mice fed antibiotics (in dosages similar to those given to children for throat or ear infections) had significant increases in body fat despite their diets remaining unchanged.
Multiple studies have actually shown that obese people have different intestinal bacteria than slim people, and that altering the microbial balance in your gut can influence your weight. Here are six such studies:
When rats were given lactic acid bacteria while in utero through adulthood, they put on significantly less weight than other rats eating the same high-calorie diet. They also had lower levels of minor inflammation, which has been associated with obesity.
Babies with high numbers of Bifidobacteria and low numbers of Staphylococcus aureus -- which may cause low-grade inflammation in your body, contributing to obesity -- appeared to be protected from excess weight gain. This may be one reason why breast-fed babies have a lower risk of obesity, as Bifidobacteria flourish in the guts of breast-fed babies.
Two studies found that obese individuals had about 20 percent more of a family of bacteria known as Firmicutes, and almost 90 percent less of a bacteria called Bacteroidetes than lean people. Firmicutes help your body to extract calories from complex sugars and deposit those calories in fat. When these microbes were transplanted into normal-weight mice, those mice started to gain twice as much fat.
Obese people were able to reduce their abdominal fat by nearly 5 percent, and their subcutaneous fat by over 3 percent, just be drinking a probiotic-rich fermented milk beverage for 12 weeks.
Probiotics (good bacteria) have been found to benefit metabolic syndrome, which often goes hand-in-hand with obesity.
Probiotics may also be beneficial in helping women lose weight after childbirth when taken from the first trimester through breastfeeding.
Healthy Gut Bacteria Cannot Coexist With Antibiotics
Antibiotics can save your life if you develop a serious bacterial infection, but it's important that you resist the urge to ask your physician for a prescription for every ear, nose, or throat infection you come down with. Likewise for a cold or the flu. Antibiotics are useless against viral infections like these, and when used for this purpose will only harm your health by wiping out the good bacteria in your gut.
Antibiotic use has become so routine in the United States that one round of the drugs may seem like no big deal, but remember that using them drastically alters the makeup of bacteria in your gut, which will need to be rebuilt in order for you to stay in good health. Whenever you use an antibiotic, you're also increasing your susceptibility to developing infections with resistance to that antibiotic -- and you can become the carrier of this resistant bug and even spread it to others.
Ultimately the problem of antibiotic-overuse needs to be stemmed through public policy on a nationwide level, especially in the agricultural community, but I urge you to also take personal responsibility and evaluate your own use of antibiotics, and avoid taking them -- or giving them to your children -- unless absolutely necessary.
Remember that the foods you eat are also a major source of exposure to antibiotics, so to protect your gut bacteria you should buy primarily antibiotic-free, organically raised meat and produce. Keep in mind that conventionally farmed food is often grown in fertilizer derived from factory-farmed animal waste and human sewage, which may be a source of contamination with antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
The Recipe for Healthy Gut Bacteria
Your gut bacteria are vulnerable to your lifestyle. If you eat a lot of processed foods, for instance, your gut bacteria are going to be compromised because processed foods in general will destroy healthy microflora and feed bad bacteria and yeast.
In addition to antibiotics, your gut bacteria are also very sensitive to:
Chlorinated water
Antibacterial soap
Agricultural chemicals
Pollution
Because virtually all of us are exposed to these at least occasionally, ensuring your gut bacteria remain balanced should be considered an ongoing process, and consuming fermented foods is one of the best ways to do this.
One of the reasons why fermented foods are so beneficial is because they contain lactic acid bacteria -- a type of beneficial gut bacteria that research shows can help you stay slim.
I have long stated that it's generally a wise choice to "reseed" your body with good bacteria from time to time by taking a high-quality probiotic supplement or eating non-pasteurized, traditionally fermented foods such as:
Lassi (an Indian yoghurt drink, traditionally enjoyed before dinner)
Fermented organic grass-fed raw milk, such as kefir
Various pickled fermentations of cabbage, turnips, eggplant, cucumbers, onions, squash and carrots
If you do not eat fermented foods on a regular basis, a high-quality probiotic supplement can be incredibly useful to help maintain healthy gut bacteria when you stray from your healthy diet and consume excess grains or sugar, or if you have to take antibiotics.
Also please remember that it is vital to eliminate ALL sugars. They will sabotage any beneficial effects of the fermented foods, as they will act as nutrients for the pathogenic yeast, fungi and bacteria that are in your gut.
from Articles : Hormones https://ift.tt/3tSGJmH
via IFTTT
Bioidentical hormone therapy has become widely adopted as a useful method of normalizing hormone levels. While it is far safer than synthetic or animal based hormones like Premarin, there are clearly some dangers associated with its use and the purpose of this article is to highlight some of the major ones.
This article is in no way meant to be a comprehensive review of the topic, but merely to point out some of the major concerns and approaches as I see them from having practiced medicine for nearly three decades.
If you have any interest. I would strongly recommend purchasing Dr. Wright's new book Stay Young and Sexy. It is under $10 and simply the best book I have reviewed on the topic. If the book were $100 it would be worth the price. This book is a classic and should be in everyone's natural medicine library. The publisher has also created a web site with a free hormone self assessment and sample chapters at www.stayyoungandsexy.com.
Natural Progesterone
I will focus much of this article on natural progesterone cream as it is one of the most popular and useful ones for women.Typically, women find rapid improvement in two of the most common premenopausal challenges which are PMS and painful cramps. It can be also extraordinarily useful to prevent miscarriages but dosing would be continuous after conception.
Dr. John Lee was my original mentor in this area but he passed away a number of years ago and did not fully appreciate the challenges that are associated with using the creams on your skin.
Dr. Jonathon Wright, along with Dr. Lee, are considered the pioneers in introducing bioidentical hormone therapy in the United States. Dr. Wright is still alive and I believe has successfully resolved the challenge associated with using the creams. Before I discuss that though, let's first do a brief review of why progesterone is important.
Natural progesterone is the identical hormone that is produced by a woman's ovary. It is made from naturally occurring plant steroids found in the wild yam. It is NOT the synthetic version that is commonly purchased as tablets with a prescription such as Provera.
Synthetic progesterones, like Provera or medroxyprogesterone, can produce severe side effects including increased risk of cancer, abnormal menstrual flow, fluid retention, nausea, depression and can even increase risk of heart disease and stroke.
Side effects are extremely rare with natural progesterone. The only one of concern is that it can potentially alter the timing of your menstrual cycle.
Reasons Why Natural Progesterone Made by Your Body Is Good
Progesterone is a steroid hormone made by a woman's ovaries when she ovulates and in smaller amounts by the adrenal gland. A menstruating woman will typically produce about 20 to 30 mg of progesterone a day during the luteal or last phase of her menstrual cycle.
While menopause doesn't typically occur until age 50 or later, many women can start going out of balance in their 30s or even earlier. This decline in progesterone is not trivial for as women age into their fourth, fifth, and sixth decade, their progesterone levels continue to fall. By the time they reach perimenopause as much as 75% or more of their youthful progesterone secretion may already be missing.
Natural progesterone is very useful to balance excess estrogen which can be a major risk for breast cancer. Natural progesterone is also different from estrogen in that your body can use it as a precursor or starting material to make other hormones such as adrenal hormones. It can even convert it into estrogen or testosterone if your body needs it.
Natural progesterone is made from a substance called diosgenin which is commonly extracted from wild yams or soybeans. Even though it may be extracted from soy it is a highly purified hormone and there are absolutely no remnants of soy substances that would lead to any problem.
Estrogen Dominance
Many if not most women in our culture are estrogen dominant, so using the progesterone goes a long way towards balancing hormones which usually:
Decreases a woman's risk for breast cancer,
Improves her PMS and breast tenderness and
The table below lists the properties of estrogen relative to progesterone. Some of the reasons that estrogen is frequently in excess in many women are:
Overproduction of estrogen. Ovarian cysts or tumors can lead to excess estrogen production. Stress also increases production, but probably the most common cause is obesity. All body fat has an enzyme which converts adrenal steroids to estrogen, so the more fat you have, the more estrogen is present.
Inability to breakdown estrogen. Excess estrogen is generally removed by the liver. Diseases of the liver like cirrhosis or decreased enzyme activity can lead to increased estrogen levels. Vitamin B6 and magnesium are necessary for the liver to neutralize estrogen. Increased sugar intake will also excrete magnesium and interfere with its ability to breakdown estrogen.
Exposure to pesticides in foods. Most of us eat foods that have pesticides on them. These and many other unnatural chemicals share a common structure with estrogen and serve as "false" estrogens which further stimulates the body's estrogen receptors.
Estrogen supplementation. Clearly any additional estrogen given by prescription will increase the level unless it is properly balanced with natural progesterone.
Decreased production of progesterone. Progesterone is necessary to counterbalance estrogen. If women do not ovulate during their cycle they will not produce any progesterone that cycle. This happens commonly and worsens the already disturbed progesterone/estrogen balance. Decreased progesterone levels are one of the most common reasons for miscarriages.
To minimize your risk of cancer it is very important to understand that you should never take any supplemental estrogen without taking natural progesterone. Note that I use the term "natural' progesterone, or the real hormone. Taking synthetic versions like Provera will actually increase your risk of cancers and heart disease.
Estrogen Effects
Progesterone Effects
Stimulates breasts cysts
Protects against breast cysts
Increases body fat storage
Helps use fat for energy and keep it off hips
Salt and fluid retention
Natural diuretic (water pill)
Depression and headaches
Natural anti-depressant
Interferes with thyroid hormone
Facilitates thyroid hormone action
Increases blood clotting and risk of stroke
Normalizes blood clotting
Decreases libido (sex drive)
Increases libido
Impairs blood sugar control
Normalizes blood sugar levels
Loss of zinc and retention of copper
Normalizes zinc and copper levels
Reduced oxygen level in all cells
Restores proper cell oxygen levels
Increased risk of endometrial cancer
Helps prevent endometrial cancer
Increased risk of breast cancer
Helps prevent breast cancer
Helps decrease bone loss slightly
Increases bone building
Why You Should AVOID All Oral Hormone Preparations
There are many ways to "naturally" address bioidentical hormone replacement but one of the most common mistakes is to use oral hormones.
If nature had intended to locate your ovaries in your stomach or somewhere else in your GI tract it might make sense for women to swallow progesterone. If your ovaries were in your GI tract, your body would certainly have been equipped with a way to process them safely and efficiently so that everything worked in perfect synchrony.
Of course your ovaries are not in your GI tract but in your pelvis outside your GI tract and connected to your uterus and vagina through your fallopian tubes. Your ovaries have direct access to your blood stream through a pelvic plexus of veins, which delivers their hormone secretions to your heart which in turn pumps them, unchanged to hormone sensitive cells throughout your entire body.
If you swallow steroid hormones you will seriously distort their natural metabolism When you swallow them they will encounter potent stomach acids. The hormones that survive this assault then go to your liver where they will be further broken down. Your liver screens all molecules that enter your blood stream, passing some onward, modifying or detoxifying others, and rejecting a few.
This routing of orally swallowed hormones is in sharp contrast to the way nature intended them to be distributed to your tissues. If you swallow hormones only 10-15% will eventually reach the target tissues and you will need to take an oral dose that is 500% higher than you need. Over 30 different metabolites are created in your liver when you swallow the progesterone and any of these can then have unwanted side effects.
So if you or anyone you know currently use oral hormones like progesterone or DHEA or any hormone, I encourage you to strongly consider phasing them out.
Like most good things in life if you use too much of the hormone cream, complications can develop and disrupt your hormone balance.
The Key to Safely and Effectively Using Progesterone Cream
If you want to copy nature and reproduce a hormonal environment that most closely resembles a normal premenopausal woman the first logical step would be to get the hormones directly into your blood stream, just the way your ovary does.
Hormones carefully measured and formulated in an appropriate cream or gel need only be rubbed once or twice a day into your mucous (epithelial) membranes. Since there are no destructive detours through your GI tract when administered this way, your tissues are exposed to the appropriate concentrations of the hormone without the side effects of 30 different liver metabolites.
I first started using these creams in the early 1990s be became gradually disenchanted with them after I noticed that they typically worked wonderfully initially but then invariably stopped working. This is now known as "dermal fatigue".
What happens, not only for progesterone cream, but for ANY hormone preparation you use by applying as a cream to your skin is that within a few weeks to a few months you will saturate the fat tissue with the hormones and they will actually stop working or can even make your symptoms worse.
The problem relates to the fact that progesterone is highly fat soluble and once applied to your skin will store itself in your fat tissue. When one initially uses the cream, there aren't any problems as the fat stores are very low. But as time goes on, the cream accumulates and contributes to disruptions in your adrenal hormones such as DHEA, cortisol, and testosterone. I have learned that although progesterone cream is an enormously useful tool, it needs to be used very cautiously.
I found that many of the women who were on the cream have terribly elevated levels of this hormone. Progesterone is normally a cyclical hormone and the body really needs to see a change in the concentration to affect a proper physiological response. If the level is constantly above the concentration that it recognizes as "off" or low, this is not possible.
Fortunately, this is repairable. But it may involve going off the cream for as long as two years to wash the progesterone out of your system.
Best Way to Use Progesterone Cream
The key mistake that many well intentioned knowledgeable doctors, including myself made is to advise to use the cream on your skin. While this certainly provides better results than swallowing the hormones, it can still be improved.
There is a relatively minor tweak you can make with the creams which avoids nearly all of the side effects of applying the cream on your skin.
If you apply the cream to your mucous epithelial membranes that line your uterus and vagina you obtain a virtually ideal administration system. Not only is absorption through these membranes more complete than through your skin, but hormones absorbed through your vaginal membranes enter the very same pelvic plexus of veins that your ovaries normally empty into.
From here the hormones are carried to your heart and lungs and distributed to your tissues just as if your ovary had actually produced them.
Men also require hormones. Obviously men don't have a vagina to use but we do have a rectum that has a similar mucosal epithelial surface and can be used to administer the hormones in a near ideal fashion without any of the complications previously described.
Timing and Dose of Progesterone Cream
For most premenopausal women the usual dose is 15-24 mg/day for 14 days before expected menses, stopping the day or so before menses. So you would use the cream for twelve days and then stop. Typically this would mean you would start on day 12 of your cycle and stop on day 26.
The abrupt lowering of your progesterone level is the primary stimulus for your period to start. Hopefully when it starts any PMS and painful periods will be dramatically reduced.
When a women is in menopause she may only need 15 mg but taken for the first 25 days of the month, then take 5 or 6 days off and restart on the first of the month.
For most women a single daily application will work. However, because the half-life is relatively short, some women find that they get a more satisfactory response by splitting the daily dose in two, half in the morning and half in the evening. If you are only taking the hormones in the morning and begin to feel symptoms later in the day, splitting the dose in two should solve this problem.
Testing of Your Natural Hormones
This is somewhat of a controversial area but basically involves three different types.
Blood
Saliva
Urine
I have never been a fan of blood testing as many of the hormones are secreted in a pulsatile fashion and it is difficult to get an accurate idea of the levels in this way.
Saliva testing is easier than urine but is not as accurate.
My current belief is that a 24 hour urine test is the preferred method and the one I use for myself and family. This is the one that Dr. Wright advocates in his own clinic. Dr. Wright has trained many hundreds of physicians in this system and if you are seeking further guidance in this area it would be wise to seek one of them to help you in this area.
from Articles : Hormones https://ift.tt/1vjqjmU
via IFTTT
Soy supplements are reputed to stave off hot flashes, night sweats, and other uncomfortable menopausal symptoms. But the latest in a series of disappointing studies finds that soy supplements do not actually have any such effect, they do not reduce the aging-related bone loss that can lead to osteoporosis.
During menopause, a woman's body produces less estrogen and progesterone. Soy protein has been considered a possible treatment ever since researchers observed that women in Asia tend to have lower rates of bone loss and osteoporosis.
According to CNN:
"So if soy isn't beneficial, what options are women left with? To prevent bone loss, women should stick with the basics ... That means getting enough calcium and vitamin D, [and] exercising regularly".
from Articles : Hormones https://ift.tt/3vEWj73
via IFTTT
While, for many years, I’ve been a popular target for Big Pharma smear campaigns, 2020 onward has really given new meaning to what it means to be under attack. I’m not alone, by any means, as censorship of anti-propaganda narratives have ratcheted up to unprecedented levels for many others seeking to uncover the truth.
These days, even elected government officials misuse their positions of power to openly call for censorship of certain groups, organizations and individuals in direct violation of Constitutional law — the highest law of the land.
The latest in this series of attacks comes from two state attorneys general, Letitia James of New York and William Tong of Connecticut, who in an April 8, 2021, op-ed1 in The Washington Post stated, right in the headline, that “Anti-vaxxers put us all at risk,” and that “Facebook and Twitter must ban them.”
According to James and Tong, COVID-19 vaccine availability marks “the end of the pandemic and the start of our recovery,” but “vaccine availability means nothing without vaccine acceptance.”
This lack of acceptance of novel gene therapy technology, they claim, is all because a small group of individuals with a social media presence — myself included — are successfully misleading the public with lies about nonexistent vaccine risks.
“The solution is not complicated. It’s time for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to turn off this toxic tap and completely remove the small handful of individuals spreading this fraudulent misinformation,” they write.2
‘The Disinformation Dozen’
The basis for their censorship push is a report by two previously unknown groups called the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and Anti-Vax Watch, both of which are opaque in the extreme as to their history and funding.
According to that report,3 “The Disinformation Dozen,” a mere 12 individuals “are responsible for a full 65% of anti-vaccine content on Facebook and Twitter,” Tong and James write, again stressing that “they must be removed from the platforms.”4
But, just who are these “social media researchers” whose word Tong and James take as gospel? An online search for “Anti-Vax Watch” delivers a single hit for a site called antivaxwatch.org, which is nothing but a simple news aggregator. Its “About” page provides no names, no indication of who is part of this group, or who funds them.
By way of its board members, the CCDH can be linked to the Trilateral Commission, the Atlantic Council, the European Council of Foreign Relations, Save the Children Fund (funded by the Gates Foundation and a partner of Gates’ GAVI Vaccine Alliance), the British Parliament, the CIA and Reuters. CCDH chairman Simon Clark even has ties to a participant of Event 201 (former CIA deputy director Avril Haines).
Event 201 was a coronavirus pandemic exercise held in October 2019 that foreshadowed and “played out” the draconian countermeasures implemented when COVID-19 appeared mere months later. Curiously enough, a primary focus of that exercise was how to best censor and counteract problematic narratives about the virus, public disagreement with pandemic measures and doubts about vaccine safety.
It’s All About Social Engineering
You would think that if public health were the primary concern and impetus behind such an exercise — as opposed to wealth transfer, economic destruction and societal reformation — it would focus on the medical and scientific strategies of how to best contain and control the actual virus, and not how best to contain and control information about the virus. Infectious disease control science would have been the key feature, not the science of social engineering.
“Let us be clear — nothing is wrong with asking questions and researching vaccine effectiveness and safety,” Tong and James write.5“We are not in any way looking to limit the ability of individuals to ask these important questions, but the small handful of people we’re talking about are simply promoting dangerous lies …”
People in search of vaccine information should “seek out legitimate medical experts … and official sources, such as local departments of public health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” they say, adding that:
“As the chief law enforcement officers of our states, we can say that there is no First Amendment right to spread disinformation on social media.”
What Is Disinformation?
The problem with this argument is that what they perceive and label as “disinformation” is entirely subjective. The definition of “disinformation” provided by the American Heritage dictionary is: “Deliberately misleading information” and “Dissemination of intentionally false information to deliberately confuse or mislead.”
I — and, as far as I know, none of the others on the CCDH’s hit list — am not engaging in the dissemination of “intentionally false” information with the “deliberate intent” to confuse or mislead. We provide information — the other side of the story — that “official” sources and mainstream media not only refuse to share but social media platforms will ban them for sharing. We provide a counterbalance to the wholly one-sided official narrative.
With respect to my own site, my articles are fully referenced to publications in the medical literature, and I make every effort to clearly indicate where I insert my own opinions.
I’ve also published my own research in peer-reviewed journals, the last of which was a scientific review6 on the impact of vitamin D in COVID-19, co-written with William Grant, Ph.D., and Dr. Carol Wagner, both of whom are part of the GrassrootsHealth expert vitamin D panel. You can read the paper for free on the journal’s website.
Opinions are protected speech under the First Amendment, as is reporting on published science — even if that science is later found to be flawed, incomplete or, in worst case, outright fraudulent. The fake hydroxychloroquine study in The Lancet, which was ultimately retracted after being exposed, is a perfect example.
This study, which was found to be completely fraudulent, was reported as fact, worldwide, by virtually all mainstream media and continues to serve as the basis for the WHO’s discrediting of hydroxychloroquine. If opinion and scientific reporting were not protected speech, Tong’s and James’ own op-ed could be banned, as could every single mainstream media report on scientific findings that has ever been published.
No one has unequivocal rights to the truth. No one “owns” the truth. There is no single group or organization on this earth that knows everything, has all the facts and tells the unbiased truth. Tong and James would like you to believe otherwise. They want you to listen to select sources only — sources which, curiously, only present one side of any given argument. This is what social engineering is all about.
“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime,” Lavrentiy Beria once said. Beria, described7 as “the most ruthless and longest-serving secret police chief in Joseph Stalin’s reign of terror,” claimed he could prove criminal conduct on behalf of anyone, even people who were completely innocent.
Indeed, anyone can be made to look like a crook. Facts can be twisted through clever wording salted with hidden bias. But, usually, truth tends to win in the end. You just have to survive long enough.
Illegal Attacks on Free Speech
In their op-ed, Tong and James admit they intend to use their official powers to force social media companies to comply with their demand to censor certain individuals. If platforms refuse to violate the free speech of select people, they will find something to prosecute. Does this sound unethical to anyone else but me?
As noted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in an April 5, 2021, ruling8 in which he weighed in on the ability of social media giants to control free speech:
“The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly … Under this doctrine, plaintiffs might have colorable claims against a digital platform if it took adverse action against them in response to government threats.”
As attorneys general, Tong and James are government officials and, as such, they are legally barred from accomplishing “through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits [them] from doing directly.”
In other words, they do not have the legal right to pressure social media companies into violating the First Amendment rights9 of Americans when they do not have the legal right to censor or “abridge”10 free speech themselves. Put yet another way, it is illegal for government officials to pressure private companies into censoring free speech on their behalf or at their request, since they as government officials do not themselves have the right to infringe on free speech.
‘Free Press’ Pushes for Censorship, and More
The fact that attorneys general are now getting involved and calling for censorship is to me a sign of just how desperate Big Pharma and the Great Reset interests are getting. There’s no room for free speech and the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment in that New World Order.
To their credit, they have, over the decades, masterfully infiltrated and now appear to control all the required areas of influence, from media, Big Tech and Hollywood, to nongovernmental organizations with global influence, government agencies and intelligence agencies of all stripes.
In a sane, free world concerned with democratic processes, we simply would not see a “free press” calling for the censorship of books,11 we would not see public officials calling for the selective elimination of free speech (as has been done by several congressmen and senators in recent months12,13,14), and writing legislation aimed at penalizing social media companies that refuse to censor.15
We would not see a dozen state attorneys general — chief law enforcers — calling for the selective elimination of First Amendment rights by private companies,16 and we would not see intelligence agencies using sophisticated cyberwarfare tools to aid in the elimination of select speech online.17,18,19
In a free world, all of these would stand squarely on the side of free speech rights. So, that must mean we no longer live in a free world where democratic processes and Constitutional rights are given their due consideration.
Decentralized Uncensorable Web Is Part of the Answer
In his legal commentary,20 Supreme Court Justice Thomas presents an intriguing idea for how to address the monopolistic power over speech currently wielded by social media giants like Facebook and Twitter, which would be to treat them as public utilities that, like phone service providers, must serve all customers, without discrimination.21
That’s certainly one way to go, and would probably be a positive strategy. Beyond that, however, we really need a more censor-proof web in general. This is something a decentralized, blockchain-based web can provide. I am currently working with some of the brightest minds in the tech space who are committed to preserving your personal freedoms and liberties.
The technology22 focuses on maintaining data sovereignty, giving you control over your data and privacy, and undoing the current system of surveillance capitalism where Big Tech profits off your personal data and uses it against you at the same time. In this Web 2.0, tech monopolies also will no longer have the ability to censor.
In the meantime, consider ditching social media networks that erode your civil liberties, and to join those that promote freedom of speech instead. For example, free-speech alternatives to Facebook and Twitter include Gab, MeWe, Minds and Parler. Uncensored alternatives to YouTube include Bitchute, Rumble, Brighteon, BrandNewTube, Banned.video and Thinkspot.
For content creators and alternative news sources that no longer have a social media presence due to censoring, subscribe to their newsletter if available, and/or mark their website in your favorites and check back on a regular basis.
Evidence suggests that including bay leaves and ginger in your nutritional plan may have a positive impact on your blood sugar and gut health. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1 6 in every 10 adults living in the U.S. have a chronic disease. Nearly 4 in every 10 adults have two or more chronic illnesses that may include heart disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease or cancer.
Many of these conditions are associated with behaviors that include poor nutrition, lack of physical activity, exposure to smoke or excessive alcohol use. Two health conditions that contribute to chronic diseases include metabolic syndrome and poor gut health, or gut dysbiosis.
Metabolic syndrome is a group of five health conditions that are associated with other chronic problems, including cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and chronic kidney disease. When a person has three or more of the five risk factors they are diagnosed with metabolic syndrome. These include:2,3
High blood glucose
High blood pressure
Obesity, a BMI of 30 or above or a large waist (40 inches in men; 35 in women)
High triglycerides
Low high-density lipoproteins (HDL) cholesterol
Your nutritional choices also have an impact on your gut health. Optimizing your gut microbiome is a pursuit that has far-reaching effects on your physical and emotional health. There is mounting scientific evidence to suggest that a large component of nutrition centers on nourishing beneficial bacteria in your gut, which may help keep harmful microbes in check.
This in turn reduces your risk of chronic disease. The list of conditions influenced by your gut microbiome includes learning disabilities, obesity,4 diabetes5 and Parkinson's disease.6 In fact, one scientific review7 published in 2020 goes so far as to suggest all inflammatory diseases begin in the gut.
Prevalence of Metabolic Syndrome Is Rising
Metabolic syndrome, also called Syndrome X, has risen to epidemic proportions across the world.8 While the constellation of symptoms began in the Western world, the ever-growing spread of this lifestyle has created a global problem.
A combination of calorie-dense foods and a reduction in physical activity has fed the spread of metabolic syndrome that has led to a rising number with cardiovascular diseases, Type 2 diabetes and other disabilities. It's estimated the total direct and indirect cost to the economy is in the trillions.
According to the CDC,9 data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey gathered from 1988 to 2012 demonstrated that more than 33% of all adults living in the U.S. had met the criteria for metabolic syndrome.
The prevalence of metabolic syndrome closely follows the rates of obesity,10 which have only continued to rise.11 It is a safe assumption that as the rates of obesity continue to rise, so has the prevalence of metabolic syndrome.
These Ingredients May Affect Symptoms of Metabolic Syndrome
Making small lifestyle changes can help normalize weight management and reduce insulin resistance, a hallmark of Type 2 diabetes. Adding ginger and bay leaves in your dietary regimen are two small steps that may help support lifestyle changes. Bay leaves are popular in pickling, marinating and flavoring stews, soups and stuffing.
The leaves can be up to 2 inches long12 and are almond-shaped. While they are added for marinating or cooking, you shouldn’t eat them since biting into a bay leaf is unpleasant. The flavor of the bay leaf changes after simmering it for an hour or two and it adds a complex profile to foods.
There are a variety of plants that are called bay leaves, but it is the Indonesian bay leaf (Syzygium polyanthum) that has demonstrated the ability to reduce fasting blood sugar in individuals with Type 2 diabetes. In a pilot study,13 researchers gave 350 milligrams (mg) of an extract in capsule form once a day for 14 days to the intervention group.
They found at the end of the 14 days the fasting blood sugar in the group receiving the supplement was lower than in the control group. This supported an earlier animal study14 also using an extract of Indonesian bay leaves.
Ginger is another flavorful choice you can add to your diet that may help reduce your blood sugar and has advantages for obesity and metabolic syndrome. The most frequent references for ginger have been for the treatment of nausea without any adverse side effects.15
However, ginger has also been shown to reduce blood sugar levels in human and animal studies. In 2014, an animal study16 using obese diabetic rats demonstrated those given cinnamon and ginger “significantly reduced their body weight and body fat mass” and “decreased blood glucose and leptin and increased insulin serum levels.”
A 2015 study17 using a ginger powder supplement for 12 weeks demonstrated the people in the intervention group had lower levels of hemoglobin A1c, which is a measurement of long-term blood glucose control. In 2016, an animal study18 demonstrated ginger extract supplementation in rats with diabetes may help protect against cardiovascular complications that are commonly found with diabetes.
Bay Leaves May Help Lower High Blood Pressure
High blood pressure is another symptom of metabolic syndrome that may be affected by the addition of a bay leaf supplement. On its own, high blood pressure can also increase your risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke and may double your risk of dying from COVID-19.19 Bay leaves are a traditional Malay treatment for high blood pressure,20 which may be associated in part with diuretic properties.21
Using an Indonesian bay leaf supplement, another study22 published in 2020 found that it has an influence on your vascular system. The researchers examined the effect against vascular endothelial growth using an animal model in which acute coronary syndrome was surgically induced.
The animals were then treated with bay leaf extract. When evaluated, they found there was a significant expression of vascular endothelial growth factors in the intervention group as compared to the control group. This led the researchers to conclude that the extract could have a potential effect on angiogenesis and act as an adjuvant treatment that could lead to better prognosis for reperfusion.23
These changes have the potential to improve recovery after a cardiovascular event that triggers tissue ischemia and damage. However, the results of a second study24 indicated that the extract also has an effect before cardiovascular damage and may help reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure.
The researchers engaged 39 pregnant women and split them into an intervention group and control group. The women in the intervention group were given 80 mg of Indonesian bay leaf nanoparticles in combination with 10 mg of nifedipine for 14 days. The control group received just the nifedipine.
Nifedipine is a calcium channel blocker used to treat high blood pressure and control angina,25 and is prescribed in the treatment of high blood pressure in pregnancy.26 The data revealed there was a greater decrease in the systolic and diastolic blood pressure of the women in the intervention group when the medication was augmented with bay leaf nanoparticles.
Bay Leaves May Help With Intestinal Issues
According to a scientific review27 the chronic inflammatory diseases that are linked to leaky gut may depend in part on the types of exposures you've had, your genetic makeup and the composition of your gut microbiome. The author mentions several inflammatory diseases that are associated with dysregulation, including metabolic and autoimmune disorders and infections.28
Your gut bacteria are part of your natural immune defense, including antiviral defense as recent research has shown.29 According to a report by Harvard Medical School,30 researchers have for the first time identified specific populations of beneficial bacteria that help “ward off viral Invaders.”
Bay leaves have traditionally been used to help those who are having intestinal problems. Olga Korapliova, a nutrition expert, believes in part this may be due to the mineral and vitamin composition of bay leaves,31,32,33 which includes magnesium, potassium, trace selenium, iron and vitamins A, C, B6, B12 and B9 (folate).
These may assist in soothing an upset stomach and help in eliminating toxins from the gastrointestinal tract.34 It is also an Ayurvedic remedy that helps to manage indigestion. According to a report in Medicinal Plants of South Asia Journal,35 bay leaves have traditionally been used to relieve abdominal pain, gastrointestinal problems, constipation and diarrhea.
Ginger Fights Obesity and Aids Digestion
Ginger also helps aid digestion. Studies have demonstrated that ginger can reduce systemic inflammation, body weight and blood sugar,36 which helps protect against nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), found in up to 40% of U.S. adults.37
This in part may be related to an elaborate chemical makeup that includes bioactive compounds with antioxidant, antiemetic and anti-inflammatory properties.38 The compounds in ginger tend to concentrate in the gastrointestinal tract,39 which may be why so many of the benefits are related to this system.
It also has an exceptional ability to break up and get rid of intestinal gas that can cause cramping, pressure and vomiting. Some researchers also theorize that ginger can stimulate the digestive tract and is associated with rising levels of digestive enzymes.40
Together with elevating saliva41 and improving gastric motility,42 ginger helps keep food moving through the gut, so fermentation or gas buildup is less likely to occur.
How to Add Ginger and Bay Leaves
As mentioned before, bay leaves are often added to stews or in a marinade. However, you can also steep bay leaves for a flavorful tea. How long you steep the bay leaf will depend on the flavor profile you enjoy. Consider grating raw ginger to add a punch to foods, salad dressings and drinks or slicing the root and steeping a fresh hot cup of tea.
As you're considering adding bay leaves and ginger, remember to choose organically grown herbs and spices over processed products. Try to be consistent with adding these to your diet. It is regular consumption over a period of weeks that has demonstrated positive results and not intermittent use.
Bay leaves are likely safe for most people but there isn't enough information about safety for women who are pregnant or nursing.43 Since the leaf cannot be digested, it may remain intact while passing through the digestive system and may pierce the digestive system if an intact leaf is swallowed.
People who are on antidiabetic medications, narcotics or sedative medications should speak with their health care provider before using bay leaf supplements or adding a bay leaf to their daily routine.44 Bay leaves can decrease how quickly the body metabolizes narcotics and may cause sleepiness or drowsiness, especially when combined with sedative medications.
By injecting pregnant women with novel COVID-19 mRNA gene technologies, the medical establishment has thrown away one of the most fundamental safety edicts of medicine, which is that you do not experiment on pregnant women.
None of the COVID-19 vaccines on the market are licensed. They’ve only received emergency use authorization, as basic efficacy and safety studies are still ongoing. Yet pregnant women are urged to get vaccinated, and are lining up to get the shot — probably while at the same time being careful about avoiding second-hand smoke, alcohol and drugs with known or suspected toxicity.
In my view, giving these vaccines to pregnant women is beyond reprehensible. This experimentation is doubly unforgivable seeing how women of childbearing age have virtually no risk of dying from COVID-19, their fatality risk being a mere 0.01%.1
Contrast this dramatic downside to the potential benefits of the vaccine. You can still contract the virus if immunized and you can still spread it to others.2 All it is designed to do is lessen your symptoms if or when you get infected. Pregnant women simply do not need this vaccine, and therefore any risk is likely excessive.
It seems like the choice is obvious, unless you are an unethical pharmaceutical company that has been previously convicted of criminal felonies that resulted in billions of dollars in judgments and is seeking to create tens of billions of dollars of revenue.
Abnormal Periods and Miscarriage Reported
As reported by The Defender,3 as of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths. Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. The youngest person to die was just 18 years old.
There were also 110 reports of miscarriage or premature birth among pregnant women. In all, 379 pregnant women reported some sort of adverse event. In the U.K., the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Yellow Card reporting site that collects COVID-19 vaccine side effects had, as of March 28, 2021, 40 miscarriages listed for Pfizer’s vaccine4 and 15 for AstraZeneca’s.5
Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., sent me a 2006 study6 that could explain this, as it showed sperm can take up foreign mRNA, convert it into DNA, and release it as little pellets (plasmids) in the medium around the fertilized egg. The embryo then takes up these plasmids and carries them (sustains and clones them into many of the daughter cells) throughout its life, even passing them on to future generations.
It is possible that the pseudo-exosomes that are the mRNA contents would be perfect for supplying the sperm with mRNA for the spike protein. So, potentially, a vaccinated woman who gets pregnant with an embryo that can (via the sperms' plasmids) synthesize the spike protein according to the instructions in the vaccine, would have an immune capacity to attack that embryo because of the "foreign" protein it displays on its cells. This then would cause a miscarriage.
If there were, truly, a public health authority in the U.S., the criminals that are recommending this would be put in prison for reprehensible criminal negligence for the unnecessary damages they are causing to pregnant women and the deaths of their unborn children.
Even among non-pregnant women, side effects hinting at reproductive side effects are being reported, such as heavier than normal menstrual flow, uterine bleeding or restarting their period for the first time in years.7,8
While no one knows what might be causing the heavier flow, it may be worth looking into the parallels between the blood clotting disorders reported, both in some COVID-19 cases and post-COVID-19 vaccination, and Von Willebrand disease, a chronic condition that prevents normal blood clotting, thus resulting in excessively heavy periods.
Rare and Lethal Blood Disorder Reported
Several individuals have rapidly developed immune thrombocytopenia9,10 (ITP), a rare autoimmune disease, following COVID-19 vaccination.11 The condition, which is often lethal, causes your immune system to destroy your platelets (cells that help blood clot), resulting in hemorrhaging. Despite the loss of platelets, serious blood clots are also occurring at the same time.
One example is the 58-year-old Florida doctor who got the Pfizer vaccine and died from sudden onset of ITP two weeks later. Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, told The New York Times “it is a medical certainty” that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine caused the man’s death.12,13 Pfizer, of course, denies any connection.
At least two papers have been published on the condition, as scientists search for clues as to how the vaccines might be causing this unusual reaction. As reported by The Defender:14
“Two teams of researchers have published detailed observations of patients who developed thrombotic thrombocytopenia after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine and have speculated about a possible mechanism.
Both groups suggest that the development of serious blood clots alongside falling levels of platelets is an immune response that resembles a rare reaction to the drug heparin, called heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. The researchers have labelled the syndrome vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.”15,16
It’s unclear, however, where the platelet-antagonistic antibodies come from. They might form against the spike antigen, or perhaps it’s a response triggered by some other immune response factor. Either way, doctors at Oslo University Hospital recently announced the blood clotting disorders experienced by some recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine are caused by the vaccine:17
“Our theory that this is a powerful immune response most likely triggered by the vaccine, has been confirmed … In collaboration with experts in the field from the University Hospital of North Norway HF, we have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions …
We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response. There is nothing in the patient history of these individuals that can give such a powerful immune response. I am confident that the antibodies that we have found are the cause, and I see no other explanation than it being the vaccine which triggers it.”
Several European countries have halted use of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to blood clots in the past several weeks, and in the U.S., the FDA and CDC have agreed to temporarily halt use of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine while they review six reports of blood clots in combination with low platelet counts. So far, one has died. Another is in serious condition. The announcement was made April 13, 2021.18
Another Novel Hypothesis
Other potential mechanisms of action also exist. For example, as noted by freelance medical writer and neurobiology postgrad Shin Jie Yong in a March 19, 2021, Medium article,19 Dr. Goh Kiang Hua, a consultant general surgeon and Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, has suggested a novel hypothesis to explain the loss of platelets seen in some COVID-19 vaccine recipients.
He believes the lipid-coated nanoparticles, which transport the mRNA, may be carrying that mRNA into the megakaryocytes in your bone marrow. Megakaryocytes are cells that produce platelets. According to this hypothesis, once the mRNA enters your bone marrow, the megakaryocytes would then begin to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which would tag them for destruction by cytotoxic T-cells.
“Platelets then become deficient, causing thrombocytopenia,” Yong writes, adding, “Of course, he emphasized that these are just speculations.” In my view, Hua may well be onto something. If correct, it would be an elegant explanation.
Breast Cancer Symptoms
Many also report developing swollen lymph nodes after their COVID-19 vaccination and, as reported by Fox 8 News Cleveland,20 doctors at Cleveland University Hospital system are seeing swollen lymph nodes in the mammograms of women who have had a COVID vaccine, and typically on the side where the vaccine was given.
Swollen lymph nodes on a mammogram are one sign of breast cancer. University Hospital’s breast imaging department also reported that they are fielding calls from patients who are concerned about finding swollen nodes under their arms.
According to the news report, data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows over 11% of vaccine recipients have swollen lymph nodes after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 16% after the second dose. The swelling typically begins two to four days post-vaccination, and can persist for up to four weeks.
Lymph nodes that remain engorged beyond the four-week mark need to be evaluated by your doctor, Dr. Holly Marshall with University Hospitals told Fox 8 News.
Scarcity of Controlled Trials in Pregnant Women
Getting back to vaccination during pregnancy, it’s important to realize that this is a time during which experimentation can be the most hazardous of all, as you’re not only dealing with potential repercussions for the mother but also for the child. Any number of things can go wrong when you introduce drugs, chemicals or foreign substances during fetal development.
According to the Mayo Clinic,21 30,000 pregnant women have been “successfully” vaccinated against COVID-19 in the U.S. with either Pfizer’s or Moderna’s mRNA vaccines. They don’t mention anything about reported side effects, but as mentioned earlier, 379 VAERS reports had been filed by pregnant women as of April 1, 2021.
A recent BBC article22 sought to make light of post-vaccination miscarriages, saying, “Data showing a miscarriage occurred after a vaccine does not mean that the two events are linked.” Meanwhile, people dying from heart attacks, cancer and other longstanding diseases who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were counted as COVID-19 deaths, no questions asked. There was no difficulty in linking those data points to drive up COVID-19 fatality statistics.
The BBC also notes that miscarriage is “very common,” with 1 in 8 pregnancies (12.5%) ending in miscarriage. The U.K. MHRA, in an effort to put a lid on concerns about miscarriages, claim they occur in “about 1 in 4 pregnancies,”23 or 25%, which strikes me as an exaggeration.
Other sources24 reviewing statistical data stress that the risk of miscarriage drops from an overall, average risk rate of 21.3% for the duration of the pregnancy as a whole, to 5% between Weeks 6 and 7, all the way down to 1% between Weeks 14 and 20. One way to assess whether miscarriages are in fact increasing after vaccination could be to compare miscarriage rates during the second and third trimester, when spontaneous losses are at their lowest under normal circumstances.
A vaccination safety monitoring program led by the CDC called V-Safe currently has 2,000 pregnant patients enrolled, but fewer than 300 had completed their pregnancies by the end of March 2021.25 Their babies will be evaluated for side effects until they’re 3 months old.26
These are not significant numbers. It’s also a very short follow-up for the babies. So, while COVID-19 vaccines are hailed as safe for pregnant women and their babies alike, they seem to be basing such claims on extremely limited data.
On the whole, injecting pregnant women with novel gene therapy technology that can trigger systemic inflammation, cardiac effects and bleeding disorders (among other things), isn’t a good idea in my view, and violates both the Hippocratic Oath that admonishes doctors to “First, do no harm,” and the precautionary principle that, historically, has governed health care for pregnant women.
Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects
If you or someone you love has received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, be sure to report it, preferably to all three of these locations:27
Animals often act as sentinels for what’s to come — the canaries in the coal mine for a number of potential environmental threats. The dubious sentiment tragically now applies to sea lions in California, which are being struck with cancer at an alarming rate.
About 250,000 California sea lions live along the west coast of North America.1 These long-lived marine mammals have a lifespan of 20 to 30 years,2 which gives time for environmental contaminants to accumulate in their bodies.
While cancer is generally rare in wild animals, 25% of California sea lions have cancer — one of the highest cancer prevalence in mammals, according to a team of researchers with the Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito, California.3 The study’s lead author, veterinarian Dr. Cara Field, called the finding "extremely alarming" and "unprecedented in wildlife."4
Environmental Contaminants to Blame
When examined post-mortem,5 it was found that 18% to 23% of the sea lions were primarily suffering from urogenital carcinoma (UGC), which has previously been associated with organochlorines such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethanes (DDTs), and infection with otarine herpesvirus-1 (OtHV-1).
After conducting post-mortem exams on 394 animals collected over a 20-year period, the risk of cancer was found to be 43.57 times higher in sea lions infected with OtHV-1, along with 1.48 times higher for every unit increase in contaminant concentrations in their blubber.6 Sadly, the sea lions live in an area that’s heavily polluted. Writing in Frontiers in Marine Science, the researchers explained:7
“The central California coast and its food web are exposed to high levels of potentially carcinogenic persistent organochlorines following dumping of industrial waste DDTs (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethanes) in the 1960s and urbanization and industrialization of the coast increasing run-off of newer chemical contaminants.”
Previous studies have tied pollutants with cancer in marine mammals, such as the beluga, while California sea lions with cancer are known to have higher levels of PCBs and DDTs in their blubber than sea lions without cancer. Higher levels of PCBs were linked to eight times the cancer risk in sea lions while DDTs raised the risk sixfold.8
Synergism Between Virus and Pollutants Causing Cancer
The featured study suggests exposure to OtHV1 in addition to early exposure to pollutants could be driving cancer rates up in sea lions, with potential implications for humans. People in the Huaihe River Basin in China, for example, have a high rate of esophageal carcinoma that is associated with human papillomavirus and exposure to the highly carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon 3-methylcholanthrene.9
Sea lions are exposed to PCBs and DDTs in utero, as the chemicals travel across the placenta, as well as via milk early in life. It’s likely, the researchers suggested, that a synergism between the pollutants and later infection with OtHV1, which is sexually transmitted and localized to the reproductive tract where the cancer is occurring, may be driving up cancer rates in the animals:10
“As carcinogenesis is a multistep process requiring multiple mutagenic events and may necessitate replication and fixing of the DNA damage caused by promoters, this study supports the hypothesis that carcinoma in California sea lions is a multifactorial disease …
… Thus, as there is often a long latency period between the initial DNA damage and the onset of neoplasia, this study suggests early exposure to persistent organic pollutants, followed by infection with OtHV1, are important in the pathogenesis of UGC in wild sea lions.”
How Are the Pollutants Causing Cancer?
PCBs are “complete carcinogens”11 and have also been linked to fertility, reproductive and endocrine damage along with neurological effects, including damage to learning and memory. Even though PCBs have been banned in the U.S. for decades, these chemicals are extremely persistent in the environment.
Exposure to DDT is also linked to reproductive effects in humans, and the chemical is classified as a probable human carcinogen that’s been linked to liver tumors in animal studies.12
Elevated levels of DDT are also associated with high blood pressure in adults,13 while exposure to DDT is also known to induce epigenetic changes that promote obesity and kidney, testis and ovary disease that are passed on to future generations.14 Other toxic effects of DDT exposure in humans include:15
Developmental abnormalities
Reproductive disease
Neurological disease
Cancer
The chemicals may induce cancer directly via DNA damage or could affect cancer risk indirectly by suppressing the immune system, making it easier for viral infections to occur. Indeed, in 2016 it was revealed that DDT may inhibit P-glycoprotein, a “defense protein” that’s important for protecting organisms against environmental toxins.16
Research also suggest contaminants can modulate the immune system’s antiviral and tumor-surveillance activities. In addition to immune system suppression, the chemicals’ endocrine-disrupting effects are also problematic:17
“[I]t is possible that modulation of the immune system by organic contaminants can lead to variations in effectiveness of immune responses to OtHV-1 and cellular transformation.
Another possibility is that persistent organic pollutants may increase the likelihood of cancer via their hormone mimicking properties, as sea lion reproductive tracts which are prone to cancer have estrogen and progesterone receptors and alteration of receptor expression is noted in UGC. The endocrine-disrupting properties of organochlorine pesticides are well recognized, as are the endocrine associations with cancer.”
Secret DDT Dumpsite Discovered Off California Coast
The reason why California sea lions may have some of the highest contaminant levels ever recorded in their blubber is due to the chronic dumping of persistent organic pollutants off the California coast prior to their ban.
Marine biologist Rachel Carson was the first to sound the alarm that chemicals like DDT were destroying nature. But prior to that DDT was praised as “the war’s greatest contribution to the future health of the world” by Brig. Gen. James Simmons, the U.S. Army’s chief of preventive medicine, during World War II — a time when the chemical was sprayed onto soldiers to protect them from malaria and typhus.18
In DDT’s early years of production, the ocean was considered to be an acceptable place to dispose of waste. In addition to being very persistent in the environment, DDT is known to accumulate in fatty tissues and travels long distances in the upper atmosphere.19 It’s because of its persistence in the environment that even residues dumped decades ago remain a significant environmental and human health concern today.
Yet, shipping logs show that thousands of barrels of DDT-laced acid sludge were dumped into the ocean off the coast of Los Angeles, California each month following World War II.20
The barrels were dumped by Montrose Chemical Corp. at an estimated rate of 2,000 to 3,000 per month — an amount equal to about 1 million gallons of waste per year — from 1947 to 1961.21 This was a legal process at the time, and researchers suggested the waste may contain 0.5% to 2% DDT, amounting to a total DDT discharge of 384 tons to 1,535 tons.22
Photos taken by a deep-sea robot confirmed the barrels exist on the ocean floor, covered in sediment and some with slashes through them because, “when the barrels were too buoyant to sink on their own, one report said, the crews simply punctured them.”23 Other animals aside from sea lions are being affected as well.
When researchers tested the blubber of eight Southern California bottlenose dolphins, it contained 45 bioaccumulative DDT-related compounds, 80% of which are not typically monitored for.24 The dolphins lived in deeper waters, which was why researchers were surprised at their results, which showed higher levels of DDT than dolphins tested in Brazil and other areas.
Serious Implications for Humans
If higher levels of DDT and other chemicals increase the risk of cancer, there’s a good chance the same can be said for humans. It’s already known, for instance, that exposure to DDTs in utero increases breast cancer risk later in life, with researchers suggesting in 2015, “Findings support classification of DDT as an endocrine disruptor, a predictor of breast cancer, and a marker of high risk.”25
Other health risks are also likely. One study found that women exposed to the most DDT before birth were 2.5 to 3.6 times more likely to develop high blood pressure before the age of 50 than those with the lowest prenatal exposure.26 Due to its environmental persistence, people and animals continue to be exposed to these chemicals even in areas where they’re no longer produced.
Biologists know that pesticides like DDT are bioaccumulating in wildlife and becoming more concentrated as they move up the food chain — and the food chain includes humans. If you eat farmed salmon, you’re likely being exposed, and this is just one avenue of exposure. When the Environmental Working Group tested farmed salmon from U.S. grocery stores, they found farmed salmon had, on average:27
16 times more polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) than wild salmon
Four times more PCBs than beef
3.4 times more PCBs than other seafood
What’s more, in 2005 researchers found that farmed Atlantic salmon were so contaminated with PCBs, toxaphene, dieldrin, dioxins and polybrominated diphenyl ethers that they posed a cancer and additional health risks to humans, even when consumed in moderate amounts.28
The featured study highlighted the implications for human health, including the fact that virally associated cancer occurs in humans. “[The] … likelihood of cancer development could similarly be increased by exposure to environmental contaminants [in humans as it is in sea lions],” they wrote. “Efforts to prevent ecosystem contamination with persistent organic pollutants must be improved to protect both wildlife and human health.”29
Broccoli sprouts may also help detox environmental pollutants,31 while choosing organic and/or biodynamically grown food can also help cut down on your chemical exposure. As for the California sea lions, they serve as an important warning for humans. Frances Gulland, a research associate at UC Davis, told the Los Angeles Times:32
“Sea lions, they’re coming up on the beach, using the same waters that we swim and surf in, eating a lot of the same seafood that we eat. They’re predisposed to cancer by these high levels of legacy compounds that are still in the environment — and we are also exposed to these chemicals.”
While reports of side effects from COVID-19 gene therapies, including life-threatening effects and deaths, continue to climb at breakneck speed,1 a one-sided narrative of safety and effectiveness permeates mainstream media and medical news.
These "vaccines" are so safe and so effective, according to this narrative, that keeping control groups intact for long-term study and comparison of outcomes is now being derided as "unethical," despite the fact that there is absolutely no non-fraudulent data to support their perverse assertions. Truly, what we're watching is the active destruction of basic medical science in a surreal dystopian nightmare.
Vaccine Makers to Ditch Control Groups
Consider this report in JAMA by Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, for example.2 According to Rubin, the launch of "two highly efficacious" COVID-19 vaccines has "spurred debate about the ethics, let alone the feasibility, of continuing or launching blinded, placebo-controlled trials …"
Rubin recounts how Moderna representatives told a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel that rather than letting thousands of vaccine doses to go to waste, they planned to offer them to trial participants who had received placebo.
Pfizer representatives made a similar announcement to the advisory panel. According to a news analysis published in The BMJ,3 the FDA and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are both onboard with this plan, as is the World Health Organization.4
In the JAMA report by Rubin, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, is quoted saying he thinks "it's very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines" because trial participants "should be rewarded" for their participation.
All of these statements violate the very basics of what a safety trial needs, which is a control group against which you can compare the effects of the drug or vaccine in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding is even a consideration at this point, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fraud that these vaccines are safe.
None of the COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market are actually licensed. They only have emergency use authorization — which, incidentally, also forbids them from being mandated, although this is being widely and conveniently ignored — as trials are still ongoing.
At the earliest, they may be licensed two years from now, at the completion of the follow-up studies.5 This is why those in the military are allowed to refuse it, and refuse they have. Among Marines, the refusal rate is nearly 40%.6
So, before the initial studies are even completed, vaccine makers and regulatory agencies are now deciding to forgo long-term safety evaluations altogether by giving placebo recipients the real McCoy, and so-called bioethicists are actually supporting this madness. As reported in The BMJ:7
"Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded."
Hypocrisy Abounds
It's ironic in the extreme, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community supersedes the risk of individual harm. In other words, it's OK if some people are harmed by the vaccine because the overall benefit to society is more important.
Yet here they're saying that participants in the control groups are being harmed by not getting the vaccine, so therefore vaccine makers have an obligation to give it to them before the long-term studies are completed. This is the complete opposite argument used for mandatory vaccination.
If we are to accept the "greater good" justification for vaccination, then people who agree to participate in a study, and end up getting a placebo, need to roll the dice and potentially sacrifice their health "for the greater good." Here, the greater good is the study itself, the results of which are of crucial importance for public health decisions.
Without this data, we will never know whether the vaccines work in the long term and/or what their side effects are. If an individual in the control group gets COVID-19, then that's the price of scientific participation for the greater good of society, just as when a vaccinated person gets harmed, that's considered an acceptable price for creating vaccine-induced herd immunity.
Put another way, when it comes to mandating vaccines, harm to the individual is acceptable, but when it comes to doing proper safety studies, all of a sudden, harm to the individual is not acceptable, and protecting the controls is more important than protecting the integrity of the research. The fact that they're this inconsistent in their "ethics" could be viewed as proof positive that public health isn't even a remote concern.
Scientific Ethics Are Eroding
Apparently, concern about risk to the individual only matters when vaccine makers have everything to gain. By eliminating control groups, we'll have no way of really proving the harm that these "vaccines" might impart over time, as all participants will be in the same proverbial boat.
I remain confident that we'll continue to see many more health problems and deaths develop in time, but without control groups, these trends can more easily be written off as "normal" and/or blamed on something else. As noted by Dr. Steven Goodman, associate dean of clinical and translational research at Stanford University, who is quoted in Rubin's JAMA article:8
"By unblinding trial participants, 'you lose a valid comparison group,' Goodman said. 'There will be this sense, and it will be sort of true, that the study is over.' Unlike, say, a highly effective cancer drug, 'the vaccine is not literally a life-and-death issue today and tomorrow' for most trial participants, Goodman said.
So, he noted, those running COVID-19 vaccine trials shouldn't feel obligated to unblind participants and vaccinate placebo recipients right away. Doing so implies 'you can just blow up the trial' on the basis of promising preliminary results, establishing 'an ethical model for future trials that we maybe don't want to set,' Goodman said."
Indeed, this strategy will set a dangerous precedent that will probably lead to vaccine and drug studies being conducted without control groups in the future, which could spell the end of medical science as we know it. At bare minimum, future variations of the current COVID-19 vaccine trials are likely to be conducted without control groups.
Trial Participants Told Not to Unblind Themselves
Goodman is also quoted in another article,9 this one in MedPage Today, discussing the problems with trial participants unblinding themselves by taking an antibody test:
"'There is no good scientific reason for someone to do this,' he told MedPage Today.'I can understand why they want that information, but it can only serve to diminish the value of the trial. Getting tested is not right unless there is a pressing need for unblinding for health reasons.'"
Here, yet another hypocritical irony arises, as the reason they don't want trial participants to unblind themselves is because if they know they got the vaccine, they're statistically more likely to take more risks that might expose them to the virus.
This, then, will skew the results and "could make the vaccine look less effective than it is," Dr. Elizabeth McNally of Northwestern University explained to MedPage Today.10 So, whether vaccine scientists agree with unblinding or not, unblinding really only has to do with whether it will skew results in their favor.
Trial participants unblinding themselves might make the vaccine appear less effective if they alter their behavior as a consequence, whereas vaccine makers unblinding the entire control group will allow them to hide side effects, even if participants alter their behavior.
Justification for Elimination of Controls Is Flimsy at Best
While pro-vaccine advocates insist the elimination of control groups is justified on the "moral grounds" that it's unethical to not provide volunteers with something of value, this argument completely ignores the undeniable fact that no vaccine is 100% safe.
Getting the active vaccine comes with risk, not merely benefit. This is particularly true for the novel mRNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines. Historical data are troubling to say the least, and the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is rapidly filling up with COVID-19 vaccine-related injury reports and deaths.
Reports of Side Effects and Deaths Are Piling Up
As reported by The Defender,11 as of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths. Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination! The youngest person to die was 18 years old. There were also 110 reports of miscarriage or premature birth among pregnant women.
As reported in "COVID-19 Vaccine To Be Tested on 6-Year-Olds," between January 2020 and January 2021, COVID-19 vaccines accounted for 70% of the annual vaccine deaths, even though these vaccines had only been available for less than two months!
In my view, it's unconscionable and morally reprehensible to not take these data into account. Clearly, these "vaccines" have risks. Pretending like they don't, and that all placebo recipients in vaccine trials are at a distinct disadvantage simply isn't true.
Keep in mind that we still do not know the percentage of adverse effects being reported. Is it between 1%12 and 10%13 as past inquiries into VAERS reporting have shown, or is it higher?
If only 10% are reported, we may be looking at 23,420 deaths, but if it is as low as 1%, it jumps to more than 230,000 deaths. We will never know because there are major attempts to suppress this information, as we have already witnessed with the deaths of sport celebrities Hank Aaron and Marvin Hagler, both of whom died shortly after COVID vaccinations.
Regardless, it's hard to justify even a single death of an otherwise healthy individual, seeing how the survival rate for COVID-19 across all age groups is 99.74%. If you're younger than 40, your survival rate is 99.99%.14
There's every reason to suspect that these reports account for just a small percentage of actual side effects. Just think of all those who get the vaccine at grocery stores or temporary vaccination sites, for example. First of all, are all Americans even aware that VAERS exists and that they need to file a report if they suffer an adverse reaction post-COVID vaccination?
Who is going to file the adverse report if you get vaccinated in a grocery or convenience store? Will they return to the pharmacist and report their side effects? Will the pharmacist file the report? Who's responsible for filing the report if you go to a temporary vaccination site?
CDC Stays Mum on How It's Ensuring Reporting Compliance
According to the CDC, deaths from COVID-19 vaccines are required to be reported to VAERS.15 It's not supposed to be voluntary, as with other vaccines. However, it is not being transparent about how it is ensuring this "requirement" is being followed, so it's impossible to confirm that all related deaths are in fact being reported. As reported by The Defender:16
"We … inquired about whether healthcare providers are reporting all injuries and deaths that might be connected to the COVID vaccine, and what education initiatives are in place to encourage and facilitate proper and accurate reporting.
Twenty-two days later a representative from the CDC's Vaccine Task Force responded by saying the agency had never received our questions — even though the employees we talked to several times said their press officers were working through the questions we sent. We provided the questions again and requested a response by April 7. To date, the CDC has not responded despite our repeated follow-up attempts."
Absolute Versus Relative Risk Reduction
Vaccine makers are also very careful about only referencing relative risk, not absolute risk. By doing so, the vaccines appear far more protective than they actually are. It's a commonly used statistical trick that I encourage you to familiarize yourself with.
For example, in his November 26, 2020, BMJ article,17 Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, pointed out that while Pfizer claims its vaccine is 95% effective, this is the relative risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction — which is far more relevant for public health measures — is actually less than 1%!
I recommend listening to the interview with Dr. Ron Brown above, in which he explains the ins and outs of relative and absolute risks, and the differences between them. He's also written two papers detailing the problems with this kind of reporting bias: "Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials"18 and "Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation."19
You Likely Don't Need a Vaccine
If you're concerned about vaccine side effects, please understand there are several prevention strategies and treatments readily available that have been shown to be highly effective, which means the need for a vaccine in the first place is nearly moot.
What to Do if You Got the Vaccine and Are Having Problems
In closing, if you got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you'd use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection.
I've written many articles over the past year detailing simple strategies to improve your immune system, and with a healthy immune system, you'll get through COVID-19 without incident. Below, I'll summarize some of the strategies you can use both to prevent COVID-19 and address any side effects you may encounter from the vaccine.
• Eat a "clean," ideally organic diet. Avoid processed foods of all kinds, especially vegetable oils, as they are loaded with damaging omega-6 linoleic acid that wrecks your mitochondrial function. Linoleic acid has been shown to increase mortality from COVID-19.
• Consider nutritional ketosis and a time-restricted eating window of six to eight hours with no food at least three hours before bed. These strategies will help you optimize your metabolic machinery and mitochondrial function.
• Implement a detoxification program to get rid of heavy metals and glyphosate. This is important as these toxins contribute to inflammation. To improve detoxification, I recommend activating your natural glutathione production with molecular hydrogen tablets.
A simple way to block glyphosate uptake is to take glycine. Approximately 3 grams, about half a teaspoon, a few times a day should be sufficient, along with an organic diet, so that you're not adding more glyphosate with each meal.
• Maintain a neutral pH to improve the resiliency of your immune system. You want your pH to be right around 7, which you can measure with an inexpensive urine strip. The lower your pH, the more acidic you are. A simple way to raise your pH if it's too acidic (and most people are) is to take one-fourth teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or potassium bicarbonate in water a few times a day.
Nutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are:
Vitamin D — Vitamin D supplements are readily available and one of the least expensive supplements on the market. All things considered, vitamin D optimization is likely the easiest and most beneficial strategy that anyone can do to minimize their risk of COVID-19 and other infections, and can strengthen your immune system in a matter of a few weeks.
N-acetylcysteine (NAC) — NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. According to one literature analysis,20 glutathione deficiency may actually be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment.
Zinc — Zinc plays a very important role in your immune system's ability to ward off viral infections. Like vitamin D, zinc helps regulate your immune function21 — and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore, like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes.22 Importantly, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function.23
Melatonin — This boosts immune function in a variety of ways and helps quell inflammation. Melatonin may also prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by recharging glutathione24 and enhancing vitamin D synthesis, among other things.
Vitamin C — A number of studies have shown vitamin C can be very helpful in the treatment of viral illnesses, sepsis and ARDS,25 all of which are applicable to COVID-19. Its basic properties include anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antithrombotic and antiviral activities. At high doses, it actually acts as an antiviral drug, actively inactivating viruses. Vitamin C also works synergistically with quercetin.26
Quercetin — A powerful immune booster and broad-spectrum antiviral, quercetin was initially found to provide broad-spectrum protection against SARS coronavirus in the aftermath of the 2003 SARS epidemic,27,28,29 and evidence suggests it may be useful for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 as well.
B vitamins — B vitamins can also influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including30 viral replication and invasion, cytokine storm induction, adaptive immunity and hypercoagulability.
Type 1 interferon — Type 1 interferon prevents viral replication and helps degrade the RNA. It's available in spray form that you can spray directly into your throat or nose. You can try taking a couple of sprays per day prophylactically, and more if you have a cough, fever or headache.
Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects
Last but not least, if you or someone you love have received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, report it. The Children's Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do three things:31
Soy supplements are reputed to stave off hot flashes, night sweats, and other uncomfortable menopausal symptoms. But the latest in a series of disappointing studies finds that soy supplements do not actually have any such effect, they do not reduce the aging-related bone loss that can lead to osteoporosis.
