Health & Fitness

This past year, we have seen many lawmakers in the U.S. and other countries vote to eliminate or severely restrict civil liberties in the name of the public health.^1,2,3 One of the most outrageous legislative actions violating parental and human rights took place in Washington, D.C., in November 2020 when city council officials gave doctors the power to vaccinate children as young as 11 years old and hide what they did from parents.^4,5,6,7,8

The D.C. mayor refused to veto the bill^9,10 and, in January 2021, the U.S. Congress sat on its hands^11,12 and gave tacit approval to enactment of the most dangerous child vaccination law in America.

In a breathtaking violation of medical ethics and several federal laws, the new vaccine concealment law in Washington, D.C., allows doctors to extract "informed consent" from young children too immature to know what informed consent¹³ means or what a vaccine reaction looks and feels like.^14,15,16

The D.C. city council majority, with only three members dissenting, cruelly disempowered parents by voting to make it illegal for a doctor, insurance company or school administrator to divulge a child's vaccination history in records that can be seen by the child's mother or father.¹⁷

Parents Won't Have Information to Protect Child From Injury

An 11-year-old child does not know or understand his or her personal health history but most parent do. If a child has experienced previous vaccine reactions, has severe allergies or other health conditions that could increase vaccine risks,^18,19 parents kept in the dark will not have a way to protect their child from further harm.

Parents who don't know which vaccines their children have been given will not be able to monitor them for signs of a potentially life-threatening vaccine reaction that requires immediate medical treatment.²⁰ If the child is injured or dies after vaccination, parents will not know they must apply to the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) before the filing deadline expires.²¹

Parents will not know their insurance company has been billed for vaccines. Parents will not know that a school the child attends is in possession of their child's secret vaccination records even when there is a vaccine exemption for religious belief reasons on file with the school.

This blatant violation of a parent's moral right and legal responsibility to make medical risk decisions on behalf of a minor child was endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics²² and pushed through by the D.C. city council, while the mayor and the US Congress looked the other way.

Washington, DC, Vaccine Concealment Law Violates Federal Laws

First, D.C.'s vaccine concealment law violates vaccine safety provisions of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, a federal law that confirmed vaccine injuries and deaths are real and made preventing vaccine reactions a national priority.

Parents of DPT vaccine-injured children secured vaccine safety provisions in the 1986 Act, which directs doctors and other medical workers to give parents written vaccine benefit and risk information BEFORE a child is vaccinated²³ and also mandates that vaccine providers record which vaccines the child is given in a record the parents can access.

Specifically, the 1986 Act mandates that "health care providers who administer a vaccine" must give a child's legal representative "a copy of the information materials" developed by the Centers for Disease Control "prior to the administration" of a vaccine.^24,25

The 1986 law also requires each person administering a vaccine to "ensure that there is recorded in such person's permanent medical record or in a permanent office log or file to which a legal representative shall have access upon request" certain information:

No. 1: the date of administration of the vaccine; No. 2: the vaccine manufacturer and lot number of the vaccine; and No. 3: the name and address and, if appropriate, the title of the health care provider administering the vaccine."²⁶

These informing and recording vaccine safety provisions were included in the 1986 Act specifically to provide parents with information they need to make well informed vaccine decisions for their minor children; to help parents recognize and prevent vaccine reactions; and to ensure a vaccine reaction is reported to the government's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).^27,28

If a doctor can secretly inject a young child with one or more vaccines and hide the vaccination records, how will parents know what is happening when a vaccine reaction occurs? They won't have the information they need to take their child to an emergency room or be able to make the connection between the vaccinations and a child's regression into poor health.

This lack of critical information about their child's medical history also means parents will likely miss the deadline for filing a claim in the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which has awarded more than $4.5 billion to the vaccine injured over the past three decades.²⁹

D.C.'s vaccine concealment law violates the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, known as FERPA, which guarantees parents the legal right to have access to their children's education records, including health and vaccine records, at the primary and secondary school level.³⁰

Vaccine Concealment Law Violates Informed Consent Rights

D.C.'s vaccine concealment law also violates the long standing ethical principle of informed consent to medical risk taking,³¹ which has governed the ethical practice of human research and medical practice since the Nuremberg Code was published in 1947 after the Doctors' Trial.^32,33

Informed consent is exercised on behalf of minor children by parents, who are morally and legally responsible for the well-being and financial support for their children until they are old enough to live independently.^34,35,36

Child development specialists have documented how young children and teenagers lack the critical thinking skills and emotional maturity to exercise good judgment when assessing risks.^37,38,39,40, Preadolescents are more susceptible to pressure from peers and authority figures.^41,42,43,44

Vaccine Administrators Have No Liability for Injuries, Deaths

Doctors are the ultimate authority figures in our society today, and many are serving as authoritarian implementers of one-size-fits-all federal vaccine policies and state vaccine mandates.^45,46

Like vaccine manufacturers, doctors and other persons who administer vaccines cannot be held liable in civil court when a child dies or is injured.⁴⁷ Congress passed special legislation in 2020 to make sure that doctors or anyone else who administers a Covid-19 vaccine cannot be sued.⁴⁸

When the risks of vaccination turn out to be 100 percent for a child, it is the mother and father raising that child on a day-to-day basis who will be left with the lifelong consequences — not the doctor who has been given the power to secretly persuade the child to take vaccines, and not the politician who voted to give doctors that power.

The D.C. council sponsor of the bill entitled the "Minor Consent for Vaccinations Amendment Act" originally wanted doctors to be able to vaccinate children of any age — no matter how young — without the knowledge or consent of their parents. She argued that minors of any age can get an abortion in Washington, D.C., and get treated for a sexually transmitted disease or substance abuse without the knowledge or consent of their parents.⁴⁹

She told Medscape Medical News that parents with "anti-science" beliefs were not vaccinating their children based on a "disproven belief" that vaccines may cause harm, which puts other people at "extreme risk" for disease.⁵⁰

A dissenting D.C. city council member countered with "Medical professionals and schools should not be permitted to coerce impressionable minors into procedures capable of causing injury or death behind their parents' back."⁵¹

Vaccine Concealment Law a Profound Betrayal of Public Trust

The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights states that:⁵²

"The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society;" and "For persons who are not capable of exercising autonomy, special measures are to be taken to protect their rights and interests;" and "Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information."

It is a profound betrayal of public trust for any city, state or federal government to strip parents of their God-given right to protect their children from harm by allowing a doctor to give a child a pharmaceutical product without getting a parent's permission.

Science is not perfect, doctors are not infallible, and pharmaceutical products like vaccines come with risks that can be greater for some individuals than others,^53,54,55 which is why parents must retain the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking on behalf of their minor children. Will the vaccine concealment bill that is now law in Washington, D.C., be exported to your state next?

Take Action Today to Protect Parental Rights

If you want to protect parental and informed consent rights, register for the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal today and stay up to date on vaccine laws being proposed in your state so you can contact your legislators and take positive action.

Never be the one who has to say you did not do today what you could have done to change tomorrow. It's your health. Your family. Your choice. And our mission continues: No forced vaccination. Not in America.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3B75fF0
via IFTTT

Stanford University recently announced work on a “groundbreaking 'superhero' vaccine inspired by the DNA code of Olympic athletes.”¹ Euan Ashley is a professor of medicine and genetics at Stanford University, and the genetic scientist behind this attempt to use science to adjust your DNA, with unknown short-term and long-term consequences.

Science has been manipulating plant DNA for decades, culminating recently in the development of fake meat. Bill Gates and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are pushing for all people in Western nations to swap traditional, whole foods for mass-produced fake food grown in a laboratory.

Sadly, this is not how your body is designed to thrive, yet it is being pushed as a green and sustainable alternative to animal food. The fake meat industry is well-established, which consulting firm Kearney predicts will reach $450 billion by 2040. At that time, it would represent up to 25% of the meat market.²

The COVID-19 vaccine is another example of manipulating genetic material with poorly researched outcomes. The mRNA vaccine being pushed throughout the world is designed to trick your body into making spike protein inside your cells using genetic coding.³

The spike protein covers the COVID-19 virus and does not mutate as rapidly as the virus. This is supposed to trigger an immune response in your body, so you recognize the virus when you are exposed. The vaccine was released under emergency use authorization, long before scientists established that the vaccine held greater danger than they had potentially anticipated.

As the number of people injured and disabled from the vaccine continues to mount, some researchers have discovered it is the spike protein — used by the vaccine to trigger your immune system — that is causing widespread endothelial damage linked to many of the long-haul symptoms⁴ and likely responsible for developing blood clots, stroke and organ damage.

As the growing number of deaths and destruction of human lives from the COVID vaccine are revealed, Stanford University announced⁵ yet another DNA-driven “vaccine” designed to rewrite your genetic code to prevent diseases, many of which are preventable through lifestyle choices.

Scientists Take Aim at a Genetic Frankenstein Vaccine

The Stanford team of scientists believe the vaccine may be available in the not-so-distant future. Ashley said that his vaccine would use genetic traits from people such as Olympic athletes as a blueprint to repair cells.

He believes the vaccine could potentially protect people from some of the leading causes of death, including heart disease, liver disease and Alzheimer's disease. He hopes that clinical trials of individual components would begin as early as 2026 and combination vaccines would then be available within the next 15 years.⁶

In a communication with the Daily Mail,⁷ Ashley told the reporter that his idea came while studying specific populations of people who appear to be more resilient to certain types of diseases. His idea is to study the genetics of people who are resilient to disease in order to create therapies, including gene editing, to make others more resilient, saying:⁸

“At the moment, these "resilience" genes have been identified for heart disease, for Alzheimer's disease, and for liver disease. But in the future we might discover people resistant to a whole host of human diseases.”

Study Finds describes the shot as a treatment that delivers an “instruction manual” to help the body “repair, tweak and improve” its own versions. A single dose could lead to a “bodywide genetic upgrade” that would cut the risk of premature death in some adults by as much as 50 percent.”⁹

Ashley believes the vaccine would first be administered to adults with serious clinical conditions before being released to the general population. While this genetic experiment has all the earmarks of Frankenstein medicine, Ashley takes it to the next step as he anticipates the “superhero” vaccine will also be given to children.

Ashley anticipates the timeline for release may be as early as 10 years if breakthroughs in technology continue at the same rapid pace. He is quoted in British online news media Wales Online, saying:¹⁰

“Genomic medicine has been promised for decades, but thanks to advances in the field we are now reaching the stage where that promise is set to become reality, ushering in a bold new era of medical treatments. We will soon have the genetic engineering tools to repair, tweak and improve DNA associated with a host of life-limiting diseases, to make us all less prone to developing these illnesses across our lifetimes.

This isn’t, of course, to say that we can make people live forever, and we can’t guarantee life expectancy will increase, but it is likely premature deaths could be avoided in many cases. Advances in DNA modification mean the number of people with ‘superhuman’ genes — those who are more disease resistant — is no longer science fiction but, in the coming years, absolute science fact.

Potentially millions of people could be impacted by this technology - a superhero jab, for want of a better description. This has the potential to greatly reduce the burden of diseases with a genetic component such as Alzheimer’s disease, liver disease, coronary heart disease and associated conditions such as strokes, and vascular dementia.

It is not only possible, but probable, that such a jab will become available in the next 10 to 15 years, with the benefits of that treatment becoming apparent within the next two to three decades. If we modelled on fatal heart attacks alone then the new treatment could lead to as much as a 50 per cent reduction in incidence.”

Most Disease Is Not Controlled by a Single Gene

Ashley believes a single shot can alter an individual's DNA enough to prevent heart disease, Alzheimer's disease or liver disease. Yet, what the Human Genome Project was able to show us was that the causes of these chronic diseases are complex and that there are few that are caused by a mutation of a single gene.¹¹

Most chronic diseases are influenced by a combination of mutations, each of which have a small effect and are themselves influenced by environmental factors. The microbial DNA from your gut microbiome also plays a role.¹² Experts estimate that gene therapy for rare single-gene diseases, such as Huntington's disease, may succeed. However, these must be tailored to the individual condition and their genetic makeup.

There were advances that came from the Human Genome Project and it had an impact on nearly every area of biological research. However, these advances have not led to a dramatic improvement in treatments, only a more accurate understanding of single gene conditions.

The Human Genome Project has also transformed technology and analytical tools, helping to merge the expertise of computer scientists and mathematicians with biologists and geneticists.¹³ The approach increased data sharing and established the foundation of sharing data across specialties.

Work on a CRISPR edit for heart disease was announced in 2018 by researchers from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.¹⁴ Their idea was to edit a genetic mutation that might lower an individual's risk of heart attack by altering their cholesterol levels, namely low-density lipoproteins.

William Lagor is a molecular biologist at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. He believes the approach is feasible from a technological standpoint. However, he recognizes there is a philosophical question of whether you treat an individual who has not yet acquired the disease.¹⁵

Karel Moons, clinical epidemiologist at the University Medical Center Utrecht in the Netherlands, has a grasp on how a shot that promises to alter your DNA may in fact alter your outlook on life. He is concerned that gene therapy would hinder a person’s effort to help themselves, increasing the risk that people turn over their responsibility for health and wellness even further. He warns:¹⁶

“Changing lifestyle may be much more effective for a population than focusing on high-cost interventions. It is the way the human mind works. Take a pill and we think we are protected.”

Was COVID the Turning Point for Genetic Vaccines?

Has the acceptance of genetic manipulation using mRNA COVID vaccines created a turning point for genetic vaccines to treat chronic illness and disease? Governments have used fear to control and manipulate their citizens, especially during COVID-19. Fear is a strong motivational force that may trigger people to make decisions they would ordinarily not consider.

Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behavior (SPI-B), a subcommittee that advises the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) in the U.K., admit governments are using fear. And they should know. They advocated for it, and now say it was a regrettable mistake. As reported by The Telegraph, May 14, 2021:¹⁷

“Scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behavior during the COVID pandemic have admitted its work was ‘unethical’ and ‘totalitarian.’ Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behavior (SPI-B) expressed regret about the tactics in a new book about the role of psychology in the Government’s COVID-19 response.

SPI-B warned in March last year that ministers needed to increase ‘the perceived level of personal threat’ from COVID-19 because ‘a substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened.’

Gavin Morgan, a psychologist on the team, said: ‘Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government. By nature I am an optimistic person, but all this has given me a more pessimistic view of people.’”

For nearly a year and a half, governments around the world, with few exceptions, have fed their citizens a steady diet of frightening news. Even when it became clear that people weren’t dying in excessive numbers, the mainstream media continued to publish updates on the growing number of “cases,” without ever putting the numerical figures into context or explaining that the vast majority were false positives.

To read more about how governments have been using fear, see “Fear Is Contagious and Used to Control You.” As you think about the decisions that have been made by vast numbers of people in the past 18 months, consider whether these decisions would have been logical if there weren’t an overwhelming atmosphere of fear over a virus that demonstrably has not lived up to the number of deaths predicted.

Has this fear, and the subsequent acceptance of genetic therapy experts insist on calling a “vaccine,” been the driving force behind large numbers of people who have taken the shot without question? What are the consequences of this decision in the coming years? Some experts believe there will be mass numbers of people who die prematurely from conditions triggered by the vaccine.

Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’ Came to Her in a Nightmare

The concept behind “superhero” vaccine research is reminiscent of Frankenstein medicine. The story of “Frankenstein” was written by Mary Shelley after a particularly vivid nightmare during a dark and stormy night.¹⁸ Shelly was 18 when she wrote “Frankenstein,” which some believe is the “first major work in the science fiction genre.”¹⁹

The story has captured the imagination of generations of readers and one which medical schools have used as a framework for examining ethics, science and technology. Anesthesiologist Dr. Audrey Shafer writes in Stanford Medicine:²⁰

“But, as the frontiers are pushed further and further, the unintended consequences of how science and technology are used could affect who we are as humans, the viability of our planet and how society evolves.”

No doubt, the push for discovery has revealed scientific secrets that have helped lengthen human life. But without moral and ethical oversight these discoveries cause great harm and suffering.

Shafer warns that caution is needed in fields that are fascinating, such as “genetic engineering, tissue engineering, transplantation, transfusion, artificial intelligence, robotics, bioelectronics, virtual reality, cryonics, synthetic biology and neural networks.”

Two hundred years have passed since Shelley penned “Frankenstein,” which has since become a ubiquitous figure and featured regularly as a symbol of the danger of tampering with nature. As Julian Koplin and John Massie point out in a paper written in The BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics,²¹ the scientist Victor Frankenstein wasn't just arrogant, but he also failed to take responsibility for what he created.

Frankenstein’s obsession was achieving a breakthrough, but he did not consider the repercussions of what he brought to life. Shelley aptly described a scientific community bent on discovery while neglecting the moral obligations attached to that discovery. In their paper, Koplin and Massie discuss the unprecedented powers that scientists have recently gained to develop life and create chimeras. They wrote:

“These strands of research bear some resemblance to Frankenstein’s own. In each case, scientists are creating entirely new forms of life … And in some cases, scientists are confronting these questions in the absence of robust regulatory oversight; many of the novel entities described above do not fit neatly within existing regulatory frameworks.”

Health authorities used the recent outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 to create an environment of fear, which in turn has driven acceptance of genetic jabs without pharmaceutical liability and a growing evidence of human damage. You can read more in “COVID Vaccine Deaths and Injuries Are Secretly Buried.”

Scientists Want to Replace Healthy Decisions With a Shot

Approximately 655,000 people in the U.S. die each year from cardiovascular disease.²² In 2013, the CDC estimated that at least 200,000 of those deaths, or a about a third, were preventable by making changes in your health habits.²³ By 2016, federal health officials bumped that statistic, saying 80% of all heart attacks and strokes could be prevented by making lifestyle changes.²⁴

According to Ashley, the most they could hope for from a genetic therapy “superhero” shot is a 50% reduction in cardiovascular disease.²⁵ In real numbers, if 655,000 people die each year from heart disease, then the shot may save 327,500 people who would then potentially be open to a host of side effects, diseases and premature death from the vaccine.

On the other hand, health authorities say that there could be 524,000 fewer deaths each year if people stop smoking, eat healthy, exercise and sleep well. But the benefits of making those changes do not stop with having fewer deaths from cardiovascular disease.

Those same lifestyle changes also reduce your risk of several other chronic illnesses, including obesity, Type 2 diabetes and some cancers. In other words, the benefits of one expensive shot do not outweigh the risks or the benefits of lifestyle changes that could improve millions of lives, reduce the risk of a host of chronic diseases and lower health care costs across the board.

Scientists are excited by new technology and the potential it may have to improve life. However, as Mary Shelley so aptly illustrated, science is about more than experiments, technology and pushing the boundaries. It must also be balanced by moral and ethical standards that hold human life precious and take care to consider the ramifications of discovery.

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

Body+Soul writer Shona Hendley explores how we can shop smarter, not harder, particularly when we have a specific event or dress code to adhere to.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/36yP1pT

Is 100 the new 130? The rate of people living an entire century is increasing and the children born now could reach new records.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3kaMla5

The vaccine rollout is happening, slowly but surely. As more Aussies become eligible for the jab, get prepared to see a lot more selfies about the subject.  

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3wF7YSl

Researchers have found that the magnetic field of the MRI scanner decreased the BBB opening volume by 3.3-fold to 11.7-fold, depending on the strength of the magnetic field, in a mouse model.

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

Mathematicians have created a new modeling toolkit which predicts the impact of COVID-19 at a local level with unprecedented accuracy.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3hZC269

A screening method known as untargeted metabolomics profiling can improve the diagnostic rate for inborn errors of metabolism, a group of rare genetic conditions, by about seven-fold when compared to the traditional metabolic screening approach.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3xBa5bk

A new study sheds light on how the specter of dementia and chronic pain reduce people's desire to live into older ages. Among Norwegians 60 years of age and older the desire to live into advanced ages was significantly reduced by hypothetical adverse life scenarios with the strongest effect caused by dementia and chronic pain.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3AP478R

In a mouse model, brain regions involved in working memory present a modular network organization that is critical for persistent neural activity.

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

Researchers deloped a new genetic circuit called the Equalizer that leads to uniform gene expression.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2U4XezF

Researchers have described a new approach that uses machine learning to hunt for disease targets and then predicts whether a drug is likely to receive FDA approval.

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

A new software improves data-independent acquisition proteomics by providing a computational workflow that permits highly sensitive and accurate data analysis.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/36tAEmO

Researchers have created an inflammatory clock of aging (iAge) which measures inflammatory load and predicts multi-morbidity, frailty, immune health, cardiovascular aging and is also associated with exceptional longevity in centenarians.

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

A diet rich in fermented foods enhances the diversity of gut microbes and decreases molecular signs of inflammation, according to researchers.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/36vcxEf

Researchers have developed a sensor that can be implanted anywhere in the body -- for example, under the tip of a severed finger. The sensor connects to another nerve that functions properly and restores tactile sensation to the injured nerve. The development is biocompatible and does not require electricity, wires, or batteries.

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

A recent trial has shown that nose drops of modified 'friendly' bacteria may protect against meningitis.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2VztU4J

Scientists reveal that during hematopoietic regeneration, RNA expressed from a part of the genome considered 'junk DNA' is used by hematopoietic stem cells to get activated and proliferate. The study shows that these so-called transposable elements make RNA after chemotherapy and activate an immune receptor which induces inflammatory signals enhancing hematopoietic stem cell cycling and thus participating in the regeneration of the hematopoietic system.

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

Researchers found that a four-week training course made a substantial difference in helping special education teachers anticipate different ways students with learning disabilities might solve math problems.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3yQDGO2

Ancient sediments from caves have already proven to preserve DNA for thousands of years. The amount of recovered sequences from environmental sediments, however, is generally low, which complicates analyses. A study has now successfully retrieved three mammalian environmental genomes from a single soil sample of 25,000 years BP obtained from the cave of Satsurblia in the Caucasus (Georgia).

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3i2dCZF

An international study of parks and gardens finds even the humble roadside verge plays an important role in the environment and for our health.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3hW1eKG

Human Usher syndrome is the most common form of hereditary deaf-blindness. Researchers have now identified a novel pathomechanism leading to Usher syndrome. They have discovered that the Usher syndrome type 1G protein SANS plays a crucial role in regulating splicing process. Furthermore, they have been able to demonstrate that defects in the SANS protein can lead to errors in the splicing of genes related to the Usher syndrome, which may provoke the disease.

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

When it comes to post-menopausal hormone therapy, the type, route and duration all play a role in reducing the risk of neurodegenerative diseases.

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

A novel method of gene therapy is helping children born with a rare genetic disorder called AADC deficiency that causes severe physical and developmental disabilities. The study offers new hope to those living with incurable genetic and neurodegenerative diseases.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3kdWu5R

Scientists have produced the first fine-detail molecular blueprints of a bacterial enzyme known as Lit, which is suspected to play a 'stealthy' role in the progression of infection by reducing the immune response. Blueprints such as these allow drug designers to uncover potential weaknesses in bacterial arsenals as they seek to develop new therapeutics that may help us win the war against antibiotic resistance.

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

The blood-brain barrier protects the brain and is notoriously hard to get past for drug delivery, making it difficult to treat disorders in the central nervous system. In a mice study, a team of researchers used a novel approach to study the barrier and in detail characterized a Trojan horse technique to help to solve the challenge.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3AR8jot

Excluding non-melanoma skin cancers, colon and rectal cancers are the third most common types of cancer diagnosed each year in the U.S.¹ Scientists have identified several modifiable factors that increase your risk of colorectal cancer, and the most current link is sugar-sweetened drinks, which are very popular in the West.²

Colon and rectal cancers are the third leading cause of death from cancer in men and women, or the second leading cause if you combine the two.³ The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimates there will be 149,500 new cases of colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2021. Experts expect 52,982 to die in 2021 from colorectal cancer.

Although colorectal cancer numbers have been dropping in older adults for the past couple decades because of increased testing and lifestyle changes, scientists believe that this downward trend is masking a rising number of younger adults who are being diagnosed with it.⁴

In a paper published by the ACS in 2017,⁵ researchers looked at incident patterns from 1974 to 2013. They wrote that “nearly one-third of rectal cancer patients are younger than age 55 years,”⁶ which fueled headlines and recommendations that younger people should consider colon cancer screening.

However, it’s not clear whether increasing the number of screenings could reduce the number of people who are diagnosed, as it's a mistake to equate screening with prevention. This is especially true since the ramifications of poor diet and sedentary behavior are catching up at an increasingly younger ages.

So, instead of signaling a need for more testing, the rising number of young adults diagnosed with colorectal cancer should be a wake-up call to reassess your lifestyle. In fact, data from the featured study demonstrate the impact one dietary choice can have on your risk of colorectal cancer.⁷

Sugary Drinks Increase Risk of Colon Cancer in Young Adults

In this study, a team of researchers from Washington University School of Medicine,⁸ used data from the national Nurses’ Health Study II to evaluate the relationship between sugar-sweetened beverages and the increasing number of individuals younger than 55 diagnosed with colorectal cancer.⁹

There were 95,464 women aged 25 to 42 who reported their beverage intake from 1991 to 2015.¹⁰ They also examined data from a subset of 41,272 nurses who used a validated high school food frequency questionnaire to report their beverage intake when they were aged 13 to 18.

During the 24-year prospective study, the researchers documented 109 early-onset colorectal cancers in the group. After analyzing the data, they found that individuals who drank two or more 8-ounce servings¹¹ each week of a sugar-sweetened beverage more than doubled their risk of diagnosis as compared to people who drank less than one sugar-sweetened beverage each week.¹²

The results also appeared to show that the earlier individuals began drinking sugar-sweetened drinks, the higher the risk of early-onset colorectal cancer. In adults, with every additional 8-ounce beverage they drank each week, it increased their risk 16%. However, in the adolescent group, for every additional sugar-sweetened drink each week, their risk of developing the cancer before age 50 rose by 32%.¹³

The data also showed that when individuals replaced one sugar-sweetened drink with coffee, tea or artificially sweetened beverages, their risk reduced from 17% to 36%. However, as I discuss below, there are additional and dangerous health risks outside of colorectal cancer that are associated with artificial sweeteners.

Caroline H. Johnson is an epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health whose interest lies in the environmental risks associated with colorectal cancer. She was not involved in the study but spoke to a reporter from The New York Times about the results, saying,¹⁴ “I was really interested to see that the study was on women. The focus has mostly been on males. It will be interesting to see if it’s confirmed in men.”

Interestingly, the researchers did not find an association between drinking fruit juices and early-onset colorectal cancer. During the analysis, the scientists controlled for a variety of external factors that also affect risk, including hormonal use during menopause, smoking, alcohol, race and physical activity.¹⁵

One of the researchers commented that while weight gain is a known risk, their analysis controlled for obesity, suggesting the statistical association they found is outside the independent risk of obesity. Senior author Yin Cao, associate professor of surgery and medicine, commented on the results:¹⁶

"Despite the small number of cases, there is still a strong signal to suggest that sugar intake, especially in early life, is playing a role down the road in increasing adulthood colorectal cancer risk before age 50.

This study, combined with our past work linking obesity and metabolic conditions to a higher risk of early-onset colorectal cancer, suggests that metabolic problems, such as insulin resistance, may play an important role in the development of this cancer in younger adults."

Artificial Sweeteners Also Carry Significant Risks

Although the featured study did not look for a link between artificial sweeteners and colorectal cancer, past research has confirmed that artificial sweeteners have a significantly negative effect on your health.

For example, one French study¹⁷ found people who drank just 6.26 ounces or more each day of sugar-sweetened soda had a higher risk of cardiovascular events over 6.6 years of follow-up¹⁸ — but people who drank 5.97 ounces of artificially sweetened beverages experienced a similar increase in cardiovascular disease.

Additionally, these sugar substitutes have a variety of metabolic effects, including a negative impact on your gut microbiome. One recent molecular research study¹⁹ from Angelia Ruskin University²⁰ discovered that popular artificial sweeteners, including sucralose (Splenda), aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal and Sugar Twin) and saccharin (Sweet’n Low, Necta Sweet and Sweet Twin) have a pathogenic effect on two types of gut bacteria.

When E. coli and E. faecalis become pathogenic, they kill Caco-2 cells that line the wall of the intestines. Data from the study showed a concentration from two cans of diet soft drinks significantly increased the ability of E coli and E. faecalis to adhere to the Caco-2 cells and increase the development of bacterial biofilms.²¹

One animal study²² published in the journal Molecules analyzed six artificial sweeteners including saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-K. The data showed they all caused DNA damage in, and interfered with, the normal and healthy activity of gut bacteria.

Another study²³ showed a link between artificially sweetened soft drinks and death from circulatory diseases and an association between sugar-sweetened soft drinks and death from digestive diseases.²⁴ And, a study published in April 2021²⁵ confirmed earlier rodent studies that showed “aspartame is a chemical carcinogen” that can increase the risk of cancer in offspring that are exposed to it in utero.

This suggests that policies aimed at cutting or reducing sugar consumption may have disastrous consequences when manufacturers reformulate their products using artificial sweeteners.

Vitamin D Deficiency in Older Adults Linked With Colon Cancer

New evidence published in BMC Public Health²⁶ revealed an aged dependent inverse link between exposure to ultraviolet B (UVB) light and the incidence of colorectal cancer. The data were gathered over 186 countries using UVB estimates and the incident rates of colorectal cancer.

The researchers made the association between UVB light and the manufacturer of vitamin D in the body since vitamin D has limited dietary sources. Inadequate vitamin D status has been identified as a risk factor in the development of colorectal cancer and has a potential protective action.

Past research demonstrates that taking at least 1,000 international units of vitamin D each day can reduce the risk of colorectal cancer by up to 50%.²⁷ While analyzing the data, the researchers accounted for factors that may affect the results, such as smoking, skin pigmentation and age.²⁸

The authors suggested that lower UVB exposure may lower an individual's levels of vitamin D. Since deficiency has been associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer in the past, the researchers used UVB data to estimate vitamin D levels. Lack of exposure to UVB was correlated with higher rates of colorectal cancer in all age groups living in all countries that were included in the study.

However, the association between lower exposure and higher risk of cancer was more significant in those over age 45. Raphael Cuomo, Ph.D., is a public health scientist from the University of California, San Diego, and co-author of the current study. He commented in a press release:²⁹

"Differences in UVB light accounted for a large amount of the variation we saw in colorectal cancer rates, especially for people over age 45. Although this is still preliminary evidence, it may be that older individuals, in particular, may reduce their risk of colorectal cancer by correcting deficiencies in vitamin D."

Risks Associated With Screening Tests

The risk of colorectal cancer must be balanced against the risk of the testing procedures. Depending on the data source, the risk of death from a colonoscopy may be 1 out of every 16,318 procedures³⁰ to 1 out of every 1,000 procedures.³¹ As of 2018, there were nearly 19 million colonoscopies being performed each year in the U.S.³²

This means if you use the lower comparison of 1 in every 1,000, as many as 19,000 Americans may die as the result of a routine screening test. According to on paper, serious complications, injury or death from a colonoscopy is 0.5%, or about 95,000 per year.³³

An alternate method of testing for colorectal cancer, virtual colonoscopy, appears to have minimal risk. However, the X-ray exposure from a virtual colonoscopy raises your lifetime risk of all forms of cancer by 20%.³⁴ As noted by GutSense.org:³⁵

"Virtual colonoscopies are now recommended every five years. By age 70 one's risk of developing any other form of cancer grows to 100 percent. Killing you with another form of cancer before the colon gets affected is one hell of [a] way to 'prevent' colon cancer."

Aside from the chance of death, other risks of colonoscopy include:³⁶

• Perforation of the colon, which occurs at a rate of 0.9 out of every 1,000 procedures.³⁷ Research³⁸ shows the risk of death after a perforation was 51.9 per 1,000 colonoscopy perforations and 64.5 per 1000 sigmoidoscopy perforations.
• Dysbiosis and other gut imbalances, caused by the process of flushing out your intestinal tract before the procedure with harsh laxatives.³⁹
• Complications from the anesthesia.⁴⁰ In addition to the expected complications from anesthesia, during a colonoscopy anesthesia increased the risk of complications by 13% within 30 days after the procedure and specifically was associated with an increased risk of perforation.
• Infections caused by poorly disinfected scopes.⁴¹

Tips to Prevent Colorectal Cancer

Data show there are non-modifiable and modifiable risk factors for colorectal cancer.⁴² Some of the non-modifiable risk factors include race, sex, age, inflammatory bowel disease and abdominal radiation. Modifiable risk factors are those over which you have control and may reduce your risk of colorectal cancer.

These include obesity, physical activity, diet, smoking, alcohol and certain medications. People with diabetes and insulin resistance also have an increased risk related to the metabolic shift that promotes carcinogenic activity.⁴³

Below are several diet and fitness suggestions that may significantly lower your risk of colorectal cancer, regardless of your age:

Eat more vegetables — Vegetables contain an array of antioxidants and other disease-fighting compounds that are very difficult to get anywhere else, such as magnesium. Results from one meta-analysis indicated that higher intakes of magnesium resulted in a lower risk of colorectal cancer.44

Eat more fiber — For optimal health, I recommend getting about 50 grams of fiber per 1,000 calories. If you follow the tip above and eat more vegetables, you'll naturally be eating more fiber from the best possible source.

Optimize your vitamin D level — Vitamin D deficiency is a risk factor for colorectal cancer. Sensible ultraviolet exposure, ideally from the sun, and/or vitamin D3 supplementation can get your vitamin D levels into the optimal range of 45 to 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL). You'll need to monitor your level to be sure you stay within this target range.

Lower your protein intake and avoid processed meats entirely — Most Americans eat far more protein than they need, thereby raising their risk for cancer. A more ideal protein intake is likely around one-half gram of protein per pound of lean body mass. Avoid processed meats of all kinds.

Get regular exercise — There's convincing evidence that regular exercise can significantly reduce your risk of colon cancer.45 For instance, one study46 showed physically active men and women have about a 30% to 40% reduction in the risk of developing colon cancer compared with inactive persons.

Maintain a healthy weight and control belly fat — Several studies have linked obesity to an increased risk for about a dozen different cancers, including colon cancer. Losing excess belly fat is particularly important, as belly fat is linked to an increased risk of colon cancer regardless of your body weight.47

Limit alcohol and quit smoking — Both excessive alcohol intake and smoking are associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer.

Eat more garlic — Research has shown those who consume high amounts of raw garlic have a lower risk of stomach and colorectal cancers.48

Drink soursop tea — Drinking tea made from soursop leaves may help reduce the risk of colon cancer. A PLOS One study49 notes that the leaves contain a compound named "annomuricin E," which has apoptosis-inducing effects against colon cancer cell lines.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3wCb9KC
via IFTTT

In the featured video, which aired June 22, 2021, independent reporter Stew Peters plays an audio recording¹ made by a young woman who suddenly developed Guillain-Barre syndrome after her Moderna injection. Her neurologist believes her condition is the direct result of the COVID shot.

While the neurologist filed an adverse event report with the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the woman decided to report it to Moderna as well. The Moderna rep does not appear the least surprised by the injury, and appears to admit he’s received similar reports before.

Everyone Who Gets the Jab Is Part of the Safety Trial

During that call, the Moderna representative reads her the following disclaimer:

“The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, but it has been authorized for emergency use by the FDA under an emergency use authorization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019, for use in individuals 18 years of age and older.

There is no FDA-approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19. The EUA for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is in effect for the duration of the COVID-19 EUA declaration, justifying emergency use of the product unless that declaration is terminated or the authorization is revoked sooner.”

The rep also points out that all clinical trial phases are still ongoing, and that long-term protective efficacy against COVID-19 is unknown. When the patient asks whether everyone who gets the COVID shot — even if they did not specifically sign up to be a trial participant — is in fact part of the clinical trial, he replies, with a chuckle, “pretty much, yeah.”

So, in a nutshell, while vaccine makers, health authorities, mainstream media, social media platforms like Facebook and public advertisements tell you the vaccine has undergone rigorous testing, has been “approved” and is safe and effective, none of those claims are true.

The shots have received emergency use authorization only, which is completely different from regular FDA approval and licensing. They don’t know how effective the shot is, or how long the effects last, and they don’t know if it’s safe, because the trials have not been completed. In fact, the public vaccination campaign is a big part of those trials, whether people realize it or not.

Children Are Being Coerced into Medical Experimentation

This makes the push to inject children and teens all the more disturbing. Vaccine manufacturers have received EUA for children as young as 12,² and parents are now being told their children “must” participate in what is a medical experiment.

People are being told it’s their social “duty” to participate in a medical experiment. People are told they have to participate in a medical experiment or lose their job or educational prospects. What’s happening here is no different than being told you “must” participate in a new cancer drug trial in order to keep your job or attend school. It’s completely absurd, unethical and illegal.^3,4,5

When people do get the shot, they are not informed that they’re taking part in a medical experiment and they’re not asked to sign a consent form (as this particular requirement is waived under EUA rules). While consent forms are waived under an EUA, providing truthful information about potential side effects is not.

It’s really important to realize that coercing people to participate in medical experimentation violates long-established research ethics rules. If you wanted to perform a medical study and decided to lure participants with free ice cream or a free Playstation, the ethics committee would shut down your project.

The problem here is that the COVID-19 injection trials have no oversight boards. There’s no Data Safety Monitoring Board, no Clinical Event Committee and no Clinical Ethics Committee. This despite the fact that such oversight is standard practice for all human research. If such committees do exist, they’ve not been announced and no standard reports have been published.

Myocarditis Update

Peters also addresses an increasingly common side effect, namely myocarditis, i.e., heart inflammation. Animal research performed by Masonic Medical Research Institute researchers in collaboration with the Boston Children’s Hospital was posted on the preprint server bioRxiv, June 20, 2021.⁶

The study, “Selectively Expressing SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein S1 Subunit in Cardiomyocytes Induces Cardiac Hypertrophy in Mice,”⁷ found that the spike protein itself (without the rest of the virus) “directly impairs endothelial function.” As it turns out, the S1 subunit of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates NF-kB, a protein that controls not only the transcription of DNA but also cellular survival, cytokine production and secondary inflammation.

This disease process does not involve the ACE2 receptor but rather the toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is responsible for the detection of pathogens and the initiation of innate immune responses. In summary, the research showed spike protein subunit “caused heart dysfunction, induced hypertrophic remodeling and elicited cardiac inflammation.”

“Since CoV-2-S does not interact with murine ACE2, our study presents a novel ACE2-independent pathological role of CoV-2-S [SARS-CoV-2], and suggests that the circulating CoV-2-S1 [CoV-2-spike protein subunit 1] is a TLR4-recognizable alarmin that may harm the CMs [cardiomyocytes, i.e., heart cells] by triggering their innate immune responses,” the authors state.⁸

In short, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein subunit directly damages the heart and causes myocarditis by triggering an exaggerated immune response — a cytokine storm — in the heart cells.

Importantly, hypertrophic remodeling means this is a permanent reshaping and damage of the heart, which refutes claims that the hundreds of myocarditis cases reported to VAERS are of little concern and that their hearts will eventually heal. I believe those assumptions will be found to be wrong, and that many of them may be left with permanently damaged hearts.

‘They Knew What They Were Doing’

As noted by Jane Ruby, Ph.D., on the Stew Peters Show, this research should have been done before these injections were put out into the public domain. Instead of conducting rigorous animal trials, vaccine makers are using the public as guinea pigs in one of the biggest experiments in human history, making tens of billions of dollars in profits while enjoying absolute immunity from any damage their experimental jabs cause.

By falsely labeling these gene modification tools as vaccines (because gene therapy does not qualify as a pandemic treatment that can be granted immunity against liability), they’ve been given the green light to conduct human experimentation without remuneration, informed consent or liability under the guise of a public health emergency.

There’s no way these gene therapies in any rational society would have been released to be tested on this many human subjects, including pregnant women and children, were it not for this sinister misrepresentation.

Here’s the most disturbing part, though: It appears these COVID injections may have been designed to cause this kind of cell damage on purpose. Why? Because the researchers also tested the natural spike protein subunit of another coronavirus called NL63.

This virus was chosen because it, like SARS-CoV-2, uses the ACE2 receptor for entry into the human cell. The NL63 spike protein did not, however, trigger this kind of heart damage. “They knew what they were doing when they engineered this mRNA to make this particular spike protein,” Ruby says.

Pfizer Injection Victim Speaks Out

In the video above, Peters interviews Stevie Thrasher, a previously healthy 29-year-old in Washington state who got her first Pfizer shot April 27, 2021. Since then, she’s been hospitalized nine times, and her doctor has confirmed her injuries are a direct result of the Pfizer mRNA injection. Her neurologist has told her not to get a second dose.

One of her first symptoms was severe menstrual bleeding. After that, she started experiencing severe body pains, muscle weakness and muscle failure, fatigue, dizziness and disorientation. Since her shot, she’s been in the hospital nine times, had three neurological evaluations and received referrals to rheumatologists and immunologists.

Remarkably, despite the severity of her symptoms, all tests, including imaging and blood work, appear normal, with the exception of an ANA blood test (a test that detects antinuclear antibodies that can attack your own tissues) indicating she might have an autoimmune condition, although it’s unclear which one.

Her doctors have thus far been unable to explain why her test results are all normal while she’s clearly experiencing symptoms of disease, and all she’s been diagnosed with so far is “adverse reaction to Pfizer COVID vaccine with myalgias.” As you can see in the video above, she has involuntary tremors. She says they come and go depending on circumstances. Triggers include sunlight, heat, elevation, stress and physical activity.

While Thrasher was warned of the possibility of blood clots and anaphylactic reactions, she was not informed there may be neurological and autoimmune side effects. “If I had known this was a possibility, I would have turned around and ran,” she tells Peters.

Unvaccinated Falsely Accused of Being ‘Disease Factories’

Adding insult to injury, mainstream media are now pushing the idea that those who refuse the COVID shot are to blame for the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, even though a number of health experts have warned that it’s the complete opposite — that mass injections, causing a very narrow band of antibodies, are forcing more rapid mutations of the virus.⁹

It’s a general principle in biology, vaccinology and microbiology, that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics or antibodies, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system end up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.

If an individual who does not have a narrow band of antibodies becomes infected, then, if mutation does occur, it’s far less likely to result in a more aggressive virus. So, while mutation can occur in both vaccinated and unvaccinated people, vaccinated individuals are actually far more likely to pressure the virus into a mutation that strengthens it and makes it more dangerous. Alas, according to CNN:¹⁰

“Unvaccinated people do more than merely risk their own health. They're also a risk to everyone if they become infected with coronavirus, infectious disease specialists say. That's because the only source of new coronavirus variants is the body of an infected person.

‘Unvaccinated people are potential variant factories,’ Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told CNN … ‘The more unvaccinated people there are, the more opportunities for the virus to multiply,’ Schaffner said.”

What Schaffner and CNN fail to address is the confirmed fact that the COVID shot does not provide immune protection against a SARS-CoV-2 infection. So those who have gotten the injection can also become hosts to the virus, just like those who have haven’t been scammed into taking the COVID jab.

There’s absolutely no medical justification for singling out unvaccinated people as the sole disease vectors, or the sole vectors for mutation. Breakthrough cases in fully “vaccinated” people prove this point. Unfortunately, vaccinated individuals are not informed about the potential that they might experience antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE) or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE), which may actually render them more susceptible to infection by variants.¹¹

If that turns out to be the case, and there are already indicators suggesting this is happening,^{12,13,14,15,16,17} then vaccinating even more people is not the answer. Unvaccinated individuals cannot be held responsible for what happens to those who volunteered to take part in this mass experiment, or be asked to “save” those people by putting their own health at risk.

Control Groups Destroyed on Purpose

Disturbingly, all the evidence points to vaccine makers and health agencies not wanting to identify problems with these shots. Despite this being the largest medical experiment in human history, vaccine makers are purposely eliminating their control groups so that injuries will be far more difficult to ascertain, since they won’t have anything to compare the vaccine recipients against.

In a JAMA report,¹⁸ Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, quotes the chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., 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.

Such 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 in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding was even considered, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet, and some standard safety studies have been bypassed entirely.

For example, Pfizer has not conducted any reproductive toxicology studies despite finding the mRNA and spike protein accumulates in the ovaries. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fact that these injections are unsafe. Safety evaluations have also been undermined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which chose not to require vaccine makers to implement robust post-injection data collection and follow-up on the general public.

What Is the Mass Injection Campaign Really All About?

It’s obvious the COVID injection manufacturers intentionally removed every safety monitoring control because they wanted to obfuscate the anticipated complications that were certain to occur. They wanted to prevent as many complications as possible from surfacing. Safety is clearly not something they are concerned about.

Think about it: If the vaccination campaign were about creating a high rate of immunity within the population, they would accept natural immunity to COVID as an alternative to the jab. But they don’t. Even if you can prove you have high levels of antibodies from natural infection, you still must get the COVID shot if you want to attend school or keep your job in some areas, and natural immunity does not count if you want a COVID immunity passport.

This means the injections are NOT about creating herd immunity. They want a needle in every arm for some other reason. What do you think that reason might be? Many who have pondered this question have reached the conclusion that whatever the reason might be, it’s a nefarious one.

At a minimum, this campaign is about getting a needle in every arm to maximize their profits. At its extreme worst, it could be part of a cleverly constructed depopulation strategy.

Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer, has gone on record saying he believes the COVID-19 injections, and the upcoming boosters in particular, are a “serious attempt at mass depopulation.”¹⁹

In my view, there are still so many potential avenues of harm and so many uncertainties, I would encourage everyone to do your homework, keep reading and learning, weigh the potential pros and cons, and take your time when deciding whether to get any of these COVID-19 gene therapies. If you have already had one, think long and hard before getting any boosters.

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

 

from Articles https://ift.tt/3wt74IM
via IFTTT