Health & Fitness

In recent days, another big, fat lie has been allowed to circulate unchecked and unverified in headlines across the media landscape. "Ivermectin: Why Are U.S. Anti-Vaxxers Touting a Horse Dewormer as a Cure for COVID?" asks the Independent.¹ Similar headlines — all focusing on "horse dewormer" — have been plastered across many other media outlets.

It appears Oklahoma's KFOR news was the first to run a fake story that made this false narrative explode. September 1, 2021, KFOR reported that emergency rooms were overrun with patients who had overdosed on horse ivermectin. The claim was supposedly made by doctor Dr. Jason McElyea. According to KFOR:²

"Dr. McElyea said patients are packing his eastern and southeastern Oklahoma hospitals after taking ivermectin doses meant for a full-sized horse, because they believed false claims the horse de-wormer could fight COVID-19.'The ERs are so backed up that gunshot victims were having hard times getting to facilities where they can get definitive care and be treated,' he said."

Fake News Alert

Other media outlets ran with the story, including Rolling Stone magazine,³ The Daily Mail,⁴ the Independent,⁵ Newsweek,⁶ The Guardian,⁷ Yahoo News⁸ — which later published a story saying a hospital was "disputing" the claim — and MSNBC's Rachael Madow.⁹

There was just one problem. It was a fake story. A few days after the story made major media rounds, the Sequoyah Northeastern Health System issued a public notice and posted it on its website homepage, dismissing McElyea's claims as pure fiction:

However, rather than retract the article, which would be appropriate for a piece that turns out to be fictional from start to finish, Rolling Stone simply posted an "update" at the top of the article, noting Sequoyah's rebuttal. KFOR has issued no correction at all, as of September 7, 2021. The Guardian issued an update at the bottom of its article, but did not include the hospital's statement that NO patients have been treated for ivermectin overdose.

Hundreds of news articles have also brought attention to alleged rises in ivermectin-related calls to poison control centers around the U.S. These too, it turns out, are based on the flimsiest of data. For example, in Kentucky, poison control reports having received six calls relating to ivermectin paste overdose, compared to an average of one per year.

The department of health in Mississippi similarly noted that while calls to poison control involving ivermectin paste have seen a slight increase, all cases have been mild and none have required hospitalization due to toxicity.¹⁰ Clearly, people are not dying from horse ivermectin overdoses, and they're certainly not dying from appropriately-dosed and prescribed oral ivermectin.

False Narrative Alert

This idea that ivermectin is a horse dewormer that poses a lethal risk to humans is pure horse manure, shoveled at us in an effort to dissuade people from using a safe and effective drug against COVID-19.

The intent is clear. What our so-called health agencies and the media are trying to do is confuse people into thinking of ivermectin as a "veterinary drug," which simply isn't true. Ultimately, what they're trying to do is back up the Big Pharma narrative that the only thing at your disposal is the COVID shot. As noted in a recent HuffPost article:¹¹

"Health experts ― the kind who practice on humans ― agree that the best way to prevent yourself from catching the virus is to get vaccinated, wear a face mask and stay out of crowds."

In an August 21, 2021, Twitter post,¹² the Food and Drug Administration said, "You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y'all. Stop it," linking to an FDA article on why you should not use ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19.

The MSNBC report in the video above is another perfect example of the deceptive narrative being spun around ivermectin. The host blatantly mixes data points together, talking about ivermectin horse paste in one breath and rising prescriptions for ivermectin in the other, as if doctors are now prescribing veterinary drugs just to appease desperate patients. He then goes on to refer to doctors' success with ivermectin as "anecdotal."

Comedian and podcast host Joe Rogan, who recently developed COVID-19 and treated it with ivermectin and a slew of other remedies, is also being badmouthed for daring to share his success story. NPR, for example, reported:¹³

"Joe Rogan has told his Instagram followers he has been taking ivermectin, a deworming veterinary drug formulated for use in cows and horses, to help fight the coronavirus. The Food and Drug Administration has warned against taking the medication, saying animal doses of the drug can cause nausea, vomiting and in some cases severe hepatitis."

Did Rogan take horse ivermectin paste? No. Did he take animal doses of it? No. As you can see in the video above, Rogan talked with "multiple doctors" who told him to take it and, ultimately, he did take it and he got well, remarkably quickly. Yet NPR blatantly blends veterinary and human use together, as if to insinuate that he did take horse-level doses of it.

It's worth noting that the FDA is not warning against low-dose oral ivermectin as routinely prescribed for human use. They're warning against animal doses, which no licensed medical doctor would prescribe. In short, doctors are not prescribing ivermectin for horses, nor are they prescribing it at horse dosages.

Ivermectin Is an Essential Human Drug

While ivermectin is used as a dewormer in animals, it is also a human drug, approved by the FDA since the mid-1990s for the treatment of river blindness.¹⁴ It's also on the World Health Organization's list of essential medicines for several parasitic diseases.¹⁵

Like many other drugs, ivermectin is also used off-label for other diseases and conditions. Systemic lupus and papulopustolar rosacea,¹⁶ for example, are sometimes treated with ivermectin. In 2018, a patent was filed to treat certain autoimmune disorders with ivermectin.¹⁷

When used preventatively for COVID-19, or as treatment for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, ivermectin is being used off-label, but there's nothing unusual or suspect about this at all. Many drugs are used "off label." So, when media warn that "ivermectin is not approved by the FDA for the treatment of COVID-19," that essentially means nothing. It certainly doesn't mean the drug isn't FDA approved at all, or that it's only approved for animals.

The fact is, ivermectin has several different properties. In addition to being antiparasitic, it also has potent antiviral properties and has even been shown to protect against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein damage.

Research shows ivermectin impairs the spike protein's ability to attach to the ACE2 receptor on human cell membranes.¹⁸ The drug can also help prevent blood clots by binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This prevents the spike protein from binding to CD147 on red blood cells and triggering clumping.¹⁹

As for safety, more than 4 billion doses have been given to (human) patients since 1998, and only 28 cases of serious adverse events have been reported in that time.²⁰ Yet the FDA now claims ivermectin should not be used for COVID-19 because the drug may cause "serious harm," is "highly toxic" and may cause "seizures," "coma and even death"²¹ — warnings that are far more applicable to COVID shots.

Ivermectin Suitable for All Treatment Stages

Since early on, the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has been trying to get the truth out about ivermectin. The FLCCC's prophylaxis and early outpatient COVID-19 protocol is known as I-MASK+²² while the hospital treatment is called I-MATH+.²³ All include ivermectin. As noted by the FLCCC in a news release:²⁴

"The data shows the ability of the drug Ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, to keep those with early symptoms from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease, and even to help critically ill patients recover.

… numerous clinical studies — including peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials — showed large magnitude benefits of Ivermectin in prophylaxis, early treatment and also in late-stage disease. Taken together … dozens of clinical trials that have now emerged from around the world are substantial enough to reliably assess clinical efficacy."

FLCCC president and chief medical officer Dr. Pierre Kory has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020²⁵ and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel in January 2021.²⁶

The two protocols — I-MASK+²⁷ and I-MATH+²⁸ — are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages. The clinical and scientific rationale for the I-MATH+ hospital protocol has also been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine²⁹ in mid-December 2020.

Strong Evidence for Ivermectin

April 24 through 25, 2021, Dr. Tess Lawrie, director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd.,³⁰ hosted the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference online.³¹

Twelve medical experts³² from around the world — including Kory — shared their knowledge, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data. All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org.³³

A one-page summary of the clinical trial evidence for ivermectin is available on the FLCCC website,³⁴ while a listing of all ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com.³⁵ So, what does the evidence show? In summary, studies have demonstrated ivermectin:³⁶

Who's Actually Following the Science?

As noted in an August 3, 2021, review paper in New Microbes New Infections, titled "Ivermectin: A Multifaceted Drug of Nobel-Prize Honored Distinction With Indicated Efficacy Against a New Global Scourge, COVID-19":⁴⁰

"In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honored the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world's most devastating tropical diseases.

Since March 2020, when IVM was first used against a new global scourge, COVID-19, more than 20 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have tracked such inpatient and outpatient treatments. Six of seven meta-analyses of IVM treatment RCTs reporting in 2021 found notable reductions in COVID-19 fatalities, with a mean 31% relative risk of mortality vs. controls.

During mass IVM treatments in Peru, excess deaths fell by a mean of 74% over 30 days in its ten states with the most extensive treatments. Reductions in deaths correlated with the extent of IVM distributions in all 25 states with p < 0.002.

Sharp reductions in morbidity using IVM were also observed in two animal models, of SARS-CoV-2 and a related betacoronavirus. The indicated biological mechanism of IVM, competitive binding with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, is likely non-epitope specific, possibly yielding full efficacy against emerging viral mutant strains."

Despite the evidence, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) are now banding together to call on doctors to immediately stop prescribing ivermectin for COVID outside of clinical trials.⁴¹

Hopefully, doctors will evaluate the evidence for themselves and do what makes sense and is best for their patients, rather than cater to Big Pharma. Indeed, as the U.S. wants to eliminate all use of ivermectin, other countries are starting to use more of it. India, for example, has added ivermectin for COVID-19 to its list of essential medicines.

The Tokyo Metropolitan Medical Association also added ivermectin to its home treatment protocol August 13, 2021, and Indonesia's government not only authorized the use of the drug but also created a website showing real-time availability of the drug. Hospitals in Indonesia started using ivermectin July 22, 2021. By the first week of August, cases and deaths were plummeting.⁴²

The 'Delta Variant' Is Vaccine Injuries, Whistleblower Claims

In a recent Stew Peters program, a nurse blows the whistle on several commonly-held beliefs. She points out that her hospital was never, not even during the height of the pandemic 2020, over capacity due to COVID patients. Disturbingly, she notes that most hospital personnel are still unaware that the PCR test is completely unreliable, and care is all based on that test.

Even if you do not have any COVID symptoms, a positive test will land you on the COVID ward, where standard protocol calls for Remdesivir and, if you have low oxygen, being put on a ventilator. She says most patients get worse on Remdesivir, which has been shown to cause heart and kidney problems. She points out that for a short time, the drug was given in combination with ivermectin, and during that time, patient outcomes were much better. Ivermectin was then removed from the protocol.

As for the Delta variant, there are no commercial tests that will identify variants, although genetic sequencing in a research lab would be able to differentiate them. The nurse stresses that she’s never seen “Delta” specified on any patient chart — a claim that raises the question how officials are able to claim that most COVID-19 patients are now infected with the Delta variant.

She’s also reporting seeing a significant number of vaccine injuries, yet she’s not aware of a single instance where the injury was reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System (VAERS). Whenever she’s brought her suspicions to the doctor, she’s been rebuffed and the vaccine link has been dismissed.

The most shocking take-home from this interview is that the supposed surge in Delta cases are in fact mislabeled vaccine injuries, according to this whistleblower.

“The Delta variant is the vaccine injuries,” she tells Peters. “It’s common knowledge around the staff that is aware of what’s going on, [who are] paying attention [and] aren’t in denial.”

from Articles https://ift.tt/3z7bdmM
via IFTTT

Curcumin is the major biologically active polyphenolic compound of turmeric and gives the spice its yellow color. Recent research shows the biological activity of curcumin reduces the severity of COVID-19. The results rank curcumin in the top five substances of 25 tested when used early to reduce illness and death from COVID.¹

Turmeric is a perennial plant in the ginger family and found native to southern India and Indonesia.² Like ginger, it is the underground rhizome that is used in cooking and for medicinal purposes. Traditionally, it was used in Ayurvedic medicine and traditional Chinese medicine.³

The cosmetic and fabric industry has also found uses for turmeric, having been used to dye fabric for more than 2,000 years.⁴ According to Linus Pauling Institute,⁵ evidence continues to mount showing that curcumin can exert antioxidant, anticancer, anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective activities.

Clinical trials are underway to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the compound as an adjuvant or as a treatment for patients with several types of cancer, including pancreatic, lung, prostate and colorectal cancers. The variety of positive health benefits found with curcumin may be a result of its highly pleiotropic capability, or ability of interacting with a variety of molecular targets.⁶

In the current environment, researchers have been studying anti-inflammatory compounds in an effort to reduce the severity of COVID-19. After multiple studies, curcumin outranks zinc, quercetin, melatonin and remdesivir, which ranked 24 out of the 25 substances.⁷

Curcumin in Top Five Substances to Improve COVID Outcomes

The ranking was based on several studies performed in 2020 and 2021. In one study,⁸ researchers engaged 41 patients who met the inclusion criteria of mild to moderate COVID-19. There were 21 in the group who received nanocurcumin and 20 received a placebo.

The researchers monitored symptoms and laboratory data, finding that symptoms in the intervention group resolved significantly faster and patients’ oxygen saturation was higher after just two days of treatment. It remained higher than the control group through 14 days. Researchers also found it noteworthy that none of the patients who received the nanocurcumin deteriorated during the 14-day follow-up period, but 40% of the control group did.

A second study⁹ using nanocurcumin recruited 40 patients with COVID-19 to look at inflammatory cytokine expression. They were divided into 20 patients who received nanocurcumin and 20 who received a placebo. The researchers measured cytokine secretion of interleukin-1 beta (IL-1B), IL-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha and IL-18. They concluded that the data demonstrated nanocurcumin modulates:

“… the increased rate of inflammatory cytokines especially IL-1β and IL-6 mRNA expression and cytokine secretion in COVID-19 patients, which may cause an improvement in clinical manifestation and overall recovery.”

Another study published in Frontiers in Pharmacology¹⁰ in early 2021 measured the differences in mortality between a control group and intervention group, each of which included 70 patients. The control and intervention groups received conventional COVID-19 treatment.

In addition, those in the intervention group received curcumin with piperine twice a day and those in the control group received probiotics twice a day. The researchers found patients who had mild, moderate and severe symptoms in the intervention group showed early symptomatic recovery and less deterioration.

Overall, they had better clinical outcomes and a lower death rate than the control group. Based on their results the researchers also concluded that curcumin may be a therapeutic option to prevent post COVID thromboembolic events.

Curcumin’s Action Is Similar to Proxalutamide

The drug in the No. 1 position for early treatment of COVID-19 is proxalutamide. It is an androgen receptor antagonist that was in clinical trials for the treatment of prostate cancer and breast cancer.¹¹ At the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, the company found the drug could limit the expression of transmembrane protein serine 2 (TMPRSS2) and ACE-2 receptors, both which play a critical role in severity of COVID-19.

Ability of the virus to enter pneumocytes depends on TMPRSS2 that is expressed on the surface of human cells in much the same way as ACE-2.¹² Interestingly, TMPRSS2 is regulated by an androgen receptor, which means that the ability of the virus to infect the cells is directly dependent on androgenic status.

Past research indicated that men who had androgenetic alopecia hair loss had a greater risk of severe disease and men taking antiandrogenic drugs had a reduced risk of severe disease. This led to the hypothesis that proxalutamide would be beneficial, as it is an androgen receptor antagonist.

The hypothesis was supported in a study¹³ that engaged 236 men and women with COVID-19. By Day 7, the virus was not detected using a PCR test with a cycle threshold of greater than 40 in 82% of the subjects taking proxalutamide. The average time it took patients to show clinical remission in the treatment group was 4.2 days versus 21.8 days in the placebo group.

In one study¹⁴ evaluating the ability of three polyphenols to suppress SARS-CoV-2 viral penetration into human cells, researchers found that curcumin treatments decreased the TMPRSS2 activity by up to 50%. This is similar to the mechanism demonstrated by proxalutamide in the recent studies.

Curcumin Alone Has Poor Bioavailability

Turmeric and curcumin have been challenging to study since curcumin has a low bioavailability when taken orally, which researchers attribute to the body's limited ability to absorb the compound, as well as rapid metabolism and elimination.¹⁵ However, researchers have found there are different compounds, that when taken with curcumin, can raise bioavailability and therefore enhance the multiple health benefits attributed to curcumin.

For example, piperine is an alkaloid found in black pepper, which is responsible for the distinct taste. On its own, it has several health benefits, including anti-inflammatory effects and insulin resistance properties.¹⁶ When scientists combine it with curcumin it can raise the bioavailability of curcumin by up to 2,000%¹⁷ by blocking the metabolic pathway,¹⁸ thus increasing the amount available in the body.

One study published in the journal Medicine¹⁹ in 2021 addressed the issues of bioavailability of curcumin as it relates to conflicting dosing strategies and the ability to compare research data. The writers described clinical trials in which purified curcumin was given in relatively large doses, up to 12 grams per day, without achieving measurable plasma levels.²⁰

In addition to combining curcumin with piperine to raise bioavailability, the writers acknowledge manipulating curcumin in other ways can also enhance bioavailability, such as reduced particle size, emulsions, essential oil complexes or the addition of whey protein or surfactants.

The study sought to establish the bio bioavailability of CURCUGEN,²¹ which is a curcuminoids formulation of turmeric and curcuminoids. The patent-pending supplement has an increased dispersion in water, which the researchers cite is a known mechanism of improving bioavailability.²²

At the completion of the study, 17 healthy men between 18 years and 45 years participated in the double-blind, randomized crossover study.²³ People who were using any products or food with turmeric within the 14 days before the study started were excluded. The researchers used several serum measurements to determine bioavailability, including the bioactive metabolite, tetrahydrocurcumin. 

They found individuals taking CURCUGEN had 39 times higher the amount of free curcumin, 31 times higher the amount of tetrahydrocurcumin, 49.5 times the amount of total curcumin and 52.5 times the amount of total curcuminoids over the compared standard curcumin reference product.²⁴

Curcumin May Reduce Pain in Those With Arthritis

A 2019 report from the Arthritis Foundation²⁵ found that there were 54.4 million people in the U.S. between 2013 and 2015 that had been diagnosed by their physician with arthritis. Conservatively, they estimate this number will increase 49% to 78.4 million people by 2040.

This represents 25.9% of all adults. Additionally, the number whose activities are limited due to their arthritis are estimated to jump from 43.5% of all people with the condition in 2015 to 52% by 2040. The condition is painful, and people often turn to anti-inflammatory and pain medications to relieve the discomfort.

The Arthritis Foundation²⁶ lists topical and oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, steroid, hyaluronic acid, platelet rich plasma and stem cell injections as a means of reducing pain and thus potentially improving activity levels.

However, many of these treatments come with a list of side effects and are not always well tolerated. Since the safety and nontoxicity of curcumin, even at high doses, has been documented in human trials²⁷ studies have evaluated whether the anti-inflammatory effects of curcumin could help those with osteoarthritis, which is the most common form of arthritis.²⁸

One study²⁹ engaged 139 people with knee osteoarthritis for a randomized, open-label, active controlled clinical study to receive either curcumin or diclofenac twice daily for 28 days. Baseline measurements were taken before the interventions began and then again at Days 7, 14 and 28.

The main outcome measure was pain. Researchers also had secondary outcome measures that included anti-ulcer effect, anti-flatulent effect, altered weight and a global assessment of therapy. By Days 14 and 28, there was no statistically significant difference between those taking curcumin and those taking diclofenac in pain measurements.

Those taking curcumin had fewer episodes of flatulence and by Day 28, had a statistically significant weight loss and anti-ulcer effect. No patient using curcumin required an H2 blocker, while 28% of those using diclofenac needed an H2 blocker to reduce excess stomach acid. Researchers found that curcumin had a similar effect in reducing pain to diclofenac but was better tolerated and had fewer side effects.

Additional Health Benefits for Curcumin

Natural plants have been used for medicinal purposes throughout history, and turmeric is not an exception. There is evidence it was used in human health as far back as 4,000 years ago and modern medicine has seen over 3,000 papers published on it within the last 25 years.³⁰

In addition to pain relief, curcumin has also demonstrated the ability to make significant changes in cognitive function and mood in older adults who took the supplement for at least four weeks.³¹ Researchers found significant improvement in working memory, general fatigue and state of calmness. Additionally, it significantly reduced total and LDL cholesterol.

A second study³² performed at the University of California Los Angeles and published in the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry examined the effects of curcumin on individuals who had no history of dementia. The study's first author, Dr. Gary Small, said in a press release:³³

“Exactly how curcumin exerts its effects is not certain, but it may be due to its ability to reduce brain inflammation, which has been linked to both Alzheimer’s disease and major depression.”

The study followed 40 people between ages 50 and 90 who had mild memory complaints. Researchers found those who took the curcumin had significant improvements in memory and attention abilities, as well as mild improvement in mood and significantly fewer amyloid and tau signals in the amygdala and hypothalamus, areas of the brain that control some memory and emotional functions.³⁴

One paper published in 2019³⁵ postulated that since chronic inflammation plays such a significant part in obesity, cardiovascular diseases and impaired glucose tolerance, increasing the bioavailability of curcumin may help modulate many of these lifestyle-related diseases.

A meta-analysis of three studies³⁶ that included 326 patients, also found that curcumin has a beneficial effect on irritable bowel syndrome symptoms, and another analysis showed curcumin a being effective and well-tolerated agent for the treatment of some skin diseases.³⁷

Researchers continue to evaluate the effects curcumin has on many conditions driven by chronic inflammation, including rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, cognitive decline, major depressive disorders and premenstrual syndrome.³⁸

Although curcumin is generally recognized as safe (GRAS),³⁹ it has been found to increase the risk of bleeding in people taking medications that affect platelet aggregation, such as Lovenox, heparin or warfarin. People who are on chemotherapy should consult with their physician before including curcumin as it has inhibited chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in the lab.⁴⁰

Additionally, curcumin may interfere with the metabolism of some drugs used in the U.S. and piperine, sometimes included with curcumin to increase bioavailability, may also affect the elimination and bioavailability of certain drugs.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3C3YUK2
via IFTTT

This article was previously published on March 16, 2021, and has been updated with new information.

As calls for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination grow around the world, it's becoming ever more crucial to understand what these injections actually are. The mRNA "vaccines" created by Moderna and Pfizer are in fact gene therapies.

Interestingly enough, mainstream media, fact checkers and various industry front groups insist the gene therapy claim is bogus, even though every single detail about the vaccines shouts otherwise. Why are they spreading this disinformation? Why do they not want you to know what these injections actually are?

mRNA 'Vaccines' Fulfill None of the Criteria for a Vaccine

To start, let's take a look at some basic definitions of words. When these gene therapies were introduced, the definition of vaccine according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was:¹

• "A product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease."

Immunity, in turn, was defined as:

• "Protection from an infectious disease," meaning that "If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected."

That's the CDC's medical definition, which was effective until September 1, 2021 — a detail I'll go into in the next section. The legal definition, in the few cases where it has been detailed, is equally unequivocal:

• Iowa code² — "Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity."
• Washington state code^3,4 — "Vaccine means a preparation of a killed or attenuated living microorganism, or fraction thereof …" The statute also specifies that a vaccine "upon immunization stimulates immunity that protects us against disease ..."

These definitions, both medical and legal, present problems for mRNA "vaccines," since:

• mRNA injections do not impart immunity. Moderna and Pfizer both admit that their clinical trials aren't even looking at immunity. As such they did not fulfill the CDC's medical and/or legal definition of a vaccine.
• They do not inhibit transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection. As such they do not fulfill the medical and/or legal definition of a vaccine — that is, until the CDC changed its definition of vaccine.

Dictionaries and the CDC Attempt to Rewrite Medical Terms

We should not be fooled by attempts to condition the public to accept redefined terms. As of February 2019, Merriam-Webster defined⁵ "vaccine" as "a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease." By February 26, 2021, they had updated the definition of "vaccine" to:⁶

"A preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious disease:

Let's be clear. Merriam-Webster does not dictate medical terminology. It can be used, however, to confuse people. For now, all medical dictionaries still show the traditional definition of vaccine,⁷ as Merriam-Webster did up until this year. That said, I would not be surprised if changes are made there as well, eventually, if the misrepresentation of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is allowed to stand.

On the other hand, months after Merriam-Webster's change, the CDC decided to change its definition of vaccine⁸ in such a way that it better matches what mRNA gene therapies do. Coincidentally, the CDC made that revision just a week after the FDA gave full approval for Pfizer's gene therapy, now called Comirnaty.⁹

Now, as of September 1, 2021, the CDC's definition of a vaccine is a "preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases."

The differences in the definitions are subtle but distinct: The first one defined a vaccine as something that will "produce immunity." But, since the COVID-19 vaccines are not designed to stop infection but, rather, to only lessen the degree of infection, it becomes obvious that the new definition was created specifically to cover the COVID gene therapies.

mRNA Therapy Doesn't Satisfy Public Health Measure Directive

There's also the issue of whether a gene therapy can be mandated, and this may hinge on it being accepted as a vaccine. The 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson v. Massachusetts¹⁰ essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit.

Put another way, the ruling argues (although legal experts diverge on some of the finer details of its interpretation) that it's acceptable for some individuals to be harmed by a public health directive as long as it benefits the collective. However, if vaccination is a public health measure meant to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to accomplish two things:

1. Ensure that the vaccinated person is rendered immune from the disease.
2. Inhibit transmission of the disease from the vaccinated person to other individuals.

We're now back to the original problem that mRNA therapies for COVID-19 do not accomplish either of these things. Since these gene therapies do not render the person immune, and do not inhibit transmission of the virus, they cannot qualify as a public health measure capable of providing collective benefit that supersedes individual risk.

On the contrary, the only one benefiting from an mRNA "vaccine" is the individual receiving the gene therapy, since all they are designed to do is lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein.

In other words, they won't keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they are only supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected. So, getting vaccinated protects no one but yourself. Since you're the only one who will reap a benefit (less severe COVID-19 symptoms upon infection), the justification to accept the risks of the therapy "for the greater good" of your community is blatantly irrational.

Marketing mRNA Therapy as Vaccine Violates Federal Law

Since mRNA "vaccines" do not meet the medical and/or legal definition of a vaccine that imparts immunity, referring to them as vaccines, and marketing them as such, is a deceptive practice that violates¹¹ 15 U.S. Code Section 41 of the Federal Trade Commission Act,¹² the law that governs advertising of medical practices.

The lack of completed human trials also puts these mRNA products at odds with 15 U.S. Code Section 41. Per this law,^13,14 it is unlawful to advertise "that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made."

Here's the problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 "vaccine" trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those was measured.

What's more, key secondary end points in Moderna's trial include prevention of severe COVID-19 disease (defined as need for hospitalization) and prevention of infection by SARS-CoV-2, regardless of symptoms.^15,16 However, Moderna did not actually measure rate of infection, stating that it was too "impractical" to do so.

That means there's no evidence of this gene therapy having an impact on infection, for better or worse. And, if you have no evidence, you cannot fulfill the U.S. Code requirement that states you must have "competent and reliable scientific evidence … substantiating that the claims are true."

Making matters worse, both Pfizer and Moderna are now eliminating their control groups by offering the real vaccine to any and all placebo recipients who want it.¹⁷ The studies are supposed to go on for a full two years, but by eliminating the control group, determining effectiveness and risks is going to be near impossible.

What Makes COVID Vaccines Gene Therapy?

Alright. Let's move on to the definition of "gene therapy." As detailed on MedlinePlus.gov's "What Is Gene Therapy" page:¹⁸

"Gene therapy is an experimental technique that uses genes to treat or prevent disease … Researchers are testing several approaches to gene therapy, including: … Introducing a new gene into the body to help fight a disease …

Although gene therapy is a promising treatment option for a number of diseases (including inherited disorders, some types of cancer, and certain viral infections), the technique remains risky and is still under study to make sure that it will be safe and effective. Gene therapy is currently being tested only for diseases that have no other cures."

Here, it's worth noting that there are many different treatments that have been shown to be very effective against COVID-19, so it certainly does not qualify as a disease that has no cure. For example, research shows the antiparasitic ivermectin impairs the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein's ability to attach to the ACE2 receptor on human cell membranes.¹⁹

It also can help prevent blood clots by binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This prevents the spike protein from binding to CD147 on red blood cells and triggering clumping.²⁰

It makes sense, then, that gene therapy should be restricted to incurable diseases, as this is the only time that taking drastic risks might be warranted. That said, here's how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration defines gene therapy:²¹

"Human gene therapy seeks to modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or to alter the biological properties of living cells for therapeutic use. Gene therapy is a technique that modifies a person's genes to treat or cure disease. Gene therapies can work by several mechanisms:

November 17, 2020, the American Society of Gene + Cell Therapy (ASGCT) announced "COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates Show Gene Therapy Is a Viable Strategy," noting that:²²

"Two COVID-19 vaccine trials, both of which use messenger RNA (or mRNA) technology to teach the body to fight the virus, have reported efficacy over 90 percent.

These findings, announced by Moderna on Nov. 16 and by Pfizer and its partner BioNTech on Nov. 9 … demonstrate that gene therapy is a viable strategy for developing vaccines to combat COVID-19.

Both vaccine candidates use mRNA to program a person's cells to produce many copies of a fragment of the virus. The fragment then stimulates the immune system to attack if the real virus tries to invade the body."

mRNA Deliver New Genetic Instructions

As explained in the ASGCT's video above, mRNA are molecules that contain genetic instructions for making various proteins. mRNA "vaccines" deliver a synthetic version of mRNA into your cells that carry the instruction to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, the antigen, that then activates your immune system to produce antibodies. Then there's Moderna's trial website,²³ where they describe their technology thus:

"Typical vaccines for viruses are made from a weakened or inactive virus, but mRNA-1273 is not made from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is made from messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA), a genetic code that tells cells how to make protein, which help the body's immune system make antibodies to fight the virus."

November 18, 2020, Wired magazine made a big deal about COVID-19 vaccines being "genetic vaccines," noting:²⁴

"The active ingredient inside their shot is mRNA — mobile strings of genetic code that contain the blueprints for proteins. Cells use mRNA to get those specs out of hard DNA storage and into their protein-making factories. The mRNA inside Pfizer and BioNTech's vaccine directs any cells it reaches to run a coronavirus spike-building program."

Importantly, as reported by David Martin, Ph.D.,^25,26 "Moderna … describes its product not as a vaccine, but as 'gene therapy technology' in SEC filings. This is because neither Moderna nor Pfizer … make any claims about their products creating immunity or preventing transmission." Additionally, Moderna's SEC filings specifically state that "Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA," as well.²⁷

mRNA Is 'Proven Form of Gene Therapy'

In a February 2021 article, MIT Technology Review reviewed the history of mRNA technology in general, and Moderna's in particular, stating:²⁸

"Vaccines were not their focus. At the company's founding in 2010, its leaders imagined they might be able to use RNA to replace the injected proteins that make up most of the biotech pharmacopoeia, essentially producing drugs inside the patient's own cells from an RNA blueprint. 'We were asking, could we turn a human into a bioreactor?' says Noubar Afeyan, the company's cofounder …"

Bloomberg, in August 2020, reported²⁹ that the Moderna vaccine would seek to transform your body into "a vaccine-making machine." The New York Times was more to the point. In May 2020, they reported³⁰ that "Researchers at two Harvard-affiliated hospitals are adapting a proven form of gene therapy to develop a coronavirus vaccine." Read it again — A proven form of gene therapy.

So, to summarize: The definition of "genetic" is something relating to genes, and the definition of "therapy" is the medical treatment of a disease. The definition of "gene therapy" is the process of modifying or manipulating the expression of a gene, or altering the biological properties of living cells.

mRNA are snippets of genetic code that instruct cells to produce proteins. mRNA COVID-19 therapies "deliver genetic instructions into your cells," thereby triggering your body to produce a fragment of the virus (the spike protein). So, mRNA vaccines ARE gene therapy. There's simply no way around this. They fulfill all the definitions of gene therapy and none of the definitions for a vaccine.

Defining 'COVID-19'

There's yet one more potential problem with the "COVID-19 vaccine" narrative as a whole, which Martin unpacked in a January 25, 2021, interview on the Wise Traditions podcast (above).³¹ In it, he explains:

"COVID-19 is not a disease. It is a series of clinical symptoms. It is a giant umbrella of things associated with what used to be associated with influenza and with other febrile diseases.

The problem that we have is that in February [2020], the World Health Organization was clear in stating that there should not be a conflation between [SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19]. One is a virus, in their definition, and one is a set of clinical symptoms. The illusion in February was that SARS-CoV-2 caused COVID-19.

The problem with that definition, and with the expectation, is that the majority of people who test positive using the RT-PCR method for testing, for fragments of what is associated with SARS-CoV-2, are not ill at all. The illusion that the virus causes a disease fell apart. That's the reason why they invented the term asymptomatic carrier."

In short, SARS-CoV-2 has yet to be definitively proven to be the actual cause of COVID-19. So, a gene therapy that instructs your body to produce a SARS-CoV-2 antigen — the viral spike protein — cannot even be touted as a preventative against COVID-19, as the two have not been shown to be causally linked.

"They have been willfully lying since the inception of this," Martin says in the interview. "There is not a causal link between these things … It has never even been close to established.

We have a situation where the illusion of the problem is that people say, 'I don't want to get COVID-19.' What they mean is they don't want to get infected with a virus. The problem is those two things are not related to each other. A viral infection hasn't been documented in the majority of what is called cases.

There is no basis for that conflation other than the manipulation of the public. That's the first half of the problem. The second half of the problem is that what is being touted as a vaccination … is not a vaccine. This is gene therapy …

What is this doing? It's sending a strand of synthetic RNA into the human being and is invoking within the human being, the creation of the S1 spike protein, which is a pathogen … A vaccine is supposed to trigger immunity. It's not supposed to trigger you to make a toxin …

It's not somewhat different. It's not the same at all … It's not a prohibiting infection. It's not a prohibiting transmission device. It's a means by which your body is conscripted to make the toxin that then, allegedly, your body somehow gets used to dealing with, but unlike a vaccine — which is to trigger the immune response — this is to trigger the creation of the toxin."

Why the Misrepresentation?

As for why drug companies are misrepresenting this technology, Martin suspects "it's done exclusively so that they can get themselves under the umbrella of public health laws that exploit vaccination."

Experimental gene therapies do not have financial liability shielding from the government, but pandemic vaccines do, even in the experimental stage, as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect. This is indeed a major incentive to make sure this technology is perceived as a vaccine and nothing else, particularly after the FDA grants final approval.

So, by maintaining the illusion that COVID-19 is a state of emergency, when in reality it is not, government leaders are providing cover for these gene therapy companies so that they are insulated from any liability until that final approval is made.

Experimental Gene Therapy Is a Bad Idea

I've written many articles detailing the potential and expected side effects of these gene therapy "vaccines."

The take-home message here is that these injections are not vaccines. They do not prevent infection, they do not render you immune and they do not prevent transmission of the disease. Instead, they alter your genetic coding, turning you into a viral protein factory that has no off-switch. What's happening here is a medical fraud of unprecedented magnitude, and it really needs to be stopped before it's too late for a majority of people.

If you already 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. And, last but not least, if you got the vaccine and are having side effects, please help raise public awareness by reporting it. The Children's Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do these three things:³²

1. If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS
2. Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like)
3. Report the injury on the CHD website

from Articles https://ift.tt/3loYl74
via IFTTT

By Dr. Mercola

In its latest move against small farmers who dare to operate outside the umbrella of CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations) and Monsanto-dominated crops, the U.S. government has seized $70,000 from a small dairy farmer in Maryland. The feds did this under the "Bank Secrecy Act," which requires that paperwork be filled out for any cash deposit in excess of $10,000.

The farmers, Randy Sowers and his wife Karen, made deposits totaling more than $295,000 from May 2011 to February 2012, but each transaction was less than $10,000.

Now they are being accused of "structuring," a violation of federal currency reporting requirements, as the feds are accusing them of deliberately depositing money in increments of less than $10,000 in an attempt to evade Currency Transaction Reporting requirements.

Government Seizes $70,000 On What Grounds?

The dairy farmer's "crime" stems from his weekly sales at local farmers' markets. The sales averaged about the same amount each week and, dutifully, the Sowers deposited them. They'd reportedly never even heard of the Bank Secrecy Act or "structuring," but that was of no interest to the feds—the consistency of the amount the Sowers deposited, always less than $10,000, raised red flags to the feds, who claimed that this was indicative of a crime.

The government promptly seized about $70,000 from the bank account, then issued a warrant for the seizures. As reported by Food Freedom News:¹

"The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers' money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy. Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting. When a similar action was taken against Taylor's Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges, and kept $45,000 of Taylor's money.

Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family's income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.… Former Maryland assistant U.S. attorney Steven Levin told the paper [City Paper], "The emphasis is on basically seizing money, whether it is legally or illegally earned. It can lead to financial ruin for business owners, and there's a potential for abuse here by the government.""

The raid on the Sowers was conducted by an agency created in 2009 to go after money-laundering criminals. The agency started out with a bang by seizing $1.2 billion from a real money launderer, but it appears that what it's interested in now is making criminals out of small business persons, including small farmers.

Why Are Family Farms Under Attack?

If they're not seizing bank accounts, it seems the government will find other ways to attack small farmers. A family farm in rural Michigan—and possibly others—may be shut down by a new state law that designates certain breeds of hogs as a threat to neighboring hog breeders and croplands.

Basically, the fight is over the definition of feral hogs vs. domestic hogs. The dictionary definition of "feral" refers to an animal running wild. But Michigan authorities have taken it a step further and extended the definition to include enclosed private hunting preserves and small farms that house what authorities call an "invasive species" of hogs.

There is no genetic test to determine whether the species on these farms are truly invasive, so authorities are basing their cases against these farmers solely on visual observations. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) uses this vague description to describe the prohibited hogs, and makes it clear that this does not apply to the domestic hogs raised on CAFOs:²

"Wild boar, wild hog, wild swine, feral pig, feral hog, feral swine, Old world swine, razorback, eurasian wild boar, Russian wild boar (Sus scrofa Linnaeus). This subsection does not and is not intended to affect sus domestica involved in domestic hog production."

Other descriptions supplied by the MDNR include such a wide variety of characteristics that virtually any pig other than the familiar pink domestic breed raised on CAFOs could potentially be deemed "feral":

• Erect or folded/floppy ear structure
• Straight or curly tail
• Solid black, wild/grizzled, solid red/brown, black and white spotted, or black and red/brown spotted coat colorations
• "Other characteristics" not currently known to the MDNR

Interestingly, the Big Pork industry has been planning this anti-feral pig campaign for years, and even bragged about it in a 2010 newsletter.³ It was the same newsletter where they declared a win against the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) in Ohio, where HSUS was seeking legislation to end the practice of sow gestation stalls (cages so small the sow can't turn around or move).

What this means for residents of Michigan is that soon they will be unable to purchase sustainably and humanely grown meat from the Mangalitsa "wooly" hogs raised on Baker's Green Acres farm. This particular breed is being raised by only a handful of small farms across the country; whereas more than 2 million pigs are slaughtered each week in the United States, only about 50 of them are Mangalitsas (which have been called the "it" pig by the New York Times, as several high-end restaurants and specialty markets have featured the rich, naturally raised meat⁴).

But, of course, this issue is about much more than pasture-raised pork from a heritage breed ... it's about your ability, your right, to purchase and consume pure, unadulterated food – a right that continues to be threated for those living in the United States.

FDA Also Threatens Your Right to Food Choice …

Another glaring example of government going out of its way to prohibit your access to pure, unprocessed food is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) war against raw milk. When the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF) filed a lawsuit against the FDA over their raw milk ban, stating that banning raw milk in interstate commerce is unconstitutional, the FDA rebutted with the following extremely concerning and outrageous statements:

• "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food."
• "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."
• "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."
• FDA's brief goes on to state that "even if such a right did exist, it would not render FDA's regulations unconstitutional because prohibiting the interstate sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk promotes bodily and physical health."
• "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract."

Since when did the FDA have authority to tell you what you can and cannot eat and feed your children? Apparently they believe they've had it all along. If you go by these assertions, it means the FDA has the authority to prohibit any food of their choosing and make it a crime for you to seek it out. If, one day, the FDA deems tomatoes, broccoli or cashews capable of causing you harm (which is just as ludicrous as their assertions that raw milk is harmful), they could therefore enact such a ban and legally enforce it.

What this means is that freedom of food choice is a myth if you live in the United States, and this simply is not acceptable. No one, and certainly not any government agency, should be able to restrict your access to pure, unadulterated food, but the dairy industry and other industrial farmers that depend on CAFOs employ powerful lobbyists will stop at nothing to persuade government to remove the small farmers from the market entirely. The truth is, if enough people start demanding naturally, sustainably and humanely raised meat, dairy and produce, the giant farming monopolies that currently dominate the market would not be able to compete.

Their businesses depend on pesticides, CAFOs, genetically modified seeds, growth hormones and the like … so when they see all-natural creameries like the one operated by Randy Sowers and his wife Karen, or natural farms like Bakers Green Acres gaining loyal and growing customer bases, they get nervous – and they get the government involved in any way they can.

Please Support Your Local Small Farms

The healthiest food choices are nearly always those that come from responsible, high-quality, sustainable sources.

This is why I encourage you to support the small family farms in your area. This includes not only visiting the farm directly, if you have one nearby, but also taking part in farmer's markets and community-supported agriculture programs. Now that summer is almost here in the United States, fresh produce and other wonderful whole foods are available in abundance. Not only is the food so much tastier and healthier when you get it from sustainable, non-CAFO sources, but there is something about shopping for fresh foods in an open-air, social environment that just feels right. An artificially lit, dreary supermarket -- home to virtually every CAFO food made -- just can't compete.

If you want to experience some of these benefits first-hand, here are some great resources to obtain wholesome food that supports not only you but also the environment:

1. Alternative Farming Systems Information Center, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
2. Farmers' Markets -- A national listing of farmers' markets
3. Local Harvest -- This Web site will help you find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.
4. Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals -- The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.
5. Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) -- CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
6. FoodRoutes -- The FoodRoutes "Find Good Food" map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSA's, and markets near you.

Finally, for more information on the ongoing attacks against small family farms in the United States consider watching Farmageddon: The Unseen War on American Family Farms, a documentary by Kristin Canty. But I warn you … the injustices it contains may just make your blood boil.

from Articles : GMO, Finances https://ift.tt/3995XoI
via IFTTT

We've long marvelled at the simplicity of a dog's life - and now we've manifested one. The doggy-life-swap dawned on Dr Brown when he realised the highlight of his day in lockdown was going for a walk and greeting the postman.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3nFJ0Sn

A positive outlook is just around the corner, Kerr says these simple pointers can lead you there.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/3k3aEWT

An international research team with participation of the Paul Scherrer Institute PSI has revealed a secret about a marine animal's shell: The researchers have deciphered why the protective cover of the brachiopod Discinisca tenuis becomes extremely soft in water and gets hard again in the air. The study appears today in the journal Nature Communications.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/3hm4DTp