Health & Fitness

This article was previously published January 11, 2021, and has been updated with new information.

A compelling report¹ in the journal Gastroenterology offers a radically novel yet logically sound explanation as to why some COVID-19 patients develop life-threatening organ failure. According to the authors, data indicate that COVID-19 mortality rates are heavily influenced by the amount of unsaturated fats you eat.

Simply put, unsaturated fat intake is associated with increased mortality from the infection. On the bright side, they believe early treatment with inexpensive calcium and egg albumin will reduce rates of organ failure and ICU admissions.

While no clinical studies have been done yet on this type of therapy, the authors believe it's time to do one, as it appears early albumin and calcium supplementation can bind unsaturated fats and reduce injury to vital organs. They also point out that saturated fats are protective.

The Most Dangerous Fat of All

I'm currently writing a book on what I believe might be the primary disease-maker in the Western diet, namely omega-6 linoleic acid (LA). And, since diet-related comorbidities are responsible for 94% of all COVID-19-related deaths,² taking control of your diet is a simple, common-sense strategy to lower the risks associated with this infection.

LA makes up the bulk — about 90% — of the omega-6 consumed and is the primary contributor to nearly all chronic diseases. While an essential fat, when consumed in excessive amounts, LA acts as a metabolic poison.

The reason for this is because polyunsaturated fats such as LA are highly susceptible to oxidation. As the fat oxidizes, it breaks down into harmful sub-components such as advanced lipid oxidation end products (ALES) and OXLAMS (oxidized LA metabolites). These ALES and OXLAMS are actually what cause the damage.

One type of advanced lipid oxidation end product (ALE) is 4HNE, a mutagen known to cause DNA damage. Studies have shown there's a definite correlation between elevated levels of 4HNE and heart failure.

LA breaks down into 4HNE even faster when the oil is heated, which is why cardiologists recommend avoiding fried foods. LA intake and the subsequent ALES and OXLAMS produced also play a significant role in cancer. HNE and other ALES are extraordinarily harmful even in exceedingly small quantities.

While excess sugar is certainly bad for your health and should typically be limited to 25 grams per day or less, it doesn't cause a fraction of the oxidative damage that LA does.

Processed vegetable oils are a primary source of LA, but even food sources hailed for their health benefits contain it, and can be a problem if consumed in excess. Cases in point: olive oil and conventionally raised chicken, which are fed LA-rich grains.

Many now understand that your omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is very important, and should be about 1-to-1 or possibly up to 4-to-1, but simply increasing your omega-3 intake won't counteract the damage done by excessive LA. You really need to minimize the omega-6 to prevent damage from taking place.

LA Damages Your Mitochondria

In order to understand how excess LA consumption damages your metabolism and impedes your body's ability to generate energy in your mitochondria we need to explore some molecular biology. There's a particular fat only located in your mitochondria — most of it is found in the inner mitochondrial membrane — called cardiolipin.

Cardiolipin is made up of four fatty acids, unlike triglycerides that have three, but the individual fats can vary. Examples include LA, palmitic acid and the fatty acids found in fish oil, DHA and EPA. Each of these have a different effect on mitochondrial function, and depending on the organ, the mitochondria work better with particular kinds of fatty acids.

For example, your heart preferentially builds cardiolipin with LA, while your brain dislikes LA and preferentially builds cardiolipin in the mitochondria with fats like DHA. As mentioned, LA is highly susceptible to oxidation.

The LA within the mitochondria cardiolipin is exposed to cytochromes in the electron transport chain that contain iron, which in turn can catalyze oxidation of the cardiolipin. This is bad news because oxidation of cardiolipin is one of the things that controls autophagy.

In other words, oxidation of cardiolipin is one of the signals your body uses when there's something wrong with a cell, so it triggers the destruction of that cell, a process called apoptosis. Your cells know that they're broken when they have too many damaged mitochondria, and the process that controls this is largely the oxidation of omega-6 fats contained within cardiolipin.

So, by altering the composition of cell membranes and stored fatty acids in cells to one that's richer in omega-6 fats, you make your cardiolipin far more susceptible to oxidative damage. The good news is that by making a few well-chosen tweaks to your diet, you change the composition of fatty acids in both your cell membranes and your cardiolipin to a favorable composition.

Fat Intake Linked to COVID-19 Outcomes

Getting back to the issue of how your fat intake can affect your COVID-19 outcome, the Gastroenterology paper³ points out that unsaturated fats "cause injury [and] organ failure resembling COVID-19." More specifically, unsaturated fats are known to trigger lipotoxic acute pancreatitis, and the sepsis and multisystem organ failure seen in severe cases of COVID-19 greatly resembles this condition.

The solution they propose, namely early supplementation with egg albumin and calcium, is thought to be helpful because they are known to bind unsaturated fats, thereby reducing injury to organs. The two conditions also share other risk factors. As explained in the paper:⁴

"Unsaturated fatty acids (UFAs) generated by adipose lipolysis cause multisystem organ failure, including acute lung injury. Severe acute pancreatitis and severe COVID-19 share obesity as a risk factor, along with lipase elevation, hypoalbuminemia, and hypocalcemia."

The authors further explain that the ACE2 receptor that the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses to gain entry into your cells resides on fat cells, and oleic acid — a monounsaturated omega-9 fat found in olive oil — has been shown to cause multisystem organ failure, including acute lung injury.

PUFAs in general also depolarize mitochondria and increase inflammatory mediators. All of this is what caused the researchers to explore the potential connection between lipotoxicity (toxicity caused by harmful fats such as LA) and severe COVID-19 resulting in organ failure.

The paper contains an interesting diagram that summarizes the investigative approach they took to reach the conclusion that unsaturated fat intake correlates to COVID-19 outcomes, which I unfortunately cannot include here. In summary, though, it shows that higher intakes of polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs), primarily LA, resulted in a greater risk of severe COVID-19, while higher intake of saturated fat lowered the risk.

PUFAs Raise COVID-19 Mortality While Saturated Fat Lowers It

The researchers discovered that hypocalcemia (lower-than-average levels of calcium in your blood or plasma) and hypoalbuminemia (low albumin in your blood) are observable early on in patients with severe COVID-19.

When looking at data from COVID-19 patients, the also found that low arterial partial pressure of oxygen and percentage of oxygen ratios were associated with higher levels of unbound fatty acid levels in their blood. They also speculate that UFAs may cause vascular leakage, inflammatory injury and arrhythmia during severe COVID-19.

In tests on mice, animals given LA developed a range of conditions resembling lethal COVID-19, including hypoalbuminemia, leucopenia (low white blood cell count), lymphopenia (low lymphocyte count), lymphocytic injury, thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), hypercytokinemia (cytokine storm), shock and kidney failure.

How to Calculate Your LA Intake With Cronometer

Considering the damage LA imparts, it's not surprising that it could play a significant role in the outcome of COVID-19. As mentioned, virtually all of the comorbidities associated with COVID-19 are diet related, share many of the same risk factors, and can be triggered or worsened by high LA intake.

Fortunately, you won't have to spend hundreds of dollars to have your food analyzed for LA. All you need to do is accurately enter your food intake into Cronometer — a free online nutrition tracker — and it will provide you with your total LA intake. The key to accurate entry is to carefully weigh your food with a digital kitchen scale so you can enter the weight of your food to the nearest gram.

Cronometer.com is free to use when you use the desktop version. If you feel the need to use your cellphone (which is not recommended) to enter your data, then you will need to purchase a subscription. Personally, I have used the desktop version exclusively for the last five years as it has greater functionality and allows me to avoid electromagnetic fields from my phone.

Ideally, it is best to enter your food for the day before you actually eat it. The reason for this is quite simple: It's impossible to delete the food once you have already eaten it, but you can easily delete it from your menu if you find something pushes you over the ideal limit.

Once you've entered the food for the day, go to the "Lipid" section on the lower left side of the app. The image below is taken from one of my recent data entries and shows you what the section looks like. To find out how much LA is in your diet for that day, you merely need to see how many grams of omega-6 is present. About 90% of the omega-6 you eat is LA.

To find out the percentage of calories the omega-6/LA represents in your diet, go to the "Calories Summary" section shown in the image below. In my case, I consumed 3,887 calories. Since there are nine calories per gram of fat, you will need to multiply the number of omega-6 grams times nine to obtain the total amount of omega-6 calories. In my case, that is 69.3 calories.

Next, divide the LA calories by your total calories. In this example, that would be 69.3/3887 = .0178. If you multiply that number by 100, or move the decimal point two spaces to the left, you will have the percentage as a whole number. In my example, it is 1.8% of LA. This falls within the ideal LA percentage range, which is between 1% and 2% of your total calorie intake.

Cronometer is in the process of automatically displaying the "Percent of Omega-6" in your diet, but that will not be deployed until early 2021, so use the formula above to calculate it for yourself until then.

Helpful Feature You Might Not Be Aware Of

Most people aren't aware of an incredibly helpful feature in Cronometer that allows you to easily identify where all your LA is coming from. If you mouse over the percent field next to the omega-6 value, you will see a popup displayed that will rank order the foods based on the quantity of LA they contain.

In my case, below, you can see that the four eggs I ate are my largest source of LA. Eggs are a very healthy food but, unfortunately, nearly all chickens, including pasture raised, are fed grains that are loaded with LA. Even if the grains are organic, they still contain LA.

I raise my own chickens and am in the middle of an experiment to change this by feeding my chickens a very low-LA, no-grain diet. I will have the eggs analyzed in a research lab and hope to get the LA levels 90% lower, which should hopefully get my LA intake below 5 grams.

It is interesting to note from my analysis that my primary protein, bison, only contributes 0.5 grams of LA even though I had 8 ounces that day. For the most part, fruit is also LA-free, which makes it a better source of healthy carbs than grains.

I also use rice on my high-carb diet days, in this case about 100 grams of carbs for the day, and the rice has no LA in it. Both rice and millet are two of the best grains to use as they have no gluten. The rice has the additional advantage, though, of being LA-free. It is best to use white rice, as the fiber in brown rice provides little nutritional benefit and may actually cause some problems.

Carbohydrates — Choose Wisely

I must admit that I have a prejudice in this area as my first book in 2004 (which was a New York Times best seller) was "The No Grain Diet." The concern about avoiding grains was largely based on consuming excessive carbohydrates that could lead to insulin resistance. At the time, I wasn't aware that increased LA consumption was likely a far more significant issue than excessive carbs, or that most grains are typically loaded with LA.

However, when you have increased carbs in the form of sugar and processed wheat, and then add seed oils, you have the Devil's Triad, which collectively contribute to most metabolic diseases.

So even though I wrote the book 17 years ago, I still believe most grains should be avoided, or at the least minimized, because they are typically high in carbs and LA. Many are also loaded with other problems like gluten, oxalates and phytates.

In my book, "Fat for Fuel," I advocated the cyclical use of balanced and healthy carbs in the form of fruits and healthier grains. For most of us, fruit is a far healthier option than grains as there is virtually no LA in fruit, with exceptions like avocado, which is technically a fruit.

Metabolic Flexibility Is Key for Optimal Health

About 90% of the population is insulin resistant. Ideally, you will first want to become metabolically flexible and improve your ability to burn fat as your primary fuel. I discuss this strategy extensively in "Fat for Fuel." It typically takes a few weeks to a few months for someone to transition to a metabolically flexible state.

When you are metabolically flexible, you will typically have normal blood pressure, not be overweight, and have a fasting blood glucose below 90, which you can easily measure at home.

While limiting carbs to less than 50 grams per day when you are metabolically inflexible is a powerful strategy, once you regain your ability to burn fat for fuel, most will find that they need to include a healthy source of carbs back into their diet. A simple strategy would be to shoot for around 50 grams on your low-carb days and double or triple that on your high-carb days.

You can start by simply alternating low and high carb days and monitor your fasting blood glucose. If it starts to rise over time, you will know that it is probably better to decrease the frequency of your high-carb days. Again, the best carbs to use would be fruit or white rice, as they are virtually LA-free. After you have been on a low-LA diet for a year or two, you can integrate other carbs that are higher in LA.

Fats — Be Careful of Cooking Oils

Ideally, it would be best to limit the amount of oil you use for cooking. Typically, it is better to cook using no oils and substitute grass-fed butter, instead. This is because seed oils are the single greatest source of omega-6 LA and the higher you heat food, the more toxic byproducts you create.

You might wonder how you can limit your cooking oils. Let me give you an example. If you were cooking ground beef or bison, you could cook in a frying pan or in a covered pot over low heat using the water in the meat to convert to steam and cook the food at a low 212 degrees Fahrenheit.

If you choose to use oil for cooking, then you can use the table⁵ below to help you select the best oils. It is color coded to guide you. The preferred oils are shaded green. Notice that concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) beef tallow or butter has three times as much LA as the grass-fed version.⁶ They still are very low and within an acceptable range, but it is clearly better to choose the higher quality grass fed version when you can.

Lard and palm oil are less preferred options because of their higher LA content. There is a load of confusion around olive oil, though, that needs to be cleared up. And, while avocado oil isn't widely appreciated, it too has the same concerns as olive oil.

Both olive oil and avocado oil LA content varies widely. Typically, it will average around 10%, although some oils could be twice as high. The reason one needs to be ultra-careful using these oils is because the vast majority (over 80%) are adulterated with cheaper and high LA oils like safflower.

So, if you plan on using either of these oils, you need to have independent objective confirmation that the oil has not been tampered with. These brands are typically more expensive as authentic olive and avocado oils have much higher production costs.

Oils that should be completely avoided at all times are the primary culprits of destroying health in the 20th century: the toxic seed oils that are shaded in red. That said, the dose makes the poison. So, you can theoretically use any of the oils in the table below so long as your total intake of LA for that day is less than 2% of your total calories. The higher up on the table the oil is, the more likely you will exceed your safe limit for the day.

What About Seeds and Nuts?

Seeds and nuts can be used in moderation. The table below indicates approximately how much LA is common seeds⁷ and nuts.^8,9,10 You can see that most are nearly half LA. For that reason, it is very easy to reach really high levels of LA if you eat lots of seeds and nuts, with the exception of macadamia nuts.

Also keep in mind that even if the nut has a relatively low quantity of LA, like almonds, it could be loaded with other potential problems like oxalates. Oxalates are razor sharp crystals contained in many nuts and seeds. They are water soluble and only found in the unprocessed seed or nut. If you are consuming an oil version of the seed or nut, it will contain virtually no oxalates.

So, the key here is that seeds and nuts are clearly allowed, but large quantities should be avoided. Be sure to enter them into Cronometer so you can see precisely how much LA they contain and how they are influencing your total daily intake.

Please note that the percent of LA indicated for the foods above is the typical average. It is important to understand that the percent of LA in any specific food can be highly variable based on many factors, but the values listed are what are typically found in the literature.

Ideal Sources of Protein

In general, animal foods are typically much lower in LA than vegetable sources. This is especially true for seeds and most all nuts, except macadamia, as you can see in the table above. Additionally, many vegetable sources have oxalates, phytates and gluten, which have been previously well-documented to have adverse health effects.

There are two important exceptions, though. Ideally, you will want to limit your intake of chicken and pork as these animals are universally fed grains that are loaded with LA. It is common for them to have LA levels from 10% to 20%. They will contain lower amounts of LA if they are not raised in a factory farm (CAFO), but most likely will exceed levels in lamb, beef, bison and other game animals like elk, by 10-fold.

For most of us, the ideal source of protein would be from bison, followed by beef and lamb. An 8-ounce serving of these foods typically has less than 1 gram of LA. In addition to eating muscle meat, it would be wise to regularly include sources of organ meats, as they are loaded with important micronutrients not found in muscle meat.

Eggs are another source of LA concern as the yolks are about 16% LA. This is because nearly all chickens, including those that are pasture raised, are given grain as their primary feed. As long as you aren't allergic to eggs, they are an incredibly healthy nutrient-dense food and one of the finest sources of bioavailable choline available.

I believe it would be wise to limit eggs to four or less per day, as that would provide about 2.5 grams of LA. As mentioned earlier, I am currently in the middle of an experiment.

I'm feeding my 20 chickens a low-LA carnivore-type diet consisting of 1 gallon of 4-day-old sprouted mung beans with 4 ounces of melted butter mixed in, along with a regular supply of beef liver and mealworms. I will be analyzing the eggs for LA in the next few months as it takes some time for LA to be liberated after it's consumed.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3vkL9Vh
via IFTTT

October 4, 2021, Southwest Airlines sent an announcement to its employees informing them that “because Southwest Airlines is a federal contractor,” the airline is “required to comply with the government federal contractor mandate for employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19.”¹

The following weekend, October 9 and 10, 2021, the airline was forced to cancel some 1,800 flights. The reason for the mass cancelations remains unclear, however.

While some claim the cancellations were due to a coordinated “sickout” in protest of the vaccine mandate, Southwest Airlines blamed “disruptive weather” and “air traffic issues” for the cancellations. Curiously, bad weather did not have the same devastating effect on most other airlines. American Airlines, for example, which is much larger, cancelled just 63 flights that weekend.²

The pilots’ union also denied involvement, saying that “our pilots are not participating in any official or unofficial job actions.”³

The timing is interesting though. Friday October 8, 2021, Southwest’s pilot union asked a Dallas, Texas, court to temporarily block the vaccine mandate until its preexisting lawsuit⁴ against the company, filed August 30, 2021, is resolved. According to the pilot union’s legal filing:⁵

“The new vaccine mandate unlawfully imposes new conditions of employment and the new policy threatens termination of any pilot not fully vaccinated by December 8, 2021. Southwest Airlines’ additional new and unilateral modification of the parties’ collective bargaining agreement is in clear violation of the RLA [Railway Labor Act].”

While the mass cancellations of flights surely made life difficult for many people, coordinated walkouts appear to be the only way to make our voices heard. The COVID-19 shot is far from harmless, and any blood clotting issue would be a clear career killer for pilots and flight attendants. Pilots also aren’t allowed to fly when they report being fatigued, and fatigue is a very common side effect of the jab as well.

Interestingly, a few weeks ago, there was a report of a Delta pilot who had recently received his second dose of the COVID jab, who died during the flight. The plane was landed safely by the co-pilot. You can learn more details in the video below.

NBA Players Take a Stand

In related news, an estimated 50 to 60 NBA players have refused to take the COVID jab.⁶ Among them is Kyrie Irving, who is predicted to be sidelined from dozens of games during the 2021-2022 basketball season. As reported by USA Today:⁷

“New York City's vaccine mandate requires professional athletes playing in public arenas to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and Irving's vaccination status remains unclear. Now, for the first time, Nets coach Steve Nash is acknowledging that the team expects Irving to miss home games at Barclays Center due to the mandate.

‘I think we recognize he's not playing home games,’ Nash told reporters Sunday. ‘We're going to have to for sure play without him this year. So it just depends on when, where and how much.’"

In early August 2021, the NBA Union had held its annual summer meeting online. One of the agenda items was whether the league office should mandate that 100% of players had to get the COVID jab. Across the board, those in attendance said such a mandate would be a “non-starter.” As reported by Rolling Stone magazine:⁸

“ … unvaccinated players were pushing back. They made their case to the union summit: There should be testing this year, of course, just not during off-days. They’d mask up on the court and on the road, if they must. But no way would they agree to a mandatory jab. The vaccine deniers had set the agenda; the players agreed to take their demands for personal freedom to the NBA’s negotiating table.”

Rolling Stone also disparages Orlando Magic’s Jonathan Isaac, who has refused the COVID jab on religious grounds:

“When NBA players stated lining up for shots in March, Isaac started studying Black history … He learned about antibody resistance and came to distrust Dr. Anthony Fauci. He looked out for people who might die from the vaccine, and he put faith in God.

‘At the end of the day, it’s people,’ Isaac says of the scientists developing vaccines, ‘and you can’t always put your trust completely in people.’ Isaac considers un-vaxxed players to be vilified and bullied, and he thinks ‘it’s an injustice’ to automatically make heroes out of vaccinated celebrities.’”⁹

Another player who has spoken out against the COVID jab mandate is Golden State Warriors Draymond Green, who during a September 30, 2021, press conference said he will not pressure other players to get vaccinated.¹⁰

He said he believes the vaccination issue has become a political issue. In the process, we’ve lost the notion that people’s personal medical decisions must be honored. He also noted that the pressure levied to force people into taking the jab is causing many to get suspicious. “Why are you pressing this so hard?” he said.

Rolling Stone Attacks Me

In another article,¹¹ Rolling Stone reporter Matt Sullivan takes aim at yours truly, referring to me as “the anti-vax godfather.” The article appears to be an emergency response to a tweet in which I said that “NBA players are being very courageous to speak up.”¹²

It’s becoming apparent that the technocratic machine has one primary front group working on their behalf, and that is the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH). Despite being publicly outed — by Facebook, nonetheless! — as a biased organization that fabricates data, Sullivan shamelessly refers to a “CCDH analysis” conducted specifically for the Rolling Stones, which claims to have found:¹³

“… consistently increased engagement on social posts in support of vaccine-denying athletes from accounts linked to what they call The Disinformation Dozen.

The nonprofit estimated in March that this group … accounted for 73 percent of all anti-vax content on Facebook; the social network responded by shutting down their main accounts and penalizing their other ones, but Silicon Valley’s Covid police haven’t stopped the anti-vaxxers from re-emerging to ally themselves with celebrities.

‘The Disinformation Dozen are sort of saying, ‘They’ve got Biden, we’ve got Kyrie Irving,’ and they’re trying to see if they can use it to access Black audiences, young audiences and basketball fans,’ says CCDH chief executive Imram [sic] Ahmed.

‘This cancer is seeking to replicate itself in another organ of society. The hope is that it can be contained and doesn’t metastasize from there. But the worst thing that can happen is for players to react to nonsense — if they’re wrong, the price is paid in life’ ...

Dr. Joseph Mercola, who tops The Disinformation Dozen, tweeted his applause to more than 325,000 followers this week for Golden State Warriors superstar Draymond Green’s rant against vaccine mandates as ‘very courageous’ and for an appearance on Fox News by the Orlando Magic forward Jonathan Isaac — who told RS that he didn’t know why vaccinated people wear masks indoors — as ‘a refreshing voice of reason.’¹⁴”

Facebook Has Refuted the CCDH Report

What Sullivan didn’t include was the fact that Facebook has publicly refuted the CCDH’s “Disinformation Dozen” report, stating that:¹⁵

“… these 12 people are responsible for about just 0.05% of all views of vaccine-related content on Facebook. This includes all vaccine-related posts they’ve shared, whether true or false, as well as URLs associated with these people.

The report¹⁶ upon which the faulty narrative is based analyzed only a narrow set of 483 pieces of content over six weeks from only 30 groups, some of which are as small as 2,500 users.

They are in no way representative of the hundreds of millions of posts that people have shared about COVID-19 vaccines in the past months on Facebook.

Further, there is no explanation for how the organization behind the report identified the content they describe as ‘anti-vax’ or how they chose the 30 groups they included in their analysis. There is no justification for their claim that their data constitute a ‘representative sample’ of the content shared across our apps.”

Despite that, Sullivan continues to promote that CCDH report as “fact” and Imran as some sort of authority on who has the greatest influence on social media.

Are Naturally Immune ‘Antivax’?

Sullivan emailed me a few questions in preparation for that smear piece. Among those questions was whether I have “counseled any NBA players seeking information about the vaccine,” and “If so, how so?” Apparently, he believes I advise professional athletes, which I don’t.

He also wanted to know how I consider these sports influencers to be part of “my movement” or “my team,” and whether I believe Irving’s defiance of the New York City vaccine mandate would rally my supporters. Here’s my reply:

“Many of these athletes have had COVID themselves and the public health officials are reluctant to admit they are right. Natural immunity is better than any vaccine, which proves these mandates are not about immunity — they are about forced vaccination and control.

You’ve said the NBA is ‘relying on science’ in a previous article yet they are ignorant and lying about natural immunity — just as the federal government is doing. The mandates are not about immunity, they are about control and obedience. www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/15/natural-immunity-vaccine-mandate/

Individuals can think for themselves and should be allowed to do so, independent of pharmaceutical influence, employer mandates or political authoritarians. I believe that each person must fully educate themselves before engaging in any medical risk taking.

People are smarter than they are being given credit for, and everybody has their own unique circumstances to base their decisions on including biological vulnerabilities that can make vaccine risks greater for some people than others. twitter.com/ericspracklen/status/1445901692143390720?s=21

I applaud anyone who stands up against medical mandates which can negatively affect their lives. It takes courage to take on the attacks of the media and pharmaceutical interests and accept the consequences being forced upon them without their consent.

Many stadiums are packed with 80,000 people now, without any vaccine mandates and have embraced life beyond the ridiculous propaganda currently controlling in the media.”

It’s Not About Health, It’s About Control

As noted by Spencer Fernando,¹⁷ the idea that the COVID jab would be mandated and forced on people was rejected as loony conspiracy theory at the beginning of the pandemic. Ditto for vaccine passports. Yet here we are.

The pace toward tyranny is slower in the United States compared to some other countries, thanks to our Constitution, but President Biden’s attempt to dictate unconstitutional COVID injection mandates to private employers across the nation is evidence that the Constitution is routinely being overstepped even here. Some countries, like Canada and Australia, aren’t even pretending to hide the fact that it’s about social control anymore. As noted by Fernando:¹⁸

“Have you noticed how events in Canada have really moved in only one direction? Compliance at all costs. The trend has been clear: More and more control, more and more threats of punishment, and more and more demands for compliance.”

As of November 30, 2021, unvaccinated Canadians will be barred from planes and trains“ to ensure a minority of people cannot sabotage Canada’s economic recovery” by spreading the virus and getting people sick. But there’s a giant hole in this rationale.

A person with natural immunity is safer than anyone who has gotten the jab, because its more robust and provides wider protection against variants. The COVID shot does not prevent infection or spread of the virus.

If the goal were to prevent spread of the virus, then the only things that would make sense would be to prove you’re not infected or that you are immune. Proof of vaccination will have zero impact on the spread of the virus. You’ll just end up with a vaccinated population that spreads new mutations among themselves.

The Power of Natural Immunity

In a September 15, 2021, Washington Post article, Dr. Marty Makary, professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, stated:¹⁹

“It’s okay to have an incorrect scientific hypothesis. But when new data proves it wrong, you have to adapt. Unfortunately, many elected leaders and public health officials have held on far too long to the hypothesis that natural immunity offers unreliable protection against covid-19 — a contention that is being rapidly debunked by science.

More than 15 studies have demonstrated the power of immunity acquired by previously having the virus. A 700,000-person study from Israel two weeks ago found that those who had experienced prior infections were 27 times less likely to get a second symptomatic covid infection than those who were vaccinated.

This affirmed a June Cleveland Clinic study of health-care workers (who are often exposed to the virus), in which none who had previously tested positive for the coronavirus got reinfected.

The study authors concluded that ‘individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination.’ And in May, a Washington University study found that even a mild covid infection resulted in long-lasting immunity.

So, the emerging science suggests that natural immunity is as good as or better than vaccine-induced immunity. That’s why it’s so frustrating that the Biden administration has repeatedly argued that immunity conferred by vaccines is preferable to immunity caused by natural infection, as NIH director Francis Collins told Fox News host told Bret Baier a few weeks ago.

That rigid adherence to an outdated theory is also reflected in President Biden’s recent announcement that large companies must require their employees to get vaccinated or submit to regular testing, regardless of whether they previously had the virus.”

If You Don’t Take a Stand, Who Will?

Clearly, we’re not dealing with either logic, science or health. The effort to vaccinate the whole world, whether they need it or not, is about control and greed.

“Some have said that people have ‘gone crazy’ during this crisis,” Fernando writes.²⁰ “However, I think the reality is that people have been revealed.

A large number of people (and nearly all politicians) have demonstrated that in a crisis they panic, lose any sense of proportion, are unable to think creatively, and double-down on the same failed approach over and over again.

Worse than that, they have shown that they would prefer to demonize and direct fear towards others, rather than seek to take responsibility for their own lives and their own health. Rather than seek control over themselves, they seek control over others.”

Many are now so locked into irrational fear, it’s virtually impossible to get them to look at data or facts. Meanwhile, the political class has grown obsessed with controlling everyone, and don’t want to see or hear anything that might undermine that aim.

As a result, those willing to defend freedom and individual rights appear to be a shrinking group. But no matter how small that group gets, we can never quit. As noted by Fernando:²¹

“… it’s remnants that hold on to values in difficult moments, and provide the foundation from which those values are renewed and rebuilt. That’s why we must continue to stand up against measures like the national vaccine passport, and stand up for our fellow citizens who are being demonized by our pathetic and failed leaders.”

The question is how? How do we stand against the ever more draconian rules being thrown at us? For starters, we all need to stop making money for the authoritarians. That means not donating to political campaigns that support authoritarian leaders or buying products or using services provided by companies that in turn support the elimination of our rights.

Secondly, we need to get organized. If you work at a company that is threatening to implement mandatory vaccination, you could coordinate a “sickout,” where everyone calls out sick on the same days, or some other form of strike. You can also consider taking legal action.

In early September 2021, USCourts.gov posted a list of attorneys willing to take on vaccine injury cases and/or cases involving vaccine mandates. Since then, that webpage has been removed, but the list can still be found on Daily USA24.²² Legal counsel may also advise you on how to protect your communications.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3voc3LH
via IFTTT

Evidence suggests that lysine, an essential amino acid your body uses in the production of protein,¹ may help prevent or treat viral infections.^2,3 Virologists have also suggested lysine could help prevent or treat COVID-19.⁴

In the past months it's become obvious that COVID-19 can no longer be called a major public health threat. The virus is now endemic, in much the way that the seasonal flu or common cold is. Yet, to continue to implement the Great Reset to “build back better,” fearmongers need this crisis to continue.

Just as influenza mutates and creates new variants, SARS-CoV-2 will continue to mutate in the environment. Thankfully, as viruses mutate within a population, they also tend to become more benign.⁵

One strategy to continue a high level of fear in a population is to censor any successful treatment modalities. Without successful treatments, society would be forced to focus on a vaccine. And yet, as I have written in the past months, there are several strategies you can use to reduce your risk of getting infected or to be treated if you are infected.

These strategies include optimal levels of vitamin D, quercetin and zinc, and use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.⁶ Without knowledge of successful treatments, you could be vulnerable to the Chicken Little warnings that the sky is continuing to fall.

The first warnings were about the number of deaths that we could experience from COVID-19. When this did not materialize, the next step was to publicize the rising number of “cases” that appeared to confirm dire predictions and sparked widespread panic.

However, those caseloads were supported by erroneous PCR testing methodology with threshold counts set so high that even healthy, uninfected people tested positive. This sparked lockdowns, masking and business shutdowns. But even with all the shutdowns and other contagion-containment measures, next came the Delta variant, which appears to be affecting both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.^7,8

The sky still has not fallen, but experts are promising that unless we comply with vaccine mandates, social distancing and scheduled testing, the world will surely come to an end. Let’s consider how one amino acid may help stop the replication of the virus and add to the growing number of strategies you can use to prevent or treat COVID-19.⁹

Amino Acid Stops Replication of Virus

A small study¹⁰ was undertaken by Bio-Virus Research Inc. and preprint published in September 2020. The company¹¹ works on both vaccines and therapeutic approaches to illness. In this paper they report on results they had using L-lysine against COVID-19.¹²

The treatment was built on a report published in 2016¹³ in which researchers used L-lysine against MERS-CoV in vitro. Since L-lysine works universally on all herpes variants, the researchers believed it would be reasonable to expect that it would have the same effect on this viral family.¹⁴

The effectiveness of Lysine was evaluated in approximately 140 patients, eight of whom were living in the U.S. The majority of the patients were in the Dominican Republic and ranged in age from 16 to 77. According to the researchers, approximately 80% of participants with acute symptoms showed a minimum of 70% reduction in the first 48 hours.

Patients who had been in the hospital were discharged on an average of three days after treatment started. The writers stressed that lysine is a treatment for the condition and not a cure. Instead, it is dependent on the individual's immune response. In their observation of the participants there was an “incredibly short time to eliminate/reduce fever presumably due to extinguishing the associated cytokine storm.”¹⁵

The treatment used a dose range between 1,000 milligram (mg) to 4,000 mg. However, the average dose was 2,000 mg. The scientists said they “rarely” gave 4,000 mg, and they do not recommend exceeding 3,000 mg, since this could trigger a bradykinin build up and increased coughing. The participants in this study took 1,000 mg twice a day on Day 1 and if needed increase that by 500 mg to 1,000 mg on Day 2 and forward.

The researchers administered the lysine in staggered increments, beginning one hour before breakfast and again at 3 p.m. on Day 1. The second dose could be moved up on Day 2, which allowed for a third dose at 9 p.m. if needed.

Antiviral Actions of Lysine Dependent on Arginine

The researchers recommend that lysine should be taken a minimum of one hour before a meal with 2 cups of water. The reasoning for 2 cups of water was to aid in absorption, anticoagulation and to dampen the appetite of the participant and thus help reduce the intake of arginine.¹⁶

Lysine and arginine work in concert in the body. The ratio between lysine and arginine influences viruses and your immune system. The researcher’s intent was to lower the amount of arginine in the body by restricting foods high in arginine while raising levels of lysine using supplementation.

While the lysine and arginine amount in brewed coffee is nearly identical,¹⁷ the researchers completely restricted coffee and other caffeinated drinks as they triggered a return of symptoms.

The researchers reference one study¹⁸ that showed lysine suppresses RNA and DNA viruses, potentially by interfering with the incorporation of arginine into the virus. Lysine also inhibits the absorption of arginine. The researchers propose there is also a more complex pathway that lysine uses with respect to inhibiting SARS-CoV-2.¹⁹

A newer study²⁰ published in 2021 evaluated the effects of lysine and arginine and their ester derivatives on influenza A and SARS-CoV-2. The researchers found that in the lab study, lysine and the ester derivative could efficiently block infection and arginine boosts viral infection of both viruses. These findings have suggested:²¹

“… lysine supplementation and the reduction of arginine-rich food intake can be considered as prophylactic and therapeutic regimens against these viruses while also providing a paradigm for the development of broad-spectrum antivirals.”

Amazingly, several of the inpatients in the study using lysine were PCR negative for SARS-CoV-2 by Day 3.²² The researchers also found that the five patients who were not eating due to a lack of appetite had a significant reduction in the time it took to reduce their symptoms. The assumption the researchers made was that the participants were not consuming arginine, which sped the response time.

This small group of people demonstrated a significant reduction in fever and nonfebrile symptoms from four to 18 hours. While symptoms appeared to rapidly decline, D-dimer levels were high in some participants. In the participants, only a small percentage continue to have fever after 24 hours. The researchers found it was the combination of lysine supplementation and arginine restriction that offered the best results.

The researchers wrote of past evidence demonstrating that lysine influences interleukin-10, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-1 beta that are all implicated in fever. Data demonstrate that lysine has an inhibitory effect on interleukin-6 and increases interleukin-10 anti-inflammatory cytokines.

The researchers also wrote of evidence demonstrating lysine decreases production of nitric oxide, which limits the pathogenesis of inflammation and reduces proinflammatory cytokines. This suggests that independent of its role in suppressing arginine, lysine may also suppress viral replication.

Lysine Effective Against Herpes Cold Sores

The researchers²³ wrote that in 1974, a researcher from the Bio-Virus Research team proposed in an article published in the Lancet²⁴ that lysine could be effective against the herpes virus. Four years later a clinical follow-up study confirmed the effectiveness²⁵ and another study in 1981²⁶ demonstrated that lysine inhibited arginine in vitro.

In 2016, experts estimated that 13.2% of the world aged 15 to 49 years were living with herpes simplex virus type 2.²⁷ Data from the 2005-2010 NHANES survey show people aged 14 to 49 had a prevalence of 53.9% of herpes simplex virus type-1 and 15.7% of herpes simplex virus type 2 during that time period.²⁸

A literature search published in 2017²⁹ concluded that without a low-arginine diet, supplementation with lysine at 1 gram per day was not effective. Studies using 3 grams per day appeared to reduce the number of herpes outbreaks.

The effectiveness of lysine with herpes virus is related to the herpes virus dependency on arginine to replicate.³⁰ Direct application of lysine to cold sores can also reduce the length of the outbreak.

Balance Your Lysine and Arginine Intake

Your body needs a balance between lysine and arginine to function optimally. Foods that are rich in lysine³¹ include lean meat, tuna, low-fat ricotta cheese and milk. Foods that are rich in arginine include soy-based flour, seed flours, seeds, nuts, egg and chocolate.³² Many people's diets are richer in arginine than they are in lysine.

Benefits of lysine are not limited to your immune system. For example, studies have demonstrated that lysine can reduce anxiety levels^33,34 and reduces vascular calcification.³⁵ Animal research shows that lysine is necessary for wound repair³⁶ and helps the formation of collagen.³⁷

One of the symptoms of lysine deficiency is high blood pressure. In one study³⁸ of 50 adults with lysine-deficient diets and high blood pressure, supplementation produced a significant reduction in blood pressure. Of course, women who are pregnant or nursing should consult with their doctor before taking a lysine supplement.

One of the best ways to balance your lysine and arginine levels is through diet modification. However, during a viral illness lysine supplementation at levels lower than 3 grams per day may help shorten the length of your illness. If you choose to use a lysine supplement, the researchers from the featured lysine study had several cautionary notes:³⁹

• Patients who are medically fragile or asymptomatic for over one month should exercise caution in using lysine and start with a low dose for the initial days.
• Patients with COVID-19 should avoid coffee, exercise, arginine-rich foods and marijuana.
• Since lysine can raise zinc and calcium levels, supplementation with zinc or calcium should be avoided while taking lysine.
• Lysine can also increase cardiac output and pulmonary resistance so patients using a pacemaker should be under close clinical observation.

from Articles https://ift.tt/3pc9yet
via IFTTT

She is one of our most popular acting exports in decades, but over the past 12 months Rebel Wilson made far more headlines with the health and fitness routine that resulted in a total body transformation.

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

The model and Seafolly ambassador tells Body+Soul about her plans for a season of sultry weather ahead.

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

By Dr. Mercola

Over the years, I've written a number of articles outing industry front groups¹ such as the Genetic Literacy Project, the American Council for Science and Health (ACSH),² Science 2.0, GMO Answers, Independent Women's Forum, Science Codex, Center for Consumer Freedom and the Center for Inquiry.

Once you start to investigate these front groups, you'll find the same names appearing again and again, cowriting articles, interviewing each other and referring to each other's work in a closed loop.

I've also written about academics and journalists who, while presenting themselves as independent experts, are actually shills for industry. This is a fairly close-knit group of individuals, so the worst actors are not hard to identify based on their associations.

Well-established actors include Forbes contributor Kavin Senapathy,³ Henry Miller, Steven Salzberg,⁴ Bruce Chassy, Jon Entine,^5,6 Kevin Folta, Keith Kloor⁷ and Mark Lynas.

Learn to Recognize Astroturfing When You See It

In the TED Talk above, award-winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson discusses strategies used by industry to manipulate public opinion and steer online discussion.

A strategy that has become phenomenally popular with the advent of social media is astroturfing, which is when a special interests group creates a fake grassroots campaign for or against a particular agenda. You might think it's a group of moms devoted to children's health that is touting the benefits of GMOs or vaccines, for example, when in fact the campaign is run by industry.

Increasingly over the past year or so you may have seen a number of articles simultaneously criticizing both the "anti-vaxxers" and "anti-GMO movement," making contemptuous and sometimes wildly insulting comments about people who question the safety of either of these industries and their wares.

While GMOs and vaccines may seem like strange bedfellows, the cross-linking of these two industries in propaganda material is neither accidental nor haphazard.

Industry Messaging Example

In a May 18, 2017 Forbes article,⁸ Senapathy (one well-known mouthpiece for the GMO industry) took aim at the "anti-vaccine and anti-GMO movements," saying they're "inextricably linked and cause preventable suffering."

"The thoroughly answered question of whether vaccines cause autism isn't really a question outside of conspiracy-theorist circles," Senapathy writes.

"The body of evidence shows that vaccination has … vastly reduced suffering and death … and that vaccines don't cause autism, cancer, dementia or long term health problems, and that any minute risk is vastly outweighed by benefits to individuals and society.

Yet with the backing of prominent leaders like Robert DeNiro and Robert Kennedy Jr., anti-vaccine groups fuel common narratives that keep herd immunity down, directly leading to suffering and death.

Now with Donald Trump embracing vaccine skeptics, the anti-vaccine movement has earned a hallowed place on the shelf next to other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought.

The question of the safety of genetically engineered crops (GMOs) has been answered just as thoroughly, and the anti-GMO movement deserves its own place on the same shelf, not just for being wrong but for its role in unconscionable suffering …

She goes on to point out how similar the communication tactics are between vaccine and GMO detractors. Ironically, her article reveals just as much if not more about the biotech and vaccine industries' messaging tactics. You can go through her article and check off numerous boxes for how to spot a piece of industry propaganda.

That includes the claim that the science is settled (which automatically precludes the need for further discussion), citing a fellow industry shill (in this case Kloor), using strong, derogatory language when describing those who disagree with industry talking points, making ample references to "conspiracy theories" and "other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought."

Seven Classic Propaganda Techniques

Whenever you hear or read that someone is a "quack," and that "the science has been settled," or that something is "science-based," it's probably a smear campaign created by an astroturf group, industry front group or paid shill. In fact, the seven techniques of propaganda have been clearly delineated and are used without exception by most industries. As noted by writer Morgan Crouch in his article, "What Are the Seven Techniques of Propaganda?" these include:⁹

1. Name calling — Derogatory terms or discriminatory words used to arouse suspicion and prejudice
2. Glittering generalities — Slogans, catchphrases and highly generalized statements that sound good but mean little and prove nothing (such as "the science is settled")
3. Transfer — The linking of a company/industry idea with a revered symbol
4. Testimonial — Testimony by a respected authority, similar to celebrity endorsement
5. Plain folks — Corporate material presented by someone who appears to be "just like you" — someone who shares your concerns and ideals
6. Bandwagon — Creating the illusion that there's a consensus, which capitalizes on people's inherent desire to be on the "right" side
7. Card stacking — Using only those facts that support the company's/industry's ideas, with the aim of making you assume these facts are conclusive. As noted by Crouch, "By 'stacking cards against the truth,' propagandists can control the beliefs of their audience"

Pesticide and Vaccine Partnerships Revealed

While Senapathy tries to show how those who question the safety of either GMOs or vaccines are all alike — that is, tinfoil hat-wearing lunatics who follow flat earth theories in their spare time — what she ultimately achieves is a perfect example of industry PR.

This systematic messaging strategy has been carefully developed, and is known to have a penetrating psychological effect. Both the vaccine and biotechnology industries use the same terminology and the same psychological assault strategies to make you feel like you're in the wrong — or worse.

In her article, Senapathy basically accuses all vaccine and GMO safety advocates of being killers, merely for asking questions and not settling for non-answers, and doing what they think is right for their own health and that of their children.

Another article¹⁰ that connects the vaccine and chemical technology industries was recently published by The Feed.

In it, Ashleigh Morse, Ph.D., whose training centers on psychology and the influence of environmental cues on decision-making, and who says she works as a consultant to "a range of clients" in the field of science communication and public health,¹¹ argues that juries are incapable of assessing the validity of scientific evidence presented in court, or the validity of the scientific methods used.

Specifically, Morse — whose professional credits include a single published research paper listed on her LinkedIN bio on the role of opioid processes in reward and decision-making — is referring to the recent jury verdict against Monsanto, but she goes on to link that to vaccine science. "When juries decide on the science, we get autism linked to vaccines and the Monsanto verdict," she writes.

When In Doubt, Blame the Russians

Then there's the curious claim that the Russians are to blame for Americans' lack of faith in vaccine safety.¹² According to a recent paper¹³ published in the American Journal of Public Health, Russian trolls and Soviet-directed Twitter bots promoted anti-vaccine information on social media to "amplify the vaccine debate" and create dissent in the U.S.

According to the authors, "Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination," and "Directly confronting vaccine skeptics enables bots to legitimize the vaccine debate." Those two sentences are interesting and revealing indeed.

In a nutshell, they're saying that by providing anti-vaccine content, these bots made it seem as though there was actually something to discuss when, in the opinion of the authors, no discussion about vaccine safety should occur at all.

Apparently, it is their view that the vaccine debate is "illegitimate," since there's "public consensus" on vaccines (refer back to the bandwagon strategy, No. 6 in the propaganda list above).

In other words, everyone knows vaccines are safe; the science is settled, so there's no valid reason to question it. Summing up the alleged Russian bots' efforts to sway public opinion against vaccination, the authors referred to it as "weaponized health communication."

The Russians Did It Again

Coincidentally, the vaccine paper above was submitted for publication shortly after news stories began circulating claiming the Russians were behind anti-GMO rhetoric.¹⁴ Minnesota Farm Living writes:¹⁵

"Researchers from Iowa State University (Shawn Dorius and Carolyn Lawrence-Dill) wanted to better understand the controversy around genetically engineered food.¹⁶ The issue is with the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, consumers still question their safety. Dorius and Lawrence-Dill wanted to find out why.

What they found was surprising. The ISU researchers looked at not only how U.S. publications portrayed GMOs but also looked at the American versions of RT and Sputknik, two Russian publications. They counted how many times the term 'GMO' was used in different publications …

They went a step further and analyzed the tone of each article. What they found is the Russian publications were overwhelming anti-GMO. The articles talked negatively about environmental risks, nutrition concerns, and health risks of GMOs."

Here, the author links to the "Are GMOs Safe?" page on the Genetic Literacy Project's website as evidence to support GMO safety. But, the Genetic Literacy Project is a well-known front group for the GMO industry and hardly a reliable source of impartial information.

As for why the Russians would want to spread anti-GMO rhetoric in the U.S., the study authors note Russia has an interest in creating division among the American people to weaken the country as a whole, and to promote their own agricultural exports, as Russia banned GMOs in 2016 and is trying to increase its exports of organic food.

Claim of Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety Is Patently False

In the Minnesota Farm Living article cited above, you can see the telltale industry rhetoric in the sentence, "the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, [yet] consumers still question their safety." The reality is there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.

That is in fact the title of a scientific statement¹⁷ published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, January 24, 2015. The statement, aptly titled "No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety," was signed by 300 scientists, researchers, physicians and scholars.

What's more, the paper states that the claim of scientific consensus on GMO safety is in actuality "an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated," and that such a claim "is misleading and misrepresents or outright ignores the currently available scientific evidence and the broad diversity of scientific opinions among scientists on this issue."

In addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration still does not possess any evidence demonstrating safety because they do not do scientific reviews. And even if they did, hundreds of scientists say there's no evidence demonstrating that genetically engineered foods are safe, and a number of independent studies have raised serious health concerns.

To learn more about how GMOs were introduced into the food supply without safety testing, see my two-part interview with attorney Steven Druker, author of "Altered Genes, Twisted Truth." (Part 1, Part 2.)

GMO-Vaccine Convergence

The reason for the joining of PR forces between the vaccine and biotech industries becomes clearer when you take into account the fact that GMOs are moving into the vaccine industry. The 2016 article,¹⁸ "GMOs Lead the Fight Against Zika, Ebola and the Next Unknown Pandemic," published in The Conversation, asserts that GMOs play a "vital role" in medicine, adding:

"Most modern biomedical advances, especially the vaccines used to eradicate disease and protect against pandemics … rely on the same molecular biology tools that are used to create genetically modified organisms.

To protect the public, scientists have embraced GMO technology to quickly study new health threats, manufacture enough protective vaccines, and monitor and even predict new outbreaks."

Additionally, scientists are also exploring the possibility of vaccinating plants against pests as an alternative to using pesticides.¹⁹ In other words, it's really quite crucial for these two bedfellows, strange as their joining may seem at first, to get people to embrace both genetic engineering and vaccines.

That's why we're now seeing more and more articles deriding both vaccine and GMO safety advocates in the same piece, whether it necessarily makes sense to do so or not.

Both of these industries are using the exact same messaging strategies — because so far they have worked — to achieve the same aim: Shame those who dare question the safety of either, and make them feel like ignorant outcasts and social misfits, thereby shutting down the conversation.

Preempting Your Rights

In my five-part "Ghost in the Machine" series, I discuss the many ways in which big industries manipulate science, and how they've captured our regulatory agencies and manipulate our political system. Here's a listing of the series, in case you missed any of them:

"Introduction to Ghost in the Machine — A New Article Series That Exposes How Puppet Masters Control the Planet for Their Benefit"

"Ghost in the Machine, Part 1 — Drug Safety and Media Shaped by Big Pharma"

"Ghost in the Machine, Part 2 — Success Breeds Greed That Gets in the Way of Ethics, Common Sense and Caution"

"Ghost in the Machine, Part 3 — Pride and the Politics of Vaccines"

"Ghost in the Machine, Part 4 — The War on Supplements, Essential Oils and Homeopathy"

"Ghost in the Machine, Part 5 — Lies, Denial, Deceit and Manipulative 'Research'"

A feature common to both the vaccine industry and the biotech industry is the use of legislation to preempt your rights and force you to use their products whether you want to or not, and without regard for the health consequences.

In recent years, I've written extensively about the vaccine industry's attempts to mandate vaccines and eliminate personal belief exemptions across the U.S. In some cases, they've succeeded. In others, they've lost, but efforts to strip every American of their right to informed consent and medical freedom is ongoing.

The chemical technology industry is following the same agenda. One of the latest infringements on your rights is a provision in the Farm Bill that would block local governments from regulating pesticide use. The U.S. House committee approved the draft back in April. As noted by Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides:²⁰

"This is really a backdoor attempt to interfere with state governments and local governments. I think the trend is for local governments to engage on this issue. This would undermine that."

Monsanto Ghostwriting Shill Attempts to Tie USRTK to Russian Troll Efforts

A common corporate tactic is to use "third-party experts" to bring the industry's message to the public under the cloak of independent opinion or expertise (No. 4, "Testimonial"). The idea is that academic types are far more credible than industry employees when it comes to defending the industry's position.

A well-known spokesperson for the GMO industry is Henry Miller, who was thoroughly outed as a Monsanto shill during the 2012 Proposition 37 GMO labeling campaign in California. A "No on 37" advertisement had to be pulled off the air because Miller was fraudulently identified as being part of the Stanford University faculty.

Last year, Miller was outed yet again — this time as a ghostwriter for Monsanto. Forbes fired Miller when it became clear he had submitted ghostwritten material. On a relevant side note, Senapathy has cowritten articles with Miller, which is why some of her Forbes articles ended up being deleted as well,²¹ and the foreword for her book "Fear Babe" was written by Folta, a University of Florida professor who hid his financial ties to Monsanto.

The Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) discovery against Monsanto was led by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK). Proving he's still working on Monsanto's behalf, Miller penned a two-part article^22,23 for Investor's Business Daily this past summer, in which he tries — quite unsuccessfully — to tie USRTK to the alleged Russian GMO disinformation campaign.

The fact that they're still turning to Miller is probably a sign of just how desperate Monsanto (now Bayer) has become. Other discovery documents obtained by USRTK included email correspondence revealing Monsanto has been quite desperate for a number of years already.

In an email dated February 26, 2015, Daniel Goldstein, senior science lead of medical sciences and outreach for Monsanto, tells Monsanto's food safety scientific affairs lead, John Vicini, Ph.D.:²⁴

In this email, Goldstein admits two pearls: First, the list of supporters willing to do their dirty work is short — which is why we keep seeing the same names pop up in pro-GMO propaganda pieces — and ACSH is a most valuable front group for the biotech industry.

Another Undercover Ambassador for GMO Industry Wants You to Think the Russians Are Responsible for 'Anti-Vaccine Myths'

So, who else wants you to think that "the Russians did it"? Mark Lynas, a long-term shill for the GMO industry, just published: "Opinion: Russian Campaign to Spread Anti-Vaccine Myths Part of a Wider War on Science and Truth"²⁵ on the Alliance for Science website.

As the other examples cited above, Lynas — normally a pro-GMO advocate — is now cross-linking GMOs and vaccines, closely mimicking the core message of Senapathy's article, which is that "Many anti-GMO groups and anti-vaxxers are closely linked."

Again, what we're seeing is a crossover or merging of the GMO and vaccine industries in terms of messaging and propaganda angles. Rather than fighting public doubt separately, the shills for these industries are now putting out a single joint message that anyone who doubts the science presented by either of them is an anti-science nut job.

The take-home message here is that these tactics are nothing but a PR ploy. Yes, they're trying to make you feel like an outsider, an outcast. They're trying to make you feel ashamed of your "ignorance," or worse, as if you've fallen for false propaganda propagated by evil Russians in an effort to divide and conquer.

But all you really need to do is look for the hallmarks of astroturfing, and you'll quickly see through their ruse. You are not wrong for questioning flawed and biased science. You are not ignorant for questioning whether vaccines and GMOs might be unsafe when there's a clear lack of evidence to support safety claims.

You are not a danger to the public for looking at the evidence and making your own decisions about whether or not you want your family to receive a particular vaccine or eat a certain food. Your inquiries and thought processes are only dangerous to the industries in question which, by the way, are willing to go to just about any lengths to hide the dangers of their products in order to maintain their profits. Stand your ground. It's solid.

from Articles : GMO, Vaccines https://ift.tt/2MInBlh
via IFTTT

By Dr. Mercola

Goats are being genetically engineered to become "pharm animals" that carry vaccines in their milk.

Current experiments being conducted by researchers from Texas A&M are geared toward producing an "edible" malaria vaccine, with the ultimate goal being that children drinking the milk will become vaccinated in the process.

While claiming that bioengineered animals could be "life-savers" for people in third-world countries, the researchers ignore the glaring issue that such biotechnology often produces unknown, and unintended, health consequences that prove tragic for individuals and the environment.

Vaccines in Your Milk?

Transmogrifying farm animals into "pharm" animals to act as living and breathing pharmaceutical factories is not new.

In 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first drug produced by livestock that had been bioengineered to express a human gene.

In that case, the protein was extracted from the milk of genetically engineered (GE) goats.

In the latest instance, researchers introduced DNA coding for the malaria parasite into the goat genome linked to milk production.

The DNA is supposed to "switch on" only in the mammary gland when the goat produces milk.

As we've seen in the past with genetically modified plants, genetically engineered vaccine-producing animals might enter the food supply unexpectedly -- exposing unintended recipients to the vaccine. Or the animals might escape and breed with others, passing these bioengineered genes on with unpredictable consequences. Even the technology itself is risky at best, because when animals are exposed to foreign DNA, literally anything can happen.

Take, for instance, milk from cows treated with a synthetic, genetically engineered growth hormone called rBGH. rBGH milk differs from natural milk nutritionally, pharmacologically, immunologically, and hormonally, and along with causing health problems in the cows, it is linked to cancer in humans. What does ingesting the DNA from the malaria parasite in your milk cause? No one knows.

Vaccine Makers See Dollar Signs When They See Third-World Countries

Malaria is caused by a parasite of the species Plasmodium, which is spread from person to person by infected mosquitoes. Every year, it results in about 1 million deaths, the majority of which are in third-world countries. We are certainly in need of a solution, and while it sounds good in theory that a child could be protected from malaria just by drinking a glass of milk, remember that vaccines often weaken and confuse children's immune systems, which ultimately increases their susceptibility to the very infectious diseases vaccines are designed to prevent.

The most vulnerable of the world's children are those in the poorest countries where death and disease is often a result of malnutrition, and where children are often battling some sort of infection 200 days out of the year. Vaccines can be devastating to these already immunosuppressed children, as well as to adults.

However, emerging vaccine markets like third-world countries will soon outgrow developed markets by hundreds of billions of dollars. Emerging markets are areas of the world that are beginning to show promise as a profitable venture for many products, including vaccines. And emerging markets – primarily in developing countries in Southeast and Central Asia, and Africa – have been on vaccine makers' radar for quite some time.

Giving Immune-Compromised Children Vaccines May Create Illness, Not Cure It

One reason that vaccine makers are interested in these parts of the world is that that's where most of the world's deaths from major infectious diseases occur. The only problem has been that, until recently, making vaccines for undeveloped countries with no money to pay for them, was not exactly a profitable goal for vaccine makers.

Concerned that developed countries would have little or no resources for addressing serious infectious diseases if vaccine makers continued their pull-out, the World Health Organization and the G8 – the top developed countries in the world – responded with a plan for inducing vaccine companies to stay in the business.

That plan was called Advance Market Commitments (AMCs). Under AMCs, developed countries make legal, binding agreements to purchase vaccines that are needed in low-income countries. The purchase guarantees a bottom line for the manufacturers. In return, the manufacturers promise to sell those vaccines at reduced prices in the countries where they are most needed.

Unfortunately, legally binding, advance market commitments to purchase vaccines that are mostly needed in third world countries could backfire on developed countries that don't need – or want – certain vaccines. Malaria is one of the top neglected diseases that world health leaders want to address with AMCs, so the GM vaccine-producing goat milk might already be on their radar.

The ability to resist diseases like malaria requires a strong immune system, and for that, you require good nutrition, clean drinking water, and sanitation. If we want to help people in other countries to lower their malaria rates, it would be wise to focus on these basics first. In order to eradicate infectious disease from a nation, you have to first address compromised immune systems. If you hit immune suppressed children with a potent, adjuvant-loaded vaccine, you're far more likely to create new disease, not eradicate it.

It's similar to the corporations seeking to plant genetically modified golden rice in the developing world to purportedly alleviate vitamin A deficiency. What people in the developing world need to receive ample dietary vitamin A are the basics like access to a diverse range of nutritious foods -- including animal products like eggs, cheese and meat and vegetables such as dark leafy greens and sweet potatoes. This is the type of diet that is attained from biodiverse farming -- the opposite of what will occur if golden rice is planted on a large scale. So in the end it appears the golden rice will do little to improve vitamin A levels in the poor -- and may actually make vitamin A deficiency worse.

Fertility Problems, DNA Damage Among the Serious Health Problems Linked to GM Foods

The vaccine-producing GM goats are a double-edged sword because while no one knows for sure what consuming GM vaccine-containing milk will do to humans, there's very convincing evidence that genetically modified foods spell nothing but trouble for your health.

In one review of genetically modified organisms (GMO) -- an analysis of 19 animal studies -- it was revealed that nearly 10 percent of blood, urine, organ and other parameters tested were significantly influenced by GMOs, with the liver and kidneys faring the worst.

In the only human feeding study ever published on genetically modified foods, seven volunteers ate Roundup-ready soybeans. These are soybeans that have herbicide-resistant genes inserted into them in order to survive being sprayed with otherwise deadly doses of Roundup herbicide. In three of the seven volunteers, the gene inserted into the soy transferred into the DNA of their intestinal bacteria, and continued to function long after they stopped eating the GM soy!

So, exposing children in third world countries to these potential risks needs to be carefully considered before a malaria vaccine is distributed in GM milk especially when there are other innovative ways of fighting malaria available. In addition, Jeffrey Smith, founder of the Institute for Responsible Technology, has documented at least 65 serious health risks from GM products of all kinds. Among them:

• Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce
• Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells
• The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning
• Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties
• Investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products

Why We MUST Insist on Mandatory Labeling of GM Foods

Mandatory labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of GM foods in the US because while GM seeds are banned in several European countries, in the U.S., certain states are actually passing legislation that protects the use of GM seeds and allows for unabated expansion! At present, no less than 14 states have passed such legislation. Michigan's Senate Bill 777¹, if passed, would make that 15. The Michigan bill would prevent anti-GMO laws, and would remove "any authority local governments may have to adopt and enforce ordinances that prohibit or regulate the labeling, sale, storage, transportation, distribution, use, or planting of agricultural, vegetable, flower or forest tree seeds."

While legislation like this sounds like crazy nonsense to most people, such bills are essentially bought and paid for through the millions of dollars Monsanto and other biotech companies spend lobbying the US government each year. In the first quarter of 2011 alone, Monsanto spent $1.4 million on lobbying the federal government -- a drop from a year earlier, when they spent $2.5 million during the same quarter.

Their efforts of persuasion are also made infinitely easier by the fact that an ever growing list of former Monsanto employees are now in positions of power within the federal government.

Proof Positive that GMO Labeling WILL Change the Food Industry

Many don't fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive and a logistical nightmare. So rather than have two labels, they would simply not carry the product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. This is why we are so committed to this initiative as victory here will likely eliminate genetically engineered foods from the US.

Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California's labeling requirements for carcinogens²:

"Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They've already been made for drinks sold in California."

This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California GMO labeling mandate can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire US market, rather than have two different labels. According to USA Today:

"A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. "While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning," Garza-Giarlante said in an email."

Learn More about Genetically Modified (GM) Foods

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what GM foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about GM foods and helping your friends and family do the same.

To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.

Your BEST strategy, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit GM ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the GMO's you're exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you're not inadvertently consuming something laced with GM ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.

To learn more about GM foods, I highly recommend the following films and lectures:

• Hidden Dangers in Kid's Meals
• Your Milk on Drugs - Just Say No!
• Everything You Have to Know About Dangerous Genetically Modified Foods

from Articles : GMO, Vaccines https://ift.tt/1AT6CUn
via IFTTT