Health & Fitness

In the interview above, Dr. Andrew Wakefield and Mary Holland, president and chief legal counsel for Children's Health Defense, discuss their new documentary film, "Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda," which we published yesterday. If you missed it, you can watch it here.

"Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda" is Wakefield's fourth film. The first was "Who Killed Alex Spourdalakis?" followed by "Vaxxed" and "1986: The Act." This latest film details the World Health Organization's intentions to produce an anti-fertility vaccine in response to perceived overpopulation, and how such vaccines have been used without people's knowledge or consent since the mid-'90s.

"It's a very important story, and it's a story that I'd been aware of for some years," Wakefield says. "I think a lot of people heard about this intentional infertility vaccine program being conducted, primarily in women in developing countries such as Africa. But it had gone into abeyance so I hadn't paid due attention.

I should have paid more attention to it, because people had asked me over the years, 'Do you think there is a population control agenda?' ...

The allegation had been that the World Health Organization, under the guise of a neonatal tetanus prevention program, had been deliberately sterilizing women [in Kenya] — either using a vaccine to abort existing pregnancies or to prevent future pregnancies. They had done this under the guise of protecting children rather than actually reducing the population."

As explained by Wakefield, it was no secret that the WHO had been working on an anti-fertility vaccine since the 1970s.¹ Papers were published, and the WHO itself even admitted it. The real issue here is that of informed consent. The WHO has been caught more than once deliberately deceiving women into thinking they were vaccinated against tetanus, when in fact they were being sterilized. This is an ethical and moral low that is hard to beat.

Covert Sterilization Campaign in the Philippines Revealed

The story detailed in this film begins in 1995, when the Kenyan government launched a WHO vaccination campaign against tetanus among women of childbearing age. Dr. Stephen K. Karanja, former chairman of the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, became suspicious of the program when he learned that involuntary sterilization programs posing as tetanus programs had occurred.

That same year, 1995, the Catholic Women's League of the Philippines actually won a court order halting a UNICEF tetanus program that was using tetanus vaccine laced with hCG. Anti-hCG-laced vaccines had also been found in at least four other countries.

This anti-hCG-laced tetanus vaccine perfectly matched the anti-fertility vaccine the WHO had announced in 1993. The paper trail reveals that by 1976, WHO researchers had successfully conjugated, meaning combined or attached, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) onto tetanus toxoid, used in the tetanus vaccine. As a result, when given to a woman, she develops antibodies against both tetanus and hCG.

HCG is a hormone that is produced as soon as the sperm enters the egg and the embryo begins to form. In response to this signal, the woman's ovaries then produce progesterone, which maintains the pregnancy to term. The conjugated vaccine effectively ends and prevents pregnancy as her own immune system will immediately attack and destroy the hCG as soon as it forms.

At the time, Karanja, who passed away in 2021, convinced leaders of the Catholic Church — one of the largest health care providers in Kenya — to test the tetanus vaccine being given, to make sure there was no foul play. Without explanation, the WHO abandoned the 1995 campaign, but in 2014, they were back with a neonatal tetanus program.

A Diabolical Agenda

Girls and women, 15 to 49 years of age, were instructed to get vaccinated with a series of five injections, six months apart. Suspiciously, this is the exact schedule required for the anti-fertility vaccine to produce sterility. Regular tetanus prevention requires only one injection every five to 10 years, and under no circumstance would you need five of them.

The Catholic Church decided to test the vaccines and collected three sample vials directly from clinics during the 2014 campaign. The samples were tested by three independent laboratories and, as feared, they contained hCG. Another six vials were then collected and tested. This time, half were found to contain hCG.

When the Catholic Church went public with the findings, urging girls and women to not comply with the vaccination campaign, the Kenyan government went on the defensive, insisting there was nothing wrong with the vaccine. Wakefield says:

"They used the media to demonize the Catholic Church and insinuate there had been deliberate contamination of these samples with hCG to produce the result they wanted.

That's where it remained until — and this is where it gets really interesting and where the film really comes into its own — our cameras were invited back into the laboratory where these tests were done ... [and] the truth was revealed.

It came down to a resolution of this key question of who was lying and who was being honest? Who was cheating, who was not? It's really an extraordinary story that woke me up to the importance of this issue. There is an extraordinary prophetic statement at the end from the late Dr. Karanja, OBGYN from Africa. who was at the heart of all of this.

He said, 'When they are finished with Africa they're coming for you' ... That's probably a pertinent place to hand over to Mary, because never could a prophecy have been more apt, more true."

Depopulation Agenda Is Now a Conspiracy Fact

Holland continues:

"It's been very hard to answer ... when people would ask us, 'Is there a depopulation agenda?' People would point to things Bill Gates said, like how vaccines would reduce the population. There was an interpretation that it was going to make people healthier, and therefore they would choose not to have more children.

It was murky. I think this film really helps us understand that this is not a conspiracy theory. It's an absolute reality ... The film makes that 100% clear. There's just no question about it. And you see the deceit and deception. Just to point out, the Rome statute for the International Criminal Court that most countries of the world have signed onto ... makes forced sterilization a war crime.

This is not a trivial thing, to deprive people of informed consent and to sterilize them. That's exactly what happened. One of the interviews in the film that is so poignant is of a woman who cannot carry a pregnancy to term. She comes to realize that she has antibodies to hCG, and she realizes that somebody, somewhere, made her infertile. It is, as she calls it, a diabolical agenda ...

We can now look back at what happened with the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which I co-wrote a book about in 2018. One of the things we saw was that ... the teen pregnancy rate dropped 50% from 2007 to 2018 — 50%! Now, whatever one wants to think about unplanned pregnancies, that is a staggering drop over 10 years.

People were reporting extreme reproductive effects from the HPV vaccine. Now we're hearing the same thing, only much more so, with respect to COVID shots. We're hearing that women are having miscarriages, babies are literally dying from breastfeeding mothers who have been recently vaccinated.

Congenital deformities are being reported to the vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS). It's now, I think, beyond the realm of conspiracy theory to say it is very plausible that these vaccines that are being pushed on the world — particularly the COVID shots — have strong anti-fertility effects."

Is There Such a Thing as Vaccine Safety?

It's important to realize that no study has ever proven that any of the vaccines on the childhood vaccination schedule are safe, especially when given in various combinations. As noted by Wakefield, vaccine manufacturers and people like Dr. Anthony Fauci present "an almost kindergarten-like approach" to safety.

The blanket statement given is that vaccines in general, and the COVID shots in particular, are "safe and effective," and that they have no adverse effects on reproduction and fertility. This, despite the fact they've done no reproductive studies at all.

Women who hear such assurances will assume the necessary studies HAVE been done when, in fact, that's a complete lie. The reality is, you cannot find evidence of harm if you're not looking for it. Another reality is that assumptions and guesses about science are not the same as scientific evidence. One major assumption that has now turned out to be completely wrong is that the mRNA injection stays in the deltoid muscle, the site of injection.

"No one has ever sought to determine whether they remain at the site of injection or not, or whether they disseminate throughout the body, which of course they do," Wakefield says. "So, it's a naive and completely inappropriate assumption.

The other assumption that was completely inappropriate was making any assumption at all. You're going to give this [shot] to seven billion people ... and you're going to assume something about its safety? Then you discover, after giving it to the majority of that seven billion population, that you were completely wrong.

In fact, it goes throughout the body. The spike protein can be found in tissues throughout the body, including and in particular in the ovaries. There it can set up an inflammatory reaction, autoimmunity, damage and infertility. There is no question that is biologically plausible.

So here you have the mentality of these people, that after the horse has bolted, they are trying to shut the gate. If there is going to be damage, then the damage is done and it is too late. That is totally irresponsible and people need to know that."

Wakefield further points out that no clinical trial for any of the vaccines on the childhood vaccination schedule has ever been tested against a true placebo. All have used active placebos, such as an aluminum injection or another vaccine, which effectively hides most of the adverse effects.

Interestingly, in some of the COVID jab trials, they actually used a completely inert placebo (although some vaccine makers used another vaccine). But then note what happened. Before the trial was over, they unblinded everyone and offered the jab to everyone in the placebo group, effectively eradicating the control group altogether! Then, they tried to bury the data under red tape for 75 years. Thankfully, a sensible judge didn't let them get away with it. Wakefield says:

"They [Pfizer] knew there were problems. They had identified the problems doing the appropriate study, at least to start with, until they gave the crossover group the vaccine. Then they tried to hide the data because they knew it revealed the seriousness of the adverse reactions to their vaccine. The court overruled them and now those data are being analyzed, and they are terrifying."

Stunning Abdication of Science

What's worse, government has incentivized ignorance under the law. They have incentivized not knowing what the long-term effects are. Holland adds:

"What's particularly stunning, in terms of the absolute abdication from science, is that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said it's perfectly fine to co-administer the COVID shots with everything else on the childhood schedule. That is going to have untold horrific likely effects ...

Most pediatricians will say 'Hey, the CDC says it's fine' ... They are going to be co-administering these shots with other things, and there is no science to back that up. None."

Unfortunately, the future looks grim in this regard, as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is now considering a "Future Framework" in which vaccine makers will be allowed to reformulate and release future COVID shots without any additional testing. Clinical trials are easy to rig to begin with, but now they won't even have to go through the trouble of fabricating desired results.

"And, of course there will be harmful effects on fertility," Holland says. "I think it's becoming very clear that we just have to reject all of this. It is corrupted to its core. It's anti-human, I mean it's truly anti-human. I think the reality that we're in is becoming clearer."

A Hopeful Note

Wakefield adds:

"To follow-up on that, a note of hope ... People coming to this anew may think that we're in a terribly dark time. I see it differently, having been in this now for 30 years. When I started out, a handful of people around the world were prepared to debate the thorny issue of vaccine safety.

Now I read the other day that 70% of American adults have rejected the CDC's recommended protocol for the COVID vaccine. They either didn't get the first dose, they didn't get the second dose, or they have refused to get the boosters, saying this is neither necessary nor is it safe.

Those people — 70% of American adults — according to mainstream media are anti-vaxxers. So, whether they know it or not, they've joined our team and the other side has lost.

This is a desperate, desperate measure; one hail Mary pass after another, and it's failing very, very badly. For those of you who have not seen it from an historical perspective, take heart, because the world really is waking up in an extraordinary way ...

The silver lining of the dark cloud of COVID is that it has woken so many people ... There is an inevitability to what is happening here, and they will not get away with it for very much longer."

We've Allowed the Creation of an Anti-Human World

As for those who insist they have no objections to childhood vaccines, only the COVID jab, Wakefield warns just about every vaccine safety advocate began by objecting to a single vaccine or single ingredient before realizing it isn't that simple:

"We all came to the collective realization that this was far more complex than we had previously imagined. They were making it more and more complex by the year, adding more vaccines into the schedule, lumping them all together. As Mary said, the idea of these vaccines being safe in combination was one they'd never tested but merely assumed to be safe ...

We came to the realization that it is some cumulative toxicity, some interactive effect, some potentiation that is leading to this massive increase in, for example, neurodevelopmental or immunological disorders.

Had we been allowed to continue the research, any of us, all of us, we would have answers now. But we don't have answers because the work was sabotaged at every turn, and now we are living in a state of greater ignorance than we were before.

We're now living in a world of man-made diseases. It's absolutely staggering. None of this need ever have happened, and yet here we are with all of these new conditions or new variants on an old theme, like regressive autism, that we did not see before. That is something that man has created.

Just as easily man could get rid of it if we took the initiative. That's what, collectively, we have to do, and that's what Children's Health Defense is doing. They're alerting people to this, waking them up, and it's working."

In addition to learning about the dangers of vaccines, people are also starting to learn more about other environmental toxins — pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), air pollution, water pollution, artificial foods, hormone-mimicking plastic chemicals and more, all of which have adverse effects on health and reproductive capacity.

"I think most humans want to live in a pro-human environment," Holland says. "And I think the corporate government world we're in right now is genuinely anti-human."

The Scale of Harm Is Staggering

While VAERS is the only publicly available database collecting adverse vaccine reactions, the U.S. government has at least 10 other adverse event reporting systems that they're not sharing data from.

Children's Health Defense is filing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for the other systems to get a better idea of the scale of harms, but VAERS and anecdotal reports alone suggest the scale of injuries and deaths is enormous. Data from insurance companies around the world also confirm this. Holland notes:

"In 2021, from one life insurance company in the United States, an Indiana company, we know that 18 to 64 year olds suffer a 40% excess death rate. They said a 10% shift would be a 1 in 200-year occurrence. A 40% shift is beyond catastrophic, and that's what we're looking at. These are secrets that can't be hidden."

Panafrican Congress Is Pushing Back

Another piece of positive news is that a Panafrican Congress that was recently convened is starting to push back against the WHO. And, if the WHO were to be banned from a continent like Africa, it would be game over for them. Holland explains:

"The WHO is following a two-track course to get to what they say, in 2024, will be a new international treaty, which basically will put the WHO at the center of global health and governance de facto. One track was through U.S.-proposed international health regulations.

The U.S. proposed 12 regulations in December 2021 that would put the WHO at the center of these things and put in place very draconian regulations that would allow the WHO to supersede any decisions at the national government level. In a vote on those new international health regulation amendments, 47 African countries rejected all of them.

Africa really led the way in saying 'No, we don't trust the WHO, we don't want the WHO in this role.' That's very exciting because Africa absolutely has been exploited in every which way by the WHO and their pharmaceutical industry partners. I don't think the WHO agenda is dead. We still have a lot of work to do.

But clearly, we did have on Saturday an African sovereignty coalition launch, which you can see on the Children's Health Defense TV website. There were activists, advocates, physicians, scientists from all over Africa, and then supporters from around the world. It's very exciting. I think Africa is sending a message loud and clear we will not put up with this ...

We'll take it one day at a time, but I believe the WHO and its backers will fail, and certainly many people around the world, Children's Health Defense included, are working on lawsuits to prove there's fraud going on here, this is criminal activity. Certainly, the authorization for [young] children [is a criminal act].

We're going to amend the lawsuit we have, which is to contest the jabs for 5 to 11-year-olds that the FDA authorized. We'll just amend that for these younger children. This is devastating, this is a crime against humanity. There is no justification for young children getting these shots. They are not at risk of serious injury or death from COVID, but they certainly are at risk from these shots."

Can the Judicial System Be Trusted?

Speaking of lawsuits, many legal actions over the past two years have failed, but Holland, who is the chief legal counsel for Children's Health Defense, is optimistic, because courts tend to shift with public opinion. She's noticed courts are becoming increasingly receptive to the notion that there may be fraud going on with the COVID jabs, and that conflicts of interest play a role.

For example, two judges in New York who were assigned to cases she was representing were recently forced to recuse themselves, after it became known they owned between $50,000 and $500,000 in Pfizer stock.

"I think we're likely to see many more successful lawsuits going forward in the next two years than in the last two years," she says. "I think the population is coming to understand that there are conflicts of interest that prevent these people from being unbiased.

I think it's a question of time, and I think we're in a race against time, but I do believe that lawsuits are likely to be more successful as time goes on and I think we're already seeing that. We struck down the OSHA mandate, we struck down the mask mandates in airline transportation, we got access to the Pfizer documents. I think there's more good news coming from the courts, I really do."

The home run, judicially speaking, would be if we could prove vaccine makers committed fraud or "willful misconduct," as that would eliminate all of their protections against prosecution and liability. The COVID jabs are authorized for emergency use under the 2005 PREP Act — which Holland believes is unconstitutional — and under that law, willful misconduct must be proven by "clear and convincing evidence."

"I believe that at this point we're getting very, very close to that threshold where we can prove willful misconduct by clear and convincing evidence," she says.

"At that point, I think it will be clear to the whole population that it's the liability protection on the back end and the mandates at the front end that makes this whole enterprise possible. I think there are serious attacks on both of those, and by the time the whole truth comes out, the whole vaccine paradigm disappears.

I think it's in our sights, I really do. I think the health of the unvaccinated is overwhelmingly superior to the health of the vaccinated, and that story's coming out. Children's Health Defense is coming out with a book this fall by Dr. Brian Hooker and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., about the science showing how much healthier unvaccinated people are.

I think the truth is coming out, and I think the stakes are very high for the next couple years. But I really do believe that at the end of these couple years we will be in a whole new paradigm of vaccines and health. People have seen enough about the bad side of COVID shots that they are now open to this. I think we're likely to see a sea change."

In closing, if you didn't watch the film yesterday, set aside 30 minutes to do it now. And, be sure to watch it all the way to the end. The final 10 minutes include an update on the Kenya story, a review of what happened with the HPV vaccine, and an overview of what we know about the COVID shots' potential impacts on fertility. It's important to realize that this depopulation agenda didn't begin and end in Kenya. It's happening worldwide.

More Movies Are Coming

Wakefield's fifth film is already in preproduction and should be ready for release next year. This one will be a full-length narrative feature about the childhood vaccination schedule. It was co-written by Terry Rossio, who also wrote "Shrek," "Pirates of the Caribbean," "Aladdin" and other well-known movie productions. 

"It's a very powerful film, it will really move the mindset," Wakefield says. "It will take those who have been awoken by the issue of COVID vaccines across the bridge from the adult vaccine schedule to the realization that this has been happening in the childhood vaccine schedule since the very beginning. It's a very, very important film."

Children's Health Defense will also be coming out with a film version of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s book, "The Real Anthony Fauci." That will be coming out later this year for which I was interviewed.

from Articles https://ift.tt/CbKgYnW
via IFTTT

This article was previously published April 26, 2020, and has been updated with new information.

Francis Boyle, a former advisory board member for the Council for Responsible Genetics, is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law.

His educational background¹ includes an undergraduate degree from the University of Chicago, a juris doctor (lawyer) degree from Harvard and a Ph.D. in political science. For decades, he's advocated against the development and use of bioweapons, which he suspects COVID-19 is.

In fact, Boyle was the one who called for biowarfare legislation at the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, and the one who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and signed into law by George Bush Sr.

In our first, March 8, 2020, interview, Boyle shared his views on the origins of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Here, we continue our discussion, as more details have emerged about this virus. One of the criticisms raised since our last interview is that Boyle has no formal training in virology. When asked what makes him qualified to speak about this particular virus, he says:

"I went to the University of Chicago, which is one of the top five universities in the country, if not the world. There I took their bio pre-med sequence, which was biochemistry, population biology and genetics, and got straight A's.

I was in there competing with all the University of Chicago bio pre-med students for grades and my biochem lab partner went to Harvard Medical School.

I won the University of Chicago's Sigma Zi award and prize in biology for my graduating year. They gave out one per year and it usually went to seniors, but in my case, they had to make a special exception because I was a graduating junior.

So, yes, I'm not a scientist, but one of the reasons the Council for Responsible Genetics asked me to get involved was that my knowledge in this field was well-known to my life science friends there on the Harvard faculty, and that's how I got involved here.

I had basic rudimentary training, actually very good training, at the University of Chicago, and my professors there, professor friends at Harvard in the life sciences, I guess they vouched for me. So, when I was asked to join shortly after CRG was founded in 1983, I agreed to do so and they asked me to handle their biological warfare work."

SARS-CoV-2 — A Biological Warfare Weapon

"Novel coronavirus" means it is a new virus not previously known to previously infect humans. The currently held conventional view is that SARS-CoV-2 was transmitted through animals (zoonotic transmission), specifically bats. Boyle dismissed this notion in our initial interview, and still refutes the idea.

While a widely-cited paper,² published in the Nature journal on February 3, 2020, claims to establish that SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus of bat origin that then jumped species, the work of one of the authors of that paper, Shi Zhengli, actually involved the weaponization of the SARS virus. (Another Nature paper³ published that same day reiterates the idea that the COVID-19 pandemic is zoonotically transmitted.)

However, according to Boyle, other scientific literature establishes that this is indeed an engineered synthetic virus that was not transmitted from animals to humans without human intervention.

For starters, a Lancet paper⁴ published February 15, 2020, by physicians who treated some of the first COVID-19 patients in China showed that patient zero, the one believed to have started the transmission, was nowhere near the Wuhan seafood market.

What's more, there were no bats sold in or even close to the market. At least one-third of the patients reviewed also had no exposure or links to that market. This data supports the counter-hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 was not zoonotically transmitted but is in fact an engineered virus.

By mid-2020 even U.S. politicians and intelligence agencies were starting to say they believed the virus leaked from the Wuhan BSL4 lab^5,6 In our first interview, Boyle discussed published research establishing that the novel coronavirus is SARS, which is a weaponized version of the coronavirus to begin with Wuhan BSL 4 lab, with added gain-of-function capabilities that increases its virulence (makes it spread easier and faster).

"I also went through the scientific article where the Australian health board working with Wuhan … genetically engineered HIV into SARS," Boyle says. "So, that is all verified in scientific papers. In addition, it seems to me that they took that back to the [Wuhan] BSL4 and applied nanotechnology to it.

The size of the molecules are maybe 120 microns, which indicates to me we are dealing with nanotechnology. That's [something] you need to do in a BSL4. Biological weapons nanotechnology is so dangerous, people working with it have to wear a moon suit with portable air …

We also know that one of the cooperating institutions [to Wuhan BSL4] was Harvard, and that the chairman of the Harvard chemistry department, [Dr. Charles Lieber], a specialist in nanotechnology, set up an entire laboratory in Wuhan where [according to reports] he specialized in applying nanotechnology to chemistry and biology.

My guess is, based on what I've read in the literature, that they tried to weaponize all that together. And that is SARS-CoV-2 that we are dealing with now.

So, it's SARS, which is genetically engineered biowarfare agent to begin with. Second, it has gain-of-function properties, which makes it more lethal, more infectious. It has HIV in there. That was confirmed by an Indian scientist … and it looks like nanotechnology [has been used] … An MIT scientist who did a study found that it traveled 27 feet through the air. And that, I guess, was in lab conditions.

That, I think, is why it's so infectious, and that is what I believe we are dealing with here … [This is] why the 6-foot [social distancing recommendation] by the CDC … is preposterous. Even doubling that will do you no good. If there is nanotechnology, it floats in the air …

I am not saying that China deliberately released this, shooting itself in the foot. But it was clear they were developing an extremely dangerous unknown biological weapon that had never been seen before, and it leaked out of the lab.

And as you see in the Washington Post,⁷ U.S. State Department officials … [reported] back to Washington that there were inadequate safety precautions and procedures in that lab to begin with. We also know that SARS has leaked out of other Chinese biological warfare labs. So right now, I believe that is what happened here …

I personally believe that until our political leaders come clean with the American people, both at the White House and in Congress and our state government, and publicly admit that this is an extremely dangerous offensive biological warfare weapon that we are dealing with, I do not see that we will be able to confront it and to stop it, let alone defeat it."

The Origin of SARS-CoV-2

While Boyle made the origin of SARS-CoV-2 clear in our initial conversation, as I started reading some of the literature it really was shocking because one of the primary investigators on the 2015 paper⁸ from the University of North Carolina — "A SARS-like Cluster of Circulating Bat Coronaviruses Shows Potential for Human Emergence" — was Dr. Shi Zhengli, a virologist who in 2010 had published a paper⁹ discussing the weaponization of the SARS virus.

Normally, while the coronavirus found in bats may be SARS,¹⁰ it typically does not infect humans as it does not target the ACE-2 receptor. The infectious agent causing the current pandemic is called SARS-CoV-2 — SARS standing for "serious acute respiratory infection" and CoV-2 indicating that it's a second type of SARS coronavirus known to infect humans.

SARS-CoV-2, of course, contains the genetic modification to attach to ACE2 receptors in human cells, which allows it to infect them. Zhengli's publications show that she engineered this bat coronavirus into one that crosses species and infects humans. She was in fact working on this for more than 10 years.

"That is why I said SARS was a bioengineered warfare weapon to begin with," Boyle says. "And that is what … [the University of] North Carolina and … the Australian lab were trying to make even more dangerous with the gain-of-function and the HIV. So … SARS was a biological warfare [agent] to begin with, it leaked, and that is the origin of the [COVID-19] epidemic."

In addition, an Indian paper^11,12 that ended up being withdrawn due to intense political pressure, shows a specific envelope protein from the HIV virus called GP41 was integrated in the RNA sequences of SARS-CoV-2. In other words, the implication is that the HIV virus was genetically engineered into SARS.

So, in summary, SARS-CoV-2 appears to be a bioengineered bat coronavirus¹³ — which was initially benign and nontransmittable to humans. Zhengli then genetically modified the virus to integrate spike proteins that allows the virus to enter human cells by attaching to ACE-2 receptors. That was the first modification.

The second modification was to integrate an envelope protein from HIV called GP141, which tends to impair the immune system. A third modification appears to involve nanotechnology to make the virus light enough to remain airborne for a long time, apparently giving it a range of up to 27 feet.¹⁴

Nanotech Expert With Wuhan Connection Arrested

While the BSL4 lab in Wuhan may have leaked the virus, its creation does not appear to be limited to the Chinese. As noted by Boyle in his comment above, the chairman of the Harvard department of chemistry, nanoscience expert Dr. Charles Lieber, was arrested in 2020 by federal agencies, suspected of illegal dealings with China.¹⁵ Lieber denied the allegations, but was convicted in December 2021 of lying about his China ties.¹⁶

In total, he was found guilty of six felonies, including falsely-reported tax returns. In February 2022, Lieber's attorneys filed for the conviction to be overturned and for Lieber to either be acquitted or granted a new trial.¹⁷ After hearing arguments, a Boston judge said he would make a determination on the petition at a later, undisclosed date.

The government's case against Liber showed that Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) allegedly paid him $50,000 a month from 2012 to 2017 to help establish and oversee the WUT-Harvard Joint Nano Key Laboratory. He also received another $150,000 a month in living expenses from China's Thousand Talents program. The problem was, Harvard officials claim they had not approved the lab and didn't know about it until 2015. Boyle comments:

"The cover story here — that Harvard didn't know what was going on — is preposterous. I spent seven years at Harvard. I have three degrees from Harvard. I spent two years teaching at Harvard.

Of course Harvard knew that its chair of the chemistry department had this lab in Wuhan, China, where he was working on nanotechnology with respect to chemical and biological materials. That's been reported. They didn't say what the materials were. In addition, it has now been reported that Harvard was a cooperating institution with the Wuhan BSL4."

Researchers Working on Gain-of-Function to Spanish Flu

If you think SARS-CoV-2 is bad, be glad it's not the weaponized version of Spanish flu, which has also been in the works, according to Boyle. He says:

"[The University of North Carolina's] work was existentially dangerous and they knew it at the time. If you read the UNC scientific article¹⁸ [cowritten by] the Wuhan BSL4 scientist [Shi Zhengli] … it says, 'Experiments with the full-length and chimeric SHC014 recombinant viruses were initiated and performed before the GOF research funding pause and have since been reviewed and approved for continued study by the NIH.'

It says recombinant … So, they admit it was gain-of-function [research]. [The research] was paused by NIH¹⁹ [National Institutes of Health]. Why was it paused by NIH? Because there was a letter put out by large numbers of life scientists at the time saying this type of gain-of-function work … could be existentially dangerous if it got out in the public. Therefore, it had to be terminated … [But] the NIH was funding this in the beginning …

A footnote here: I read the NIH's pause letter to the University of North Carolina, and UNC was doing two gain-of-function research projects. The other one was with Dr. [Yoshihiro] Kawaoka from the University of Wisconsin, who had resurrected the Spanish flu virus²⁰ for the Pentagon.

He, according to the pause letter, was also there doing gain-of-function work on the flu virus — one could only conclude it was the Spanish flu virus. It did not say the Spanish flu, but they also put a gain-of-function pause on that type of deadly research …

I mean, the Spanish flu, we all know what that is, so imagine giving the Spanish flu gain-of-function properties, making it even more lethal and more infectious. That's exactly what was going on there at that UNC lab …"

Disturbingly, while the NIH halted funding of this kind of gain-of-function research on lethal pathogens in 2014, it reauthorized it in December 2017,²¹ and Boyle suspects Kawaoka's work may have been restarted as well, although he's not found proof of it yet.

"So, this was existentially dangerous work that was going on at that UNC lab. Everyone knew it, NIH funded it, NIAID under Dr. Fauci funded it as well. They knew exactly how dangerous this was. They paused it and then they resumed it," Boyle says.

Can Violations of Biowarfare Treaty Be Enforced?

As mentioned, Boyle is a professor of international law and drafted an international treaty on biowarfare agents and weapons. That law is still in force, and would provide life imprisonment for everyone involved in the creation and release of SARS-CoV-2, were it officially concluded to be a biowarfare agent.

"If you read that UNC article,²² it says exactly it was dealing with synthetic molecules … And in my biological weapons anti-terrorism act of 1989, I specifically criminalized — by that name — synthetic molecules.

That is why, at first, the whole synthetic biology movement … was set up by the Pentagons DARPA. They funded the whole thing. And it's DARPA money that is behind synthetic biology, gene drive and all the rest of it.

And that is why at the first convention of synthetic biologists, in their final report, one of their key recommendations was the repeal of my biological weapons anti-terrorism act, because they fully intended to use synthetic biology to manufacture biological weapons …

The law still applies. It provides for life imprisonment for everyone who has done this … all the scientists involved at the University of North Carolina and everyone who funded this project, knowing that it was existentially dangerous — and that includes Fauci and [people at] the NIH … UNC, Food and Drug Administration … the Dana Harvard Cancer Institute at Harvard … the World Health Organization …"

So, just how would we get that process of justice going? Boyle explains:

"There are two ways. First, you're going to have to pressure the Department of Justice to prosecute these people. That might be very difficult to do. Federal statutes require indictments to be brought by U.S. attorneys. However, just with respect to North Carolina, state law applies there too. I haven't researched North Carolina law; however, I was originally hired here to teach criminal law and I taught it for seven or eight years …

To have criminal intent, one of the variants of criminal intent is the demonstration of grave indifference to human life. And that is the criminal intent necessary for homicide.

So in my opinion, and my advice would be, if we can't get [attorney general William Pelham] Barr to sign off on prosecuting these people, that the district attorney, state's attorney, attorney general out there in North Carolina, institute and indict everyone involved in this North Carolina work for homicide.

And that could include up to and including murder, malice of forethought. Again, one of the elements can be manifestation of grave indifference to human life. And it's clear from this article [the 2015 UNC paper²³], they knew it was gain-of-function, they paused it because it was existentially dangerous, it was then reapproved and they continued it.

So, I think a good case could be made, certainly, for indicting these people under North Carolina law by North Carolina legal authorities, if the federal government is not going to do it for us, under my law [the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989]. But again, I want to make it clear, I haven't research North Carolina law."

Time to Shutter All BSL4 Laboratories?

Boyle is adamant that all BSL3 and BSL4 laboratories must be closed down and all biowarfare work with lethal pathogens ceased. "They are all existentially dangerous," he says. "This is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And it is now happened. Here we are. It's staring us in the face."

Certainly, COVID-19 is nowhere near as devastating as the Black Death or the Spanish flu of 1918, both of which exacted a shocking death toll, all without the aid of synthetic molecules and nanotechnology.

The very idea that any of these horrific illnesses might be brought back in turbo-charged form should be terrifying enough for the world to unite in saying "No thanks; we don't want or need that kind of research going on." What value have these dangerous laboratories provided to date compared to the risk they are exposing all of us to?

from Articles https://ift.tt/ehzbVfx
via IFTTT

More than 80 percent of schools in America use toxic pesticides as a preventative measure, whether it‘s needed or not.

Mark Lame, an entomologist and professor at Indiana University‘s School of Public and Environmental Affairs, believes this is an entirely unnecessary practice that carries more risks than benefits to students and faculty.

The most widely used pesticides are, in fact, nerve poisons. They cause uncontrolled nerve firing, and disrupt the delicate hormone systems.

The link between pesticide exposure and health problems in children is already well established. Research has connected these endocrine-disrupting pesticides to health problems such as ADHD, autism, and infertility -- all of which are on the rise.

Professor Lame says pest problems are better managed through an integrated approach -- by preventing the conditions that attract pests into school facilities in the first place.

Lame serves as a consultant for schools around the country, helping them reduce the toxic load by implementing his Integrated Pest Management (IPM) process.

Science Daily July 21, 2007

from Articles : Thyroid Disease, Autism https://ift.tt/DQ9nyqF
via IFTTT