At the start of each year, the world’s elite hop into their private jets and descend upon Davos, Switzerland, a city prized not only for its luxury ski resorts but also for hosting the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting.
Also known as the Davos Forum, the event takes on a different theme each year, providing a global platform for business leaders, government officials, academia and other members of society to discuss “critical issues.”1 WEF is one of the key players behind The Great Reset, with their “new normal” dictum that, by 2030, you will own nothing and be happy.2
In such a scheme, the world’s resources will be owned and controlled by the technocratic elite. All items and resources are to be used by the collective, while actual ownership is restricted to an upper stratum of social class. Just how “upper class”?
To even attend the WEF annual meeting, you must be privately invited or a member of WEF, which costs $60,000 to $600,000. The attendance badge for the meeting is extra and costs another $27,000 in 2020, just to get entrance to the conference.3
The irony was palpable at Davos 2020, which brought in a “steady stream” of private planes and helicopters so their passengers could discuss the climate crisis and sustainability.4 In 2018, more than 1,000 private jets and helicopters similarly made their way to Davos and, in 2017, an estimated 200 private flights landed in the city each day during the event.5
By 2050, it’s estimated that aviation will contribute 22% of global carbon emissions. Still, in 2019, more than 600 private planes arrived at the Davos Forum, and that doesn’t include the military planes that transported an additional 60 presidents and prime ministers.6
But we needn’t worry about this indulgence of the upper classes at the expense of the environment, according to WEF. “Offering little self-awareness, leaders of the WEF claim that the jet-set class promises to purchase carbon credits to offset the emissions from their planes,” Forbes noted. This is yet another strategy of the technocratic elite to set up a new wave of colonization in the name of sustainability and “net zero” carbon emissions.
The deadline Bill Gates has given to reach net zero emissions is 2050.7 It’s another ironic statement coming from the jet-set elite. Gates lives in a 66,000-square-foot mansion and travels in a private jet that uses up 486 gallons of fuel every hour.8 As a result of buying up staggering amounts of farmland, he’s a major contributor to carbon emissions,9 and his jet-setting lifestyle also makes him a carbon “super-emitter.”10
But when it comes to the elite, it’s “do as I say, not as I do.” As explained by Vandana Shiva, in order to force the world to accept The Great Reset’s new food and agricultural system, new conditionalities are being created through net zero “nature-based” solutions, which are anything but good for the environment and favor the rich.
Navdanya’s report, “Earth Democracy: Connecting Rights of Mother Earth to Human Rights and Well-Being of All,” explains:11
“If ‘feeding the world’ through chemicals and dwarf varieties bred for chemicals was the false narrative created to impose the Green Revolution, the new false narrative is ‘sustainability’ and ‘saving the planet.’ In the new ‘net zero’ world, farmers will not be respected and rewarded as custodians of the land and caregivers, as Annadatas, the providers of our food and health.
… ‘Net Zero’ is a new strategy to get rid of small farmers in first through ‘digital farming’ and ‘farming without farmers’ and then through the burden of fake carbon accounting.
Carbon offsets and the new accounting trick of ‘net zero’ does not mean zero emissions. It means the rich polluters will continue to pollute and also grab the land and resources of those who have not polluted — indigenous people and small farmers — for carbon offsets.”
The idea that the elite can continue to pollute but simply purchase carbon credits to “offset” their pollution is simply a matter of smoke and mirrors. Speaking with Business Insider, Lucy Gilliam, with the European clean transport nonprofit Transport & Environment, stated, "You're not actually removing the emissions that have been created by that plane. The plane will have burned that fuel, and the carbon has been released into the atmosphere."12
In 2021, due to the pandemic the Davos Forum was held virtually in January and again in person in Singapore in August. During the five-day January event, which was attended by 1,507 people from “the highest levels of leadership,” five domains of The Great Reset Initiative were discussed, including:13
It’s made clear that the COVID-19 pandemic has created “a unique window of opportunity” to rapidly usher in The Great Reset, which involves changing everything from future global relations and the direction of national economies to “the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons.”14
The end goal is to “build a new social contract,”15 which sounds like a lofty goal while telling you exactly nothing. “Build back better” is a tagline that’s used often with The Great Reset, and though this is being played off as a new initiative, it’s actually a rebranding of terms for technocracy and the old “New World Order.”
Part of the plan involves the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which Schwab has been discussing since at least 2016,16 and which “is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital and biological spheres.”
In terms of government, the Revolution will bring new technological powers that allow for increased population control via “pervasive surveillance systems and the ability to control digital infrastructure.”17 As for as its effects on people, Klaus Schwab, WEF’s founder and executive chairman, wrote in 2016:18
“The Fourth Industrial Revolution, finally, will change not only what we do but also who we are. It will affect our identity and all the issues associated with it: our sense of privacy, our notions of ownership, our consumption patterns, the time we devote to work and leisure, and how we develop our careers, cultivate our skills, meet people, and nurture relationships.
It is already changing our health and leading to a ‘quantified’ self, and sooner than we think it may lead to human augmentation. The list is endless because it is bound only by our imagination.”
Davos 2022 will take place in January 2022, with plans to continue The Great Reset narrative. The theme, “Working Together, Restoring Trust,” will focus on “accelerating stakeholder capitalism, harnessing the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and ensuring a more inclusive future of work.”19
Also known as stakeholder economy, Forbes described stakeholder capitalism as “the notion that a firm focuses on meeting the needs of all its stakeholders: customers, employees, partners, the community and society as a whole.”20
The idea of stakeholder capitalism has been around since at least 1932, and was also endorsed by nearly 200 CEOs of large corporations in August 2019.21 However, it is now being accelerated as part of The Great Reset.
“Business has now to fully embrace stakeholder capitalism, which means not only maximizing profits, but use their capabilities and resources in cooperation with governments and civil society to address the key issues of this decade. They have to actively contribute to a more cohesive and sustainable world,” said Schwab.22
However, forms of stakeholder capitalism have already been tried and failed, because balancing conflicting stakeholder claims was near-impossible and only led to mass confusion and poor returns.23 The failure of this strategy is what led big businesses to focus on maximizing shareholder value instead.
In stakeholder capitalism, private corporations become “trustees of society,” as Schwab said, which he added is “clearly the best response to today’s social and environmental challenges.”24 But while it sounds like a good thing to have corporations looking out for their customers, suppliers, employees and society as a whole, the underlying theme is that private corporations take power over society — not elected leaders.
WEF is partnered with multinational corporations that lead the food, oil, technology and pharmaceutical industries. What does a future look like in which these corporations call all the shots? We’ve already seen snippets, such as the 2021 United Nations Food Systems Summit, which prompted boycotts from farmers and human rights groups over claims that it favored agribusiness interests, elite foundations and the exploitation of African food systems.25
In terms of Big Tech, it’s possible it would end up as its own global governing body, wielding increasing power over society. Your privacy and data, your food and your access to medications would all be under the control of these corporate “custodians.” As political scientist Ivan Wecke wrote in Open Democracy:26
“The plan from which The Great Reset originated was called the Global Redesign Initiative. Drafted by the WEF after the 2008 economic crisis, the initiative contains a 600-page report on transforming global governance. In the WEF’s vision, ‘the government voice would be one among many, without always being the final arbiter.’
… Instead of corporations serving many stakeholders, in the multi-stakeholder model of global governance, corporations are promoted to being official stakeholders in global decision-making, while governments are relegated to being one of many stakeholders. In practice, corporations become the main stakeholders, while governments take a backseat role, and civil society is mainly window dressing.
… If you value your right to public health, to privacy, to access healthy food or to democratic representation, be wary of the words 'stakeholder capitalism’ when they pop up at the next Davos summit.”
This article was previously published January 17, 2021, and has been updated with new information.
Dawson Church,1 Ph.D., is a leader in the energy psychology movement, one of the most common forms being the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT), which I have promoted for years. Church investigated and built on the EFT techniques developed by Gary Craig2 in the 1990s (which in turn was a derivative of the founder of energy tapping, Roger Callahan's, work3).
While Craig was not a clinical investigator, Dawson's work has led to over 100 clinical trials on EFT. In this interview, Church shares insights from his experience, which he has also documented in the books "Mind to Matter: The Astonishing Science of How Your Brain Creates Material Reality" and "Bliss Brain: The Neuroscience of Remodeling Your Brain for Resilience, Creativity and Joy."
This information is particularly timely in light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. While the infection itself has been shown to be far less lethal than initially suspected, government responses to it have undoubtedly led to an epidemic of fear and stress, which can have serious health consequences. As explained by Church:
"The stress we feel in our minds and bodies can often do far more harm than pathogens. I've done several randomized controlled trials of cortisol.
When you think a negative thought, when you feel stress, when you have a fearful belief, your cortisol level rises within three minutes. Chronically high cortisol produces all kinds of ill effects in your body, including depressed immune function and increased inflammation. The fear will get you even if the virus doesn't."
As noted by Church, our brains are hard-wired and evolutionarily adapted to pay attention to potential threats. Failing to notice a threat can get you killed, whereas there's no evolutionary reward for failing to notice the good stuff. As a result, most of us need to train our brain to notice the positive, and to feel gratitude.
"We're subject to a constant barrage of bad news, so it takes meditation, it takes tapping, it takes time in nature," Church says. "You really have to be deliberate in your efforts to redirect your attention and not have meditation it hijacked by all the bad stuff out there.
What I do in response is to read positive blogs, news and media. That doesn't mean I never read any bad news, I stay informed, but I make sure I read positive things. I'm reading Marcus Aurelius right now … I meditate for an hour every day. And I anchor myself in what I call in my book 'Mind to Matter,' Nonlocal mind.
Tune into nonlocal mind, look out the window and see the roses and the bees and the sunset, and then it's a lot easier to stay centered when confronted by difficult local events. I also focus on compassion."
In 2008, Church attended a conference where he presented with Roland McCraty,4 head researcher in how the heart and mind interconnect from HeartMath Institute, and Joe Dispenza,5 whose fields include mind-body medicine and brain/heart coherence.
Curious about what would happen if he combined the best evidence-based methods, he came up with what eventually became known as "EcoMeditation" — a conglomerate of techniques proven to rapidly increase positivity and well-being. They include:
According to Church, when you do them together, they reinforce each other. "The whole is more than the sum of its parts," he says. EcoMeditation has now been empirically tested and refined, showing that it can lower baseline cortisol levels by one-third in as little as a week. And, when stress chemicals like cortisol and adrenaline decline, the neurochemicals of repair and rejuvenation such as DHEA, serotonin and dopamine increase.
In one trial, Church looked at the effects of EcoMeditation on immunoglobulins, antibodies that bind to and neutralize corona viruses. In just two days, participants who did EcoMeditation had a 27% rise in these antibodies in their mucous membranes.
"You produce a huge shift in your immunity by lowering stress," Church says. "Meditate, tap, use your favorite methods to lower your stress level. This automatically upregulates your immune system."
The year 2020 has been challenging for most people. The drumbeat of negative news can overwhelm even the most resilient among us. In Chapter 2 of "Mind to Matter," Church talks about a phenomenon called "emotional contagion." In a nutshell, researchers have shown that emotions have an impact similar to that of infectious disease. They're contagious, and affect those around us.
He cites one study in which they found that the next-door neighbor of a happy person is 35% more likely to be happy as well, and the neighbor twice removed is 15% more likely to be happy. That person's neighbor, in turn, who is 3 degrees removed from the happy person is 6% more likely to be happy. The same contagion rule applies when the emotions are negative.
"We're in the middle of this mass contagion of fear," Dawson says, "and it is depressing our immune systems, rendering us less resilient, affecting us psychospiritually, making us less able to cope. That's when we need a bigger dose of positivity, joy and gratitude. We need to do that deliberately. That means meditation, it means consuming positive media. It means not exposing yourself to needless negative emotions."
One of the reasons Dawson recommends meditation is because of the distinct biochemical effects it produces. He explains:
"Mystics describe this experience of oneness with the universe. When they meditate, they lose any sense of as isolated beings. If you look at MRIs of Tibetan monks, you find that the part of the brain that constructs the sense of self — the mid-prefrontal cortex — downregulates. They lose themselves.
Another part of the brain that downregulates is the part of the parietal lobe, the temporal parietal junction that handles 'proprioception', the location of our body in space. When they're in this deep mystical experience, their sense of self has turned off and their brains' ability to locate their bodies and space is turned off.
At the same time, oxytocin, the love hormone, floods their cells. They experience this ecstatic bliss as anandamide, serotonin and dopamine flood their brains and they've lost the sense of who they are and where they are, and they're literally feeling one with the universe.
Do that each morning using EcoMeditation and you're one with what I call nonlocal mind. You have that experience of mystical unity. Then, after meditation, you come back into your body, come back to your local mind, your mid prefrontal cortex turns back on, you're a local self again, your parietal lobe comes back. You know where you are in time and space.
You then bring all the resilience of that contact with nonlocal mind into local reality and you're then far more effective … Over time, these parts of the brain start to shift into this function as the neurological wiring changes, and then it becomes a trait."
To show you how effective meditation can be in daily life, Dawson cites a 10-year-long study of high performing people by the McKinsey Consulting Group. It found that those who are able to enter this flow state are five times as productive as ordinary people.
Another study by DARPA described in his book "Bliss Brain" found people who meditate improved their ability to solve complex problems by 490%. "That's why meditation is a powerful antidote to dealing with all the chaos of the world around us," Dawson says. These and many other studies can be found on www.eftuniverse.com/research-studies/eft-research.
As mentioned, EcoMeditation incorporates several different techniques, including EFT tapping, breath control and meditation. To download a free EcoMeditation audio track that guides you through each of the steps, see EcoMeditation.com. Step 1 involves tapping a series of acupuncture meridian end points. Dawson explains their relevance:
"Over 100 clinical trials have shown that [tapping] regulates the body. It downregulates your stress. It improves your mood, it decreases anxiety and depression very, very quickly ... The research shows that symptoms of trauma, hypervigilance, intrusive negative thoughts, depression — all of these things are regulated by tapping."
When you're doing EFT, you first focus on a target problem by formulating a statement. The target problem might be 'I'm afraid of catching the virus.' It might be, 'I'm afraid of dying.' It might be 'I've lost my job, I don't know how I will cope.' However, in EcoMeditation, you tap the points without defining a specific target problem.
"We know that general tapping produces an effect," Dawson says. It basically regulates your energy system in a general way and helps you enter a space of calm. Next, you add in heart coherent breathing, muscular relaxation, neurofeedback techniques and meditation on compassion.
"There are several things that move the needle in terms of neuroplasticity in the brain quicker than others, Dawson says the one that changes the brain the quickest is compassion … a response to the suffering of the world and just a sense of acceptance of people just as they are.
We get people to this compassionate state and then they start to feel really centered, really resilient, really happy. Focus on a person who makes you feel unconditionally loved. That might be a Saint. It might be a historical figure. It might be a childhood hero … Focus on that person and then … expand that compassion to every atom in the universe.
That's the very general conceptual framework we use to keep people out of trauma. We've had to really refine this thing over the years because a lot of people traumatized and it's very easy to trigger traumatic memories.
If you go into that altered state without adequate preparation, it can be produce what's called retraumatization. The instructions for EcoMeditation have been very carefully calibrated to avoid the possibility of retraumatization, which of course is the opposite of resilience, which we're trying to produce."
Emotional intensity is also important for optimal results, and the emotion of gratitude typically generates this. As such, compassion and gratitude go hand in hand and work very well together. Lastly, you need to recenter in your body. So, at the end of the meditation, open your eyes and take in your surroundings. You feel the weight of your body in the chair or on the cushion as you re-anchor yourself in the here and now.
"We don't want people to bliss out and then not be able to bring it back down to the immediate issues of their lives," Dawson explains. "We want to have them experience that mystical state, and then come back and be effective in their daily lives."
When California issued its first round of lockdown orders, Dawson and his wife agreed to use that time of increased togetherness to be extra nice to each other — to literally shelter in love. He explains:
"We realized we would be together a lot more than usual. We said we're going to use this as a crucible to really be nice to each other. We weren't not nice to each other before, but we knew we'd have tension.
We used this as a way to shelter in love, get to know each other better … I began to learn things about her. I began to be fascinated by her. We used the crisis to strengthen our relationship. Families are systems. When you change one element of a system, you change the whole system.
That's why, in a marriage, in a family, not everyone has to change. People think that 'Oh, my husband has to change. My wife has to change. My kid has to change. My parent has to change.' Actually … your chances of getting them to change are approximately zero. The only person you have leverage over is yourself …
We know, through that new science of emotional contagion, that your emotions are contagious. So, make that choice to work on yourself, to find your negative emotion, to release it, to be this agent of positive emotional contagion all around you and soon you'll find it spreads far beyond you.
Be proactive. Do the things it'll take to shift your mood. When we shift psychology, we shift biology. People don't realize how dependent their biology is on their psychology. For example, in study of a weekend EcoMeditation, anxiety went down by 26%. Depression went down by 32%. PTSD symptoms went down by 18%. Pain went down 43%. All of these are psychological shifts people are making as they tap and meditate.
Average resting cortisol went down significantly by 29%. The resting heart rate went down by 5% and their immunoglobulins went up by 27%. These are your leverage points and you can decide proactively to meditate to tap and to release all that negative emotion you have.
Fill your mind with positive thoughts. I'm not saying don't read anything negative. You can't avoid it. You need to be well informed. But be informed and see it through the lens of that positive being. Tune into nonlocal mind every day. That's something you can choose to do.
EcoMeditation is about 15 to 20 minutes long. It doesn't take long and you're making a powerful declaration that you are choosing to be that agent of positive emotional contagion. You then enter your day after that morning meditation as a resourceful person, a resilient person.
Are there still problems — financial problems, medical problems, family problems? Sure. There might be all those problems. But now you are a resilient person who is facing those problems and bringing five times the problem-solving ability into that situation."
Again, to learn more about the scientific underpinnings of tapping, visit www.eftuniverse.com/research-studies/eft-research, and for a free EcoMeditation audio track, see EcoMeditation.com. If you want professional EFT help, you can tap with a practitioner, live via the internet, on tappingplace.com. Free tapping resources and meditations are also available on DawsonGift.org
Also consider picking up a copy of "Mind to Matter: The Astonishing Science of How Your Brain Creates Material Reality," in which you'll find 30 different practices that will help reprogram your mind and energetic system, including yoga, Chi Gung, Tai Chi, spending time in nature, grounding and much more. The book is available on Amazon, but you can also get it free — just cover the cost of shipping — if you order it on mindtomatter.com.
"Pick the ones that fit your lifestyle and love yourself enough to do that," Dawson says. "Make a practice of doing them. Be that proactive person and then you'll find your whole lifestyle to change.
One of the problems that meditators have [is that] we really have to calibrate ourselves when we meet other people because they're not here, they're not full of love, joy and laughter. They're full of anguish, stress and doubt. [So] you listen to people, you hear their grief and pain and sorrow and loss.
Then, by the end of your time with them, they've been affected by your positive emotional contagion and we then can change the emotional tone of our whole world. One of the cool things about those studies is that positive emotions travel out to affect those around you. So, do negative ones, but negative ones only affect people 2 degrees of separation out.
Positive ones affect people 3 degrees of separation out. We're actually more effective as agents of emotional contagion if we're positive than negative. So, go out there and meet people where they are. Listen to them if they're suffering, but then bring the power of joy and beauty and all those benefits of nonlocal mind into your local world and be that powerful change agent …
Do things to love your mind and body, and then be that vibrant person who helps those around you shift. A suffering world needs us now more than ever."
Mass psychosis is defined as “an epidemic of madness” that occurs when a “large portion of society loses touch with reality and descends into delusions.” The witch trials of the 16th and 17th centuries are a classic example. We’re now in the middle of another mass psychosis, induced by relentless fearmongering coupled with data suppression and intimidation tactics of all kinds.
The 20-minute video above, “Mass Psychosis — How an Entire Population Becomes Mentally Ill,” created by After Skool and Academy of Ideas,1 explains the tactics used to seed and nurture mental illness on a grand scale.
A number of mental health experts have expressed concern over the blatant panic mongering during the COVID-19 pandemic, warning it can have serious psychiatric effects. For example, in a December 22, 2020, article2 in Evie Magazine, S.G. Cheah discussed the emergence of mass insanity caused by “delusional fear of COVID-19.”
“Even when the statistics point to the extremely low fatality rate among children and young adults (measuring 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at 25), the young and the healthy are still terrorized by the chokehold of irrational fear when faced with the coronavirus,” Cheah wrote, adding:3
“Instead of facing reality, the delusional person would rather live in their world of make-believe. But in order to keep faking reality, they’ll have to make sure that everyone else around them also pretends to live in their imaginary world.
In simpler words, the delusional person rejects reality. And in this rejection of reality, others have to play along with how they view the world, otherwise, their world will not make sense to them. It’s why the delusional person will get angry when they face someone who doesn’t conform to their world view …
It’s one of the reasons why you’re seeing so many people who’d happily approve the silencing of any medical experts whose views contradict the WHO or CDC guidelines. ‘Obey the rules!’ becomes more important than questioning if the rules were legitimate to begin with.”
In a December 2020 interview (below), psychiatrist and medical legal expert Dr. Mark McDonald4 also went on record stating “the true public health crisis lies in the widespread fear which morphed and evolved into a form of mass delusional psychosis.”
He went so far as to refer to the outside of his home or office as the “outdoor insane asylum,” where he must assume “that any person that I run into is insane” unless they prove otherwise.5
Now, after some 19 months of abnormal “pandemic life,” the data are starting to reflect McDonald’s fears. For example, in the U.K., psychiatric referrals for first-time psychotic episodes have skyrocketed. As reported by The Guardian, October 17, 2021:6
“Cases of psychosis have soared over the past two years in England as an increasing number of people experience hallucinations and delusional thinking amid the stresses of the Covid-19 pandemic.
There was a 29% increase in the number of people referred to mental health services for their first suspected episode of psychosis between April 2019 and April 2021, NHS data7 shows. The rise continued throughout the spring, with 9,460 referred in May 2021, up 26% from 7,520 in May 2019.
The charity Rethink Mental Illness is urging the government to invest more in early intervention for psychosis to prevent further deterioration in people’s mental health from which it could take them years to recover.
It says the statistics provide some of the first concrete evidence to indicate the significant levels of distress experienced across the population during the pandemic.”
Deputy chief executive of Rethink Mental Illness, Brian Dow, commented on the findings:8
“Psychosis can have a devastating impact on people’s lives. Swift access to treatment is vital to prevent further deterioration in people’s mental health which could take them years to recover from. These soaring numbers of suspected first episodes of psychosis are cause for alarm.
We are now well beyond the first profound shocks of this crisis, and it’s deeply concerning that the number of referrals remains so high. As first presentations of psychosis typically occur in young adults, this steep rise raises additional concerns about the pressures the younger generation have faced during the pandemic.
The pandemic has had a game changing effect on our mental health and it requires a revolutionary response. Dedicated additional funding for mental health and social care must go to frontline services to help meet the new demand, otherwise thousands of people could bear a catastrophic cost.”
According to a spokesperson for the British Department of Health and Social Care, the agency will expand the NHS mental health services budget by £2.3 billion ($3.1 billion) per year by 2023/2024. They’ve also added £500 million ($691 million) to the 2021 budget to provide services to those hit hardest by pandemic measures.9
Another study,10,11 looking at the rates of anxiety and depression worldwide, found both conditions increased dramatically in 2020. The researchers estimate the COVID pandemic resulted in an additional 76 million cases of anxiety and 53 million cases of major depressive disorder, over and above annual norms, with women and younger individuals being disproportionally affected. According to The Guardian:12
“… the team estimate there were 246m cases of major depressive disorder and 374m cases of anxiety disorders worldwide in 2020, with the figure for the former 28% higher, and for the latter 26% higher, than would have been expected had the crisis not happened.
About two-thirds of these extra cases of major depressive disorder and 68% of the extra cases of anxiety disorders were among women, while younger people were affected more than older adults, with extra cases greatest among people aged 20-24.”
Lead author Damian Santomauro, Ph.D., of the University of Queensland told The Guardian:13
“We believe [that] is because women are more likely to be affected by the social and economic consequences of the pandemic. Women are more likely to take on additional carer and household responsibilities due to school closures or family members becoming unwell.
Women also tend to have lower salaries, less savings, and less secure employment than men, and so are more likely to be financially disadvantaged during the pandemic. Youth have been impacted by the closures of schools and higher education facilities, and wider restrictions inhibiting young people from peer interactions.”
Increased prevalence of domestic violence may also be a contributing factor that places women at increased risk of mental problems, while young adults are more likely to become unemployed.
Children are bearing a particularly heavy burden as adults succumb to irrational fears. It’s not surprising then that mental health referrals for children have nearly doubled in the U.K. since the start of the pandemic.14 According to British authorities, 16% of children between the ages of 5 and 16 were diagnosed with a mental disorder in 2020, compared to 10.8% in 2017.15 As noted in a September 23, 2021, press release by the Royal College of Psychiatrists:16
“Eighteen months after the first lockdown and after warnings from the mental health sector about the long-lasting mental health impact of the pandemic, the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ analysis of NHS Digital data found that:
Eating disorders are also more prevalent than ever, and the rapid increase has left many children waiting months for treatment — delays that could have life-threatening consequences — as facilities are at capacity. The press release quotes a mother whose teenage daughter relapsed into anorexia during the pandemic:17
"The pandemic has been devastating for my daughter and for our family. She has anorexia and was discharged from an inpatient unit last year, but the disruption to her normal routines and socializing really affected her recovery. She was spending a lot less time doing the things she enjoys and a lot more time alone with her thoughts.
Unfortunately, she relapsed, becoming so unwell she was admitted to hospital and sectioned. After 72 days in hospital with no specialist eating disorder bed becoming available, we brought her home where I had to tube feed her for 10 weeks.
My daughter urgently needed specialist help for this life-threatening illness, but services are completely overwhelmed because so many young people need help. It's a terrifying situation for patients and families to be in."
Indeed, the widespread insanity on display among adults can have severe and lasting effects on children as they grow up. According to McDonald (see interview above), the mental states of the children he’s treated during this pandemic are far worse than he’s used to seeing in these age groups. This tells us the trauma inflicted by pandemic measures is very serious.
One of the worst traumas inflicted on children has been the ridiculous idea that they might kill their parents or grandparents simply by being around them. They’re also being taught to feel guilty about behaviors that would normally be completely normal — as just one example: hysterical adults calling a toddler who refuses to wear a mask a “brat,” when resisting having a restrictive mask put across your face is perfectly normal at that age.
It's extremely abnormal for children to grow up thinking that they’re a danger to people around them, and that everyone around them is a danger to them. It’s completely abnormal to grow up thinking that facemasks, gloves and physical separation are required to stay alive.
Adults have also twisted irrational fear into a virtue, which is doubly tragic and wrong. Wearing a mask has become a way to demonstrate that you’re a “good person,” someone who cares about others, whereas not wearing a mask brands you as an inconsiderate lout, if not a prospective mass murderer, simply by breathing.
What’s more, by encouraging us to remain in fear and allow it to control and constrain our lives, the fear has become so entrenched that anyone who says we need to be fearless and fight for our freedoms is attacked for being both stupid and dangerous.
It’s adults who are mindlessly inflicting this emotional trauma on an entire generation. As noted by McDonald in his interview, a primary cause of depression among children is feeling disconnected from family and friends.
Everyone, but children in particular, needs face-to-face contact, physical contact, and emotional intimacy. We need these things to feel safe around others and within our own selves. Digital interactions cannot replace these most basic human needs, and are inherently separating.
McDonald cites U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics showing there was a 400% increase in adolescent depression during 2020 compared to the year before, and in 25% of cases, they contemplated suicide. These are unheard of statistics, he says. Never before have so many teenagers considered committing suicide.
According to McDonald, parents and adults in general are to blame, because they are the ones scaring children to the point they don’t feel life is worth living anymore. This is why we can’t just treat the children. We must also address the psychosis of the adult population that is causing all this trauma.
The mass delusion must also be addressed because it’s driving us all, sane and insane alike, toward a society devoid of all previous freedoms and civil liberties, and the corrupt individuals in charge will not voluntarily relinquish power once we’ve given it to them.
Clearly, many of our political leaders know COVID-19 isn’t the deadly plague it’s been made out to be. They issue stay-at-home orders from their vacation homes in the Caribbean and repeatedly break their own mask and lockdown mandates.
They ride their bikes, stroll through the park, have family gatherings and dine out without a care. They’re simply playing along, following the narrative coming from technocratic strongholds like the World Health Organization, because it benefits them.
You could say the ruling class suffers from a different kind of psychosis. As explained in “Mass Psychosis — How an Entire Population Becomes Mentally Ill,” totalitarianism actually begins as psychosis within the ruling class, as the individuals within this class are easily enamored with delusions that augment their power. And no delusion is greater than the delusion that they can, and should control and dominate others.
Whether the totalitarian mindset takes the form of communism, fascism or technocracy, a ruling elite that has succumbed to their own delusions of grandeur then sets about to indoctrinate the masses into their own twisted worldview. All that’s needed to accomplish that reorganization of society is the manipulation of collective feelings.
Sadly, many citizens are unwittingly aiding and abetting the global power grab that will result in our enslavement. Fear fueled hysteria, which led to mass delusional psychosis and group control where citizens themselves support and press for the elimination of basic freedoms.
There’s no doubt at this point that a totalitarian society is the ultimate end of this societal psychosis unless we do something about it. The truth is, we’re as safe now as we ever were. We must not allow our freedoms to be taken from us due to delusional fears. As noted by Cheah in her article:18
“It’s not unthinkable that the final outcome would be total societal control on every aspect of your life. Consider this — the endpoint of a mentally ill person is for them to be put under a controlled environment (institutionalized like an asylum) where all freedoms are restricted. And it's looking more and more like that's the endpoint of where this mass psychosis is heading.”
Once a society is firmly in the grip of mass psychosis, totalitarians are free to take the last, decisive step: They can offer a way out, a return to order. The price is your freedom. You must cede control of all aspects of your life to the rulers, because unless they are granted total control, they won’t be able to create the order everyone craves.
This order, however, is a pathological one, devoid of all humanity. It eliminates the spontaneity that brings joy and creativity to one’s life by demanding strict conformity and blind obedience. And despite the promise of safety, a totalitarian society is inherently fearful. It is built on fear, and is maintained by it too. So, giving up your freedom for safety and a sense of order will only lead to more of the same fear and anxiety that allowed the totalitarians to gain control in the first place.
Knowing this, we must remember to embrace courage, truth, honesty and freedom as we move forward — not just in our thoughts and words but also in our actions. People cannot think logically when in a state of delusional psychosis, which is why sharing information, facts, data and evidence tends to be ineffective except in cases where the person was acting out of peer pressure rather than a delusional belief.
Typically, the best you can do is stand firm and act in alignment with truth and objective reality, much like you would if you were a first responder faced with an accident victim who is responding hysterically to what you know is only a minor injury.
In short, to help return sanity to an insane world, you first need to center yourself and live in such a way as to provide inspiration for others to follow — speak and act in such a way as to demonstrate that you are not afraid to live life and return to normalcy.
Diabetes has reached crisis levels in the U.S., with 10.5% of Americans affected.1 That data came from 2018 — before the pandemic — and the problem has only worsened since. Diabetes was the seventh leading cause of death in the U.S. in 2017,2 but diabetes deaths surged during the COVID-19 pandemic, rising 17% in 2020.3
While COVID-19 was a problem — 39.5% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among people with diabetes4 — even diabetics who didn’t get COVID-19 suffered, often falling victim to isolation, social distancing, lack of medical care and fear, instead.
Younger people have been disproportionately affected, with diabetes deaths among 25- to 44-year-olds jumping 29% in 2020. Other deaths from everything, excluding COVID-19, rose 6% that year,5 highlighting the dismal public health failure that accelerated the diabetes pandemic.
Even prior to the pandemic, diabetes was on an alarming trajectory that saw hospitalization for hyperglycemic crises increase by 73% from 2009 to 2015. Diabetes deaths rose by 55% during that time.6
Inactivity and poor diet are fueling the diabetes crisis, causing people to develop the condition at younger ages. Diets focused on ultraprocessed foods and fast foods are the root of the problem, as they’re loaded with seed oils — misleadingly known as “vegetable oils” — that contain toxic oxidized omega-6 linoleic acid (LA) that accelerate metabolic dysfunction.7
Yet, the American Diabetes Association continues to recommend seed oils like canola as “part of a healthy, balanced diet.”8 Diabetes is a manageable — and often reversible — condition, provided you make positive lifestyle changes and get proper medical care and advice.
However, many people are limited by their insurance plans as to which care providers they can see, and others forgo medical care entirely to avoid having to pay out-of-pocket costs. As it stands, diabetes treatment costs top $230 billion a year in the U.S., yet the diabetes mortality rate is 42% higher than it is in 10 other industrialized countries.9
“The focus in U.S. health care on treating crises over preventing them doesn’t help, downplaying the importance of lifestyle changes that could lessen the severity of the disease,” a Reuters investigation reported. “‘Over and over again, the problem is worse in young adults, and there isn’t improvement in older adults,’ Ed Gregg, a former CDC researcher, told Reuters. ‘The magnitude of the increase has set us back 15 to 20 years.’”10
In fact, in 2020 only accidents and overdose deaths rose faster than diabetes deaths, which beat out Alzheimer’s disease, flu and pneumonia, stroke, heart disease, kidney disease and cancer for the dubious title of fastest-rising deaths.11
The Reuters investigation follows the case of a 42-year-old woman whose death from complications of Type 2 diabetes during the pandemic was the result of isolation and fear. Locked down in her home, fearful of COVID-19, she ordered fast food and lost the motivation to eat better and exercise, and had difficulty getting adequate medical care.
Ultimately, “the isolation and the financial and logistical issues proved overwhelming.”12 In another case, a 68-year-old man with Type 2 diabetes had his leg amputated after avoiding medical care for a chronic sore out of fear of COVID-19.
These stories aren’t unique. Sandra Arevalo, director of community and patient education at Montefiore Hospital in Nyack, New York, told Reuters that diabetes deaths, amputations and intensive care admissions had plagued several patients she knew of after they delayed medical care during the pandemic.
“The diagnosis was uncontrolled diabetes, but it was caused by COVID fear. COVID caused more damage than we realized,” Arevalo said13 Giuseppina Imperatore, with the CDC’s Division of Diabetes Translation, also told Reuters that “the impact of the COVID pandemic on people with diabetes cannot be overstated.”14
Young people are also suffering. Among 8- to 20-year-olds, Type 2 diabetes diagnoses tripled in 2020 at Children’s National Hospital in Washington, D.C., and they’re showing up sicker than they did in the past, with 23% affected by diabetic ketoacidosis, compared to 4% in 2019.15 School closures and reduced physical activity triggered by the pandemic were likely factors in the sudden rise.
“It was really pointing us to the indirect effect of social distancing,” Dr. Brynn Marks, a pediatric endocrinologist at Children’s National, told Reuters.16 Weight gain has been another consequence, with significant increases in the rate of body mass index (BMI) change noted during the pandemic among 2- to 19-year-olds, according to the CDC. The CDC noted:17
“The COVID-19 pandemic led to school closures, disrupted routines, increased stress, and less opportunity for physical activity and proper nutrition, leading to weight gain among children and adolescents.
Among persons with overweight, moderate obesity, and severe obesity, pandemic rates of BMI increase more than doubled, compared with prepandemic rates … similar effects were observed for weight change … Compared with other age groups, children aged 6-11 years experienced the largest increase in their rate of BMI change … with a pandemic rate of change that was 2.50 times as high as the prepandemic rate.”
Translated into the resulting weight gain, the figures reveal that 22% of children and teens were obese in 2020,18 up from 19% in 2019. Average annual weight gain among healthy weight children was 3.4 pounds prior to the pandemic, which rose to 5.4 pounds in 2020. Among children who were already obese, the acceleration was even greater.
For moderately obese children, expected annual weight gain rose from 6.5 pounds in 2019 to 12 pounds in 2020, while severely obese children’s expected annual weight gain increased from 8.8 pounds to 14.6 pounds during the pandemic.
Americans are also facing an obesity crisis, which goes hand in hand with the diabetes crisis. The latest figures from the CDC state that 42.4% of Americans were obese in 2017 to 2018, an increase from 30.5% in 1999 to 2000.19
The pandemic has made these numbers even worse, as 42% of U.S. adults who responded to the American Psychological Association’s 2021 Stress in America poll said they had gained more weight than they intended since the pandemic started.20
The average weight gain among this group was 29 pounds, with 10% stating they gained more than 50 pounds during the pandemic.21 The CDC also announced September 15, 2021, that the number of states with high obesity prevalence — defined as at least 35% of residents with obesity — has nearly doubled since 2018.22
There are now 16 states where at least 35% of the residents are obese, up from nine states in 2018 and 12 in 2019. “These and other emerging data show that the COVID-19 pandemic changed eating habits, worsened levels of food insecurity, created obstacles to physical activity, and heightened stress, all exacerbating the decadeslong pattern of obesity in America,” Trust for America’s Health reported.23
Eliminating ultraprocessed foods is an essential part of tackling both obesity and Type 2 diabetes, as it lowers your intake of toxic seed oils. Dr. Chris Knobbe, an ophthalmologist and the founder and president of the Cure AMD Foundation, explained the complex process behind seed oils’ toxicity in his presentation at the ALLDOCS annual 2020 meeting:24
“Here's what excess omega-6 does in a westernized diet: induces nutrient deficiencies, causes a catastrophic lipid peroxidation cascade … This damages … a phospholipid called cardio lipid in the mitochondrial membranes. And this leads to electron transport chain failure … which causes mitochondrial failure and dysfunction.
And this leads first to reactive oxygen species, which feeds back into this peroxidation cascade.
So you're filling up your fat cells and your mitochondrial membranes with omega-6, and these are going to peroxidize because of the fact that they are polyunsaturated … next thing that happens, insulin resistance, which leads to metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes … Your mitochondria are failing to burn fat for fuel … this is a powerful mechanism for obesity.”
While the CDC and other health officials aren’t sounding the alarm about the risks posed by ultraprocessed foods and other toxic exposures, the scientific community is taking note. As noted by a team of researchers in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, the role of toxic substance exposures, which includes ultraprocessed foods and poor diet, is underreported in the COVID-19 pandemic.25
“In short, it is the pervasive, constant exposure to toxic stressors in our environment, in combination with genetic factors, that cause us to develop diseases that impair our immune systems and make us susceptible to serious COVID-19 infection,” reported the Alliance for Natural Health.26
As the researchers noted, this includes lifestyle factors such as inactivity, smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, poor diet including ultraprocessed foods and refined grains and chronic sleep deprivation — all factors that also affect your weight and risk of diabetes.27
In order to protect the public, a “quarantine” from toxins like ultraprocessed foods, environmental chemicals and more would be far more effective than quarantining from one virus,28 and for long-term pandemic prevention, the researchers believe, and I would strongly agree, that such toxicology-based approaches should be given priority over virology-based approaches.29
Many aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic response, from lockdowns to school closures, have worsened the already perilous diabetes and obesity epidemics, but you can take action to protect your health. In addition to eliminating ultraprocessed foods — including fast foods and most restaurant foods — from your diet, give intermittent fasting a try.
Time restricted eating (TRE) is a simple powerful intervention that mimics the eating habits of our ancestors and restores your body to a more natural state that allows a whole host of metabolic benefits to occur.30
TRE involves limiting your eating window to six to eight hours per day instead of the more than 12-hour window most use. Research shows, for instance, that TRE promotes insulin sensitivity and improves blood sugar management by increasing insulin-mediated glucose uptake rates,31 which is important for resolving Type 2 diabetes.
In another study, when 15 men at risk of Type 2 diabetes restricted their eating to even a nine-hour window, they lowered their mean fasting glucose, regardless of when the “eating window” commenced.32
Remember when you eat is also important. I recommend adopting a cyclical ketogenic diet, which involves radically limiting carbs (replacing them with healthy fats and moderate amounts of protein) until you’re close to or at your ideal weight, ultimately allowing your body to burn fat — not carbohydrates — as its primary fuel.
And always remember the most dangerous foods in your diet are seed oils, commonly hidden in all chicken, pork, salad dressings and any sauces or dressings at a restaurant.
This article was previously published January 20, 2021, and has been updated with new information.
While vitamins C and D have garnered much attention in the fight against COVID-19, B vitamins can also play an important role, according to two recent papers — niacin (B3) in particular.
The first, "Be Well: A Potential Role for Vitamin B in COVID-19,"1,2 was published in the February 2021 issue of the journal Maturitas. The paper is the result of a joint collaboration between researchers at the University of Oxford, United Arab Emirates University and the University of Melbourne, Australia.
While no studies using B vitamins have been performed on COVID-19 patients, the researchers stress that, based on B vitamins' effects on your immune system, immune-competence and red blood cells (which help fight infection), supplementation may be a useful adjunct to other prevention and treatment strategies. As noted by the authors:3
"There is a need to highlight the importance of vitamin B because it plays a pivotal role in cell functioning, energy metabolism, and proper immune function.
Vitamin B assists in proper activation of both the innate and adaptive immune responses, reduces pro-inflammatory cytokine levels, improves respiratory function, maintains endothelial integrity, prevents hypercoagulability and can reduce the length of stay in hospital.
Therefore, vitamin B status should be assessed in COVID-19 patients and vitamin B could be used as a non-pharmaceutical adjunct to current treatments …
Vitamin B not only helps to build and maintain a healthy immune system, but it could potentially prevent or reduce COVID-19 symptoms or treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. Poor nutritional status predisposes people to infections more easily; therefore, a balanced diet is necessary for immuno-competence."
Importantly, B vitamins can influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including:4
The paper goes on to detail how each of the B vitamins can help manage various COVID-19 symptoms:5
Vitamin B1 (thiamine) — Thiamine improves immune system function, protects cardiovascular health, inhibits inflammation and aids in healthy antibody responses. Vitamin B1 deficiency can result in an inadequate antibody response, thereby leading to more severe symptoms. There's also evidence suggesting B1 may limit hypoxia.
Vitamin B2 (riboflavin) — Riboflavin in combination with ultraviolet light has been shown to decrease the infectious titer of SARS-CoV-2 below the detectable limit in human blood, plasma and platelet products.
Vitamin B3 (niacin/nicotinamide) — Niacin is a building block of NAD and NADP, which are vital when combating inflammation.
Vitamin B5 (pantothenic acid) — Vitamin B5 aids in wound healing and reduces inflammation.
Vitamin B6 (pyridoxal 5′-phosphate/pyridoxine) — Pyridoxal 5′-phosphate (PLP), the active form of vitamin B6, is a cofactor in several inflammatory pathways. Vitamin B6 deficiency is associated with dysregulated immune function. Inflammation increases the need for PLP, which can result in depletion.
According to the authors, in COVID-19 patients with high levels of inflammation, B6 deficiency may be a contributing factor. What's more, B6 may also play an important role in preventing the hypercoagulation seen in some COVID-19 patients.
Vitamin B9 (folate/folic acid) — Folate, the natural form of B9 found in food, is required for the synthesis of DNA and protein in your adaptive immune response.
Folic acid, the synthetic form typically found in supplements, was recently found6 to inhibit furin, an enzyme associated with viral infections, thereby preventing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein from binding to and gaining entry into your cells. The research7 suggests folic acid may therefore be helpful during the early stages of COVID-19.
Another recent paper8 found folic acid has a strong and stable binding affinity against SARS-CoV-2. This too suggests it may be a suitable therapeutic against COVID-19.
Vitamin B12 (cobalamin) — B12 is required for healthy synthesis of red blood cells and DNA. A deficiency in B12 increases inflammation and oxidative stress by raising homocysteine levels. Your body can eliminate homocysteine naturally, provided you're getting enough B9 (folate), B6 and B12.9
Hyperhomocysteinemia — a condition characterized by abnormally high levels of homocysteine — causes endothelial dysfunction, activates platelet and coagulation cascades and decreases immune responses.
B12 deficiency is also associated with certain respiratory disorders. Advancing age can diminish your body's ability to absorb B12 from food,10 so the need for supplementation may increase as you get older. According to "Be Well: A Potential Role for Vitamin D in COVID-19":11
The second paper,12 "Sufficient Niacin Supply: The Missing Puzzle Piece to COVID-19 and Beyond?" (which is a preprint and has yet to undergo peer review), focuses specifically on niacin (B3), raising the question of whether this vitamin might actually be a crucial player in the COVID-19 disease process. As noted in the abstract:
"Definitive antiviral properties are evidenced for niacin, i.e., nicotinic acid (NA), as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapy for both disease recovery and prevention, to the level that reversal or progression of its pathology follows as an intrinsic function of NA supply.
This detailed investigation provides a thorough disentanglement of how the downstream inflammatory propagation of ensuing severe acute respiratory virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is entirely prohibited or reversed upstream out the body to expeditiously restore health with well-tolerated dynamic supplementation of sufficient NA (i.e., ~1-3 grams per day)."
As noted in this paper, a primary hallmark of COVID-19 pathology is the cytokine storm, which can lead to multiple organ failure and death. Marked elevations in proinflammatory cytokines are to blame for this chain of events, most notable of which are interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-1β (IL-1β), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1).
If you can decrease and control these damaging cytokines, you stand a good chance of thwarting the cytokine storm and the downstream damage it causes. Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) plays an important role in this, and niacin is a building block of NAD. As explained in "Be Well: A Potential Role for Vitamin D in COVID-19":13
"NAD+ is released during the early stages of inflammation and has immunomodulatory properties, known to decrease the pro-inflammatory cytokines, IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α. Recent evidence indicates that targeting IL-6 could help control the inflammatory storm in patients with COVID-19."
Aside from markedly decreasing proinflammatory cytokines, niacin has also been shown to:14
COVID-19 also triggers bradykinin storms. Bradykinin is a chemical that helps regulate your blood pressure and is controlled by your renin-angiotensin system (RAS). The bradykinin hypothesis provides a model that helps explain some of the more unusual symptoms of COVID-19, including its bizarre effects on your cardiovascular system.
Researchers have discovered SARS-CoV-2 downregulates your body's ability to degrade or break down bradykinin. The end result is a bradykinin storm, and this appears to be an important factor in many of COVID-19's lethal effects, perhaps even more so than the cytokine storms associated with the disease. As bradykinin accumulates, the more serious COVID-19 symptoms appear.
Vitamin D has a significant impact on the RAS,15 and can therefore help prevent a bradykinin storm, but niacin also plays an important role. As noted in "Sufficient Niacin Supply: The Missing Puzzle Piece to COVID-19 and Beyond?":16
"Immediate-release NA [niacin] administration has been reported as highly effective in preventing the lung tissue damage involved in this … pathology. As a matter of fact, authors of a March, 2020, paper17 in Nature for this very reason conclude with suggestion of niacin supplementation to COVID-19 patients as a 'wise approach.'"
The paper also expounds on the role of NAD+, and why niacin is a useful strategy for boosting NAD+:18
"The major effects of COVID-19 are evidenced to involve tryptophan metabolism and the kynurenine pathway towards depletions of these precursors of NAD+ …
Exclusively sufficient dosage of immediate-release NA — through its processing in the mammalian body to form NAADP [nicotinic acid adenine dinucleotide phosphate, a calcium mobilizer] — leads to an inverse potential energy pump back upstream, from the core up and ultimately out the body, of the downstream ensuing propagation of such inflammatory disease that spreads into the cells.
This is made possible by the capability of NAADP to be readily formed by sufficient NA supply to induce Ca2+ [calcium] channeling back upstream out the body of built-up or ensuing inflammation, representing kinetic energy … that by electron gradient, moves downstream into the body.
Attempting to restore NAD+ with other NAD+-precursors aside from NA (e.g., nicotinamide, nicotinamide riboside, nicotinamide mononucleotide) only actually temporarily and in a sense, artificially, raises NAD+ levels, until they imminently deplete back down with further ensuing inflammation.
NA is in fact the only compound to readily produce NAADP if needed in acidic environments (as is characteristic to ensuing inflammatory disease pathology), which in turn provides a potential energy/H+ pump-out action of its inverse, downstream kinetic (heat) energy inflammation to ultimately restore NAD+ to normal, pre-inflammatory levels, as well as other inflammatorily-depleted cofactors and biochemical pathways towards a more thermodynamically homeostatic health status …
The 'niacin red flush' in fact is this thermodynamic exfoliation of ensuing disease, toxins, and (restoration of) free radical-damaged compounds being H+ (potential energy) pumped out the body.
It represents the anti-inflammatory or thermodynamic (i.e., energy transfer-like) therapy in action that only and exclusively sufficient oral intake of immediate-release NA is capable of (readily) accomplishing with potency."
The paper19 goes deep into the biochemical aspects of how niacin works in your body, so if you're interested in that, you may want to read through it. In summary, as it pertains to COVID-19, the important thing to understand is that there appears to be a causative link between low niacin status and SARS-CoV-2 infection.
According to the authors, SARS-CoV-2's ability to invade your body is dependent on whether calcium signaling can properly proceed, which in turn is dependent on the presence of NAADP. And, as explained in the quoted section above, niacin forms NAADP in your body. NAADP-dependent calcium signaling is responsible both for the inhibition of viral entry into cells and driving the virus out of already infected cells.
And, again, the authors stress that "nothing outside of sufficiently, dynamically supplied niacin is capable of readily leading to the NAADP supply needed in these acidic environments for therapeutic action that counteracts inflammatory disease progression."
They also point out that the flushing you get from niacin is part of how the niacin drives inflammatory free radicals out of the cells. As you continue to take the supplement at a consistent, sufficiently high dose, that flushing will gradually lessen, which is a sign that your body is reaching a healthy homeostasis.
"This represents perhaps the ideal state that should be worked up to and maintained thereafter — in terms of niacin dosing — to respectively reverse out and prevent inflammation," the authors state.20
While the flushing can be uncomfortable, the authors stress that it is "indeed safe," and actually "should be sought when needed for its anti-inflammatory properties."
As a "health restorative therapy" for those diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2, they recommend starting with a dose of 500 milligrams of immediate-release niacin, two to three times a day, ideally within the first 48 hours of symptom onset. As your flush response lessens, increase your dose to 1,000 mg, two to three times a day.21
"For the subgroup of patients still suffering with high cytokines profiles from deep, remnant damage of previously experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection — termed the 'long-haulers' — alleviation from ailment(s) towards complete health restoration to pre-infection state from initiating and maintaining the aforementioned dosage regimen has consistently been reported to assume within two days and to incrementally follow further over the course of weeks."22
Although the authors suggest you can use niacin prophylactically, using that same dose, I disagree. According to the authors:23
"By readily providing sufficient NAADP, this same NA dosage regimen is capable of serving as prophylaxis, which can be interpreted as the physical/biochemical inability of sufficient progression of SARS-CoV-2 in order to enter into the body and/or thereafter induce replication, infection onset, or disease progression in a previously uninfected host."
There may be some value to the high doses in acute COVID-19 infections but I am skeptical. I am a huge fan of NAD+ augmentation and have been using it for years. My research suggests you really only need about 25 mg per day of niacin, which will not cause flushing in nearly anyone. I believe most would benefit from taking 25 mg of niacin daily, preferably in a well-balanced B complex, which would have thiamine (B1) that has also been shown to be useful in COVID-19.
Other alternatives to high-dose niacin would be nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN), which is my personal favorite. I believe that compounding these into rectal suppositories would avoid most of the methylation of the supplement and supply you with higher NAD+ tissue levels.
Another downside of high-dose niacin is that it breaks down to nicotinamide and in high doses, nicotinamide will inhibit Sirt1, which is an important longevity protein.
Personally, I believe a superior strategy to high-dose niacin in acute COVID-19 would be to use nebulized hydrogen peroxide at 0.1%. I have never seen or heard of this intervention failing in the treatment of COVID-19.
As a general rule, I recommend getting most if not all of your nutrition from real food. This will work well for most B vitamins, but not if you're using niacin therapeutically, as described above. For that, you will need to take a supplement.
That said, the list below will show you which foods contain which B vitamins, as well as provide general guidance on dosage if you're taking a supplement. If you're trying to improve your vitamin B status, also consider limiting sugar and eating more fermented foods.
The reason for this is because the entire B group vitamin series is produced within your gut, assuming you have healthy gut flora. Eating real food, including plenty of leafy greens and fermented foods, will provide your microbiome with important fiber and beneficial bacteria to help optimize your internal vitamin B production.
|Nutrient||Dietary Sources||Supplement Recommendations|
Pork, fish, nuts and seeds, beans, green peas, brown rice, squash, asparagus and seafood.24
The recommended daily allowance for B1 is 1.2 mg/day for men and 1.1 mg/day for women.25
Eggs, organ meats, lean meats, green vegetables such as asparagus, broccoli and spinach.26
The RDA is 1.1 mg for adult women and 1.3 mg for men.
Your body cannot absorb more than about 27 mg at a time, and some multivitamins or B-complex supplements may contain unnecessarily high amounts.27
Liver, chicken, veal, peanuts, chili powder, bacon and sun-dried tomatoes have some of the highest amounts of niacin per gram.28
Other niacin-rich foods include baker's yeast, paprika, espresso coffee, anchovies, spirulina, duck, shiitake mushrooms and soy sauce.29
The dietary reference intake established by the Food and Nutrition Board ranges from 14 to 18 mg per day for adults.
Higher amounts are recommended depending on your condition. For a list of recommended dosages, see the Mayo Clinic's website.30
The dosage recommended as an anti-inflammatory, health-restorative therapy in "Sufficient Niacin Supply: The Missing Puzzle Piece to COVID-19 and Beyond?"31 is 500 mg two to three times a day, working your way up to 1,000 mg, two to three times a day as the flushing lessens.
Beef, poultry, seafood, organ meats, eggs, milk, mushrooms, avocados, potatoes, broccoli, peanuts, sunflower seeds, chickpeas and brown rice.32
The RDA is 5 mg for adults over the age of 19.
Pantothenic acid in dietary supplements is often in the form of calcium pantothenate or pantethine.33
Turkey, beef, chicken, wild-caught salmon, sweet potatoes, potatoes, sunflower seeds, pistachios, avocado, spinach and banana.34,35
Nutritional yeast is an excellent source of B vitamins, especially B6.36
One serving (2 tablespoons) contains nearly 10 mg of vitamin B6.
Not to be confused with Brewer's yeast or other active yeasts, nutritional yeast is made from an organism grown on molasses, which is then harvested and dried to deactivate the yeast.
It has a pleasant cheesy flavor and can be added to a number of different dishes.
Fresh, raw, organic leafy green vegetables, especially broccoli, asparagus, spinach and turnip greens, and a wide variety of beans, especially lentils, but also pinto beans, garbanzo beans, kidney beans, navy and black beans.37
Folic acid is a synthetic type of B vitamin used in supplements; folate is the natural form found in foods.
(Think: Folate comes from foliage, edible leafy plants.)
For folic acid to be of use, it must first be activated into its biologically active form (L-5-MTHF).
Nearly half the population has difficulty converting folic acid into the bioactive form due to a genetic reduction in enzyme activity.
For this reason, if you take a B-vitamin supplement, make sure it contains natural folate rather than synthetic folic acid.
Nutritional yeast is an excellent source.38
Research39 also shows your dietary fiber intake has an impact on your folate status.
For each gram of fiber consumed, folate levels increased by nearly 2%.
The researchers hypothesize that this boost in folate level is due to the fact that fiber nourishes bacteria that synthesize folate in your large intestine.
Vitamin B12 is found almost exclusively in animal tissues, including foods like beef and beef liver, lamb, snapper, venison, salmon, shrimp, scallops, poultry, eggs and dairy products.
The few plant foods that are sources of B12 are actually B12 analogs that block the uptake of true B12.
Nutritional yeast is high in B12, and is highly recommended for vegetarians and vegans.
One serving (2 tablespoons) provides nearly 8 mcg of natural vitamin B12.40
Sublingual (under-the-tongue) fine mist spray or vitamin B12 injections are also effective, as they allow the large B12 molecule to be absorbed directly into your bloodstream.
In early 2020, as scientists were analyzing the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it was theorized the virulence and infectivity could be explained by gain-of-function research. Months of lab analyses and political arguments ensued over whether the virus was leaked from the lab or developed naturally in the wild.
Despite public outcry and denials from top health experts that the virus was created, the preponderance of the evidence indicates the virus was manipulated in the lab.1 Then, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), publicly announced October 5, 2021, they would grant Washington State University $125 million “to detect emerging viruses.”2
This is far greater than the $7.4 million Newsweek3 reported was granted to the NIAID for gain-of-function work on bat coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Dr. Kanta Subbarao is from the Laboratory of Infectious Disease at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).4
According to Subbarao, these experiments “are routine virological methods” and “emphasized that such experiments in virology are fundamental to understanding the biology, ecology and pathogenesis of viruses and added that much basic knowledge is still lacking for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV.”
Historically, the NIH had funded gain-of-function research, but this was paused in October 2014. December 19, 2017, the NIH announced they would lift the funding pause on gain-of-function research and stated:5
“We have a responsibility to ensure that research with infectious agents is conducted responsibly, and that we consider the potential biosafety and biosecurity risks associated with such research.”
As Newsweek reported, the "second phase of the project, beginning that year , included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit research group, under the direction of president Peter Daszak."6
After months of public and political debate, argument and division, the U.S. government agency USAID stepped into the spotlight again and awarded millions to a university “to make sure the world is better prepared.”7
Washington State University published a press release8 October 5, 2021, announcing they had been awarded $125 million from USAID. Called a “cooperative agreement,” the university is heading up a new five-year global project in which they have been asked to9 “… detect and characterize unknown viruses which have the potential to spill over from wildlife and domestic animals to human populations.”
The project will partner with 12 countries throughout Africa, Latin America and Asia. The idea is to carry out animal surveillance within the country’s borders using their facilities. USAID announced the project “to detect unknown viruses with pandemic potential” as part of Discovery & Exploration of Emerging Pathogens Viral Zoonoses (DEEP VZN).10
The organization believes that SARS-CoV-2 has demonstrated how infectious diseases threaten society. This is especially true of viruses that have been manipulated to increase virulence and infectivity in humans.11 The goal of the project is to collect over 800,000 samples over five years from wildlife and then determine the zoonotic potential of these viruses.12
“The project will focus on finding previously unknown pathogens from three viral families that have a large potential for viral spillover from animals to humans: coronaviruses, the family that includes SARS-CoV-2 the virus that causes COVID-19; filoviruses, such as the Ebola virus; and paramyxoviruses which includes the viruses that cause measles and Nipah.”
Ebola virus was first discovered in 1976 and has since led to several deadly outbreaks in African countries. The CDC13 writes that scientists do not know where Ebola virus comes from. However, the virus can spread through direct contact with body fluids and tissues of infected animals.
Nipah was first discovered in 199914 and the first outbreak resulted in 300 human cases and more than 100 deaths. The animal host is believed to be the fruit bat that can spread the disease to animals and humans. The infection also spreads from person to person and can range from mild to severe. Up to 70% of those infected between 1998 and 2018 have died.
The project expects to find between 8,000 a nd 12,000 new viruses, “which researchers will then screen and sequence the genomes of the ones that pose the most risk to animal and human health.”15 In case this sounds familiar, as Breaking Points anchor emphasizes, this has been “code” for gain-of-function research,16 or detecting viruses that have not yet “emerged.”
An ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation brought by The Intercept17 against the NIH resulted in the release of over 900 pages of previously undisclosed documents that detailed the work of EcoHealth Alliance as a subcontractor of gain-of-function research on bat coronavirus through the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
It’s important to note that the moratorium on federal funding of gain-of-function research instituted in 2014 was initiated on the heels of a high-profile lab mishap at the CDC and controversial experiments over deadly bird flu virus that was manipulated to be more contagious.18
Reportedly, the goal was to determine if bird flu could mutate in the wild and start a pandemic. David Relman, a microbiologist from Stanford University, stated the obvious when he said,19 "I don't think it's wise or appropriate for us to create large risks that don't already exist.”
The new documents released under the FOIA request by The Intercept contained previously unpublished proposals by the NIAID and updates to the EcoHealth Alliance’s research. As reported in The Intercept,20
“The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed.
The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has aggressively dismissed.”
According to The Intercept, Richard Ebright, molecular biologist at Rutgers University, also reviewed the documents released in the FOIA. He told The Intercept that the documents contained vital Information about the research being conducted in the Wuhan lab. He wrote:21
“The viruses they constructed were tested for their ability to infect mice that were engineered to display human type receptors on their cell. While they were working on SARS-related coronavirus, they were carrying out a parallel project at the same time on MERS-related coronavirus.”
In other words, the lab was doing parallel research on two types of coronaviruses that were able to infect humanized mice. In a series of posts on Twitter, Ebright goes on to say:22
“The materials further reveal for the first time that one of the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses — one not been previously disclosed publicly — was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed ... and thus not only was reasonably anticipated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity, but, indeed, was *demonstrated* to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity.
The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful.”
This new information again questions the origins of COVID-19, which many scientists proposed was from a wet market in China where humans and animals are in close contact. However, bioscience safety experts have long suspected a lab origin. It appears that some in the U.S. government and some scientists have not learned from the gain-of-function research in Wuhan and have brought the problem home to roost.
Whether the virus was released intentionally or accidentally is a question for another day. Long before the outbreak, scientists had expressed concerns that these kinds of experiments may end up creating the thing they were reportedly working against. As the Intercept reports,23 in 2014 a grant was awarded to EcoHealth Alliance titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
Part of the grant money was earmarked to identify and alter bat coronaviruses suspected of being able to infect humans. In the grant the writers acknowledged concerns stating, “Fieldwork involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs, while working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for fecal dust to be inhaled.”24
In the USAID announcement, the government agency gives an overview of the goals in one sentence:25 “The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to advancing global health security, international pandemic preparedness and global health resilience.” As the Breaking Points anchor in the video above says,26 “So essentially, we have learned nothing.”
August 1, 2021, Rep Michael McCaul, R-Texas, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs committee, published an addendum to the investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The investigation concluded:27
“... the preponderance of evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 was accidentally released from a Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory sometime prior to September 12, 2019. The virus, or the viral sequence that was genetically manipulated, was likely collected in a cave in Yunnan province, PRC, between 2012 and 2015.
Researchers at the WIV, officials within the CCP, and potentially American citizens directly engaged in efforts to obfuscate information related to the origins of the virus and to suppress public debate of a possible lab leak.”
By the end of August 2021, the White House released a statement from President Biden essentially calling the intelligence report inconclusive,28 “while this review has concluded, our efforts to understand the origins of this pandemic will not rest.”
Multiple pieces of information led the committee to conclude there was ample evidence to support genetic modification of the coronavirus and there was a cover-up which “likely turned what could have been a local outbreak into a global pandemic.”29 The cover-up involved the 2019 Military Games held October 18, 2019, in Wuhan China.
The report demonstrated that by October 2019, health officials in Wuhan were well aware of an outbreak of infectious disease. The athletes reported that the city appeared to be in lockdown30 while they were there. The games drew over 9,000 athletes from 109 countries. The Chinese government had 236,000 volunteers, 90 hotels, three railroad stations and more than 2,000 drivers available for the athletes.
The report included a quote from a Canadian Armed Forces personnel who participated in the games, which appeared in The Financial Post.31 He was told the lockdown in the city was to make it easier for the participants in the games to get around. Twelve days after arrival in Wuhan, he was sick with fever, chills, vomiting and insomnia.
He reported that on the flight home to Canada, 60 athletes were isolated at the back of the plane for the 12-hour flight with a range of symptoms including coughing and diarrhea. After returning home, the same service member found his family members got ill, which the report finds is:32
“... consistent with both human-to-human transmission of a viral infection and COVID-19. Similar claims about COVID-19 like symptoms have been made by athletes from Germany, France, Italy, and Sweden.”
Following the release of The Intercept report and additional grant documentation, some GOP members are calling for Dr. Anthony Fauci to resign while others want him fired from his position on the White House COVID-19 response team.33
U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.., has referred Fauci to the Department of Justice for an investigation for possible perjury charges relating to his Congressional testimony in May 202134 and July 2021,35 when he vehemently denied ever having funded gain-of-function research.
Paul specifically asked the DOJ36 to investigate whether Fauci violated 18 U.S. Code § 10012137 — which makes it a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review" conducted by Congress — or any other statute.
How much genetic manipulation and gain-of-function research that occurs as a result of the $125 million grant to the university may not come to light for years. However, it is incumbent on our government to ensure biosafety in the labs doing the research and, for the public, to call for a halt of this type of research that “create[s] large risks that don’t already exist.”38
Your kidneys are essential to filter excess water and waste from your blood.1 Chronic kidney disease (CKD) can lead to dialysis and the need for a kidney transplant to live. One woman in Colorado recently learned that the University of Colorado Health System's policy change meant she was no longer eligible for a kidney transplant.2
Conditions that damage your kidney and decrease their function are called chronic kidney disease.3 Chronic kidney disease is divided into stages.4 The higher the stage, the greater the damage to the kidneys. Stages range from Stage 1 indicating mild kidney damage to Stage 5, which is just before complete failure.
Dialysis is needed when a person reaches Stage 5 kidney failure.5 This process helps the body eliminate waste products, salt and extra water, and helps control blood pressure. Dialysis is done in a dialysis unit or at home, depending upon the process used. However, without a kidney transplant, the average life expectancy on dialysis is between five and 10 years.
For the majority of people, a kidney transplant is the best option. Although it is not a cure for kidney disease, it can improve the quality and length of life.6 The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) maintains the list of individuals who need any type of organ transplant, including a kidney transplant.
On average, people wait three to five years for a kidney transplant. In some areas, it can be even longer. The wait time is dependent on blood type and history of blood transfusions or transplants.
Leilani Lutali's situation became public when Colorado state Rep. Tim Geitner published the letter that Lutali received from UCHealth denying the transplant. Geitner posted a copy of the letter on Twitter without Lutali's identifying information saying, "UCHealth denies lifesaving treatment — kidney transplant — to El Paso County resident. See my FB live post @timgeitnercolorado"7
Lutali met her kidney donor, Jaimee Fougner, at a Bible study. In August 2021, Lutali confirmed with UCHealth that a COVID shot was not required, but by September 28, 2021, she learned she would be denied the lifesaving transplant because she and her donor were unwilling to get the shot.
In an interview with CBS,8 we learn that Lutali has already had COVID and Fougner cannot get the shot for religious reasons, in what the news anchor called the "latest example of someone facing severe consequences after refusing to get vaccinated for COVID."
Despite thousands of deaths and disabilities9 resulting from the vaccine, another newscaster quoted UCHealth, saying,10 "The hospital system says that keeping people from dying unnecessarily is kind of the point."
Hospitals have routinely placed conditions on organ transplants, hoping to extend the life of those who receive the organ. Some of these requirements include stopping smoking, avoiding alcohol, changing eating habits or taking certain vaccinations.11 However, with the COVID shot, Lutali clearly expresses her concern that it's still new and there are many questions about how it would affect her health.12
Interestingly, the hospital also requires the donor to be vaccinated. They reason that a living donor could pass a COVID infection to the recipient after testing negative.13 And yet, according to government officials, anyone vaccinated can pass COVID to anyone else.14 Therefore, using the hospital's reasoning, it does not track that the donor must also be vaccinated.
Lutali is receiving a direct donation and is not taking a kidney from the transplant waiting list. According to the Department of Health Resources and Services Administration,15 there are currently 106,729 people on the waiting list and 17 people will die every day waiting for an organ transplant.
It is worth noting that while government officials and hospitals continue to call the shot a vaccine, it does not meet the definition of a vaccine by the CDC before 2021. Until September 1, 2021, the definition was:16
"A product that stimulates a person's immune system to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed in the nose."
However, just days after the FDA approved the Pfizer shot,17 September 1, 2021, the CDC changed the definition of a "vaccine" to:18
"A preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose."
As you may have noticed, in this latest iteration, a vaccine is a "preparation" that:
9 News reported that the hospital released a statement saying,19 "… studies indicate the mortality rate for transplant recipients who test positive for COVID ranges from 18% to 32%, compared to a 1.6% mortality rate among all people who have tested positive."
After a kidney transplant, patients must take anti-rejection drugs that have a significant impact on their innate immune system.20 Children and adults are prescribed a combination of immunosuppressant medications that must be taken for as long as the kidney transplant is working.
These drugs have serious side effects, including an increased risk for all infections.21 They also increase the risk for influenza infection. However, while past research has demonstrated influenza vaccination may reduce the risk of flu after a kidney transplant,22,23,24 UCHealth has not mandated a flu vaccine, only a COVID shot.
One literature review25 found the overall mortality rate from COVID-19 was 20% for those who had received a transplant. However, the median age range of the patients was 66 years and the participants had other comorbid conditions often related to severe disease, including high blood pressure, diabetes, malignancy and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
In one prospective cohort study26 in France, 5% of the participants were diagnosed with COVID. Again, the mortality rate was 24% with comorbidities that included obesity, diabetes, asthma and chronic pulmonary disease. A third study27 enrolled 1,073 patients with a mean age of 60 years who had either a kidney transplant or were on dialysis.
Mortality was associated with older age in transplant patients, and with age and frailty in those on dialysis. Interestingly, one study28 found factors strongly associated with mortality from COVID after a kidney transplant were demographic, clinical and social determinants, such as age, sex, body mass index, diabetes, education and socioeconomic status.
Fougner cannot get the shot for religious reasons, supported by the announcement in February 2021 by the New Orleans Archdiocese in which they stated the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was "morally compromised as it uses the abortion-derived cell line in development and production of the vaccine as well as the testing."
While the Archdiocese recommended avoiding the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, it did not have the same concerns for Pfizer and Moderna. However, other clergy disagree since abortion-derived cell lines were used in lab testing for all the vaccines. This debate has a long history that centers on using HEK293 cells that were harvested from an aborted fetus in the early 1970s.29
This is the moral dilemma that is at the basis for most religious exemptions for the vaccine. Several fact-checkers including PolitiFact,30 The Associated Press31 and Snopes32 have labeled this claim as false because the fetal cells are not directly in the vaccine.
However, as it turns out the fact-checkers relied on semantics when, technically, fetal cells are used during the production of certain vaccines. Several of the cell lines commonly used in vaccine development that originated from aborted fetuses include:
Some critics of abortion-derived cell lines have claimed that since the vaccines literally do not contain abortion-derived cells, the entire claim is false. In other instances, fact-checkers claim the cell lines are not original, as in the statement made in an archived article from The Washington Post,37 but rather a clone.
However, the claim that the cells are clones of the original is like saying your 20-year-old or 40-year-old body is no longer your body since all the cells are copies of those when you were a baby. They are, in essence, a clone of the original.
Yet, there is virtually no difference between cells that grow and multiply in a petri dish and those that grow and multiply in your body during your lifetime. If the cells in your body are still you, then the cells in the petri dish are still those of the original aborted fetus.
It has become apparent that fact-checkers are trying to dissuade people from having a public conversation about the ethics of using abortion-derived cell lines to produce and test vaccines.
So how many deaths could there be that are attributable to disease or lack of treatment? The answer to this question is unknowable. At the start of 2020, doctors scrambled to find treatments that would be effective against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. If you have been reading my newsletter, you know that I have interviewed several of these experts, including Dr. Vladimir Zelenko,38,39 who has been successfully treating his patient population with hydroxychloroquine and zinc.
In the video above you can see Dr. Peter McCullough's early treatment regimen at minute 53:40 that includes a nutraceutical bundle, progressing to monoclonal antibody therapy, antiinfectives like hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, antibiotics, steroids and blood thinners.
You have also heard from Front Line care doctors, including Dr. Paul Marik who is a critical care doctor at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in East Virginia. Marik was one of the founding critical care doctors who formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC)40 early in the pandemic.
In each case, the experiences of these physicians have demonstrated treatment protocols that have severely reduced the mortality rate in those treated. Yet, physicians who chose to use these protocols or institute early treatment for their patients experienced the unthinkable — they were being threatened with the loss of their medical license for trying to help.41,42
Hospitals were sued to use ivermectin, and the decisions were reversed.43 Without hope of early or effective treatment, the public was being conditioned to wait for a vaccination. Since the U.S. rollout of the vaccine in December 2020,44 through October 1, 2021, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System45 has recorded:
Instead of using drugs with a low side effect profile, the FDA46 approved the use of remdesivir October 22, 2020. Remdesivir is an antiviral drug that's a nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor.
According to the National Institutes of Health,47 the drug is approved for hospitalized adult and pediatric patients 12 years and older and has emergency use authorization for hospitalized pediatric patients younger than 12 years.
This treatment protocol is not recommended by the World Health Organization that published a conditional recommendation against remdesivir November 20, 2020, which they have not rescinded.48 They stated, "there is currently no evidence that remdesivir improves survival and other outcomes in these patients."49
What is important to note is that remdesivir, the only recommended treatment protocol in the U.S., has significantly damaged kidney function in past studies50,51 and has not been used yet in COVID vaccine clinical trials for patients with kidney damage.52
I recommend that you proactively work to support your immune system using strategies evidence has demonstrated reduces your risk of severe disease. Should you get sick at home, there are several early treatment protocols you may consider that do not require prescription.
If you have had an organ transplant or other underlying medical condition, check with your health care professional, or a physician familiar with early treatments and your health condition. You may find a list of telemedicine doctors at Aesthetic Advisor53 or the FLCCC.54 Take care to share your current medical history and ensure the drugs being prescribed are safe for your situation.
It was only a matter of time before a vaccine-resistant strain of COVID-19 would surface, and that time has already come to pass. As reported by The Conservative Treehouse October 3, 2021:1
“What this study2 finds is exactly what vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (Belgium) has been predicting. The predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-Cov-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California …
Dr. Vanden Bossche has been using Israeli data and showing3 how the widespread vaccination rates were creating pressure on the virus to mutate into variants with higher levels of contagion.
The unvaccinated group has been keeping the pressure down by defeating the virus and carrying natural immunity. However, as the unvaccinated population is increasingly made smaller, the pressure on the virus to mutate increases. Subsequently, these mutations stay at higher or more effective levels of infection.”
The study, posted on the preprint server medRxiv, August 25, 2021, concluded that those who are fully “vaccinated” against COVID-19 are in fact more susceptible to COVID variant infections than unvaccinated people.
Vanden Bossche’s theory was that vaccine antibodies would suppress natural antibody responses, allowing variants to slip through, and this seems to be what’s happening. As explained by The Conservative Treehouse October 3, 2021:4
“Among vaccinated individuals, a COVID variant virus is not recognized by the specialized antibodies provided by the vaccine, and the natural antibodies have been programmed to stand down.”
According to the authors of the study:5
“Associations between vaccine breakthrough cases and infection by SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants have remained largely unexplored. Here we analyzed SARS-CoV-2 whole-genome sequences and viral loads from 1,373 persons with COVID-19 from the San Francisco Bay Area from February 1 to June 30, 2021, of which 125 (9.1%) were vaccine breakthrough infections.
Fully vaccinated were more likely than unvaccinated persons to be infected by variants carrying mutations associated with decreased antibody neutralization (78% versus 48%), but not by those associated with increased infectivity (85% versus 77%) …
These findings suggest that vaccine breakthrough cases are preferentially caused by circulating antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants, and that symptomatic breakthrough infections may potentially transmit COVID-19 as efficiently as unvaccinated infections, regardless of the infecting lineage.”
“Be careful around vaccinated people, because they can carry a more resistant form of COVID-19,” The Conservative Treehouse warns, adding that the narrow protection you get from the COVID shot will inevitably necessitate a booster shot for each emerging new variant that is resistant to the shots.
British data also raise serious questions about the wisdom of this injection campaign. In its Technical Briefing 23,6 published September 17, 2021, Public Health England reveals data showing the COVID death toll is actually higher among the fully vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated.
Between February 1, 2021, and September 12, 2021, 157,400 fully vaccinated patients (26.52% of total cases) were diagnosed with a Delta variant. Among the unvaccinated, there were 257,357 Delta variant cases (43.36% of total cases).
However, while Delta infections were far more prevalent among the unvaccinated, these patients also had better outcomes. In all, 63.5% of those who died from COVID-19 within 28 days of a positive test were fully vaccinated (1,613 compared to 722 in the unvaccinated group).
In a letter to the editor of the Journal of Infection,7 published August 9, 2021, three researchers point out that “infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants,” which suggests antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) is emerging. According to the authors:8
“Antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection is a safety concern for vaccine strategies. In a recent publication, Li et al. (Cell 184 :4203–4219, 2021) have reported that infection-enhancing antibodies directed against the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein facilitate virus infection in vitro, but not in vivo.
However, this study was performed with the original Wuhan/D614G strain. Since the Covid-19 pandemic is now dominated with Delta variants, we analyzed the interaction of facilitating antibodies with the NTD of these variants … [W]e show that enhancing antibodies have a higher affinity for Delta variants than for Wuhan/D614G NTDs …
As the NTD is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies, our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favor of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain.
However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors).”
As noted by independent journalist Sharyl Attkisson,9 “Despite the fact that multiple medical authorities predicted, told us, and hoped, ADE would not impact Covid-19 vaccines, data from the study indicates it has done just that.”
While you’re not considered “fully vaccinated” until 14 days after your first dose of Janssen’s or AstraZeneca’s shot, or second dose of Moderna’s or Pfizer’s, a recent Israeli study found antibody levels actually decrease after the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID shot. The findings were reported by The Jerusalem Post, October 7, 2021:10
“Antibody levels decrease rapidly after two doses of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine, a study11 by researchers at the Sheba Medical Center published … in the New England Journal of Medicine …
The research also showed the probability that different groups of individuals — based on age and general health status — will find themselves below a certain antibody threshold after a period of six months.”
In all, 4,868 staff members at the Sheba Medical Center participated in the study,12 undergoing monthly serological tests to measure their antibodies for up to six months after their second Pfizer shot.
Everyone, regardless of age or gender, saw a rapid decline in their antibodies after the second dose. IgG antibodies — which are part of your humoral immune response — decreased at a consistent rate over time, whereas the neutralizing antibodies rapidly decreased during the first three months, and then slowed down thereafter. According to the authors:13
“Although IgG antibody levels were highly correlated with neutralizing antibody titers (Spearman’s rank correlation between 0.68 and 0.75), the regression relationship between the IgG and neutralizing antibody levels depended on the time since receipt of the second vaccine dose …
The highest titers after the receipt of the second vaccine dose (peak) were observed during days 4 through 30, so this was defined as the peak period.
The expected geometric mean titer (GMT) for IgG for the peak period, expressed as a sample-to-cutoff ratio, was 29.3. A substantial reduction in the IgG level each month, which culminated in a decrease by a factor of 18.3 after 6 months, was observed.
Neutralizing antibody titers also decreased significantly, with a decrease by a factor of 3.9 from the peak to the end of study period 2, but the decrease from the start of period 3 onward was much slower, with an overall decrease by a factor of 1.2 during periods 3 through 6. The GMT of neutralizing antibody, expressed as a 50% neutralization titer, was 557.1 in the peak period and decreased to 119.4 in period 6 ...
Six months after receipt of the second dose, neutralizing antibody titers were substantially lower among men than among women, lower among persons 65 years of age or older than among those 18 to less than 45 years of age, and lower among participants with immunosuppression than among those without immunosuppression.”
The Israeli findings above can help explain the findings of a study14 published September 30, 2021, in the European Journal of Epidemiology, which found no relationship between COVID-19 cases and levels of vaccination in 68 countries worldwide and 2,947 counties in the U.S. If anything, areas with high vaccination rates had slightly higher incidences of COVID-19. According to the authors:15
“[T]he trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”
Iceland and Portugal, for example, where more than 75% of their populations are fully vaccinated, had more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than Vietnam and South Africa, where only about 10% of the populations are fully vaccinated.16
Data from U.S. counties showed the same thing. New COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people were “largely similar,” regardless of the percentage of a state’s population that was fully vaccinated.
“There … appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated,” the authors wrote.17 Notably, out of the five U.S. counties with the highest vaccination rates — ranging from 84.3% to 99.9% fully vaccinated — four of them were on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s “high transmission” list. Meanwhile, 26.3% of the 57 counties with “low transmission” have vaccination rates below 20%.
The study even accounted for a one-month lag time that could occur among the fully vaccinated, since it’s said that it takes two weeks after the final dose for “full immunity” to occur. Still, “no discernable association between COVID-19 cases and levels of fully vaccinated” was observed.18
The study summed up several reasons why the “sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19” should be reevaluated. For starters, the jab’s effectiveness is rapidly waning.
“A substantial decline in immunity from mRNA vaccines six months’ post immunization has … been reported,” the researchers noted, adding that even severe hospitalization and death from COVID-19, which the jabs claim to protect against, have increased from 0.01% to 9% and 0% to 15.1%, respectively, among the fully vaccinated from January 2021 to May 2021.19
If the jabs work as advertised, why haven’t these rates continued to rise instead of fall? “It is also emerging,” the researchers noted, “that immunity derived from the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine may not be as strong as immunity acquired through recovery from the COVID-19 virus.”20
For instance, a retrospective observational study published August 25, 2021, revealed that natural immunity is superior to immunity from COVID-19 jabs. According to the authors:21
“This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”
The fact is, while breakthrough cases continue among those who have gotten one or more COVID-19 injections, it’s extremely rare to get COVID-19 after you’ve recovered from the infection. How rare? Researchers from Ireland conducted a systematic review including 615,777 people who had recovered from COVID-19, with a maximum duration of follow-up of more than 10 months.22
“Reinfection was an uncommon event,” they noted, “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” The absolute reinfection rate ranged from 0% to 1.1%, while the median reinfection rate was just 0.27%.23,24,25
Another study revealed similarly reassuring results. It followed 43,044 SARS-CoV-2 antibody-positive people for up to 35 weeks, and only 0.7% were reinfected. When genome sequencing was applied to estimate population-level risk of reinfection, the risk was estimated at 0.1%.26
There was no indication of waning immunity over seven months of follow-up, unlike with the COVID-19 injection, which led the researchers to conclude that “Reinfection is rare. Natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy >90% for at least seven months.”27
The purpose of informed consent is to give people all of the data related to a medical procedure so they can make an educated decision before consenting. In the case of COVID-19 injections, such data initially weren’t available, given their emergency authorization, and as concerning side effects became apparent, attempts to share them publicly were suppressed.
In August 2021, a large study from Israel28 revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,29 leading to the condition at a rate of one to five events per 100,000 persons.30 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID-19 jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.31
Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist and epidemiologist, is among those who have warned that COVID-19 injections are not only failing but putting lives at risk.32
According to McCullough, by January 22, 2021, there had been 186 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database following COVID-19 injection — more than enough to reach the mortality signal of concern to stop the program.
“With a program this size, anything over 150 deaths would be an alarm signal,” he said. The U.S. “hit 186 deaths with only 27 million Americans jabbed.” McCullough believes if the proper safety boards had been in place, the COVID-19 jab program would have been shut down in February 2021 based on safety and risk of death.33
Now, with data showing no difference in rates of COVID-19 cases among the vaxxed and unvaxxed, it appears more and more likely that the injections have a high level of risk with very little reward, especially among certain populations, like youth.
It’s well-known that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics, antibodies or chemotherapeutics, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system end up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.
Many have warned about immune escape due to the pressure being placed upon the COVID-19 virus during mass vaccination,34 and according to one mathematical model,35 a worst-case scenario can develop when a large percentage of a population is vaccinated but viral transmission remains high, such as it is now. This is a prime scenario for the development of resistant mutant strains.36
At this point, COVID-19 injection failures and serious jab-related health risks are both apparent. We now also have data showing that having a high vaccination rate does nothing to lower COVID-19 incidence.
It might actually increase it slightly, as we’re seeing in India. In Kerala, India, which boasts a 93% vaccination rate, more than half of all new COVID cases are fully vaccinated, as are 57% of COVID-related deaths.37 With all data pointing in the same direction, it’s clear that COVID shots aren’t the answer. As noted in the European of Journal of Epidemiology:38
“Stigmatizing populations can do more harm than good. Importantly, other non-pharmacological prevention efforts (e.g., the importance of basic public health hygiene with regards to maintaining safe distance or handwashing, promoting better frequent and cheaper forms of testing) needs to be renewed in order to strike the balance of learning to live with COVID-19 in the same manner we continue to live a 100 years later with various seasonal alterations of the 1918 Influenza virus.”
As predicted from the very beginning of the mass vaccination campaign, we’re now starting to see evidence of ADE, which makes people more prone to serious illness rather than less.
Even if your risk for ADE is small (and we have no data on prevalence as of yet), the data we do have suggest the shots aren’t ending outbreaks, and indeed can’t, end them, as it’s the vaccinated who are facilitating the emergence of vaccine-evading variants. The real answer is natural herd immunity, as natural immunity protects against most variants and not just one.
To be on the safe side, I recommend considering yourself “high-risk” for severe COVID if you’ve received one or more shots, and implement known effective treatment at the first sign of a respiratory infection.
Options include the Zelenko protocol,39 the MATH+ protocols40 and nebulized hydrogen peroxide, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper.41 Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms.
This article was previously published December 07, 2020, and has been updated with new information.
There's good news for those of you who have taken the proactive step to make sure your vitamin D level is optimized. Several recent studies demonstrate vitamin D can have a significantly beneficial impact on your cancer risk, both in terms of preventing cancer and in the treatment of cancer.
In the first of these studies,1,2 which included 25,871 patients, vitamin D supplementation was found to reduce the risk for metastatic cancer and death by 17%. The risk was reduced by as much as 38% among those who also maintained a healthy weight.
This was a really poorly done study as they only gave participants 2,000 IUs a day and never measured their blood levels. Had there been no improvement, I would not have been surprised, but the fact is it still reduced metastatic cancer and death by 17%, and they found significant benefit among those who were not obese.
This is pretty extraordinary but not as good as epidemiological studies that show a 50% to even 78% reduction in vitamin D-sufficient people, as suggested in a study further below. That said, UPI reported the results saying:3
"The benefits of vitamin D3 in limiting metastases — or disease spread to other organs — and severity was seen across all cancers, and was particularly prominent among study participants who maintained a healthy weight …
'The primary message [of our study] is that vitamin D may reduce the chance of developing metastatic or fatal cancer among adults without a diagnosis of cancer,’ study co-author Dr. Paulette Chandler told UPI."
The study, published in JAMA Network Open, is a secondary analysis of the VITAL Study4 which, in part, sought to determine whether taking 2,000 IUs of vitamin D per day would reduce the risk of cancer, heart disease or stroke in people who did not have a prior history of these diseases.
The VITAL study itself, which followed patients for an average of 5.3 years, found no statistical difference in overall cancer rates among those who took vitamin D3, but there was a reduction in cancer-related deaths, which is what prompted this secondary analysis.
The fact that patients with a healthy weight derived a much greater benefit — a 38% reduced risk for metastatic cancer and death compared to 17% overall — suggests your body weight may play a significant role in whether vitamin D supplementation will provide you with the anticancer benefits you seek.
According to study co-author Dr. Paulette Chandler, assistant professor of medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, "Our study highlights that obesity may confer resistance to vitamin D effects."5
There may be something to that. Research6 published in 2010 found that dietary fructose inhibits intestinal calcium absorption, thereby inducing vitamin D insufficiency in people with chronic kidney disease.
That said, vitamin D tends to be lower in obese people in general, for the fact that it's a fat-soluble nutrient and when you're obese, the vitamin D ends up being "volumetrically diluted." As explained in the paper "Vitamin D in Obesity," published in 2017:7
"Serum vitamin D is lower in obese people; it is important to understand the mechanism of this effect and whether it indicates clinically significant deficiency … Vitamin D is fat soluble, and distributed into fat, muscle, liver, and serum.
All of these compartments are increased in volume in obesity, so the lower vitamin D likely reflects a volumetric dilution effect and whole body stores of vitamin D may be adequate … Obese people need higher loading doses of vitamin D to achieve the same serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D as normal weight."
While that particular paper stresses that lower vitamin D in obese individuals might not mean that they're deficient, others disagree. For example, one study8,9 found that for every 10% increase in body-mass index, there's a 4.2% reduction in blood levels of vitamin D. According to the authors of that particular study, obesity may in fact be a causal factor in the development of vitamin D deficiency.10
A scientific review11 published in the September 2020 issue of the British Journal of Cancer noted that having low vitamin D is associated with poor colorectal cancer survival.
To assess whether vitamin D supplementation might improve survival in these patients, they reviewed the findings of seven trials, three of which included patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the outset and four population trials that reported survival in incident cases.
Overall, the meta-analysis found supplementation resulted in a 30% reduction in adverse colorectal cancer outcomes. Vitamin D also improved outcomes among patients already diagnosed with colorectal cancer. According to the authors:12
"Meta-analysis demonstrates a clinically meaningful benefit of vitamin D supplementation on [colorectal cancer] survival outcomes. Further well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are needed to … [determine] optimal dosing."
Another review and meta-analysis,13 this one published in November 2019 in Bioscience Reports, looked at vitamin D supplementation on cancer incidence and mortality in general. Ten randomized controlled trials with a pool of 81,362 participants were included in the analysis.
While the incidence rate of cancer was very similar between the vitamin D intervention group and the placebo control group (9.16% versus 9.29%), the risk reduction in mortality was deemed "significant." As reported by the authors:
"The mortality rate of cancer was 2.11% (821 cases) and 2.43% (942 cases) in vitamin D intervention group and placebo group, respectively, resulting in a significant reduction in risk (RR = 0.87).
There was no observable heterogeneity or publication bias … Our findings support a beneficial effect of vitamin D supplement on lowering cancer mortality, especially in subpopulations with no history of cancer, extra use of vitamin D, or calcium supplement."
Several studies have highlighted the benefit of vitamin D for breast cancer. For example, an analysis14 by GrassrootsHealth published June 2018 in PLOS ONE showed women with a vitamin D level at or above 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) had an 82% lower risk of breast cancer compared to those with levels below 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L).
An earlier study,15,16 which looked at women in the U.K., found having a vitamin D level above 60 ng/mL resulted in an 83% lower breast cancer risk, which is nearly identical to GrassrootsHealth's 2018 analysis.
One of the more recent meta-analyses17,18 looking at breast cancer was published December 28, 2019, in the journal Aging. Here, they reviewed 70 observational studies, finding that for each 2 ng/mL (5 nmol/L) increase in vitamin D level there was a corresponding 6% decrease in breast cancer incidence.
Overall, this translates into a 71% reduced risk when you increase your vitamin D level from 20 ng/mL to 60 ng/mL. The following graph, created by GrassrootsHealth,19 illustrates the dose response between vitamin D levels and breast cancer risk found in this study.
GrassrootsHealth's 2018 analysis in PLOS ONE also analyzed this dose relationship.20 To do that, they looked at the percentage of breast cancer-free participants in various vitamin D groups, from deficient (below 20 ng/mL) to optimal (at or above 60 ng/mL), over time (four years).
As you might expect, the higher the blood level of vitamin D, the lower the incidence of breast cancer. The graph below illustrates this dose-related protection. At four years, the percentage of women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer in the 60 ng/mL group was 78% lower than among those with blood levels below 20 ng/mL.
If you live in the northern hemisphere, which is currently heading toward winter, now is the time to check your vitamin D level and start taking action to raise it if you're below 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L). As you can see from the studies above, a vitamin D level of 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) or higher is recommended if you want to protect against cancer.
An easy and cost-effective way of measuring your vitamin D level is to order GrassrootsHealth’s vitamin D testing kit. Once you know your current vitamin D level, use the GrassrootsHealth vitamin D calculator21 to determine how much vitamin D you might need to reach your target level. To optimize vitamin D absorption and utilization, be sure to take your vitamin D with vitamin K2 and magnesium.
Lastly, remember to retest in three to four months to make sure you’ve reached your target level. If you have, then you know you’re taking the correct dosage. If you’re still low (or have reached a level above 80 ng/mL), you’ll need to adjust your dosage accordingly and retest again in another three to four months.
In early September 2021, Oklahoma’s KFOR news ran a falsified story about emergency rooms being overrun with patients who had overdosed on horse ivermectin.1 Other mainstream media followed suit — all incorrectly referring to ivermectin as a dangerous veterinary drug.
In the real world, ivermectin is a human drug that has been safely used by 3.7 billion people since the early 1990s.2 In 2016, three scientists received the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine for their discovery of ivermectin against parasitic infections in humans.3 It’s also on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.4
There’s absolutely no reason whatsoever to disparage ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” that only a loony person would consider taking. Yet that’s what mainstream media have done, virtually without exception.
When comedian and podcast host Joe Rogan revealed5 he’d treated his bout of COVID-19 with ivermectin and other remedies — fully recovering within three days — NPR reported Rogan had taken “ivermectin, a deworming veterinary drug that is formulated for use in cows and horses,” adding that “the Food and Drug Administration is urging people to stop ingesting” the medication, saying animal doses of the drug can cause nausea, vomiting and in some cases severe hepatitis.6
CNN, among many others, also reported on Rogan’s use of “horse dewormer.” In mid-October 2021, Rogan interviewed CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta, grilling him on why CNN would outright lie about his use of ivermectin.
“It’s a lie on a news network,” Rogan said, “and it’s a lie that they’re conscious of. It’s not a mistake. They’re unfavorably framing it as a veterinary medicine …
Don’t you think a lie like that is dangerous … when they know they’re lying? They know I took medicine [for humans] … Dude, they lied. They said I was taking horse dewormer. It was prescribed to me by a doctor, along with a bunch of other medications.”
Gupta finally relents and agrees that ivermectin should not be called horse dewormer. When asked, “Does it bother you that the news network you work for out and out lied about me taking horse dewormer?” Gupta replied, “They shouldn’t have said that.”
When asked why they would lie about such an important medical issue, Gupta replied “I don’t know.” Gupta also admits he never asked why they did it, even though he’s their top medical correspondent.
While CNN and mainstream media are certainly at fault for spreading disinformation here, they got the idea from a supposedly reputable source — the FDA. In an August 21, 2021, tweet,7 the FDA linked to an agency article warning against the use of ivermectin, saying “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
This blatantly misleading post seeded the lie that then spread across mainstream media. In an article posted on RESCUE with Michael Capuzzo substack, two independent investigative health journalists, Mary Beth Pfeiffer and Linda Bonvie, detail how the FDA’s anti-ivermectin campaign began:8
“Within two days, 23.7 million people had seen that Pulitzer-worthy bit of Twitter talk. Hundreds of thousands more got the message on Facebook, LinkedIn, and from the Today Show’s 3 million-follower Instagram account.
‘That was great!’ declared FDA Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock in an email to her media team. ‘Even I saw it!’ For the FDA, the ‘not-a-horse’ tweet was ‘a unique viral moment,’ a senior FDA official wrote to Woodcock, ‘in a time of incredible misinformation’ …
When CNN retweeted ‘not-a-horse,’ FDA was gleeful. ‘The numbers are racking up and I laughed out loud,’ wrote FDA Associate Commissioner Erica Jefferson in one email … There was one problem, however. The tweet was a direct outgrowth of wrong data — call it misinformation — put out the day before by the Mississippi health department.
The FDA did not vet the data, according to our review of emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and questions to FDA officials. Instead, it saw Mississippi, as one email said, as ‘an opportunity to remind the public of our own warnings for ivermectin.’”
The now infamous tweet was born out of a single sentence in a Mississippi poison control health alert, which stated that “At least 70% of the recent calls have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers.” The problem? That wasn’t accurate either.
As it turns out, the real percentage of recent calls to poison control related to veterinary ivermectin was 2%, not 70%. In an October 5, 2021, correction, the Mississippi health department clarified that it wasn’t 70% of all poison control calls that involved veterinary ivermectin, it was 70% of all ivermectin-related calls.9
In absolute numbers, there were six such calls, and four of those calls actually related to livestock accidentally receiving the drug. Investigation by Pfeiffer and Bonvie also revealed that between July 31 and August 22, 2021, 40%, 10 of 24 ivermectin-related calls to the Mississippi poison control center were mere requests for information, which is a common occurrence.
“Without question, people should not take drugs made for animals, given issues of dosing and medical oversight, to name just two. That much is clear,” Pfeiffer and Bonvie write.10
“But in hopping on the Mississippi bandwagon, the FDA … turned ivermectin, which doctors and health ministers in several countries say has saved many from covid-19, into a drug to be feared, human form or not.
This highly effective bait-and-switch began last March with a webpage, to which the FDA tweet linked, that conflates the two ivermectins. On one hand, the FDA tells of receiving ‘multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention’ after taking the animal product.
On the other, it describes the fate awaiting people who take large amounts of any ivermectin, ending a long list with ‘dizziness, ataxia, seizures, coma and even death.’
The medical literature,11 nonetheless, shows ivermectin to be an extremely safe medicine … Last March, a safety review12 of ivermectin by a renowned French toxicologist could not find a single accidental overdose death in the medical literature in more than 300 safety studies of the drug over decades.
The study was performed for MedinCell, a French pharmaceutical company … Since 1992, twenty deaths have been linked to inexpensive, off-patent ivermectin, according to a World Health Organization drug tracker called VigiAccess …
So how big was the surge that FDA described as ‘multiple’? Four, an agency spokesperson said just after the page went up. Three people were hospitalized, but it wasn’t clear if that was for COVID itself.
When pressed for details, FDA cited privacy issues, and said in an email, ‘Some of these cases were lost to follow up.’ This is how government gets away with some whoppers, and with the media’s help.”
According to VigiAccess, the World Health Organization’s drug tracker, a total of 20 deaths have been linked to ivermectin since 1992.13 Compare that safety profile to remdesivir, the primary drug used by hospitals across the U.S. against COVID-19.
Since the spring of 2020, VigiAccess has received 7,491 adverse events in all attributed to remdesivir, including 560 deaths, 550 serious cardiac disorders and 475 acute kidney injuries.14
The question is why remdesivir is being used at all, with the World Health Organization recommending15 against it and a new Lancet study16 finding “no clinical benefit.” Could it be that Fauci is involved with the fraud? Pfeiffer and Bonvie write.17,18
“The other question is why ivermectin is not. The FDA tweet arrived just as ivermectin prescriptions were soaring, up twenty-four-fold in August from before the pandemic.
These were legal prescriptions written by doctors who, presumably, had read the studies, learned from experience, and decided for themselves. Indeed, 20 percent of prescriptions are written off-label,19 namely for other than an approved use.
The effort to vilify ivermectin broadly has helped curb the legal supply of a safe drug. That’s what drove people to livestock medicine in the first place.”
In better news, in early October 2021, the Nebraska Department of Health asked Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson to issue a legal opinion on the off-label use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19.
October 15, 2021, Peterson issued a legal opinion20,21 stating health care providers can legally prescribe these medications for off-label use for the treatment of COVID, provided they have informed consent from the patient.22 The only causes for disciplinary action are failure to obtain informed consent, deception and/or prescribing excessively high doses.
Peterson concluded that, based on the available evidence, hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin “might work for some people.”
He highlighted studies demonstrating the safety and benefits of these drugs against COVID-19, as well as the shocking scientific fraud that led to worldwide shunning of hydroxychloroquine, and the cherry-picking and exclusion of data in studies that are critical of ivermectin. He also pointed out how illogical it is to discourage early treatment.
"Allowing physicians to consider these early treatments will free them to evaluate additional tools that could save lives, keep patients out of the hospital, and provide relief for our already strained healthcare system," Peterson wrote.23,24
Peterson also called out the FDA and Dr. Anthony Fauci on their hypocrisy, detailing how the FDA and National Institutes of Health seeded confusion by issuing contradictory guidance. The NIH has taken a neutral position to ivermectin, which Peterson “clearly signaled that physicians should use their discretion in deciding whether to treat COVID-19 patients with ivermectin.”
NIH officials, however, have ignored the agency’s official position. At the end of August 2021, Fauci “went on CNN and announced that ‘there is no clinical evidence’ that ivermectin works for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19,’ and that ‘there is no evidence whatsoever’ that it works,” Peterson writes, adding:
“Yet this definitive claim directly contradicts the NIH’s recognition that ‘several randomized trials … published in peer-reviewed journals’ have reported data indicating that ivermectin is effective as a COVID-19 treatment.”
Peterson goes on to review the FDA’s behavior with respect to ivermectin:
“The FDA has similarly charted a course of confusion. In March 2021, the FDA posted a webpage entitled ‘Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.’
Although the FDA’s concern was stories of some people using the animal form of ivermectin or excessive doses of the human form, the title broadly condemned any use of ivermectin in connection with COVID-19.
Yet there was no basis for its sweeping condemnation. Indeed, the FDA itself acknowledged on that very webpage (and continued to do so until the page changed on September 3, 2021) that the agency had not even ‘reviewed data to support use of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients to treat or prevent COVID-19.’
But without reviewing the available data, which had long since been available and accumulating, it is unclear what basis the FDA had for denouncing ivermectin as a treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19.”
Peterson also highlights the fact that while the FDA claims ivermectin “is not an antiviral (a drug for treating viruses),” on another FDA webpage they list a study in Antiviral Research that “identified ivermectin as a medicine ‘previously shown to have broad-spectrum antiviral activity.”
“It is telling that the FDA deleted the line about ivermectin not being ‘anti-viral’ when it amended the first webpage on September 3, 2021,” Peterson writes.
He also points out that while the FDA now claims off-label use of drugs “can be very dangerous,” and that this is why they don’t recommend ivermectin for COVID, doctors routinely use drugs off-label, and ivermectin has a well-established safety record.
So, “it is inconsistent for the FDA to imply that ivermectin is dangerous when used to treat COVID-19 while the agency continues to approve remdesivir despite its spottier safety record,” Peterson writes.
Peterson also questioned the stance of professional associations such as The American Medical Association, American Pharmacists Association and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, which in September 2021 issuing a joint statement25 opposing the use of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID outside of clinical trials.
Their statement, Peterson points out, relied on the FDA’s and CDC’s “suspect positions,” and a statement by Merck, in which they opposed the use of the drug due to a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”
“But Merck, of all sources, knows that ivermectin is exceedingly safe, so the absence of safety data in recent studies should not be concerning to the company,” Peterson writes, adding:
“Why would ivermectin’s original patent holder go out of its way to question this medicine by creating the impression that it might not be safe? There are at least two plausible reasons.
First, ivermectin is no longer under patent, so Merck does not profit from it anymore. That likely explains why Merck declined to ‘conduct clinical trials’ on ivermectin and COVID-19 when given the chance.
Second, Merck has a significant financial interest in the medical profession rejecting ivermectin as an early treatment for COVID-19. [T]he U.S. government has agreed to pay [Merck] about $1.2 billion for 1.7 million courses of its experimental COVID-19 treatment [molnupiravir], if it is proven to work in an ongoing large trial and authorized by U.S. regulators.
Thus, if low-cost ivermectin works better than, or even the same as molnupiravir, that could cost Merck billions of dollars.”
Another excellent article26 detailing the FDA’s questionable actions, and Merck’s incentives to disparage their old drug, ivermectin, was published by the American Institute for Economic Research.
“While we can all be happy that Merck has developed a new therapeutic that can keep us safe from the ravages of Covid-19, we should realize that the FDA’s rules give companies an incentive to focus on newer drugs while ignoring older ones,” David Henderson, a senior fellow with AIERS, writes.27
“Ivermectin may or may not be a miracle drug for Covid-19. The FDA doesn’t want us to learn the truth. The FDA spreads lies and alarms Americans while preventing drug companies from providing us with scientific explorations of existing, promising, generic drugs.”
There’s no doubt that many have died unnecessarily due to our health authorities’ incomprehensible decision to discourage all prevention and early treatment of COVID-19. As noted by many doctors, early treatment is absolutely crucial for preventing hospitalization, death and long-term side effects of the infection.
There are several proven protocols to choose from at this point, including the following. Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at first onset of symptoms.
This article was previously published January 25, 2021, and has been updated with new information.
Knowledge is power. So is ownership, including land ownership. Did you know that Bill Gates is America's top farmland investor? This short video reveals many of the global strategies Gates has been using to influence your health and the food supply.
Through his founding of the second-largest technological company in the world,1 Gates has developed financial and influential relationships with powerful organizations responsible for many global decisions that affect your life.
Subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, his movements have grown a massive financial empire and expanded his ability to create change to support his goals. Gates is also a supporter of the "Great Reset" that promises "social cohesion, fairness, inclusion and equality,"2 while allowing elite billionaires to practice strategies that grew his and other billionaires' wealth by 26% during the pandemic in 2020.3
In other words, while supporting Marxist principles to spread the wealth — so by 2030 you can say, "I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better"4 — he is enjoying the fruits of his labor by accumulating more wealth and property, a decidedly different approach to the Great Reset he promotes.
Put plainly, the political and ideological foundations of Marxism have once again surfaced, and in some arenas, are celebrated. However, it's vital to remember that unlike Walgreens' advertising campaign featuring a picture-perfect town of "Perfect,"5 Marxist philosophy has created tyranny and was responsible for the deaths of more than 100 million people in the last century, as aptly described by James Bovard in USA Today.6
History is studied and shared so the mistakes of the past are not repeated. However, it’s evident there are many who have forgotten, or never learned, what resulted behind the Iron Curtain from implementing the socialist principles which now underpin The Great Reset.
The Great Reset or Fourth Industrial Revolution has strong supporters among wealthy technocrats who will not redistribute their own wealth, but will only continue to grow their financial empires as the rest of the world suffers. Indeed, 2020 has only been a taste of what could come as more people lose their jobs and financial security, while those controlling the event become wealthier.
The Land Report announced that multibillionaire Bill Gates currently holds the title as America's biggest private farmland owner. He owns 242,000 acres, nearly 52,000 more than the next largest farmland owner.7 To put this in perspective, 52,000 is equal to 39,325 football fields, including the end zones.8 His farmland (approximately 378.125 square miles) would rank in total land mass as the eighth largest city in the U.S. in 2010.9
It was Eric O'Keefe from the Land Report10 who ferreted out the story after reading that 14,500 acres of choice farmland in Benton County, Washington, had been sold for $171 million, or nearly $12,000 per acre. O'Keefe describes the area as "some of the richest farmland in the Lower 48," that "savvy investors have been plowing millions of dollars into."11
Although the seller was listed as John Hancock Life Insurance, the buyer was reported as a limited liability company from Louisiana. Digging deeper and engaging their research team, he discovered the paper trail led to a company managed by Michael Larson, manager of the Gates' personal portfolio and much of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for the last 25 years.
Larson primarily uses Cascade Investment LLC as the entity through which he manages their personal portfolio. O'Keefe details the sequence in which the land changed hands over 10 years. The largest single block of farmland was quietly acquired by Cascade in 2017, one year after it was purchased by a Canadian firm.12
The sale was revealed in the Canadian firm's quarterly statement, in which they reported offloading $520 million in farmland offered in a single block. An investigative journalist ultimately found the half-billion-dollar sale led to Cascade Investment LLC.
Gates owns a substantial amount of land, for a total of 268,894 acres if you count his transitional and recreational properties. But, he's not the only billionaire who tops the Land Report list. Stewart and Lynda Resnick, co-founders of Wonderful Company, come in at No. 2, owning 190,000 acres. They use their farmland to support their food products, such as Wonderful Pistachios and Wonderful Halos Mandarin oranges.13
Gates also is not the largest individual landowner overall, as that spot goes to John Malone, chairman of the board at Liberty Media Corporation and former chief executive officer for Tele-Communications Inc.14 Malone owns 2.2 million acres of forest and ranch land; media Mogul Ted Turner owns 2 million across eight states.15
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is also heavily invested in land, coming in the 25th spot at 420,000 acres located mostly in Texas.16 The remaining list is filled with recognizable names, including the King Ranch, Ford family and the Kennedy Memorial Foundation.17
In addition to farmland, Cascade Investment has purchased 24,800 acres of transitional property west of Phoenix, which is poised for city expansion projected to include: “up to 80,000 homes; 3,800 acres of industrial, office and retail space; 3,400 acres of open space; and 470 acres for public schools."18
Cascade also bought 1,234 recreational acres, making the land Gates owns through just Cascade Investment LLC at 268,984 acres. Separate from the Gates’ personal holdings is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has no ties to Cascade, but does have a farmland initiative called Gates Ag One, which19
"… aims to speed up efforts to provide smallholder farmers in developing countries, many of whom are women, with access to the affordable tools and innovations they need to sustainably improve crop productivity and adapt to the effects of climate change."
Although Cascade Investment has declined to make any comment on the quiet transactions through the Canadian company, they have come out in support of sustainable farming. One of the entities owned by Cascade, Cottonwood Ag Management, is an initial member of Leading Harvest, a nonprofit organization formed to advance:20
"… sustainable agriculture, providing assurance programs comprised of standards, audit procedures, training and education, and reporting and claim offerings that are optimized for flexibility, scalability, and impact."
As O'Keefe describes it, the goal is to create a "sustainability standard that can be implemented across the greatest swath of agricultural acreage."21 Yet, while this goal is commendable, they remain words on paper without a substantive foundation.
In other words, according to the organization, they do not offer farmers guidance to achieve the goal, only the formation of a certification program to audit the farmers' results.22 In their publication, they describe the program:23
"It does not prescribe practices necessary to conform with the Standard; rather, it provides family farmers and farm managers the flexibility to select best practices for sustainable outcomes. This approach allows for adaptation across crops and geographies, recognizing that even a single crop can require unique management strategies in different regions.
An outcome-based approach recognizes that prescribing the same processes and metrics across geographies can be ineffective. By encouraging farmers to innovate new approaches and apply best management practices suited for their crops and consistent with regional best practices, management results are improved, and greater sustainability outcomes are achieved."
In other words, instead of guidance and standards for how the farmer achieves sustainability and protects the future of farming, they created a certification for farmers to demonstrate their participation in developing practices where the end result meets their standard — do the ends justify the means?
Gates has been calling for sustainable energy and a reduction of carbon emissions for over a decade.24 At one point in a 2010 TED talk, he questioned if we need another Manhattan Project to discover a renewable and safe energy source.
If you don't remember, the Manhattan Project was the code name given to an operation aimed at discovering a functional nuclear weapon,25 that resulted in a bomb being dropped on Hiroshima, Japan. When asked how he would deal with climate change skeptics, he said:26
"The main problem we have here — it's kind of like with AIDS: You make the mistake now, and you pay for it a lot later. And so, when you have all sorts of urgent problems, the idea of taking pain now that has to do with a gain later, and a somewhat uncertain pain thing."
Gates spoke about climate change and the technological advancements that may be necessary in an interview with a journalist from The Atlantic in 2015. The journalist recorded this response:27
"Yes, the government will be somewhat inept," he said brusquely, swatting aside one objection as a trivial statement of the obvious. "But the private sector is in general inept. How many companies do venture capitalists invest in that go poorly? By far most of them."
While Gates may not think highly of the government or entrepreneurs, he does believe that plant-based and lab-grown meat alternatives are healthy and sustainable. Historically, some of the decisions from the Gates Foundation haven’t been focused on the environment but, rather, cloaked in rhetoric that appears environmentally friendly.
For example, despite a lack of consensus on GMO safety,28 in 2010 the Gates Foundation aligned itself with Monsanto and Cargill. They invested nearly $23 million in 500,000 Monsanto shares.
Subsequently, a South African watchdog group discovered the Gates Foundation had also invested $10 million in Cargill to "develop the soya value chain,"29 which The Guardian wrote probably meant the "big time introduction of GM soy in southern Africa."30
In 2010, The Guardian also reported that Gates had funded research to develop machines that would spray seawater into the clouds with the goal of increasing the ability to reflect sunlight into space, and therefore reduce global warming. The move triggered a call for a global ban on geoengineering experiments from the ETC Group and a comment from co-executive director Jim Thomas:31
"We knew Microsoft was developing cloud applications for computers but we didn't expect this. Bill Gates and his cloud-wrenching cronies have no right to unilaterally change our seas and skies in this way."
Not to be deterred by naysayers, eight years later in 2018 Gates agreed to help fund experiments for Harvard scientists, who proposed to spray the stratosphere with calcium chloride to help slow the Earth's warming.32
In keeping with past decisions, Gates also supports plant-based and lab-grown meat alternatives,33,34 which are riddled with patented chemicals and genetically engineered ingredients. Seth Itzkan from Soil4Climate, characterizes one fake-meat product this way:35
"Impossible Foods should really be called Impossible Patents. It’s not food; it’s software, intellectual property — 14 patents, in fact, in each bite of Impossible Burger with over 100 additional patents pending for animal proxies from chicken to fish. It’s iFood, the next killer app. Just download your flavor. This is likely the appeal for Bill Gates, their über investor."
Presumably, his support of chemical food, reminiscent of the DuPont slogan "Better things for better living through chemistry,"36 is to reduce carbon emissions. However, as has been documented and covered in other articles I’ve written, regenerative farming practices are better for the land, the animals and your health.
Convinced that their method of producing chemical-based food reduces the carbon footprint, Impossible Foods hired Quantis to give them scientific evidence.37 According to the executive summary published on their website, their product reduces the environmental impact between 87% and 96% in the categories Quantis studied, including global warming potential, land occupation and water consumption.
However, Quantis compared fake meat production against CAFOs, which are notoriously destructive. On the other hand, White Oak Pastures in Bluffton, Georgia, practices true sustainable, regenerative farming and produces high-quality, grass fed products.
White Oak Pastures commissioned the same analysis, by the same company, which showed they had a net total emission in the negative numbers.38 It's also worth noting that the Impossible Burger is made from GMO soy containing glyphosate.
Your health and longevity are dependent on providing your body with necessary nutrients from whole food. It's simply impossible to be sustained by synthetic chemicals, toxic GMO grains contaminated with pesticides and fake meat. Regenerative farming practices can provide whole food and can have a positive impact on the environment.
Imagine the powerful influence Gates could have on the environment and the country if he would move his massive acreage into regenerative farming practices. This could raise the quality of food the land produces and demonstrate sustainable practices that can be followed around the world.
Instead, it appears that financial motivations are helping to drive environmental decisions to support his personal goals. As I’ve discussed in other articles, the movement to develop fake food is lucrative. However, you can protect your health and your future by starting with a few simple guidelines that include always choosing organic foods, buying from local farmers and never eating processed foods of any sort.
In the video above retired nurse lecturer John Campbell, Ph.D., reports on a comparative analysis of molnurpirivir and ivermectin published in the Austin Journal of Pharmacology and Therapeutics.1 The first is Merck's new antiviral drug and the second is the much vilified and maligned2,3 antiparasitic drug used in humans since 19874 and approved for human use in the U.S. in 1996.5,6
Campbell compares the efficacy, safety and cost using available data for ivermectin published in peer reviewed studies and the first interim data for molnupiravir published by Merck. Molnupiravir, also known as EIDD-2801/MK-44827 has data published as early as October 2019 that showed it was a clinical candidate for monotherapy in influenza viruses.8
And yet, Merck's investigation into the oral antiviral medication against SARS-CoV-2 was not logged with Clinical Trials until October 5, 2020.9 While Gilead raced to release remdesivir, posting their first clinical trial February 5, 2020,10 Merck appeared to be slow off the mark. Gilead suspended or terminated the early trials for remdesivir. The reasons given included:
The advantage molnupiravir has over remdesivir is that it is administered orally and can be used for early treatment in an outpatient setting. However, as we review the comparison between the drugs, it's important to remember that the early data on molnupiravir has been published in a press release.13
In the video Campbell reviews a paper published in the Austin Journal of Pharmacology and Therapeutics14 that was a chemical comparison of the pharmacological effects of molnupiravir and ivermectin. Looking at the two ways science uses to develop new treatments when a new condition arises,15 Campbell explains the first is to create a new drug and the second is to repurpose medications used for other conditions.
For example, aspirin originally was used to treat fever. Once it became evident that it was also effective against pain, doctors began recommending it to relieve headaches and other minor aches and pains. Subsequently, it was found that aspirin was an effective antiplatelet, as well, and this function was added to the known uses for aspirin.
According to the paper,16 Ivermectin is the "most studied, 'repurposed' medication globally, in randomized clinical trials, retrospective studies and meta-analysis." Ivermectin is an FDA-approved, broad spectrum antiparasitic17 with known anti-inflammatory properties.18
As Campbell reviews, an in vitro study19 demonstrated that a single treatment with ivermectin effectively reduced viral load 5,000 times in 48 hours in cell culture. By comparison, Merck claims molnupiravir is a broad-spectrum antiviral that is active against the Gamma, Delta and Mu SARS-CoV-2 variants.20
The data in the comparison paper show molnupiravir is more potent in-vitro than ivermectin,21 which means it needs less drug to work with a lower tissue concentration.22 The amount of time the maximum drug dose is found in the serum is one to 1.75 hours for molnupiravir and four to six hours for ivermectin.
Interestingly, the half-life for Merck's drug is seven hours and the half-life for ivermectin is 81 to 91 hours. This is the amount of time it takes for your body to reduce the active ingredients in the drug by half. Campbell also reviews the following factors:
• Safety — No matter how well a drug works, if it's not safe for use, it cannot be effective. Offering some examples of how ivermectin's safety compares to other drugs, according to Campbell23 the global database of the World Health Organization, VigiBase, recorded 5,593 adverse events from ivermectin after 3.7 billion doses were administered to humans.
For comparison, VigiBase recorded 136,222 adverse events for amoxicillin and 165,479 for ibuprofen. At this time there is no VigiBase data available for molnupiravir, so no comparisons can be made for that drug yet. To take the example one step further, an outside look at acetaminophen adverse events shows that this drug (aka Tylenol) is many times more dangerous than ivermectin.
In the U.S. alone24 the National Institutes of Health's STATPearls manual reports that there are 2,600 hospitalizations, 56,000 emergency room visits and 500 deaths each year for acetaminophen overdoses as of July 2021. And, the drug is the second leading cause of liver transplantation worldwide and the leading cause of transplantation in the U.S.
• Efficacy — According to interim data from Merck,25 molnupiravir reduced hospitalizations or deaths by 50% in 385 participants who had at least one risk factor associated with poor disease outcome. A meta-analysis of 15 trials26 that included 2,438 participants demonstrated that ivermectin could reduce the risk of death by 62%.
According to an ongoing collection from published data,27 across all studies ivermectin is 86% effective prophylactically, 66% effective in early treatment and 36% effective in late treatment. By comparison, a Cochrane review of the literature28 that Campbell references in the video found the data did not determine if ivermectin leads to more or less infections, worsened or improved infection, or increased or decreased unwanted events.
• Cost — According to a Forbes report,29 the raw material for the active pharmaceutical ingredients in molnupiravir costs about $2.50 per treatment. The cost of manufacturing the product would be $20, which is 35 times less than the price set by Merck of $700 per treatment. Additionally, Forbes reports that initially the drug will be purchased using federal funds.
According to the treatment protocol by the FLCCC,30 ivermectin is dosed at 0.4 to 0.6 mg/kg of body weight per dose once daily for five days. For an average person 160 pounds (72.5 kg), the dose is 29 mg to 43.5 mg per day for five days.
The average cost for 30 tablets of 3 mg of ivermectin in the U.S. can run as high as $108 or as little as $29.72 with a drug discount program — a fraction of molnupiravir's prices.31
As I mentioned, according to the data released by Merck, molnupiravir reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by 50% as compared to the placebo group.32 According to the numbers in their study, 28 people in the intervention group died or were hospitalized by Day 29 while 53 in the placebo treated group were hospitalized or died.
Merck did not identify the placebo in either their press release33 or in the Clinical Trials data.34 Dr. James Lyons-Weiler also evaluated the results of the trial and asked some very pertinent questions, such as:35
• Why were patients taking a placebo allowed to die?
"When there is a vast amount of published research on clear winners are the early treatment protocols as described by the medical authorities on the matter? Merck and NIH allowed 14.1% of people in the control arms to develop severe COVID-19 and die with no treatment. None. Just placebo.
How did the NIH and the FDA let this happen in the face of the evidence of efficacy of early treatment? How could they? Because that's the standard of care for early COVID-19: go home, incubate, get sick, and die if you must. But don't call us until you are seriously ill."
• Why are the number of participants low? — When the study was first listed on Clinical Trials36 the team initially anticipated 1,450 patients in a parallel phase 2/3 randomized, placebo-controlled study. This changed May 25, 2021, to 1,850 participants anticipated.37
At the completion of the study when they were no longer recruiting participants, they reported data on 762 participants in the press release38 from 173 locations. What happened to the data from the rest of the participants?
• Why was the second study for hospitalized patients terminated? — A second study39 was ongoing during the same time period for hospitalized patients, having started October 5, 2020, and last updated September 9, 2021.
They anticipated enrolling 1,300 patients but terminated the study for "business reasons" after enrolling 304. What happened to cause the company to close this arm of the study after enrolling so few patients and what happened to the data?
Lyons-Weiler is a senior research scientist at the University of Pittsburgh.40 He also listed the numerous exclusion criteria for participants in the study and went on to write:41
"If, by any stretch of reason, FDA approval is made using the one interim analysis of (potentially) cherry-picked data in a cherry-picked study published as a press release without peer review, ignoring the data from the study not mentioned at all- their guidance should carry restrictions disallowing the use of the drug on or by patients in all of the excluded groups, including those who are hospitalized.
If by some miracle the rules on full reporting are enforced for the buried molnupiravir trial, the identified data from the trials need to be audited to make sure patients with an undesirable outcome under one trial were not excluded because they were enrolled in another trial focused on studying that same outcome. That would point to more scientific chicanery, and we've all had more than enough of that."
CBS News42 reports that Merck has asked U.S. regulators for emergency use authorization for the drug against COVID-19. The decision could come in just a few weeks and "The FDA will scrutinize company data on the safety and effectiveness of the drug, molnupiravir, before rendering a decision." It is hoped the FDA has access to all the data.
Although Campbell adamantly defends the need for both a vaccine and treatment,43 he also points to diseases such as the bubonic plague for which we have adequate treatment but do not have a vaccine,44 even for areas of the world where it may have greater incidence.45
Campbell also believes that if there is a good quality antiviral medication, there would be less of an impact from COVID in countries where the vaccine rollout is patchy.
And yet, data show that the number of confirmed cases of COVID in countries where much of the population is unvaccinated is not higher than in countries where nearly 100% have been given the jab. For example, as of October 13, 2021, according to the CNN COVID-19 vaccination tracker46 and the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center:47
|Country||Vaccination Rate||Infections||Population48||% Population Infected|
|United Arab Emirates||84.3%||737,890||9,890,402||7.4%|
In the past, according to the CDC's definition, a vaccination program used a product that "stimulates a person's immune system to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease."49 But today, CDC's new definition says vaccines are only meant to "stimulate the body's immune response against diseases."50 You'll note that the new definition says a vaccine isn't responsible for stimulating the immune system or protecting against any specific illness.
According to COVID-19 statistics from the CDC,51 people over 65 carry the greatest burden of mortality. In 2020 this population accounted for 80.7% of deaths and thus far in 2021 this age range accounts for 71.2% of deaths in the U.S. However, these percentages are highly skewed since, to date, large populations of people are not offered or treated with successful protocols.
This begs the question: How high has the CDC and FDA allowed the death rate to go by suppressing effective treatments that are readily available and economical?
While ivermectin has demonstrated it is a useful strategy, it's not my primary recommendation. You don't necessarily need prescribed medication to help prevent, and in the early treatment of, COVID-19.
I believe your best option to fighting the onset of any disease is to optimize your vitamin D level, as your body requires this for a wide variety of functions, including a healthy immune response.52,53 Then, for early treatment, or after you've been exposed to someone with COVID, I recommend using nebulized hydrogen peroxide treatment.54
This treatment is inexpensive, highly effective, can easily be done at home and is completely harmless when you're using the low (0.04% to 0.1%) peroxide concentration recommended. In the video below I demonstrate how to make a low concentration of hydrogen peroxide at home and how to use your nebulizer. You'll find my interviews with Dr. Thomas Levy55 and Dr. David Brownstein56 about this treatment on Bitchute.
Today, we continue our discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic and its origin with a fascinating guest who has been a leader exposing the corruption and fraud with respect to the origin of the virus. Li-Meng Yan is both an M.D. and Ph.D., with specific training in coronaviruses. She escaped from China's influence while in Hong Kong to the United States to warn us of what she believes is a massive cover-up.
Yan went to medical school, followed by a Ph.D. program in ophthalmology. The school where she got her Ph.D. was originally a military medical university, which helps explain some of her personal network. She has contacts in both civilian and military research laboratories and hospitals in mainland China.
After finishing her studies, she decided to pursue research. For two years, she worked in an ophthalmology lab in the University of Hong Kong, where she researched stem cells, drugs and artificial tissue development. She was then invited to join the lab of professor Malik Peiris.
Yan's husband had worked with him and Peiris was impressed with Yan's skillset. She jumped at the chance to learn more about emerging infectious diseases. She worked with Peiris for five years, until she escaped to the U.S. in April 2020.
"I worked on the influenza virus, universal influenza vaccine development, and then focused on the SARS-CoV-2 after the outbreak," she says.
At the end of December 2019, Yan's supervisor, Dr. Leo Poon, who is also an emerging infectious disease expert with the World Health Organization, assigned her to conduct a confidential investigation into a mysterious new pneumonia-like infection.
Colleagues and friends at universities and hospitals around China gave her information, which she forwarded to Peiris and Poon. They did not follow up on it, however, which she says "shows that they want [to] help China to cover it up."
In January 2020, Poon asked her to look into whether the raccoon dog, a civet cat-like animal, which was a host for the original SARS virus, might also be an intermediary host for SARS-CoV-2. Yan's research, however, was indicating that the virus did not come from nature. Poon warned her to keep silent or "you will be disappeared."
According to Yan, SARS-CoV-2 was made in a Chinese military lab. The Third Military Medical University in Chongqing, China, and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command in Nanjing, had discovered a bat coronavirus called ZC45. The discovery of ZC45 was published in early 2018.
"If you compare this virus genome and the SARS-CoV-2 virus genome, you will realize [this is the] smoking gun," Yan says. She's convinced that ZC45 was used as a template and/or backbone to create SARS-CoV-2.
In mid-May 2020, shortly after she'd left Hong Kong, the journal Nature published a paper1 Yan had co-written, detailing the pathogenesis and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in golden hamsters. This experiment showed SARS-CoV-2 primarily spreads via aerosol.
In mid-September 2020, Yan published an open access paper2 on Zenodo, in which she and her two co-authors laid out the evidence and their theory for SARS-CoV-2 being manmade.
Almost immediately, four "reviewers" of her work denounced it as being an "opinion" piece that was "flawed" and not scientifically in line with currently accepted knowledge of the origin of the virus. One reviewer3 said, "The manuscript attempts to refute our current understanding of the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Briefly, the consensus is that SARS-CoV-2 is a zoonosis and originated in bats with perhaps an intermediate host before spilling over into humans."
A year later, in 2021, numerous indicators4,5 show that dismissing the lab leak hypothesis was premature and there is no "consensus" of a zoonosis origin.
Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by The Intercept6 also point directly to a lab origin, so much so that the WHO's director general, Tedros Ghebreyesus, called for a new investigation into it, writing in the October 13, 2021, edition of the journal Science,7 "A lab accident cannot be ruled out until there is sufficient evidence to do so and those results are openly shared."
Initially, Yan had released information via an American YouTube blogger that was very popular in China. By the end of April 2020, a colleague warned Yan she was at risk of being "disappeared." That's when she decided to flee to the U.S. Luckily, she already had a valid visa. Her husband was deeply opposed to her leaving, as you might imagine. She explains:
"I didn't know it would happen like [it did]. From January to April , I didn't tell him what I had done. I tried to protect him, because at that time, in Hong Kong, there were a lot of people fighting against government for democracy and freedom. They can get disappeared easily.
But if their family don't know what they have done, it's kind of safe for the family. That's why I tried to protect him. But when I heard that I need leave, I tried to bring him with me. He's not Chinese. He's from Sri Lanka. When I told him, he was outraged, which was really not like him. He warned me, saying 'We can go nowhere. They are everywhere. We can do nothing.'"
Her husband even threatened to have her killed if she left. The next two weeks were a dangerous time for Yan. Her husband kept her under surveillance, and she developed a sudden heart problem. The day before she left, she went for a checkup. She had a resting heart rate of 130, which is a sign of sinus tachycardia.
Yan suspects foul play, saying the Chinese government prefers to "disappear" people by making it look like a natural death. "Like this virus," she says. According to Yan, infections and heart attacks are common strategies used to get rid of dissenters. Yan also suspects her husband may have been helping them.
Fortunately, since entering the U.S., the attacks have been relegated to discrediting her and ruining her reputation. "For example, they created thousands of fake accounts on social media, using at least seven languages, to spread [lies about me] and attacks to discredit me," she says.
According to Yan, this has been verified by FireEye, a cybersecurity company that also does work for American intelligence agencies. Her family, who are in mainland China, friends and even alumni are also under strict surveillance by the Chinese government, she says.
While the whole world denied the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was manmade for over a year, in recent months, the truth has finally entered the mainstream. A number of reporters have wrestled with excuses, trying to justify or explain away their long-held denials.
"Last year in July, when I was first on Fox News, I told them the WHO and the CCP are corrupted and are in the cover-up together," Yan says. "At that time, it was a bombshell. Now, most people realize [the virus] is not from nature. That is a very good turning, and I keep helping other people to realize the evidence.
I explain to them the CCP's style and the evidence. Now, I see that even some mainstream media are starting to talk about the possibility of [it being a] bioweapon. I think it is very encouraging. Because people need to realize that China is using this virus together with their misinformation campaign and propaganda to attack all over the world."
While the Chinese military may be responsible for the physical creation of the virus, there's ample evidence showing the U.S. funded at least some of the research that resulted in this pandemic.
The flow of money from Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the EcoHealth Alliance run by Peter Daszak and the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is well-documented. Ralph Baric, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina has also conducted research that appears to have been applied to SARS-CoV-2.
The sequence of events is confusing, however, and it's unclear just who is the real string-puller in all of this. When asked what her take is, and who she believes might be running the show, Yan replies that even without American funding, China certainly would still have managed to create this virus.
"The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) … they are a giant octopus and they have tentacles. The brain is the CCP. Those scientists, especially the military scientists and coronavirus experts [such as] my previous supervisor, Dr. Malik Pieris, they are the ones that had the real evil ideas.
They enjoy it, and they want to command this knowledge ... Even China cannot use their tentacles … if they cannot use infiltration to get your money, they will still manage to get your technology and do it in China. That's the key point. The money from American taxpayers, it looks a lot. Yes, it's millions [of dollars]. However, compared to the money donated by the Chinese government, it's just a very small piece …
They developed this virus and other things in their unrestricted bioweapons program. They want to destroy Americans' economic and social order, destroy your civilization. [While the virus has attacked worldwide], they always list America as a primary enemy and the biggest problem.
So, when they show you this kind of propaganda, through TikTok and other social media [where Chinese citizens] tell you, 'Oh, in China we control the outcome and it's good, and we love our government.' American people will feel, 'Yeah, maybe we should give up our democracy and turn to try communism.' That's all they want to do."
Since the start of the pandemic, it's been near-impossible to determine how many Chinese have actually been affected. According to Yan, the CCP will only release data that benefits itself.
"Chinese people all know not to trust any data that comes from our government," she says. "They don't do statistics. They just sit there. Whatever data they want, they write it down. That's how they [produce] data."
According to Yan, the CCP has been using the converse strategy used in the U.S. and elsewhere. Rather than inflate case numbers, they've been suppressing them. One way they've been doing this is by delaying diagnosis, so deaths are not listed as COVID-19 deaths.
"It's totally opposite," she says. "For example, in America, once a person has been diagnosed with COVID, even if they later died of some other problem, they still will be [counted] as a COVID case.
But in China, they can use a ventilator to make the patient survive until the test comes out negative. They have thousands of ways to handle it. Importantly, they also gave early treatment, including hydroxychloroquine and other drugs."
According to Yan, military scientists in China have also filed a patent to use hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. "That made them earn the top anti-COVID award by Chairman Xi last year," she says. Hydroxychloroquine is also sold over the counter in China, so it's easy to get a hold of. She believes part of the reason why the death toll in the U.S. has been so high is because hydroxychloroquine was suppressed and censored.
The COVID-19 pandemic has clearly been capitalized upon by greedy drug companies, and the suppression of early treatment drugs appears to have been an intentional strategy to make the COVID shot — which is turning out to be extraordinarily hazardous to your health — the only alternative. How does the COVID "vaccine" tie into the theory that SARS-CoV-2 is a CCP bioweapon? Yan says:
"Definitely there is a clear connection between the vaccine and the CCP's strategies … Some people … try to explain that the vaccine will kill people, and therefore it is another bioweapon. But this is not an accurate reason. First China released the virus they developed in the military labs. This virus doesn't have a high death rate ... That's why I called it an unrestricted bioweapon. It looks like it's natural occurring.
Once you realize something is wrong, they use misinformation and denial to confuse you. So, when China released it — and China controls the scientific community to spread misinformation, and censored [information] to let people believe it's come from nature — what will people do?
They will think about drugs, the drugs they already have. The other way is a vaccine, because people are educated to accept a vaccine can end a pandemic.
In this case, useful drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are so cheap. How could they use this to earn huge profits? The CCP also had a lot of stock shares from Pfizer, Moderna and other big pharmaceutical companies. Check the money they put in … And then big pharmaceutical companies, they all say, 'OK, now we can use this chance to make money.'"
Clearly, many who support and push the COVID shot know full well that they're bound to cause health problems. Yan herself was asked to work on a COVID vaccine but she declined after looking into the available science. No coronavirus vaccine has ever been released, despite scientists working on it for two decades.
The reason? The vaccines cause too many injuries. They're lethal. Yan did not believe these problems could be overcome for SARS-CoV-2. Peiris himself discovered antibody-dependent enhancement during efforts to develop a vaccine against the original SARS virus. Still, when money is being thrown at scientists, they're usually not going to turn it down.
Of course, the COVID shots and the vaccine passports also fit into the CCP agenda by making the whole world accept and adopt the CCP's social control system. The vaccine passports are clearly designed to usher in a social credit system like they have in China. And with that, you get 24/7 digital surveillance and an unbelievable amount of control over every single person.
As explained by Yan, in China, the digital surveillance system is so advanced, if your phone GPS shows you were near an infected person, you are automatically ordered into isolation.
What's more, if parents or grandparents fail to get the COVID shot, the family's children are barred from school, even if they got the shot. Every aspect of life is linked together through this system, so a poor social credit score will also have financial ramifications, and will dictate if, where and how you're allowed to travel.
Yan points out that Americans, being unaware of the Chinese surveillance system, don't understand that by agreeing with vaccine mandates and passports, they are saying yes to a total surveillance system that will dictate their entire lives. They're also saying yes to being guinea pigs for an endless stream of questionable vaccines.
"Once you support mandate for two doses, then you have to support for the booster, and then support 60 boosters, 199 boosters. It [will be] endless," she says. "And you'll be tied into this [social] credit system you built."
According to Yan, China's goal is to achieve world dominance by 2035. With that aim in mind, they've spent decades developing unrestricted bioweapons. With COVID-19, they're well on their way.
"They want to use all this to overcome the world, and America is their primary enemy," Yan says. "So we have to stand up for the future, for our next generations. We cannot keep silent. This will be the last chance we have to fight against such communist evil plans, and to save all of us. And, most importantly, we have to all work together to stop the next pandemic or attack that comes out of China …
[Just look at] what's happening in Hong Kong now. In two years, from 2019 until now, China destroyed the systems of law, democracy and freedom in Hong Kong. They also enacted national security laws. Basically, they own your privacy. They own your freedom, and you are forced to listen to them.
There is no reason they can't do whatever [they want] to you. Basically, you are a slave living in a modern society. No doubt, once China overcomes America, it will be the same here, and maybe worse because they will have other technology at that time."
When asked what actions Yan believes we need to take to resist and derail this plan, she says:
"I want Americans to know that, first, adults should realize the evilness of Communism, Maoism, Marxism, no matter what name it changes to … And once you realize that, speak out about it, because they are using propaganda to brainwash people, to brainwash the kids.
Also, you must let your policymakers, legislators, know this. I'm a foreigner, but you are an American citizen. You can vote, so you must let them understand the importance and push them to do something. Don't believe the Chinese government and don't give any mercy to the CCP.
Also, you have to update your own system. Study the weakness in your whole system, [the weakness that allows them] to divide America. Once you do all these things, hold them accountable and don't let them do more. That's the end of the pandemic."
You can follow Yan on Twitter for frequent updates and breaking information. Her only authentic Twitter account is @Dr.LiMengYan1.
This article was previously published January 31, 2021, and has been updated with new information.
Over the years, I've done several interviews with Dave Asprey, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, founder and CEO of bulletproof.com, including one in which we discuss how ketones may be useful against COVID-19. Here, we discuss his latest book, "Fast This Way: Burn Fat, Heal Inflammation, and Eat Like the High-Performing Human You Were Meant to Be."
As the name implies, the book is about fasting and all the magnificent health benefits it provides. Is it for everyone? No, and he will be the first to admit that. But it can benefit most of us, certainly, those of us who are either overweight or obese. In his book, Asprey tells his own journey into fasting and what he's learned along the way.
"The word fasting is associated with pain, and I wanted to teach people some hacks for fasting," Asprey says. "I also put a whole chapter in for women, because fasting doesn't work for everyone and there is no one best kind of fasting. The evidence seems pretty clear that fasting the same way every day or every week is probably also not the best strategy.
So, how do you make it so you can fast without pain when you have stuff to do? And how do you make it so you fast with all of the emotions of fasting when you want to really dig deep and do the meditation, personal development side of fasting? Sorting through all that hasn't been done in a book, so that's why I wrote it."
As noted by Asprey, a common concern is that fasting will put your body into starvation mode, thereby actually preventing fat loss. This is a persistent belief, but it's not true. That said, some strategies will indeed activate starvation mode, such as when you're eating a low-calorie diet for months on end. Asprey tells a personal story that encapsulates this dilemma:
"On my journey of losing 100 pounds, I was doing what everyone said would work. I went to the gym an hour and a half a day, six days a week, halfway tough cardio until I could max out all but two machines, and I would do 45 minutes on the treadmill at a 15-degree angle wearing a backpack — really just pushing it.
And, I went on a low-fat, low-calorie diet. At the end of 18 months, I'm sitting at a Carl's Jr. with friends. I'm eating the chicken salad with no chicken and no dressing and my friends are eating double western bacon cheeseburgers. I looked around and I'm like, 'I exercise more than all my friends and I eat less than all my friends, even though I'm taller than they are. Maybe I'm just eating too much lettuce.'
To have a 46-inch waist after that much exercise, low-calorie dieting and all the suffering and intense hunger … My god, the sense of personal failure that comes with that, it's one thing that holds people back and makes us stay heavy.
What's going on there is there is a hunger set point that is caused by ghrelin, one of the hunger hormones. It's a precursor to leptin. Research has shown that when you lose weight using a low-calorie diet or excessive exercise — and I was doing both — your hunger set point will remain your fat set point, and it will always do that.
The thing that turns your set point for hunger to your actual weight instead of to your fat weight is ketones. So, if you were to fast for a couple days or use the fasting hacks that I talk about in the book — there are three fasting hacks to turn off hunger, and two of them are going to help get your ketones up — even just one dose will reset your hunger levels."
As explained by Asprey, yo-yo weight loss and weight gain occurs because you're on the wrong diet. Key dietary principles for losing the excess weight and keeping it off include:
So, what are the main benefits of fasting? Is it just the ease of weight loss? As explained by Asprey, there are many other health benefits to fasting beside the fact that stubborn weight will fall off. Importantly, the primary benefit of fasting is that it makes your body better at making energy.
This in turn has several benefits, one of which is improved blood sugar regulation, which will allow you to stave off insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction and all the diseases of aging associated with that. As noted by Asprey, if you can avoid cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer's disease, you're probably going to live longer, as these are the primary killers.
Fasting is also antiaging because it improves autophagy in your mitochondria and cells. Autophagy is a natural process that cleanses and detoxifies your mitochondria and cells. By breaking down old, damaged organelles, fresh, new ones can be made to replace them. And, with healthy, new mitochondria, your body can make more energy, more efficiently.
"That's an unappreciated side of fasting," Asprey says. "High-intensity interval training will do something similar, but when you combine that with fasting, your body is like, 'Get rid of that old stuff.' It's kind of like a snake shedding its skin. It's that autophagy process that is a really big deal."
As mentioned, about half or more of your daily calories should come from fats, but it's crucial to avoid certain types of fats. 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).
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 oxidized LA metabolites (OXLAMS). 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.
Contrary to popular belief, fasting doesn't have to be difficult or painful. Asprey details three fasting hacks in "Fast This Way." The first one is to increase your ketone level. As explained by Asprey, hunger hormones start shifting when your ketone level hits slightly below 0.5, which is not yet the level at which you enter nutritional ketosis. He explains:
"Ghrelin will drop at 0.38, so almost no ketones. The hunger that comes with the ghrelin turns off. But there's also a satiety hormone, the one that makes you feel full, which is called CCK or cholecystokinin. CCK, when you hit levels of 0.48, CCK makes you feel full. So, if you can get your ketones up to that level in the morning, then you will not pay attention to food.
The first step to get your levels up is mycotoxin-free black coffee — the Bulletproof beans are that. I did the original research about this. Anything that causes inflammation is going to make you hungry because inflammation just means the electrons that should be powering your thoughts are going to create inflammation in the body. They must go somewhere.
These toxins are present in very small amounts. Coffee that has more than five parts per million is illegal to sell in China, Japan and Europe, but it gets sent to the U.S., and we wonder why we get really hungry two hours after we have coffee and why we want sugar in our coffee.
It has to do with toxins, not coffee itself. A study at UC San Diego is really interesting. They found that the amount of caffeine present in two small cups of black coffee will double ketone production.
The second way is to make the coffee 'bulletproof.' And what that means is, you take your mycotoxin-free beans and you add some MCT oil. The 8-carbon chain (C8) MCT is the correct one. C8 MCT raises ketones four times more than coconut oil. [Then] you [add] butter and blend it or really shake it."
Asprey funded research at the University of Washington with Dr. Gerald Pollack, who determined that when water is mixed with grass fed butter or MCT oil, it creates a very large exclusion zone (EZ) in the water, and this EZ is important during fasting.
When you drink regular water, your body takes the water and puts it near your cell membranes, which are made of tiny droplets of fat. Body heat warms the water, converting it from bulk water into EZ water, which your body requires for ATP production and other biological processes, including autophagy and protein folding.
"When you put that tiny bit of butter and the MCT oil and you blend it in the morning, the MCT is going to raise your ketone levels very meaningfully. I can always get to 0.5 with just a Bulletproof coffee. But you're also getting this water in the form of the coffee that is already primed for your body to use it to start burning fat, to start making energy," Asprey explains.
"This is why taking a bite of butter and drinking a cup of coffee isn't going to do it for you. It's a different process. And I have noticed profound differences from doing that … I have found that for women, in particular, starting out with this really helps, especially if you're over 40."
A third fasting hack is to make sure you're getting enough prebiotic fiber. According to Asprey, long-term fasting and/or eating a carnivore-like, zero-carb diet for extended periods of time without cycling healthy carbs back in can alter your gut microbiota, which in turn can cause sleep disruptions.
When you feed your gut bacteria with prebiotics, they convert the prebiotics into propionic acid and butyric acid (butyrate), and butyrate is very pro-ketogenic.
"In fact, you can get into a state of ketosis by taking a handful of butyrate capsules," Asprey says. "You want more butyric acid if you want to live a long time and have a healthy metabolism, and studies show massive hunger suppression when you do this.
So, if you put prebiotic fiber, which has essentially no flavor, in your coffee in the morning … you'll also find that you care nothing about food. I was able to quadruple the number of species of [beneficial bacteria] in my gut using this. It's totally compatible with fasting and it turns off hunger like no one's business.
So now you're saying, 'Wait, a minute. I could have the coffee I was going to have anyway. I don't put the sugar and artificial crap in it. I get the mold-free coffee and then I have a choice of drinking a black, of adding butter and MCT, and/or adding prebiotic fiber.'
What you do then is you drink this and you just stop caring about food, you go into the zone and you have the best morning you've ever had. Then the next morning, maybe you only have black coffee or maybe you have tea or maybe you have nothing at all, but it's OK and it's even preferable to mix up your length and style of fasting."
In the interview, Asprey discusses several of the diet traps that people get themselves into. As a general guidance, Asprey and I both agree that the best strategy to stay out of trouble is to cycle in and out of whatever routine you're doing, be it low-carb keto or fasting.
While you may need to be very strict in the beginning, once you're metabolically flexible, mix things up once or twice a week. Eat three meals instead of one and/or spread them out. Add in more carbs.
"The idea is to be flexible about your fasting regimen," Asprey says. "I don't even like the word regimen. It's just a practice that we do and it's a practice that makes us feel good, it makes us perform better. And it makes us age less, but doing it too much is a real danger.
If you're going to do something like a four-day fast, after about 48 hours, there's all sorts of additional forms of autophagy that turn on. Once every three or six months, doing a 48-hour fast is really well-advised. But man, as a weekly practice, that'll mess you up …
Women will hit the wall before men do. I think there are evolutionary reasons for this. But it's a big problem and I oftentimes see thyroid problems manifest and autoimmunity. There are good studies that show chronic stressors trigger autoimmunity, and over-fasting is a chronic stressor almost by definition."
One reason why fasting is a stressor is because it releases toxins from your fat cells. A simple intervention to address this is the use of activated charcoal when you're fasting. This is particularly beneficial if you're also doing saunas.
"The universal thing that will happen is you will experience massive brain fog. You'll feel like a zombie. This was a big thing for me because I had toxic mold exposure [and] I had heavy metals. You have these very interesting things in your gut, these gut bacteria that make lipopolysaccharides (LPS).
LPS's can cross the gut barrier and then they cause inflammation in the body and trigger cravings in the brain. So, when the bad bacteria in your gut are going, 'I didn't get my sugar. I didn't get any food. Oh, my god, it's a mortal threat. If there's a threat, I should release toxins.'
So, they ramp up their LPS production and then you'll feel like garbage. Then you have to use even more willpower to get through your fast — or you could take activated charcoal that binds directly to LPS. Then you don't feel the hunger and you don't have to take the biological hit of all the toxins you're releasing from your fat, and that really makes a big difference."
In his book, Asprey also discusses how to integrate exercise into your fasting regimen. The best time to exercise is at the end of your fast. He explains:
"There's something in the body called mTOR, which drives growth. mTOR will drive muscle [growth]. So, if you want to get a bicep, then you need some mTOR. But if your mTOR is chronically elevated, your risk of cancer and the diseases of aging go up. If you eat too much protein, especially certain amino acids, your [mTOR] level goes up and stays up, and that's not good for you.
It's not enough to trigger muscle growth, but it's just enough to trigger inflammation. The way mTOR works is you suppress mTOR and then when you stop suppressing it, it surges forth and you get a big spike, which is what causes the benefits.
There's three things that suppress mTOR and I call the strategy 'tripling down on mTOR.' The first thing that is shown to increase mTOR is fasting. The longer you fast, the lower your mTOR goes, which is good for triggering autophagy and things like that.
Other things that lowers mTOR are coffee and exercise. So, by having coffee during the fast, you keep cranking down on it, and then you exercise and it's really low.
Then when you eat, which releases mTOR, and you have adequate protein in that meal, the body is like, 'Woo-hoo, I've got a huge surge of mTOR and I've got protein present. Now, I'm going to go to work and I'm going to fix everything. I'm going to replace all the cells I got rid of during autophagy. I'm going to grow the new mitochondria.'"
This is why you get more out of exercise when you do it at the end of a fast. I'm convinced this strategy has helped me radically build my muscles and improve my strength. One small tweak that may be helpful if you're doing very heavy exercise is to eat a small amount of food about 30 to 60 minutes before you start, essentially breaking your fast right before your exercise.
"There's great logic in that advice," Asprey says. "You fasted and then you broke the fast right before the exercise, because by the time those calories are digested and hit the blood sugar, you will be done with your workout. It's going to be a good half hour before that stuff really hits the bloodstream.
So, I would totally support that unless you're doing the kind of high-intensity workouts that I'm a fan of, the ones where if I tried to do it with a full stomach, I think I might throw up. They're very short but they're very intense."
Asprey discusses a number of other antiaging strategies in this interview as well — things like hormone regulation and the use of testosterone, and how fasting affects these levels — so for those details, be sure to listen to the whole interview.
He also goes into some of the problems that can occur when you're on a plant-based diet, and/or if your omega-3 to omega-6 ratio is off-kilter, as well as how your diet and exposure to sunlight influence your circadian rhythm, and which supplements are helpful when fasting and which should be avoided.
Naturally, you'll also want to pick up a copy of his book, "Fast This Way: Burn Fat, Heal Inflammation, and Eat Like the High-Performing Human You Were Meant to Be," where he covers everything in greater depth. In addition to everything already mentioned, his book also includes information about intermittent hypoxic training and breathing exercises.
"What we know now, and what is in 'Fast This Way,' is that when you show your body that it will be required to regularly go without something it thinks it needs, you walk away from that as a stronger person.
Your willpower is stronger, but more importantly, your cells are stronger, and then they will give you more energy all the time. And, going from a 300-pound tired, fat, uncomfortable guy to where I am now, even though I'm 48, if I could do it, I think anyone could do it," Asprey says.
To help you on your way, Asprey also provides a two-week program where he guides you through a 24- or 48-hour fast and answers questions on a daily basis. All you need to do is order "Fast This Way," and then send a copy of your receipt to FastThisWay.com and sign up for the program. There's an upload form on the website.
"I'll teach you the fasting hacks. We'll do some intermittent fasting together in a community, and then towards the end of this, we will actually do a 24-hour or 48-hour fast. I'm going to lead you through it," he says.
"We also [cover] mediation and the gratitude side of this. I just want to teach you this book because I spent thousands of hours writing it and I want you to get it … So, if you want to ask me questions, I'm going to be there for you."
In this interview, we continue the COVID-19 discussion with a medical expert from Argentina, Dr. Hector Carvallo, whose focus since early 2020 has been the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.
Carvallo graduated from medical school in 1981 — the same year AIDS emerged as a global pandemic. In the first two years, AIDS killed 2 million people. Since 1981, it has claimed the lives of 35 million. While officially retired for a couple of years, the 2020 COVID pandemic brought him out of retirement.
“My first fire baptism was with AIDS,” he says. “I have dedicated my professional time to teaching and assisting. I graduated as a professor in 1996, and worked as a professor for the School of Medicine in Buenos Aires, which is public. Later, I was an associate professor of internal medicine for two private schools of medicine until I retired a couple of years ago.”
Interestingly, Carvallo had experience with ivermectin as an antiviral before the COVID outbreak. Argentinian doctors were using it against dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina. So, when SARS-CoV-2 emerged, they decided to take another look at the drug to see if it might be useful.
“We came across some studies that were being conducted in Australia at the Monash University by people like Dr. Kylie Wagstaff,” Carvallo says. “We supposed that it would be very useful because the virology in effect already proved that, and we decided — even before they published their first findings — to replicate what they were doing, but in vivo. That is, not in the laboratory but in human beings.”
In early April 2020, Carvallo and his team developed two trials submitted to the National Library of Medicine in the United States. One was for preexposure1 (prevention) and the other for treatment. In both cases, ivermectin was used as an adjunct to other compounds, as they didn’t believe it was a silver bullet by itself.
For preventive purposes, they used ivermectin together with carrageenan, a food emulsifier and thickener that has a long history of use in both food and medicine. According to Carvallo, carrageenan has antiviral effects too, so the ivermectin was used in combination with topical carrageenan, administered through the nose and mucus membranes of the mouth.
In the treatment trial, ivermectin was combined with aspirin for mild cases, aspirin and corticosteroids for moderately severe cases, and enoxaparin (an anticoagulant drug) for severe cases.
These drug combinations were selected based on what was known about other viruses that cause similar health effects as SARS-CoV-2, such as the rhabdovirus’ effect on neurology, the paramyxovirus, which causes hyperinflammation in the lungs, and the dengue virus, which overamplifies the immune system.
Like so many other doctors, Carvallo knew right from the start that early treatment would be crucial and that telling patients to just wait it out at home until they couldn’t breathe would be a death sentence.
“We knew from the very first day we entered the school of medicine that the sooner you treat any illness, the more chances you will have to be successful in the treatment,” he says. “You have to treat quickly, and strongly. This is natural thinking. Nobody has to be a genius to know that. In this case, inexplicably, many doctors have been told to do nothing.
To keep the patients in their homes on their own with just a few pills of Tylenol — which we know it's good for nothing — until they cannot breathe properly. Then they have to be referred to the hospital. That is patient abandonment under any law in any country …
If you walk around a corner and you see your neighbor’s house on fire, you may call 911. You may play hero and enter the house and try to save them. You may cry out for help. The only thing you must not do is nothing.
I believe in any attempt to keep a mild patient, mild. What I cannot accept as a medical doctor — because it is against our oath — is to remain with arms folded until that person gets worse. That's criminal … There's only one reason for all this. The reason is summarized in one word, greed.”
Aspirin was chosen for its anticoagulant effects. Another option recommended by American doctors is NAC, an over-the-counter supplement that both prevents blood clots and breaks up existing ones. NAC also has other benefits that makes it useful against COVID-19. Argentina does not allow the sale of supplements without prescription, so no dietary supplements were used in these particular trials.
“That doesn't mean we say they are not good,” Carvallo says. “We simply adjusted ourselves to what was there. We believe in the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine. We believe in the effectiveness of azithromycin. Vitamin D, zinc, doxycycline. We believe in those compounds too. But we have not tried them.”
So far, only five of the 24 provinces in Argentina have authorized these ivermectin-based protocols for prevention and early treatment, but at least that’s better than the U.S., where ivermectin is rejected outright. In many U.S. hospitals, doctors who dare prescribe it face being fired.
As you’d expect with something that actually works, those five provinces are indeed faring better in terms of infection rates, hospitalizations and deaths. In one province, the death rate was reduced to one-third in less than a month, in the middle of the outbreak, when no vaccines were available.
Argentina didn’t start rolling out their COVID shots until March 2021, and the vaccination campaign has been slow. Carvallo estimates no more than 40% of the population has received two doses so far.
He believes the slow vaccine uptake is partly due to logistical challenges, and partly due to safety concerns. “Many people have preferred to use alternative methods instead of vaccines,” he says. Argentina may still move to make the injections mandatory, though.
“You know what? Making an experiment mandatory and using the media to convince everybody to use it is not new,” Carvallo says. “It was done during the second World War. Josef Mengele and Joseph Goebbels did that.
One made any experiment he wanted on people that were hopeless and at the camps. The other one was a minister of propaganda who convinced everybody that everything was OK … That's what we are seeing. Let's forget about science — common sense has been disregarded.”
Carvallo himself ended up taking the Chinese COVID shot, as proof of vaccination was required for him to travel to Europe. In an effort to counter any potential side effects, he continues to take aspirin to prevent blood clots, and ivermectin. “I keep on using Ivermectin,” he says, “I've been using it for over a year.”
In the U.S., ivermectin has been mocked and misrepresented as a veterinary drug. In reality, it’s been approved for human use for decades, and won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 1995, at which time it was considered a miracle drug.
“Even people from the CDC have said, ‘You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Why should you use Ivermectin?’” Carvallo says. “I would answer them, if they consider ivermectin is only for veterinary use, they are neither horses nor cows, they are asses. The fact is, we use ivermectin on a weekly basis for preexposure, that's for prevention. The dose is 0.2 mg per kilo [of bodyweight. To calculate pounds into kilos, divide your weight in pounds by 2.2].
We adjust the dose to the patient's weight. One of the worst comorbidities for somebody contracting the virus is obesity. You cannot give the same dose to a skinny person and to an obese or morbid obese person. So, we adjust for that.
We use it once a week. Now that Delta is appearing in South America, we are considering reducing it to three or four days between doses. Do you know why we use it on a weekly basis? Because ivermectin will work for 3.5 days. For the other three days, you will be exposed.
You may contract the virus, but even before the virus can replicate enough to pass from the incubation period to the invasion period, you will take ivermectin again. So, you won't know it exists. You won't even realize you have contracted the disease. Your immune system will have [encountered] the virus and will start creating immunity …
We keep on using that four months. We'll stop for a couple of months because ivermectin will accumulate in the fat tissue. After two months of not using it, we start again.”
Carvallo also points out that natural immunity is far stronger than artificial immunity created by the COVID shots. This is no surprise, because that’s how it’s always been with all other viruses. The key is to prevent the infection from getting a strong foothold. With early treatment, you’ll get through the infection just fine, and have robust and likely lifelong immunity.
As for the safety of ivermectin, studies in Africa have used doses that were 10 times higher than the 0.2 mg/kg recommended for COVID, without toxic effects. Hydroxychloroquine, on the other hand, has a far narrower safety margin. This is well-known, and was clearly used to discredit the drug. As explained by Carvallo:
“What they did with hydroxychloroquine in order to discredit it was easy. Hydroxychloroquine is also very useful against COVID. But the safety margin is narrow. What they did was to use three times the dose in order to cause toxicity. There were 200 studies in favor of hydroxychloroquine.
There was one study talking about the toxicity, and all the scientific community in the world latched on to that one. That's crazy. In the case of ivermectin, it was so wide a gap between safety and toxicity that they couldn't do that. So, they just disregarded it.”
Now, there are veterinary formulations of ivermectin. Do not use these, as they typically contain polyethylene glycol (PEG), which is toxic to humans. Ironically, the COVID shots actually contain PEG. Many are allergic to this substance, which is why anaphylaxis is such a common acute side effect of the jabs.
As of September 24, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received 15,937 reports of deaths following the COVID shot, 71,036 hospitalizations and more than 752,800 adverse events in total.2
Calculations by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, based on VAERS data suggests the actual death toll may be around 212,000.3 He estimates side effects and deaths are under-reported by a factor of 41 or more, so the total number of injuries is likely between 2 million and 5 million.
Even if we were to accept the official VAERS numbers, the death toll is astronomical. Under normal circumstances, a pandemic vaccine would be pulled after about 50 deaths. No explanation has ever been given for why the COVID shots are still being universally recommended after nearly 16,000 reported deaths.
What we’re living is really a classic imitation of George Orwell's book “1984.” Almost everything government and health officials say is the exact opposite of the truth. Right is left. Up is down. Black is white. For those who know the facts, it’s a surreal experience. Double standards have also become the norm. As noted by Carvallo:
“The vaccine is almost sacred. It's like a Bible. Whatever we say in favor of other treatments is a sin. Nobel Prize [winners] of medicine, like Luc Montagnier and Satoshi Omura, have been censored on the media. It's crazy.”
What’s more, we already have evidence showing the shots don’t work as advertised. They lose effectiveness very rapidly. The answer we’re given is booster shots. Israel is already talking about a fourth dose, and the injections have not even been out for a full year yet.
“If you give a medicine and don't get a positive result in a few days, you reconsider either your diagnosis or your treatment,” Carvallo says. “You don't insist on the same thing because it's insane to insist on the same thing trying to get different results.”
The reason we keep getting more variants is because the vaccine is “leaky.” It doesn’t prevent you from getting infected, so the virus starts to mutate to evade the vaccine-induced antibody. Carvallo agrees, adding that it’s equally insane that the shots are designed to produce antibodies against just one portion of the virus, the spike protein, rather than act against the pathogenesis of the virus.
When you recover from a natural infection, you have both humoral and cellular immunity, and even though humoral immunity (antibodies) will decrease within a few months, you still have latent cellular immunity that will spring into action when needed.
The COVID shots do not provide any cellular immunity, which is why they cannot achieve herd immunity, even if 100% of a population is injected. Carvallo also points out that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is now the weakest it’s ever been. The real enemy at this point is the propaganda that keeps fear alive.
Carvallo is one of those rare individuals who has been able to perform research others cannot at this time. He’s retired, so he has no funding or career to lose. He hopes that, eventually, more doctors will go back to thinking for themselves and return to their oath to do no harm, and to focus on what’s best for their patients rather than the bureaucracy currently dictating what they can and cannot do.
According to projections, we could potentially see billions of people die or be permanently disabled from these experimental injections. How are we going to take care of them all? Who’s going to pay for their care? Already, U.S. entitlement programs — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — are nearing bankruptcy.
According to David Martin, Ph.D.,4 pension programs and entitlement programs will all run out by 2028, and as they run out of money, the drug industry will collapse as well, as they are the primary beneficiaries of these programs. Medicare and Medicaid pay for the bulk of the drug dependency in America.
So, in just a few years’ time, we’ll be facing a convergence of collapses on multiple fronts, and at the same time, large portions of the population may be severely ill and wholly dependent on these systems for their survival.
Society also requires all sorts of infrastructure, and if large portions of society are crippled or dead, society will collapse from lack of qualified workers alone. So, the COVID shot mandates are clearly making an already precarious situation far worse, as the financial system would be collapsing anyway.
The best thing anyone can do right now to prepare for this convergence of collapses is to focus on your health. Make sure you’re as healthy as you can be. Be sure to optimize your vitamin D level, for example, and avoid toxins of all kinds. Getting used to growing some of your own food would also be a good idea, as would looking into ways to protect your retirement assets.
To learn more about ivermectin, you can download a free ebook created by Carvallo and his team. It contains not only their Argentinian studies but also other peer-reviewed scientific articles detailing the benefits of ivermectin in the fight against COVID-19. You can find the bilingual (English and Spanish) book, “Ivermectin in COVID-19: Prophylaxis and Treatment,” on iniciatherapeutics.com.