Over time, it’s become clear that the globalist cabal seeking to implement a one world government repeatedly tell us what they’re about to do. They hold dress rehearsals in the form of tabletop exercises, and they’ve revealed their plans in various reports and white papers through the years.

I have been subscribed to the channel that posted the video above for some time now. She only has 10K subscribers but really gets some amazing content. I have no idea how she was able to secure this video as it is not widely circulated. Even more surprising is that her channel is not being taken down.

COVID Dress Rehearsals

For example, in 2017, Johns Hopkins Center of Health Security held a coronavirus pandemic simulation called the SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028 scenario.¹ Importantly, the exercise highlighted and stressed “communication dilemmas concerning medical countermeasures that could plausibly emerge” in a pandemic scenario.

In October 2019, less than three months before the COVID-19 outbreak, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in collaboration with Johns Hopkins and the World Economic Forum hosted Event 201.

As in the SPARS Pandemic scenario, this exercise involved an outbreak of a highly infectious coronavirus, but the primary (if not sole) focus of the exercise was how to control information and keep “misinformation” in check, not how to effectively discover and share remedies.

Social media censorship played prominently in the Event 201 plan, and in the real-world events of 2020 through the present, accurate information about vaccine development, production and injury has indeed been effectively suppressed around the world, thanks to social media companies and Google’s censoring of opposing viewpoints.

We now know this censorship was illegally directed by U.S. government officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was recently deposed² about his role in the online censoring of COVID information.

Both of these simulations, SPARS and Event 201, foreshadowed what eventually occurred in real life during COVID, so, when Gates hosts yet another pandemic exercise, it’s worth paying attention to the details.

‘Catastrophic Contagion’ Exercise

October 23, 2022, Gates, Johns Hopkins and the World Health Organization cohosted “a global challenge exercise” dubbed “Catastrophic Contagion,”^3,4 involving a novel (and as of now fictional) pathogen called “severe epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025” or SEERS-25 for short.

Enterovirus D68⁵ is typically associated with cold and flu-like illness in infants, children and teens. In rare cases, it’s also been known to cause viral meningitis and acute flaccid myelitis, a neurological condition resulting in muscle weakness and loss of reflexes in one or more extremities.

Enteroviruses A71 and A6 are known to cause hand, foot and mouth disease,⁶ while poliovirus, the prototypical enterovirus, causes polio (poliomyelitis), a potentially life-threatening type of paralysis that primarily affects children under age 5. So, the virus they modeled in this simulation appears to be something similar to enterovirus D68, but worse.

Training African Leaders to Go Along With the Narrative

Tellingly, the Catastrophic Contagion exercise focused on getting leadership in African countries involved and trained in following the script. Participants included 10 current and former Health Ministers and senior public health officials from Senegal, Rwanda, Nigeria, Angola, Liberia, Singapore, India and Germany, as well as Gates himself.

African nations just so happened to go “off script” more often than others during the COVID pandemic, and didn’t follow in the footsteps of developed nations when it came to pushing the jabs. As a result, vaccine makers now face the problem of having a huge control group, as the COVID jab uptake on the African continent was only 6%.⁷

Not surprisingly (for those in the know), Africa has fared far better than developed nations with high COVID jab rates in terms of COVID-19 infections and related deaths.⁸

Now, the Catastrophic Contagion exercise predicts SEERS-25 will kill 20 million people worldwide, including 15 million children, and many who survive the infection will be left with paralysis and/or brain damage. In other words, the “cue” given is that the next pandemic will likely target children rather than the elderly, as was the case with COVID-19.

This is an interesting coincidence, seeing how rates of toddlers and young children hospitalized with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is already spiking.

COVID Jabs Are Destroying People’s Immune Systems

Coincidentally, over the past year, researchers have been warning that the COVID jabs may be dysregulating and destroying people’s immune systems, leaving them vulnerable to all sorts of infections. According to a study⁹ posted on the preprint server medRxiv in May 2021, the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID jab “reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses, causing immune depletion.”

In August 2021, a French group of pediatric infectious disease experts also warned that “immunity debt” caused by a lack of exposure to common viruses and bacteria during COVID lockdowns and school closures might predispose children to suffer more infections in the future.¹⁰

They predicted the decrease in viral and bacterial exposure that train your child’s immune system may result in a rebound of a variety of infectious diseases, including influenza and RSV) which is precisely what we’re now seeing. If a modified enterovirus gets added into the mix, it’s not difficult to see how parents might get spooked enough to start lining their kids up for more shots — including parents in African nations.

Why Manufactured Pandemics Will Continue

At this point, it’s quite clear that “biosecurity” is the chosen means by which the globalist cabal intends to seize power over the world. The WHO is working on securing sole power over pandemic response globally through its international pandemic treaty which, if implemented, will eradicate the sovereignty of all member nations.

Ultimately, the WHO intends to dictate all health care. December 13, 2022, the WHO announced Sir Jeremy Farrar, head of the Wellcome Trust — who colluded with Dr. Anthony Fauci to suppress the COVID lab-leak narrative — has been chosen as its new chief scientist.¹¹

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime, a one world government. But to secure that power, they will need more pandemics. COVID-19 alone was not enough to get everyone onboard with a centralized pandemic response unit, and they probably knew that from the start.

So, the reason we can be sure there will be additional pandemics, whether manufactured using either fear and hype alone or an actual bioweapon created for this very purpose, is because the takeover plan, aka The Great Reset, is based on the premise that we need global biosecurity surveillance and centralized response.

Biosecurity, in turn, is the justification for an international vaccine passport, which the G20 just signed on to, and that passport will also be your digital identification. That digital ID, then, will be tied to your social credit score, personal carbon footprint tracker, medical records, educational records, work records, social media presence, purchase records, your bank accounts and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Once all these pieces are fully connected, you’ll be in a digital prison, and the ruling cabal — whether officially a one world government by then or not — will have total control over your life from cradle to grave.

COVID Is a Global Propaganda Operation

It’s unknown whether blood donated by people who’ve received mRNA COVID-19 shots poses a risk to those who receive it. A growing number of people aren’t willing to take any chances, however, and are requesting blood that comes from unvaccinated patients. One high-profile case involves a 4-month-old baby, Will Savage-Reeves, in New Zealand, who needs surgery for a heart valve disorder.

His parents, Samantha and Cole, requested the infant receive blood only from donors who have not received COVID-19 shots. While unvaccinated blood is available, the doctors and hospital refused to grant the request. The case was heard before a New Zealand court, which sided with the doctors and took guardianship of the child to proceed with the surgery using vaccinated blood.^1,2

Hospital Refuses Family’s Request for Unvaccinated Blood

The outcome of baby Will’s case may serve as a harbinger of things to come. The hospital argued that the surgery should proceed using vaccinated blood because of the importance of finding a quality match. A large pool of donor blood raises the possibility of finding the highest quality match.

In addition, according to Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, another of their arguments is, “If there were a safety signal from using vaccinated blood for transfusions, it would have surfaced by now.” They also want to keep up appearances, and allowing one patient to use unvaccinated blood may open the floodgates to others requesting the same. Kirsch noted:³

“If they agree to use unvaccinated blood, it could be interpreted as an admission that vaccinated blood is not safe and could lead to everyone requesting unvaccinated blood which would then create severe blood shortages for a dubious benefit.”

Further, the New Zealand Blood Service (NZBS) manages blood donations and collections in New Zealand. Only a specialist doctor can request directed donation for the baby to received unvaccinated blood.

But, Kirsch noted, “The clinicians responsible for the surgery determined that there was insufficient evidence to make a special request … The hospital cannot compel the NZBS to do what it says, e.g., even if the doctors agreed with the parents, NZBS can still refuse to supply the blood if it doesn’t think the request is justified.”⁴

The hospital also claimed mRNA shots “to date remain safe.”⁵ According to Kirsch, “The court, lacking the legal and technical ability to second guess the doctors, therefore sided with the expert opinion of the doctors.”⁶

The media, meanwhile, are painting the reasonable request to honor the precautionary principle as a conspiracy theory and disinformation dreamed up by fringe “anti-vaxxers.” Case in point, The New York Times reported:⁷

“The case, and the family’s flawed scientific arguments, highlight the continuing dangers of online misinformation and conspiracist narratives, experts say. The dispute has ‘become a cause célèbre in the most toxic way,’ prompting a spike in hate speech on fringe platforms where conspiracy theories run rife, said Sanjana Hattotuwa, a researcher at the Disinformation Project, a New Zealand monitoring group.”

Not only did the New Zealand health service refuse the family’s request, but New Zealand’s High Court granted two doctors authority to make medical decisions regarding baby Will.⁸ It didn’t need to go this far, supporters have stated, since there is ready availability of blood from unvaccinated donors.⁹

In a similar case in Italy, however, a judge also ruled against parents who requested blood transfusions only from unvaccinated donors be used during their 2-year-old son’s heart surgery.¹⁰

Embalmers Find Unusual Clots in Veins Post-Shots

Richard Hirschman, a board-certified embalmer and funeral director with more than 20 years of experience, has come forward stating that, in the time period since COVID-19 shots were rolled out, starting around the middle of 2021, he’s been finding “strange clots” in the bodies of the deceased.

“When I do the embalming, I have to go into the vein. And in order for the embalming process, I have to allow blood to be drained. So I actually pulled this huge, long clot — fibrous looking clot — out prior to an embalming,” Hirschman said.¹¹

The beginning of the clot, which resembles a white, rubbery worm, appears red and like a normal clot. But the majority of the clot is different: It’s composed of a white, fibrous material. “It just isn’t normal,” he said, adding:¹²

“Typically, a blood clot is smooth; it’s blood that has coagulated together. But when you squeeze it, or touch it or try to pick it up, it generally falls apart … you can almost squeeze it between your fingers and get it back to blood again. But this white fibrous stuff is pretty strong. It’s not weak at all. You can manipulate it, it’s very pliable. It’s not hard … it is not normal. I don’t know how anybody can live with something like this inside of them.”

What’s important to note is embalmers have reported finding unusual clots not only in deceased people who’ve received the shots but also in those who have had a blood transfusion. So while we don’t know what risk there is from receiving blood from someone who’s had COVID-19 shots, “the risk is not zero,” Kirsch said.¹³

Another case involves a baby, Alexander, who received a vaccinated blood transfusion and developed “an enormous clot that eventually stretched from his left knee, all the way to his heart,” and died.¹⁴ According to Kirsch, the hospital then went on to delete all related medical records:¹⁵

“Sacred Heart Hospital in Washington State has erased all records of the death of baby Alex who died from a blood clot after receiving a transfusion from a vaccinated patient. So there is no evidence of a problem anymore. They erased it, just like the CDC erased all data linking vaccines and autism. This is how science works nowadays.”

Is the Blood Supply Safe? Nobody Knows

In the U.S., a person is in need of blood every two seconds.¹⁶ If you have a medical emergency, getting a blood transfusion can be life-saving. But should patients have the option of choosing to receive blood that hasn’t been exposed to mRNA COVID-19 shots?

The Red Cross states they’re following the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s blood donation eligibility guidance, which states, “In most cases, there is no deferral time for individuals who received a COVID-19 vaccine as long as they are symptom-free and feeling well at the time of donation.”¹⁷

“While the antibodies that are produced by the stimulated immune system in response to vaccination are found throughout the bloodstream, the actual vaccine components are not,” Jessa Merrill, Red Cross director of biomedical communications, told The Daily Beast.¹⁸ Further, after speaking to Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist, internist and epidemiologist, Kirsch reported:¹⁹

“He said he’d take the vaccinated blood because of the critical nature of the matching process. With donor blood, the match quality would not be as good because there is a smaller pool to draw from, and it’s not just blood type that is matched.

Nobody has quantified the risk of using vaccinated blood. He said if the risk were high, it would have been noticed by now (I’m not sure I agree with that; there is a lot of willful blindness for anything associated with the vaccine).”

Many Contracted AIDS Via Tainted Blood Transfusions

Pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole compared the current unknowns regarding “vaccinated blood” with HIV-tainted blood that was used for transfusions in the 1980s:²⁰

“We don’t know. Nobody knows. I have clots from unvaccinated deceased that were transfused and formed large clots post transfusion and died. No blood bank is checking. ‘One cannot find, that for which they do not look.’ This is akin to blood banks and hemophiliacs and HIV in the 1980s. It may not be a problem.

However, it may be. There are assays academically available to check for circulating spike protein. It is criminal negligence to not assure the safety of the blood supply based on bureaucratic declarations without scientific explorations.”

Similarly, in January 1983, after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revealed evidence strongly suggesting blood and blood products transmitted AIDS and the disease was sexually transmitted, it recommended blood banks directly question donors about their sexual behavior and run blood donations through a series of screening tests.²¹

The blood bank community issued a statement soon after, stating “direct or indirect questions about a donor’s sexual preference are inappropriate” and not recommending any laboratory screening tests.²² As noted by Encyclopedia.com:²³

“In fact, in the early years of the disease, many of the people who contracted AIDS were infected through blood transfusions. Because it took more than five years to develop a test to check for AIDS in blood before it was used in a transfusion, many people got the disease in hospitals.

The AIDS epidemic continued to grow in Africa and Asia during the 1990s and even in the early 21st century because many nations were slow to adopt blood testing.”

In the 1980s, increasing fears over tainted transfusions led many people to say they’d refuse donated blood entirely. One man, whose wife died of AIDS contracted through a contaminated transfusion, told the AP in 1985, “You want to play Russian Roulette? Even if it were an emergency — and I had some say in the matter — I wouldn’t take blood out of the pool.”²⁴

Now, decades later, doctors are hearing similar concerns from patients regarding vaccinated blood. Dr. Davinder Sidhu, the division head for transfusion and transplant medicine for southern Alberta, Canada, told CTV News he gets requests for blood from unvaccinated donors “at least once or twice a month over the last several months.”²⁵

Is it Your Right to Receive ‘Unvaccinated’ Blood?

As it stands, blood donation centers may ask about vaccines their donors have received,²⁶ but it’s not guaranteed that this information will be passed on to consumers. The Red Cross also states, “If you’ve received a COVID-19 vaccine, you’ll need to provide the manufacturer name when you come to donate.”²⁷

Still, it’s unlikely that most hospitals will readily divulge this information when it comes to receiving a blood transfusion. So what are your options if you’re looking for blood from a donor that’s hasn’t received a COVID-19 shot? Directed donations, in which a donor donates blood for a specified receiver, are an option, but they’re typically only used in cases where matched blood is unavailable due to extremely rare blood types.²⁸

Autologous donations, or self-donation, is another option, in which you donate blood for your own use, such as before a medical procedure like surgery. In both cases, you’ll need your doctor to submit a Red Cross Special Collections Order form to complete an autologous or directed blood donation.²⁹

A “Safe Blood” donation campaign has also been formed to match blood donors and recipients who have not had COVID-19 shots. For now, they’re acting as a resource to match donors with those in need of blood, but the hope is that an mRNA-free blood bank will be established:³⁰

“There is no blood bank with mRNA-free blood yet, not even with us. And, although we have already asked hundreds of clinics, at the moment — at least in Europe — all of them still refuse to allow the human right of free blood choice with them — or at least do not want to be mentioned, because otherwise they fear reprisals. However, we promise you that we will not give up until we can offer a worldwide network of such clinics.”

As for baby Will, whose parents’ hopes for an mRNA-free blood transfusion have been dashed, Kirsch said:³¹

“Whatever happened to the precautionary principle of medicine? In my opinion, this isn’t a close call. We can’t know today if the blood supply is safe because nobody wants to even ask the question and do the experiments required to answer it. For that reason, Baby Will’s parents’ request to use unvaccinated blood should be respected.”

Sulfur is in the top three abundant minerals found in the human body¹ and the topic of the interview with Stephanie Seneff, senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in the video above. An epidemiological study from West Virginia University found glucosamine sulfate supplements may lower overall mortality as much as regular exercise.² The underlying mechanism may be related to sulfur.

If you’ve ever smelled sulfur gas when it comes up from well water, you won’t forget the smell of rotten eggs. In fact, the natural gas industry adds mercaptan, a component of sulfur, to natural gas — which has no odor — to make it smell like rotten eggs so you can detect a natural gas leak.³

While stinky in gas form, sulfur is an important mineral in the optimal function of your body. Interestingly, you’ll get most of your sulfur from specific amino acids, including methionine, cysteine, cystine, homocysteine, homocysteine and taurine.⁴ Of these, the two most important are methionine and cysteine. Methionine is an essential amino acid, which means your body can’t synthesize it so it must be supplied through your diet.

Your body can make cysteine from methionine but not from inorganic forms of sulfur. Some individuals are allergic to sulfa drugs and may have concerns about eating sulfur-containing foods. However, since sulfur is an essential element to life, no one is allergic to sulfur. When a sulfonamide molecule from sulfa drugs is metabolized it can bind to a protein that serves as an allergen.⁵

The sulfonamide molecule in sulfa drugs does have sulfur, but it is embedded in a compound with the unique property of being able to form proteins that cause an allergic reaction in some people. Glucosamine, the subject of the featured publication, is an amino acid that is often combined with sulfate and not known to trigger allergic reactions from the sulfate.⁶

However, most glucosamine supplements are derived from shellfish and there is some concern of an allergic reaction in people who have an allergy to shellfish.⁷ There are several forms of glucosamine supplements that are not interchangeable.

They include glucosamine sulfate, glucosamine hydrochloride and n-acetyl glucosamine. Glucosamine sulfate is what is used to help painful arthritis and was the focus of this study.

Study: Glucosamine/Chondroitin Lowers All-Cause Mortality

In an epidemiological study released from West Virginia University, researchers found that individuals using glucosamine supplements had reduced overall mortality to the degree conferred by regular exercise.⁸ The first author, Dana King, is chair of the department of family medicine at West Virginia University.⁹

He and his partner, a data analyst, evaluated information from 16,686 adults who had participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The results were from 1999 to 2010 and the data was merged with 2015 mortality figures.

The researchers controlled for a variety of confounding factors, such as age, activity level and smoking status, and found those taking a glucosamine/chondroitin supplement each day for at least a year or longer had a 39% reduced potential of all-cause mortality and a 65% reduction in mortality from cardiovascular-related events.¹⁰

King shared that his interest in glucosamine and chondroitin began when he learned many of the cyclists he rode with on weekends used the supplement. King points out that the data are from an epidemiological study and not a clinical trial so it can’t conclusively demonstrate that death is less likely, but goes on to comment:¹¹

“Does this mean that if you get off work at five o’clock one day, you should just skip the gym, take a glucosamine pill and go home instead? That’s not what we suggest. Keep exercising, but the thought that taking a pill would also be beneficial is intriguing.

Once we took everything into account, the impact was pretty significant. In my view, it’s important that people know about this, so they can discuss the findings with their doctor and make an informed choice. Glucosamine is over the counter, so it is readily available.”

The results of this study support previous research published in the BMJ in which researchers engaged 466,039 participants without cardiovascular disease to determine if there was an association between glucosamine use and a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease.¹²

After adjusting for confounding factors, such as age, body mass index, dietary intake, sex and drug use, researchers found there was a “significantly lower risk” of 9% to 22% of all outcome measures.

The outcome measures included cardiovascular disease events, coronary heart disease and stroke in people who used glucosamine supplements daily. The researchers found that their findings supported past studies that had demonstrated an inverse relationship between glucosamine supplementation and cardiovascular disease risk and mortality.

Interestingly, they also found those taking glucosamine and who were current smokers experienced reductions in cardiovascular disease greater than in those who were past smokers or never smokers. They theorized this was because smokers have a higher level of inflammation and glucosamine is associated with a reduction in C-reactive protein, a marker for systemic inflammation.

Sulfur Deficiency May Contribute to Multiple Conditions

An opinion piece that ran in the same publication points out that the sulfate in glucosamine sulfate supplements, which make up “most glucosamine products available on the market,”¹³ may have been a contributing factor as it satisfies a potential sulfur deficiency.¹⁴

One study analyzing how much sulfur is available in the diet concluded “a significant portion of the population that included disproportionately the aged, may not be receiving sufficient sulfur.”¹⁵Scientists are aware that nutrient deficiencies can produce significant health problems.

In one paper in the Journal of the American Heart Association the writers said: “Micronutrients are necessary cofactors for normal cardiac metabolism, and deficiencies have been implicated in the development and progression of HF [heart failure].”¹⁶

Seneff and her team proposed the hypothesis that atherosclerosis is the result of a cholesterol sulfate deficiency.¹⁷ They proposed that atherosclerosis can be explained by the body using plaque to replenish cholesterol and sulfate to the microvasculature. They argue that insufficient sulfate may increase the risk of high blood pressure and blood clot formation.

Seneff calls sulfur an “unappreciated deficiency” since it is found in several foods and most assume that your diet meets your minimum daily requirements.¹⁸ Excellent food sources include eggs, garlic, onions and green leafy vegetables. Nuts, grass fed meat and seafood also contain sulfur.

However, a depletion in the soil creates a deficiency in your fruits and vegetables and may contribute, in part, to sulfur deficiency. She theorizes that a sulfur deficiency is related to rising obesity rates and is connected to glucose metabolism and cardiovascular disease.

In her research, she found people who experience muscle wasting from diseases such as cancer, HIV, sepsis, irritable bowel disease and athletic overtraining may be the result of a deficiency in cysteine and glutathione, two amino acids with sulfur molecules.

MSM Is a Powerful Sulfur Supplement

Sulfur can be found in your muscles, skin and bones. It helps with fat digestion, is needed to make bile acid and required to form collagen.¹⁹ The element plays important roles in hundreds of physiological processes. For example, sulfur bonds are needed for proteins to maintain their shape and they determine the biological activity of the protein.

Hair and nails are made of a tough protein called keratin, which is high in sulfur, whereas connective tissue and cartilage have protein with flexible sulfur bonds.²⁰ In addition to proteins, sulfur is also required for the proper structure and biological activity of enzymes.

Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) is a sulfur donor and contains 34% elemental sulfur by weight.²¹Many of the benefits of supplementing with msm are related to the compound’s ability to reduce inflammation, regulate the balance of reactive oxygen species and antioxidant enzymes,²² and modulate your immune response.²³ It is widely used in the treatment of pain, especially pain associated with arthritis.

In one clinical trial, researchers found people with osteoarthritis of the knee who took three grams of MSM twice a day for 12 weeks experienced a significant reduction in pain and improvement in physical function, as compared to those who took the placebo.²⁴

In another randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study,²⁵ data showed participants with mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis experienced an analgesic and anti-inflammatory effect when given oral glucosamine and MSM, both individually and in combination.

In this study, the treatment groups received 500 milligrams (mg) of glucosamine and/or 500 mg of MSM three times a day for 12 weeks. According to the authors:

“Combination therapy showed better efficacy in reducing pain and swelling and in improving the functional ability of joints than the individual agents.

All the treatments were well tolerated. The onset of analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity was found to be more rapid with the combination than with glucosamine. It can be concluded that the combination of MSM with glucosamine provides better and more rapid improvement in patients with osteoarthritis.”

The Benefits of Bone Broth and Epsom Salts

In addition to food and MSM supplementation, you may also absorb sulfur from homemade bone broth or a relaxing soak in a warm Epsom salt bath. As I’ve written in the past, bone broth contains other valuable minerals that your body can easily absorb in use, including magnesium, phosphorus, calcium, silicon, sulfur chondroitin and glucosamine.²⁶

Bone broth also helps attract and hold liquids in the digestive system and supports proper digestion. In one study, researchers found that chicken soup has medicinal qualities and significantly mitigated inflammation and infection.^27,28 The amino acids in bone broth helps to fight inflammation and courtesy of chondroitin sulfate and glucosamine, it helps to reduce joint pain and inflammation.²⁹

Bone broth is made from animal bones. It’s important to use homemade bone broth since the store-bought variety is produced by adding chemical-laden bouillon cubes, whereas traditional soups are made by cooking bones and meat for several hours. In its simplest form, it’s made by using bones, vinegar and spices, and simmering in a pot or slow cooker for as long as 24 to 72 hours.

Bone broth made over longer periods of time increases the release of gelatin, minerals and other nutrients from the bones, which are key to many of the benefits and restorative properties.

Epsom salt baths are a simple way of absorbing both magnesium and sulfate. Epsom salt is magnesium sulfate, which is easily absorbed through your skin. It is also a preferable way of absorbing magnesium and sulfate since it’s readily available to your body without having to be converted as it is when taken orally.

As a general recommendation, use 1 to 2 cups of Epsom salt in a tub of water. The warmer the water, the more the salt will dissolve and the more your body will be able to absorb it.

Some people may experience a negative reaction, such as irritability or hyperactivity. In this case, decrease the amount you use and incrementally raise it based on your tolerance. Alternatively, make a foot bath of one part Epsom salt to two parts water and soak your feet for about 30 minutes.

According to media reports, COVID-19 “cases,” meaning positive PCR test results, are soaring across the U.S. and around the world, leading to the implementation of measures that in some cases are stricter than what we endured during the initial wave.

However, as detailed in several articles, including “Why COVID-19 Testing Is a Tragic Waste,” PCR tests are being used incorrectly, resulting in the false appearance of widespread transmission.

In reality, the vast majority of people who end up with a positive test will not develop symptoms and aren’t infectious. Needless to say, if you’re not infectious, you pose no health risk to anyone, and being placed under what amounts to house arrest is nothing but cruel and unusual punishment for no reason whatsoever.

Positive Test Rates Have No Bearing on Mortality Rates

In The Highwire report above, Del Bigtree breaks down how excessively high test sensitivity leads to falsely elevated “case” numbers that in reality tell us nothing about the situation at hand. As noted by Bigtree, what’s missing from the COVID-19 conversation is the actual death rate.

“If COVID is a deadly virus, what should we see when cases increase?” he asks. The answer, of course, is an increase in deaths. However, that’s not what’s happening.

Aside from a small bump at the beginning, when doctors were unsure of the appropriate treatment and some states recklessly and irresponsibly sent infected patients into ill equipped nursing homes, the death rate has remained relatively flat while positive test rates have dramatically risen and fallen in intervals.

In the video, Bigtree features a November 4, 2020, tweet¹ by former White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas — who since locked his account so only approved followers can see it — showing the number of positive tests (aka “cases”) in blue and COVID-19 related deaths in red, since the start of the pandemic up until the end of October 2020. As you can see, there’s no correlation between the positive test rate and subsequent deaths.

Vast Majority of ‘COVID-19 Patients’ Are Asymptomatic

One of the explanations for why positive test rates and mortality do not go hand in hand is the simple fact that a vast majority of those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic. They simply aren’t sick. The PCR test is merely picking up inactive (noninfectious) viral particles.

In one study,² which looked at pregnant women admitted for delivery, 87.9% of the women who tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms. Another study³ looked at a large homeless shelter in Boston. After a cluster of COVID-19 cases was observed there, researchers conducted symptoms assessments and testing among all guests residing at the shelter over a two-day period.

Of 408 people tested, 147, or 36%, were positive, yet symptoms were conspicuously absent. Cough occurred in only 7.5% of cases, shortness of breath in 1.4% and fever in 0.7%. All symptoms were “uncommon among COVID-positive individuals,” the researchers noted.

Asymptomatic Transmission Is Very Rare

During a June 8, 2020, press briefing, Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that asymptomatic transmission is very rare, meaning an individual who tests positive but does not exhibit symptoms is highly unlikely to transmit live virus to others.

“We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases, they’re following contacts, and they’re not finding secondary transmission … it’s very rare, and much of that is not published in the literature,”Van Kerkhove said.

Just one day later, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s emergencies program, backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s statement, saying the remarks were “misinterpreted.”⁴ Needless to say, when you’re trying to justify the implementation of a vast surveillance network, it’s no good to admit a vast majority of people are having their privacy infringed upon for no good reason whatsoever.

Asymptomatic People Pose No Risk to Others

Most recently, a study⁵ in Nature Communications assessed the risk posed by asymptomatic people by looking at the data from a mass screening program in Wuhan, China.

The city had been under strict lockdown between January 23 and April 8, 2020. Between May 14 and June 1, 2020, 9,899,828 residents of Wuhan city over the age of 6 underwent PCR testing. In all, 92.9% of the entire city population participated in the testing. Of these, 9,865,404 had no previous diagnosis of COVID-19 and 34,424 were recovered COVID-19 patients.

In all, there were zero symptomatic cases and only 300 asymptomatic cases detected. (The overall detection rate was 0.3 per 10,000.) Importantly, not a single one of the 1,174 people who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual tested positive.

Additionally, of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19, 107 individuals (0.310%) tested positive again, but none were symptomatic. As noted by the authors:⁶

“Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no ‘viable virus’ in positive cases detected in this study … The 300 asymptomatic positive persons aged from 10 to 89 years …

The asymptomatic positive rate was the lowest in children or adolescents aged 17 and below (0.124/10,000), and the highest among the elderly aged 60 years and above (0.442/10,000). The asymptomatic positive rate in females (0.355/10,000) was higher than that in males (0.256/10,000).”

Asymptomatic People Have Low Viral Load

Interestingly, when they further tested asymptomatic patients for antibodies, they discovered that 190 of the 300, or 63.3%, had actually had a “hot” or productive infection resulting in the production of antibodies. Still, none of their contacts had been infected.

In other words, even though asymptomatics were (or had been) carriers of apparently live virus, they still did not transmit it to others. As noted by the authors, “there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts.” They further added:⁷

“Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.

In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.”

Reinfected Individuals Are Not Infectious Either

The same held true for people who tested positive a second time after having recovered from an active infection.

“Results of virus culturing and contract [sic] tracing found no evidence that repositive cases in recovered COVID-19 patients were infectious, which is consistent with evidence from other sources,” the authors said.⁸

The researchers also pointed out that virus cultures and genetic studies have shown the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be weakening over time, and that newly infected individuals are more likely to be asymptomatic and have a lower viral load than the cases seen earlier in the outbreak.

What does all of this tell us? It tells us there’s no reason to panic simply because the number of positive tests are on the rise. Remember, the more people you test using a PCR test that is set to an excessive cycle threshold, the more false positives you’ll get.

As explained in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” by using an excessive cycle threshold that amplifies the viral RNA to the point that it detects inactive (noninfectious) particles is at the heart of this so-called pandemic. It’s what keeps the pandemic narrative going, when in fact it’s long since over.

CDC Uses Questionable Sources to Counter China Study

Interestingly, the same day the China study came out, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance⁹ on mask wearing, claiming asymptomatic people account for more than half of all transmissions. Where did they get that from?

The two references listed as support for that claim include a study¹⁰ from July 2020, and CDC data that haven’t even been published yet.¹¹ It just says it was “submitted” for publication sometime in 2020, therefore, we are unable to provide any source link. The CDC makes no mention of the China study, which included nearly 10 million individuals.

CNN, which reported the CDC’s update, parroting the idea that asymptomatic spread is why it’s so important to wear a mask, also made no mention of the landmark study from China. Curious, don’t you think? It’s almost as though the CDC doesn’t want us to know we have nothing to fear from healthy people.

German Lawyers Sue Fact Checkers Over Censorship

Many doctors, scientists and lawyers have now become wise to the fact that it is these flawed tests, and their fraudulent use, that is keeping the fear narrative alive — and they’re taking action.

In the video above, Ben Swann talks to Dr. Reiner Fuellmich,¹² a consumer protection trial lawyer¹³and founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss¹⁴),^15,16 which is seeking to expose how fraudulent testing has been and continues to be used to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic when in fact there is none.

The committee is now filing the first of many lawsuits to come, this one against so-called fact checkers on social media. They opted to file a defamation lawsuit on behalf of Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a former member of the German Congress and the Council of Europe who has been an outspoken critic of PCR testing, as it cannot be used to diagnose infection.

Social media companies have labeled Wodarg’s statements as “false,” and by filing a defamation suit, the burden of proof now falls on the fact checkers to prove that they are correct. In other words, to win, the fact checkers must prove that PCR tests diagnose active infection. The scientific evidence proves they don’t, so this case could turn out to be pivotal in the fight against the big tech censorship that keeps the fearmongering alive.

COVID-19 Pandemic — The Greatest Psyop in History?

While Fuellmich and his team make no claims about WHY the pandemic is being kept alive using fraudulent science, they are unequivocal in their assertion that it is in fact a fake pandemic and that it has had devastating health and economic consequences around the world.

For the why, we have to turn to the geopolitical scene to see what narratives have rolled out in tandem with the pandemic. What we find is that leaders across the world are now calling for a “reset” of the global economy in the wake of the destruction brought by the pandemic. In reality, of course, it is the global response to the pandemic that created the economic devastation, not the virus itself.

Either way, the call to “build back better” is being heard around the world, and such plans include the elimination of conventional capitalism, free enterprise and private ownership, replacing them with a technocratic resource-based economic system in which energy and social engineering run the economy rather than pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand.

Leaders are also calling for invasive health surveillance, and there appear to be plans in place to use biometric surveillance via vaccines, all of which feed into the technocratic system in which this kind of mass surveillance is not only paramount but also foundational.

The reason surveillance is so crucial is because the functioning of this system hinges on artificial intelligence-driven social engineering and manipulation of the masses. Unless people are locked into what could be described as a digital prison, they won’t comply with what’s coming.

Hook everyone up to a digital centralized banking system, a digital ID and a social credit score, however, and few will have the fortitude to object or speak out against the unelected rulers. Your entire life could easily be upended with the push of a button.

We’ve already seen how many people have not only been deplatformed for speaking out against one thing or another this past year, they’ve also had their digital payment accounts closed down, effectively destroying their ability to earn a living. Imagine if there were nothing but a centralized digital currency system and your accounts got shut down. How would you live?

Fear Is a Highly Effective Manipulation Tool

No person in their right mind would agree to this Great Reset plan if they were aware of all the details and its ultimate implications for humanity as a whole. So, to roll it out, they had to use psychological manipulation, and fear is the most effective tool there is.

As explained by psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, there’s an entire school of public health research that focuses on identifying the most effective ways to frighten people into accepting desired public health measures.

By adding confusion and uncertainty to the mix, you can bring an individual from fear to anxiety — a state of confusion in which you can no longer think logically — and in this state, you are more easily manipulated. The following graphic illustrates the central role of fearmongering for the successful rollout of the Great Reset.

In closing, testing asymptomatic people and isolating people who test positive even when they have no symptoms is a key strategy that keeps the fear level high. There simply aren’t enough hospitalized COVID-19 patients to keep the ruse going, and far too few actually die to make the narrative work. That’s why we hear nothing about those statistics anymore.

Instead, all we hear about are the “cases” — the positive tests which have no bearing on mortality rates. Fear of asymptomatics also drive the narrative that we must all wear face masks everywhere we go, because you don’t know who might be infected and not know it. It instills fear of others, as even seemingly healthy people might make you deathly ill.

The featured study from Wuhan demonstrates the fallacy of such fears. People who test positive but have no symptoms are not infectious and pose no risk to others. They don’t need to wear masks and they don’t need to be isolated. In short, we don’t need to fear each other.

As we know, “the U.S. lies for a living,”¹ says Jeffrey Sachs, the former director of The Earth Institute at Columbia.² Sachs is also an adviser to the United Nations and a professor of economics who’s been involved in diplomacy in more than 100 countries for decades.³ He made this comment to Russell Brand, an English comedian and actor, in their interview above, which covers media lies, including about the Ukraine War.

“The mainstream media do nothing about [the lies],” Sachs continued, “just amplifies them. And it’s getting pretty dangerous. That’s the real problem. It’s a very dangerous time right now because we seem not to be able to have an adult conversation about almost anything, in the mainstream.”⁴

Over the past several months, the U.S. has poured billions of tax dollars into Ukraine, ostensibly to help Ukraine fight for freedom and preserve democracy. This despite the fact that Ukraine has long been deemed one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and no one knows where all this money is actually going.

America’s meddling in the Ukraine conflict also reveals that it is not willing to relinquish its imperialistic tendencies. But extreme censorship has silenced any open discussion that goes against the official narrative on the war in Ukraine.

Extreme Censorship Is Shaping Reality

Sachs tells Brand that when he grew up, newspapers enjoyed dissing on political figures. But now, “these papers don’t do anything but repeat the lies. And it’s extremely strange to me.”⁵ Due to his experience, Sachs knows a lot of reporters, and they actually tell him that they’re unable to report freely:⁶

“They tell me privately, ‘Yeah, what you’re saying is right, but our editor is not so interested in it’ … Corporate ownership, yes, it’s definitely part of it. But the complete collapse of professionalism in journalism in these mainstream media — not everywhere, because there are some really brave people out there — but in, what we call the mainstream, it’s pathetic and very dangerous.”

Even as the war grows increasingly dangerous, there is no open discussion — only a one-sided dictate that’s spread over the airwaves. Sachs explained:⁷

“We’re deep into a war that is escalating and we can’t even have a decent discussion about what the sources of this war are and how to end it. I’ve had the experience. I wrote for one project syndicate for 20 years. I was their most-published writer. But they wouldn’t print the pieces that I wrote that were contrary to the official line about this war. It was pretty amazing to me after 20 years. I couldn’t post a piece. And that’s not good, in my view.”

What does this level of censorship and control suggest? The clues can be found in our heavily militarized government, which is the overarching theme across party lines:⁸

“I’ve been involved with dozens of governments across the world for 40 years now. Basically, the neocons took over U.S. foreign policy 30 years ago. And it hasn’t really mattered whether it’s democrats or republicans … the mainstream of our political system in both parties is militarized, and our foreign policy is largely based on secrecy. So we don’t even see what our government is doing.

Nothing is explained, nothing is debated anymore, and that’s been true for a long time. It’s been true across the administration, so it’s not a partisan thing.”

Was the Ukraine War Really Unprovoked?

The mainstream media is clear in its message that the Ukraine war is the result of an unprovoked and unjustified invasion. But was it really? Further, if you’re still thinking this war is only between the Ukraine and Russia, think again.

“Now we’re in a war in Ukraine. And we are in it. This is absolutely a war between the United States and Russia. It’s extraordinarily dangerous. We’re told every day in the mainstream media — an unprovoked war that started on February 24, 2022, which is false,” Sachs said. “There’s a history to this. There was a way to avoid this war. Biden didn’t choose it. But none of it is properly debated at all. That’s really what we’re facing.”⁹

Sachs, in fact, pleaded with the White House to negotiate peace and discourage Ukraine from joining NATO. They refused, saying anyone has the right to join NATO if they want to. But as astutely noted by Sachs, this isn’t about the “right” of Ukraine to join NATO, it’s about the threat that poses to its neighbors, Russia in particular.

Russia has long been very clear about the fact that it will not allow Ukraine to join NATO, for the simple fact that it would place a NATO military presence right on its border. Russia wants Ukraine to remain an independent “buffer zone” between itself and NATO countries.

Would the U.S. be fine with Mexico forming a military alliance with China, installing Chinese military at our southern border? Sachs wonders. That’s highly unlikely, yet that’s what they’re pursuing in Ukraine.

Since Russia’s entry into Ukraine, the U.S. has done nothing but push for the escalation of conflict, to the point that we’re now hearing predictions about nuclear war. Why would we take such risks? To take a stand for Ukraine’s “right” to join NATO? It’s beyond irrational, but that’s where we are.

Who Blew Up the Nord Stream Pipelines?

Another piece to the puzzle lies with who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines. September 26, 2022, massive “leaks” were detected in two Russian pipelines, Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, which deliver natural gas from Russia to Europe underneath the Baltic Sea. Within a couple of days, several countries, including Russia, agreed the leaks were the result of intentional sabotage or an act of terrorism. But the question remains: Who did it?

Western officials and media have by and large blamed Russia itself. The Washington Post suggested Russian President Vladimir Putin is “fully weaponizing the Nord Stream pipelines.” Bob Rae, Canada’s ambassador to the United Nations, accused Russia of “using pollution as an act of war.”¹⁰

The Center for Strategic and International Studies admitted that Russia’s motives for attacking its own pipelines are unclear, but that it “may be warning and signaling to Europe and the West that it is willing to target civilian infrastructure.”¹¹ Putin has dismissed such allegations as “stupid,” and is placing the blame on the West, the U.S. in particular.¹² Sachs weighed in with his take on who did it:¹³

“It’s pretty interesting who blew up the Nord Stream Pipeline. One president, I know, said if Russia invades, that’s the end of the pipeline.¹⁴ And then when asked, ‘Well, what do you mean Mr. President,’ he said, ‘Well, we have our ways.’ Then after the pipeline is blown up, the Secretary of State said this is a tremendous opportunity to wean Europe from Russia. Well, what’s the narrative?

The narrative is Russia did it. And the newspapers say, ‘U.S. officials say Russia did it.’ Russia blew up its own pipeline. Its own billions of dollars of infrastructure. The pipeline that carries Russian energy to European markets … whereas the other side said they were going to do it. This narrative business, it’s really pretty clear.”

Who stands to gain from the pipelines’ demise? Russia lost a multibillion-dollar investment, long-term wealth potential and hence geopolitical power, and present-day leverage against NATO sanctions.

Aside from “sending a message” that it’s willing to destroy civilian infrastructure, it gains nothing from sabotaging its own pipelines. Such a message would have been far clearer and more rational had they attacked someone else’s infrastructure and not its own.

The U.S., however, certainly appears to have both motive and intention. U.S. officials have publicly stated they would “one way or another” eliminate Nord Stream 2 if Russia decided to invade Ukraine, which, of course, it did.

By sabotaging the pipelines, the U.S. stands to gain financially by increasing its own natural gas exports, and it gains by weakening Russia’s income potential and leverage over Europe. The loss of the pipelines also benefits the U.S. by putting Europe in a situation where it cannot be tempted to leave America’s side against Russia. As noted by The American Conservative:¹⁵

“Winter is soon arriving in Europe. If European peoples get tired of being cold, and/or paying a fortune for heating, they may take to the streets to demand that their governments push for peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, so that the flow of Russian gas can start again. But now, with the Nord Stream pipelines badly damaged, that possibility has been foreclosed …”

Is War What They Want?

Ukraine has long been used as a pathway — during WWI and WWII — for Western powers as they attempted to conquer the East. But, as noted in “Ukraine on Fire,” a 2016 documentary produced by Oliver Stone, “every time, Ukrainians ended up paying the highest price for these grand games of power.”¹⁶ As a result, Ukraine, being surrounded by greater powers on all sides, had to master the art of changing sides.

The U.S., meanwhile, has long meddled in the affairs of other countries against the wishes of the very populations we claim to have “rescued.” As explained in a “Democracy Now!” video titled “Overthrow: 100 Years of U.S. Meddling and Regime Change,” “By one count, the United States has interfered in more than 80 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000. And that doesn’t count U.S.-backed coups and invasions.”¹⁷

As Brand put it, “In case after case, we are seeing, whether it’s the war, NATO expansionism, meddling in foreign democracies, a sort of psychotic, vampiric recklessness, followed by maddening lies.”¹⁸ Indeed, even now, the U.S. is still flexing its imperialist muscles, this time by apparently seeking to escalate the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. And ultimately, imperialism, which the U.S. has perfected, is globalism.

As explained by investigative journalist Whitney Webb, the Ukraine-Russia conflict may be “the opening act for the newest iteration of the seemingly endless ‘War on Terror,’”¹⁹ leading to further fear among the population. A fearful people, in turn, will willingly give emergency powers to leaders, who will use them to take your rights away “for your own safety.”

The U.S. supplement market was valued at $48.4 billion in 2021, with an expected compounded annual growth rate of 8.9%.¹ In the U.S., where 80% of Americans use dietary supplements, the industry is viewed as trustworthy by the majority of adults (79%).² However, access to high-quality supplements is continually being threatened by legislation, along with corporate mergers and acquisitions.

Proposed legislation is calling for a federal database for dietary supplements, which could pave the way for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gain premarket approval power — changing access to supplements as we know it.

Mandatory Product Listing for Supplements May Be Coming

In April 2022, Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Mike Braun, R-Ind., introduced the Dietary Supplement Listing Act of 2022.³ The Act would require supplement makers to provide information about their products to the FDA, including (but not limited to):⁴

• A list of all ingredients
• An electronic copy of the label
• Allergen statements
• Health and structure/function claims

Known as mandatory product listing (MPL) for dietary supplements, supporters claim it’s a way for the FDA to know what products are on the market and what ingredients they include. But opponents suggest the move, which is burdensome for small supplement companies, could ultimately give the FDA more power to ban supplements from the market. According to Natural Products Insider:⁵

“Pete Evich, vice president of the lobbying firm Van Scoyoc Associates in the nation’s capital, cited ‘immense pressure’ from MPL proponents to get the proposal into an omnibus bill … Durbin is expected to lobby aggressively for MPL during the lame-duck session.”

Why the Push for Mandatory Product Listing?

The information that MPL would require is already available via existing sources, including facility registrations and product labels, which include ingredients and dosing information readily available for the public to see. The National Institutes of Health Dietary Supplement Label Database also contains some supplement label information.

Michael McGuffin, president of the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA), told Nutritional Outlook, “We keep … wonder[ing] why the reporting requirement is so redundant. It requires submission of not just the label but also a whole bunch of information that’s already on the label … You gotta ask this question: Should American taxpayers pay for two databases?”⁶

Meanwhile, a prominent concern is that along with being unnecessary and burdensome, MPL could turn into a tool for premarket approval, which the FDA could use to keep dietary supplements off the market. Daniel Fabricant, president and CEO of the Natural Products Association (NPA), explained to Nutritional Outlook:⁷

“The thing is, if the safeguards were there” — meaning language built into the bill to clearly state that the law doesn’t let FDA reject any database submissions — “they would be specifically spelled out. They would say, ‘Hey, nothing in this act would allow the Secretary to remove an ingredient that isn’t the subject of final agency action.’

… That would give you a safe harbor, but we haven’t seen any language here that would present that [in the current bills]. And, again, if the goal is … to get FDA labels? OK, those would meet that goal.

Now, if the goal is something else, well then people need to be honest about what that goal is. If that goal is to get FDA an administrative tool that’s in effect premarket approval? Yeah, that’s not going to work at all. Everyone is opposed to that.”

There’s also the possibility that MPL would bring the U.S. closer to adopting universal limits on supplement dosages and formulas — a move that would also restrict consumer’s access to therapeutic levels of such products. According to Alliance for Natural Health USA:⁸

“As we’ve seen in issues like GMO-labeling, where some states required labeling of GMO foods and others didn’t until federal law pre-empted state labeling laws, big companies don’t like dealing with a patchwork of regulations.

Mega-corporations doing business across the world would likely welcome harmonized levels of supplements so they can sell their products on the world market without having to change formulations or labels.

Higher-end products would be eliminated because they wouldn’t meet the ‘harmonized’ nutrient levels, and all that would be left are the most basic, cookie-cutter products that don’t support patient needs but make the most money — think of the supplements you see at CVS, or Walgreen’s, etc.”

‘We Need To Be Aware of FDA’s History’

Given FDA’s history of attacking dietary supplements, MPL needs to be viewed with extreme caution, particularly with regard to what it could morph into in the years to come via “regulatory drift.”⁹

Supporters have claimed an MPL database would help protect consumers by keeping fraudulent or adulterated products off the market, but even this is misleading, since criminals could easily submit fraudulent labels. AHPA’s McGuffin explained:¹⁰

“Again, we don’t see any words in there that say, ‘This is premarket approval.’ We don’t see any words in there that say, ‘This could never become premarket approval.’

And that’s why we’ve continued to push back on that detail. If the language is cleaned up, then we’d be back to, ‘Could somebody please clarify with a great deal of certainty why this is needed, because we’re still at that point of we don’t really see the need. We think it’s redundant to FDA’s existing authority to get as many labels as it wants.’

We think it’s unlikely to work because … the companies that we really want pushed out of the market are those creepy-creeps that sell products that say ‘dietary supplements’ and contain undeclared drugs. But we don’t think that this will fix that, because they’ll just register. And then, apparently, they’re compliant.

And then we’re also concerned about potential regulatory drift. Where does FDA go with this over the next 10 or 15 years? It’s not crazy to think, or I would be naïve to think, that based on decades and decades of history, we should assume that FDA will treat this exactly as we think it should be treated.

I think anybody with experience in the trade would have to agree that we need to be aware of FDA’s history, which is to seek narrowing of availability of natural products and dietary supplements …”

Another Threat: FDA’s ‘New Dietary Ingredient’ Guidance

Another threat to dietary supplements that could also turn into a preapproval system is the FDA’s New Dietary Ingredient (NDI) Guidance.¹¹ An NDI, under the FDA’s definition, is any “dietary ingredient that was not marketed in the United States in a dietary supplement before October 15, 1994.” Manufacturers that want to market a dietary supplement containing an NDI must notify the FDA about the ingredients.

While large corporations will have no problem complying with FDA’s burdensome NDI requirements, many small supplement makers may be pushed out of the market as a result. Alliance for Natural Health USA noted:¹²

“Simply put, the FDA is trying to install a quasi pre-approval system for ‘new’ supplements — those introduced to the market after 1994. In its revised guidance document explaining how they intend to implement this provision of the law, the FDA has signaled its intention to treat many, many common supplements as ‘new’ and thus subject to the onerous NDI requirements before they can come to market.

Note that the law passed by Congress only calls for a premarket notification system for ‘new’ supplements, but the FDA has tried to usurp power to turn this into a premarket approval system like the one they have for drugs. An economic analysis estimated that, if implemented as is, the NDI guidance could lead to the elimination of over 41,000 products from store shelves.”

Is the FDA Intent on Turning Supplements Into ‘Drugs’?

The FDA recently concluded that beta-nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN), an antiaging ingredient, cannot be marketed or sold in dietary supplements,¹³ because it was investigated as a pharmaceutical drug.¹⁴

The conclusion came in response to an NDI notification submitted for NMN. The takedown of NMN is a harbinger of things to come, according to Chris Masterjohn, who has a Ph.D. in nutritional sciences. He tweeted that the FDA’s ruling that NMN is “an article authorized for investigation as a new drug,” is a “backdoor into essentially banning all supplements that do anything useful.”¹⁵

The key narrative continues to be the FDA honing in on the most successful supplements and essentially turning them into pharmaceutical products. Masterjohn continued:¹⁶

“I am not a lawyer and I am not an expert on FDA regulations, but I believe the FDA’s interpretation … means that the following will happen: a) company A wants to make a health claim for a supplement. They have to fill out an IND [investigational new drug]. b) company B does not want to do that.

They want to sell their supplement and make no claims. However, company A filled out an IND. Now, FDA concludes company B’s supplement is a drug.

With this interpretation, what will happen is slowly but surely everything on the market will be chipped off from “dietary supplements” and stacked onto “drugs” because companies that want to do research studies to show health effects will have to fill out INDs.

Once they fill out an IND, according to FDA’s current interpretation, that thing has become a drug, can no longer be a supplement, and is no longer a nutrient or food. In short, the FDA is completely unhinged.”

Big Corporations Taking Over Supplement Companies

Meanwhile, multinational companies like Bayer, Nestle, Unilever, Proctor & Gamble and Clorox have been buying up supplement companies at a frenzied pace. In 2018, there were 83 such transactions. This rose to 137 in 2021.¹⁷ For instance, Nestle Health Science, a division of Nestle, now owns:¹⁸

“Several of these brands are higher quality supplement companies,” Alliance for Natural Health USA noted.

“What will happen to them now that they are owned by mega-corporations that have not historically had core natural health principles as the foundation of their businesses? We’ve spoken to several of the largest and highest quality brands that have not been purchased; they have confirmed that larger companies have made several unsuccessful attempts to purchase them.”¹⁹

Why are there continued attempts to make supplements drugs and for mega-corporations to acquire their makers? “Where there’s money to be made, big players will want to cash in,” Alliance for Natural Health explained.²⁰ The end result for consumers could be disastrous, however, including restricted access to supplements and inferior products on the market:²¹

“Overall, this level of consolidation isn’t good for competition, because just a small number of companies can make decisions that affect our supplement access, and many of them do not share the values of small, independent companies who go into business to fill a need in the natural health sector.

Issues over quality of supplements and access to higher dosages become the decision of a smaller and smaller contingent of companies — this is not good from a health freedom standpoint.”

There is strong scientific evidence vitamin D plays a central role in your immune response and your ability to fight infections. In this video, Ivor Cummins, biochemist and chief program officer for Irish Heart Disease Awareness, explains how recent studies supporting higher levels of vitamin D may reduce your risk of negative outcomes from COVID-19.

He also singles out some of the conditions associated with low vitamin D levels, such as low sun exposure, insulin resistance and high levels of inflammation.

In 2017, a review of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials using vitamin D2 or D3 was published in the BMJ.¹ The data revealed vitamin D supplementation was “safe and it protected against acute respiratory tract infection overall.” They found people who were most deficient experienced the greatest benefit.

I am beyond excited to announce a groundbreaking new study by an organization that we have supported for over 15 years, GrassRootsHealth. Many of you have ordered their vitamin D test in the past, and the funds from that were used to do this clinical trial that could change the entire treatment strategy for COVID-19.

A recent clinical trial to investigate the efficacy of vitamin D against COVID-19 was announced April 3, 2020.² Days later, Mark Alipio — who received no funding for his work — published a preprint letter³ in which he released data from an analysis of 212 people with lab-confirmed COVID-19 and for whom there were serum 25(OH)D levels available. You can read Alipio’s full study here.

Using a classification of symptoms based on previous research, he employed statistical analysis to compare the differences in clinical outcomes against the levels of vitamin D. Of the 212 people, 49 had mild disease; 59 had ordinary disease; 56 were severe and 48 were critical.

In the initial study group of 212 patients (see Table 1 below), 55 had normal vitamin D levels, which Alipio defined as greater than 30 ng/ml; 80 had insufficient levels of 21 to 29 ng/ml and 77 had deficient levels of less than 20 ng/ml. Vitamin D levels were strongly correlated to the severity of the illness experienced. It is important to note that most experts consider 30 ng/ml half of what an optimum vitamin D level should be, which is 60 to 80 ng/ml.

Of the 49 with mild illness, 47 had normal vitamin D levels. For those of you who are not good with math that means that 96% of the patients with mild illness had “normal” levels of vitamin D. Note again this “normal” level was above 30, and most experts would raise that to 60.

Of the combined 104 with severe or critical illness, only four had normal levels of vitamin D. That is 4% or the reciprocal of the mild group. How much stronger a correlation could one hope for? Alipio concluded:⁴

“… this study provides substantial information to clinicians and health policy-makers. Vitamin D supplementation could possibly improve clinical outcomes of patients infected with Covid-2019 based on increasing odds ratio of having a mild outcome when serum (OH)D level increases. Further research may conduct randomized controlled trials and large population studies to evaluate this recommendation.”

Further Evidence Vitamin D Significantly Impacts Outcomes

The writers of a recent editorial in Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics⁵ used a different metric, but arrived at similar results. They argued a marked variation in mortality occurs above or below 35 degrees North latitude. This is also the line above which it is not possible for people to get enough sunlight to retain vitamin D during the winter months.

When the mortality per million is plotted against latitude, the results suggest vitamin D plays a role in the outcome of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Data were gathered from countries reporting more than 150 people infected by April 15, 2020.

Although Nordic countries are far north of the demarcation line, vitamin D deficiency is also relatively low, potentially from widespread use of supplements. In countries where deficiency is common, such as Spain and Italy, mortality rates have been higher. The writers stress the importance of vitamin D on the outcome of infection, concluding that, while there is modest evidence, it protects against infection:⁶

“… the hypothesis is not that vitamin D would protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection but that it could be very important in preventing the cytokine storm and subsequent acute respiratory distress syndrome that is commonly the cause of mortality.”

A second paper⁷ published in April 2020 hypothesized that vitamin D protects the body against SARS-CoV-2 infections and sought to assess if there was an association between vitamin D levels and the number of COVID-19 infections. The data included only European countries and found a significant relationship between the mean (average) vitamin D level and the number of infections.⁸

People who were most vulnerable to this respiratory infection were the most deficient. They concluded the results support the advice to supplement with vitamin D to protect against the SARS-CoV-2 infection. These results support the 2017 review of studies published in the BMJ noted above.⁹

Yet another paper evaluated the role vitamin D deficiency plays in preventing respiratory infections and found similar results.¹⁰ The researchers wrote that vitamin D had “a significant protective effect” and reduced the risk of an acute respiratory infection from 60% to 32% in participants. The researchers also wrote vitamin D may help prevent respiratory infections and lower antibiotic use.

African-Americans Experiencing Higher Rates of Infection

A letter to the editor was then published in the BMJ, signed by 30 scientists from around the world, including Alipio.¹¹ They pointed out the disproportionately high number of individuals who are Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME), or those living in care homes in the U.K. who die from COVID-19.

They also identified obesity as another risk factor, with co-morbid conditions including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Each group of people — those living in care homes, BAME and obese — also tends to have lower levels of vitamin D.

The letter included the research results from Alipio’s preprint letter, indicating the 30 scientists agreed with how the data was collected and analyzed, as well as the conclusions. The group identified the lengthy process vaccines require and the 100 years of research on vitamin D.

They hypothesized that vitamin D has clinical relevance to COVID-19 and may reduce the number of fatalities. Although there is a need for clear clinical evidence with research, it’s important to note the widespread vitamin D deficiency, including the risk groups mentioned. They quote Dr. Hugh Sinclair, who nearly 100 years ago observed:¹²

“The deficiency of any nutrient which is essential for every tissue will eventually lead to abnormal function in every tissue. That is so incontrovertibly obvious that I am continually astonished it must be repeatedly forcefully restated.”

They then went on to give a reason for why vitamins have so often been overlooked:¹³

“Human nature is such that simple solutions to complex issues, for example vitamin C for scurvy, and hand washing prior to baby delivery, are often not readily embraced; but surely the scale and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic demands all avenues are fully explored; more so when no other effective treatment strategies as yet exist.

A safe simple step, the correction of a deficiency state, vitamin D this time, convincingly holds out a potential, significant, feasible ‘COVID-19 mitigation remedy.”

Others connect the heavy toll in the African-American community with an increased prevalence of obesity, diabetes and high blood pressure, which are risk factors for increased severity of COVID-19.¹⁴ In the states of Maryland and Louisiana and the metropolises of New York, Chicago and Washington, D.C., the percentages of BAME individuals dying from probable COVID-19 are higher than the percentages of BAME who live in the area.

However, while there is a correlation between the higher prevalence of health conditions that increase disease severity in the African-American population, there is also a higher prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency due to reduced production.¹⁵ Darker pigmentation produces less vitamin D with exposure to the sun.

Vitamin D in COVID-19 Treatment

Findings from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA)¹⁶ and a vitamin D review paper¹⁷ published in the journal Nutrients, April 2, 2020, also suggest vitamin D deficiency could have serious implications for COVID-19. As reported by Medical Xpress, April 6, 2020:¹⁸

“The report,¹⁹ ‘Vitamin D deficiency in Ireland — Implications for COVID-19. Results from the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA),’ finds that vitamin D plays a critical role in preventing respiratory infections, reducing antibiotic use, and boosting the immune system response to infections.

With one in eight Irish adults under 50 deficient in vitamin D, the report highlights the importance of increasing intake … TILDA researchers recommend that adults over 50 should take supplements — not just in winter, but all year round if they don’t get enough sun …

Professor Rose Anne Kenny, principal investigator of TILDA, said: ‘We have evidence to support a role for vitamin D in the prevention of chest infections, particularly in older adults who have low levels. In one study Vitamin D reduced the risk of chest infections to half in people who took supplements.

Though we do not know specifically of the role of vitamin D in COVID infections, given its wider implications for improving immune responses … at-risk cohorts should ensure they have an adequate intake of vitamin D.'”

The second paper, published in the journal Nutrients, carries the telling title, “Evidence That Vitamin D Supplementation Could Reduce Risk of Influenza and COVID-19 Infections and Death.”²⁰ As reported in the abstract:

“This article reviews the roles of vitamin D in reducing the risk of respiratory tract infections, knowledge about the epidemiology of influenza and COVID-19, and how vitamin D supplementation might be a useful measure to reduce risk. Through several mechanisms, vitamin D can reduce risk of infections.

Those mechanisms include inducing cathelicidins and defensins that can lower viral replication rates and reducing concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines that produce the inflammation that injures the lining of the lungs, leading to pneumonia, as well as increasing concentrations of anti-inflammatory cytokines …

Evidence supporting the role of vitamin D in reducing risk of COVID-19 includes that the outbreak occurred in winter, a time when 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations are lowest; that the number of cases in the Southern Hemisphere near the end of summer are low …

Vitamin D deficiency has been found to contribute to acute respiratory distress syndrome; and … case-fatality rates increase with age and with chronic disease comorbidity, both of which are associated with lower 25(OH)D concentration.

To reduce the risk of infection, it is recommended that people at risk of influenza and/or COVID-19 consider taking 10,000 IU/d of vitamin D₃ for a few weeks to rapidly raise 25(OH)D concentrations, followed by 5000 IU/d. The goal should be to raise 25(OH)D concentrations above 40–60 ng/mL (100–150 nmol/L). For treatment of people who become infected with COVID-19, higher vitamin D₃ doses might be useful.”

UK Recommends Supplementation

Public Health England is recommending their citizens take a vitamin D supplement while they are spending more time indoors.²¹ The National Health Service²² routinely recommends their citizens take a supplement during the fall and winter months. They also recommend a supplement all year round for those who aren’t outdoors, are in a care home, usually cover all their skin or have dark skin.

The chief nutritionist at Public Health England is concerned that Britons may not be getting enough vitamin D from sunlight as they spend more time indoors. They counsel their citizens that while an adequate amount of vitamin D cannot stop an infection, it does have benefits, including improved outcomes in those who are deficient.²³

Yet, despite radical changes in the way people are living during the pandemic, the guidelines in the U.S. have not changed. The National Institutes of Health recommends that most people get their nutrients from food and beverages, including fortified food products. However, dietary intake is not sufficient to maintain healthy levels:²⁴

“Dietary intake of vitamin D from natural foods traditionally plays only a minor role with few available natural sources: animal sources such as fatty fish, cod liver oil, or egg yolks contain vitamin D₃, and fungal sources such as mushrooms and yeast exposed to sunlight or UV radiation contain vitamin D₂ (ergocalciferol).”

The U.S. health agencies appear to have little interest in helping the public support their immune system through appropriate nutrition but would rather rely on drugs and vaccines.

Some Public Health Officials Recognize Value of Vitamin D

Although the official recommendation from government agencies is to wait for drugs and a vaccine, some are speaking out. Former CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden wrote an opinion piece for Fox News in which he suggests vitamin D may reduce COVID-19 mortality rates, especially in those who are deficient.²⁵

He goes on to say supplementation has reduced the “risk of respiratory infections, regulates cytokine production and can limit the risk of other viruses such as influenza.” Much of the damage from COVID-19 occurs with a “cytokine storm,” during which the body’s inflammatory system goes into high gear, damaging organs and increasing mortality rates.

The evidence of seasonality of some viral infections may be related to vitamin D production that declines during the winter months. Seasonal changes in infection rates are more evident in northern climates, and little or none in areas that are warm all year. He concluded:²⁶

“We can do lots of things to improve our resistance to infection. These include getting regular physical activity, getting enough sleep, stopping smoking and other tobacco use, and, for people living with diabetes, getting it under control. Taking a multivitamin that includes Vitamin D, or a Vitamin D supplement, probably can’t hurt, and it might help.

As we continue to work to mitigate the impact of COVID-19, anything we can do to strengthen our resistance is a step in the right direction.”

Dr. John C. Umhau was a public health specialist at the National Institutes of Health for over 20 years. In an article in MedPageToday he referenced his review in which he argued there were groups who were more likely to have vitamin D deficiency, including those who are obese, the elderly and those with dark skin. Yet vitamin D is one of the:²⁷

“… most studied and most important host factor impacting survival from COVID-19 … A government-sponsored research strategy to address this issue has not been developed, as officials explained that there was no mandate to explore an alternative to the existing vaccination program.

However, other researchers picked up the ball and provided convincing evidence that vitamin D could reduce the incidence of acute respiratory infection.”

In further evidence published in Nutrients,²⁸ scientists reviewed how vitamin D can reduce the risk of infection by lowering the rate at which the virus replicates and reduce the pro-inflammatory cytokines that damage the lungs, leading to pneumonia. Vitamin D also helps increase concentrations of anti-inflammatory cytokines that may help protect the lungs. The researchers recommended those at risk take:

“… 10,000 IU/d of vitamin D₃ for a few weeks to rapidly raise 25(OH)D concentrations, followed by 5000 IU/d. The goal should be to raise 25(OH)D concentrations above 40–60 ng/mL (100–150 nmol/L).”

Individuals Dosages Vary Widely — Test To Be Sure

Although the researchers recommended a specific amount of vitamin D3 to take, it’s impossible to predict how much supplementation you personally may need unless your blood level is measured. Typically, ranges are from 2,000 to 10,000 units (IUs) per day, but there are many variables that contribute to this dose — that is why testing is so important.

By testing at home you can stay away from hospitals unless you’re having symptoms of a worsening respiratory infection, such as difficulty breathing. Ideally, you’d like your level to be 60 ng/mL.

GrassrootsHealth makes testing easy by offering an inexpensive vitamin D testing kit as part of its consumer-sponsored research. All revenues from these kits go directly to GrassrootsHealth. I make no profit from these kits and only provide them as a service of convenience to my readers.

For more information about supporting your immune system, fighting the SARS-CoV-2 virus and additional nutraceuticals that have demonstrated a positive effect on your immune system or fighting viral infections, see “Quercetin and Vitamin D — Allies Against Coronavirus?”

Interesting Note on Fauci and Vitamin D

As reviewed in an earlier article, long before SARS-CoV-2 became part of everyday life, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), believed vitamin C and D were important strategies for enhancing your body’s immune system. Just four years ago, he was interviewed by a reporter from Washingtonian on how to avoid getting sick.

He explained the importance of washing your hands, clipping your nails and getting enough sleep. A fourth strategy he discussed was using vitamin C and D supplements:²⁹

“It can enhance your body’s defense against microbes. I take 1,000 milligrams a day. Many people also do not get enough vitamin D, which affects a lot of body functions, so that would be helpful, too.”

In the current pandemic, the U.S. has placed inexpensive, patent-free nutritional supplements in second place to drugs and vaccines, which come with a high price tag in addition to unwelcome side effects.

In a more recent interview with RealClearPolitics, Fauci appeared to hedge his opinion. He stressed the viability of vitamin C as an antioxidant that’s “essentially totally harmless unless you take in a ridiculous amount.”

But when asked whether vitamin D might mitigate some respiratory infections, he said: there’s “no definitive proof.” He did point out, though, that you’re not likely to get hurt by it.³⁰ Still, his answers suggest an unwillingness to admit vitamin D plays a proven and important role in infectious disease.

Might Fauci’s backpedaling on vitamins C and D have anything to do with the fact that he serves on the Leadership Council for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Global Vaccine Action Plan? He describes his litmus test for safety and effectiveness as being tied to randomized control trials:³¹

“That’s why you keep hearing me over and over again saying the best optimal way is to do a randomized control trial to determine as quickly as possible whether something works, and if it does, get it out there. If it doesn’t, get it off the table.”

In what appears contradictory to this statement, Fauci said a vaccine may be released in the next 12 to 18 months.³² However, the standard steps to develop a relatively “safe” vaccine averages five years. It begins with two to four years of laboratory research, followed by one to two years of preclinical studies, and then Phase I, II and III trials.³³

In this video, I interview repeat guest Edward (Ed) Dowd, a former analyst and fund manager with BlackRock, the largest asset manager in the world. With more than $10 trillion in assets, BlackRock wields greater financial power than any country in the world with the exception of the U.S. and China.

Dowd has a knack for seeing trends, and was able to grow the assets he managed during his time at BlackRock from $2 billion to $14 billion. Ten years ago, he left BlackRock, moved to Maui and became an entrepreneur. More recently, he’s come out as a whistleblower against the COVID shots and Big Pharma corruption.

In our last interview, we discussed the mathematical certainty of a financial collapse, and how COVID provided a convenient smoke screen to hide this reality.

Data Reveals Crimes Against Humanity

Dowd has now published a book, “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,” in which he details the data showing the shots are a crime against humanity.

“When this product [the COVID shots] came to market, I was very suspicious because I know a lot about health care,” Dowd says. “I was on Wall Street and I used to analyze health care stocks. I knew that normal vaccines took seven to 10 years to prove effectiveness and safety.

This was an experimental vaccine, a nontraditional gene therapy that had never been tested on humans. I read the literature on the animal tests and they were an abomination. Then, this thing was approved in 28 days. They got rid of the control group. I knew it was Operation Warp Speed, so I was highly suspicious of this whole thing from the get-go.

Then in early 2021, I started hearing anecdotes that people were getting sick and/or injured, or died, from distant friends and relatives. I started reading about sudden athlete deaths, [and] suspected the vaccine right away. I didn’t have the data that I have now, but I said to myself, ‘You know, I’m going to look at insurance company results, funeral home results.’

That eventually led to excess mortality statistics … I’m known as ‘the excess mortality guy’ right now. What I’ve learned through my own personal experience is that Pharma is, on the whole, mostly fraudulent. Most drugs that have been approved by the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] aren’t really all that safe and effective.

They have to recall so many drugs every year. The FDA has been wholly captured by the pharma industry. Seventy to 75% of the drug approval pharma arm of the FDA comes from pharma fees, directly from the companies, so this has been corrupted for a long time.

It’s now exposed primarily because [the COVID shot] is [injuring and killing] such a large amount of people. It’s hard to hide this one … This fraud is unveiled and out there for people to see, but it’s only in the echo chamber. Mainstream media is still beholden to Big Pharma because of all the ad spend and the government policymakers … [who] want this to go away.

There’s a giant cover-up going on as far as I’m concerned. The data that I’m going to talk about today is there for the global health authorities to see. They see what I see, and at this point it’s negligence, malfeasance, a cover-up and a crime.

That’s why I’m here, because I don’t believe anybody has a right to tell me what to do with my body, and I can’t believe this actually happened. The numbers I’m going to reveal to you are now a national security concern.”

Group Life Insurance Statistics Tell a Curious Story

Dowd’s concerns are based on a variety of statistics, including but not limited to government mortality and disability data, as well as data from private insurance companies, such as group life insurance data. As explained by Dowd, group life policies are policies given to large Fortune 500 corporations and mid-sized companies.

Basically, when you start to work at one of these companies, you sign onto a policy from Day 1 that includes a health care plan and life insurance plan (death benefit), which is typically one or two times your annual salary. The only way you can get a claim on these policies is if you die while employed. If you quit or get fired, you don’t get this claim.

Group life insurance is a lucrative business for insurance companies because the death rates have historically been highly predictable. In the U.S., the available civilian labor force is about 164 million people in total. Of those, 98 million are actually employed, and of those 98 million, only small subset actually has group life insurance.

“These people are a tiny subset of the 98 million because these are the workers at the best corporations with access to the best health care. They’re highly educated and employed, and you have to have some measure of health to be employed.

The industry did research in 2016 to determine how healthy this population is compared to the general U.S. population … This report said that in any given year, the group life policyholders die at one-third the rate of the general U.S. population. They experience a third the mortality rate of the general U.S. population, so they’re healthy.

What happened in 2021 to this group? Well, let’s talk about what happened in 2020. COVID affected everybody, and the general U.S. population experienced more excess mortality from COVID pre-vaccine than the group life holders, so that relationship helped. Well, in 2021 that flipped. Ages 25 through 64 of the group life policyholders, as reported by the Society of Actuaries, experienced 40% excess mortality.

The general U.S. population in 2021 experienced 32% excess mortality. This is year two of the pandemic with miracle vaccines. Isn’t that interesting? A much healthier subset of the population died at a higher rate than the general population.”

Disability Stats Reveal Jabs Are a National Security Concern

American disability statistics are equally revealing. Every month, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts surveys on disability. In the five years before COVID, the monthly disability rate was between 29 million and 30 million. Those are absolute numbers.

After the COVID jabs, starting in May 2021, the disability trend changed dramatically. As of September 2022, there were 33.2 million disabled Americans. That’s an extra 3.2 million or 4.2 million, depending on whether you’re using the 29 million or 30 million baseline. That’s a three standard deviation rate of change since May 2021.

A three standard deviation means that the chance of this happening is 0.03%, so something happened around May 2021 that was highly unusual. Since then, the overall U.S. population has experienced an 11% rate of increase in disabilities, while the employed — which is about 98 million out of a total population of about 320 million — experienced 26% increased rate of disability.

“So, we have two different databases suggesting the same thing,” Dowd says. “It was detrimental to your health to be employed in 2021 and 2022 … Something is happening to the most able-bodied amongst us, college students, those employed, those in the military, the frontline workers …

Those who are employed are getting disabled faster than the general U.S. population. That shouldn’t happen. The employed amongst us are healthier, generally speaking … If you have a job, you tend to be able to show up at work. Basically, the bottom line is this. The only explanation for this that I can see is mandates for experimental biological inoculations …

One of my whistleblowers from the insurance [industry] told me that as of August 2022, the millennial cohort of the group life holders is still experiencing 36% excess mortality.

People in Fortune 500 companies are dying at a much more excessive rate than those who are not employed there, so this has implications for years to come. It’s a national security concern as far as I can tell … We seem to have poisoned the most able-bodied amongst us through [COVID jab] mandates.”

The same trends are seen in Europe. Excess mortality amongst the young has gone up. In the first year of the pandemic, old people died. In the second year, it suddenly shifted to younger working folks.

A Disaster in the Making

For now, the excess mortality trend in the U.S. has leveled out between 15% to 20% for the general population. In the U.K. and Europe, the excess mortality trend in the general population is between 10% and 20%. Meanwhile, American millennials in the workforce with group life policies have an excess death rate of 36% as of August 2022.

As noted by Dowd, if you’re employed at a Fortune 500 company that mandate boosters, it makes sense that your excess mortality will be higher than the general population if the shots are harming people.

Many in the general population are too young to take the shots, are self-employed, work for small companies that aren’t obliged to mandate shots, or are retired. In short, the general population has had greater choice when it comes to taking the shots or not. If these trends continue at this same rate, it’s an absolute disaster for our economy and society at large.

“The CEO of OneAmerica, Scott Davison, said a 10% rise in excess mortality amongst younger-age working people is a three standard deviation event, or a once in a 200-year flood. That’s just 10%. He said the 40% they saw in 2021 was just unfathomable. They couldn’t even calculate what that meant.

We’re above 10%, so we’re well above the three standard deviation event. What we don’t know is the long-term trends. Anecdotally, one young woman I know, [aged] 30, got it in December 2021.

She’s presenting with heart issues now, in the month of October [2022]. She’s got a heart rate beat per minute of 30, so she’s got problems. I’m hearing about lots and lots of heart issues in my millennial friends’ circles that have presented themselves well after the shot.”

As detailed in “Is Long-COVID the Elephant in the Room?” recent research¹ from Switzerland found the rate of subclinical myocarditis is hundreds of times more common than clinical myocarditis. In fact, 100% of those who got the jab suffered some level of heart injury, even if they were asymptomatic, as they all had elevated troponin levels (an indicator of or biomarker for heart damage).

Stock Trading as an Analogy for COVID Jab Uptake

The good news is that the uptake of the latest bivalent boosters is only 10%, which means 90% of those eligible for it have not gotten it. Hopefully, this is a sign of sanity returning. However, many remain stuck in the pro-mandate box for the simple reason that their egos are wrapped up in it.

Many didn’t take and push the shots for personal health reasons. As noted by Dowd, “They did it for virtue signaling tribal reasons, and they wanted to feel superior to other people.” To break the spell, they must come to the realization that they were duped, they were fooled, and that’s painful.

“If you buy a stock and your investment thesis is proven wrong, what you should do is pull a 180 and sell the stock, because you’re wrong. What I found, even with some of the greatest investors, is that if their ego was attached to it, they would ignore clear evidence that the thesis was compromised. Sometimes fraud would even be involved in some of these companies, but they would continue to buy the stock all the way down.

That’s an analogy for what taking boosters is at this point — taking boosters for a product that doesn’t work at all, doesn’t prevent COVID nor transmission. Let’s say you think it’s safe and effective. But now there are serious safety concerns that are proven, so it’s literally your ego that’s going to kill you. We call that ‘dumb money’ on Wall Street, so think of this like a trade.

You either long [i.e., take a long position on] the vaccine or short the vaccine. Those of us who didn’t take it are short. Those who are long have an opportunity to pull a 180 on this and not get boosters. That would be the equivalent of selling stock.

Those who continue to get boosters are getting longer as more and more evidence [against the COVID shots] rolls out. [Editor’s note: In stock trading, a long position is held with the expectation that the stock will rise in value in the future. If the value goes down, you lose money.]

This is the greatest asymmetric information gap I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, and it’s due to a whole host of factors — media blackouts, government corruption, regulator corruption and ego, people’s individual ego. This is the greatest trade of my lifetime and, what side of the trade do you want to be on?

My hope is to convince people to cut their losses and stop taking this thing and then look at ways to heal the damage that’s been done. The good news is there does seem to be people working on protocols to at least mitigate and hopefully reverse some of the damage.”

Impacts on US Infrastructure

If excess mortality and disability rates remain catastrophically elevated, the impacts on our infrastructure will be severe. Dowd estimates 2 million to 3 million Americans have already been disabled by the shots. Officially, the unemployment rate is 3%, but if you add in the excess disabilities, you find that the real unemployment rate is actually around 6%.

“Why is that important? We have 3% unemployment yet we have help wanted signs everywhere. Well, the reason you have help wanted signs is because people who used to be able to work, able-boded Americans, are no longer able to work, so it’s creating shortages.

There’s also not complete disability. Some people are sucking it up and dragging their ass to work, but they’re also missing days. A lot of people are calling in and missing days … I can also talk about what I’m seeing with supply chain with automobiles. My car was hit July 14th [2022]. My left headlight panel was destroyed and the radiator was damaged.

It took 10 days to get a police report because my police department has staff shortages. Then, I called around and there are shortages of parts all across the globe and the body shops are backed up. I couldn’t even get a tow to a body shop until November, so I couldn’t get an estimate to give to my insurance company. I had to do a photo estimate.

It took them about a month to get back to me, and then when I put in [a claim for] the repairs, my insurance company said, ‘We’re going to junk your car. It’s a total loss. We’ll cut you a check.’ Now, the reason they did that was because they’re making money off my junk car.

They’re going to sell the parts, [which is why] they gave me more money than the Blue Book value … This is kind of the glacial beginning, what I call the ‘glacial Mad Max’ scenario.

Goods and services that we used to take for granted are going to start to disappear. Uber Eats, that’s going to go the way of the dodo bird. There’s just not going to be enough people to fill these jobs and it’s going to become increasingly more difficult to get things. Supply chains are already broken. They’re going to become more broken with less people on the margin.

Remember, supply chains are all done just-in-time. That was a big thing when I was on Wall Street. ‘Just-in-time supply chain, super-efficient.’ Well, just-in-time was algorithmically designed to use the least amount of people. Now, you just need a couple of people to call in sick or disappear, and everything gets backed up. So, this is beginning.

I think it’s going to get worse and worse. What I’m hearing about the medium-term impacts scare me. Because of the uptake in boosters has lessened, we should have seen excess mortality start to drop into single digits. But it’s not.

It’s still running [high], and I suspect when the numbers are in from the flu season this winter, excess mortality will trend up again because people’s immune systems are compromised. Illnesses that would have been easy to withstand are going to knock some people out.”

Life Expectancy Has Plummeted

At the end of August 2022, we also discovered that life expectancy in the U.S. dropped precipitously during 2020 and 2021,² which further supports the hypothesis that the shots are prematurely killing people.

As I was preparing for my interview with Ed, I realized I wanted to discuss the worst decrease in life expectancy in the U.S. in over 100 years with him, as he had not discussed it in his book. I used a few of the non-Google search engines and could not find it at all. Then I realized I saved a copy of the story in one of my PowerPoint lectures (see below):

If I had not saved this screenshot and not had the precise headline to search for I would likely have never found the article.

In 2019, the average life span of Americans of all ethnicities was nearly 79 years. By the end of 2021, life expectancy had dropped to 76 — a loss of nearly three years. Typically, a drop in life expectancy by a mere month or two is a big deal, so a three-year loss is a sign that something catastrophic has occurred.

It’s also rather incriminating that The New York Times article³ that reported this historical decline in life expectancy was quickly deleted, as were all reposts. To me, the decrease in life expectancy is prima facie evidence that the COVID shots are a dangerous fraud. Probably, the article was scrubbed to protect the pro-jab narrative.

This is a classic illustration of what the global cabal is doing, and I discussed it in great depth with an upcoming interview with Whitney Webb. It is clear this censorship and removal of important information will only worsen with time. So if you value a video or article it would be really helpful to download it to your personal drives as it very well may be gone the next time you go to look for it.

More Information

To learn more, be sure to pick up a copy of Dowd’s book, “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.” To stay abreast on Dowd’s ongoing work, you can also follow him on GETTR.

“I’m not a scientist. I’m not a doctor. I’m a financial capital markets expert,” Dowd notes. “What do we do in financial capital markets? We accumulate information edges over other people to make decisions on asset classes, to make money before everybody else sees the trend change. That’s how you make money.

I live in the world between perception, reality and timing of that switch from perception to reality. Right now, the perception by 90% of the population seems to be that the COVID shot is a safe and effective and I’m crazy. Well, my data suggests that I’m not crazy. Not only am I not crazy, you’re so wrong it’s going to be detrimental to your health.

The book is a journey through how I think. I present the theory of the case. It’s simple deductive reasoning. You don’t have to believe me, but you have to ask this question: ‘If 2020 was so exciting to the media and the health officials that counted all the deaths with such glee, why are they not talking about the excessive death rates we’re now seeing globally, especially amongst the younger age working folks and the employed folks?’

There seems to be crickets on that, so you have to ask yourself, ‘If that’s not a national security concern and a national health crisis, then what is?’ Why the silence? Well, prima facie evidence of a cover-up is my thesis … Look at my book as a stock thesis. It’s my investment case on why I would pitch a stock to you … I’m just pitching you a trade.

Get out of the vaccine. Stop taking them. You’re on the wrong side of the trade, and if you don’t listen to me, instead of losing money, you’re probably going to lose your health and/or life.”

A Red Pill for Christmas

A great feature of “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022” is that it’s not going to overwhelm you with complex statistical analysis. It’s a simple read with lots of pictures and graphs. It also includes QR codes to references so you can rapidly confirm them.

“Everything I sourced,” Dowd says. “It’s a powerful book. It’s a book that I hope changes the marginal mind … I think it makes a great Christmas gift for the family member who doesn’t see the reality we see and, again, it’s coming from a Wall Street guy, laid out as an investment thesis. You can disagree, but all the stuff that I put in the book is sourced and the data is the data …

What we don’t do in the book is we don’t get into the who and why. We don’t want to assault someone’s worldview, but the data’s so compelling, we do say at the end of the book … ‘There’s a cover-up going on and malfeasance.’

Jessica Rose, Ph.D., said in an interview with me, and I put her quote in the book, ‘Some things are worse than death.’ The most acute adverse reaction is death. But there are other ones that can make your life pretty miserable for a long, long time, and also make other people’s lives miserable that have to take care of you.

When you think about labor statistics, if there’s someone in the house that’s disabled severely, the person who’s not disabled loses work hours and work weeks taking care of that person, taking them to hospital visits, what have you.

Also, think about the hospital infrastructure that’s going to be overwhelmed, especially with the health care workers who were mandated to take all these jabs. We’re going to have a health care crisis, whether you know it or not.

It’s coming, and you’re not going to have access to health care … That’s why I think people need to look at holistic health themselves and get as healthy as possible right now … Do what you can outside the medical system because soon it’s not going to be there for you.”

In this interview, return guest Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT for over five decades,¹ discusses her paper,² “Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The Role of G-quadruplexes, Exosomes and MicroRNAs,” published in the June 2022 issue of Food and Chemical Toxicology.

The paper was co-written with Drs. Peter McCullough, Greg Nigh and Anthony Kyriakopoulos. In May 2021, Nigh and Seneff published a paper³ detailing the differences between the spike protein and the COVID jab spike protein.

In the “Innate Immune Suppression” paper, they and their other co-authors delve deep into the mechanisms of the COVID shots, showing how they suppress your innate immune system.

The paper caused quite a stir when it was first posted, prior to publication. A campaign was launched to have it retracted on the premise that it would discourage people from getting these life-saving shots — regardless of whether the mechanisms described were true or not.

Ultimately, the controversy led to the resignation of the editor of the journal. Many have also tried to discredit Seneff, and McCullough has since been stripped of his medical credentials.⁴

Understanding G-Quadruplexes

G-quadruplexes (G4) are genomewide targets of transcriptional regulation, and as such as a novel target for drug design. The “G” in G4 stands for guanine, so G4 is DNA sequence of four guanines. It’s one of the four nucleotides — the basic code — in DNA, and it’s known to play an important role in diseases such as cancers and neurological disorders.⁵

As explained by Seneff, prions, when misfolded, build beta sheets and precipitate out of the cytoplasm, causing plaque to form. This plaque is a hallmark of several neurodegenerative diseases in animals and humans, such as Mad Cow disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, scrapie (which affects sheep) and chronic wasting disease in deer.

“So, there are all these debilitating neurodegenerative diseases that come out of the prion protein, and the prion protein actually binds to its own G4s, which are in its own RNA,” Seneff explains. “In so doing, it promotes [the prion protein] to misfold into the wrong shape … [which] causes prion disease.

The [COVID jabs] produce a version of the messenger RNA (mRNA) that codes for the spike protein. Their version is enriched in guanines — it produces a lot more G4s than the original mRNA that the virus produces — so, it’s a different form.

And there’s lots of mRNA in the [COVID jab]. It’s a big dose of this mRNA that is enriched in G4s … which then … causes the cell to produce the prion protein. So, the cell is producing the prion protein in the context of a situation with lots of G4s lying around from the mRNA from vaccine. That’s a really dangerous situation for causing the prion protein to misfold and causing prion disease.”

How the COVID Jab Can Induce Autoimmune Disease

As explained by Seneff, the mRNA in the jab is taken into your lymph system and spleen, germinal centers where antibodies are produced, and in order to produce the antibodies, these germinal centers release exosomes. This can help explain the phenomenon of “shedding,” but it also helps explain the immune destruction we see occurring. Seneff explains:

“The exosomes are part of the process by which the cells communicate to induce the antibody production, which is the goal of the [COVID jab]. The [jab] does a fantastic job of producing high levels of IgG [immunoglobulin] antibodies, which are the ones that are associated with autoimmune disease.

It doesn’t make the mucosal antibodies. It makes IgG, which is actually much more dangerous if there are too many antibodies. They can cause autoimmune disease through molecular mimicry, and that’s another aspect that I think is going on.

That’s why you’re getting this platelet problem where platelet count goes down to zero, because you get antibodies to the platelets by molecular mimicry, or even because the spike protein is binding to the platelets. They’re getting antibodies to the complex and you’re wiping out the platelets.

Some people are getting thrombocytopenia and VITT [vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia], conditions that can be life-threatening. And there’s a huge signal for thrombosis. The paper talks about thrombosis. We have … seven tables for different aspects of the symptoms of the vaccine.

There’s a table on the liver, there’s a table on thrombosis, there’s a table on cancer, there’s a table on the vagus nerve, and all of the inflammations of the nerves because those exosomes are traveling up the vagus nerve, making their way to the heart, brain and liver.

They’re causing disease in all of those organs, and you see that very clearly in the various databases — 98%, 99% of the [adverse event] reports in 2021 for these conditions were [from the] COVID shots and 1% was all the other vaccines combined.”

Mechanism of Action

Swiss researchers recently reported finding elevated troponin levels in 100% of COVID jabbed individuals, indicating everyone is suffering some degree of heart damage, even if they’re asymptomatic.^6,7 Seneff explains the mechanism by which the COVID shot damages your heart.

“I think the whole issue is the spike protein being released by the immune cells in the germinal centers — the lymph system and the spleen releasing these exosomes that then travel along their fibers and reach all these critical organs.

The spleen has a very good connectivity with the liver, heart, brain and gut via the nerve system, starting with the splanchnic nerve and then hooking up to the vagus nerve … So, these exosomes are migrating along the vagus nerve and they’re arriving at these organs and are getting taken up by cells there. And everywhere they go, they cause inflammation.

The spike protein is very good at causing inflammation. That’s been shown in multiple studies … It causes the immune cells to migrate to the heart, and that’s how you get myocarditis, this inflammation in the heart.

You also get inflammation in the muscles. I was looking at myositis, which is muscle inflammation, and that’s another issue. I’ve been in contact with multiple people who suffered severe muscle damage from the spike protein, even to the point of being debilitated because of [inflammation in the] muscles.

So, not just the heart, but the skeletal muscles are also affected in a really bad way. Inflammation in the brain also causes neurons to be damaged and that’s causing cognitive disorders.

So, I think the long COVID is caused by the spike protein reaching the brain. Many papers have talked about long COVID, and they think it’s the spike protein, not the virus, but the spike protein itself [that is causing it].”

The Role of MicroRNAs

Another piece of the puzzle is related to the role of microRNAs, which are embedded in the exosomes that travel to the tissues. MicroRNAs should not be confused with mRNA. They’re two different things. The microRNAs are short pieces of RNA, about 22 nucleotides long. Unlike mRNA, microRNA do not code for protein.

The mRNA in the jabs are designed to be extremely resilient. Normally, mRNA lasts a few hours, but the mRNA in the jabs stick around producing protein in cells for several months, at minimum primarily because of the substitution of the nucleotide uridine with pseudouridine.

Because the mRNA is so resilient, spleen cells have to try to cope with all the spike protein that they cannot stop making, and one way they do that is by pushing the spike protein out in the form of exosomes. Those exosomes also contain microRNAs. Indian researchers found two specific microRNAs in people who got the jab, and these microRNAs interfere with Type 1 interferon response.

“This is a big topic of our paper,” Seneff says. “We talk about innate immune suppression … due to the effect of these microRNAs that are packaged up with the spike protein.

Everywhere [the exosomes] go, they deliver these microRNAs, which disrupt the immune cell’s ability to respond to Type 1 interferon. These microRNAs actually have a very high-level controlling role in the regulatory process of biology. They control which genes are expressed.”

Hypothesis to Explain Post-Jab Sudden Death

Seneff goes on to cite animal research from 2005, in which mice were exposed to a virus that causes myocarditis. They wanted to see what would happen if the mice were suffering from myocarditis and then got a shot of adrenaline. So, the mice were infected with the myocarditis-inducing virus, and then, 120 days later, they injected them with adrenaline.

The dose given killed 70% of them. Meanwhile, control mice that did not have myocarditis suffered no ill effect when injected with the same dose of adrenaline. The mice that died, died of heart failure. Basically, their hearts were too damaged to withstand the adrenaline rush. Today, we’re seeing a similar effect in athletes, who are dropping dead while exerting themselves.

Digging for other papers, Seneff found one that detailed the Type 1 interferon response in chromaffin cells, the cells that make adrenaline. Type 1 interferon inhibits and reduces their production of adrenaline.

Seneff’s theory is that the COVID jabs interferes with your body’s ability to respond to Type 1 interferon, thereby allowing too much adrenaline to be released. If your heart has been damaged by the spike protein, the outcome could be lethal, as we’ve seen.

“I think that could be what’s going on with the sudden death problem, because we certainly are seeing lots of young people suddenly dying of heart issues,” she says.

At the same time, microthrombi (micro blood clots) are activated by the spike protein, which could have lethal effects, and endothelial cells (the cells lining your blood vessels) are also inflamed. So, there’s not just one mechanism by which the jabs could kill you.

Spike Protein Creates Incredibly Tough Blood Clots

According to Seneff, blood clots are also connected to the prion aspect. Many different proteins are amyloidogenic and can misfold, causing them to precipitate out, including proteins in your blood. Blood clots are tough to break down, and when you add spike protein into them, they become even tougher.

Seneff suspects the spike protein binds to fibrin, causing it then to misfold in a way that makes it very resistant to breaking down. The same thing happens with prion proteins. When they misfold, they create a gel that becomes denser over time, eventually becoming completely inaccessible to the water base.

“It just precipitates out as this thing that just sits there for the rest of your life,” Seneff says. “Nothing can get at it. The immune cells can’t break it down. It just stays there. It can’t be cleared.”

This is why I recommend taking fibrinolytic enzymes like lumbrokinase (which is the most effective), serrapeptase and nattokinase, several times a day one hour before or two hours after a meal, if you’re struggling with long COVID, as they help break down the fibrin. To work, you have to take them between meals, on an empty stomach, or else they’ll just act as a digestive enzyme to break down food.

Another technique is to use a near-infrared sauna, which will help address the misfolding of proteins by encouraging autophagy, your body’s natural clean-out process.

The Role of Antibodies in Prion Disease

Antibodies may also play a role in the devastating side effects from the COVID jab. We know that prion protein is upregulated in cells that produce it under stress, and the COVID jab spike protein has been shown to cause cells to make more prion protein. One possibility is that antibodies to a particular part of the spike protein end up binding to the prion protein through molecular mimicry.

As explained by Seneff, researchers have discovered that if you produce antibodies to the C-terminal end of the prion protein, it can cause disease that looks a lot like prion disease but develops much faster.

As it turns out, the antibodies to the C-terminal end of the prion protein prevent the prion protein from going into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), where it needs to go in order to do its job. Instead, the antibodies keep the prion in the cytoplasm.

Subsequently, the cell gets sick because of these antibodies. The late Luc Montagnier posted a case study with 26 people who developed symptoms of prion disease within the first month after their second vaccine. All died, many within three months of their diagnosis. All were dead within a year, from what was basically an extremely aggressive form of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (the human Mad Cow disease equivalent).

Seneff believes antibodies against the spike protein are to blame, because it didn’t happen until they got their second dose. Antibodies developed after that first dose, which primed the cells. Then, after the second dose the cells started making loads of spike protein again, which the antibodies bound to.

This exosome package then traveled up the vagus nerve to the brain, where neurons took them up. Seneff suspects this explains the disease process on those 26 patients.

“It would be explained completely by this model of spike protein antibodies binding to the C-terminal domain and preventing the prion protein from going into the ER,” she says, “and then, it causes [the prion protein] to break down.

It gets broken down by the proteasome and disappears. So, it’s causing a loss of function problem for the prion protein in the neuron at a very accelerated rate, much faster than what goes on with the normal prion disease …

Montagnier and his team identified a segment of the spike protein that they thought had characteristic prion-like features. Within that segment is a piece that has five amino acids, YQRGS.

The prion protein has [the same] piece … Except for the middle one, the other four [amino acids] are all identical with this piece near the C-terminal end of the prion protein. So, it’s really perfect. It’s a place where, if you get antibodies to that, it’s basically a death sentence.”

COVID Jabs Impair Your Immune Function

To circle back to where we began, it seems the reason so many jabbed individuals are now contracting COVID and other infections, and are dying from them, is because Type 1 interferon is suppressed. That suppresses your immune function, making you more prone to contracting infections.

In the interview, Seneff also reviews how chronic exposure to glyphosate is a predisposing condition for bad COVID-19 outcomes, as glyphosate disrupts the immune system. For more details on that, please listen to the interview in its entirety. We also review how glycine supplementation can help displace glyphosate in your body, thereby limiting its damaging influence.

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Alexandra Latypova, an ex-pharmaceutical industry and biotech executive, who has been investigating and exposing manufacturing and regulatory fraud related to COVID injections.

We talked about the industry standards that were not adhered to during the clinical trials and the manufacturing of those injections, about the vial content quality testing procedures that had not been put in place, about the “hot batches” and their geographical distribution, about signs of fraud at every stage of testing and manufacturing the product, and about the general condition of living in a world run by a mob.

The latter was the lightest part of our conversation — evoking a lot of dark Eastern European humor — since both of us are Soviet expats, and in 2020, neither of us required a whole lot of imagination to embrace the existential possibility of living in a world run by a mob. We had seen it in the past without a disguise — and when something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, maybe it’s just a duck!

Alexandra Latypova’s Background

Alexandra grew up in Soviet Ukraine and immigrated to America in the late 1990s. She received her MBA from Dartmouth College and the spent about twenty five years in pharmaceutical industry and biotech (including in the areas of drug safety and clinical trials).

Alexandra has had a very gratifying entrepreneurial career. She has founded a number of successful startups, sold them — all before COVID — and retired, hoping to focus on enjoying her life and especially painting, which she does masterfully.

When 2020 knocked on the door with a whole bag of ugly and weird “new normal” treats, Sasha smelled the rat right away. Initially, she became alarmed by the abnormalities in “COVID response,” including the very conspicuous campaign to prevent effective treatment of COVID.

Compelled to understand what was going on, Alexandra got to work. She looked at VAERS and discovered huge discrepancies between the lots, where some batches had just a few reported severe adverse events, and some had over 1500 (she later learned from FOIA’ed documents that lot sizes were in a relatively similar range, and thus the discrepancies could not be explained by the lot size).

And when it comes to VAERS, let’s not forget the 2010 Harvard Pilgrim study showing that VAERS was severely underreported — NOT overreported — capturing less than 1% of adverse events.

“Hot Batches”

Early on, Alexandra discovered the existence of “hot batches.” She is one of team members behind the famous “How Bad Is My Batch” webpage where people can look up the number of severe adverse events reported to VAERS associated with a COVID injection lot number. Other fearless members of the team are Dr Mike Yeadon, ex-head of Pfizer Respiratory Research, Jessica Rose, statistician, Craig Paardekooper, researcher, and Walter Wagner, lawyer.

The slide below show the unprecedented variability of serious adverse events and deaths in the U.S. per batch. Note the comparison to the variability of the flu vaccine lots.

In the interview, Alexandra also mentioned the uneven distribution of deaths per a hundred thousand doses from batch to batch in the U.S. The coasts did much better than some of the Midwestern states that showed a very high numbers of reported deaths per a hundred thousand doses. The worst state is South Dakota (30+ reported deaths per 100,000 doses).

The areas that did even worse, according to Alexandra, were some of the U.S. territories with high percentage of indigenous population. (The latter data became available after the presentation was created, not reflected in the slide.)

“Garbage Soup”: Non-Compliance With Good Manufacturing Practices

In the interview, Alexandra calls the COVID injections products “garbage soup,” both due to the massive non-compliance of the vial content to the specifications (per multiple independently done tests) — as well as due to their non-compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices. Wait, are the manufacturers trolling us? Are telling us that they do not comply (but we must)?!

There are many theories about what’s behind for such wild inconsistency between batches, from manufacturing defects to deliberate toxicity testing — and anything in-between. In her TrialSiteNews article, Alexandra tackles one important angle of the challenge that so many of us had to “explain” when talking to the friends of a more mainstream persuasion:

“Many of us are familiar with the following conundrum: on one hand, highly credentialed scientists and doctors have written numerous research papers explaining the dangerous mechanisms of action underlying mRNA/DNA “platform” technologies. The papers are meticulously researched and depict, correctly in my opinion, many terrifying consequences of the technology that breaches the innate protective mechanisms of human cells.”

“Furthermore, these theoretical papers are validated by the observed outcomes, such as for example, increases in all-cause mortality in high correlation with increases in rates of vaccination in a given territory, unprecedented increases in the adverse events and deaths recorded by various passive reporting systems, astonishingly high reports of the adverse events and deaths from the pharmas’ own pharmacovigilance systems, and autopsy findings in vaccinated post-mortem showing the mechanisms of mRNA technology damage in histopathologic evaluations.

On the other hand, many who have received the injections report no adverse effects and deem the points above a ‘crazy conspiracy.'”

“The question from the uninjured seems to be – why don’t we see MORE deaths if what you say about mRNA products is true? Setting aside ethical limitations of this question, here is a possible answer why: The mRNA shots do not conform to their label specifications. In practice both “blank” and “lethal” vials and anything in between is produced [emphasis mine].”

Like I wrote earlier on my Substack, “remarkably, some analyzed vials were reported to contain left over magnetic beads (magnetic beads are used in production of mRNA). Remember the “crazy” videos of some people developing magnetism in the place of injection? Now we have a new, ‘non-conspiratorial’ explanation for the ‘conspiratorial’ videos! Yay, following the science!”

According to Alexandra, vials of mRNA injections are not routinely tested by the manufacturers for conformity to the label. She notes that “the more they conform to the mRNA specification, the deadlier they seem.”

The only vial-level tests specified, for instance, by Pfizer, in leaked Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls documents, are the vial weight at filling, manual inspection for large visible particles, and some tests related to integrity such as vial capping.

The documents don’t describe no routing vial or dose tests verifying the ingredients. Each Pfizer dose is supposed to contain 30 mcg of mRNA, as stated on the label, but there is no information about any testing done to verify that.

“The ingredient conformity tests described in Pfizer CMC package are based on the bulk product batch testing – an upstream manufacturing process step.

It is a regulatory requirement to retain samples of each batch produced, and these samples of vials should exist and be available for examination. Per contracts with the US Government/DOD, the product is shipped to the DOD who retains the ownership of the vials until the product is injected into people.”

Alexandra notes that those contracts are very detailed and specify manufacturing data to be delivered to the DOD, however, she not find any descriptions of sampling of the vials for purposes of verification of their contents vs the label. “Furthermore, it is expressly forbidden by the international vaccine supply contracts to perform the vial tests for label conformity.”

Evidence of Collusion

In the interview, as well as in this article, Alexandra talks about the evidence of collusion between the manufacturers, the global regulatory agencies, and the US Department of Defense.

Having analyzed various public data from CDC’s VAERS database as well as various documents that have been obtained through FOIA releases and other source, she concluded that such collusion “led to the commercial release of the Covid-19 countermeasures that do not comply with the current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP).”

Evidence that Alexandra talks about includes Moderna’s non-clinical study summaries, Pfizer’s Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls documentation, and contracts between pharma and the DOD for supply of the mRNA/DNA products. According to her, “it reveals disregard for established safety rules, regulations, and safety practices throughout the development, manufacture, and distribution of these products.”

Moderna Red Flags

As reported by Children’s Health Defense, Alexandra reviewed 700 pages of documents that Moderna submitted to the FDA as part of its application process and obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request.

And according to her, “out of nearly 700 pages, about 400 pages are irrelevant studies that Moderna repeated multiple times. Moderna also submitted three versions of a single module, she said. And one module contained only narrative summaries of Moderna’s studies, but no actual study results.” Alexandra’s conclusion is that we are missing a large number of results, such as full reports that would support their narrative.

“The FDA ‘obviously did not object’ to any of this, she said. ‘That’s evidence of collusion to me with the manufacturer.'”

Other “abnormalities” that Alexandra highlighted both in the interview and in the Children’s Health Defense article, were Moderna’s clinical trials timeline and the fact that their product has two — not one — Investigational New Drug (IND) number.

Normally, there is one IND application for one product. “In this case, however, there are two IND applications — one belonging to Moderna, and one belonging to the National Institutes of Health, which partnered with Moderna on its COVID-19 vaccine.”

“The Investigational New Drug (IND) application meeting is supposed to occur with the FDA when the company initiates human clinical trials. Moderna and the FDA had a pre-IND meeting on Feb. 19, 2020, and the IND application was formally opened the next day. The global pandemic was declared on March 11, 2020.”

In the words of Alexandra, “Somehow these visionaries could predict the future with such certainty that they opened a clinical trial for the vaccine, for which a pandemic was announced a month later.”

Pfizer Red Flags

As Alexandra notes in her article titled, “Did Pfizer Perform Adequate Safety Testing for its Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine in Preclinical Studies? Evidence of Scientific and Regulatory Fraud,” “both the manufacturer and the regulators behaved in a highly dishonest manner and conspired to push an entirely novel technology and product on millions of people without carrying out a single well designed safety assessment.”

For example, she points out that a review of clinical studies released by FOIA uncovered that at least 4 different variants of active ingredient were included in the single Investigational New Drug application by Pfizer IND#19736:

• BNT162a1 — Unmodified mRNA (uRNA; variant RBL063.3)
• BNT162b1 — Methylpseudouridine-modified mRNA (modRNA; variant RBP020.3)
• BNT162b2 — Methylpseudouridine-modified RNA (modRNA; variant RBP020.2)
• BNT162c2 — Self-amplifying unmodified mRNA (saRNA; variant RBS004.2)

Alexandra writes that while the use of multiple versions of a product in the early stages of development is often inevitable, each chemical or biological entity is nevertheless deemed legally distinct for the purpose of product approval.

“Therefore, studies conducted with versions of the product that don’t conform to the exact specification of the final version may serve only as supporting information for the approval of the latter, but they should never be deemed definitive and sufficient tests for claims of safety or efficacy pertaining to the final product.”

She further mentions that in September 2021, the FDA issued a draft guidance entitled “Studying Multiple Versions of a Cellular or Gene Therapy Product in an Early-Phase Clinical Trial,” which states that each version of product requires a separate IND application.

However, stunningly, “a footnote in this guideline exempts ‘vaccines intended to prevent infectious diseases’ from this requirement. No explanation is given as to why this exemption is made, and no conceivable scientific or legal basis exists for this exemption, other than that the FDA had already arbitrarily allowed this unprecedented deviation from the regulatory standard and later needed to cover their tracks.

In fact, arguably this regulatory ‘exception’ does not even apply to Pfizer’s COVID-19 ‘vaccine,’ since the product does not prevent infection or transmission of the disease. Is intent to prevent illness alone a sufficient condition? After all, every new drug is intended to do something like preventing an illness, but only few successfully do so.”

Alexandra’s article is very detailed, and I highly recommend reading it in full. You can also find Alexandra on TrialSiteNews and on her Bitchute channel. To summarize her take on Pfizer, she make the following points:

• Pfizer’s program did not include a comprehensive end-to-end test of all components of the final approved product (the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine). Instead, the studies included in the document package submitted to the FDA employed several variants and analogues of the product, whose comparability to the actual COVID-19 vaccine was not demonstrated or evaluated.

Thus, no comprehensive assessment of product safety can be made on the basis of these studies.

• A key determinant of a drug’s toxicity is its distribution within the body. However, with the mRNA active ingredient of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, this crucial aspect was never studied!

• Pfizer claimed absence of potential for “vaccine-elicited disease enhancement” based on studies of an animal species that does not get sick from SARS-CoV-2.

• The CDC, the FDA and Pfizer all lied about “vaccine staying at the injection site;” they knew all along that distribution of the vaccine throughout the body had to be expected.

• Pfizer skipped major categories of safety testing altogether.

• Pfizer used dishonest and self-serving interpretation of regulatory guidelines to justify the shortcuts it took in routine safety testing.

• Both FDA and Pfizer knew about major toxicities associated with gene-therapy medicines in general, and they therefore cannot claim lack of anticipatory knowledge of these risks with the particular gene therapy medicine that is Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. This points to intentional fraud and collusion between Pfizer and the regulators, who conspired to push this untested dangerous product on the market.

Yes, They Are Trolling Us — But We Are Not Helpless

Even though it is rather disheartening to know we live in a world that run by a mob, the challenge is centuries old, and remembering it can bring us much needed perspective and balance. The novel and “sudden” part of the challenge is that is happening to us, here and now, in broad daylight. That’s shocking! But throughout history, many of our ancestors had to deal with tyrants, and today, it is our turn to be brave. May our brave ancestors be our inspiration.

I would like to end this story with a short quote from my earlier article titled, “Is Our World Run Like a Mafia? So What Do We Do?:”

“Good news: As the mafia bosses do their predatory thing, something mysterious is happening the hearts of those of us who insist on love. Under pressure, we are forced to remember that we are not theirs.” We are not theirs. It is true.

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

 

The manufactured COVID pandemic has been a proverbial golden egg-laying goose for Pfizer. Its annual revenue is expected to reach $101.3 billion in 2022,¹ thanks to its COVID jab, which doesn’t prevent infection or spread, and Paxlovid, an ineffective and dangerous COVID antiviral that causes rebound. It would be comical if it weren’t so egregious.

And, Pfizer’s coffers are more or less guaranteed to continue being filled to the brim as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has now added COVID-19 shots to the U.S. childhood, adolescent and adult vaccine schedules.²

With this action, the CDC has secured Pfizer’s (and Moderna’s) permanent liability shield so that no one can sue them for damages for injuries and deaths occurring as a result of the shots. It also opens the door for states to mandate the jab for school children, which guarantees a continuous revenue stream.

That revenue stream may even exceed previous profits, as Pfizer raised the price on its COVID jab by about 400%,³ from $30⁴ per jab to somewhere between $110 and $130, on the same day ACIP voted to add the shot to the vaccine schedule. That price hike will take effect once the current U.S. purchase program expires.

Pfizer Hunts for the Next Blockbuster

As reported by Kaiser Health News (KHN),⁵ “a fortune amassed in the COVID pandemic is now paving the path to pharma nirvana: a weight loss pill likely worth hundreds of billions.” Pfizer is also hoping to develop blockbuster drugs for diabetes, migraines, ulcerative colitis, prostate cancer and sickle cell disease, and is gobbling up smaller drug companies with promising product portfolios.

A blockbuster drug may rake in billions, but that doesn’t mean it’s a blockbuster in the sense that it’s effective, as we’ve seen with Paxlovid and the mRNA COVID shot. Pfizer gets around this in large part by being a “remarkable marketing machine,” to quote Timothy Calkins, a professor of marketing at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management.⁶

Not only is Pfizer spending big bucks on splashy advertising, they also work with contract research firms like ICON, which run medical research trials for drug companies and federal agencies alike, thereby giving the drug companies the inside track on drug approvals.^7,8

Pfizer also gets plenty of free help from the federal government which, in the case of COVID, coerced millions with job loss threats into getting the shots, and implemented rules that ensure hospitals and pharmacies will only prescribe certain COVID drugs, Paxlovid being one of them.

The Art of Really Big Lies

In a November 4, 2022, article,⁹ clinical and public health physician Dr. David Bell discusses the art — and price — of lying, noting that the more divorced a lie is from reality, the more likely it is to succeed, thanks to the quirks of human nature and normal psychology:

“In a former role I had a boss who lied a lot. The lies were pure fantasy, but massive in scope and delivered with sincerity. They were very successful.

This success was based on the reluctance of most people to consider that someone in a position of authority in a humanitarian organization would completely ignore all semblance of reality. People assumed the claims must be true as fabricating information to that extent in those circumstances seemed to defy logic.

The principle of Really Big Lies is based on the lies being so divorced from reality that the listener will assume their own perception must be flawed, rather than doubt the claims of the person telling the lies. Only an insane or ridiculous person would make such outlandish claims, and a credible institution would not employ such a person.

Therefore, given that the institution is apparently credible, the statements must also be credible, and the listener’s prior perception of reality was therefore flawed. Lesser lies, by contrast, are likely to be perceived as sufficiently close to known reality to be demonstrably wrong. Inventing truth can be more effective than bending it.”

I believe this is precisely the strategy employed by Big Pharma, health agencies, government officials and the deep state propaganda arm over the past three years. Their claims have been so far from any semblance of reality, anyone aware of the facts has been left feeling more than a little crazy.

Unfortunately, while most humans have a moral and ethical compass, few end up following it when confronted by psychopaths in authority and the peer pressure to conform. As noted by Bell, good team players almost always end up supporting false narratives, and those who refuse to go along with what are clearly lies tend to be but a tiny minority.

For decades, patient-centered health care has been the norm, and patients not only had the right, but the duty, to participate in the planning and implementation of their care. This was enshrined in the 1978 Declaration of Alma Ata¹⁰ — a declaration adopted by the World Health Organization “as the key to achieving an acceptable level of health throughout the world.”

However, as noted by Bell, centralized top-down health care is far more attractive to Big Pharma investors. The primary obstacle to the corporatization and monetization of public health was truth, and this obstacle was finally (and formidably) overcome during the COVID pandemic. Bell explains:¹¹

“COVID-19 proved that even this impediment to progress can be expunged through consistent lying and the vilification of truth-tellers, backed by a well-managed behavioral psychology campaign.

This pandemic response provided a template not only for vastly-increased corporate income, but for job certainty and expansion of opportunity for the army of mostly-Western bureaucrats and health professionals filling the offices, meeting rooms and business-class seats of its implementing organizations. COVID-19 made corporate colonialism respectable again.

Superficially, COVID-19 appears a poor disease choice to facilitate a fundamental societal reset.

Death is heavily concentrated in old age … Severe cases are generally confined to those with life expectancies already shortened by metabolic diseases … Countries that failed to implement measures to restrict and impoverish their people … had COVID-19 outcomes similar to those that opted for lockdowns and other trappings of medical fascism.

Average hospital admissions in the UK and USA declined during the pandemic, not what the public expects when a pathogen wreaks havoc. Lockdowns devastated economies … COVID vaccines have also been unhelpful as high vaccination rates failed to noticeably impact infection and transmission …

Thus, COVID-19 provided a hard bucket of facts to deal with, but this is just the situation in which Really Big Lies can work. These were needed both to fool the public, and to provide a structure within which health professionals could implement the policy.

Largely by playing on fear, divorcing data from context, and disseminating false information widely and incessantly, a whole new belief system has been constructed in public health to replace the evidence-based orthodoxy of former years.

Reality has been replaced with dogma so divorced from any basis in fact that it is easier to go with the propaganda than deal with the dissonance that would otherwise result.”

The New Fantasy-Based Dogmas

The new fantasy-based beliefs that health care workers, patients, researchers, academics and public health employees are now forced to embrace include the following, quoted from Bell’s article:¹²

Refusing the False Narratives Has Real Consequences

As Bell correctly points out, these new public health positions are not just slightly incorrect. They’re all “either unethical or clear nonsense, contradicted by prior public health orthodoxy.” Indeed, most are classical Orwellian doublespeak and 180 degrees from the truth.

But it’s the sharp break from factual reality that makes it impossible to question them because, if you do, you’re now questioning “the entire current hierarchy of public health,” Bell says.

To quote Dr. Anthony Fauci, you’re not attacking him when you question his irrational flip-flopping, you’re questioning science itself. If you question any of these fantasy-based beliefs, you’re now a science-denier, and you’re putting your employment and reputation at risk. Unfortunately, those risks are not imaginary.

The punishment for refusing these false narratives is very real and very severe. Many doctors and scientists whose reputations and contributions to public health have been beyond reproach for decades have been stripped of their medical licenses and lost their jobs for speaking out against these COVID fallacies.

So, where do we go from here? How do we end the madness and return to reality-based public health?

“Whilst growing their industry’s finances, public health professionals are degrading themselves and betraying society,” Bell writes.¹³ “The betrayal, based on incessant lying, is something for which they will inevitably face consequences …

Eventually, even the most dedicated followers will begin to question the sense of putting on a mask at a restaurant door only to remove it 10 steps later, or vaccinating vast populations against a disease to which they are already immune whilst they die of other readily preventable diseases.

The way out of this is simply to refuse to lie, or cover for the lies of others … [The] truth will catch up, one day, with those who don’t … It is far better to leave early and live with dignity.”

Evil Genius: Creating the Market

If you’re paying attention, you’ve undoubtedly noticed that many drug companies, Pfizer in particular, are in the business of creating their own markets. Pfizer released a COVID jab that neither protects against infection nor prevents spread, thereby necessitating multiple boosters. Its antiviral COVID drug Paxlovid causes rebound, necessitating multiple doses.

Now we find that the COVID jabs are also associated with increased rates of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in children, and like clockwork, Pfizer and Moderna start working on RSV jabs. The CDC also aids by recommending kids get additional COVID shots. Is this a racket or what!?

The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) is now demanding answers from the CDC about the off-season spike in RSV rates,¹⁴ which mysteriously arose in the wake of childhood injections against COVID.

Moderna’s pediatric COVID jab trial showed those who got the jab had higher rates of RSV than the placebo group. RSV was also one of the primary serious side effects in Pfizer’s pediatric trial. Now, all of a sudden, we’re seeing out-of-season RSV spikes in children. Coincidence? Make them prove it. In a legal update, ICAN reports:

“The issue is so serious that even the FDA’s vaccine committee, VRBPAC, which normally cheerleads even the most dangerous vaccine, noted the correlation and ‘stressed the importance of continued post-authorization safety surveillance, in particular for … certain respiratory infections (RSV and pneumonia) in the youngest age group …’¹⁵

Despite the noted importance of surveilling RSV post-authorization, no one at CDC or FDA seems to be drawing a connection between the increase in RSV and the COVID-19 vaccines being administered to children.

Incredibly, the CDC just issued an ‘Official Health Advisory’¹⁶ about the increase RSV and respiratory virus cases and, in it, the CDC recommends all individuals 6 months and up receive an influenza vaccine and a COVID-19 vaccine!

Not surprisingly, the press has missed the mark, too. While there are numerous articles detailing the troubling increase in sick children, none reference COVID-19 vaccination despite the data from the manufacturers’ trials.

To get to the bottom of this, on October 26, 2022, ICAN’s attorneys sent a letter¹⁷ to the CDC observing the clinical trial data showing a correlation between increased RSV cases and receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine. ICAN’s letter demanded to know the percentage of children who tested positive for RSV and who had received a COVID-19 vaccine prior to their RSV diagnosis.”

Study Calls for Reevaluation of Jab Campaigns

In related news, we also have a November 2022 study¹⁸ in Nature Communications, which questions the rationale of current booster campaigns. According to the authors:

“An important aspect of vaccine effectiveness is its impact on pathogen transmissibility, harboring major implications for public health policies. As viral load is a prominent factor affecting infectivity, its laboratory surrogate, qRT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct), can be used to investigate the infectivity-related component of vaccine effectiveness …

By analyzing results of more than 460,000 individuals, we show that while recent vaccination reduces Omicron viral load, its effect wanes rapidly. In contrast, a significantly slower waning rate is demonstrated for recovered COVID-19 individuals.

Thus, while the vaccine is effective in decreasing morbidity and mortality, its relatively small effect on transmissibility of Omicron (as measured here by Ct) and its rapid waning call for reassessment of future booster campaigns.”

Considering the theoretical protection of these shots last for just 70 days (according to this study), are the risks associated with the shots really worth it? So far, several risk-benefit analyses have all come to the conclusion that the risks far outweigh any potential benefit.

Unfortunately, it seems we have to rely on scientists outside the U.S. to do this kind of bench science, as all we seem get from American research institutions are analyses of how to get “anti-vaxxers” to buy the false narrative and roll up their sleeves.

The global public has been assured COVID-19 jabs are safe and effective — but as deaths and disabilities mount, it’s time for a second opinion. In Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion, a documentary by Oracle Films, COVID-19 shot injuries and deaths are highlighted, along with the systemic failings that allowed them to happen.

Big Tech companies and the media only added to the scandal by suppressing free speech and open debate on the shots. Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra has spoken openly about the shots’ downfalls. He said in the film:¹

“Having been double jabbed and being one of the first to take the Pfizer vaccine, I have — after several months critically appraising the data, speaking to eminent scientists in Oxford, Stanford and Harvard, speaking to two investigative medical journalists and being contacted by two Pfizer whistleblowers — reluctantly concluded that this vaccine is not completely safe and has unprecedented harms, which leads me to conclude that it needs to be suspended until all the raw data has been released for independent analysis.”

Giving a Voice to Those Injured by COVID Jabs

Federal governments have largely dismissed data suggesting COVID-19 shots cause harm. But the stories of those personally affected cannot be denied. While Big Tech has tried to censor these stories and keep them from getting out, eventually the truth will be heard. The film includes several tragic stories of lives lost or forever changed by these supposedly “safe” shots:

Across the U.K. coroners have confirmed deaths linked to the shots. “They are usually framed as very rare,” the film notes, “but how rare?”⁵ Adverse reactions are supposed to be reported to the Yellow Card scheme operated by the U.K.’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

As of August 24, 2022, they reported 432,819 adverse reactions, of which 2,240 were fatal. In the U.S., the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received reports of 1,400,350 adverse reactions to the shots as of September 2, 2022, including 30,796 fatalities.⁶

“Not all these reports will be confirmed as vaccine-induced,” the film continued. “But then again, not all reactions are reported. The figures surely demand investigation.”⁷ Dr. Clare Craig, a diagnostic pathologist, explained:⁸

“I don’t think anybody can deny that there has been harm. You can argue about how much, but you can’t deny that there has been harm. It’s just a scandal of such epic proportions that I think people don’t know where to begin with it. It’s frightening to even approach it.”

Sir Christopher Chope, Member of Parliament (MP) in the U.K. is pursuing a bill to speed up compensation for victims and increase the maximum amount from £120,000. He said:⁹

“Other jurisdictions have taken the view that … those who do the right thing for public health reasons by having a bad vaccine should be looked after by the state if the consequences of having that vaccine result in disability or injury.

This approach is taken in order to promote vaccine confidence amongst those who might otherwise be hesitant about having a vaccine. This government’s approach, however, seems to be to try and promote vaccine confidence by covering up the adverse consequences for some of having been vaccinated.”

Pfizer Shot — 119 People Jabbed to Prevent One COVID Case

One mechanism of harm from the mRNA COVID-19 shots is the delivery of synthetic messenger RNA (mRNA) encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles that forces the body’s cells to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which vaccine developers initially stated would remain localized to the arm. However, research shows that it actually migrates throughout the body to every major organ system, causing direct toxicity and/or autoimmune reactions.¹⁰

The development of the genetically engineered biological product was fast-tracked at an unprecedented pace without long-term clinical trials to assess the true extent and severity of adverse effects before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, the two mRNA COVID shot manufacturers, an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to distribute it.

At the same time, the U.S. and other governments indemnified the manufacturers against any liability for deaths and injuries caused by the COVID shots. In November 2020, Pfizer claimed their COVID-19 shot was 95% effective against COVID-19, but this was highly misleading and, according to Malhotra, based on flawed methodology:¹¹

“‘Relative risk reduction is a way of exaggerating the benefits of any intervention … which would be in the interest of people trying to sell you something — in this case, the pharmaceutical industry.

So if, for example, you have 1,000 people in a trial that didn’t have the vaccine versus 1,000 people that did in the placebo group … you may have two people dying. And in the intervention group, you may have just one person dying. And that’s a reduction of 50%. One over two is a 50% relative risk reduction. But actually, you’ve only saved one life out of 1,000.

So the absolute risk reduction is only 1 in 1,000. It’s a big difference. The guidance has been for many years that we must always use absolute risk reduction in conversations with patients, not just relative risk reduction alone; otherwise, it’s considered unethical,’ Malhotra said.

The accusation is that governments acted on Pfizer’s relative risk figure of 95% efficacy, when the absolute risk was a mere 0.84%. In other words, you’d have to vaccinate 119 people to prevent just one from catching COVID. ‘So we were basically sold on something that ultimately, and in retrospect now, was very, very misleading.’”

Raising more red flags, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Pfizer attempted to hide the COVID-19 shot clinical trial data they did have for 75 years. But the FDA was ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to release redacted versions of trial documents on a much faster schedule. Alexandra Latypova, a research specialist in clinical trials, is one of a group of experts who studied the documents.

Her investigation revealed that Pfizer skipped major categories of safety testing, and the toxicity of the mRNA shots was not studied. “The FDA and Pfizer knew about major toxicities associated with the gene therapy class of medicines. The CDC, FDA and Pfizer lied about vaccine staying in the injection site. My examination of leaked Moderna documents also revealed that vaccine-induced antibody-enhanced disease was identified as a serious risk,” she said.¹²

Shots Saved 20 Million? ‘Implausible,’ ‘Science Fiction’

Instead of commenting on the controversies over the shots’ effectiveness and serious adverse effects, most scientists, governments and media instead promote inaccurate and misleading information, such as stating COVID-19 shots have saved at least 20 million lives. This statistic is “science fiction, not scientific fact,” Malhotra said, as it’s based on a poor-quality observational study.¹³

“When you look at a higher quality level of evidence, in fact, even Pfizer’s own randomized controlled trial didn’t show any reduction in COVID mortality of statistical significance,” Malhotra said. “It showed no reduction in all-cause mortality. So this really this statement is almost implausible. To be honest, it sounds more like an advert from the drug industry than true science.”¹⁴

Meanwhile, the government continued to promote COVID-19 shots aggressively, even after data showed the product did not prevent infection or transmission — and the vast majority of the population wasn’t at risk of serious illness.¹⁵ Even physicians who were typically pro-vaccination began to question it. One consultant pediatrician who spoke in the film warned, “Children are at low risk. They don’t need this vaccine, and the harms are real.”¹⁶

Data also show that deaths from any cause among 15- to 44-year-olds in England and Wales increased significantly in 2021, the year COVID-19 shots became widely available. There have been concerning reports of myocarditis (heart inflammation), including sudden deaths and collapse, that have occurred in young people and athletes aged 18 to 24.¹⁷

Data from the Office of National Statistics also reveal that more people than usual are dying in 2022. Deaths among 10- to 14-year-olds increased 11.75%, while deaths among 55- to 59-year-olds rose 15%. The film notes:¹⁸

“Overall, that could equate to over 75,000 excess deaths in England and Wales this year, and not from COVID. The Daily Telegraph is reporting the deaths in the aftermath of lockdown could be greater than COVID itself.

There are calls for an investigation mentioning lack of health care, stress, long COVID, even the cost of living. Why on earth isn’t COVID vaccination under suspicion when there are so many reports of adverse reactions here and around the world?”

According to mainstream media, hospitalizations for respiratory infections are on the rise and “experts” warn of a potential “tripledemic” this winter, as people contract COVID,¹ seasonal influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).²

“The CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] reports a 1% increase in new admissions of patients with confirmed COVID-19 in the U.S.,” Yahoo! News reported at the end of October 2022.³

Far from being a pandemic of the unvaccinated, however, most COVID patients are now, in fact, fully jabbed. As noted by Yahoo! News (before urging everyone to stay up to date on their boosters):

“The state with the most COVID hospitalizations is Maine even though it has one of the country’s highest full vaccination rates, which means a person has received their primary series of vaccinations (whether that’s one or two doses) and two weeks have passed since their last dose.”

RSV cases are also unseasonably high.⁴ According to Dr. Margaret R. Moon, co-director of Johns Hopkins Children’s Center in Baltimore, the hospital “is experiencing a surge of patients due to an increase in cases of RSV, as well as other reasons, and many surrounding hospitals are facing the same.”⁵

Scare Tactics to Sell You on RSV Vaccine

Fear sells, they say, and that’s certainly the adage used by Big Pharma when it comes to vaccines. A perfect example of this was recently published by Vox.⁶ “New RSV Vaccines Are Coming. This Is Very, Very Good News,” the headline states. Why good news? Because RSV is a “baddie responsible for much of the mayhem” now seen in hospitals. Vox publishes classic fear porn:

“RSV generally causes cold symptoms but can also lead to severe lung inflammation or infection in very young and very old people. And it’s started off cold season with a bang:

As of October 22, babies under a year old were being hospitalized at rates six times higher than they were at the same point in 2019, and the overall hospitalization rate was seven times higher for people of all ages.

Every year, hundreds of children die of RSV, and tens of thousands more are hospitalized … RSV disease is one of the first pediatric illnesses that young pediatricians learn to fear, said [Amy] Edwards [a pediatric infectious disease specialist in Cleveland].

Babies with the infection have terrible coughs and make wheezing noises as they struggle to move air through their swollen airways. ‘Once you’ve seen it, it’s like you never forget it,’ she said …

In the US, the infection leads to about 58,000 hospitalizations and 100 to 300 deaths among young children each year, making it the country’s top cause of hospitalization in infants.

Although it’s a particularly risky infection for babies born prematurely and for those with lung problems or heart abnormalities, about 40 percent of American infants who died of RSV over the past few decades were otherwise healthy.

However bad RSV is in the United States, it’s worse globally. Every year, it causes an estimated 120,000 infant deaths worldwide … There is currently no approved antiviral treatment for RSV in either adults or children, and the one preventive option that currently exists is far from perfect …

Babies need something better — something affordable that can protect all infants, not just the highest-risk ones, from this seasonal scourge. Adults, too, need something to protect them from a virus that reliably causes an immense amount of disease — ideally, something that’s as good as a flu shot, or better.”

“Something as good as a flu shot.” Really? The 2017/2018 seasonal influenza vaccine’s adjusted overall effectiveness for the U.S. was just 36% against influenza A and influenza B virus infection,^7,8and between 2005 and 2015, the flu vaccine’s adjusted overall effectiveness was less than 50% more than half the time — with a low of only 10% in the 2004-05 season.^9,10

Other than the COVID jab, it’s difficult to find another example of where a commercial product can fail to work more than half the time and still be recommended and even mandated. Not to worry, though, because according to Vox, “RSV vaccines are super effective.” Where have we heard that before?

Expect Insane COVID Measures to Resume

As predicted, “health experts” are starting to call for voluntary indoor masking again,¹¹ even though all the evidence garnered over the past three years confirms what we already knew in 2020, which is that face masks do nothing to stop viral infections.

And, as before, in the absence of actual scientific evidence the narrative focuses instead on virtue. Masking up is said to be a way to protect everyone,¹² so just “do your part” and wear it, even though, in reality, it protects no one.

The same goes for vaccination. Both the flu vaccine and the COVID shots are proven ineffective, yet the recommendation¹³ to get them continues. And this season, you’re expected to get both!

First-Ever RSV Vaccines Expected in 2023

The fact that RSV is now being highlighted as a severe risk is understandable in light of the fact that the first-ever RSV vaccines are now in the pipeline. According to CNN,¹⁴ four different RSV shots are “nearing review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration” and more than a dozen others are in trials.

This includes a “long-acting injection” specifically for babies, to be given “right after birth” to protect them from RSV “for as long as six months.” If that’s not a perfect example of how media tries to change the perception of the basic meaning of a term, I don’t know what is. Six months is hardly long-acting!

Historically, most vaccines have at least offered antibody-only “protection” for years, not months. Please recognize all vaccines fail to use cellular immunity to protect you, which is far more important than humoral antibody protection. This extremely short duration of antibody-only protection appears to be a hallmark of mRNA technology however, and indeed, at least some of these new RSV shots are mRNA based.

Moderna has announced it is working on an mRNA jab for RSV, which is scheduled for release in 2023.¹⁵ They’re also working on a combination mRNA jab for COVID, RSV and the flu. (Ultimately, Moderna wants to create an annual mRNA shot that covers all of the top 10 viruses that result in hospitalizations each year.¹⁶)

Janssen is also working on an RSV shot using an adenovirus vector, the same technology used in its COVID shot, while Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) are testing “protein subunit” RSV vaccines for pregnant women and seniors.¹⁷

According to Forbes,¹⁸ Pfizer announced November 1, 2022, that it is ready to seek FDA authorization for its RSV vaccine. In clinical trials this shot was given to pregnant mothers and the efficacy was measured not by whether it prevented RSV, but by severity of the infection in hospitalized babies during their first months of life.¹⁹

Why No RSV Vaccine Ever Made It to Market

No vaccine for RSV has ever been successfully developed before. Why? Because the vaccines had a persistent tendency to cause worse disease, a phenomenon known as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). As explained by CNN:²⁰

“The hunt for an effective way to protect against RSV stalled for decades after two children died in a disastrous vaccine trial in the 1960s.

That study tested a vaccine made with an RSV virus that had been chemically treated to render it inert and mixed with an ingredient called alum, to wake up the immune system and help it respond. It was tested at clinical trial sites in the US between 1966 and 1968.

At first, everything looked good. The vaccine was tested in animals, who tolerated it well, and then given to children, who also appeared to respond well.

‘Unfortunately, that fall, when RSV season started, many of the children that were vaccinated required hospitalization and got more severe RSV disease than what would have normally occurred,’ said Steven Varga, a professor of microbiology and immunology at the University of Iowa, who has been studying RSV for more than 20 years and is developing a nanoparticle vaccine against the virus.

A study²¹ published on the trial found that 80% of the vaccinated children who caught RSV later required hospitalization, compared with only 5% of the children who got a placebo. Two of the babies who had participated in the trial died.

The outcomes of the trial were a seismic shock to vaccine science. Efforts to develop new vaccines and treatments against RSV halted as researchers tried to untangle what went so wrong … ‘It is in fact, in many ways, why we have some of the things that we have in place today to monitor vaccine safety,’ Varga said.”

Is Anyone Monitoring Vaccine Safety?

The sad irony here is that while we do have vaccine safety monitoring tools in place, the data are not being properly evaluated and used in the decision-making process. So, no, we do NOT have a functioning vaccine safety monitoring in the U.S. If the FDA and CDC were actually monitoring safety, using the tools at their disposal as intended, the COVID shots would have been withdrawn within months of their release.

They are, by any measure, the most dangerous and lethal injections ever released in history. Yet the FDA and CDC have ignored all safety signals and recently added the COVID jab to the childhood vaccination schedule. If there’s no safety monitoring for the COVID jab, there’s no reason to expect safety monitoring for any other new vaccine or mRNA shot.

What’s more, there’s no reason to assume researchers have actually figured out how to make an RSV shot that doesn’t cause ADE or immune imprinting, both of which pervert your immune response to subsequent exposures of the pathogen “immunized” against so you actually get sicker than if you had never been jabbed.

Public health technocrats foolishly believe mRNA technology will circumvent the problem encountered previously, but considering we’re now seeing signs of ADE and immune imprinting — or original antigenic sin — in those who got the COVID jab, there’s no precedent to assume such a thing.

It’s important to realize that the COVID pandemic has radically altered the authorization and approval processes for medical interventions. Everything is now on the fast track, which opens the floodgates for quick profits.

Instead of requiring trials that span a decade or more, mRNA shots are being rolled out after mere months of testing, and much of the safety is assumed based on the alleged safety of the COVID shots.

“Alleged safety” are the key words here, as more than 1.4 million adverse event reports following the COVID jab have been logged in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including well over 31,600 deaths.²² According to the FDA and CDC, NONE of these deaths are attributable to the shots, which is a statistical impossibility.

Fearmongering Is a Tool to Foster Obedience

Sleeping well is an essential strategy to optimize your health, and at the heart of it is your circadian rhythm. This is also known as your body clock. It’s a natural, biological timer present in every one of your cells that helps your body recognize sleepiness and wakefulness over a period of 24 hours.

Your circadian rhythm is largely dictated by your pineal gland, located near the center of your brain, which produces melatonin, a hormone that is crucial for the regulation of your sleep cycle.

If you have had enough exposure to bright light in the daytime, your pineal gland typically starts secreting melatonin around 9 p.m.¹ As the amount of melatonin in your brain increases, sleepiness sets in as your body begins to prepare for sleep.

If you stay awake past dark, artificial light — especially that emitted by electronic devices — will inhibit your body’s melatonin production, so, ideally, you would stop using electronics at least an hour or two before bedtime to help increase melatonin production and maintain a steady circadian rhythm.

Melatonin Does More Than Control Sleep

While melatonin works as a natural sleep regulator, its biological effects don’t end there.² It’s also a potent antioxidant³ that plays an important role in cancer prevention.⁴ It’s also thought to be important for brain, cardiovascular and gastrointestinal health,⁵ and has been shown to boost your immune function in a variety of ways.

In one study,⁶ researchers suggested melatonin may even improve the treatment of bacterial diseases such as tuberculosis. In another, melatonin was identified as a potential tool against inflammation and autoimmune diseases, including Type 1 diabetes.⁷

Melatonin is also an important energy hormone. As noted in the Stanford University course paper “Melatonin and Energy Levels:”⁸

“… decreasing the melatonin in the blood stream, consistent with the body’s natural response to suppress the secretion in the presence of light, causes the body to function at a higher energy level … An increase in the melatonin levels leads to a subsequent decrease in energy levels.

As such, understanding how to control and optimize the secretion and suppression of the melatonin for optimal hours of the day could help improve the treatment of sleep disorders and positively impact the energy levels of individuals.”

In short, if your sleep efficiency is impaired, meaning you’re not sleeping as deeply as you should, for as long as is ideal, then your energy level is going to be adversely affected.

Conversely, spending most of your daytime hours in poorly lit rooms, especially if you’re also exposed to excessive light after sunset, can impair your melatonin production, causing you to not sleep well.

Melatonin Protects Your Mitochondria

Importantly, the antioxidant activity of melatonin also helps protect your mitochondria, the tiny organelles inside your cells that generate most of the ATP or energy currency of your body. As noted in a 2007 paper in the Frontiers of Bioscience:⁹

“Melatonin is an ancient molecule present in unicellular organisms at the very early moment of life … The best-known actions of melatonin, currently supported by experimental and clinical data, include antioxidant and anti-inflammatory abilities, some of them involving genomic regulation of a series of enzymes.

Besides, melatonin displays anticonvulsant and antiexcitotoxic properties. Most of the beneficial consequences resulting from melatonin administration may depend on its effects on mitochondrial physiology.”

In fact, melatonin appears to be the most powerful antioxidant in this regard, as it has the ability to actually enter into your mitochondria.¹⁰ This is an ability that not all antioxidants have. According to this Frontiers of Bioscience paper,¹¹ melatonin helps “prevent mitochondrial impairment, energy failure and apoptosis in oxidatively-damaged mitochondria.”

One of the things that makes melatonin so powerful is that it doesn’t just act as an antioxidant in and of itself; it also interacts with your body’s innate antioxidant system where it recharges glutathione.¹² However, this brings us back to the importance of sleep.

Since melatonin is only released in response to darkness, and is easily and significantly inhibited by light (such as regular room lighting and electronic screens, after dark), your mitochondrial health will suffer if you do not take steps to optimize your sleep.

Aside from worsening your sleep quality and decreasing your sleep quantity, low melatonin production also increases oxidative stress, speeds up the aging process and raises your risk of degenerative diseases and chronic fatigue, thanks to its influence over your mitochondria.

How Mitochondrial Melatonin Is Generated

Mitochondrial melatonin production is one of the reasons why regular sun exposure is so crucial. Most people understand that sun exposure on bare skin generates vitamin D, courtesy of UVB (ultraviolet B radiation). Few, however, understand that the near-infrared spectrum, when hitting your skin, triggers the generation of melatonin in your mitochondria.

Russel Reiter, Ph.D. is a world-class expert on melatonin. With some 1,600 papers to his credit, as well as three honorary doctor of medicine¹³ degrees, he’s published more studies on melatonin than anyone else alive. In a previous interview, he explained how the near-infrared spectrum triggers the generation of melatonin in your mitochondria:

“Every one of those cells contains mitochondria and it appears that near-infrared radiation that is detected in fact induces melatonin production. That is important, because we now think that melatonin within mitochondria is inducible under a lot of stressful conditions.

That is not definitively proven, but it appears that under stress, all cells may upregulate their ability to produce melatonin because it’s so highly productive. And typically, under stress, free radicals are generated. That is emphasized by the [fact] that in plants … that happens.

In other words, if you expose plants to drought, heat, cold, to metal toxicity, the first thing they do is upregulate their melatonin, because all of those situations generate free radicals. And we suspect, although that has not yet been definitely proven, in animal cells as well, including human [cells].”

For more information on how this works, see my article, “What You Need to Know About Melatonin,” which includes my interview with Reiter.

Melatonin Works Synergistically With Vitamin D

In my February 2, 2020, article “The Importance of Vitamin D for Optimal Sleep,” which features my interview with neurologist and sleep coach Dr. Stasha Gominak, I review the hidden influence vitamin D has on your sleep.

A paper¹⁴ published in the May 2020 issue of The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology — which I was able to review early, parts of which I’m sharing with you here — sheds further light on this connection. Not only does melatonin enhance vitamin D signaling, the two molecules act synergistically to optimize your mitochondrial function.

As noted in this paper,¹⁵ “The biosynthetic pathways of vitamin D and melatonin are inversely related relative to sun exposure,” meaning both are dependent on properly timed exposure to the sun.

A hypothesis presented by the researchers is that vitamin D and melatonin “play an essential role as modulators of mitochondrial function and adaptation to circadian and seasonal variations.”

Additionally, “both molecules are involved in the homeostatic functioning of the mitochondria,” the authors point out, stressing that the mitochondria are, in fact, “the final common target for melatonin and vitamin D.” Furthermore:

“A deficiency of these molecules has been associated with the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases, including arterial hypertension, neurodegenerative diseases, sleep disorders, kidney diseases, cancer, psychiatric disorders, bone diseases, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes, among others.

During aging, the intake and cutaneous synthesis of vitamin D, as well as the endogenous synthesis of melatonin are remarkably depleted, therefore, producing a state characterized by an increase of oxidative stress, inflammation, and mitochondrial dysfunction …

Mitochondrial dysfunction has been related to the etiologies of many complex diseases where overactivation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), vitamin D deficiency and the reduction of melatonin synthesis converge.

In this sense, experimental and clinical evidence indicates that inflammation, oxidative stress, as in mitochondrial dysfunction, are consistent with low levels of melatonin and vitamin D, and also represent risk factors connected with development and maintenance of prevalent acute and chronic pathologies.”

Melatonin-Vitamin D Combo Produces Strong Synergistic Effects

According to the 2020 paper in The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology,¹⁶multiple sclerosis, cancer, neuropsychiatric disorders and high blood pressure are all examples of diseases that appear strongly linked to and affected by your vitamin D and melatonin status.

Interestingly, a 2012 study¹⁷ pointed out melatonin is “an overlooked factor in schizophrenia and in the inhibition of antipsychotic side effects.” Vitamin D deficiency has also been linked to a higher risk of schizophrenia,^18,19 especially when levels are low during development.²⁰

When combined in treatment, melatonin and vitamin D produce strong synergistic effects against cancer. Two separate studies^21,22 have demonstrated the combination induces apoptosis and inhibits growth and division of breast cancer cells. In one of them, the combination resulted in “an almost complete cell growth arrest at 144 hours.”²³

These effects were attributed (at least in part) to enhanced release of transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β1), a type of cytokine that controls cell growth, proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis. Melatonin in combination with vitamin D has also been shown to protect against apoptotic ischemia-reperfusion injury in the kidney.²⁴

Simple Ways to Optimize Your Melatonin and Vitamin D

The evidence suggests optimizing your melatonin production by making sure you sleep well at night may be a hidden key to maintaining mitochondrial health, which in turn is paramount for longevity and the prevention of virtually all chronic health problems.

However, while there are likely many benefits to supplementing with vitamin D and melatonin, it makes no sense to do so unless you are seeking to optimize your body’s own production.

The good news is it’s relatively simple and inexpensive to increase your melatonin and vitamin D levels. To optimize your vitamin D, I recommend getting sensible sun exposure on large portions of your body on a regular basis, ideally daily.

If for whatever reason you cannot get sufficient amounts of sun exposure, consider taking a vitamin D3 supplement (along with a little extra vitamin K2 to maintain a healthy ratio between these two nutrients).

I personally have not taken any oral vitamin D for well over 10 years and my levels are typically over 70 ng/mL, even in the winter, but I have started taking sublingual melatonin as I am now older than 65, and believe there are benefits for such, even though I sleep in pitch dark and get bright sun exposure around 85% of the time during the day.

Optimizing your melatonin production starts with getting plenty of bright sunlight during the day, as this helps “set” your circadian clock. Then, as the evening wears on and the sun sets, you’ll want to avoid bright lighting.

Blue light from electronic screens and LED light bulbs is particularly problematic and inhibits melatonin the most. If you need lighting, opt for incandescent light bulbs, candles or salt lamps. The blue light from electronic screens can be counteracted by installing blue-blocking software such as Iris,²⁵ or wearing blue-blocking glasses.

Additionally, an interesting paper²⁶ in Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, published in 2017, highlights the usefulness of time-restricted eating to improve your sleep cycle. As noted in this paper:

“The robustness of the circadian clock deteriorates with aging. Two new studies show that aging reprograms the circadian transcriptome in a cell-type-dependent manner and that such rewiring can be reversed by caloric restriction …

Surprisingly, the expression of core clock genes and clock-controlled genes remained unchanged with aging, despite the drastic circadian reprogramming. Thus, the core clock machinery remains largely intact in old age, giving hope for the prospect of reversing aging-associated circadian reprogramming to potentially improve physiological functions.

Indeed, CR-induced robust reprogramming of the circadian transcriptome partially overlaps with the circadian transcriptome in young mice. Thus, the profound physiological impact of CR may be, in part, mediated by the reprogramming of the circadian clock …

Given that aging-associated accumulation of DNA damage in stem cells originates from exposure to mitochondrial stress and that the mitochondrial protective programs are repressed in aged adult stem cells, it is tempting to speculate that reactivating the mitochondrial protective programs may provide a means to reduce the accumulation of cellular damage and reverse aging-associated circadian reprogramming.”

This story is about living in a world run by crazy people with access to powerful technology. This is the world we are in. We are in a world run by genocidal maniacs. It is our life. It is our challenge. So what do we do? I’ll get to my personal answer to this question at the end of the article but first, let’s look at a paper about a new artificially created pathogen with high transmissibility rate and the disease mortality rate of 80%.

“Disease Morality Rate of 80%”

Recently, a preprint came out of the paper titled, “Role of spike in the pathogenic and antigenic behavior of SARS-CoV-2 BA.1 Omicron.”

Here is what the preprint is saying (the emphases are mine): “The recently identified, globally predominant SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1) is highly transmissible, even in fully vaccinated individuals, and causes attenuated disease compared with other major viral variants recognized to date. The Omicron spike (S) protein, with an unusually large number of mutations, is considered the major driver of these phenotypes.

We generated chimeric recombinant SARS-CoV-2 encoding the S gene of Omicron in the backbone of an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 isolate and compared this virus with the naturally circulating Omicron variant.

The Omicron S-bearing virus robustly escapes vaccine-induced humoral immunity, mainly due to mutations in the receptor-binding motif (RBM), yet unlike naturally occurring Omicron, efficiently replicates in cell lines and primary-like distal lung cells.

In K18-hACE2 mice, while Omicron causes mild, non-fatal infection, the Omicron S-carrying virus inflicts severe disease with a mortality rate of 80%. This indicates that while the vaccine escape of Omicron is defined by mutations in S, major determinants of viral pathogenicity reside outside of S.”

I would like to quote Dr. Paul Alexander whose response says it all: “The question is why? Is anyone policing these crazy idiots? Is this bioweaponry?” Now, the fatality rate of the chimera was determined based on the results in “humanized mice” … but so was the approval of the bivalent boosters!

And again, like I said many times before, I am far less interested in the motives of the crazies than I am in the practical implications. Our society is very compartmentalized, the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing, and a large number of people never even tried to think about the big philosophical picture.

So the scientists might be excited about the “power over nature,” and the scientists; sponsors might be genocidal, and each participant might practice their own style of being destructive to the human species — but in the end, the really important question is the one that Dr. Alexander is asking: “Who is policing these crazy idiots”?

To quote more of Dr. Alexander, “Menachery and Baric et al. in 2015 told us they just created the very situation we faced with COVID virus, in 2015 and they did not stop.

They went stir crazy raving mad in 2015 and beyond, inserting furin cleavage sites (a 9 amino acid genetic sequence just in-between the junction of the S1 and S2 subunits of the spike glycoprotein) into any and every bat coronavirus and chimera they could produce, stitching together parts of coronaviruses or whole viruses to see the ‘spillover’, zoonotic jump from animal to human, to test how infectious and lethal they could make the spike. They did and it seems there are more MADMEN around.”

Mad Ambition

Whenever I think about synthetic biology, my mind goes back to the obnoxious article on the World Economic Forum titled, “From synthetic life to engineering the climate – how we’re learning to manage the Earth.”

“It is common to think about “process” in commerce, industry, and society. A well-designed, well-managed process is essential for producing “products” that are desirable across numerous social and business realms …

If Earth’s products are the magnificent array of species that populate the Earth, together with the mountains, deserts, and oceans where they dwell, then its processes are the major biological, geological, and physical forces responsible for creating these products in the first place.”

“So, what would it mean to talk about “well-designed” and “well-managed” Earthen processes? The question is an odd one because these processes … originated without us and they continue to operate independently of us.

Short of the idea of some sort of divine architect responsible for setting them up in the first place, any talk of a management or design seems entirely out of place. Gravity, photosynthesis, and genetic mutation have never been in our species’ wheelhouse. They are the timeless and independent backdrop against which every civilization has been fashioned …

Despite the startling impact of humanity on Earth’s products, the processes that shape it have not yet fallen into human hands. Not, that is, until now.

New technologies are fast arriving that will permit the management of fundamental Earth-shaping processes. Two examples of these technologies are climate engineering and synthetic biology.”

How is that one going?

Multiple Mechanism of Harm = “Safe and Effective”

Here is a thought experiment. For a long time, Dr. Marin Pall has been screaming from the rooftops saying that the rollout of 5G was not a good idea at all and that if the rollout occurs, it could cause disease on a massive scale.

Massive scale 5G rollout has happened, and even before the vaccines rolled out — and especially after they rolled out — many people got sick with mysterious ailments. But because there can be more than one factor impacting our health (what a revolutionary concept), we are not allowed to even think in the direction of 5G without sounding crazy.

It is like poisoning one’s soup with arsenic while simultaneously poisoning one’s wine with a cyanide while also trying to nuke their house, and then not being able to identify the cause of death because, according to experts, arsenic, cyanide, and nukes are safe and effective. And it’s written right there, in black and white, in an official paper, sponsored by the investors into the companies manufacturing arsenic, cyanide, and green nuclear weapons!

Crazies With a “Savior Complex” or Genocidal Maniacs?

One of the main objections from respectable people is that there could be corruption — even bad corruption — but surely, no evil motives, and the reason for that is that we live in a “normal” world in which large scale conspiracies don’t happen. When I get to that part of the conversation, I usually say, very sincerely, that I don’t care if the people bringing destruction to our species think of themselves as saviors or just like killing.

In my recent article called, “What is a Conspiracy?” I argued that “it is possible that Klaus Schwab believes his own b*****t and thinks that the Great Reset is good for our species. But does it matter? Most likely, even classic serial killers follow their own internal logic that makes them “not villains” — but none the less they are killing, and conspiring to do so! And, on a side note, there is nothing new about the practice of combining one’s “missionary obsession” with personal profit!”

The history of our species is proof that genocides are not a figment of imagination and not an abstraction — and while it is usually hard to scholastically “prove” a genocide in real time due to the proximity and the narrow view of the observer, people in the West seem to be dying at a higher rate than usual and giving birth at a slower rate than usual. And it’s only been two years of the “new normal!”

Is it a genocide in the making? It is a case of careless poisoning of human beings? Honestly, talking about this in a scholarly manner feels like a request to please be a good girl, take a spade, and dig out a hole in the ground that may or may not be used as our own grave. Sorry this is not normal. Not normal!

And when it comes to the likelihood of evil motives, of course the world is complex! Of course there can be many players with many motives! If you are curious, please check out deeper dives: “The Mind of a Global Owner: Does Depopulation Make Sense?” and Betrayal and Extermination of Property Owners: A Thought Experiment.

And on the final note about conspiracy theories, Igor Chudov recently wrote a fantastic articleshowing, side by side, the evolution of “crazy conspiracies.” I think the comparisons are potent!

How to Handle Too Much “Crazy”?

It’s never easy. I promised to give my personal answer to coping with an onslaught of “crazy.” My personal answer is faith in the power of the universe and praying for courage, clarity, and protection. It sounds simple but it takes a lot of work to leave behind the intellectual habits of “smart, educated people” and go back the primal feeling of how people felt about the world for maybe millions of years.

When you are here, between the Earth and the sky, and you have no idea what’s ahead — but you know that you are a good person, a dignified person, that you are here for a reason, surrounded by good energy, and that you have an obligation to walk your path with dignity and self-respect, to be grateful to the higher powers for all the joyous things, and to not be afraid of anything. This is the only way I know how to do it.

It’s raw. It’s in the moment. But it’s very beautiful, and we are not alone, we are guided and protected, and no villain in the world can break our spirit without our permission. They cannot break our spirit without our permission. I don’t give my permission. I don’t. They can’t have it.

May the destructive ones eat each other! May we find the sweetest way toward truth and healing — and heal completely! There will come a day, now or in a thousand years, when the cruel transhumanist crazies will be a myth, a bad dream. It’ll come. And our descendants will thank us. May we stand with courage. May it be so.

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

In the video above, Glenn Beck interviews investigative journalist Whitney Webb about her book, “One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime That Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein,” Parts 1 and 2.

These books provide the necessary framework to understand not just Jeffrey Epstein’s geopolitical role and function, but also, more broadly, the deep connections between the U.S. intelligence community and organized crime.

The political corruption we see today grew out of this unholy alliance, which has led to blackmail and bribery being two key strategies by which the wealthy self-described “elites” maintain power and influence from behind the scenes.

As noted by Beck, Webb “is a massive threat to powerful people. If people will listen and … explore what she’s saying, the game is up.” I agree. People need to understand how the system we thought we knew actually works, how it’s been used against us, and what the end game is.

Organized Crime at the Highest Levels

Epstein’s pedophilia and sexual blackmail enterprise was a central cog in this network of corruption for decades. He was also involved in many other questionable and/or criminal enterprises, including financial crimes, but he wasn’t necessarily at the top level in any of them. Webb describes him more as a middle-management-type of character, carrying out orders from higher-ups, including U.S. intelligence.

Overall, these “higher-ups” are people who favor globalism and global governance, and who don’t want the United States to have a monopoly on power. This is part of why the power of the U.S. is now being dismantled before our eyes, but the undermining and infiltration have been going on for decades.

As noted by Beck and Webb, our government is basically being run by organized crime, and this organized crime ring is setting into place a technocratic form of feudalism, a digital slavery system.

The reason Epstein’s financial crimes matter is because they’re like a microcosm of what has been going on in the U.S. for decades. According to Catherine Austin Fitts and Mark Skidmore, an estimated $21 trillion of U.S. taxpayer money have already been looted, stolen and siphoned out. Where did all that money go? Who took it?

Against that background of having already been looted, we’re now facing a radical degradation of our standard of living, with rising inflation and manufactured energy and food crises piled on top of each other.

All of these things, Webb says, are part of a plan to coerce us into accepting the unacceptable. Making sure people are cold, hungry, destitute and desperate is a surefire way to get people to cooperate with the globalist takeover, which includes a radical transition into transhumanism.

Transhumanism Is Eugenics Rebranded

In the interview, Webb reviews the history of transhumanism, the roots of which go back to Julian Huxley, brother of the famous author Aldous Huxley. Julian was president of the British Eugenics Society.

When the United Nations was created after World War II, he was put in charge of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the stated aim of which is to promote world peace and security through international cooperation in education, arts, sciences and culture.

But in writing about his vision for UNESCO, Julian said about eugenics, “We need to make the unthinkable thinkable again.” Ten years later, in 1957, he coined the term “transhumanism,” and described it as eugenics through the merging of man with machine.

So, transhumanism is eugenics rebranded. This is also corroborated by the fact that the same people, families and organizations that in the past supported eugenics now support transhumanism. Likewise, the merger of Silicon Valley companies with Big Pharma is nothing other than eugenics framed as health care. And COVID has now shown us that this rebranded form of eugenics can be forced on us.

Transhumanism Is Not for Betterment of the Average Person

As noted by Webb, while transhumanism is sold to us as a way for all people to obtain health and longevity — health equity for all! — the reality will be far from equitable.

She points out that science fiction writer H.G Wells once described the transhumanist future as one in which there is a physically and intellectually augmented elite class, and squat, dwarf-like, slave underclass that eats bugs and doesn’t even have the cognitive capacity to rebel.

Sound familiar? The World Economic Forum and their allied networks are pushing for a transition from real meat to insects. One of the primary side effects of the bioweapon referred to as the “COVID-19 vaccine,” aside from early death, is neurological dysfunction, and the masking, lockdowns and shuttering of schools have resulted in children who are nonverbal, cognitively impaired and/or years behind on core reading and math skills.

The Transhumanist Plan Is Being Fast-Tracked

As detailed in “The Plan to Turn You Into a Genetically Edited Human Cyborg,” a 2021 report by the U.K. Ministry of Defense and the German Bundeswehr Office for Defense Planning offers shocking insights into the dystopian cybernetics future that global technocrats are pushing us toward.

The report, “Human Augmentation — The Dawn of a New Paradigm, a Strategic Implications Project,”¹ reviews the scientific goals of the U.K. and German defense ministries, and they are precisely what the title suggests. Human augmentation is stressed as being a key area of development.

It’s worth noting that anything released to the public is a decade or more behind current capabilities, so everything in this report can be considered dated news, even though it reads like pure science fiction.

Importantly, the report notes that “Human augmentation has the potential to … change the meaning of what it means to be a human.” This is precisely what Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), has stated is the goal of The Fourth Industrial Revolution.²

Schwab has stated that “the Fourth Industrial Revolution will lead to a fusion of our physical, our digital and our biological identities.”³ Beyond your own “enhanced” 5G cloud-connected self, the WEF foresees a near future in which everyone’s digital identity is connected to each other through an “Internet of Bodies” (IoB).^4,5

The fact that we’re moving at lightning speed into the transhumanist future envisioned by the WEF and militaries around the world is also evidenced by President Biden’s September 2022 Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology, which places development of genetic engineering techniques “to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology” on the fast-track.

US Defense Department Is Also Working on Human Cyborgs

In a September 14, 2022, Substack article,⁶ Dr. Robert Malone also reviewed the U.S. DoD’s plans for an army of human cyborgs. Certain report titles alone tell the story, such as the Biotechnologies for Health and Human Performance Council’s report⁷ “Cyborg Soldier 2050: Human/Machine Fusion and the Implications for the Future of the DOD.” According to the assessment abstract:

“The primary objective of this effort was to forecast and evaluate the military implications of machines that are physically integrated with the human body to augment and enhance human performance over the next 30 years.

This report summarizes this assessment and findings; identifies four potential military-use cases for new technologies in this area; and assesses their impact upon the DOD organizational structure, warfighter doctrine and tactics, and interoperability with U.S. allies and civil society.”

Human augmentation technologies deemed technically feasible by 2050 at the latest include ocular enhancements to improve sight and situational awareness, optogenetic bodysuit to restore or improve muscular strength and control, auditory enhancements, and neural enhancement of the brain for two-way data transfers and brain-to-brain communication.

With H.G. Wells’ description of our transhumanist future in mind (the two-tiered society of augmented super humans and bug-eating devolved slaves), it’s worth noting that both the DoD’s “Cyborg Soldier” report and the British/German “Human Augmentation” report address the fact that human augmentation will inevitably widen already existing disparities, inequalities and inequities — not close them! — and therefore, “efforts should be undertaken to reverse negative cultural narratives of enhancement technologies.”⁸

In other words, don’t let people come to the conclusion that human “borgs” are a bad idea, because at worst that might prevent their development, and at best, it’ll pitch regular people against the augmented elite, making their efforts to rule more difficult. Combating negative narratives about the borgification of mankind is also necessary in order to maintain the lie that transhumanism is about leveling the playing field and allowing everyone to live longer and have lifelong health.

Final Thoughts

I don’t know what it will take to prevent the dystopian post-human world envisioned by technocratic transhumanist elitists, but I suspect education would be a cornerstone of such an endeavor. In order for there to be a resistance, enough people need to be aware of what the plan is, and where we’re actually being led with all these novel therapies and inventions.

In the shorter term, it’s crucial to realize that the fast-tracking of “genetic engineering technologies and techniques to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way in which we write software and program computers” means they’re going to cut corners. Loads of them.

Testing is basically going to be done on the population at large, just as they’ve done with the COVID jabs. The results of such experimentation are relatively predictable. People will be seriously injured and many will die.

We also still don’t know what the legal standing of people whose genetics are altered by RNA might be, now or in the future, since that has yet to be established.

So please, think long and hard before you agree to take any of these forthcoming gene therapies, be they COVID boosters or any other “vaccines.” They’re not vaccines. They’re gene transfer technologies that alter your DNA.^9,10 They’re part of the transhumanist agenda, the Fourth Industrial Revolution — and remember, transhumanism is a eugenics agenda. Same agenda, just new tools.

Recent research^1,2 looking at deaths attributable to excessive alcohol consumption in the U.S. has found rates are trending upward. Between 2015 and 2019, 1 in 5 deaths (20.3%) in the 20- to 49-year age group was related to excessive alcohol intake.

Expanding the age group to 20- to 64-years of age, alcohol related deaths were 1 in 8. This makes alcohol a leading preventable cause of death in the U.S. The percentage of men dying from excess alcohol consumption (15%) was higher than that of women (9.4%), but both are on the rise. Common types of alcohol-related deaths include alcohol poisoning, motor vehicle accidents, suicides, falls and alcohol-related liver disease or pancreas failure. According to the authors:³

“The number of premature deaths could be reduced with increased implementation of evidenced-based, population-level alcohol policies, such as increasing alcohol taxes or regulating alcohol outlet density.”

Alcohol Intake Skyrocketed During Pandemic

Other data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggest the rate of deaths directly attributed to alcohol rose by more than 25% in 2020,^4,5 the first year of the pandemic, when many were self-isolating and working from home. The trend continued into 2021, by then up 34% from prepandemic levels.⁶

Clear Links Between Loneliness and Alcohol Abuse

This should come as no surprise, seeing how researchers have long since established a clear link between isolation, loneliness and alcohol abuse and addiction. As noted in the 1992 scientific review “Loneliness and Alcohol Abuse: A Review of Evidences of an Interplay”:⁷

“A theoretical discussion based on clinical observations can be dated back to the 1950’s … knowledge is still incomplete, but the review indicates that loneliness may be significant at all stages in the course of alcoholism: as a contributing and maintaining factor in the growth of abuse and as an encumbrance in attempts to give it up.

Concordant reports demonstrate that alcoholics do feel more lonely than members of most other groups do. In advanced abusers, loneliness is obviously connected with a number of negative characteristics and, together with several of those, directly linked to a poor prognosis.

There are, however, no obvious relations to the external social situation (i.e. network) or amount of drinking. Instead, the feeling of loneliness appears to be more connected with a general negative perception about oneself and one’s relations to other people and also with a general dissatisfaction with most things in life …”

An even earlier study⁸ found “feeling of loneliness” was the most important factor influencing the prognosis of advanced alcohol abusers, followed by “a general dissatisfaction with the existing situation, independent of its nature.”

As noted by the authors, “To sum up, the lonely abuser showed a recurrent pattern characterized by discontentment and dissatisfaction, in combination with some traces of passivity in essential life-spheres.”

The American Addiction Centers also stresses that isolation is a barrier to getting and staying sober.⁹ It certainly didn’t help that liquor stores, of all things, were deemed to be an “essential business” during the pandemic, and were kept open while churches, gyms and even parks and beaches were shut down. Clearly, public health officials did not have public health at the top of their minds when they made these decisions.

A Brief History of Alcohol

In the video above, podcast host Joe Rogan interviews university scholar and philosophy professor Edward Slingerland, Ph.D., author of “Drunk.” Slingerland highlights an important point, which is that, historically, mankind has not been drinking hard liquor.

Traditionally, alcohol was primarily consumed in the form of beer with an alcohol content of 2% to 3%, and wine with an alcohol content of 8% to 10%. As noted by Slingerland, there’s a built-in limit to the amount of alcohol you can obtain through fermentation. Fermentation, as you likely know, is the process of yeast turning sugar in the brew into alcohol.

Over the past century or two, alcohol makers have developed hardier yeasts capable of fermentation rates as high as 16%. At present, that’s the upper limit for fermentation, as at that point, the alcohol shuts down the activity of the yeast.

Distillation, which is another modern invention, is a way around that. By heating the alcoholic beverage, you can capture the ethanol as a vapor and then turn it back into a liquid, giving you a really concentrated form of alcohol, i.e., distilled liquor or spirits, which can be as high as 90% alcohol by volume (ABV).

As noted by Slingerland, the human body is not equipped to handle that kind of concentration. So, while mankind has been making and consuming alcoholic beverages for many thousands of years, it’s only in recent times that alcohol has become a potent toxin that needs to be carefully regulated.

How Much Is Too Much?

According to experts, two alcoholic drinks per day or less for men and one drink or less for women is considered “moderate” consumption. Binge drinking is defined as having five or more alcoholic drinks on a single occasion for men, or four or more for women. A “drink” is defined as 12 ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of hard liquor.

Excessive Alcohol Intake Is a Primary Driver of Liver Damage

According to researchers, the rise in cirrhosis mortality is entirely driven by excess alcohol consumption by young adults. While, historically, alcohol-related liver cirrhosis has been regarded as a condition that develops after two or three decades of heavy drinking, these newer statistics reveal it doesn’t have to take that long at all, as it’s now occurring in (and killing) 20- and 30-year-olds.

In the 25 to 34 age group, death from alcohol-related liver disease nearly tripled between 1999 and 2016. This increase parallels statistics¹⁰ showing a rise in binge drinking between 2002 and 2012.

It also correlates with the global financial crisis in 2008, after which more people began dying from cirrhosis. Researchers believe financial worries and unemployment may have been significant contributing factors, causing more people to drink more heavily. The good news is that alcohol-related liver cirrhosis can be reversed if caught early enough — and provided you quit drinking.

Limit Fructose to Protect and Heal Your Liver

While giving up the drink is a prerequisite, you’ll also want to strictly limit or eliminate fructose from your diet, the primary sources of which are sweet beverages like soda and most all processed foods and condiments.

Fructose is metabolized differently in your body than glucose, resulting in the production of toxic byproducts (like uric acid) that are similar to those produced by the metabolism of alcohol, with similarly damaging effects on your liver.

There are clear data linking fructose consumption to causing your body to make fats — a disease process associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) fat accumulation in the liver, which causes insulin resistance and associated diseases, such as Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancer and dementia.

One of the best books ever written about the dangers of fructose is “The Sugar Fix” by Dr. Richard Johnson, a professor of medicine at the University of Colorado. A majority of Johnson’s work involves research, which primarily focuses on how fructose relates to obesity, high blood pressure, kidney disease and fatty liver disease.

Another leading expert in this area is Dr. Robert Lustig, professor of pediatric endocrinology at the University of California in San Francisco (USCF). His research shows sugar, in most forms, but fructose in particular, acts as a poison when consumed in excess.

Data suggest the average American consumes 126.4 grams of sugar a day¹¹ — more than five times the recommended max, and your liver, which processes sugar, simply cannot handle that kind of load. When you overload your liver in this way, you inevitably end up with chronic metabolic disease. Type 2 diabetes, Lustig has pointed out, is nothing other than insulin resistance in the liver.

As a standard recommendation, I recommend keeping your total fructose consumption below 25 grams per day, but for many, it would actually be wise to limit it to 15 grams or less, as most all processed foods contain hidden fructose.

Nutraceuticals That Support Liver Health

Aside from cutting out fructose and other forms of sugar, there are also nutritional supplements that can help protect and restore health and function to your liver, such as:

How to Cut Down or Quit Drinking

If you’re not addicted but tend to drink more than what’s considered “moderate,” consider cutting down your consumption, or just quit cold turkey. Drink more water, including between drinks when socializing. If plain water gets old, get a Soda Stream and add some digestive bitters, fresh fruit or herbs.

Other strategies include drinking only on certain days, and keeping it within moderate limits, or mixing weaker cocktails than usual. If you’re at a social event and want to limit your alcohol consumption, keep a nonalcoholic drink in your hand so the offer of another drink doesn’t come up. You can also slow down your body’s alcohol absorption by eating something at the same time.

Help for Substance Use Disorders

If you live in the U.S. and need help or support for your alcohol addiction (or if you need support because a family member or friend has an addiction problem), contact the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration by calling 800-662-HELP (4357).²¹

It’s a free, confidential helpline, available in English and Spanish, that’s open 24/7, every day of the year. They can offer acute help and provide treatment referrals to local treatment facilities, support groups and community-based organizations for individuals and family members facing mental and/or substance use disorders.