Everything you need to know about CBD


How statin drugs really lower cholesterol & kill you one cell at a time

[ed. – This article explains everything you need to know about statin drugs and why you should never take them! Almost all doctors insist that statins are good for you. Just the opposite is true. Statins can kill  you! But don’t expect your doctor to see the truth. Doctors are brainwashed by the pharmaceutical companies who make billion$ selling pills and vaccinations. This article will equip you and empower you against your doctor’s blindness.]


This is a review of a book written by James & Hannah Yoseph entitled How statin drugs really lower cholesterol: and kill you one cell at a time (and many thanks to Eric who posted a comment to say that there is a ‘made easier’ version of this here.)

I won’t reiterate the importance of cholesterol – you can read this on this post. Suffice to say your body makes cholesterol because it is so utterly vital, the body cannot leave it to chance that you would consume it. You would die instantly without cholesterol – it is a fundamental part of every cell in your body.

This book should be read by every person BEFORE they either prescribe or take statins. I would be interested to know if any person could prescribe or take statins AFTER reading it…

There is an interview with the Yosephs here.

The three key contributions of the Yoseph book

There are three key contributions of this book:

1) The explanation of precisely how statins work in the human body (and in animals where they have been used for drug testing).

2) The documentation of medical journal articles proving that the precise mechanism as to how statins work has been known by their proponents throughout.

3) The detailing of the conflict of interest endemic in the pharmaceutical industry and approval processes, which have monumentally failed the human race. The book takes one drug company, Merck, and the American Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and a number of other related bodies (e.g. the National Cholesterol Education Programme NCEP) and a handful of individuals and traces in incredible detail the role that each played in this scandal. And it is a scandal.

Let us look at the three main findings that the Yosephs have given us:

1) How statin drugs really lower cholesterol

Every cell needs sustenance. The cell says “I’m hungry” and makes a protein called “reductase.” Reductase activates something called the mevalonate pathway. Mevalonate is cell food just as glucose is brain food. Mevalonate is utterly vital for the life of every cell in the human body.

The Yoseph’s put it this way: “Mevalonate is the essence of cell renewal. In all cells, mevalonate travels down the mevalonate pathway to make cholesterol and isoprenoids (five-carbon molecules). Both stimulate the cell to grow, replicate its DNA and divide into two cells. This is the ‘cell cycle’. This is life.”

Cell renewal is continuous throughout the body – cells lining the gut are turned over every 10 hours to 5 days; skin cells are recycled every two weeks; liver cells are replaced every 300-500 days and bone cells last a decade.

Without the cholesterol and isoprenoids made by the mevalonate pathway, none of this cell rejuvenation happens. Isoprenoids make our cells replicate and renew. Without mevalonate and without isoprenoids, cells age and die. They cannot be replaced.

CoQ10 is an isoprenoid. CoQ10 is vital for cell energy. Heme-A is an isoprenoid. Heme-A is vital for cell energy and drug metabolism. Isopentenyl adenine is an isoprenoid. Don’t worry about the names in all of this – just remember that Isopentenyl adenine is vital for DNA replication. DNA is the blueprint of every cell. Before a cell divides, it replicates its DNA and the new cell can be formed from the same blueprint. There are other vital isoprenoids – all are stopped from functioning by the disruption of the mevalonate pathway.

In the simplified flow chart above, showing the cholesterol production pathway in the body, we can see why statins are called HMG-CoA Reductase inhibitors – this is the part of the pathway that they disrupt. Statins disable reductase. Without reductase, the mevalonate pathway cannot function properly. Without the mevalonate pathway, cells cannot rejuvenate properly. It follows that the life of every cell in the human body is catastrophically impaired by statins.

How long does it take cells to be affected? That depends on the life cycle of the cell – 300-500 days for liver cells and up to 5 days for the cells lining the gut.

In chapter four of the Yoseph’s book there is one of the most incredible explanations about what statins actually do, which I have not seen elsewhere. The Yosephs describe the fact that statins are not just HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, they are also reductase stimulators…

Life preserving responses are hard wired at the cell level – our body will do whatever it takes to keep us alive; every cell will do its bit to keep us alive. Because reductase is the ‘food’ for cell reproduction, taking something that impairs this process (statins) triggers the body to try to overcome the damage that is being done. Reductase production increases to try to reopen the mevalonate pathway. It’s a terrific attempt by the body to fight back. However, the Yosephs sadly note: “So far, they have not figured out how to save statin-fed dying cells except by adding back mevalonate.”

The book describes that there are two ways in which every cell of the body can get the cholesterol it so vitally needs: 1) it can make cholesterol and 2) it can take cholesterol from the blood stream.

When someone takes statins, the cells are impaired from making cholesterol so they try to take the cholesterol from the blood stream. The LDL receptors on each cell go into overdrive and try to ‘receive’ more LDL from the blood stream to compensate for the fact that the cell can’t currently make as much itself. This lowers the cholesterol in the blood stream. (Please remember that LDL stands for Low Density Lipoprotein – it is not cholesterol, let alone bad cholesterol. Similarly HDL stands for High Density Lipoprotein – it is not cholesterol, let alone good cholesterol).

That’s how statins lower cholesterol and that’s how statins kill us one cell at a time.

Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)

It is time to mention Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) here. FH is a genetic condition caused by a gene defect on chromosome 19. The defect makes the body unable to remove LDL from the bloodstream, resulting in consistently high levels of LDL. Bearing in mind that FH is rare to start with – one in 500 people – in some cases of FH the LDL receptors work to an extent (just not very well); in other cases the LDL receptors work barely at all.

My logical consideration of FH suggests to me that the problem is that the LDL receptors don’t work properly and therefore the LDL (lipoproteins) cannot get into the body’s cells in the way that they are supposed to. This means that cells don’t get the vital LDL, carrying the vital protein, lipids and cholesterol needed for the cell’s health. LDL in the blood stream is high because the LDL has stayed in the bloodstream and has not been able to get into the cells – where it is supposed to go. Hence high LDL blood levels are the sign that someone has FH. The high LDL levels are, however, a symptom and not a cause or a problem per se. The problem is that the health of every cell is compromised by LDL not getting to the cell. This includes heart, brain and muscle cells – all cells. An FH sufferer can therefore have heart problems – because of too little LDL reaching the heart cells – not because of too much LDL! How differently things can be seen when one is not blinded by thinking that cholesterol or lipoproteins are bad.

This also explains why high HDL would be seen as good. HDL is the lipoprotein that carries used lipids and cholesterol back to the liver for recycling. If the LDL were not able to get to the cells to do its job then there is little for HDL to carry back to recycle. Hence HDL would be low and this would be seen as bad with impaired understanding as to why.

Ironically, the most serious form of Familial Hypercholesterolemia would receive no benefit from statins anyway. As the extreme form of FH is characterised by LDL receptors working barely at all, even the body going into crisis mode, and trying to take LDL from the blood stream with increased LDL receptor activity, will not work if the LDL receptors are not working well enough in the first place. Hence the LDL will stay in the blood stream with an extreme sufferer of FH and yet the statin has reduced what little chance the FH sufferer’s body had of making cholesterol within the cell. The FH sufferer should ideally be given medication (if anything existed) to stimulate cholesterol production within the cell, so that the cell would at least get the vital cholesterol it needs, even when it couldn’t get it from the blood stream.

2) What was known by whom and when as statins were pushed through to approval?

We need to introduce some key players here:

– Brown & Goldstein were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work with lipoproteins. We will see what they knew along the way and their involvement with statin approval.

– Akira Endo was a Japanese biochemist who graduated from Tohoku University in 1957 and joined Sankyo Pharmaceuticals in Tokyo. Endo is the guy who discovered the poison that statins are made of. In 1971 he began his search for a fungal mycotoxin that would lower cholesterol. (Definition: “Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by microfungi that are capable of causing disease and death in humans and other animals”). (A metabolite is a small molecule produced during metabolism.)

In 1976 Endo managed to extract something called citrinin, a disease-causing mycotoxin from Penicillium Citrinum. He discovered that citrinin lowered blood cholesterol and published a report on this. In the same year he abandoned his work with citrinin because it was too toxic. He extracted another mycotoxin from Penicillium Citrinum called “ML-236B”, which was less toxic but still lowered cholesterol. ML-236B became Endo’s first experimental statin. (There’s a great story in the book about how Sankyo, with Japanese cultural traits of trust and honour, approached the American drug company Merck to develop the statin together. Merck shafted Sankyo and Endo was wrongly seen as the betrayer and was ostracised by Sankyo). Endo was then ‘out on his own’ and he approached Brown & Goldstein, seeing the work that they were doing with lipoproteins, and this is how these guys got together.

(Also – if you are thinking that Penicillium Citrinum sounds like an antibiotic, you’d be right. The book states “Statins – secondary fungal metabolites – are anti-life or anti-bios. Statins are antibiotics. Because antibiotics are anti-bios and kill ‘good’ vitamin-producing bacteria in the gut, most are prescribed for as short a term as possible. Statins, on the other hand, are often prescribed for life. Most antibiotics also have specific action on specific microbes. Not so with statins. Statins indiscriminately kill any cell including human cells.” (Their emphasis). This could explain the warnings about gut health on statin patient leaflets.)

In 1953 Watson and Crick discovered the structure of DNA. In 1979 Marvin Siperstein discovered that DNA replication (cell rejuvenation) required isoprenoids from mevalonate (specifically the isoprenoid called isopentenyl adenine). (p10 in the book) (I won’t dwell on Marvin Siperstein, but he’s one of the good guys in the Yoseph book – writing his important discoveries and highlighting serious issues in medical journals. These articles were sadly ignored.)

In 1976, Beecham Labs in the UK (what became SmtihKline Beecham and then Glaxo SmithKline) had discovered a statin named “compactin”. Sankyo Pharmaceuticals had discovered the same compound in parallel in Japan. They called it Mevastatin. “Stat” in statin means to stop and mevastatin means “to stop mevalonate”. So they knew exactly what they were stopping when they named this drug. Within an hour of adding compactin to cholesterol-rich cells, the cell reproduction cycle was completely stopped. Within minutes of adding back a small amount of mevalonate, DNA replication and cell cycles were completely restored.

This bit is key – because the cells were given ample cholesterol before the experiment (they were “cholesterol-rich cells”), it was clear that the problem was not cholesterol deprivation but isopentenyl adenine deprivation (that isoprenoid that enables DNA replication). The absence of this isoprenoid prevented DNA replication and the entire cell cycle.

As the Yosephs state “Cells are poisoned by statins because statins block the making of isoprenoids from mevalonate. If cells cannot replicate, they inevitably die.”

In 1977 (p37 of the Yoseph book), Endo, Brown and Goldstein published a paper documenting that statins caused an increase in reductase. It was therefore known back this far that statins should not necessarily be called reductase inhibitors, but reductase stimulators. They didn’t detect the increase in LDL receptor activity at this time.

In 1978 Merck developed their own statin.

In 1979 Endo patented another statin and sold it to Sankyo to try to restore his honour.

On p143 of the book, The Yosephs present an image of a paper written by Brown and Goldstein in The Journal of Biological Chemistry (1979). This incredible quotation from their paper is extracted: “Mevalonate, the product of HMG-CoA reductase, also supported growth, confirming that compactin was exerting its killing effect by a specific inhibition of HMG-CoA reductase.” So Brown and Goldstein admitted that the first statin, compactin, had a killing effect and this was a result of inhibiting reductase. They went on to develop further statins, which also inhibited reductase and also had a killing effect.

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein wrote the following in The Journal of Lipid Research (we’ll see who’s behind this journal shortly): “When the regulator of reductase is identified, it may be possible to administer this compound to animals and perhaps to patients, preventing the compensatory rise in reductase…” Hence Brown and Goldstein knew by 1980 that statins both inhibited and stimulated reductase. They also knew that the “compensatory rise in reductase” was something to be prevented.

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein co-authored a paper in The Journal of Biological Chemistry stating: “CoA reductase is inhibited by compactin, mevalonate formation is blocked and cultured cells die.” (p14)

In 1980, Brown and Goldstein co-authored a paper in The Journal of Lipid Research stating: “Incubation of cultured cells with compactin blocks mevalonate production and converts the cells into mevalonate auxotrophs.” (p172) An auxotroph is something that has lost the ability to synthesise certain substances needed for its growth and metabolism.

In 1980, Endo co-authored a paper in The Journal of Biological Chemistry entitled “Isolation and characterisation of cells resistant to ML236B (compactin) with increased levels of HMG-CoA reductase”. The extract (p146 of the Yoseph book) states: “…cholesterol alone is ineffective in preventing cell death…Addition of other mevalonate-derived metabolites to the culture medium along with cholesterol including ubiquinone [That’s CoQ10 remember], dolichol and isopentanyl adenine [that’s the isoprenoid vital for DNA replication] did not prevent the toxic effect of ML236B.” i.e. nothing we could add back to the cell, to compensate for the damage we had done, could prevent the toxic effect.

Also in 1980, Sankyo cancelled clinical trials of their statin on humans after half their laboratory dogs died of cancer. Merck called Sankyo to try to learn from this and Sankyo told them to sod off – quite right! Merck stopped statin development (sadly, only temporarily).

In 1982 Brown and Goldstein wrote in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: “If reducatase cannot increase sufficiently to overcome the inhibition by compactin, the cells die.” (p144)

Incredibly, given all of this going on, in 1982 Merck was allowed to give Lovastatin to humans in the first human trial. At this time:

– It was known that statins were toxins.

– It was known that statins blocked the mevalonate pathway.

– It was known that blocking the mevalonate pathway caused cell death.

– It was known that nothing could be added back to the body (not cholesterol, not isoprenoids, nothing) to prevent cell death and the toxic effect of statins.

– It was known that statins not only inhibited reductase, but they stimulated it too. It was known that inhibition of reductase “had a killing effect”. The consequences of stimulating reductase were not precisely known, but caused enough concern for the 1980 Brown and Goldstein article in The Journal of Lipid Research to discuss what might be administered to “prevent(ing) the compensatory rise in reductase…”

In 1984 lovastatin was approved by the FDA in record time.

In 1985 Brown and Goldstein were awarded the Nobel Prize!

3) The conflicts of interest:

We need to introduce some more players at this stage:

Daniel Steinberg

Daniel Steinberg is the overall ringmaster. If you do an internet search you will find remarkably little about him personally and this seems to be deliberate. The Yosephs should be commended for what they have managed to piece together about this orchestrator. (You will find his “Cholesterol Wars”, where he writes that “after much controversy, cholesterol and lipoproteins were implicated, indicted and ultimately found guilty.”)

Steinberg was the founder and first editor in chief of The Journal of Lipid Research (a vehicle for Endo, Brown and Goldstein and lipid theory supporters to use).

Steinberg was Chairman of the Council on Arteriosclerosis of the American Heart Association and used his position to recommend treating high cholesterol as early as 1969. (Introducing the theory that this life vital substance, made by the body, should be treated rather than revered).

Steinberg was co-chair of the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT). This trial was led by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), costing the taxpayer $150 million over 13 years. In January 1984 the results were published and claimed that the long sought evidence was now available – absolute differentials were less than 2% in different groups observed.

Steinberg was Merck’s scientific advisor when lovastatin was approved in record time in 1984.

Steinberg was the first speaker at the FDA advisory committee meeting on statins, held at the NIH, in February 1987.

In 2006, writing in his own Journal of Lipid Research, Steinberg reported that “the Goldstein/Brown laboratory showed that this huge over production of reductase, representing an attempt by the cell to overcome statin inhibition, is accompanied by a huge buildup of endoplasmic reticulum, the organelle [place] in which the reductase resides. As a result the cells look “abnormal” but of course they are not cancer cells.” Steinberg admits that the cell tries to overcome what the statin is doing, he uses the unscientific word “huge” twice – neither time in his favour – and he is apparently able to single-handedly declare that abnormal cells are “of course not cancer cells”.

The same article “The discovery of statins and the end of the controversy” (how arrogant is that?!) declared: “…there was no hard evidence that compactin would be toxic in humans, only rumors about toxicity in dogs…” Rumors? Merck contacted Sankyo to understand why half their dogs had developed cancer.

Steinberg chaired the NIH consensus panel, which in December 1984 declared that LDL cholesterol was the cause of Coronary Vascular Disease (CVD) and recommended that a National Cholesterol Education Programme (NCEP) be adopted. Since this time the NCEP has set continually lower cholesterol targets. Their recommended age for statin use is now nine!

The members of the NCEP

The 2004 NCEP financial disclosure report reveals that all members of the 2004 guideline participants had received payments and/or grant funds from the following organisations:

Dr Scott Grundy: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Glaxo SmithKline, Kos, Merck, Pfizer, Sankyo.

Dr Bairey: Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kos, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Wyeth.

Dr Brewer: Astra Zeneca, Esperion, Fournier, Lipid Sciences, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sankyo, Tularik.

Dr Clark: Abbot, Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer.

Dr Hunninghake: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kos, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer.

Dr Pasternak: Astra Zeneca, BMS-Sanofi, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Kos, Merck, Novartis, Takeda.

Dr Smith: Merck.

Dr Stone: Abbot, Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kos, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Reliant, Sankyo.

The members of the 1987 FDA Panel

On February 19th 1987 the FDA held an advisory committee meeting to review the NIH clinical guidelines for altering cholesterol with Merck’s new statin, lovastatin. The NIH hosted the event. This would be like the NHS hosting the approval meeting for a drug in the UK; implicit support. Incredibly a Merck consultant, Fred Singer, was in the Chair.

Steinberg and the Nobel prize winners Brown and Goldstein were present in support of Merck. The FDA advisory committee comprised 4 FDA employees, 8 FDA advisors (2 were Merck consultants) and 11 Merck speakers and guests. That put the vote 13-10 in Merck’s favour from the outset.

The Yoseph book fully documents the actual comments made in the meeting and by whom – the record was sequestered through a Freedom of Information request. A Merck toxicologist (MacDonald) admitted that rabbits on lovastatin died rapidly. He attributed this to “elevated blood levels” and got away with no one asking him elevated blood levels of what? MacDonald glossed over the fact that statins failed to lower cholesterol in rats, mice and hamsters. This was because rodents are able to reopen the mevalonate pathway – this is why they live. The rabbits couldn’t do this. This is why they died. Dogs were somewhere in between. MacDonald had to admit to liver cell damage in dogs but, again, got away with “We clearly do not understand the mechanism”. It was denied that cataracts had been observed in rats (a few cases in dogs were skimmed over).

A pharmaceutical consultant called Dr Richard Cenedella said: “I have consulted for many drug companies over the years. All of the hyper-lipidemic drugs induce cataracts in mice; it’s an early observation that holds up.” Cenedella wrote to the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1987 “…to caution against the possible complication of cataract development that might result from long-term use of this agent” [statins]

Jonathan Tobert was Merck’s Clinical Director for all trials. In March 1988 he stated that to date there had been no cataracts seen in humans taking lovastatin. The year before he co-authored a paper documenting an increase in lens opacities (i.e. cataracts) in 101 lovastatin consumers. The Yosephs pull no punches in the book. This is just one of a catalogue of examples where they are able to prove contradictory statements made by Tobert. On p121 they say “You can tell when Tobert is lying. He is either writing or his lips are moving.” And I thought I was bold!

Interestingly cataracts are back in the news as I publish this, but I have not seen any reduction in statin prescription or usage since the headlines that emanated from this JAMA research.

In April 2009 an extraordinary letter was written to President Obama by FDA scientists to say that “The FDA is fundamentally broken” and detailing examples of suppression of truth, distortion and the “FDA failing to fulfil its mission.” Nothing has happened as a result of this letter.


The remarkable Yoseph book has brought us the most precise understanding of how statins lower cholesterol. It has shown that the dangers were known all along – by those pushing through the launch and approval of statins. It has shown how a few key players – Steinberg, Endo, Brown and Goldstein could work with Merck and how Merck and other drug companies could infiltrate the FDA, influence the NIH and even see the establishment of a National Cholesterol Education Programme comprised of drug company funded representatives.

The scandal has been brilliant, meticulously planned and success guaranteed. Billions and billions of dollars have been generated from first demonising cholesterol and secondly discovering a poison (Definition: “Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by microfungi that are capable of causing disease and death in humans and other animals”) that could stop the body making cholesterol. Or, as we now know more accurately – a poison that could drive cells to remove cholesterol from the blood stream, as those cells fight to avoid death.

The mevalonate pathway should never be blocked in a living creature. A rat may get away with it, a human won’t. If only humans died as quickly as rabbits, maybe statins would have never have been approved. The fact that they are killing us one cell at a time, but just more slowly, is little consolation.

The Executive Summary:

Cholesterol is utterly life vital. We die instantly without it. We need it for every single cell of the body, the muscles, the brain, hormones, bile production, fat digestion, reproduction – it simply cannot be emphasised enough how vital cholesterol is.

It is so vital that the body makes it – the body cannot afford to leave it to chance that we would need to get cholesterol from our diet. This makes cholesterol even more vital to the body than essential fats and protein – as we need to eat these.

Statins stop the body from making the cholesterol that it was designed to make (not entirely, or they would have an immediate 100% death rate).

Statins block something called “the mevalonate pathway”. This is catastrophic. Blocking the mevalonate pathway means that cells cannot replicate or repair themselves properly. Blocking the mevalonate pathway means that every cell in the body dies. The only thing that varies is how long each cell takes to die – some take more time than others.

Nothing can compensate for blocking the mevalonate pathway. Nothing except adding mevalonate back in to the body and we don’t do this. (We don’t even know if we can do this in humans. We shouldn’t block this pathway in the first place.) Adding cholesterol makes no difference, adding CoQ10 makes no difference. Blocking the mevalonate pathway is so flipping serious that anyone who does it should be shot. (I really think using the ‘F’ word here is quite appropriate).

The body tries to respond to the crisis that it detects. As cells realise that their ability to make cholesterol has been impaired, they try to take the cholesterol they need from the blood stream. This lowers blood cholesterol levels and ignorant doctors are happy. They know not what they have done.

There is a second way in which the body tries to save itself – it tries to increase the production of reductase, hoping that this may unblock the mevalonate pathway. It can’t. Hence reductase is both stimulated and inhibited at the same time. Who knows how the body responds to this mechanism being totally confused.

LDL receptor activity and reductase activity increase in parallel. The LDL receptors (the ‘doors’ on each cell responsible for letting LDL in to the cell, with the cholesterol and other good stuff that it is carrying) work harder to try to get LDL from the blood stream into the cells. The reductase production increases to try to reboot the mevalonate pathway, so that cells can make cholesterol as they are designed to do.

The inventors of statins knew what statins were really doing throughout the development of this drug (mevastatin literally means to stop mevalonate – they knew exactly what mevastatin would do). They knew that statins blocked the mevalonate pathway. They knew that this caused cell death. They knew that nothing could compensate for this other than putting the vital mevalonate back. They knew that CoQ10 was affected and this was serious. They patented adding CoQ10 to their statins but then never bothered to add it.

Statins were only originally intended for the 1 in 500 people with Familial Hypercholesterolemia. This would not have enabled drug companies to reach the profit potential of their dreams. Hence cholesterol has been demonised and targets have continually been reset by conflicted bodies so that the norm is no longer the norm and everyone can be told that they need statins.

Ironically, the most serious form of Familial Hypercholesterolemia would receive no benefit from statins anyway. As the extreme form is characterised by LDL receptors working barely at all, even the body going into crisis mode, and trying to take LDL from the blood stream with increased LDL receptor activity, will not work if the LDL receptors are not working sufficiently. Hence the LDL will stay in the blood stream with an extreme sufferer of FH and yet the statin has reduced what little chance the FH sufferer’s body had of making cholesterol within the cell.


Some States Passing Anti-Abortion Bills – Expecting Supreme Court Will Soon Overturn Roe -v- Wade

Alabama Governor Kay Ivey Signs Bill To Ban Abortions

May 20, 2019

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed a bill that would ban most abortions once a doctor can detect a “heartbeat” in the womb — which supporters say happens around six weeks of pregnancy, before many women realize they are pregnant. Kemp has said he will sign the bill.

Several other Southern states have either passed or are considering heartbeat bills. Here’s a look at the status of those bills:

Kentucky — Gov. Matt Bevin signed a bill on March 9 that would make abortion after a heartbeat is detected a felony with the only exception being when a mother’s life is in danger. Hours later a federal judge temporarily blocked the law. Five days after that, a judge blocked another Kentucky law that sought to ban abortion for reasons of race, gender and disability. Both laws have been suspended while a federal judge considers lawsuits challenging them.

Louisiana — A Senate panel advanced a heartbeat bill on April 30.

Missouri — On Feb. 27, the state House has passed a massive anti-abortion bill that would prohibit the procedure after a heartbeat is detected and also ban all abortions if there’s is a change in federal law — known as a trigger bill. Georgia lawmakers had introduced a trigger bill earlier this year, and Gov. Brian Kemp backed it. That bill did not advance.

Mississippi — Gov. Phil Bryant signed a heartbeat bill on March 21. Last year, a judge blocked a less-restrictive bill that would’ve banned abortion after 15 weeks.

Ohio — Gov. Mike DeWine signed a heartbeat bill on April 11. The bill will take effect in July.

South Carolina — The House passed a hearbeat bill on April 24. This bill allows exceptions for cases of rape, incest or if the life of the mother is in danger. The Senate is considering the bill.

Tennessee — A heartbeat bill  has passed the state House on but failed to pass the Senate. Lawmakers later sent a trigger bill that would outlaw abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

Other states are considering different ways to restrict or in some cases expand abortion rights. 

Alabama — Gov. Kay Ivey signed a bill on May 15 that makes performing an abortion a felony punishable up to life in prison. There are no exceptions for rape or incest. The only exception would be if a mother’s life was in danger.

Arkansas — Gov. Asa Hutchinson has signed two anti-abortion bills this year. On Feb 19, he signed a bill legislation that would outlaw abortion if Roe v. Wade is reversed. The other bill, which bans abortion after 18 weeks, was signed on March 15.

New York —  On Jan. 22, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a law that codifies Roe v. Wade into state law, which would allow abortions to remain legal even if the court decision is overturned. Late-term abortions are now legal if a mother’s life is threatened or the fetus is not viable. The law also allows health care professionals such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants to perform abortions.

Oklahoma — The state Senate approved a bill on March 14 that proposes a constitutional amendment ballot issue that would allow voters to indicate that the state constitution does not protect the right to an abortion. 

Vermont — The state House passed a bill on Feb. 21 that would declare a right to abortions without restrictions. The senate is considering the bill.


ZERO U.S. Measles Deaths in 10 Years, but Over 100 Measles Vaccine Deaths Reported

With the measles and measles vaccine debate reaching a near frenzy on the Internet, it is always nice to throw some cold hard facts on the firestorm currently raging in the measles debate.

So here are some easily verifiable facts regarding deaths associated with measles in the United States for the past 10 years, and deaths associated with measles vaccines during the same 10 year period.

First, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) keeps a weekly tally of disease outbreaks, including deaths.

According to a statement made by Dr. Anne Schuchat, the director of CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, in an Associated Press story picked up by Fox News on April 25, 2014:

There has been no measles deaths (sic) reported in the U.S. since 2003 [1]

The weekly CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports (MMWR) since that date have not revealed any measles deaths either. (*See edit below.)

And while health authorities are blaming measles outbreaks in recent years on unvaccinated children, when you mention the fact that nobody is dying from measles in the U.S., they are quick to turn around and claim vaccines have eliminated measles deaths (even though they cannot eliminate the disease itself apparently.)

Besides the obvious contradiction in reasoning with such a claim, the historical evidence just does not support it either:

Image from

Death by Measles Vaccines

What about deaths associated with the measles vaccine during the same time period?

The U.S. Government keeps a database of reports called The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The database is available to the public, and there is a search portal the public can use at

We ran a search for a ten year period for deaths reported with measles vaccines, including a few that are no longer in production.

The search result contained 108 deaths over this period, associated with four different measles vaccines sold in the United States during the past 10 years.

Conclusion: Measles Vaccine Enthusiasm based Largely on Fear and Beliefs

We fully realize that those who believe in the value of vaccines will probably not be persuaded by these facts, which anyone with a computer and Internet access can verify from U.S. Government sources.

Having now published a few stories on the measles issue, and having received many hundreds of comments, it has become very clear to us that those who have strong opinions on the measles vaccine are based more on fear and beliefs, than they are on facts or science. Any attempt by these vaccine proponents to force their beliefs on the rest of the U.S. public should be vigorously opposed.


Truth About The SV-40 Cancer Virus In The Original Polio Vaccines Given To Millions Of American Children

Catherine J. Frompovich

The current “police state” actions being implemented regarding vaccination dissenters is due to the public’s mistrust of the CDC/FDA/Big Pharma consensus science regarding vaccines unknown viruses and neurotoxic ingredients causing adverse effects in children’s health, which has an historical, plus congressional hearing validation, anyone who values good health and well children must consider seriously.

Merck’s premiere vaccine inventor, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, was astute enough to realize something was amiss with the production of vaccines, which he documents in the video below.

The Polio Vaccine Has Cancer Virus, SV40, According to Dr. Maurice Hilleman – 10:37 minutes

When he spoke about bringing the monkeys over from Africa, which they used to manufacture the polio vaccine, he had this to say, “I brought African greens in. I didn’t know we were importing AIDS virus at the time.”[1]

Dr. Hilleman stated, “Yellow fever vaccine had leukemia virus in it. This was in the day of very crude science. [1]

If you think the above was something “of a fluke” or a “figment of conspiracy theorists imaginations,” then you absolutely ought to read the U.S. Government Printing Office online published report of the September 10, 2003 Hearing of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness of the Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives of the 108th Congress wherein Congressman Dan Burton is on public record saying:

There is no dispute that millions of Americans received polio vaccines that were contaminated with the virus called Simian Virus 40, or SV-40. There also is no dispute that SV-40 is capable of causing cancer, but there is a major dispute as to how many Americans may have received the contaminated vaccine, with estimates ranging from 4 million to 100 million people. There is also a major dispute as to when the polio vaccine supply got cleaned up. In addition, nobody knows how many people got sick or died because of the contaminated vaccines.

However, Dr. James Goedert, Chief of Viral Epidemiology, National Cancer Institute, provided an answer as to when the polio vaccine got cleaned up:

In addition, using PCR technology, the FDA itself found no SV-40 DNA molecules in lots that were released between 1972 and 1996.

When did you or your children receive the polio vaccine?

Can the SV-40 cancer virus be lurking within your body?

Why do I say that?

Because the Journal of Infectious Diseases published the article “Simian Virus 40 and Human Disease” wherein this was discussed:

The reported presence of SV40 in tumors in individuals born after 1963 would seem to imply that SV40 is now established as a human infection circulating in communities via person-to-person contact [8]. Other investigators have been skeptical of these claims [9–12]; several groups have not been able to detect SV40 sequences in the aforementioned tumors [13–20], and epidemiologic studies have not revealed an increased risk of these cancers in populations exposed to SV40-contaminated poliovaccines or adenovirus vaccines.

[8] Vilchez RA, Butel JS, Emergent human pathogen simian virus 40 and its role in cancer, Clin Microbiol Rev, 2004, vol. 17 (pg. 495-508)

In view of the cancer epidemic of recent years, one has to wonder what role, if any, the SV-40 cancer virus in the early polio vaccine had, or is implicated in current cancer demographics, especially in older individuals who received the polio vaccine as a child.

I’d like to point out that FDA used the Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis, a test FDA will not permit to be used to test for determining adverse mitochondrial proclivities (reactions) from mandatory vaccines prior to receiving vaccines/vaccinations, especially in infants whose immune systems are not developed fully until around two years of age!

In those individuals with mitochondrial proclivities, vaccination can be equivalent to immune system castration!

The FDA PCR directive, alone, ought to be considered as criminal activity, since such FDA actions deliberately – by the omission of PCR testing as a routine prophylactic procedure – contributes directly to any vaccine adverse reactions infants, toddlers, teens and adults would experience. Therefore, FDA ought to be held accountable, plus prosecuted, for malfeasance in the management of infectious disease protocols, in my opinion!

(Please see also Dr. Mary’s Monkey,  by Edward Haslam – the best book on the Polio vaccine).


Bill Gates and the World’s Elite DO NOT VACCINATE their own children… and for good reason

1/22/2019 / By

The absolute worst medical decision a parent of a newborn child can make is to allow doctors and nurses to severely compromise the immune system of their infant by injecting him or her with known neurotoxins, foreign proteins, and carcinogens like mercury, formaldehyde, monkey kidney cells, pig viruses, and genetically modified cells from human abortions. That’s why billionaire Bill Gates, the infamous and insidious population control freak and Microsoft mogul, refused to vaccinate his own children when they were growing up, even while he promotes toxic jabs all over the world, especially in third world countries.

It’s true. Gates’ former private doctor from Seattle back in the 1990s said, “I don’t know if he had them vaccinated as adults, but I can tell you he point blank refused to vaccinate them as children.” We know this because the quote was taken from Gates’ doctor during a side note conversation at a medical symposium, which caused a small uproar among the attending physicians, who blasphemed Gates’ doctor for breaking rank with doctor-patient confidentiality (even though it’s a “gray area” because he was speaking to other doctors privately). Still, it was too late – the cat got out of the bag, and now the world knows the ultimate hypocrisy of the elite who radically and religiously push vaccines as the “holy grail” of medicine, all while they keep the same poisons out of their own children’s blood and muscle tissue, knowing good and well the high risk of side effects and adverse events far outweighs any possible benefits.

Bill Gates’ three children, Jennifer, Phoebe, and Rory, NEVER got vaccines and are now healthy young adults

Born between 1996 and 2002, the Gates children never got mercury and formaldehyde shot into their muscle tissue as a form of “immunity,” even though their father is the most dogmatic campaigner and shill for the vaccine industry. Wait, you thought he just made his fortune off computer software? Think again. There’s huge profit in chemical medicine and population control schemes, and insidious Bill rides that cash cow every day.

According to TruthWiki, “Gates is widely criticized for being anti-competitive and for being a pro-vaccine zealot. He engages in many ‘philanthropic endeavors,’ such as donating large amounts of money to various scientific research programs through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Gates has even gone so far as to fund technologies that are designed for mass sterilization in order to address what he refers to as the world’s population problem.”

Herd theory has always been a big hoax, and the world’s elite know it. Most vaccinated children are the actual risk to each other, because they often shed the viruses they were just injected with during the first few weeks after their toxic jabs. According to one study, the richest families in California (that are often white) do NOT vaccinate their children.

In fact, more than 16,000 kindergarten-aged children in California do not get any vaccines because their white, elitist parents opt them out using religious, personal belief, and doctor-authored exemptions. Get it? The elite know there’s something inherently wrong with immunizations, but they just don’t talk about it, and the MSM news certainly never covers it.

The richest Americans don’t want to risk their children getting autism from experimental vaccines, including Polio, Malaria, MMR, and the CDC’s “highly recommended” annual flu shot

According to Bill Gates’ former doctor, who was quoted behind closed doors at a medical seminar, Gates said his children didn’t need vaccines, but isn’t the whole world educated otherwise? Doesn’t the CDC inform us all that babies are born with weak, compromised immune systems and must have 50 vaccines before age 7, or they’ll most likely die from infectious diseases? Isn’t that the narrative?

Here’s more on Bill Gates’ opinion on vaccines, as shared by his own physician from the seminar: “They were beautiful kids, truly wise and lively, and he stated they would be fine as they were; they didn’t need any shots.

Now, Bill Gates and his corrupt Foundation push experimental, untested malaria vaccines on innocent Africans in Kenya, Ghana, and Malawi. Critics are screaming that it’s all part of a depopulation scheme, and some vaccines, including the tetanus jab, have been found to contain chemicals that sterilize young girls – chemicals that have nothing at all to do with vaccine functionality.

Bill Gates’ “mission” to protect third world populations from disease via mass vaccination is contrary to his own personal actions with his own children, and auspiciously crosses lines with his deep financial collaboration with health agencies and vaccine manufacturers.

Tune in to for more updates on how there is a plague of corruption surrounding vaccine safety, and exactly why the world’s elite know better than to have their children jabbed with experimental, untested, deadly neurotoxins and genetically modified bacteria strains.



You are 550% More Likely to Get a Respiratory Infection if You Get the Flu Vaccine

Let’s assume for a moment that the flu vaccine provided a 100 percent guarantee against contracting influenza (which it doesn’t, but just pretend it does). Would it make sense to vaccinate your family against the flu if doing so meant you increased their risk of contracting other upper respiratory illnesses by more than five times? Of course not! Reducing the risk of contracting one illness only to heighten the risk of multiple others is simply illogical. And yet that is exactly what the flu vaccine – which is only between 33 and 70 percent effective, anyway – does.

A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases actually found that not only did the inactivated influenza vaccine not provide additional protection against the flu virus, but it also left recipients lacking in “temporary non-specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses.” (Related: Flu vaccine BOMBSHELL: 630% more “aerosolized flu virus particles” emitted by people who received flu shots… flu vaccines actually SPREAD the flu.)

Playing Russian roulette with the flu shot

Natural Health 365 reported that while U.S. authorities have tended to look the other way regarding flu vaccine side effects, researchers in China have been far more proactive about determining exactly what the effects of these vaccines might be. The study mentioned above, which was conducted in Hong Kong, set out to compare the health of vaccinated patients versus those who have not been immunized in relation to either the flu and other illnesses.

The trial included patients between the ages of 6 and 15, some of whom received Sanofi Pasteur’s Vaxigrip vaccine, while others received a saline placebo shot. The participants were then tracked for an average of 272 days to see whether they went on to develop the flu and/or other illnesses.

The researchers concluded:

There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of confirmed seasonal influenza infection between recipients of TIV [trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine] or placebo, although the point estimate was consistent with protection in TIV recipients … However, participants who received TIV had higher risk of ARI [acute respiratory illness] associated with confirmed noninfluenza respiratory virus infection (RR, 4.40; 95% CI, 1.31–14.8). Including 2 additional confirmed infections when participants did not report ARI, TIV recipients had higher risk of confirmed noninfluenza respiratory virus infection (RR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.19–10.1). The majority of the noninfluenza respiratory virus detections were rhinoviruses and coxsackie/echoviruses, and the increased risk among TIV recipients was also statistically significant for these viruses (Table 3). Most respiratory virus detections occurred in March 2009, shortly after a period of peak seasonal influenza activity in February 2009. [Emphasis added]

Flu Vaccine Is Worse Than The Flue

So, not only is the flu shot ineffective, but it increases risk of other viral infections. It is also known to carry serious side effects, including seizures and convulsions, swelling on the brain and Guillain-Barre syndrome, to name a few. (Related: Flu vaccine paradox spreading globally as more vaccinated people catch the flu.)

It is also advisable to support the liver and immune system by supplementing with high-quality vitamin C, turmeric, probiotics, and zinc to boost immunity.



Bullies and charlatans are everywhere these days. You can find them on the playgrounds, the internet, and even in your own home. They push you around, tell you fictional stories that never really happened, and believe in their lies like they are the God-given truth. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in a conventional doctor’s office during flu season.

But you have wised up, right? You’re not playing their “do as you’re told” game, because you have educated yourself enough to ask intelligent questions and are brave enough to confront your doctor on the subject, even if it makes your knees shake. After all, it’s YOU that has to deal with the potential repercussions, whereas the doctor just walks away with more dirty money lining his pocket, while claiming ignorance to any potential injury you may sustain.

However, in case you’re still not sure if you should reject the flu shot, consider these three reasons why you should, along with some bonafide ways to improve immunity and get over the flu, naturally.


People have been catching and surviving flu for centuries. The only real threat from flu  is if a bacterial infection ensues (like pneumonia) – and that can be treated easily with antibiotics.


“There have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with Flulaval.”

Flu shots haven’t been proven to adequately work

The first debate is whether the flu shots actually even work. There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that it “works” for some and not for others, and those results can vary from year to year. However, the first piece of damning evidence comes from several statements made on the Flulaval vaccine insert itself. These warnings include:

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval have not been established in pregnant women, nursing mothers or children.”

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval in pediatric patients have not been established.”

“Flulaval has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.”

Is your fear of the flu, or your doctor, still enough to make you ignore these warnings on the product itself?

If you’re still thinking about it, consider that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which gauges the vaccine’s protective ability, has found that the flu vaccine reduces risk of flu by 40-60 percent when it is used during seasons where the circulating virus is well matched to flu vaccine. In other words, IF they GUESS the strain correctly, you still only have a median 50-50 chance of being protected from the flu.

Results from last flu season show that between November 2, 2017 and February 3, 2018, the flu shot was estimated to be 36 percent effective overall, with the dominant virulent strain circulating that season (H3N2) about 25 percent effective. This was actually better than experts feared, with trends in Canada and Australia reported to be only 10 percent effective. The shot was reported to work 67 percent of the time against the less severe H1N1.

Good to know that it is least effective against the more dangerous strains, and more effective against the ones we should be less worried about.

Flu shots are a dangerous cocktail of toxic ingredients

Again, you don’t have to really guess what is in the flu vaccine if you are able to read the actual insert. Along with some other questionable ingredients, the flu shot has been documented to contain aluminum, antibiotics, egg protein, formaldehyde, monosodium glutamate (MSG), and thimerosal, a mercury containing chemical compound.

Being injected (bypassing the body’s detoxification pathways) with any of these ingredients is horrid. But it gets worse…

Flu shots have documented side effects

More transparency on the Flulaval vaccine insert shows a list of side effects reported by actual users. Are these worth risking, for a 50-50 chance you might avoid the flu?

  • Eye pain and chest pain
  • Arthritis
  • Dizziness, tremors and losing consciousness (syncope)
  • Convulsions and seizures
  • Gullain-Barre Syndrome
  • Cranial nerve paralysis or limb paralysis
  • Swelling of the brain
  • Partial facial paralysis

And that is the short list! How could anyone classify “medicine” as something that would cause these types of symptoms?

For more information on the side effects of vaccines, visit


“This vaccine has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potentials or impairment of fertility.”

This phrase or one similar can be found on just about every vaccine package insert and should be justification for any reasonable person to decline vaccination.  However, doctors are not required to give full informed consent regarding vaccines and most people blindly trust their doctors.

Considering the recommended vaccine schedule has tripled in the United States over the last thirty years, parents have begun to question whether this is necessary or valuable to their children.

Image of Advisories regarding Triton and Fluarix Vaccines


In 1983, children received up to 23 doses of eight vaccines before the age of eighteen.  Today children receive as many as 69 doses of 16 different vaccines, all given by the age of eighteen.

Coinciding with the ever-increasing vaccine schedule are soaring rates of chronic illness in children, including cancer, which has skyrocketed and is now the leading cause of death by disease in children past infancy.

Government authorities refuse to acknowledge any link between cancer and vaccination, but could injecting toxic chemicals repeatedly into our children, especially at critical intervals in their development be causing cancer in so many?

Toxic Vaccine Ingredients You Need to Know About

Formaldehyde – There is sufficient evidence from cancer studies in humans proving the carcinogenetic effects of this ingredient.  Both the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer admit formaldehyde is a known carcinogen.

Millions of children receive injections annually containing this toxic ingredient.

Is it a coincidence that formaldehyde has been associated with leukemia and that the number one cancer in children is leukemia?

Mercury Is In Vaccines Too – Mercury is a known carcinogen and for many years children received up to 237 micrograms (mcg) from vaccines during the first two years of life.  This far exceeds the EPA’s recommended safe (to ingest, not inject), level of 1/10th of 1 microgram per kilogram a day.

A rabbit will die if given 35 mcg of mercury.

Thimerosal, which is in many vaccines, is a mercury-containing compound that is 50 times more toxic than plain mercury!  The CDC claims to have removed “most” thimerosal from common pediatric vaccines, leaving only “trace amounts.”

There are NO safe amounts of mercury established for humans and yet, children receive combined vaccines that can build up mercury in the body and cause potential problems.

Aluminum, Yep, It’s In There Too  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved aluminum for use as an adjuvant in human vaccines to boost immune response.  Aluminum is harmful to all life forms.

The FDA limits the dosage to 0.85 milligrams per vaccine to minimize exposure; but children receive other vaccines at the same time that also contain aluminum.

The American Academy of Pediatrics admits that aluminum interferes with many cellular and metabolic processes in the body’s nervous system and tissues.

Repeated exposure to aluminum can have damaging effects and yet children receive repeated injections during the recommended vaccine schedule.  Studies with mice have demonstrated a transient rise in aluminum levels in brain tissue.  Aluminum is also widely associated with breast cancer.

What is Polysorbate 80? Polysorbate 80 is a toxic substance that should never be ingested or placed on the skin, much less injected, and yet it is in vaccines. Studies with lab rats show Polysorbate 80 has both carcinogenic and infertility effects.

Yet, it’s ironic that this carcinogenic ingredient is found both in Merck’s cancer vaccine, Gardasil, and is also used in chemotherapy given to cancer patients.

Recombinant DNA – A Biohazard? – Speaking of Gardasil, genetically modified HPV DNA, which had firmly attached itself to aluminum, was found in blood samples of a 13 year old girl who became chronically ill following her third dose of the vaccine. Could Recombinant HPV DNA cause human cell mutations and cancer?

While searching for the reason why adolescent girls were suffering such severe side effects after receiving the Gardasil vaccine, Dr. Sin Hang Lee, of Sane Vax, Inc., found that the vaccine was contaminated with rDNA of the Human Papillomavirus. This rDNA from both strains of HPV in the vaccine were firmly attached to the aluminum adjuvant. This now reaches the level of a “dangerous biohazard.” This rDNA is not natural and is genetically modified.  Now the girls who received the contaminated vaccine, have human DNA as well as genetically engineered viral DNA in their bodies. When recombinant DNA is inserted into a human cell, it could stay forever and cause mutations; the results could be catastrophic.

SV40 (Simian Virus) Responsible for Cancer Cases – In the 1950s, Rhesus Monkey kidney cells containing SV40 were used to grow the polio virus. Dr. Maurice Hilleman, MD, a renowned scientist who developed Merck’s vaccine program and dozens of vaccines, made astounding revelations to the public that Merck had been injecting this dangerous virus into people worldwide.

Even after the US government knew about contamination, they allegedly continued to inject children with the contaminated vaccine until the 1990s.

SV40 is known to cause different types  of cancers in laboratory animals including mesotheliomas, lymphomas and brain cancers.

A study in The New England Journal of Medicine, found that mothers who received the Salk polio vaccine had brain tumors at a rate “13 times greater” than mothers who received no vaccine!


How You Can Build Immunity And Possibly Reverse Vaccine Damage 

Anyone who has been injected with vaccines, (which is most people) may have vaccine damage.

According to the vaccine package inserts, a list of side effects include seizures, asthma, diabetes, eczema, allergies, auto-immune disease, autism, and more.  There are many studies linking vaccines to arthritis, chronic cognitive dysfunction, behavioral changes, learning disabilities, motor function impairment, autism, and cancer to name a few.

Many people claim to have reversed vaccine damage by using natural therapies like chelation, bentonite clay, homeopathy and fasting.

It is much better to support the body through nutrition and natural supplements than to inject harmful pathogens and toxins into it.

Eating a diet rich in organic fresh fruits and vegetables along with adequate rest, clean water, sunshine, exercise and minerals will go a long way in keeping the immune system strong and the body running well.

At the end of the day, a strong, healthy, pure, untouched immune system will fight most illnesses, including cancer.

Toxic chemicals have no place inside the human body and the sooner the medical establishment recognizes this, the faster we will see a health progression instead of a continual regression.  We must stop adding fuel to the fire with more and more vaccines.

Unfortunately, allopathic medicine and many governing authorities have endorsed what seems to be an ever increasing, toxic vaccine schedule which has been a calamity to the immune system and has undermined the health of at least two generations, all for the sake of profit.


Soy was never supposed to be a food

It was cultivated centuries ago in Asia, because dietary sources of protein
were scarce and people were starving. In ancient China it was called,
“the poor man’s cow.”

Unknowingly, indigenous people reduced many of the anti-nutrients and
phytoestrogens (plant-based compounds that mimic the hormone estrogen) via
the fermentation process. However, most Americans today eat unfermented soy
products, such as soy milk, soy yogurt, chips, cheese, edamame, tofu,
veggie burgers, soy flour in breads and some protein shakes. It is also an
ingredient in many “energy” bars and frozen dinners (as hydrolyzed, isolated or
concentrated soy protein).

In this form, soy protein liberates free amino acids such as glutamate, an
excitotoxin that can cause food cravings.

Even if you think you are not eating soy – there is a very good chance
you are, unless you know what to look for. Processed foods hide it on the
label by calling it other things, like texturized vegetable protein. You
should avoid processed foods anyway, but in the rare circumstances where
you do eat processed foods, avoid soy products at all costs.
Most soy found in the food supply is genetically modified. But that’s not
the only reason to avoid this Franken Food. In fact, not even organic
varieties of soy are fit for human consumption.

Soy contains “anti-nutrients”, including phytates and oxalates,
chemicals that interfere with the absorption of important minerals such as
zinc and calcium. Other “anti-nutrients” include enzyme inhibitors
which interfere with protein digestion and can eventually damage the

Soy products also contain compounds which feminize the body and break down
muscle. And it is a powerful goitrogen, which means it can significantly
slow down the functioning of the thyroid gland.

Soy, and other plants, are poor sources of protein as they are low in
certain essential amino acids. Now, consider that soy is the protein source
in most baby formulas. In other words, formula-fed babies start out life
drinking a cocktail of poor quality protein, powerful estrogen-mimicing
compounds and dangerous enzyme inhibitors.

Most people have no idea how to eat…as best shown by their eagerness to
jump on every fad diet that hits social media.

If you’re over 18, it’s time to grow up and eat right.



Image: Health Basics QUIZ: Which has killed more people, measles or the measles vaccine?

Health Basics QUIZ: Which has killed more people, measles or the measles vaccine?

Surely you are paranoid about infectious diseases. You’ve seen horrific pictures of children with poliomyelitis, mumps, and even smallpox. You’ve heard that the science is “settled” as far as vaccines go, and that they are one hundred percent safe and effective. You’ve also never seen any media coverage of vaccine side effects or adverse events that left children maimed or dead, so why ever question immunizations of any kind, including the flu shot?

You would never dare ask a pediatrician if vaccines are safe or effective, because you would look stupid, right? Would you ask the doctor or nurse how many people have died from the measles vaccine right before they’re about to administer it? What if you were extremely allergic to its ingredients? For some children, vaccines can cause anxiety disorders, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Did you know that the vaccine industry has paid out over $3.5 billion in reparations for injuries caused by the neurotoxins those “safe and effective” vaccines contain, like mercury, aluminum and embalming fluid? There is ONE question you must ask the next doctor or nurse you encounter as they are rubbing the alcohol-soaked cotton ball on your upper arm, or that of your child’s – “Which has killed more people, the measles or the measles vaccine?

A normal functioning human immune system can easily defeat nearly every infectious disease known today

If there were a vaccine for a mild headache, would you rush to the doctor to get it? If there were a vaccine for a stomach ache, would you get that noxious jab today? One of the main reasons Americans are so terrified of the “blight” of infectious diseases is because nobody has been educated about the human immune system and the power of organic food. Human babies are not normally born weak with compromised immune systems. That happens after they get injected with known neurotoxins and fed baby formula that contains genetically modified organisms and pesticides.

The human immune system is mighty capable of fighting off chicken pox, measles, influenza, mumps, smallpox, polio, and yes, even human papillomavirus (HPV). Plus, once you’ve caught and defeated these diseases, your body has created antibodies to help you defend against them forever, unlike vaccines that wear off after a few years. Oh yes, they do.

Exactly WHAT ingredients are put in the Measles Vaccine?

The measles vaccine is mixed into a concoction with other “attenuated” (weakened diseases) infectious organisms as advised by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), that’s trying to rush everyone to get the triple jab (it includes mumps and rubella) in order to decrease the “chance of delays in protection” against all three diseases. While delaying “chances” taken, it sounds like everyone is increasing risk of adverse events from a massive and experimental cocktail of known neurotoxins.

Get ready to learn exactly why the measles vaccine is responsible for over 100 deaths in a very recent decade. Here are just some of the ingredients in the tri-fecta “axis of evil” MMR, MMR-II and MMRV (V for Vericella) injections:

WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts (cell samples from human abortions)

Recombinant human albumin (genetically modified human blood from abortions)

Neomycin (an antibiotic)

Sorbitol (sugar alcohol that’s largely indigestible, causes diarrhea)

Hydrolyzed gelatin (can come from infected CAFO animals’ cartilage, skin, hooves, muscles)

Monosodium glutamate (yes, MSG that can cause severe migraines and brain damage in babies)

Bovine calf serum (byproduct of the dairy industry produced from blood collected at CAFO slaughterhouses)

MRC-5 cells (samples derived from lung tissue of a 14-week-young Caucasian male abortion.

The risk of getting the MMR combo-vaccine greatly outweighs the risk of just getting the diseases

Two Merck scientists confessed to fraud and filed a False Claims Act in 2010 explaining how Merck faked their mumps vaccine test data by spiking blood samples with animal antibodies to make it look like the vaccine was effective at a high rate. This all took place while the mainstream media exploited the fake Disneyland “outbreak” of measles. The result was the courts ignored the falsified clinical trials and Merck monopolized the vaccine market, making millions. The vaccine was never really tested against the wild virus. The U.S. government got their hands dirty with the “toxic cocktail” that ensued.

The irony of it all? Just like chickenpox, measles is a common childhood infection that’s typically mild and was a “rite of passage” for generations. Today, the media takes a few isolated cases of extreme measles and pretends like all children are in extreme danger without immunization. It’s all sensationalism, propaganda, fear mongering and medical corruption at the highest levels. In fact, Measles deaths were virtually nonexistent prior to the introduction of the result-falsified vaccine, which is now triggering outbreaks through what is termed “vaccine virus shedding.”

For the Years 2004 through 2015:

Deaths from Measles = 0

Deaths from Measles Vaccines = 108

Worried about diseases most human bodies beat and never catch again? Maybe you should be worried much more about death by vaccine. While no person has been reported to or by the CDC to have died from the Measles from 2004 through 2015, more than one hundred people have DIED from the Measles vaccine, according to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). That’s serious business and one of the reasons that vaccine injury settlements are kept out of the mass media news – always.

Learn more about aborted human fetal blood samples used for vaccines in the video below.


Sources for this article include:



by Dr. Mercola

Alzheimer’s disease — for which conventional medicine believes there is no effective treatment or cure — currently affects an estimated 5.4 million Americans1 and prevalence is projected to triple by 2050.2,3 Within the next two decades, this severe and lethal form of dementia may affect as much as one-quarter of the U.S. population. Already, more than half a million Americans die from the disease each year, making it the third leading cause of death in the U.S., right behind heart disease and cancer.4,5

The good news is that lifestyle choices such as diet, exercise and sleep can have a significant impact on your risk. As previously noted by Dr. Richard Lipton6 of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine where they study healthy aging, lifestyle changes “look more promising than the drug studies so far.” As with health in general, your diet plays a crucial role. Processed foods tend to be nearly devoid of healthy fat while being excessive in refined sugars, and this combination appears to be at the heart of the problem.

High-Sugar Diet Significantly Raises Your Risk of Dementia

One of the most striking studies7 on carbohydrates and brain health revealed that high-carb diets increase your risk of dementia by a whopping 89 percent, while high-fat diets lower it by 44 percent. According to the authors, “A dietary pattern with relatively high caloric intake from carbohydrates and low caloric intake from fat and proteins may increase the risk of mild cognitive impairment or dementia in elderly persons.”

Studies also strongly suggest Alzheimer’s disease is intricately connected to insulin resistance;8 even mild elevation of blood sugar is associated with an elevated risk for dementia.9 Diabetes and heart disease10 are also known to elevate your risk, and both are rooted in insulin resistance.

This connection between high-sugar diets and Alzheimer’s was again highlighted in a longitudinal study published in the journal Diabetologia in January 2018.11 Nearly 5,190 individuals were followed over a decade, and the results showed that the higher an individual’s blood sugar, the faster their rate of cognitive decline.

Both Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetics Have Higher Risk for Alzheimer’s

The connection between sugar and Alzheimer’s was first broached in 2005, when the disease was tentatively dubbed “Type 3 diabetes.” At that time researchers discovered that your brain produces insulin necessary for the survival of your brain cells.12 A toxic protein called ADDL removes insulin receptors from nerve cells, thereby rendering those neurons insulin resistant, and as ADDLs accumulate, your memory begins to deteriorate.

Curiously, while low insulin levels in your body are associated with improved health, the opposite appears to be true when it comes to the insulin produced in your brain. Reduced brain insulin actually contributes to the degeneration of brain cells, and studies have found that people with lower levels of insulin and insulin receptors in their brain often have Alzheimer’s disease.

According to researchers,13 “These abnormalities do not correspond to Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, but reflect a different and more complex disease process that originates in the central nervous system.”

In 2016, researchers at John’s Hopkins department of biology discovered that nerve growth factor, a protein found in your nervous system that is involved in the growth of neurons, also triggers insulin release in your pancreas.14 So there appears to be a rather complex relationship between body insulin, brain insulin and brain function, and we’ve probably only begun to tease out all of these connections.

Case in point, even Type 1 diabetics are at increased risk for Alzheimer’s, even though their bodies don’t produce insulin at all. Melissa Schilling, a professor at New York University, investigated this paradox in 2016. As reported by The Atlantic:15

“Schilling posits this happens because of the insulin-degrading enzyme, a product of insulin that breaks down both insulin and amyloid proteins in the brain — the same proteins that clump up and lead to Alzheimer’s disease. People who don’t have enough insulin, like those whose bodies’ ability to produce insulin has been tapped out by diabetes, aren’t going to make enough of this enzyme to break up those brain clumps.

Meanwhile, in people who use insulin to treat their diabetes and end up with a surplus of insulin, most of this enzyme gets used up breaking that insulin down, leaving not enough enzyme to address those amyloid brain clumps. According to Schilling, this can happen even in people who don’t have diabetes yet — who are in a state known as ‘prediabetes.’”

Sugar Damages Brain Structure and Function

Research16 published in 2013 showed that sugar and other carbohydrates can disrupt your brain function even if you’re not diabetic or have any signs of dementia. Here, short- and long-term glucose markers were evaluated in healthy, nondiabetic, nondemented seniors. Memory tests and brain imaging were also used to assess brain function and the actual structure of their hippocampus.

The findings revealed that the higher the two blood glucose measures, the smaller the hippocampus, the more compromised its structure, and the worse the individual’s memory was. According to the authors, the structural changes in the hippocampus alone can partially account for the statistical link we see between glucose and memory, as your hippocampus is involved with the formation, organization and storage of memories.

The results suggest glucose directly contributes to atrophy of the hippocampus, which means that even if you’re not insulin resistant or diabetic, excess sugar can still hamper your memory. The authors suggest that “strategies aimed at lowering glucose levels even in the normal range may beneficially influence cognition in the older population.”

A similar study17 published in 2014 found that Type 2 diabetics lose more gray matter with age than expected, and this brain atrophy also helps explain why diabetics have a higher risk for dementia, and have earlier onset of dementia than nondiabetics.

As noted by Dr. Sam Gandy, director of the Center for Cognitive Health at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City, these findings “suggest that chronic high levels of insulin and sugar may be directly toxic to brain cells” adding that “This would definitely be a potential cause of dementia.”18

Even Mild Insulin Resistance Speeds Cognitive Decline

A study19 published just last year also confirmed the link between insulin resistance and dementia, particularly among those with existing heart disease. Nearly 490 seniors were followed for two decades, and as in other studies, those with the highest levels of insulin resistance scored the worst on cognitive tests, especially tests for memory and executive function.

A take-home message here is that you don’t have to be a diabetic to be at increased risk. As noted by senior study author Dr. David Tanne, a faculty member of Tel Aviv University in Israel, “Even people with mild or moderate insulin resistance … are at increased risk over time … Exercising, maintaining a balanced and healthy diet and watching your weight will help you prevent insulin resistance and, as a result, protect your brain as you get older.”

Progress Made in the Development of a Blood Test for Alzheimer’s

In related news, researchers have announced great strides being made in the development of a blood test to detect Alzheimer’s.20 The test is designed to detect amyloid beta, the toxic protein known to accumulate in the brains of Alzheimer’s patients. In a recent trial,21 the test was 90 percent accurate in detecting the disease in a pool of 370 participants.

At present, the only way to measure amyloid beta is by brain scan or a spinal tap, both of which are invasive and expensive, and can only detect the disease once it has sufficiently progressed. While promising, further trials must be done to confirm the diagnostic accuracy of the blood test before it can be released and used in medical practice.

One of the most comprehensive assessments of Alzheimer’s risk is Dr. Dale Bredesen’s ReCODE protocol, which evaluates 150 factors known to contribute to the disease. This protocol also identifies your disease subtype or combination of subtypes so that an effective treatment protocol can be devised.

You can learn more about this in “ReCODE: The Reversal of Cognitive Decline,” which is my interview with him. In his book, you will also find a list of suggested screening tests and the recommended ranges for each test, along with some of Bredesen’s treatment suggestions. The full protocol is described in Bredesen’s book, “The End of Alzheimer’s: The First Program to Prevent and Reverse Cognitive Decline.”22

Turmeric May Lower Alzheimer’s Risk, Study Shows

Other recent developments include a study showing curcumin supplementation may lower the risk of Alzheimer’s by improving memory and focus.23 The double-blind, placebo-controlled study, published in the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry,24 included 40 adults between the ages of 50 and 90 who reported mild memory lapses. None had a diagnosis of dementia at the time of their enrollment. Participants randomly received either 90 milligrams of curcumin (Theracurmin supplement) twice a day for 18 months, or a placebo.

A standardized cognitive assessment was administered at the start of the study and at six-month intervals thereafter, and the level of curcumin in their blood was measured at the beginning and end of the study. Thirty of the participants also underwent positron emission tomography (PET) scans to assess their level of amyloid and tau deposits before and after treatment, both of which are strongly associated with Alzheimer’s risk.

Those who received curcumin saw significant improvements in memory and concentration, while the control group experienced no improvement. PET scans confirmed the treatment group had significantly less amyloid and tau buildup in areas of the brain that control memory, compared to controls. Overall, the curcumin group improved their memory by 28 percent over the year-and-a-half-long treatment period.

Curcumin has also been shown to increase levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF),25 and reduced levels of BDNF have been linked to Alzheimer’s disease. Yet another way curcumin may benefit your brain and lower your risk of dementia is by affecting pathways that help reverse insulin resistance, hyperlipidemia and other symptoms associated with metabolic syndrome and obesity.26

Preventive Strategies

According to Dr. David Perlmutter, a neurologist and author of “Grain Brain” and “Brain Maker,” anything that promotes insulin resistance will ultimately also raise your risk of Alzheimer’s. To this I would add that any strategy that enhances your mitochondrial function will lower your risk. Considering the lack of effective treatments, prevention really cannot be stressed strongly enough.

In 2014, Bredesen published a paper that demonstrates the power of lifestyle choices for the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer’s. By leveraging 36 healthy lifestyle parameters, he was able to reverse Alzheimer’s in 9 out of 10 patients.

This included the use of exercise, ketogenic diet, optimizing vitamin D and other hormones, increasing sleep, meditation, detoxification and eliminating gluten and processed food. You can download Bredesen’s full-text case paper online, which details the full program.27 Following are some of the lifestyle strategies I believe to be the most helpful and important:

Eat real food, ideally organic

Avoid processed foods of all kinds, as they contain a number of ingredients harmful to your brain, including refined sugar, processed fructose, grains (particularly gluten), vegetable oils, genetically engineered ingredients and pesticides. Ideally, keep your added sugar to a minimum and your total fructose below 25 grams per day, or as low as 15 grams per day if you already have insulin/leptin resistance or any related disorders.

Opting for organic produce will help you avoid synthetic pesticides and herbicides. Most will also benefit from a gluten-free diet, as gluten makes your gut more permeable, which allows proteins to get into your bloodstream where they sensitize your immune system and promote inflammation and autoimmunity, both of which play a role in the development of Alzheimer’s.

Replace refined carbs with healthy fats

Diet is paramount, and the beauty of following my optimized nutrition plan is that it helps prevent and treat virtually all chronic degenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s. It’s important to realize that your brain actually does not need carbs and sugars; healthy fats such as saturated animal fats and animal-based omega-3 are far more critical for optimal brain function.

A cyclical ketogenic diet has the double advantage of both improving your insulin sensitivity and lowering your Alzheimer’s risk. As noted by Perlmutter, lifestyle strategies such as a ketogenic diet can even offset the risk associated with genetic predisposition. (Estimates suggest genetics account for less than 5 percent of Alzheimer’s cases.

An estimated 75 million Americans have the single allele for ApoE4. Those who are ApoE4 positive have a 30 percent lifetime risk of developing the disease. Approximately 7 million have two copies of the gene, which puts them at a 50 percent lifetime risk. It’s unknown how many Americans have the TOMM40 gene or others that may affect your risk.)

When your body burns fat as its primary fuel, ketones are created, which not only burn very efficiently and are a superior fuel for your brain, but also generate fewer reactive oxygen species and less free radical damage. A ketone called beta hydroxybutyrate is also a major epigenetic player, stimulating beneficial changes in DNA expression, thereby reducing inflammation and increasing detoxification and antioxidant production.

I explain the ins and outs of implementing this kind of diet, and its many health benefits, in my new book “Fat for Fuel.” In it, I also explain why cycling through stages of feast and famine, opposed to continuously remaining in nutritional ketosis, is so important.

Pay close attention to the kinds of fats you eat — avoid all trans fats or hydrogenated fats that have been modified in such a way to extend their longevity on the grocery store shelf. This includes margarine, vegetable oils and various butter-like spreads.

Healthy fats to add to your diet include avocados, butter, organic pastured egg yolks, coconuts and coconut oil, grass fed meats and raw nuts such as pecans and macadamia. MCT oil is also a great source of ketone bodies.

Keep your fasting insulin levels below 3

Lowering your insulin will also help lower leptin levels which is another factor for Alzheimer’s. If your insulin is high, you’re likely consuming too much sugar and need to cut back.

Optimize your omega-3 level

Also make sure you’re getting enough animal-based omega-3 fats. High intake of the omega-3 fats EPA and DHA help by preventing cell damage caused by Alzheimer’s disease, thereby slowing down its progression and lowering your risk of developing the disorder. Ideally, get an omega-3 index test done once a year to make sure you’re in a healthy range. Your omega-3 index should be above 8 percent and your omega 6-to-3 ratio between 0.5 and 3.0.

Optimize your gut flora

To do this, avoid processed foods, antibiotics and antibacterial products, fluoridated and chlorinated water, and be sure to eat traditionally fermented and cultured foods, along with a high-quality probiotic if needed. Dr. Steven Gundry does an excellent job of expanding on this in his new book “The Plant Paradox.”

Intermittently fast

Intermittent fasting is a powerful tool to jump-start your body into remembering how to burn fat and repair the insulin/leptin resistance that is a primary contributing factor for Alzheimer’s. Once you have worked your way up to where you’ve been doing 20-hour daily intermittent fasting for a month, are metabolically flexible and can burn fat as your primary fuel, you can progress to the far more powerful five-day water fasts.

Move regularly and consistently throughout the day

It’s been suggested that exercise can trigger a change in the way the amyloid precursor protein is metabolized,28 thus, slowing down the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s. Exercise also increases levels of the protein PGC-1 alpha. Research has shown that people with Alzheimer’s have less PGC-1 alpha in their brains and cells that contain more of the protein produce less of the toxic amyloid protein associated with Alzheimer’s.

Optimize your magnesium levels

Preliminary research strongly suggests a decrease in Alzheimer symptoms with increased levels of magnesium in the brain. Keep in mind that the only magnesium supplement that appears to be able to cross the blood-brain barrier is magnesium threonate.

Optimize your vitamin D, ideally through sensible sun exposure

Sufficient vitamin D is imperative for proper functioning of your immune system to combat inflammation associated with Alzheimer’s and, indeed, research shows people living in northern latitudes have higher rates of death from dementia and Alzheimer’s than those living in sunnier areas, suggesting vitamin D and/or sun exposure are important factors.29

If you are unable to get sufficient amounts of sun exposure, take daily supplemental vitamin D3 to reach and maintain a blood level of 60 to 80 ng/ml. That said, it’s important to recognize that sun exposure is important for reasons unrelated to vitamin D.

Your brain responds to the near-infrared light in sunlight in a process called photobiomodulation. Research shows near-infrared stimulation of the brain boosts cognition and reduces symptoms of Alzheimer’s, including more advanced stages of the disease.

Delivering near-infrared light to the compromised mitochondria synthesizes gene transcription factors that trigger cellular repair, and your brain is one of the most mitochondrial-dense organs in your body.

Avoid and eliminate aluminum from your body

Common sources of aluminum include antiperspirants, nonstick cookware and vaccine adjuvants. For tips on how to detox aluminum, please see my article, “First Case Study to Show Direct Link between Alzheimer’s and Aluminum Toxicity.” 

Avoid flu vaccinations

Flu vaccines contain mercury and aluminum, plus foreign DNA from animals and aborted fetuses. Injected into your blood system these can be deadly.

Avoid statins and anticholinergic drugs

Drugs that block acetylcholine, a nervous system neurotransmitter, have been shown to increase your risk of dementia. These drugs include certain nighttime pain relievers, antihistamines, sleep aids, certain antidepressants, medications to control incontinence and certain narcotic pain relievers.

Statin drugs are particularly problematic because they suppress the synthesis of cholesterol, deplete your brain of coenzyme Q10, vitamin K2 and neurotransmitter precursors, and prevent adequate delivery of essential fatty acids and fat-soluble antioxidants to your brain by inhibiting the production of the indispensable carrier biomolecule known as low-density lipoprotein.

Optimize your sleep

Sleep is necessary for maintaining metabolic homeostasis in your brain. Without sufficient sleep, neuron degeneration sets in, and catching up on sleep during weekends will not prevent this damage.33,34,35 Sleep deprivation causes disruption of certain synaptic connections that can impair your brain’s ability for learning, memory formation and other cognitive functions. Poor sleep also accelerates the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.36

Most adults need seven to nine hours of uninterrupted sleep each night. Deep sleep is the most important, as this is when your brain’s glymphatic system performs its cleanout functions, eliminating toxic waste from your brain, including amyloid beta. For a comprehensive sleep guide, see “33 Secret’s to a Good Night’s Sleep.”

Challenge your mind daily

Mental stimulation, especially learning something new, such as learning to play an instrument or a new language, is associated with a decreased risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s. Researchers suspect that mental challenge helps to build up your brain, making it less susceptible to the lesions associated with Alzheimer’s disease.


Diseases With Unknown Etiology Trace Back To Mass Vaccination Against Influenza In 1976

By James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D.

Crohn’s. Lupus. Autism. ADHD. Food allergies. Celiac disease. Sjögren’s syndrome. Polymyalgia rheumatica. Multiple sclerosis. Anklyosing spondylitis. Type 1 diabetes. Vasculitis. Peripheral neuropathy. The list goes on, and on, and on. We are being increasingly diagnosed with these conditions and diseases of unknown origin, and science has very little to say – why would autoimmune diseases and mysterious diseases of inflammation be so prevalent? When did this increase start?

As an observer and participant in modern biomedical research, and a lover of deep history, I tend to focus not on the immediate or last few years, but look for trends of accumulating risk over longer periods of time. Seeking an answer to the question of “when”, I used Pubmed to estimate, per yer, the number of studies and papers discussing diseases and conditions of unknown origin. I search for the term “unknown causes”, and also for the term “journal” to get some idea of the percentage of studies, papers and editorials discussing disease of unknown causes. I had no idea what to expect.

Looking at a trend of topics per year, one has to correct for some estimate of the total number of articles published, because a mere count would, in part, reflect the overall trend in the explosion of total articles published. I chose as my control term the word “journal”, because many titles of publications include that term (e.g., “Journal of Nephrology).

Here is the control result, which is not surprising, and completely expected:

Again, this merely reflects the trend in the increase in publications in Pubmed, and so using it would provide a relative control for that trend.

Next I searched for “Unknown Causes”, and calculated the number of articles citing unknown causes per 10,000 articles (again, relative denominator term).

What I found is shocking. Here is a graph of the number of articles per 10,000 discussing “unknown causes” (Y = #articles mentioning “unknown causes” / #articles mentioning “journal”, as in the title of journals).


Because the studies in Pubmed include all sorts of journals studying all sorts of things, the actual number is not as important as the trend. The signature is undeniable. Something changed dramatically in 1976. To the skeptic: the increase is greater if one does not correct for total publications.

What changed was national mass vaccination against influenza.

The following section is excerpted from “Reflections on the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccination Program” by David Sencer and J. Donald Millar. [Link]

Swine Flu at Fort Dix

On February 3, 1976, the New Jersey State Health Department sent the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta isolates of virus from recruits at Fort Dix, New Jersey, who had influenza-like illnesses. Most of the isolates were identified as A/Victoria/75 (H3N2), the contemporary epidemic strain. Two of the isolates, however, were not typeable in that laboratory. On February 10, additional isolates were sent and identified in CDC laboratories as A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1N1), similar to the virus of the 1918 pandemic and better known as “swine flu.”

A meeting of representatives of the military, the National Institute of Health, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the State of New Jersey Department of Health was quickly convened on Saturday, February 14, 1976. Plans of action included heightened surveillance in and around Fort Dix, investigation of the ill recruits to determine if contact with pigs had occurred, and serologic testing of recruits to determine if spread had occurred at Fort Dix.

Surveillance activities at Fort Dix gave no indication that recruits had contact with pigs. Surveillance in the surrounding communities found influenza caused by the current strain of influenza, A/Victoria, but no additional cases of swine flu. Serologic testing at Fort Dix indicated that person-to-person transmission had occurred in >200 recruits (4).

In 1974 and 1975, 2 instances of humans infected with swine influenza viruses had been documented in the United States. Both persons involved had close contact with pigs, and no evidence for spread of the virus beyond family members with pig contact could be found (5).

The National Influenza Immunization Program

On March 10, 1976, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the United States Public Health Service (ACIP) reviewed the findings. The committee concluded that with a new strain (the H1N1 New Jersey strain) that could be transmitted from person to person, a pandemic was a possibility. Specifically, the following facts were of concern: 1) persons <50 years of age had no antibodies to this new strain; 2) a current interpandemic strain (A/Victoria) of influenza was widely circulating; 3) this early detection of an outbreak caused by A/New Jersey/76/Hsw1N1 (H1N1) provided an opportunity to produce a vaccine since there was sufficient time between the initial isolates and the advent of an expected influenza season to produce vaccine. In the past when a new pandemic strain had been identified, there had not been enough time to manufacture vaccine on any large scale; 4) influenza vaccines had been used for years with demonstrated safety and efficacy when the currently circulating vaccine strain was incorporated; 5) the military vaccine formulation for years had included H1N1, an indication that production was possible, and no documented adverse effects had been described.

ACIP recommended that an immunization program be launched to prevent the effects of a possible pandemic. One ACIP member summarized the consensus by stating “If we believe in prevention, we have no alternative but to offer and urge the immunization of the population.” One ACIP member expressed the view that the vaccine should be stockpiled, not given.

Making this decision carried an unusual urgency. The pharmaceutical industry had just finished manufacture of the vaccine to be used in the 1976–1977 influenza season. At that time, influenza vaccine was produced in fertilized hen’s eggs from special flocks of hens. Roosters used for fertilizing the hens were still available; if they were slaughtered, as was customary, the industry could not resume production for several months.

On March 13, an action memo was presented to the Secretary of the Department of Health Education and Welfare (DHEW). It outlined the problem and presented 4 alternative courses of action. First was “business as usual,” with the marketplace prevailing and the assumption that a pandemic might not occur. The second was a recommendation that the federal government embark on a major program to immunize a highly susceptible population. As a reason to adopt this plan of action, the memo stated that “the Administration can tolerate unnecessary health expenditures better than unnecessary death and illness if a pandemic should occur.” The third proposed course of action was a minimal response, in which the federal government would contract for sufficient vaccine to provide for traditional federal beneficiaries—military personnel, Native Americans, and Medicare-eligible persons. The fourth alternative was a program that would represent an exclusively federal response without involvement of the states.

The proposal recommended by the director of CDC was the second course, namely, for the federal government to contract with private pharmaceutical companies to produce sufficient vaccine to permit the entire population to be immunized against H1N1. The federal government would make grants to state health departments to organize and conduct immunization programs. The federal government would provide vaccine to state health departments and private medical practices. Since influenza caused by A/Victoria was active worldwide, industry was asked to incorporate the swine flu into an A/Victoria product to be used for populations at high risk.

Before the discussions with the secretary of DHEW had been completed, a member of his staff sent a memo to a health policy advisor in the White House, raising the specter of the 1918 pandemic, which had been specifically underemphasized in the CDC presentation. CDC’s presentation highlighted the pandemic potential, comparing it with the 1968–69 Hong Kong and 1957–58 Asian pandemics. President Gerald Ford’s staff recommended that the president convene a large group of well-known and respected scientists (Albert Sabin and Jonas Salk had to be included) and public representatives to hear the government’s proposal and make recommendations to the president about it. After the meeting, the president had a press conference, highlighted by the unique simultaneous appearance of Salk and Sabin. President Ford announced that he accepted the recommendations that CDC had originally made to the secretary of DHEW. The National Influenza Immunization Program (NIIP) was initiated.

The proposal was presented to 4 committees of the Congress, House and Senate authorization committees and House and Senate appropriation committees. All 4 committees reported out favorable legislation, and an appropriation bill was passed and signed.

The estimated budgeted cost of the program was $137 million. When Congress passed the appropriation, newspapers mischaracterized the cost as “$1.9 billion” because the $137 million was included as part of a $1.9 billion supplemental appropriation for the Department of Labor. In the minds of the public, this misconception prevailed.

Immediately after the congressional hearing, a meeting of all directors of state health departments and medical societies was held at CDC. The program was presented by CDC, and attendees were asked for comments. A representative from the New Jersey state health department opposed the plan; the Wisconsin state medical society opposed any federal involvement. Otherwise, state and local health departments approved the plan.

Within CDC, a unit charged with implementing the program, which reported to the director, was established. This unit, NIIP, had complete authority to draw upon any resources at CDC needed. NIIP was responsible for relations with state and local health departments (including administration of the grant program for state operations, technical advice to the procurement staff for vaccine, and warehousing and distribution of the vaccine to state health departments) and established a proactive system of surveillance for possible adverse effects of the influenza vaccines, the NIIP Surveillance Assessment Center (NIIP-SAC). (This innovative surveillance system would prove to be NIIP’s Trojan horse.) In spite of the obstacles discussed below, NIIP administered a program that immunized 45 million in 10 weeks, which resulted in doubling the level of immunization for persons deemed to be at high risk, rapidly identifying adverse effects, and developing and administering an informed consent form for use in a community-based program.

Obstacles to the Vaccination Plan

The principal obstacle was the lack of vaccines. As test batches were prepared, the largest ever field trials of influenza vaccines ensued. The vaccines appeared efficacious and safe (although in the initial trials, children did not respond immunologically to a single dose of vaccine, and a second trial with a revised schedule was needed) (6). Hopes were heightened for a late summer/early fall kickoff of mass immunization operations.

In January 1976, before the New Jersey outbreak, CDC had proposed legislation that would have compensated persons damaged as a result of immunization when it was licensed by FDA and administered in the manner recommended by ACIP. The rationale given was that immunization protects the community as well as the individual (a societal benefit) and that when a person participating in that societal benefit is damaged, society had a responsibility to that person. The proposal was sent back from a staff member in the Surgeon General’s office with a handwritten note, “This is not a problem.”

Soon, however, NIIP received the first of 2 crippling blows to hopes to immunize “every man, woman, and child.” The first was later in 1976, when instead of boxes of bottled vaccine, the vaccine manufacturers delivered an ultimatum—that the federal government indemnify them against claims of adverse reactions as a requirement for release of the vaccines. The government quickly capitulated to industry’s demand for indemnification. While the manufacturers’ ultimatum reflected the trend of increased litigiousness in American society, its unintended, unmistakable subliminal message blared “There’s something wrong with this vaccine.” This public misperception, warranted or not, ensured that every coincidental health event that occurred in the wake of the swine flu shot would be scrutinized and attributed to the vaccine.

On August 2, 1976, deaths apparently due to an influenzalike illness were reported from Pennsylvania in older men who had attended the convention of the American Legion in Philadelphia. A combined team of CDC and state and local health workers immediately investigated. By the next day, epidemiologic evidence indicated that the disease was not influenza (no secondary cases occurred in the households of the patients). By August 4, laboratory evidence conclusively ruled out influenza. However, this series of events was interpreted by the media and others as an attempt by the government to “stimulate” NIIP.

Shortly after the national campaign began, 3 elderly persons died after receiving the vaccine in the same clinic. Although investigations found no evidence that the vaccine and deaths were causally related, press frenzy was so intense it drew a televised rebuke from Walter Cronkite for sensationalizing coincidental happenings.

Guillain-Barré Syndrome

What NIIP did not and could not survive, however, was the second blow, finding cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) among persons receiving swine flu immunizations. As of 1976, >50 “antecedent events” had been identified in temporal relationship to GBS, events that were considered as possible factors in its cause. The list included viral infections, injections, and “being struck by lightning.” Whether or not any of the antecedents had a causal relationship to GBS was, and remains, unclear. When cases of GBS were identified among recipients of the swine flu vaccines, they were, of course, well covered by the press. Because GBS cases are always present in the population, the necessary public health questions concerning the cases among vaccine recipients were “Is the number of cases of GBS among vaccine recipients higher than would be expected? And if so, are the increased cases the result of increased surveillance or a true increase?” Leading epidemiologists debated these points, but the consensus, based on the intensified surveillance for GBS (and other conditions) in recipients of the vaccines, was that the number of cases of GBS appeared to be an excess.

Had H1N1 influenza been transmitted at that time, the small apparent risk of GBS from immunization would have been eclipsed by the obvious immediate benefit of vaccine-induced protection against swine flu. However, in December 1976, with >40 million persons immunized and no evidence of H1N1 transmission, federal health officials decided that the possibility of an association of GBS with the vaccine, however small, necessitated stopping immunization, at least until the issue could be explored. A moratorium on the use of the influenza vaccines was announced on December 16; it effectively ended NIIP of 1976. Four days later the New York Times published an op-ed article that began by asserting, “Misunderstandings and misconceptions… have marked Government … during the last eight years,” attributing NIIP and its consequences to “political expediency” and “the self interest of government health bureaucracy” (7). These simple and sinister innuendos had traction, as did 2 epithets used in the article to describe the program, “debacle” in the text and “Swine Flu Fiasco” in the title.

On February 7, the new secretary of DHEW, Joseph A. Califano, announced the resumption of immunization of high-risk populations with monovalent A/Victoria vaccine that had been prepared as part of the federal contracts, and he dismissed the director of CDC.

Lessons Learned

NIIP may offer lessons for today’s policymakers, who are faced with a potential pandemic of avian influenza and struggling with decisions about preventing it (Table). Two of these lessons bear further scrutiny here.

Media and Presidential Attention

While all decisions related to NIIP had been reached in public sessions (publishing of the initial virus findings in CDC’s weekly newsletter, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR); New York Times reporter Harold Schmeck’s coverage of the ACIP sessions, the president’s press conference, and 4 congressional hearings), effective communication from scientifically qualified persons was lacking, and the perception prevailed that the program was motivated by politics rather than science. In retrospect (and to some observers at the time), the president’s highly visible convened meeting and subsequent press conference, which included pictures of his being immunized, were mistakes. These instances seemed to underline the suspicion that the program was politically motivated, rather than a public health response to a possible catastrophe.Annex 11 of the draft DHEW pandemic preparedness plan states, “For policy decisions and in communication, making clear what is not known is as important as stating what is known. When assumptions are made, the basis for the assumptions and the uncertainties surrounding them should be communicated” (11). This goal is much better accomplished if the explanations are communicated by those closest to the problem, who can give authoritative scientific information. Scientific information coming from a nonscientific political figure is likely to encourage skepticism, not enthusiasm.

Neither CDC nor the health agencies of the federal government had been in the habit of holding regular press conferences. CDC considered that its appropriate main line of communication was to states and local health departments, believing that they were best placed to communicate with the public. MMWR served both a professional and public audience and accounted for much of CDC’s press coverage. In 1976, no all-news stations existed, only the nightly news. The decision to stop the NIIP on December 16, 1976, was announced by a press release from the office of the assistant secretary for health. The decision to reinstitute the immunization of those at high risk was announced by a press release from the office of the secretary, DHEW. In retrospect, periodic press briefings would have served better than responding to press queries. The public must understand that decisions are based on public health, not politics. To this end, health communication should be by health personnel through a regular schedule of media briefings.

Decision To Begin Immunization

This decision is worthy of serious question and debate. As Walter Dowdle (12) points out in this issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases, the prevailing wisdom was that a pandemic could be expected at any time. Public health officials were concerned that if immunization was delayed until H1N1 was documented to have spread to other groups, the disease would spread faster than any ability to mobilize preventive vaccination efforts. Three cases of swine influenza had recently occurred in persons who had contact with pigs. In 1918, after the initial outbreak of influenza at Fort Riley in April, widespread outbreaks of influenza did not occur until late summer (13).

The Delphi exercise of Schoenbaum in early fall of 1976 (13) was the most serious scientific undertaking to poll scientists to decide whether or not to continue the program. Its main finding was that the cost benefit would be best if immunization were limited to those >25 years of age (and now young children are believed to be a potent source of spread of influenza virus!). Unfortunately, no biblical Joseph was there to rise from prison and interpret the future.

As Dowdle further states (12), risk assessment and risk management are separate functions. But they must come together with policymakers, who must understand both. These discussions should not take place in large groups in the president’s cabinet room but in an environment that can establish an educated understanding of the situation. Once the policy decisions are made, implementation should be left to a single designated agency. Advisory groups should be small but representative. CDC had the lead responsibility for operation of the program. Implementation by committee does not work. Within CDC, a unit was established for program execution, including surveillance, outbreak investigation, vaccine procurement and distribution, assignment of personnel to states, and awarding and monitoring grants to the states. Communications up the chain of command to the policymakers and laterally to other directly involved federal agencies were the responsibility of the CDC director, not the director of NIIP, who was responsible for communications to the states and local health departments, those ultimately implementing operations of the program. This organizational mode functioned well, a tribute to the lack of interagency jealousies.

This history is fascinating. But the conclusions of those involved in the decision-making about risk is telling: even though they observed Guillain-Barré syndrome in a significant number of individuals, they forged ahead with ACIP telling them it was more important to conduct mass vaccinations.

In 1986, the The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) established the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Guillain-Barré Syndrome was added to the table of vaccine injuries for which compensation is awarded in 2017. It took thirty-one years to add GBS to the table, and they knew about the assocation for ten years before the 1986 act.

When assessing risk, there are the knowns, the unknowns, and the unknowns one does even know to look for. The “Reflections” article, on the CDC website, shows that knowledge of risk of autoimmune disorders like Guillain-Barré Syndrome and deaths from vaccination was present from the beginning.

Serious side effects in a minority of patients is rationalized by the benefits of the flu vaccine, and vaccine risk denialism perpetuates the regulation of perception necessary for continuation of the view that the benefits outweigh the risks.

But, at a population level, evidence is mounting that, due to numerous reasons, mass influenza vaccination is self-defeating.

The facts in the scientific literature that must be considered include:

(1) A/H3N2 disease vaccinated individuals were significantly more likely to report myalgias (OR 3.31; 95% CI [1.22, 8.97]) than vaccinated individuals. [Vaccine-associated reduction in symptom severity among patients with influenza]

(2) Vaccination with Thimerosal induces immunological damage. Specifically, Thimerosal inhibits the protein ERAP1, which shortens proteins headed for the cell surface of MHC Class 1 [“Stamogiannos et al., 2016 Screening Identifies Thimerosal as a Selective Inhibitor of Endoplasmic Reticulum Aminopeptidase 1″]

(3) Vaccination against Influenza with thimerosal-containing vaccines is associated with an increase in non-influenza respiratory infections [“Increased Risk of Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections Associated With Receipt of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine“]

(4) Repeated vaccination at a young age substantially increases the risk of influenza in older age, by a factor ranging between 1. 2 (vaccination after 50 years) to 2. 4 (vaccination from birth) [“Repeated influenza vaccination of healthy children and adults: borrow now, pay later?“]

(5) B-cells activated by flu vaccine crowds out B-cells for other viruses [“Why Flu Vaccines So Often Fail, Science Magazine“]

(13) The evidence that heterologous immunity and very limited efficacy makes universal vaccination against the flu will create more disease than it prevents is impressive. [Why do people get the flu after getting the flu shot?]

(8) The rate of aerosol shedding among cases with vaccination in the current and previous season is higher than that in people with no vaccination in those two seasons. [“Infectious virus in exhaled breath of symptomatic seasonal influenza cases from a college community“]

The 1976 risk policy assumptions are summarized by Sencer and Millar:

Decision-making” Risks

When lives are at stake, it is better to err on the side of overreaction than underreaction. Because of the unpredictability of influenza, responsible public health leaders must be willing to take risks on behalf of the public. This requires personal courage and a reasonable level of understanding by the politicians to whom these public health leaders are accountable. All policy decisions entail risks and benefits: risks or benefits to the decision maker; risks or benefits to those affected by the decision. In 1976, the federal government wisely opted to put protection of the public first.” (emphasis added)

At this point, in 2018, one must ask: when will protection from vaccine-induced immunological and neurological damage become a factor in the risk equations, or better yet, a priority? When will it be seen as more important than the management of the perception of risk?

Additional Considerations

A minority of ‘flu’ cases involve influenza [“Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease“] Very few “flu deaths” involve influenza virus infection [“Are US flu death figures more PR than science?”]

Many of the deaths attributed to infuenza may be due to “sudden deterioration” observed due to Tamiflu treatment. [“Oseltamivir and early deterioration leading to death: a proportional mortality study for 2009A/H1N1 influenza“]

The arguments for uniform healthcare worker influenza vaccination are not supported by existing literature. [What, in Fact, Is the Evidence That Vaccinating Healthcare Workers against Seasonal Influenza Protects Their Patients? A Critical Review]

The number needed to treat to prevent one infection is 71, and vaccination has no net positive effect on working days or hospitalization. [“Vaccines to prevent influenza in healthy adults“].

ACIP selectively picks results of science to support influenza vaccine and ignores results that question efficacy and safety. [Guidelines in disrepute: a case study of influenza vaccination of healthcare workers ]

Children Who Get Flu Vaccine Have Three Times Risk Of Hospitalization For Flu, Study Suggests [LINK1] [LINK2]

Antivirals if used early can reduce pneumonia and bronchitis, but appear to come with a risk of psychiatric episodes. [Narayana Manjunatha, N et al. 2011.  The neuropsychiatric aspects of influenza/swine flu: A selective review Ind Psychiatry J. 20(2): 83–90.]

Studies are needed to determine if “flu infection” after influenza vaccination followed by Tamiflu treatment is a recipe for mortality. [Pediatric advisory committee briefing for Tamiflu – Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. ] FDA Posts Tamiflu Warning.



 Why some people don’t eat sushi: NINE foot tapeworm removed from man’s rectum in Singapore


A nine-foot tapeworm was removed from a man’s rectum in Singapore, according to a report by the Daily Mail Online. The unnamed man did not know that a tapeworm was growing inside his intestine because there were no symptoms of having a tapeworm, such as severe abdominal pain. Experts at the Department of Microbiology of Singapore General Hospital believe that the man became infected most likely because of ingesting raw fish.

“The patient was somewhat appalled when the worm was passed out via the rectum,” said Hsu Li Yang, an infectious diseases expert at the hospital.

Hsu shared the details of the 2016 case to elaborate the issue of people being infected with parasites after consuming raw or undercooked seafood. He also explained that the worm was an actual tapeworm because no other human parasite could grow that long.

“The question is what tapeworm, which will also help answer how the patient had acquired the worm,” he said.

Infections from tapeworm occur after eating the larvae of Diphyllobothrium found in freshwater fish like salmon. Typically, humans get infected from eating sushi or raw fish that has been infected with the worm in its larvae stage. The hatching larvae stick themselves to the wall of the intestines of the fish; then the worms infect the flesh of the fish. As soon as a person gets infected, a tapeworm will grow inside the intestine as long as 15 meters within a few weeks. It can continue to live for years and can remain undetected for weeks or months, as well as release its eggs that infect other body parts of the person. Furthermore, if the larvae start to move to other parts of the body, they can begin to eat away at the liver, eyes, heart, or brain and cause life-threatening conditions. Symptoms of tapeworm infections include fatigue, constipation, and abdominal discomfort, which can be very mild that the victim may not observe anything wrong.

Consumption of raw fish in Singapore and all around the world continue to gain attention in the middle of the increasing popularity of sashimi. Cases of tapeworm infections not only increased in more impoverished areas but also in more developed countries.

In California, a man who ate sushi went to the emergency room of Community Regional Medical Center after finding a five and a half feet tapeworm that was “wiggling out” as he sat on the toilet, according to another Daily Mail Online report. Dr. Kenny Bahn told this story on the podcast This Won’t Hurt A Bit. The patient thought at first that his intestines were coming out, but when he started to remove the worm, it started moving. The man reported that he ate raw salmon every day, which most likely caused the infection. (Related: Beware: US salmon may be crawling with Japanese tapeworm, say scientists.)

Preventing tapeworm infections

To reduce the risk of getting infected by tapeworms, refrain from eating raw or undercooked pork, beef, or freshwater fish. Prepare meat and fish well and cross-contamination between raw meat or fish and cooked dishes. Wash vegetables and fruits before eating them. Remember to wash hands with soap and water before preparing food, before eating, after using the toilet, and after close contact with animals. Lastly, make sure that the water you drink is clean whenever you travel abroad.


 [We should all avoid GMO foods. Glyphosate is a killer, and since glyphosate has leached into nearly all water sources, we should all be drinking distilled water. Distilled water is inexpensive and can be purchased at food markets … or you can purchase a distiller and make your own safe water. GMO corn and wheat products are two of the biggest poisoners in our common foods -ed]

We’re the ‘Weeds’ for Monsanto Roundup Weed Killer

4534532222“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to kill you.” Such a comment might be applied to the most widely used weed-killers on Earth–Monsanto’s patented Roundup based on the systemic herbicide, Glyphosate. Earlier this year the authoritative International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World health Organisation (WHO) declared that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans. Scientific studies have confirmed it. Now a new, peer-reviewed scientific study over a two-year life span of test rats, clearly demonstrates that consumption of even tiny amounts of Roundup or other glyphosate-containing weed killers produces severe liver and kidney damage and in some cases premature death.

The well-meaning faceless bureaucrats over at the supra-national EU Commission in Brussels refuse to even seriously consider such studies and classify as “secret” a German government report from this past January because it likely would show Monsanto’s dirty paw prints. All this does is once more show the criminal conspiracy by Monsanto, the world’s leading purveyor of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMO plants to use myths, lies and any sort of corruption of science to ram their poisons down the throats of our food animals and of us human beings.

Shocking new Study

On August 25, the international scientific journal, Environmental Health, published the peer-reviewed results of a two-year study by a team led by Michael N. Antoniou of the Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, King’s College London. He conceived the study together with Prof. Gilles-Eric Seralini of the Institute of Biology, University of Caen, in France.

Under strictest conditions the different groups of rats were given micro-diluted concentrations of glyphosate and its adjuvants as found in Roundup from Monsanto. The glyphosate equivalent dose of Roundup administered in this study was half that permitted in drinking water in the European Union and Australia, and 14,000 times lower than that permitted in drinking water in the USA.

Moreover, the amount of glyphosate-equivalent Roundup consumed by the animals on a daily basis was many thousands of times below the regulatory set safety limits of glyphosate alone in all regions around the world.

This is the most extensive and only known long-term study of the potential toxic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides such as Monsanto’s Roundup, even though Roundup with glyphosate was discovered by Monsanto in 1970.

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) such as Roundup are the major herbicides used worldwide and are currently applied on at least 24 % of the total global cropland. They are also used extensively in domestic and urban environments. Residues of GBH are routinely detected in foodstuffs and drinking water contaminated via rain, surface runoff and leaching into groundwater. In short it’s almost everywhere.

What the scientists discovered should set alarm bells ringing around the world. Have you heard even so much as a jingle bell so far?

They discovered that male animals suffered from pathological liver and kidney damage resulting in an increased rate of premature deaths. Further, significant alteration in the pattern of gene function was found in both the liver and kidneys of the Roundup group of rats compared with the control group. The alterations in gene function were consistent with fibrosis (scarring), necrosis (areas of dead tissue), phospholipidosis (disturbed fat metabolism) and damage to mitochondria (the centres of respiration in cells).

I want to underscore the seriousness of what Antoniou and his colleagues are describing. The liver is a vital organ. It has some 500 functions in the body including detoxification of various metabolites, protein synthesis, and the production of biochemicals necessary for digestion. This gland plays a major role in metabolism. It regulates a variety of essential reactions, including the synthesis and breakdown of small and complex molecules which are necessary for normal vital functions. In short, the liver supports almost every organ in the body and is vital for survival. 

And we should also be clear on the role of other glyphosate-damaged organ, the kidneys, which are essential for the body’s removal of waste products of metabolism. Kidneys are essential to the urinary system and also the regulation of electrolytes, maintenance of acid–base balance, and regulation of blood pressure by maintaining the salt and water balance. They are the body’s natural filter of the blood, and remove water-soluble wastes which are diverted to the bladder.  If both kidneys and liver are damaged seriously, we are in bad trouble, or even dead.

To sum up the Antoniou and Seralini team’s rat research results, rats fed ultra-low concentrations of glyphosate-based Roundup over the two year life-span period showed that, “twice the number of biochemical parameters was disturbed in kidney than what can be expected by chance. Furthermore, a testosterone/estrogen imbalance was evident with testosterone serum levels significantly increased by 97 % by comparison to controls, while estradiol serum levels were decreased by 26 %. These observations together with pituitary gland disturbances suggest endocrine disrupting effects.” Estradiol is a steroid and estrogen sex hormone, and the primary female sex hormone. It is essential for the development and maintenance of female reproductive tissues but also has important effects in many other tissues including bone. Estrogens have essential functions in men as well.

The scientists continue their conclusions: “Overall, toxicity process analysis revealed gene expression disturbances associated with apoptosis, necrosis, phospholipidosis, mitochondrial membrane dysfunction and ischemia. Thus the alteration…in this study correlates with the observed increased signs of anatomical and functional pathology of the liver and kidneys.” They observed “more than 4000 genes whose expression was altered in both the liver and kidneys within the Roundup treatment group.”

Monsanto and corrupt scientists

Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini designed this newest study with his colleagues as a follow-up to a sensational 2012 study. The new study was specifically on the impact, not of feeding Roundup-sprayed GMO corn from Monsanto, but solely the isolated impact of Roundup, the glyphosate-based Roundup weed-killer used in all GMO crops today. In September 2012 Food and Chemical Toxicology, published Seralini’s first ever-long-term two year study of the impact of Monsanto GMO corn sprayed, as Monsanto requires, with Monsanto’s Roundup weed-killer.

That 2012 Seralini report described the world’s first feeding study of the effects on more than 200 rats of a diet of GMO corn over a period of a full two years at a cost of €3 million.  The study found alarming instances of cancer tumors in rats fed GMO corn treated with Monsanto Roundup with Glyphosate. World media coverage forced the EU Commission to cover its pro-GMO tracks.

More than one year later, in 2013, in an unprecedented and entirely unethical move, the Food and Chemical Toxicology editors retracted the Seralini 2012 article. It was later discovered that a former senior Monsanto employee, Richard Goodman, had been named by the journal to their Editorial Board shortly before the Seralini study was retracted. A year after that blatantly corrupt action, Goodman along with Editor-in-chief A. Wallace Hayes were themselves both “removed” by the publisher

But the corruption doesn’t stop with the attempts to ostracise the Seralini rat studies.

EU Declares German Monsanto study “Secret”

In the latest twist in this criminal drama of lies and intrigues the EU Commission has just declared a German government study “secret” and unavailable for examination by independent scientific experts.

The EU Commission is refusing to let independent experts have access to the recent report prepared by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) on the risk assessment of glyphosate.

On August 10, 2015 the EU Commission wrote to, an industry-independent group of experts registered as a non-profit organization to promote independent research and public debate on the impacts of biotechnology, a euphemism for GMO.

The EU Commission wrote that it had denied a request by Testbiotech to examine the documents made available to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) by the German government. The EU insisted, bizarrely, that the documents “are protected in their entirety” as confidential. The EU Commission can see “no overriding public interest” that would justify access. The letter was signed by Ladislav Miko, Acting Director-General of the EU Commission’s Food Safety Directorate (the name of the EU office even sounds like 1984). Miko is another of those Brussels faceless bureaucrats with immense responsibility and no transparency.

At issue is a report sent to the EU Commission’s Monsanto-linked EFSA, (European Food Safety Authority), this spring by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) on the safety of glyphosate. The German assessment was made following widespread publicity about the WHO assessment that glyphosate was a likely cancer causing chemical. Surprisingly, the BfR came to the opposite conclusion, namely that there is no risk of cancer from glyphosates. Theirs was in a hasty study that apparently relied on an equally hasty study provided to the German government by…you guessed it–Monsanto scientistsThat Monsanto study that formed the basis of the cheery German BfR report is what the scientific experts of wish to put under the microscope. To avoid that potential embarrassment, the EU Commission has labeled the German study “secret and confidential.” The German government has also kept their report secret.

The criminal melodrama gets even more remarkable though.

In a 2013 court ruling made by the European Court of Justice, (Case T 545/11), judges ruled that data relevant for the risk assessment of herbicides have to be made public. The EU Commission as well as the German government are in contempt of that ruling.

Whatever Monsanto touches seems to ooze with corruption and fraud. It’s interesting and extraordinary in its pervasiveness, and suggests the company has a deeper agenda than mere corporate profit. I would posit that the deeper Monsanto agenda has something to do with the company’s long history with the pro-eugenics Rockefeller family and more recently with eugenicist advocate, Bill Gates of Microsoft.

Is the entire GMO project, a project financed and brought to commercialization primarily by the Rockefeller Foundation, a hidden eugenics project to gradually reduce world population of what Rockefeller and his kind would call “useless eaters” or human “weeds”? It’s beginning to look more and more just like that. What an elegant way to get hundreds of millions or even a few billions of people to have them slowly eat themselves to death by consuming GMO and glyphosates they don’t even notice until it’s too late.



The Sexuality Question: How Difficult Can It be?

Ben Williams – 11-28-2017

[In this article I borrowed lines from another published article, edited them, and used them to build my commentary. -ed]

The sex of a baby is determined by genes, not by preference. It is accomplished very early in a pregnancy, and every cell in the body of the baby is either male or female. This identity remains with them all their life. They are conceived and born one or the other, either male or female. It is pretty simple.

Teaching innocent primary school children about cross-dressing, homosexuality, and transgender, and that it is normal, is the work of devils posing as teachers. Encouraging little boys to come to school wearing dresses, or telling pre-pubescent girls about abortion … where will this end?

Probably I will offend the LGBT groups. My answer to this is that I will have failed if I don’t offend them. Those who refuse to listen to common sense are not worth wasting time with.

In the UK, in March 2017 plans were introduced to teach children from the age of four upwards about “safe sexual relationships” in classes called SRE (Sex and Relationships Education). In the Netherlands kids are forced to hear “Comprehensive Sex Education,” talking about gender stereotypes, sexual orientation, and methods of contraception. This is introduced in primary school. In fact, it is enshrined in the law in the Netherlands.

And so the list goes on. In some countries sex education is introduced later, in others there is an option to withdraw a child from a sex education program.

All generations have discussions about key issues, and I have a lot of objections about it over the last decades. I have seen these practices produce the world we live in: growing violence, growing poverty, mishandling of the land, air, and even space, the imposition of perverts who find places within government, and projects that come through the back door as is easily seen in today’s governments around the globe where discussions of public morals and definitions of normalcy have been handed over to queers and devils.  Jesus had something to say about these devils:

42. And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones (children) that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

Mark 9:42

This applies to those who get satisfaction by shocking children and the public by walking around cross-dressed or same-sex kissing and cavorting on park benches, or even inappropriate heterosexual displays in public. This is, surely, common sense and nobody would practice this unless they had been perverted by idiot parents, devilish school teachers, and stupid church groups.

What is not common sense, and what appears to be a clear violation of normalcy and invasion of the mind of a person, is what is happening today, telling children at an age when they don’t even understand what it means, about all sorts of practices, putting notions into their heads they might never have had. Common sense would allow little innocent children be little children, playing, learning about the world in which they live, concentrating on basic arithmetic without calculators, learning their times tables properly, language, natural science, manners and social skills, and perhaps an introduction to economics, geography and history, without the typical sociopaths invading their lives. And this, delivered while sitting up straight in the classroom and not slouching in a chair with half a dozen gadgets to play with, in silence and paying attention and not chatting while the teacher is speaking.

Common sense dictates that you build on these foundations as the child grows older and as his world expands. Today the majority of high school pupils have had at least one sexual encounter (in my day the percentage was very low, and those known to be sexually active were viewed as degenerate). Sex education should come from natural experiences, watching animals, and talking to family members who love you and protect you from harmful exposure. In truth, a child in a normal setting would have to be blind and deaf to not develop natural ideas and to mature into sensible adults regarding sexual knowledge. Sexuality is not mysterious or difficult unless children are exposed to perverts and psychopaths.

Common sense says that if a four-year-old boy is dressing up in his sister’s clothing, he needs some private discussion with his loving parents. He should not be prancing around the school playground in a frilly dress and panties, almost certainly getting bullied and certainly not being allowed to sit in class wearing a frock while his teacher explains that sex with same-sex partners is normal and safe.

Common sense tells us that children find these things out for themselves as they are growing up and that if they have any questions, they ask their parents or their peers and sort things out by themselves. It isn’t rocket science! Laying everything out in the open at too young an age surely creates confusion where it should not exist, introduces questions which would never have been asked, and gives rise to stress and self-doubt and traumas that would never have appeared. And that is when the problems start to arise.

So are Americans creating more problems than they are solving with their unnatural attention to sex? Where has common sense gone, and why?





Vaccines: “Just Get Your Damn Shots”

The title above is a verbatim quote taken from any number of seriously uninformed TV physicians, paid trolls and paid celebrities as they have gleefully joined the popular CDC, WHO, AAP, AAFP and AMA-sponsored campaigns that have denigrated (and therefore infuriated) the witnesses of the hundreds of thousands of over-vaccinated, vaccine-injured, vaccine-disabled or vaccine-killed infants, children, adults and soldiers. 

Particularly angered are the parents, siblings, neighbors and other loved ones of the vaccine-traumatized victims, for they


These witnesses knew the truth, even though their physicians (especially, apparently, pediatricians) and their clinics refused to listen to them and often fired them and their families when they logically refused to accept “coincidence” as the reason for the catastrophic vaccine-induced illness that suddenly changed their normal baby into a chronically ill or dead one.

Well-informed parents are beginning to realize – despite the aggressive propaganda campaigns from Big Pharma, Big Medicine and Big Media – that vaccines are NOT necessarily safe. Indeed they are seeing that they can be lethal.

Many parents are also beginning to see that vaccines are NOT necessarily effective long-term either. As opposed to natural childhood infections giving life-long immunity, vaccines for such mild infections as measles, mumps and chickenpox need frequent booster shots to theoretically provide partial immunity.

Parents who can’t expect to get thorough information about the CDC’s and AAP’s over-vaccination mandates from their clinics are having to do their own research on neurotoxicology , and they are beginning to realize (no thanks to their too-busy and relatively un-informed physicians) that the vaccines that are planned for their precious kids contain varieties of neurotoxic ingredients in the cocktails of baby shots. As many as 3 injections at one sitting are supposed to go into the tiny muscles of 6 or 8 or 10 pound babies at their 2, 4 and 6 month well baby check-ups. These injections may contain live viruses, aluminum, mercury or unintended contaminants all of which the vaccine manufacturers admit may cause brain inflammation or infection.

The most brain toxic vaccine ingredient in this era since the year 2000 is aluminum, which is increasingly in many infant vaccines. The most brain toxic metal that was in vaccines in the latter two generations of the 20th century was mercury (thimerosal) – a preservative that was removed from many vaccines around 2000 because pediatricians KNEW that it was the major cause of the pediatric autism spectrum disorder (ASD) epidemic that had no other plausible explanation.

Because of that knowledge, the AAP (the American Academy of Pediatrics that now infamously denies the connection between vaccines and ASD), with no help from the CDC, eventually helped convince the vaccine manufacturers to remove mercury from most vaccines.

Babies, most notably the premature ones, always have immature, leaky blood-brain barriers (and leaky guts) that allow some of these toxic vaccine ingredients to enter the brain. Both aluminum and mercury – even in “trace” amounts – are known to adversely affect both the blood-brain barrier and the placental barrier, with serious implications for pregnant women who are increasingly prompted to submit to expensive and probably fetotoxic vaccinations.(!).

Paid Trolls are Behind Much of the Smearing of the Vaccine-injured

The ubiquitous smear campaigns against what paid trolls pejoratively call “anti-vaxxers” target any and all rational and scholarly skeptics of America’s blatantly over-vaccination agenda – a American national agenda that

1) over-vaccinates the most children in the entire developed world,

2) has the worst infant mortality rate in the entire developed world and

3) has the largest percentage of autistic kids in the entire developed world.

But Big Pharma’s toxic over-vaccination agenda is highly profitable for

1) Big Pharma,

2) Big Medicine,

3) pediatricians,

4) medical clinics and

5) Big Media (which makes billions of dollars per year from Big Pharma advertisers).

The propagandistic smear has been orchestrated by organizations (and their paid trolls) representing the 5 corporate institutions named above, who are drafting laws to make more and more of these toxic vaccines compulsory, as has happened in California in 2016. Even Big Pharma-bribed politicians – all totally ignorant of the neurotoxicology of America’s over-vaccination agenda – are joining the irrational campaign.

What is saddest is how vicious have been the attacks against the independent, non-pharma  scientist-scholars who have actually done well-designed toxicology research that PROVES (to any unbiased physician or otherwise smart person that isn’t conflicted and immobilized by financial or professional conflicts of interest) that what the CDC and  AAP is saying about vaccine safety is untrue.

Sadly, every major media outlet seems to employ attractive, highly indoctrinated, financially- and professionally-conflicted full-time celebrity physicians to only report on medical issues that are favorable to the network’s Big Pharma advertisers. Therefore no news will be effectively reported that might expose any of Big Pharma’s many blatantly fraudulent practices.

Don’t Criticize What You Can’t Understand

And then there are ignorant celebrities who have joined the well-financed and well-organized smear campaign  who know nothing about the science of vaccine neurotoxicology, a science that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that intramuscularly-injected aluminum (which is in most infant vaccines as an “adjuvant” – look it up) and intramuscularly-injected mercury (thimerosal) are common causes of childhood brain damage that can be diagnosed as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Asperger’s Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants (ASIA), Autoimmune Disorders, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), Allergies (and that’s just the list of vaccine-induced disorders that start with the letter “A”), tic disorder, seizure disorder, dementia, Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis, etc, etc, depending on what age the brain was sufficiently poisoned and what location in the brain was most seriously affected.

The sad reality is that most physicians (including my own) had woefully inadequate medical school training about neurotoxicology, immunology, vaccinology and nutrition, at least partly because Big Pharma has devious influences on medical education – hoping to create endless supplies of prolific prescription-writers and vaccine supporters.

A couple of years ago, prior to his pregnant wife (highly likely) receiving her mercury-laden prenatal flu shot and her aluminum-laden prenatal DTaP shot, ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel chimed in with the CDC/AMA/AAP’s “just get your damn shots” campaign that demonized

1) parents and loved ones of vaccine-injured babies and children,

2) unbiased research immunologists,

3) unbiased neurotoxicologists,

4) the 10 – 15% of pediatricians who actually listen sympathetically to their patients, and

5) other scholarly and critically-thinking science-minded folks who know that toxic vaccine ingredients commonly sicken many of America’s over-vaccinated children.

Knowing that the most common neurotoxic vaccine ingredients (aluminum and mercury)

1) are both mitochondrial toxins,

2) are both blood-brain barrier toxins,

3) are both capable of crossing the placental barrier and

4) are both exponentially more poisonous when given together,

it shouldn’t surprise any logical thinker that bad outcomes should be expected when metal-containing vaccines are given in cocktails at the same time, whether they are given to a soldier, a baby, a child, a pre-pubertal girl or an adult heading towards dementia.


I conclude with some appropriate quotes that should give some uncertain or blind pro-vaccinators pause and give them interest and the willingness to go to the massive volume of unbiased medical literature to learn the truth about the dangers of over-vaccinating children.

I don’t expect changing the minds of those who have been indoctrinated by Big Pharma and Big Medicine. I also don’t expect influencing paid or unpaid trolls to actually go to the many references and scholars that I have referred to in the past. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. And you can point out the conflicts of interest of the ignorant naysayers and trolls but that won’t stop them from continuing to criticize the science that they are either incapable of understanding or unwilling to listen to.

“You might as well consult a butcher on the value of vegetarianism as a doctor on the worth of vaccination.” – George Bernard Shaw

 It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” – Upton Sinclair, American anti-fascist, anti-imperialist author

“No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable…for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” – President Ronald Wilson Reagan, as he signed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, absolving drug companies, pediatricians and all vaccine providers from all medico-legal liability when children die, become chronically ill with vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders or are otherwise disabled from vaccine injuries. (That law has led directly to an expected reckless, liability-free development of scores of new, over-priced, potential block-buster vaccines, now numbering over 250. The question that must be asked of Big Medicine’s practitioners: How will the CDC, the AMA, the AAFP and the American Academy of Pediatrics fit any more potentially neurotoxic vaccines into the current well-baby over-vaccination schedule?)

“By Nov. 1, 2016, $3.5 billion had been awarded to more than 3,500 vaccine victims through the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) created under the 1986 NCVIA law.”

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses … the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker, a raving lunatic.— Dresden James

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.  – George Orwell

Is the Childhood Vaccine Schedule Safe?

1976: 1 child in 30 was learning disabled → 2013: 1 child in 6 is learning disabled.

1980: 1 child in 27 had asthma → 2013: 1 child in 9 has asthma.

1992: 1 child in 500 developed autism → 2013: 1 child in 50 develops autism.

2001: 1 child in 555 had diabetes → 2013: 1 child in 400 has diabetes.


1953: CDC recommended 16 doses of 4 vaccines (smallpox, DPT) between two months and age six.

1983: CDC recommended 23 doses of 7 vaccines (DPT, MMR, polio) between two months and age six.

2013: CDC recommended 50 doses of 14 vaccines between day of birth and age six and 69 doses of 16 vaccines between day of birth and age 18.


In 1983, the CDC directed doctors to give a child no more than 4 vaccines (DPT, polio) simultaneously.

By 2013, the CDC directed that a child can receive 8 or more vaccines at once.

The Institute of Medicine published a report in 2013 stating that “key elements of the entire [CDC recommended childhood vaccine] schedule – the number, frequency, timing, order and age of administration of vaccines – have not been systematically examined in research studies.”


A new CDC policy directs doctors to give pregnant women one dose of influenza vaccine in any trimester and one dose of pertussis containing Tdap vaccine after 20 weeks during every pregnancy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that large, well-controlled long term studies have not been conducted to confirm that influenza and Tdap vaccination during pregnancy is safe.

“The evidence strongly suggests that it is the vaccines and the vaccinated who are spreading the diseases for which vaccines are given.”

“The real issue is viral shedding. Viral vaccines are vaccines containing live viruses, even if they are weak or attenuated strains. These live viruses shed for varying amounts of time in the body fluids of a vaccinated individual – and can be transmitted to others. You can absolutely catch the virus (or bacterium) from someone who has just been vaccinated against that disease. Not only that, but viral shedding from vaccines is leading to viral and bacterial mutations, helping to create a phenomenon of new and dangerous strains of disease which can evade treatment by becoming accustomed to whatever drugs get thrown at them.”

“The U.S. has maintained one of the world’s highest child vaccination rates and lowest infectious disease rates, even as public health officials have been unable to explain why so many of today’s highly vaccinated children are so sick and disabled. Also unexplained, is why America has the worst infant mortality rate of all developed nations, with 6 out of 1,000 babies dying before their first birthday.

“Maternal mortality in the U.S. has also become one of the worst of all industrialized nations, with between 12 and 28 women in 100,000 dying within one year of giving birth, a maternal mortality rate that more than doubled between 1990 and 2013. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), annually an estimated 1,200 women in America suffer fatal complications during pregnancy and childbirth and another 60,000 suffer near-fatal complications.

“Women having babies in the U.S. today, who represent the most vaccinated generations in our nation’s history, are now also being given influenza, diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus vaccines during pregnancy, a federal maternal vaccination policy that was launched in 1997 with administration of influenza vaccine during any trimester and was widened in 2011 with the addition of a pertussis containing TDaP shot after 20 weeks gestation.

“As of 2015, about half of the nation’s pregnant women or nearly 2 million women, were either vaccinated with TDaP vaccine during pregnancy (42 percent) or influenza vaccine before or during pregnancy (50 percent) or received both vaccines.” – Barbara Loe-Fischer, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC)

What has happened to the health of children in America since the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed in 1986?

“After drug companies, pediatricians and all vaccine providers were shielded from accountability and liability for vaccine injuries and deaths, U.S. health officials tripled the numbers of vaccinations recommended for children – from 23 doses of seven vaccines in 1986 to 33 doses of nine vaccines by 1997, which has escalated to a current 69 doses of 16 vaccines. States also increased the numbers of vaccinations required for children to attend school and, by 1997, it was obvious that a growing number of highly vaccinated children in America were never well anymore.

“The new and unprecedented child chronic disease and disability epidemic that has perfectly coincided with the expansion of the child vaccine schedule over the past 30 years is having a devastating effect on children, their families and our nation. Today, 1 child in 6 in the U.S. is learning disabled; 1 in 9 has asthma; 1 in 10 has ADHD; 1 in 50 develops autism; and 1 in 400 has diabetes. Millions more are suffering with severe allergies epilepsy, anxiety and depression, and other kinds of brain and immune disorders marked by chronic inflammation in the body.” – Barbara Loe-Fischer

“If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.” – Russell Blaylock, MD

“The live polio vaccine…contains live attenuated polioviruses. Those polioviruses, when you take that [live] vaccine, you shed them in your body fluids – your saliva, urine, and stool…Whether you have the a viral infection or you get the live attenuated vaccine, you shed live viruses in your body fluids and you are able to transmit the virus to other people who come in contact with your body fluids.” — Barbara Loe-Fisher

”Curbing civil liberties under the guise of protecting the public health and national security has become big business. In 1982, when the pharmaceutical industry threatened to stop producing government licensed and recommended vaccines for children unless vaccine manufacturers got a product liability shield, Congress gave Big Pharma most of what it wanted in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.  It was tort reform legislation sold to parents and the American public on the backs of children legally required by states to get federally recommended vaccines to attend school.

“Even though by Nov. 1, 2016, $3.5 billion had been awarded to more than 3,500 vaccine victims through the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) created under the 1986 law, two out of three claims have been denied throughout the entire history of the law’s implementation.  Most of the compensation awards today are for adults injured by flu vaccine – not for children required to get vaccines to go to school.

“While the government denies compensation to many children, whose lives have been destroyed by state mandated vaccines, in the past five years liability-free drug companies have joined forces with politically powerful medical trade groups to change state vaccine laws. They are lobbying state legislatures to severely restrict the medical exemption and eliminate the non-medical religious, philosophical and conscientious belief exemptions for children attending school.” — Barbara Loe-Fisher

“…our current results are consistent with the existing evidence on the toxicology and pharmacokinetics of aluminum adjuvants which altogether strongly implicate these compounds as contributors to the rising prevalence of neurobehavioral disorders in children. Given that autism has devastating consequences in a life of a child, and that currently in the developed world over 1% of children suffer from some form of ASD, it would seem wise to make efforts towards reducing infant exposure to aluminum from vaccines. — C A Shaw, PhD

“There is a serious problem with vaccine safety. Vaccine aluminum adjuvant has adverse neurological effects, at dosages that are recommended by the US CDC. Vaccine critics are supported by the science. Parents refusing to vaccinate according to the recommended CDC schedule are supported by the science. Use aluminum-containing vaccines with great caution, or not at all.” – C. A. Shaw, PhD

“Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvantresearch clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences.” (From Tomljenovic and Shaw’s journal article “Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are They Safe?”, published in Curr Med Chem 2011;18(17):2630-7.)

“The CDC says that 36,000 people die from the flu every year in the US. But actually, it’s closer to 20. However, we can’t admit that, because if we did, we’d be exposing our gigantic psyop. The whole campaign to scare people into getting a flu shot would have about the same effect as warning people to carry iron umbrellas, in case toasters fall out of upper-story windows…and, by the way, we’d all be put in prison for fraud.” – Jon Rappoport

“A 2007 [Zika] outbreak on Yap Islands in Micronesia is estimated to have affected nearly 75% of the (island’s) population of some 12,000 people, and a 2013 outbreak in French Polynesia affected nearly 28,000 of 270,000 residents. Neither epidemic caused a spike in microcephaly.” —

“The correlation between a) the presence of Zika and b) babies with the microcephaly birth defect is so weak and sparse, it constitutes counter-evidence for Zika as the cause…the overwhelming majority of birth-defect cases show no presence of Zika. Therefore, the Zika-carrying mosquitoes have no business being the target of toxic spraying. But they are. And the spraying increases the risk of neurological damage in babies.” – Jon Rappoport

“Microcephaly may result from any insult that disturbs early brain growth…Annually, approximately 25,000 infants in the United States will be diagnosed with microcephaly…” – From the Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. (Neurology 2009 Sep 15; 73(11) 887-897)

“…even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.” – Dr Peter Doshi (from a British Medical Journal review article, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” 2013 (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037)

“…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t, work because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.” – Jon Rappoport

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.” – Dr Peter Doshi, from in his 2005 BMJ report, titled, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412

“Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data showed an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” – Dr Peter Doshi

“Official data shows that large scale vaccination has failed to obtain any significant improvement of the diseases against which they were supposed to provide protection” — Dr Sabin, developer of Polio vaccine

“The greatest threat of childhood diseases lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunisation…..There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease.” — Dr Robert Mendelsohn, MD

“The only safe vaccine is one that is never used.” — Dr. James A. Shannon, National Institutes of Health

“No batch of vaccine can be proved safe before it is given to children.” – Dr Leonard Scheele, Surgeon General of the United States, addressing an AMA convention in 1955

“It is pathetic and ludicrous to say we ever vanquished smallpox with vaccines, when only 10% of the population was ever vaccinated.” — Dr Glen Dettman

“The decline in infectious diseases in developed countries had nothing to do with vaccinations, but with the decline in poverty and hunger.” — Dr Buchwald, MD

“There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunisation of children does more harm than good.” – Dr. J. Anthony Morris (formerly Chief Vaccine Control Officer at the US Federal Drug Admin.)

“There is insufficient evidence to support routine vaccination of healthy persons of any age.” — Paul Frame, MD, Journal of Family Practice

“I think that no person would permit anybody to get close to them with an inoculation if they would really know how they are made, what they carry, what has been lied to them about and what the real percent of danger is of contracting such a disease which is minimal.” — Dr Eva Snead

“The evidence for indicting immunisations for SIDS is circumstantial, but compelling. However, the keepers of the keys to medical-research funds are not interested in searching this very important lead to the cause of an ongoing, and possibly preventable, tragedy. Anything that implies that immunisations are not the greatest medical advance in the history of public health is ignored or ridiculed.   Can you imagine the economic and political import of discovering that immunisations are killing thousands of babies?” — Dr William C. Douglass, MD (Honored twice as America’s ‘Doctor of the Year’)

“Sudden Infant Death Syndrome has been reported following the administration of DPT. The significance is unclear. 85% of SIDS cases occur in the period 1 through 6 months of age, with the peak incidence at age 2 to 4 months.” (From the accompanying insert to Connaught Labs’ DPT vaccine)  Jane Orient, MD, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

“If you want the truth on vaccination you must go to those who are not making anything out of it…My aim has been to show that you have a powerful body to fight in the medical profession. We cannot be stirred without great effort. We are a kind of Juggernaut; we have to be dragged; we will not go. Let each one take his doctor, or, if he be so fortunate as not to need one, the doctor who lives nearest to him, and try and instruct him (about the dangers of vaccination). Send him the literature of the subject; he may not read it, but he may. Every little helps. – Instruct the people by means of public lectures and meetings. Show them as plainly as you can the uselessness and dangers of vaccination. Teach them that they must not go to the medical profession for counsel on the matter. If cases of small-pox were isolated and the clothes of the sufferers disinfected, the disease would not spread. If you wish to avoid smallpox, you must live pure and simple lives. If we crowd together we must expect disease; if we keep our skins closed, the impurities of the body are retained, and these impurities are the food upon which small-pox thrives. If your constitution is in a bad, state and you come in contact ‘with small-pox, you will probably have it.” — Dr T. R. Allinson

“The greatest threat of childhood diseases lies in the dangerous and ineffectual efforts made to prevent them through mass immunisation…There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease.” — Dr Robert Mendelsohn, MD

“Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.” – Russell Blaylock, MD

“the 271 vaccines in development span a wide array of diseases, and employ exciting new scientific strategies and technologies. These potential vaccines – all in human clinical trials or under review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – include 137 for infectious diseases, 99 for cancer, 15 for allergies and 10 for neurological disorders.” — PhRMA (the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America), the pharmaceutical industry’s trade association and powerful lobbying group


Dr Kohls is a retired physician from Duluth, MN, USA. He writes a weekly column for the Duluth Reader, the area’s alternative newsweekly magazine. His columns deal with the dangers of American fascism, corporatism, militarism, racism, malnutrition, Big Pharma’s psychiatric drugging and over-vaccination regimens, and other movements that threaten the environment, prosperity, democracy, civility and the health and longevity of the planet and the populace. Many of his columns are archived at;; or at


The Big Fat Lie is Officially Exposed in the British Medical Journal

by Paul Fassa
Health Impact News

The saturated fat lie is officially exposed now that the British Journal of Sports Medicine, a division of the BMJ (British Medical Journal), emphatically declared:

Saturated fat does not clog the arteries: coronary heart disease is a chronic inflammatory condition, the risk of which can be effectively reduced from healthy lifestyle interventions.

Of course, the lie may persist for some time. Aa relative handful of knowledgeable consumers already know this.

Even so, most mainstream and even holistic doctors, nutritionists, and most health writers, orthodox and alternative, still maintain the prevailing false dogma of saturated fat as the villain creating poor heart health. More on that here.

The beginning of this very recent BMJ letter, 31 March 2017, reviewing several mega-studies, states early in their editorial:

Despite popular belief among doctors and the public, the conceptual model of dietary saturated fat clogging a pipe is just plain wrong.

Wrong, unequivocally and indisputably, not maybe or could be or further studies needed, but completely wrong. It’s over. And the root cause of arterial inflammation is cited with dietary recommendations that lean toward the Mediterranean Diet.

Reviewing the BMJ Review

It’s important to understand that the BMJ is one of the world’s most prestigious journals. Hopefully, some cardiologists, physicians, and nutritionists will get around to reading this recent saturated fat article. If so, maybe prescribing harmful statin drugs will go out of fashion.

Mainstream “science journalists” may even stop debunking and stop defaming veteran heart surgeon Dwight Lundell and a handful of other cardiologists who have publicly stated similar myth-busting statements of arterial inflammation, not cholesterol from saturated fats, as the cause of heart disease.

The popular avoidance of saturated fats began around 50 years ago. Yet all the diseases attributed to saturated fats, such as obesity, diabetes type 2, and coronary heart disease (CHD) have increased despite all those no-fat or low-fat foods promoted and consumed on a large scale. Heart disease is still the number one killer.

The BMJ editorial cites the fact that:

… an angiographic study of postmenopausal women with CHD, [demonstrated] greater intake of saturated fat was associated with less progression of atherosclerosis whereas carbohydrate and polyunsaturated fat intake were associated with greater progression.

The unhealthy polyunsaturated fats mentioned are those conjured up by our processed food industries to satisfy the demand for avoiding saturated fats. They include heat processed partially hydrogenated cooking and salad vegetable oils and hydrogenated margarine.

They all come with packages of trans-fatty acids that do cause cellular damage and tissue inflammation. Even the FDA in recent years has required trans-fatty acid content to be listed on ingredient labels (years after most European nations required the same, or downright banned trans fats.)

The BMJ editorial letter also mentioned refined carbohydrates as a source of arterial inflammation. This is the stuff of most cheap commercially produced pastries, bread, and other low-fat foods. It also mentioned the lack of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids creates arterial and other inflammation.

Omega-3 fatty acids are found in nuts, fish, land-based animal meats and some eggs. Those animal sources of omega-3 should be from clean water wild fish and from the highest quality free grazing grass fed animals to avoid the toxins of farmed fish and factory farm livestock.

Chia seed oil is high in heart-healthy omega-3 oils (a better source than fish oils). Coconut oil is so healthy it’s medicinal. (Source)

Another item mentioned in this BMJ editorial letter as unhealthy for heart health is fructose (and all foods with added sugars).

Many health experts claim solid whole fruits, consumed in moderation, contain sufficient fiber and other nutrients to offset any claimed hazards of fructose. Though mentioning refined carbohydrates, it failed to include added sugar as a source of arterial inflammation.

The BMJ paper claimed LDL cholesterol dangers are deceptive. It compared arterial damage from plaque to a pimple popping. A pimple represents the plaque which can be a product of inflammation in the arterial wall, comparable to pimple on the skin.

All of this led to the BMJ paper’s authors to recommend the Mediterranean Diet and daily brisk walking to prevent coronary disease and diabetes 2, both caused by chronic inflammation.

BMJ Study Without Vested Interests in Statin Drugs

Some health experts out of the saturated fat dogma box even call cholesterol an innocent bystander trying to help curb inflammation. The importance of cholesterol for overall health has been observed by many over the past decade.

They include the first phase of our skin for transforming sunlight into vitamin D3, building cell walls throughout our bodies, and comprising most of our brains’ structure. Reducing cholesterol artificially with statin drugs often leads to early dementia and other serious side effects. More on that here.

Other sources say the plaque could be formed from excessive calcium intake that doesn’t get into bone-matter because other nutrients that help calcium get into bone-matter are missing. Magnesium, silica, and vitamin K2 are vital for keeping calcium out of the blood where it can collect and form plaque in blood vessels. (Source)

None of this is new. But the BMJ paper disclosed a surprising cardiac inflammatory source: unresolved childhood trauma. Their study determined that:

chronic stress increases glucocorticoid receptor resistance, which results in failure to downregulate the inflammatory response.

The BMJ paper concluded:

It is time to shift the public health message in the prevention and treatment of coronary artery disease away from measuring serum lipids (so-called cholesterol) and reducing dietary saturated fat. Coronary artery disease is a chronic inflammatory disease and it can be reduced effectively by walking 22 min a day and eating real food. There is no business model or market to help spread this simple yet powerful intervention. (Source)

In other words, there are no big profits from extensive doctor visits and statin drugs if the message gets out where it should.

Recent empirical evidence has shown that even higher fat diets with unadulterated healthy fats mentioned earlier in this article, such as the ketogenic diet, will be substantially better for general health than a high refined carbohydrate processed food diet, not only for heart health and avoiding diabetes but also ridding obesity. You’ll find plenty of material about the ketogenic diet here.

That’s a complete turnaround from what has been health dogma for a half century.


This antibiotic will ruin you. 

4739Hi there, we need to talk. My name is Amy Moser. I have almost written this post at least 20 times and got too overwhelmed and abandoned it. Well here goes…

The antibiotics you took or are taking for your sinus infection, UTI, skin infection, laser eye surgery … may have already damaged you.

Cipro, Levaquin, Avalox, nearly every generic ending in “quin”, surgery…ect…may have already damaged you. “oxacin,””ox,”…are all part of a large family of antibiotics called “Fluoroquinolones.” The FDA finally updated their warning on these antibiotics as of July 2016. They site “multiple system damage that may be irreversible. Permanent you guys. Here is the link for the warning if you are a doubting Thomas: Please look at this. Trust me, I wish I had been given the opportunity to soak up this information before it was too late.

In 2010, I took Cipro for a UTI and it changed my life forever. A round of antibiotics literally changed the path I was walking, into a path that I couldn’t even crawl on. Multiple spontaneous tendon and ligament ruptures, spinal degeneration, and arthritis that is widespread. We are talking multiple joint dislocations and surgeries to most of my large joints and spine. Twenty surgeries in the last 7 years if you wanna count. I said T W E N T Y.

This class of antibiotics were supposed to be only used as a last resort antibiotics, if all other options had failed. They never were supposed to be given for common infections. They damage the body so seriously because they actually damage the mitochondrial DNA cells. Those are the cells that are supposed to heal any damage to the body. In this case, it damages the cells that are supposed to repair damaged cells and tissue. So…you can only heal tissue to the integrity it was when it fell apart. Fantastic. You now have tissue paper tendons and ligaments. You are a human piñata at a party and life is whacking you left and right. Do you know what it feels like to hear and feel your shoulder pull apart like taffy, or your achilles pop and tear apart like an old rubber band? It gets even better. Flouroquinolones cross the blood brain barrier. This can result in psychiatric events, depression, and suicidal thoughts. I was incredibly fortunate not to have the psychiatric side of this.

Here is another sickening truth…the damage is cumulative. The more exposures you have to these antibiotics, the more damage is done to your body. Not just for some people, ALL people. A hundred percent of people who take a Fluoroquinolone antibiotic, show changes in blood flow to the tendon, cartilage, and ligament in their bodies. Each person has a different breaking point depending on their own unique DNA. Some people fall apart or die after 1 pill. I fell apart after my 4th round of Fluoroquinolone antibiotics in my life and some people are on their 25th round and are still oblivious to what is happening inside them until they break. It might not even be a physical one. It may be a psychotic one. By then, it’s too late. The damage is done.

This was my nightmare. It gets worse. There is no cure. No treatment. No relief. No specialist even. I’m telling you…if it hadn’t been for the knowledge that God is ever present and with me…I would have walked out in front of a bus. He is the reason I am sane…well mostly.

I am writing this in hopes that you will educate yourself and your families. Don’t take this antibiotic in ignorance one more time. Don’t take your chances. Don’t be afraid to demand an alternative. You get only one life.

If you only understood the risk you are taking, you wouldn’t take it. Save the explanation. There are alternatives if you demand them. I’ve refused these medications on multiple occasions and so has my mom who is allergic to penicillins and Cephalosporins and Sulfa. There are other options if you demand them.

I am going to share some trustworthy Fluoroquinolone warning links. If you look them up…I am sure you will be glad you did. Do it for yourself and do it for your friends and your family.

Over the last 7 years, I’ve been to 3 Rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons and spine surgeons, physical therapists, physical medicine and rehab specialists and 3 different primary care doctors. There is no treatment but to try to put back together what breaks.

I have seen multiple docs from Mayo clinic and they are in the same boat as the others. They don’t know how to reverse it. They can’t. The science is not there yet. I contacted a doctor from Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minnesota, his name was Jay Smith, and he had been part of a research study of the effects of Fluoroquinolones on the musculoskeletal system in the athletic population. He actually wrote me back when I asked him for a consult and told him I would even fly there for an appointment if he thought he could help me. He said that he didn’t know how to treat it. They know the science behind the damage that Fluoroquinolones cause, but the science is not there yet in how to reverse it.

We have to get this information out there. Spread it to everyone you know. Print the FDA warning and show it to your friends and family and even your doctors. Sometimes the warnings slip through the cracks and they don’t know. You could save their lives.


If you know anyone considering a flu shot this year, show them this.

The verdict is out on flu shots. Many medical experts now agree it is more important to protect yourself and your family from the flu vaccine than the flu itself.
Every year the pharmaceutical industry, medical experts and the mainstream media work hard to convince us to get vaccinated against the flu.
But we’re not being told the whole story.
What we don’t hear, are cases about the adverse reactions or about the toxic chemicals being injected into us.
Read below:

11 reasons why flu shots are more dangerous than the flu itself.

Sources for this article include:

1. The flu shot actually makes you sick to begin with

Have you ever noticed how vaccinated children get sick almost immediately following a vaccination? This is because the flu virus is introduced into their bodies. So rather than immunize, the flu shot actually only sensitizes the body against the virus. And the fact that it causes individuals to get ill following a shot indicates immuno-suppression (i.e. lowering of the immunity).

2. Flu vaccines contain other dangerous ingredients such as mercury

The pharmaceutical industry, medical experts and the mainstream media are candid in telling us that flu vaccines contain strains of the flu virus. What they are less likely to reveal though is the long list of other ingredients that come with the vaccine. It is now a known fact that flu vaccines contain mercury, a heavy metal known to be hazardous for human health. Mercury toxicity can cause depression, memory loss, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory problems, ADD, oral health problems, digestive imbalances and other serious health issues.

3. The flu shot can cause Alzheimer’s disease

Evidence now suggests that flu vaccines can cause Alzheimer’s disease. Research conducted by Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, a leading immunogeneticist, shows that those who consistently get the flu vaccine increase their risk of Alzheimer’s disease by 10 fold. He believes this is due to the toxic combination of aluminum and mercury in the vaccine. Additionally, introducing the flu virus to an elderly person (who with age will naturally have a weaker immune system) will only increase the chances of that individual becoming susceptible to more serious illness.

4. The very people pushing flu vaccinations are making billions of dollars each year

In August 1999, the Committee on Government Reform initiated an investigation into Federal vaccine policy. This investigation focused on possible conflicts of interest on the part of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The investigation concluded that many individuals serving on two key advisory committees had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines. Often, these individuals were granted waivers to fully participate in the discussions that led to recommendations on vaccine licensing and adding vaccines to the Childhood Immunization Schedule. This in itself creates serious doubt as to how effective flu vaccines really are.

5. Lack of real evidence that young children even benefit from flu shots

51 studies involving 260,000 children age 6 to 23 months established no evidence that the flu vaccine is any more effective than a placebo. Additionally, flu shots only protect against certain strains of the virus meaning that you can still easily get the flu if you come into contact with a different strain of virus.

6. Makes you more susceptible to pneumonia and other contagious diseases

For someone with an already suppressed immune system, injecting strains of the flu virus can have devastating consequences. If your body is already working to fight off a virus or simply operating with low immunity, a vaccine injection could put your body in serious danger of contracting influenza with stronger symptoms, or even worse pneumonia and other contagious diseases.

7. Vascular disorders

Medical research shows flu shots are associated with an increased risk of vascular inflammation. Symptoms include fever, jaw pain, muscle aches, pain and stiffness in the neck, upper arms, shoulder and hips and headache.

8. Children under the age of 1 are at risk

Children under 1 years of age are highly vulnerable to a neurotoxic breach of the delicate nerve center surrounding the brain and central nervous system. The first round of the flu vaccine is administered at age 6 months. A child under the age of 1 lacks sufficient protection to guard against premature damage to the blood barrier in the brain.

9. Increased risk of narcolepsy

There have been dozens of reported cases of children in 12 different countries who have developed narcolepsy (a chronic sleep disorder) after receiving the flu vaccine. The study, which took place between October 2009 and the December 2011, compared 3.3 million vaccinated Swedes with 2.5 million who were not vaccinated. The risk was found to be highest among the youngest people who took the vaccines. For those under the age of 21, the risk of contracting narcolepsy was three times higher.

10. Weakens immunological responses

There have been literally thousands of medical journal articles published that show injecting vaccines can lead to harmful immunological responses and a host of other infections. Moreover, weak immunological responses only decrease a person’s ability to fight the diseases that the vaccine was supposed to protect against in the first place.

11. Serious neurological disorders

Evidence now suggests that ingredients in flu vaccinations can actually cause serious neurological disorders. In 1976 a significant number of those who received the flu vaccine acquired Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), a disorder characterized by permanent nerve damage and even paralysis. Flu vaccines can contain many harmful materials including detergent, mercury, formaldehyde, and strains of live flu virus.



MIT States That Half of All Children May be Autistic by 2025 due to Monsanto

M4444A senior scientist at MIT has declared that we are facing an epidemic of autism that may result in one half of all children being affected by autism in ten years.

Dr. Stephanie Seneff, who made these remarks during a panel presentation in Groton, MA last week, specifically cites the Monsanto herbicide, Roundup, as the culprit for the escalating incidence of autism and other neurological disorders. Roundup, which was introduced in the 1970’s, contains the chemical glyphosate, which is the focal point for Seneff’s concerns. Roundup was originally restricted to use on weeds, as glyphosate kills plants. However, Roundup is now in regular use with crops. With the coming of GMO’s, plants such as soy and corn were bioengineered to tolerate glyphosate, and its use dramatically increased. From 2001 to 2007, glyphosate use doubled, reaching 180 to 185 million pounds in the U.S. alone in 2007.

If you don’t consume corn- on- the -cob or toasted soybeans, however, you are hardly exempt from the potential affects of consuming glyphosate. Wheat is now sprayed with Roundup right before it is harvested, making any consumption of non- organic wheat bread a sure source for the chemical. In addition, any products containing corn syrup, such as soft drinks, are also carrying a payload of glyphosate.

According to studies cited by Seneff, glyphosate engages “gut bacteria” in a process known as the shikimate pathway. This enables the chemical to interfere with the biochemistry of bacteria in our GI tract, resulting in the depletion of essential amino acids .

Monsanto has maintained that glyphosate is safe for human consumption, as humans do not have the shikimate pathway. Bacteria, however, does—including the flora that constitutes “gut bacteria.”

It is this ability to affect gut bacteria that Seneff claims is the link which allows the chemical to get on board and wreak further damage. The connection between intestinal flora and neurological functioning is an ongoing topic of research. According to a number of studies, glyphosate depletes the amino acids tyrosine, tryptophan, and phenylalanine, which can then contribute to obesity, depression, autism, inflammatory bowel disease, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.

Monsanto disagrees. The food and chemical giant has constructed a webpage with links to scientific studies pronouncing the safety of glyphosate.

Other science writers have also taken up the Monsanto banner, scoffing at the scientific studies that prompted Seneff to make her claims. “They made it up!” pronounced Huffpost science writer Tamar Haspel, in an article thin on analysis but heavy on declarative prose.

Others, such as Skeptoid writer and PhD physicist Eric Hall, take a more measured approach, and instead focus on the studies which prompted the glyphosate concerns. According to Hall, Seneff is making an error known as the “correlation/causation error,” in which causality is inaccurately concluded when there exists only the fact that two separate items—in this case, the increased use of glyphosate and the increased incidence of autism—may be observed but are not, in fact, directly related.

Seneff’s pronouncements focus specifically on the glyphosate issue. As we know, there are other potential tributaries which may be feeding the rise in autism and also causing age-related neurological conditions, such as Alzheimer’s. These may include contents of vaccines, aluminum cooking ware as well as other potential sources for chemical consumption.

Some individuals, such as M.D. and radio host Rima Laibow have speculated on the intentionality behind this ostensible chemical siege against our gray matter. Laibow believes that the impetus may be to create an entire class of autistic individuals who will be suited only for certain types of work.

This harks back, eerily, to Aldous Huxley’s classic Brave New World, in which individuals were preprogrammed from “conception” for eventual placement in one of five groups, designated as Alpha, Beta, and so on down to Epsilon, based on their programmed brain power. In Huxley’s dystopian world, this class delineation by intellectual ability enabled society to function more smoothly.

Whatever may driving the autistic/Alzheimer’s diesel train, one thing is for certain: the spectre of half of our children coming into the world with significant brain damage constitutes a massive and undeniable wound to humanity. The rate of autism has skyrocketed from roughly one in every two thousand in the 1970’s to the current rate of one in every sixty eight. Alzheimer’s has become almost universal in the elderly. Seneff’s predictions can only be ignored at grave risk to the human race.


Lead Developer Of HPV Vaccines Comes Clean, Warns Parents & Young Girls It’s All A Giant Deadly Scam

Dr. Diane Harper was a leading expert responsible for the Phase II and Phase III safety and effectiveness studies which secured the approval of the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil™ and Cervarix™.  Dr. Harper also authored many of the published, scholarly papers about the vaccines.  She is now the latest in a long string of experts who are pressing the red alert buttonon the devastating consequences and irrelevancy of these vaccines.  Dr. Harper made her surprising confession at the 4th International Converence on Vaccination which took place in Reston, Virginia.  Her speech, which was originally intended to promote the benefits of the vaccines, took a 180-degree turn when she chose instead to clean her conscience about the deadly vaccines so she “could sleep at night”.  The following is an excerpt from a story by Sarah Cain:

“Dr. Harper explained in her presentation that the cervical cancer risk in the U.S. is already extremely low, and that vaccinations are unlikely to have any effect upon the rate of cervical cancer in the United States.  In fact, 70% of all HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment in a year, and the number rises to well over 90% in two years.  Harper also mentioned the safety angle.  All trials of the vaccines were done on children aged 15 and above, despite them currently being marketed for 9-year-olds.  So far, 15,037 girls have reported adverse side effects from Gardasil™ alone to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and this number only reflects parents who underwent the hurdles required for reporting adverse reactions.  At the time of writing, 44 girls are officially known to have died from these vaccines.  The reported side effects include Guillian Barré Syndrome (paralysis lasting for years, or permanently — sometimes eventually causing suffocation), lupus, seizures, blood clots, and brain inflammation.  

Parents are usually not made aware of these risks.  Dr. Harper, the vaccine developer, claimed that she was speaking out, so that she might finally be able to sleep at night.  ’About eight in every ten women who have been sexually active will have HPV at some stage of their life,’ Harper says.  ’Normally there are no symptoms, and in 98 per cent of cases it clears itself.  But in those cases where it doesn’t, and isn’t treated, it can lead to pre-cancerous cells which may develop into cervical cancer.’” 

Although these two vaccines are marketed as protection against cervical cancer, this claim is purely hypothetical.  Studies have proven “there is no demonstrated relationship between the condition being vaccinated for and the rare cancers that the vaccine might prevent, but it is marketed to do that nonetheless.  In fact, there is no actual evidence that the vaccine can prevent any cancer.  From the manufacturers own admissions, the vaccine only works on 4 strains out of 40 for a specific venereal disease that dies on its own in a relatively short period, so the chance of it actually helping an individual is about about the same as the chance of her being struck by a meteorite.”

“The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancersShe also says that enough serious side effects have been reported after Gardasil use that the vaccine could prove riskier than the cervical cancer it purports to prevent.

“The risks of serious adverse events including death reported after Gardasil use in (the JAMA article by CDC’s Dr. Barbara Slade) were 3.4/100,000 doses distributed. The rate of serious adverse events on par with the death rate of cervical cancer.  Gardasil has been associated with at least as many serious adverse events as there are deaths from cervical cancer developing each year.  Indeed, the risks of vaccination are underreported in Slade’s article, as they are based on a denominator of doses distributed from Merck’s warehouse.  Up to a third of those doses may be in refrigerators waiting to be dispensed as the autumn onslaught of vaccine messages is sent home to parents the first day of school.  Should the denominator in Dr. Slade’s work be adjusted to account for this, and then divided by three for the number of women who would receive all three doses, the incidence rate of serious adverse events increases up to five fold. How does a parent value that information,” said Harper.

“Parents and women must know that deaths occurred,” Harper tells CBS NEWS.  “Not all deaths that have been reported were represented in Dr. Slade’s work, one-third of the death reports were unavailable to the CDC, leaving the parents of the deceased teenagers in despair that the CDC is ignoring the very rare but real occurrences that need not have happened if parents were given information stating that there are real, but small risks of death surrounding the administration of Gardasil.”

The National Vaccine Information Center HAS CONFIRMED two virologists, Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski have filed a lawsuit against their former employer and vaccine manufacturer Merck.  NVIC writes: “The lawsuit alleges that Merck defrauded the U.S. for over 10 years by overstating the MMR vaccine’s effectivenes.  The virologists claim in their lawsuit that they ‘Witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine’s efficacy findings.”  NVIC president and co-founder, Barbara Loe Fisher, warns of the disturbingly cozy relationship and overwhelming conflict of interest between federal agencies charged with vaccine safety oversight (such as the Centers for Disease Control) and vaccine manufacturers.  Merck’s global vaccine sales total more than $20 BILLION A YEAR.

As the world’s pharmaceutical giants continue to be driven less by moral accountability and more by profit and shareholder-driven bottom lines, we are going to see more and more products such as this vaccine which are marketed as “essential to one’s survival.”


VAXXED: What Media Hid in De Niro Autism Film Affair

by – F. William Engdahl- 6-8-2016





(NOTE: The details in this article are a bit difficult to follow, so here’s a brief summary to help you get started. Drs. Wakefield and Walker-Smith authored a paper in 1998 in the Lancet about the MMR vaccine given to young children. The paper raised questions about the vaccine industry’s possible link to autism in children.

Big Pharma then brought pressure against Walker-Smith in an attempt to cover up the research. Walker-Smith’s doctor’s license was pulled, thus discrediting him and covering up the paper on vaccines and autism.

Then in 2012 the court reversed the decision and exonerated Walker-Smith and Wakefield, and thus their published paper. Walker-Smith’s physician’s license was reinstated.

Then, this year, at the Tribeca film festival in Manhattan, actor Robert deNiro, who started the festival, scheduled a film (VAXXED) to be aired exposing connections between childhood vaccinations and autism, as well as the CDS’s coverup. DeNiro has a son who is autistic, probably from vaccinations. The controversial film was canceled at the last minute due to outside pressure. But deNiro defended the movie on NBS’s Today Show, stating that America needs to know the facts.

The vaccine industry appears to be terribly corrupt, dishonest, and dangerous. The industry’s motives seem to be purely profit oriented, and the general public seems to show no interest in protecting itself against criminal medical practices that are ruining people’s health. What’s even worse is that helpless babies are being targeted.  -ed)


Dr. Andrew Wakefield, a former British gastro-enterologist and vaccine researcher has been fully exonerated of the charges that he, together with a world renowned pediatric gastroenterologist, Prof. John Walker-Smith, conducted fraudulent tests with children that raised the possibility of a link between the popular MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and onset of autism and other severe symptoms. Most remarkable is the fact that despite his de facto exoneration in a British Court more than four years ago, in 2012, mainstream media in the UK and the USA have chosen to deliberately ignore the fact. They did so to hide the explosive content of Wakefield’s film, Vaxxed.

This past April, Hollywood actor and founder of the Tribeca film festival, Robert de Niro, announced in an interview to the New York Times that he had personally arranged for a new documentary film, Vaxxed, about links between autism and vaccinations, to be shown on April 24 at his festival in order to open a national debate on the subject. Some 48 hours later the Tribeca website announced it had pulled the film. The pressure had been enormous. To his credit, some days later, on America’s most popular morning show, de Niro repeated his earlier statement that while he is not anti-vaccine, he wants an open debate on the subject. De Niro’s own son is autistic.


At the time I wrote my article, I was not aware that a British Court some four years ago completely exonerated Wakefield’s co-author and researcher in the autism study. Since then a helpful reader has pointed me to the entire text of the Court decision. I’ve decided to write this follow-up in the interest of justice to Andrew Wakefield, whom I’ve personally met and whose moral courage going up against the pharma lobby against all normal odds we owe a debt to. I do it also in support of Robert de Niro’s call for an open debate on the question of links between not only autism and vaccines. Had our “mainstream” media not been long ago polluted with the toxic waste of the pharma industry, and had they maintained a scintilla of honest journalism today, such an account would not have been necessary.

In February, 2012, Mr. Justice Mitting held hearings on the charges brought against world renowned pediatric gastro-enterologist, Prof. John Walker-Smith, Wakefield’s co-researcher, in Britain’s High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Administrative Court.

The Justice ruled that charges brought against Walker-Smith by the British General Medical Council’s Panel, the GMC “panel’s determination cannot stand. I therefore quash it.” Walker-Smith won his appeal against a General Medical Council regulatory board that had ruled against both him and Andrew Wakefield for their roles in authoring a 1998 Lancet MMR paper, which raised questions about a link to autism. The complete victory means that Walker-Smith has been returned to the status of a fully licensed physician…”

Astonishingly, as the judge pointed out, the conclusions of the GMC board that stripped both Walker-Smith and Wakefield of their licenses to practice medicine in the UK were based on “inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion… The end result is that the finding of serious professional misconduct and the sanction of erasure are both quashed.” He notes that the board’s trial of Walker-Smith and Wakefield had no actual complainants, no harm came to the children who were studied, and parents supported Walker-Smith and Wakefield through the trial, reporting that their children had medically benefited from the treatment they received at the Royal Free Hospital.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield was not party to the Walker-Smith appeal process. Walker-Smith’s insurer had agreed to fund his costly appeal. Dr. Wakefield’s insurer refused, and Wakefield was financially unable to join the appeal. The judge’s full exoneration of Walker-Smith in the matter of the Lancet study he published together with Wakefield, exonerates the content of the Lancet paper and of Andrew Wakefield. The article both co-authored was grounds for their losing medical licenses. On learning of the Walker-Smith exoneration in 2012, Wakefield, from his new residence in Texas, filed a defamation lawsuit against the British Medical Journal and three individuals for falsely accusing him of “fraud.”

The Lancet study which Professor Walker-Smith and Dr. Andrew Wakefield co-authored, never asserted a causal link between the MMR vaccine of Glaxo SmithKline and autism. They rather suggested a serious study should be undertaken. Their Lancet article was removed after the 2010 British General Medical Council’s trial. Lancet is owned by the large Elsevier Group, whose Chairman had been named to the board of Glaxo SmithKline, major producer of MMR vaccines, in 2003.

In the latest media attack campaign, led by The New York Times, the UK Guardian and other mainstream media, focus was on one fact only: That Robert de Niro had organized a screening of the documentary, Vaxxed, directed by Wakefield. As the Guardian sub-titled their article, “Actor criticized for adding doc by Andrew Wakefield, who was struck off UK medical register…”

CDC autism test fraud–the deeper media cover-up

However, the deeper cover-up by the mainstream media, was their refusal to write one word about the explosive content that Wakefield’s documentary focused on. Had they done that, Glaxo SmithKline (GSK), the world’s largest seller of vaccines, conceivably could today be in bankruptcy proceedings along with other makers of MMR vaccines.

Wakefield’s Vaxxed documents that “the CDC (US Government’s Centers for Disease Control-w.e.) deliberately and willfully concealed a significantly increased autism risk associated with receipt of MMR vaccine according to the CDC’s recommended schedule (by 18 months) in vulnerable subgroups of children i.e. African American boys and children with ‘isolated’ autism who were essentially previously developmentally normal. As a consequence, millions of American children have been put in harm’s way.” (emphasis added-w.e.)

The film’s content, which features “interviews with pharmaceutical insiders, doctors, politicians, and parents of vaccine-injured children,” contains the testimony of CDC whistleblower, Senior Scientist Dr. William Thompson who led the CDC agency’s 2004 study on the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine and its link to autism. Wakefield’s film details the history from the point in 2013 when Thompson, evidently seized by conscience, approached biologist Dr. Brian Hooker by phone. Thompson “confessed that the CDC had omitted crucial data in their final report that revealed a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism.” (emphasis added-w.e.)

In a series of phone discussions in 2015 with US Congressman Bill Posey, Thompson described (all on tape) that while he was a senior scientist at CDC, he and his colleagues, after making a study of the link between vaccines and incidence of autism in small black boys, “scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room, and reviewed and went through all the hardcopy documents that we had thought we should discard, and put them into a huge garbage can.” Thompson is quoted declaring, “Oh my God! I cannot believe we did what we did. But we did.”

In the movie Dr. Hooker states how he recorded the phone calls made to him over several months, by Dr. Thompson, who provided the confidential data destroyed by his CDC colleagues. The film calls for Congress to subpoena Dr. William Thompson and investigate the CDC fraud, and for Congress to repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that frees vaccine makers from liability and hold manufacturers liable for injury caused by their vaccines.

This criminal cover-up by the CDC, the government agency mandated to protect the health and safety of Americans, is the real focus of the Robert de Niro-Wakefield Vaxxed drama. DeNiro stated that he had familiarized himself with the William Thompson CDC case in detail before deciding to include Vaxxed in his film festival. De Niro had spoken at length with US Congressman Bill Posey, about Posey’s tape-recorded phone talks with CDC Whistleblower Thompson.

Rockefeller (Un-)Sanitary Commission

The website of the Rockefeller Foundation posted its 100-year Centenary of the founding of the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission (RSC) in 2009. Standard Oil magnate John D. Rockefeller had founded the commission in 1909 initially, as they describe,“…to bring about a co-operative movement of the medical profession, public health officials, boards of trade, churches, schools, the press and other agencies for the cure and prevention of hookworm disease.” Hookworm eradication, as the Rockefeller Foundation today admits, was simply a “favorable wedge,” allowing the RSC to promote the creation of an organized and well-funded public health network…”

The Rockefeller Foundation (RF) began in the 1920’s to organize a complete reorganization of American medical education, basing it on pharmaceuticals and surgery while discrediting or demonizing numerous alternative approaches. It was in effect doing in the medical area what the Standard Oil group had done in world oil–dominate it.

As the RF then details in its website, they were responsible for the major turn by the WHO, CDC and others in the 1980’s to advocate very early and very massive multiple vaccinations of infants:

“RF’s global efforts to provide childhood vaccines began in 1984, following an international meeting at the RF conference center in Bellagio, Italy, on the protection of the world’s children. International delegates from the fields of medicine, government and philanthropy met to discuss the concept of a global immunization program for children as one means of providing primary health care and reducing mortality among children in the developing world. The World Health Organization (WHO) had already initiated the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in 1980; however, in later years, the program had suffered from financial constraints. The Bellagio meeting resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in funding allocated to the EPI.”

However the really explosive jump in early childhood and even infant multiple vaccinations took place when the Rockefeller Foundation and their Children’s Vaccine Initiative teamed up with the billions of dollars of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, founded in 1994. At a 1999 World Bank Summit, again in the Rockefellers’ Bellagio center, senior staff of the RF, the Gates Foundation, WHO, World Bank and UNICEF. They agreed to create and fund a new organization to replace the CVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) in 2000.

This brief history is crucial in the context of the astonishing number of vaccinations given on recommendation of the WHO and the US CDC since precisely the mid-1980’s when the Rockefeller Foundation launched the project. Incidentally, the same foundation was deeply into launch of the GMO project at the same time, together with Monsanto where a Rockefeller sat on the board.

Precisely it was since the 1980’s, when the Rockefeller vaccine initiative was launched, that the alarming rise of child autism began to manifest. Most recently, USA autism rates climbed nearly 30% between 2008 and 2010. Incidents of child autism have more than doubled since 2000 according to a new study from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, affecting one of every 68 children who are 8-year-olds. Thirty years ago autism in the USA was virtually unheard of. When it was first described in 1943 by Leo Kanner, it was believed to occur at a rate of 4–5 per 10,000 children. Today, it is 1 in 68!

The CDC claims not to know the cause.

It’s clearly not genetic change because such changes take many generations to manifest. Therefore it must be a significant change in the environment of the children. The most significant environmental change since the 1980’s in the USA, where it is well-documented, has been the intensity and frequency of child, and now infant, multiple vaccinations, all including MMR.

Alarming Ratajczak Studies

In 2011, Dr. Helen Ratajczak, herself a former senior scientist in the pharmaceutical industry, published a ground-breaking article in the Journal of Immunotoxicology entitled “Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review.” Ratajczak did what nobody else apparently had bothered to do: she reviewed the body of published science since autism was first described in 1943. Not just one theory suggested by research such as the role of MMR shots, or the mercury preservative thimerosal; but all of them.

Ratajczak’s article states, in part, that “Documented causes of autism include genetic mutations and/or deletions, viral infections, and encephalitis [brain damage] following vaccination. Therefore, autism is the result of genetic defects and/or inflammation of the brain.” xviii [emphasis added]

In a detailed interview with, Dr. Ratajczak described the situation today in terms of infant exposure to multiple vaccines, the agenda of the same CDC that faked vaccine-autism data to be pharma-friendly.

She noted, “In the USA, in 2010, 50 doses of 14 vaccines are given by the age of six years with Hip B given at birth, and again at 2 months along with Rotavirus, Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis (three vaccines in one injection), Homophiles influenza type b, pneumococcal, and inactivated poliovirus. Two months is the most vulnerable age immunologically. Most infant mortality occurs at 2 months because the protection from the mother’s immunity is waning, and the child’s immunity is still immature.”

Dr Ratajczak continues with this alarming observation from her years of research, “Thus, the immune system is compromised at two months. A challenge by so many vaccines while the immune system is compromised might contribute to an onset of autism (Ratajczak, 2011). The inflammation caused by the vaccines would damage the central nervous system and brain.”

She points to several documented studies of the effect of delaying child vaccination until after 2 years: “In Japan, some doctors gave no vaccines to infants for two months, and then began vaccinations only to children 2 years old or older. Japan jumped from 17th place in child mortality to the lowest child mortality in the world (Vaccine Awareness Network, 05 May, 2011). Similar results happened in other countries, such as the United Kingdom. The post-neonatal mortality dropped in 1976 when there was publicity about the whooping cough vaccine causing brain damage, and the vaccination rate fell to only 10 – 30%, with a concomitant fall in infant mortality rate.”

A compromising video

A recent French TV documentary program, “Special Envoy,” revealed that in France since 2015 parents who by law are required to vaccinate their children for diphtheria, tetanus and polio, can only do so by giving their child multi-vaccines marketed by GlaxoSmithKline as Hexavalent vaccine, or in liquid form by Sanofi Pasteur called Hexavac.

The TV program obtained an explosive video from June 2012, which shows Jean Stéphenne, former director of the GSK’s vaccine department, boasting of his success in a presentation. He explains the GSK strategy as follows: “We bought all the patents on hepatitis B. It was the first time a vaccine was protected by patents, so we have all patents. And now you competitors, if you want to come on the market, you have to negotiate with us… one includes [patented] hepatitis B with other “products” that were not protected by patents, and by doing that the product is made fully protected. So the strategy is not more complicated than that [applause].” The previous DTP (Diphteria, Tetanus, Poliomyelitis) cost 24 euros. The “hexavalent” vaccine costs 120 euros. The French TV program asks if the GSK patent strategy was driven by genuine health concerns or by profit.

There is perhaps no greater harm done today to human beings than that being promoted by the pharmaceutical industry and its ability to win friends and influence politicians, to pass friendly laws and to persuade mainstream media to hide the horrendous and mounting toll of vaccine damage to infants. I have had personal occasion in clinics in Germany to see what vaccine damage can do to children. It’s hushed up. It’s very, very real.

Despite the fact that Andrew Wakefield’s Vaxxed was pulled at the last minute, Robert de Niro has done the world a great service, alone through the media firestorm the film has generated, by placing attention on the work of Wakefield and the urgent need for an international spotlight on possible links between vaccinations, especially the multiple MMR vaccine, and illnesses such as autism. Instead of shooting the messenger, Andrew Wakefield, honest journalism could discuss the content of the Wakefield documentary. It’s very sobering.


Putin Closes The Door To Monsanto


Paul Craig Roberts – 5-23-2016

In a new address to the Russian Parliament Thursday, Putin proudly outlined his plan to make Russia the world’s ‘leading exporter’ of non-GMO foods that are based on ‘ecologically clean’ production. Putin harshly criticized food production in the United States, declaring that Western food producers are no longer offering high quality, healthy, and ecologically clean food. Putin is correct. American agribusiness is slowly poisoning the American population.

The United States is finished. The One Percent have the country by the throat and will not let go. For the One Percent nothing is important except mega-riches. Young Americans should emigrate to Russia, a country coming out of a dark period as America descends into darkness.

Moreover, Russia has leadership that represents the people, something the United States will never again experience.


GRAIN BRAIN –  David Perlmutter. Modern GMO wheat is causing several epidemic diseases of which you need to be aware. It not only is making our gut diseased, it is affecting our brains. 



Stephanie Seneff, PhD on Glyphosate (RoundUp) Poisoning.



POLIO VACCINE red Rubber Stamp over a white background.



Bottle of poliomyelitis vaccine, close-up


cdc admits 98-million americans received polio vaccination with cancer virus

Another “New” Polio Vaccine

This week the world is attempting a first — the largest, quickest rollout of a vaccine in history. The goal is to make the polio vaccine safer, but it comes with a big risk.


This week, health workers all over the world are attempting a first, to pull off the largest and quickest rollout ever of a new vaccine. It’s for polio. The goal is to replace the existing vaccine with a safer one. And as NPR’s Michaeleen Doucleff reports, this extraordinary effort comes with a risk.

MICHAELEEN DOUCLEFF, BYLINE: The world uses nearly 2 billion doses of polio vaccine each year. They’re all stored in little vials at clinics and hospitals across the globe. Now every single vial has to be destroyed and switched out with a new one, and it all has to get done in two weeks.

WALTER ORENSTEIN: This is a tremendous amount of difficult logistics.

DOUCLEFF: That’s Walter Orenstein. He’s the associate director of the Emory Vaccine Center. He says countries have been training for this switch for months. Health workers have been taught to destroy the old vaccine by boiling it, incinerating it, even burying it in the ground.

ORENSTEIN: And what’s being done is to go out and have independent monitors visit these sites to make sure the vaccine has been collected and destroyed.

DOUCLEFF: Do you know how many sites there are, like just scale wise?

ORENSTEIN: That I don’t know, but it’s huge. It’s mind-boggling.

DOUCLEFF: Thousands of monitors are visiting thousands and thousands of sites. But Orenstein says it’s all being done for a really good reason, to get the world closer to eradicating polio. Robin Nandy is the chief of immunization at UNICEF, which is helping with the vaccine switch out. He says the vaccine used in most countries contains a live virus. Now, the virus has been weakened, so it doesn’t make people sick but…

ROBIN NANDY: In very rare instances, the live vaccine virus can mutate and cause polio.

DOUCLEFF: Last year, the world recorded about 100 cases of polio. About 30 of them were caused by mutant strains from the old vaccine. And that’s why it’s so important that all those vials of the old vaccine are completely destroyed. If some aren’t, some of that virus could leak out into the world, and we could have outbreaks of a type of polio we haven’t seen since 1999.

NANDY: We do expect this and we have put in place measures to detect this very quickly and respond to this.


DOUCLEFF: And Nandy says it’s all worth the risk because if the world is ever going to wipe out polio, we have to first make sure the vaccine isn’t causing it.




March 5, 2016

Russian president Vladimir Putin says that Western governments are enslaving humanity through vaccines.

‘When your children are barely human, psychologically-altered bots, their nerve cells and synapses failing to connect, and their neurodevelopmental processes dulled to the point of restricting them to sub-human level repetitive grunts and gormless stares, what are you going to do then?’

An insider from the Ministry of Health in Russia has revealed that an explosive report is being prepared that will be presented to the Kremlin on Tuesday regarding the huge vaccination cover-up being perpetuated by the US government agencies and its regulatory bodies, which is having disastrous consequences around most of the world.

It is understood President Putin personally requested the report. He instinctively mistrusts the vaccine agenda and wants the report to investigate the state of play regarding vaccines, Big Pharma, and Western governments, in order to formulate a solid, direct response that will stand his people in good stead for the future.

According to the Ministry of Health insider, the report validates President Putin’s suspicions. There is a huge conflict of interests between the government agencies which regulate vaccines and the corporations that approve and implement the vaccines.

This investigation, involving internationally respected scientists and leading medical professionals, won’t be a laughably corrupt affair involving a payroll of ‘scientists’ who are willing to say or do anything for a dollar or two. Considering the fact that leading scientists and doctors who have dared voice concern about state-enforced vaccinations have been dying under mysterious circumstances in the US in recent years, kudos must be given to those brave enough to continue speaking out.

It is claimed the report will declare the situation a ‘self-perpetuating criminal racket.’ Educational institutions and scientific bodies are also ‘motivated by greed and generally corrupt.’ A recent study by the University of Bristol that declared diet soda to be healthier than water (a study covertly funded by the Coca Cola Company) is presented as an example of the absurd situation in the West at the moment, and is held up to ridicule.

The report says that President Putin believes the next stage of human evolution is currently in “grave risk” and that Western and global powers are “intentionally decelerating the process for their personal gain.”

“We as a species have the choice to continue to develop our bodies and brains in a healthy upward trajectory, or we can follow the Western example of recent decades and intentionally poison our population with genetically altered food, pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, and fast food that should be classified as a dangerous, addictive drug.”

“We must fight this. A physically and intellectually disabled population is not in our interests,” the report states.

Describing the average government-controlled Westerner as an “intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown,” the report states that such tactics used by governments to subjugate their citizens are not only “dark/evil” but “counter-productive in the medium to long term.”

Russia under President Putin has been giving away land for free in the past few years to people willing to farm organically and sustainably. The goal is to become the world’s “leading exporter” of non-GMO foods that are based on “ecologically clean” production.

The Security Council report comes just months after the Kremlin announced a stop to the production of all GMO-containing foods, which was seen by the international community as a major step in the fight against multinationals like Monsanto. Russia continues to lead the way in the realm of natural, organic farming.



Only 1 TBSP of Coconut Oil Produces Powerful Health Changes, Study Confirms

coconut oil

By Sayer Ji, GreenMed Info

A simple tablespoon daily of coconut oil could promote weight loss and improve cardiovascular health, reveals a new clinical study.

A new study titled, “A coconut extra virgin oil-rich diet decreases waist circumference and body mass in coronary artery disease patients,” holds great promise in those suffering from overweight, obesity, and heightened cardiovascular disease risk, and against which pharmaceutical approaches often fail.

Coconut oil was once considered a “bad fat,” as it contains saturated fatty acids which conventional nutritionists did not distinguish from synthetically produced ones such as margarine. We know far better now, and increasingly, natural sources of saturated fats are gaining appreciation as not only “not-bad,” but actually beneficial, particularly for the brain. You can check out the first hand literature on coconut’s helath benefits on the database, or read our article, 13 Evidence-Based Health Benefits of Coconut Oil.

In the first phase, a three month period, 136 enrollees were put on a standardized diet. From the third month onward, the 116 who completed the first phase were place in two intervention groups: 22 remained on the diet, and 92 were put on the diet + 13 ml (.43 ounces) daily of extra virgin coconut oil, which is equivalent to about 14 grams, or about 1 Tablespoon (15 grams).

The results of the the three-month coconut oil intervention showed that relative to the standard diet, the coconut group saw a decrease in all six of the bodily parameters measured, including:

  • Weight: -.6 kilograms (1.322 pounds)
  • Body Mass Index: – .2 kg/m2
  • Waist Circumference: -2.1 cm
  • Neck Perimeter: -4 cm
  • Systolic Blood Pressure: -3.3 points
  • Diastolic Blood Pressure: -3.5 points

Additionally, midsection fat, also known as abdominal obesity, is a serious risk factor for cardiovascular events and cardiac mortality. In fact, a 2007 study published in the journal Circulation found that of three risk factors evaluated for heart attack, namely, abdominal obesity, abnormal lipids, and smoking, abdominal obesity was the most powerful: 48.5%, versus 40.8% for abnormal lipids, and 38.4% for smoking.

When one considers these two factors, any safe, diet-based lifestyle modification that can safely raise HDL-C cholesterol, and reduce midsection fat and related anthropometric parameters such as BMI and midsection circumference, is a home run.

This is, of course, not the first time we have reported on the powerful health benefits of coconut oil. In fact, it doesn’t take months, or even days, to observe positive changes in certain populations. We reported previously on what can only be described as an amazing study where just one dose of coconut oil derived medium chain triglycerides produced positive cognitive changes in Alzheimer’s patients in only 90 minutes. You can read about it in greater detail here: MCT Fats Found In Coconut Oil Boost Brain Function In Only One Dose.

For reducing abdominal obesity, you can take a look at our database on the topic: Reduce Belly Fat (Abdominal Obesity).


New Two-Year Study Exposes Monsanto Roundup Weed Killer

4534532222“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to kill you.” Such a comment might be applied to the most widely used weed-killers on Earth–Monsanto’s patented Roundup based on the systemic herbicide, Glyphosate. Earlier this year the authoritative International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World health Organisation (WHO) declared that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans. Scientific studies have confirmed it. Now a new, peer-reviewed scientific study over a two-year life span of test rats, clearly demonstrates that consumption of even tiny amounts of Roundup or other glyphosate-containing weed killers produces severe liver and kidney damage and in some cases premature death.

The well-meaning faceless bureaucrats over at the supra-national EU Commission in Brussels refuse to even seriously consider such studies and classify as “secret” a German government report from this past January because it likely would show Monsanto’s dirty paw prints. All this does is once more show the criminal conspiracy by Monsanto, the world’s leading purveyor of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMO plants to use myths, lies and any sort of corruption of science to ram their poisons down the throats of our food animals and of us human beings.

Shocking new Study

On August 25, the international scientific journal, Environmental Health, published the peer-reviewed results of a two-year study by a team led by Michael N. Antoniou of the Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, King’s College London. He conceived the study together with Prof. Gilles-Eric Seralini of the Institute of Biology, University of Caen, in France.

Under strictest conditions the different groups of rats were given micro-diluted concentrations of glyphosate and its adjuvants as found in Roundup from Monsanto. The glyphosate equivalent dose of Roundup administered in this study was half that permitted in drinking water in the European Union and Australia, and 14,000 times lower than that permitted in drinking water in the USA.

Moreover, the amount of glyphosate-equivalent Roundup consumed by the animals on a daily basis was many thousands of times below the regulatory set safety limits of glyphosate alone in all regions around the world.

This is the most extensive and only known long-term study of the potential toxic effects of glyphosate-based herbicides such as Monsanto’s Roundup, even though Roundup with glyphosate was discovered by Monsanto in 1970.

Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) such as Roundup are the major pesticides used worldwide and are currently applied on at least 24 % of the total global cropland. They are also used extensively in domestic and urban environments. Residues of GBH are routinely detected in foodstuffs and drinking water contaminated via rain, surface runoff and leaching into groundwater. In short it’s almost everywhere.

What the scientists discovered should set alarm bells ringing around the world. Have you heard even so much as a jingle bell so far?

They discovered that male animals suffered from pathological liver and kidney damage resulting in an increased rate of premature deaths. Further, significant alteration in the pattern of gene function was found in both the liver and kidneys of the Roundup group of rats compared with the control group. The alterations in gene function were consistent with fibrosis (scarring), necrosis (areas of dead tissue), phospholipidosis (disturbed fat metabolism) and damage to mitochondria (the centres of respiration in cells).

I want to underscore the seriousness of what Antoniou and his colleagues are describing. The liver is a vital organ. It has some 500 functions in the body including detoxification of various metabolites, protein synthesis, and the production of biochemicals necessary for digestion. This gland plays a major role in metabolism. It regulates a variety of essential reactions, including the synthesis and breakdown of small and complex molecules which are necessary for normal vital functions. In short, the liver supports almost every organ in the body and is vital for survival. 

And we should also be clear on the role of other glyphosate-damaged organ, the kidneys, which are essential for the body’s removal of waste products of metabolism. Kidneys are essential to the urinary system and also the regulation of electrolytes, maintenance of acid–base balance, and regulation of blood pressure by maintaining the salt and water balance. They are the body’s natural filter of the blood, and remove water-soluble wastes which are diverted to the bladder.  If both kidneys and liver are damaged seriously, we are in bad trouble, or even dead.

To sum up the Antoniou and Seralini team’s rat research results, rats fed ultra-low concentrations of glyphosate-based Roundup over the two year life-span period showed that, “twice the number of biochemical parameters was disturbed in kidney than what can be expected by chance. Furthermore, a testosterone/estrogen imbalance was evident with testosterone serum levels significantly increased by 97 % by comparison to controls, while estradiol serum levels were decreased by 26 %. These observations together with pituitary gland disturbances suggest endocrine disrupting effects.” Estradiol is a steroid and estrogen sex hormone, and the primary female sex hormone. It is essential for the development and maintenance of female reproductive tissues but also has important effects in many other tissues including bone. Estrogens have essential functions in men as well.

The scientists continue their conclusions: “Overall, toxicity process analysis revealed gene expression disturbances associated with apoptosis, necrosis, phospholipidosis, mitochondrial membrane dysfunction and ischemia. Thus the alteration…in this study correlates with the observed increased signs of anatomical and functional pathology of the liver and kidneys.” They observed “more than 4000 genes whose expression was altered in both the liver and kidneys within the Roundup treatment group.”

Monsanto and corrupt scientists

Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini designed this newest study with his colleagues as a follow-up to a sensational 2012 study. The new study was specifically on the impact, not of feeding Roundup-sprayed GMO corn from Monsanto, but solely the isolated impact of Roundup, the glyphosate-based Roundup weed-killer used in all GMO crops today. In September 2012 Food and Chemical Toxicology, published Seralini’s first ever-long-term two year study of the impact of Monsanto GMO corn sprayed, as Monsanto requires, with Monsanto’s Roundup weed-killer.

That 2012 Seralini report described the world’s first feeding study of the effects on more than 200 rats of a diet of GMO corn over a period of a full two years at a cost of €3 million.  The study found alarming instances of cancer tumors in rats fed GMO corn treated with Monsanto Roundup with Glyphosate. World media coverage forced the EU Commission to cover its pro-GMO tracks.

More than one year later, in 2013, in an unprecedented and entirely unethical move, the Food and Chemical Toxicology editors retracted the Seralini 2012 article. It was later discovered that a former senior Monsanto employee, Richard Goodman, had been named by the journal to their Editorial Board shortly before the Seralini study was retracted. A year after that blatantly corrupt action, Goodman along with Editor-in-chief A. Wallace Hayes were themselves both “removed” by the publisher

But the corruption doesn’t stop with the attempts to ostracise the Seralini rat studies.

EU Declares German Monsanto study “Secret”

In the latest twist in this criminal drama of lies and intrigues the EU Commission has just declared a German government study “secret” and unavailable for examination by independent scientific experts.

The EU Commission is refusing to let independent experts have access to the recent report prepared by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) on the risk assessment of glyphosate.

On August 10, 2015 the EU Commission wrote to, an industry-independent group of experts registered as a non-profit organization to promote independent research and public debate on the impacts of biotechnology, a euphemism for GMO.

The EU Commission wrote that it had denied a request by Testbiotech to examine the documents made available to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) by the German government. The EU insisted, bizarrely, that the documents “are protected in their entirety” as confidential. The EU Commission can see “no overriding public interest” that would justify access. The letter was signed by Ladislav Miko, Acting Director-General of the EU Commission’s Food Safety Directorate (the name of the EU office even sounds like 1984). Miko is another of those Brussels faceless bureaucrats with immense responsibility and no transparency.

At issue is a report sent to the EU Commission’s Monsanto-linked EFSA, (European Food Safety Authority), this spring by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) on the safety of glyphosate. The German assessment was made following widespread publicity about the WHO assessment that glyphosate was a likely cancer causing chemical. Surprisingly, the BfR came to the opposite conclusion, namely that there is no risk of cancer from glyphosates. Theirs was in a hasty study that apparently relied on an equally hasty study provided to the German government by…you guessed it–Monsanto scientistsThat Monsanto study that formed the basis of the cheery German BfR report is what the scientific experts of wish to put under the microscope. To avoid that potential embarrassment, the EU Commission has labeled the German study “secret and confidential.” The German government has also kept their report secret.

The criminal melodrama gets even more remarkable though.

In a 2013 court ruling made by the European Court of Justice, (Case T 545/11), judges ruled that data relevant for the risk assessment of herbicides have to be made public. The EU Commission as well as the German government are in contempt of that ruling.

Whatever Monsanto touches seems to ooze with corruption and fraud. It’s interesting and extraordinary in its pervasiveness, and suggests the company has a deeper agenda than mere corporate profit. I would posit that the deeper Monsanto agenda has something to do with the company’s long history with the pro-eugenics Rockefeller family and more recently with eugenicist advocate, Bill Gates of Microsoft.

Is the entire GMO project, a project financed and brought to commercialization primarily by the Rockefeller Foundation, a hidden eugenics project to gradually reduce world population of what Rockefeller and his kind would call “useless eaters” or human “weeds”? It’s beginning to look more and more just like that. What an elegant way to get hundreds of millions or even a few billions of people to have them slowly eat themselves to death by consuming GMO and glyphosates they don’t even notice until it’s too late.


Victory! World’s Largest Nation Bans GMO Food Crops

212678292Victories are to be celebrated and for the future of healthy life on our planet we all can celebrate a beautiful victory. The world’s largest nation, the Russian Federation, whose landmass spans Eurasia from the Baltic and Ukraine on the west to Vladivostock and the Pacific on her east, has formally declared all commercial planting of Genetically Modified Organisms, GMOs, to be prohibited.

The issue has been subject of a heated debate for some months inside Russia. In February 2014, just days prior to the US-orchestrated coup d’etat in Ukraine, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev created a national research project to obtain scientific information so the Government and Duma might make a decision on GMOs in Russia. Now a definitive decision has been made, and it goes against Monsanto and the US-led GMO cartel. We can say Russia’s crisis has concentrated minds on the essentials of life.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dorkovich told an international biotechnology conference in Kirov September 18, “As far as genetically-modified organisms are concerned, we have made the decision not to use any GMO in food productions.”

Last year the Duma or parliament voted to make tough GMO labeling laws as a first step to the new ban in order to inform consumers of presence of GMO in various foods they buy. That was before US and EU sanctions led to Russian counter-sanctions against EU imports of agriculture products. In August 2014, the Russian government announced its bans on import from the EU and several other countries of meat, fish, dairy products, fruit and vegetables as a response to the sanctions. It produced surprising results. Since the imposition of tough Russian food import bans, Russian agriculture has undergone a spectacular rebirth.

Russian supermarkets from Rostov on Don to Sochi to Moscow today feature overwhelmingly Russian products, domestically grown. Russians I spoke with during a visit this August to the Rostov region told me they realized that the taste of Russian food such as tomatoes was far superior to that of imported food that often is artificially colored and treated with chemical preservatives that it holds on the shelf, looking fresh. Following the tumultuous collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s the corrupt Yeltsin government opened the doors for western agribusiness giants like Kraft, Nestle, Unilever to fill Russian stores with their agribusiness industrialized food products.

Rich organic soils

The decision to build up domestic Russian food production is a huge one. Russia today has some of the richest most fertile agriculture soil in the world. Because during the Cold War economic restraints dictated that products of the chemical industry were dedicated to national defense needs, the fertile Russian soil has not been subjected to decades of destruction from chemical fertilizers or crop spraying as the soils in much of the west. Now this becomes a blessing in disguise, as EU and North American farmers struggle with the destructive effects of chemicals in their soils that have largely destroyed essential micro-organisms. Rich agriculture soils take years to create and can be destroyed in no time. Where the climate is moist and warm, it takes thousands of years to form just a few centimeters of soil. Cold dry climates need far longer.

Russia encompasses one of only two soil belts in the world known as “Chernozem belts.” It runs from Southern Russia into Siberia across Kursk, Lipetsk, Tambov and Voronezh Oblasts. Chernozem, Russian for black soil, are black-colored soils with a high percentage of humus, phosphoric acids, phosphorus and ammonia. Chernozem is very fertile soil producing a high agricultural yield. The Russian Chernozem belt stretches from Siberia and southern Russia into northeast Ukraine, on into the Balkans along the Danube. The other major Chernozem belt is in the Manitoba prairies of Canada.

Agribusiness vs. Food Security

The Russian Agriculture Ministry has also formulated a Russian Food Security Doctrine that regularly issues targets for domestic agriculture and fisheries production. This month they promulgated a new target of 85% for domestic fish consumption.

A project, financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, and developed by two professors at Harvard Business School, developed what they termed “agribusiness.” The Rockefeller idea was to do to world agriculture what Rockefellers had done to oil—create a top-down monopoly or cartel where a handful of corporations would control world food.

It was one of the most effective and by far one of the most destructive of many Rockefeller initiatives. Under pressure from the World Trade Organization “free trade” in agriculture should take precedence over national laws for health and safety. Russia’s return to a far higher degree of food self-sufficiency is a major blow to that agribusiness globalization strategy. Its decision to ban GMO food crops flies in the face of that western agribusiness lobby.

The EU sanctions are already creating major change inside Russia in terms of food production. One of the more fascinating examples is the fish production by the Russian Valaam Monastery on an archipelago in the northern portion of Lake Ladoga, in the Republic of Karelia, Russian Federation, near Finland.

Russian Valaam Monastery on Lake Lagoda is booming trout and other food production as response to Russian food import decisions

The Economic Director of the historic monastery has announced that they will triple fish production to 200 tons of trout a year from the present production of some 60-70 tons. “Previously, our fish had been on shop counters in St. Petersburg and Murmansk. But we did not supply it directly to retailers. We would supply it to the intermediaries who did the processing. Now we would like to attract investment to build fish-processing facilities. Then it would be possible to store it not two or three days but longer, and we would be able to supply it directly to retailers,” the responsible monk told Russian Izvestia. They also make cheese, including Italian varieties such as mozzarella, caciotta and ricotta. They had lost fish production Russian market share owing to cheaper industrially-produced Norwegian salmon in recent years. Norway is afected by Russia’s ban.

Food production in Russia’s under-populated far-east region is also set to boom. On September 3 in Vladivostok at the first Eastern Economic Forum, Russia’s Agriculture Ministry announced the creation of a new $10 billion agriculture development fund together with China.

A number of financial institutions, including Russia’s state-owned Sberbank, will participate in its operations. The aim of the fund is to stimulate the production of 10 million tons of grain and agricultural products annually, beginning 2020.

Both China and Russia will cooperate on joint investment projects in the Russian territories of priority development, nine of which are located in Russia’s Far Eastern Federal District, the ministry added. The projects will include investments in agribusiness, grain growing, processing, storage and logistics as well as the construction and operation of agribusiness infrastructure. In brief, major positive transformations are taking place in Russian food security and self-sufficiency.

Russia’s new Homestead Law

This July, taking a page out of American history, the Russian government announced it was drafting a Russian “Homestead Act.” The Russian government is finalizing a bill which will give an opportunity to every Russian citizen to obtain one hectare of land, or a maximum of five hectares for a family of five, in the Russian Far East for free.

They can use the land to farm, to do forestry or simply build a home and live, so long as they use the land for the first five years. After, they own the land free if the plot has been used for activities not banned by Russian laws, reported TASS. In the case of non-use the land will be confiscated and revert back to the government. Foreigners will have no right to get the free land. The new land law, if passed in the Duma, will take effect in January, 2016.

A recent poll suggests there is significant interest in the offer, with some 30 million mostly young Russians ready to “go east.” Following the economic devastation of Russia during the Yeltsin era of the 1990s, eastern regions suffered economic collapse and significant depopulation as people migrated to cities to survive.

Into this broader context of recent developments, the definitive government ban on growing GMO crops in the Russian Federation adds a major new attraction. Russia stands to become one of the world’s most desired producers of natural, organic non-GMO-contaminated food for the world.

Today, the once-great American agriculture has been de-humanized, industrialized, by giant agribusiness concerns, and contaminated by Monsanto and GMO plants along with its deadly herbicides containing toxic glyphosate. More than 80% of all US corn is GMO and almost 100% of USA soybeans. This is no small matter. Exports of GMO soybeans and corn are allowed unlabeled, by loopholes, into the European Union as well as into China. That means that most of the meat and even farmed fish that European and Chinese consumers eat contains indirect GMO crops and toxins. In light of all this it might make sense to treat Russia a little more politely in the future if we want to eat healthy food. They are doing what we should be doing, but don’t. Why?


Top Planned Parenthood abortionist describes how she dismembered babies and did partial-birth abortions

(WARNING: This article contains brutal, graphic information and pictures. As a result of these recent exposés the House of Representatives has been felt pressure to pass a bill to defund Planned Parenthood … a step in the right direction. However, it is known that the Senate will probably vote it down. And even if the bill passes the Senate, Obama will certainly veto it. Nonetheless, these horrendous details are now on the Internet, shining more light upon this monstrous crime, and holding a complicit public’s feet to the fire by exposing them to the graphic details of aborticide and the callous, psychopathic serial murderers called abortionists. It is also removing any excuse or claim of ignorance by mothers who opt to murder their own little helpless babies.)


Dr. Carolyn Westhoff, Senior Medical Advisor for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, is seen on The Center for Medical Progress’s tenth video, discussing how certain Planned Parenthood affiliates are very familiar with the process of providing aborted fetal body parts. In the uncut video, Westhoff is seen asking the actor (posing as a potential buyer) about what kinds of tissue they want for research, saying, “You only do fresh tissue, you don’t do frozen?” She continues, saying they’ve been “working with people who want particular tissues”:

… Like, you know, they want cardiac, or they want eyes, or they want neural. People want spinal cords, so I mean, that sort of thing. Certainly, everything we provide–oh, gonads! Oh my God, gonads. Everything we provide is fresh.

Westhoff should know all about “fresh” human body parts. After all, on April 2, 2004, Westhoff testified in the case of National Abortion Federation, et. al. v. Ashcroft, in which she was among several physicians (including infamous late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart) and organizations seeking to “permanently enjoin enforcement of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.”

Yes, this partial-birth abortion.


Westhoff was questioned in depth about her participation in partial-birth abortion, and whether or not she and other abortionists were honest with patients about what occurs in such procedures (they weren’t). She also admitted that she dances around the question of fetal pain if a patient asks – even though she has seen fetal pain reactions:

THE COURT: What do you tell them, does the fetus feel pain or not when they ask?

THE WITNESS: What I tell them is that the subject of the fetal pain and whether a fetus can appreciate pain is a subject of some research and controversy and that I don’t know to what extent the fetus can feel pain but that its —

THE COURT: Do you tell them it feels some pain?

THE WITNESS: I do know that when we do, for instance an amniocentesis and put a needle through the abdomen into the amniotic cavity that the fetus withdraws so I certainly know based on my experience that the fetus with [sic] withdraw in response it a painful stimulus.

Later, she answers, “No, I don’t,” when asked whether or not she feels patients need to know that, in a partial-birth abortion, the “head is collapsed or crushed….” She said that information “would be distressing to my patients and would not — information about that is not directly relevant to their safety.”

But aside from the lack of desire to inform women about the gruesomeness that really happens during an abortion, let’s go back to Westhoff’s comments about the “freshness” of fetal body parts. Here is another interaction, under oath (“Q” is the Court, “A” is Westhoff):

Q. When you perform an intact D&E, Dr. Westhoff, is the fetus living when you commence vaginal delivery?
A. Although I don’t always check for it, I believe there is usually a heartbeat and that the fetus is living.

Q. And at the time you either cut the umbilical cord or collapse the skull, is the fetus living?

A. Yes.

Q. Dr. Westhoff, do you make it a practice either to effect fetal demise by using potassium chloride, as we have heard about, or injecting a toxin into the amniotic sac prior to the time that you effect a surgical evacuation of the uterus?

A. No, Mr. Hut, I usually do not do so

Q. Why not?

A. The main reason that it is an additional procedure that does not offer any benefit to the woman that I am taking care of. The procedure itself is not trivial, it can be difficult to accomplish, can fail, and has some risks. Those are the main reasons I do not use this procedure.”

Are we now – in light of multiple videos which prove that fetal body parts are of high value to researchers and others – supposed to believe that Westhoff’s “main reason” for not using a feticide (a chemical injected into the preborn child to cause cardiac arrest) such as digoxin is really because it “does not offer any benefit to the woman”? Or is it really because it would make the fetal body parts completely unfit for use by procurement agencies and researchers? A point to ponder.

PPFA Medical Director, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, expressed willingness to alter an abortion procedure (which is against federal law) in CMP’s first video. She knew that changing the presentation of the preborn child in utero (“convert[ing] to breech”) would provide better organs for procurement.

The award-winning Dr. Carolyn “Fresh” Westhoff and her cohorts who objected to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 knew this, too.


chart th

U.S. House votes to make it a first-degree murder to kill babies after botched abortions


(This is probably a lame move, since the abortionists only need to make sure they kill the baby before it is completely removed from the womb. They do this by pulling the baby part way out feet-first, leaving the head inside, then crushing the spine at the base of the head while the head remains in the womb. Thus, the baby is then dead before the head comes out. This is called a “partial birth abortion” and is done to avoid recriminations of killing live aborted babies. See above illustration. -ed)


WASHINGTON, D.C., September 18, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) — The House has passed a pro-life bill that makes it a first-degree murder for abortionists to kill children born alive through botched abortions.

In a nearly party-line vote of 248-177, with one Member voting “Present,” the House passed H.R. 3504, the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” The bill was introduced and debated in light of the Center for Medical Progress’ videos that indicate Planned Parenthood clinics may be killing babies post-birth.

The bill makes killing a baby born from a botched abortion first-degree murder, and requires reporting of violations of the law. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-VA, and Constitution Subcommittee Chairman Trent Franks, R-AZ, said in a statement that “this legislation sends a strong message to those who are in the horrific business of abortions that there are real consequences for those who would kill or abandon children after they are outside a mother’s womb.”

STORY: Aborted baby’s heart was beating as we harvested his brains: worker in new Planned Parenthood video

The statement called the bill “a somber reminder of the horrors of abortion” and of the actions of convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell.

The bill was one of two pro-life bills passed by the House today. The other was H.R. 3134, the “Defund Planned Parenthood Act,” which eliminates federal funding for abortion for one year and transfers $235 million to Federally Qualified Health Centers — which do not conduct abortions.



Nationwide mandatory vaccination bill is now here! New law will punish states that uphold medical choice

Baby Vaccination(Here is an article that is alarming at first glance. But, in fact it is good news. If this law goes into effect it will be a blessing in disguise. How? How can a law that forces vaccination upon all children who go to public school be a blessing? Very simple. It will wake up more parents who have been too lazy or recalcitrant to take their children out of the public schools system. Parents who don’t love their children enough to protect them would go ahead and send them to the Beast System indoctrination centers (schools). It would be a test and a judgment upon parents. This would be a good thing. The parents will have to look into the mirror and ask what kind of mother or father they are.) ——————————————-

Medical tyranny is apparently quite trendy in America these days, as a Florida congresswoman recently introduced a new legislative bill that, if passed, would restrict federal funding to states that don’t require every single public school student to be fully vaccinated according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended guidelines.

Representative Frederica S. Wilson, a Democrat from Florida’s 24th District (which includes parts of Miami), has unveiled the aptly-titled “Vaccinate All Children Act of 2015,” which sets as a requirement that “each student enrolled in one of the State’s public elementary schools or public secondary schools … be vaccinated in accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.”

If a state doesn’t abide by this draconian requirement, including every state that has vaccine exemption laws currently on the books, then it will no longer be eligible to receive federal grants, according to the provisions of the bill. In other words, live by Big Brother’s rules or be cut off from the gravy train (wait, isn’t this the type of despotism our forefathers fought to escape by settling in the new world?).

“This bill is essentially an attempt to blackmail states into abandoning any vaccination exemptions they currently have in place,” writes Lily Dane for The Daily Sheeple about the proposed measure.

Forced vaccinations bill would require all Americans born into it get at least 184 jabs!

If you haven’t taken a gander at the CDC’s Recommended Childhood Vaccine Schedule in a while, you might be surprised to learn that quite a few new vaccines have been added to the list over the past several decades – and many more are on the way!

Compared to the schedule from 1983, which contained only 24 vaccine doses within the first year-and-a-half of a child’s life, today’s schedule contains an astounding 71 vaccine doses during this same time period. And this number balloons even further as a child grows older, swelling to a shocking 184 vaccine doses over a person’s entire lifetime!

“Put simply, all philosophical and religious objections would have to be abolished by the States, in submission to the power of the Federal Purse,” reads an announcement published in Dr. Rima Truth Reports. “All medical excuses would be subject to the state’s very strict regulations that violate the patient/doctor relationship and unreasonably restrict the practice of medicine.”

Parents, adults would also be subjected for forced jabs under Rep. Wilson’s proposed bill

Children wouldn’t be the only victims within this new mandatory jab paradigm. The CDC, it turns out, has already initiated a plan through Obama’s Affordable Care Act to work with employers to push the CDC’s vaccine schedule on adults. The so-called “National Adult Immunization Plan” currently being drafted would add an additional 114 vaccine doses to what an individual would receive throughout his lifetime.

“There are currently 271 vaccines in the development pipeline,” explains The Daily Sheeple.

So what happens when people refuse Rep. Wilson’s hypothetical plan to forcibly jab every American child and adult with live viruses, aluminum, mercury, and other deadly neurotoxins? In blatant violation of the Nuremberg Code, Wilson has suggested using “element[s] of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior forms of constraint or coercion.” Put simply, you’ll take the government’s vaccines or you’ll die, essentially.

“Our warning to all Federal and State legislators: Do not become accessories to the violation of International Humanitarian Law,” warns Dr. Rima Laibow about this dangerous, treasonous bill that wages war on medical freedom in the U.S.



Why Oncologists Don’t Like Baking Soda Cancer Treatment

Baking SodaDave Mihalovic,  By July 2, 2015

Even the most aggressive cancers which have metastasized have been reversed with baking soda cancer treatments. Although chemotherapy is toxic to all cells, it represents the only measure that oncologists employ in their practice to almost all cancer patients. In fact, 9 out of 10 cancer patients agree to chemotherapy first without investigating other less invasive options.

Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That’s the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it’s effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite. Chemotherapy boosts cancer growth and long-term mortality rates and oncologists know it.

A few years ago, University of Arizona Cancer Center member Dr. Mark Pagel received a $2 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to study the effectiveness of personalized baking soda cancer treatment for breast cancer. Obviously there are people in the know who have understood that sodium bicarbonate, that same stuff that can save a person’s life in the emergency room in a heartbeat, is a primary cancer treatment option of the safest and most effective kind.

Studies have shown that dietary measures to boost bicarbonate levels can increase the pH of acidic tumors without upsetting the pH of the blood and healthy tissues. Animal models of human breast cancer show that oral sodium bicarbonate does indeed make tumors more alkaline and inhibit metastasis. Based on these studies, plus the fact that baking soda is safe and well tolerated, world renowned doctors such as Dr. Julian Whitaker have adopted successful cancer treatment protocols as part of an overall nutritional and immune support program for patients who are dealing with the disease. The Whitaker protocol uses 12 g (2 rounded teaspoons) of baking soda mixed in 2 cups water, along with a healthy sweetener of your choice. (It’s quite salty tasting.) Sip this mixture over the course of an hour or two and repeat for a total of three times a day. One man claims he has found a cure for cancer using baking soda and molasses and actually successfully treated his own disease by using baking soda.

When taken orally with water, especially water with high magnesium content, and when used transdermally in medicinal baths, sodium bicarbonate becomes a first-line medicinal for the treatment of cancer, and also kidney disease, diabetes, influenza and even the common cold.

Dr. Robert J. Gillies and his colleagues have already demonstrated that pre-treatment of mice with baking soda results in the alkalinization of the area around tumors. The same researchers reported that bicarbonate increases tumor pH and also inhibits spontaneous metastases in mice with breast cancer.

What is Baking Soda?

Baking soda is a white crystalline solid that appears as fine powder. It is also called cooking soda, bread soda and bicarbonate of soda. Its chemical name is sodium bicarbonate or sodium hydrogen carbonate.

Baking soda is different from washing soda (sodium carbonate) although they share the same slightly salty and alkaline taste.

This widely used soda is commonly dissolved in mineral water and used as a leavening agent in baking. It works as a leavening agent by neutralizing the acidic components of batter. The neutralization releases carbon dioxide and leads to the “raising” or expansion of baked foods.

Baking soda has also been used to soften vegetable and to tenderize meat.

As a household chemical, baking soda is used as a cleaning agent. It is included in toothpastes for similar reasons where it serves as an antiseptic, acid-neutralizer, whitening agent and plaque-removing agent as well as a cleaning agent.

Other common personal hygiene products in which baking soda can be found include deodorants and shampoos.

Baking Soda and pH Medicine

The pH of our tissues and body fluids is crucial and central because it affects and mirrors the state of our health or our inner cleanliness. The closer the pH is to 7.35-7.45, the higher our level of health and wellbeing. Staying within this range dramatically increases our ability to resist acute illnesses like colds and flues as well as the onset of cancer and other diseases. Keeping our pH within a healthy range also involves necessary lifestyle and dietary changes that will protect us over the long term while the use of sodium bicarbonate gives us a jump-start toward increased alkalinity.

The pH scale is like a thermometer showing increases and decreases in the acid and alkaline content of fluids. Deviations above or below a 7.35-7.45 pH range in the tightly controlled blood can signal potentially serious and dangerous symptoms or states of disease. When the body can no longer effectively neutralize and eliminate the acids, it relocates them within the body’s extra-cellular fluids and connective tissue cells directly compromising cellular integrity. Conversely when the body becomes too alkaline from too much bicarbonate in the blood, metabolic alkalosis occurs, which can lead to severe consequences if not corrected quickly.

Hydrogen ions tie up oxygen. That means that the more acid a liquid is, the less available the oxygen in it. Every cell in our body requires oxygen for life and to maintain optimum health. Combine that with what we know about hydrogen ions and we see that the more acid the blood (the lower its pH), the less oxygen is available for use by the cells. Without going into a discussion of the chemistry involved, just understand that it’s the same mechanism involved when acid rain “kills” a lake. The fish literally suffocate to death because the acid in the lake “binds up” all of the available oxygen. It’s not that the oxygen has gone anywhere; it’s just no longer available. Conversely, if you raise the pH of the lake (make it more alkaline), oxygen is now available and the lake comes back to life. Incidentally, it’s worth noting that cancer is related to an acid environment (lack of oxygen)–the higher the pH (the more oxygen present in the cells of the body), the harder it is for cancer to thrive.

Understanding this is important for two reasons: (1) it reveals one of the primary benefits of alkaline water–more “available” oxygen in the system and (2) it explains why alkaline water helps fight cancer.

How Baking Soda Can Help “Cure” Cancer

Basically, malignant tumors represent masses of rapidly growing cells. The rapid rate of growth experienced by these cells means that cellular metabolism also proceeds at very high rates.

Therefore, cancer cells are using a lot more carbohydrates and sugars to generate energy in the form of ATP (adenosine triphosphate).

However, some of the compounds formed from the energy production include lactic acid and pyruvic acid. Under normal circumstances, these compounds are cleared and utilized as soon as they are produced. But cancer cells are experiencing metabolism at a much faster rate. Therefore, these organic acid accumulate in the immediate environment of the tumor.

The high level of extracellular acidity around the tumor is one of the chief driving force behind the metastasis of cancer tumors.

Basically, cancer cells need an acidic environment to grow and spread rapidly.

Some cancer experts, therefore, believe that by buffering the tumor microenvironment with an alkalizing compound, the pH of tumors can be raised enough to starve them and stop their growth and spread.

Curiously, this rather simple solution to cancer has been proven right.

What is even more remarkable is that there is no need to cook up some fancy synthetic drug to lower the acidity in the immediate environment of the tumor. A simple, commonly obtained compound like sodium bicarbonate will do.

Obviously, it is desirable to deliver the sodium bicarbonate as close to the tumor as possible since its pH-raising effect is needed in the microenvironment of the tumor. Therefore, directly injecting sodium bicarbonate in the tumor site is considered a better solution than oral administration. However, oral sodium bicarbonate is just safer and can be readily used at home.

A 2009 study published in the journal, Cancer Research, is among the first to confirm that the alkalinizing effect of sodium bicarbonate can indeed stop cancer.

By injecting sodium bicarbonate into a group of mice, the authors of the study were able to determine how the growth and spread of cancer tumors were effected by raising the pH of the organ affected by the cancer.

The study results showed that baking soda indeed raised the pH and reduced spontaneous metastases in mice induced with breast cancer.

The researchers also determined that sodium bicarbonate works by raising the pH outside cells and not within cells. This is an important finding because it suggests that sodium bicarbonate does not interfere with cellular metabolism even as it makes the microenvironment unconducive for tumor growth.

Other findings from this study show that baking soda:

  • Reduced the involvement of the lymph node on the transport of cancer cells
  • Does not lower the levels of circulating tumor cells
  • Reduced the involvement of the liver and, therefore, the spread of tumor cells to other organs
  • Inhibit the colonization of other organs by circulating tumor cells

The Baking Soda Formula for Cancer

To make the baking soda natural cancer remedy at home, you need maple syrup, molasses or honey to go along with the baking soda.

In Dr. Sircus’ book, he documented how one patient used baking soda and blackstrap molasses to fight the prostate cancer that had metastasized to his bones. On the first day, the patient mixed 1 teaspoon of baking soda with 1 teaspoon of molasses in a cup of water.

He took this for another 3 days after which his saliva pH read 7.0 and his urine pH read 7.5.

Encouraged by these results, the patient took the solution 2 times on day 5 instead of once daily. And from day 6 – 10, he took 2 teaspoons each of baking soda and molasses twice daily.

By the 10th day, the patient’s pH had risen to 8.5 and the only side effects experienced were headaches and night sweat (similar to cesium therapy).

The next day, the patient had a bone scan and too other medical tests. His results showed that his PSA (prostate-specific antigen, the protein used to determine the severity of prostate enlargement and prostate cancer) level was down from 22.3 at the point of diagnosis to 0.1.

Another baking soda formula recommends mixing 90 teaspoons of maple syrup with 30 teaspoons of baking soda.

To do this, the maple syrup must be heated to become less viscous. Then the baking syrup is added and stirred for 5 minutes until it is fully dissolved.

This preparation should provide about 10-day worth of the baking soda remedy. 5 – 7 teaspoons per day is the recommended dose for cancer patients.

Care should be taken when using the baking soda remedy to treat cancer. This is because sustaining a high pH level can itself cause metabolic alkalosis and electrolyte imbalance. These can result in edema and also affect the heart and blood pressure.

One does not have to be a doctor to practice pH medicine. Every practitioner of the healing arts and every mother and father needs to understand how to use sodium bicarbonate. Bicarbonate deficiency is a real problem that deepens with age so it really does pay to understand and appreciate what baking soda is all about.


Shocking Report from Medical Insiders

F. William Engdahl (NEO) : A shocking admission by the editor of the world’s most respected medical journal, The Lancet, has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media. Dr. Richard Horton, Editor-in-chief of the Lancet recently published a statement declaring that a shocking amount of published research is unreliable at best, if not completely false, as in, fraudulent.

Horton declared, “Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

To state the point in other words, Horton states bluntly that major pharmaceutical companies falsify or manipulate tests on the health, safety and effectiveness of their various drugs by taking samples too small to be statistically meaningful or hiring test labs or scientists where the lab or scientist has blatant conflicts of interest such as pleasing the drug company to get further grants. At least half of all such tests are worthless or worse he claims. As the drugs have a major effect on the health of millions of consumers, the manipulation amounts to criminal dereliction and malfeasance.

The drug industry-sponsored studies Horton refers to develop commercial drugs or vaccines to supposedly help people, used to train medical staff, to educate medical students and more.

Horton wrote his shocking comments after attending a symposium on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research at the Wellcome Trust in London. He noted the confidentiality or “Chatham House” rules where attendees are forbidden to name names: “’A lot of what is published is incorrect.’ I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides.”

Other voices

Dr. Marcia Angell is a physician and was longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), considered to be another one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world. Angell stated,

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.”

Harvey Marcovitch, who has studied and written about the corruption of medical tests and publication in medical journals, writes, “studies showing positive outcomes for a drug or device under consideration are more likely to be published than ‘negative’ studies; editors are partly to blame for this but so are commercial sponsors, whose methodologically well-conducted studies with unfavorable results tended not to see the light of day…”

At the University of British Columbia’s Neural Dynamics Research Group in the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Dr Lucija Tomljenovic obtained documents that showed that, “vaccine manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, and health authorities have known about multiple dangers associated with vaccines but chose to withhold them from the public. This is scientific fraud, and their complicity suggests that this practice continues to this day.”

Lancet’s Dr. Horton concludes, “Those who have the power to act seem to think somebody else should act first. And every positive action has a counter-argument. The good news is that science is beginning to take some of its worst failings very seriously. The bad news is that nobody is ready to take the first step to clean up the system.

Corruption of the medical industry worldwide is a huge issue, perhaps more dangerous than the threat of all wars combined. Do we have such hypnosis and blind faith in our doctors simply because of their white coats that we believe they are infallible? And, in turn, do they have such blind faith in the medical journals recommending a given new wonder medicine or vaccine that they rush to give the drugs or vaccines without considering these deeper issues?

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.


Why Didn’t My Doctor Tell Me Chemo Kills?


In my daily research I came across a report so alarming I put aside planned writing in order to bring this to the attention of those who care about life. It has to do with one of the main treatments for cancer used in modern medicine—chemotherapy. New research has documented that chemotherapy, far from ridding anyone of cancer actually feeds the growth and spread of cancer.

Sometimes it almost seems like the drugs industry works overtime to find new ways to hurt, cripple or even kill us. Scientist Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle in a write-up of a study of why cancer cells were so easy to kill in the lab but not inside our bodies, found that healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein called WNT16B which boosts cancer cell survival. “The increase in WNT16B was completely unexpected,” Nelson said.

He added that,“WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumor cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy.” That would explain why in cancer treatment, tumors often respond well initially, followed by rapid regrowth and then resistance to further chemotherapy.

The study was conducted by a team of scientists from different cancer research centers, universities as well as from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories. It was published online in August 2012 in the journal Nature Medicine. Among their alarming conclusions was that, “The expression of WNT16B in the prostate tumor microenvironment attenuated the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy in vivo, promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression.”

Mustard Gas Toxin

While their study results were alarming enough, more alarming is the complete absence of aggressive action to reexamine the entire field of cancer treatment. Chemo’s origins go back to World War I research into the human effects of exposure to mustard gas. Scientists discovered that the gas was a potent suppressor of blood cell production. During World War II researchers at Yale University School of Medicine in further study of nitrogen mustards, reasoned that an agent that damaged the rapidly growing white blood cells might have a similar effect on cancer. Left out was how to target only cancer cells and not healthy cells. In December 1942, the scientists gave several patients with advanced lymphomas (cancers of the lymphatic system and lymph nodes), a chemotherapeutic drug intravenously. Their improvement was called remarkable. The media concentrated on the remarkable improvement and did not bother to note that soon after treatment all were dead.

The chemotherapy revolution in cancer treatment was off and running. In the 1950’s the first chemo drug used commercially was mustine or Chlormethine. Mustine under the code-name HN2 is a chemical warfare agent. Adverse effect include: “Hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis…Nausea, vomiting and depression of formed elements in the circulating blood…Jaundice, alopecia, vertigo, tinnitus and diminished hearing.”

The research and development of mustine as a possible anti-cancer chemotherapy was led by Cornelius P. Rhoads, director of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, in wartime secrecy and published in 1946 after the war. Rhoads came to Memorial Sloan-Kettering from the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research.

There during the 1930’s as part of the Rockefeller family’s obsession with eugenics, Rhoads spent six months in Puerto Rico, a stateless island often used covertly for human experimentation with new drugs.

In Puerto Rico in 1931Rhoads wrote a letter to a friend in Boston where he stated, “Porto (sic) Ricans are beyond doubt the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever inhabiting this sphere. What the island needs is not public health work but a tidal wave or something to totally exterminate the population. I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer into several more.”

Rockefeller family spin doctor, Ivy Lee, launched a major damage control campaign over the scandal and managed to get Rhoads on the cover of Time as a “life-saving” hero.

Deadly consequences

The subsequent use of toxic chemotherapies on perhaps millions of cancer patients since then have hardly been encouraging. Published side effects of today’s chemo drugs, the largest share of which are made by Roche, are horrendous. They include “depression of the immune system, often by paralysing the bone marrow and leading to a decrease of white blood cells, red blood cells, and platelets. Anemia and thrombocytopenia… sepsis, or as localized outbreaks, such as Herpes simplex, shingles, or other members of the Herpesviridea.”

It gets worse. Because of the chemo resulting in immune system suppression, patients often get typhlitis, a life-threatening gastrointestinal complication of chemotherapy. Typhlitis is an intestinal infection which may manifest itself through symptoms including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, a distended abdomen, fever, chills, or abdominal pain and tenderness. Typhlitis is a medical emergency. It has a very poor prognosis and is often fatal.  It can cause infertility failure in men and ovarian failure in women. All that in addition to the well-known hair-loss, dry skin, damaged fingernails, a dry mouth (xerostomia), water retention, and sexual impotence.

In 2004 the Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Australia, conducted a long-term investigation into the contribution of chemotherapy to 5-year survival in 22 major adult malignancies. The results were shocking: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. The study came to the following conclusion: “ is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.”

Chemo is massively toxic and kill any rapidly dividing cell, tumor or normal. The three best-selling cancer drugs worldwide in 2013 were all made by Roche—Rituxan, Herceptin and Avastin. For all three top chemo drugs sales totaled more than $21 billion.


Russia’s small-scale organic agriculture model may hold the key to feeding the world


Imagine living in a country where having the freedom to cultivate your own land, tax-free and without government interference, is not only common but also encouraged for the purpose of promoting individual sovereignty and strong, healthy communities. Now imagine that in this same country, nearly all of your neighbors also cultivate their own land as part of a vast network of decentralized, self-sustaining, independent “eco-villages” that produce more than enough food to feed the entire country.

You might be thinking this sounds like some kind of utopian interpretation of historical America, but the country actually being described here is modern-day Russia. It turns out that Russia’s current agricultural model is one that thrives as a result of the millions of small-scale, family-owned and -operated, organically-cultivated farms that together produce the vast majority of the food consumed throughout the country.

Do Russians have more freedom, independence than Americans?

A far cry from the unsustainable, chemical-dependent, industrialized agriculture system that dominates the American landscape today, Russia’s agricultural system, which is not technically a system at all, is run by the people and for the people. Thanks to government policies there that actually encourage autonomous family farming, rather than cater to the greed of chemical and biotechnology companies like they do here in the states, the vast majority of Russians are able and willing to grow their own food on privately-owned family plots known as “dachas.”

According to The Bovine, Russia’s Private Garden Plot Act, which was signed into law back in 2003, entitles every Russian citizen to a private plot of land, free of charge, ranging in size from 2.2 acres to 6.8 acres. Each plot can be used for growing food, or for simply vacationing or relaxing, and the government has agreed not to tax this land. And the result of this effort has been phenomenal, as Russian families collectively grow practically all the food they need.

“Essentially, what Russian gardeners do is demonstrate that gardeners can feed the world — and you do not need any GMOs, industrial farms, or any other technological gimmicks to guarantee everybody’s got enough food to eat,” writes Leonid Sharashkin, editor of the English version of the The Ringing Cedars series, a book collection that explains the history behind this effort to reconnect people with the earth and nature.

Most food in Russia comes from backyard gardens

Back in 1999, it was estimated that 35 million small family plots throughout Russia, operated by 105 million people, or 71 percent of the Russian population, were producing about 50 percent of the nation’s milk supply, 60 percent of its meat supply, 87 percent of its berry and fruit supply, 77 percent of its vegetable supply, and an astounding 92 percent of its potato supply. The average Russian citizen, in other words, is fully empowered under this model to grow his own food, and meet the needs of his family and local community.

“Bear in mind that Russia only has 110 days of growing season per year — so in the U.S., for example, gardeners’ output could be substantially greater. Today; however, the area taken up by lawns in the U.S. is two times greater than that of Russia’s gardens — and it produces nothing but a multi-billion-dollar lawn care industry.”

The backyard gardening model is so effective throughout Russia that total output represents more than 50 percent of the nation’s entire agricultural output. Based on 2004 figures, the collective value of all the backyard produce grown in Russia is $14 billion, or 2.3 percent of Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) — and this number only continues to increase as more and more Russians join the eco-village movement.


August 9, 2009

from TheBovime Website  

 In 1999, 35 million small family plots produced 90% of Russia’s potatoes,  
77% of vegetables, 87% of fruits, 59% of meat, 49% of milk 

And since 1999, it seems things have only gotten better when it comes to small-scale agriculture in Russia. 

A Russian family by their Dascha, or family plot

In 2003 the Russian President signed into law a further “Private Garden Plot Act” enabling Russian citizens to receive free of charge from the state, plots of land in private inheritable ownership.

Sizes of the plots differ by region but are between one and three hectares each [1 hectare = 2.2 acres].

Produce grown on these plots is not subject to taxation. A further subsequent law to facilitate the acquisition of land for gardening was passed in June 2006 (according to a footnote in “Who We Are” by Vladimir Megre, pg. 42)

What other country raises so much of their food in such sustainable, organic, and non-GMO modes of production?

While the European Union is setting the stage for agribusiness takeovers of major market share from traditional peasant farmers in places like Poland, Russia seems to be one of the few countries on the global stage moving so clearly in a sustainable and healthy direction.

And while organic farming gets a lot of media attention in North America, the fraction of agricultural land actually under organic cultivation is miniscule at 0.6%. The EU is a bit better at 4%.

In spite of the minimal land area under organic cultivation, the movement for healthy agriculture in North America is under increasing siege by government “regulators”.


Another Russian family at homein their Dascha

A typical Russian garden

 Dachniks is a term for the cottage-gardeners of Russia.

“Currently, with 35 million families (70% of Russia’s population) working 8 million [hectares] of land and producing more than 40% of Russia’s agricultural output, this is in all likelihood the most extensive microscale food production practice in any industrially developed nation.

“According to official statistics, in 1999 more than 35 million families (105 million people, or 71% of country’s population) owned a dacha or a subsidiary plot and were cultivating it…

The 35 million plots of these families occupy more than 8 million hectares and provide,

  • 92% of Russia’s harvest of potatoes

  • 77% of its vegetables

  • 87% of berries and fruits

  • 59.4% of meat

  • 49.2% of milk”

“When you look at the contribution of gardening to the national economy as a whole, it’s even more stunning,” Sharashkin said.

“In 2004, gardeners’ output amounted to 51% (by value) of the total agricultural output of the Russian Federation. This represents 384 billion rubles (approx. US$14 billion!!!), or 2.3% of Russia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

This is greater, for example, than the contribution of the whole of electric power generation industry (317 bn rubles), significantly greater than all of forestry, wood-processing and pulp and paper industry (180 bn), significantly greater than the coal (54 bn), natural gas (63 bn) and oil refining (88 bn) industries taken together.

The share of food gardening in national agriculture has increased from 32% in 1992 to over 50% by 2000.”


Russian Dascha

“Essentially, what Russian gardeners do,” he concludes, “is demonstrate that gardeners can feed the world – and you do not need any GMOs, industrial farms, or any other technological gimmicks to guarantee everybody’s got enough food to eat.

Bear in mind that Russia only has 110 days of growing season per year – so in the US, for example, gardeners’ output could be substantially greater.

Today, however, the area taken up by lawns in the US is two times greater than that of Russia’s gardens – and it produces nothing but a multi-billion-dollar lawn care industry.”


Monsanto Loses GMO Permit In Mexico – Judge Sides With Bees


A number of countries around the world have now completely banned GM food and the pesticides that go with them, or have severe restrictions against them. This comes after the world has experienced a massive resistance against Monsanto and other biotech giants that manufacture GMOs and pesticides.

It’s (the resistance) also a result of numerous studies that have emerged showing the environmental and health dangers that are associated with pesticides, as well as health dangers that could be associated with GMOs.

The latest country to make headlines with regards to banning Monsanto products is Mexico, as a group of beekeepers was successful in stopping Monsanto from the planting of soybeans that are genetically modified to resist their Round-up herbicide.

Monsanto Loses Mexican Permit

Monsanto had received a permit to plant its seeds on over 250,000 hectares of land, which equates to approximately 620,000 acres. That’s a lot of land, and they managed to get the permit despite thousands of citizens, beekeepers, Greenpeace, Mayan farmers, The National Institute of Ecology and other major environmental groups protesting against it.

According to The Guardian:

“A district judge in the state of Yucatán last month overturned a permit issued to Monsanto by Mexico’s agriculture ministry, Sagarpa, and environmental protection agency, Semarnat, in June 2012 that allowed commercial planting of Round-up ready Soybeans.  In withdrawing the permit, the judge was convinced by the scientific evidence presented about the threats posed by GM soy crops to honey production in the Yucatán peninsula, which includes Campeche, Quintana Roo and Yucatán states. Co-existence between honey production and GM soybeans is not possible, the judge ruled.” (source)

Mexico is the fourth largest honey producer and fifth largest honey exporter in the world.

These Pesticides Are Killing Bees and Farmers Are Unable To Export Pollen From GMO Crops

Be colonies are declining very fast, threatening food security all over the world, and as the guardian reports:

“GM crops could devastate the important European export market for Mexican beekeepers, where the sale of honey containing pollen derived from GM crops has been restricted since a landmark decision in 2001 by the European Court of Justice.”(source)

Here is more on a study that found GM pollen destined for Europe after this ruling, and according to local farmers, threatens the honey industry.

Below is a summary of the problem (apart from massive bee declines):

“David Roubik, senior staff scientist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, and his colleagues developed the ability to identify pollen grains in honey in Panama and in Mexico during the 1980s and 1990s when they studied the effects of the arrival of Africanized bees on native bees. “Nobody else can do this kind of work in the ‘big field’ environment and be confident that what they are seeing are soybean pollen grains,” said Roubik. They found that six honey samples from nine hives in the Campeche region contained soy pollen in addition to pollen from many wild plant species. The pollen came from crops near the bee colonies in several small apiaries. Due to strict European regulations, rural farmers in the Mexican Yucatan face significant price cuts or outright rejection of their honey when their product contains pollen from GMO crops that are not for human consumption. The regional agricultural authorities, furthermore, seemed unaware that bees visited flowering soybeans to collect nectar and pollen” (source)

Related CE Articles with links to more information and proof:

New Harvard Study Proves Why All The Bees Are Dying

American Scientists Confirm: Pesticides Are Killing Bees

It’s Not Just Bees, Disappearance of Monarch Butterflies Also Linked To Roundup Herbicide

EPA Approved GMO Insecticide Responsible For off Millions of Bees & Puts Entire Food Chain At Risk

There Are Multiple Concerns Here, And One of Them Has To Do With The Crops That Have Been Genetically Manipulated To Resist Monsanto Pesticides. Why? Because These Pesticides Are Very Harmful To Human And  Animal Health.

A study is published in the US National Library of Medicine and in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology shows howseveral recent studies illustrate glyphosate’s potential to be an endocrine disruptor. Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that can interfere with the hormone system in mammals. These disruptors can cause developmental disorders, birth defects and cancer tumors(source)

A group of scientists put together a comprehensive review of existing data that shows how European regulators have known that Monsanto’s glyphosate causes a number of birth malformations since at least 2002. Regulators misled the public about glyphosate’s safety, and in Germany the Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety told the European Commission that there was no evidence to suggest that glyphosate causes birth defects. (source)

A new study out of Germany concludes that Glyphosate residue could reach humans and animals through feed and can be excreted in urine. It outlines how presence of glyphosate in urine and its accumulation in animal tissues is alarming even at low concentrations. (source)

It’s also been linked to Alzheimers, Parkinsons Disease and Autism.

A recent study conducted by researchers from RMIT university, published in the journal Environmental Research found that an organic diet for just one week significantly reduced pesticide (commonly used in conventional food production) exposure in adults. (source)

Thirteen participants were randomly selected to consume a diet consisting of at least 80% organic or conventional food for precisely 7 days, afterwards crossing over to the alternative diet from which they started. Urinary levels were used for analysis. The study found that urinary dialkylphosphates (DAPs) measurements were 89% lower when they ate an organic diet for seven days compared to a conventional diet for the same amount of time.

“A lot of these agents were initially developed as nerve gases for chemical warfare, so we do know that they have toxic effects on the nervous system at high doses. Conventional food production commonly uses organophosphate pesticides, which are neurotoxins that act on the nervous system of humans by blocking an important enzyme. Recent studies have raised concerns for health effects of these chemicals even at relatively low levels. This study is an important first step in expanding our understanding about the impact of an organic diet” (source) – Dr. Liza Oates

Here is a link to more information on how the Roundup herbicide was recently found to be 125 times more toxic than regulators claim.

The list goes on and on, but bottom line is that there is a tremendous amount of evidence, and it’s great to see countries like Mexico take more steps towards a completely GMO/Pesticide free environment.

For more CE articles on pesticides click HERE. For more CE articles on GMOs click HERE.

Like this article? Then join the Conversation with many others in EWAO !





Download Free PDF Database


Vaccines Cause Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)



Expert Admits Cancer-Causing Virus Is In Vaccines

This is an interview with Dr. Maurice Hilleman. He was, and still is, the leading vaccine pioneer in the history of vaccines. He developed more than three dozen vaccines – more than any other scientist in history – and was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program. He tells us that the Merck drug company vaccines were known to be contaminated with SV40, a cancer-causing monkey virus, beginning in 1953.

Millions of vials of polio vaccine, contaminated with SV40, were injected into children who, later in life, developed tumors. By 1999, molecular evidence of SV40 infections were showing up in children born after 1982. The SV40 virus comes from the culture made from Green African Monkey kidneys, apparently the medium of choice in which to grow the polio virus vaccine.

In 2002, the journal Lancet published compelling evidence that contaminated polio vaccine was responsible for up to half of the 55,000 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cases that were occurring each year. And there is the likelihood that the AIDS epidemic began from another virus originating from the toxic vaccine culture made from monkey kidneys and injected into the bodies of victims.

At first no one could fathom how the virus had been transmitted into the human population, but this shocking video proves that it was in the vaccine as witnessed by Dr. Maurice Hilleman, which he says was “good science” at that time.

Just Who is Dr. Maurice Hilleman?

Now, for those of you who may think Dr. Hilleman was just another crackpot (he passed away in 2005), think again. He was, and still is, the leading vaccine pioneer in the history of vaccines. He developed more than three dozen vaccines – more than any other scientist in history – and was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program.

He was a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society, and received a special lifetime achievement award from the World Health Organization.

When he was chief of the Department of Respiratory Diseases with what’s now the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, he discovered the genetic changes that occur when the influenza virus mutates, known as “shift and drift.” He was also one of the early vaccine pioneers to warn that simian viruses contaminate vaccines.

Dr. Hilleman knew what he was talking about. And in his own words, “vaccines have to be considered the bargain basement technology for the 20th Century.”


CDC Admits 98 Million Americans Received Polio Vaccine Contaminated With Cancer Virus

Jul 17, 2013


The CDC has quickly removed a page from their website, which is now cached here, admitting that more than 98 million Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine within an 8-year span when a proportion of the vaccine was contaminated with a cancer causing polyomavirus called SV40. It has been estimated that 10-30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of the vaccine.

V40 is an abbreviation for Simian vacuolating virus 40 or Simian virus 40 (grown in cultures made from the kidneys of African Green Monkeys – i.e., “simians” -ed.), a polyomavirus that is found in both monkeys and humans. Like other polyomaviruses, SV40 is a DNA virus that has been found to cause tumors and cancer.

SV40 is believed to suppress the transcriptional properties of the tumor-suppressing genes in humans through the SV40 Large T-antigen and SV40 Small T-antigen. Mutated genes may contribute to uncontrolled cellular proliferation, leading to cancer.

Michele Carbone, Assistant Professor of Pathology at Loyola University in Chicago, has recently isolated fragments of the SV-40 virus in human bone cancers and in a lethal form of lung cancer called mesothelioma. He found SV-40 in 33% of the osteosarcoma bone cancers studied, in 40% of other bone cancers, and in 60% of the mesotheliomas lung cancers, writes Geraldo Fuentes.

Dr. Michele Carbone openly acknowledged HIV/AIDS was spread by the hepatitis B vaccine produced by Merck & Co. during the early 1970s. It was the first time since the initial transmissions took place in 1972-74, that a leading expert in the field of vaccine manufacturing and testing has openly admitted the Merck & Co. liability for AIDS.

The matter-of-fact disclosure came during discussions of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40 virus which caused cancer in nearly every species infected by injection. Many authorities now admit much, possibly most, of the world’s cancers came from the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines, and hepatitis B vaccines, produced in monkeys and chimps.

It is said mesothelioma is a result of asbestos exposure, but research reveals that 50% of the current mesotheliomas being treated no longer occurs due to asbestos but rather the SV-40 virus contained in the polio vaccination. In addition, according to researchers from the Institute of Histology and General Embryology of the University of Ferrara, SV-40 has turned up in a variety other tumors. By the end of 1996, dozens of scientists reported finding SV40 in a variety of bone cancers and a wide range of brain cancers, which had risen 30 percent over the previous 20 years.

(ed – In 2007 Edward T. Haslam [son of Edward Haslam MD – 1915-1971] published Dr. Mary’s Monkey … a catchy title for a book. It is available from

This great book with a funny name is one of the most surprising and rewarding reads you’ll find. Written around an investigation into the murder of Dr. Mary Sherman in 1964 (a researcher who died by something that burned one of her arms off … whose death was ruled an accident, and possibly a suicide). Mr. Haslam’s father worked with Dr. Mary at Tulane Medical School. Dr. Mary was researching the polio virus that contained cancer virus from the culture made from African Green Monkey kidneys and used as a medium to grow the polio virus (which connects Haslam’s research with the article above). 

Edward Haslam reflects back on his father’s work, as well as his own discoveries as a youth visiting his father’s work place at Tulane Medical School and Tulane University’s National Primate Research Center in New Orleans.

What he saw at the laboratory, along with his years of subsequent research, is a compelling documentation of government-sponsored skulduggery and conspiracy to create cancer virus for killing select people. At the same time these government-owned-and-sponsored laboratories were knowingly formulating millions of doses of cancer-infected polio vaccines to inject unsuspecting American school children. I was no doubt one of the victims since I got the shot in the mid ’50s and the subsequent “booster shot” a couple years later – all without asking permission from me or my parents. They just lined us up in the school cafeteria and shot us. If you are over 50 years of age you are likely a victim as well if you got a polio shot while in school.

One of the results of the huge polio vaccination campaign of the 1950’s is almost certainly the cancer plague we see today in America. Of course this leaves us with the question of how many other vaccinations given to American children were contaminated with unknown viruses and parasites. There’s no telling how many current diseases are the direct results of contaminated vaccines (think flu shots) Americans are all too willing to roll up their sleeves and accept.

But Mr. Haslam has included much more intrigue in this great little book … and he documents it all. New Orleans, at the time, was the breeding ground for the conspiracy that eventually assassinated John F. Kennedy. It all came together right there in New Orleans as Mr. Haslam has uncovered many of the names we heard over and over as co-conspirators in the Kennedy assassination: Lee Harvey Oswald, Guy Bannister, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, the CIA, and a whole cadre of anti-Castro fanatics. In fact, Castro was one of the intended targets of the injectable cancer virus developed from cultures taken from African Green Monkey kidneys there in the makeshift facilities in New Orleans. They even tested the cancer virus on unsuspecting mental patients in a nearby hospital. It killed them.

Get Dr. Mary’s Monkey and read it. It will put some important pieces of the puzzle together for you.)




Journal of Virology Logo

Simian Virus 40 (SV40) Infection of Humans

1Section of Pediatric Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado 80262
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

Since its discovery, simian virus 40 (SV40) has been one of the most intensely studied animal viruses. The molecular biology of SV40 has led to seminal discoveries in the fields of transcription, DNA replication, and oncogenic transformation (19). Over the last decade, provocative evidence has accumulated that suggests that SV40 may be a human pathogen. Does SV40 infect humans? If so, when did this monkey polyomavirus enter the human population and where is the reservoir? What is the behavior of SV40 in human cells? Does it cause or contribute to acute or chronic disease? Other comprehensive reviews have also addressed these issues, with a variety of emphases (8, 10, 52, 57, 107).

In 1960, Sweet and Hilleman first described an agent, which they named SV40, that induced cytopathic effects and vacuole formation in monkey cells (117). SV40 was isolated from normal monkey kidney cells, stocks of the Sabin poliovirus vaccine, and an adenovirus vaccine. The last two reagents were prepared in primary kidney cell cultures derived from rhesus monkeys. Subsequent analyses found that the Salk poliovirus vaccine administered from 1955 to 1963 in the United States was also contaminated with SV40, potentially exposing an estimated 100 million people (106). Although poliovirus in the Salk vaccine was inactivated by formalin treatment, the conditions were insufficient to completely inactivate SV40. Soon thereafter, it was demonstrated that SV40 could infect humans and also induce tumors in experimental animals (26, 28, 29, 42, 43). These observations raised concerns that vaccinated people worldwide may have been inadvertently exposed to an oncogenic virus. Early epidemiological studies allayed these fears, revealing no increased incidence of cancers directly related to immunization status (34, 35, 83, 106). However, these initial analyses were necessarily limited in that it was unknown whether (i) the virus could be transmitted, either horizontally or vertically; (ii) vaccinated, immunocompetent individuals would be at equal risk for development of cancer with others having defective immunity or a cancer predisposition; (iii) the power of the analysis was sufficient to detect increases in rare cancers; and (iv) SV40 normally circulated in humans before development of the poliovirus vaccine. A recent review of all epidemiological data by the Institute of Medicine concluded that evidence to date was “inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between SV40-containing poliovirus vaccines and cancer” (115). Criticisms included misclassification bias, lack of confidence intervals for the data, and “ecological” study design, which are unlikely to be remedied by further follow-up of the study populations.

A brief overview of the biology of SV40 is relevant to understand the concerns raised by these initial analyses (101). When SV40 infects its natural host, it initially undergoes a lytic replication cycle. The early viral genes encode the tumor (T) antigens: large T antigen (LT), small t antigen (ST), and 17K T antigen (also tiny T or T′). LT plays a dominant role in infection, repressing early viral gene transcription and stimulating late viral gene transcription (1, 54, 98, 121). LT is also an initiation factor for viral DNA replication (16, 97, 120, 123), recruiting the DNA polymerase α-primase complex to the origin of replication and acting as a helicase (21, 112, 114). Following the strategy of other DNA viruses, the SV40 early proteins dysregulate the cell cycle and impede cell apoptosis in order to maximize virus production. LT binds the members of the retinoblastoma protein family, pRb, p107, and p130, resulting in release and activation of E2F transcription factors, which stimulate expression of genes involved in S-phase progression and DNA synthesis (22, 27, 45). LT also binds p53 and inactivates its function, preventing the infected cell from undergoing apoptotic cell death (65, 71, 75). After viral DNA replication is under way, the infection enters the late phase, when viral structural proteins are synthesized and new virions are produced. Ultimately, the infected cell releases progeny virions, frequently but not always by cell lysis (18). The immune system is critical for controlling the initial lytic phase in vivo, quenching the initial infection to a state of persistent low-level or nonreplicating genomes (i.e., in the proximal renal tubular epithelium for SV40), with detectable lytic viral reactivation coincident only with host immunosuppression (48).

Some data on the infectivity of SV40 in humans were obtained from volunteers and individuals receiving contaminated vaccines. However, antibody data from many surveys must be viewed with the knowledge that the human BK virus (BKV) and JC virus (JCV) (closely related human polyomavirus family members) might give an indistinguishable response in these assays due to the high degree of cross-reactivity between capsid protein antigens. Melnick and Stinebaugh found SV40 (by cytopathic effects in monkey cells) in the stools of children 3 to 4 weeks after ingestion of 100 to 1,000 PFU of SV40 with oral poliovirus vaccine (77). Morris et al. gave SV40 intranasally to volunteers and found subclinical infections (82). They were able to isolate virus 7 to 11 days after administration from 3 of 8 subjects, and they detected antibody responses of various amplitudes. Horváth and Fornosi found SV40 excreted in the stools of 10 of 35 children 1 to 2 weeks after being given contaminated oral poliovirus vaccines (47). Thus, SV40 may replicate in humans after oral administration, but the efficiency and duration of the replication may be low in these immunocompetent subjects who were given small inocula.

The biology of SV40 in human cells was first studied in the 1960s with fibroblast cell lines or primary human fibroblast cell cultures (108). Whereas uninfected primary human fibroblasts can only be passaged a finite number of times before ceasing to divide and undergoing senescence, cell cultures infected with SV40 undergo a “crisis” at this same stage, followed by the outgrowth of a small number of cells that are phenotypically transformed (58). During the initial phase of the infection, generally the first 4 weeks, approximately 0.1% of the cells produce 500 to 1,000 virions per cell. Virus output from the culture then remains at a constant, very low level but with 100% of the cells producing virus at a rate of approximately 1 to 2 virions/cell (41, 42, 108). Once the cell culture progresses through crisis, virus production generally decreases, accompanied by a concomitant decrease in production of viral capsid proteins and an increase in the production of LT. One interpretation of these data is that the cells producing large amounts of virus are killed, but the cells that produce low levels of virus (as assayed by infectious center assays) survive. Finally, as the culture reaches its passage limit, most cells die, but those expressing a threshold level of LT overgrow the culture. Interestingly, the onset of transformation varies quite significantly in cells isolated from different individuals, ranging from 20 to almost 50 weeks in culture (91). Based on these early studies, human cells were termed semipermissive for SV40 growth (109). This nomenclature is confusing since the virus can clearly replicate in some human cell types more efficiently than in others, although the development of cytopathic effect is more rapid in African green monkey kidney cells.

More recent data have shown that while LT alone can immortalize human cells, ST is also necessary for eliciting a fully transformed phenotype (53, 93). For example, infection of cultured human mesothelial cells with SV40 establishes an apparently persistent infection in which little or no progeny virus is produced and the cells become transformed, a process requiring both LT and ST (4, 130). As described above, however, infected primary human fibroblasts can support robust lytic replication. The steady-state level of p53 in normal mesothelial cells is fourfold higher than that in fibroblasts, suggesting that the elevated p53 level interferes with the effect of LT upon DNA replication (4). Indeed, inhibition of p53 expression in mesothelial cells with an antisense oligonucleotide allows increased SV40 replication. Mesothelial cells therefore resemble infected late-passage primary fibroblasts with respect to virus production and growth characteristics.

SV40 is highly oncogenic in experimental animals and readily transforms rodent cells in culture (58). Hamsters inoculated with SV40 develop lymphomas, brain tumors, osteosarcomas, and mesotheliomas (25, 26, 28, 40, 56, 95). SV40 is likely oncogenic in rodents because LT is unable to interact functionally with the rodent DNA polymerase α-primase complex (84). In this setting, the oncogenic functions of the T antigens are engaged but the productive cycle is not completed, resulting in uncontrolled cell division rather than cell lysis. LT is both necessary and sufficient for initiation and maintenance of transformation of rodent cells in tissue culture in most instances (7). Under certain conditions, however, usually involving primary cells in the absence of growth factors, ST is also required. ST functions by inhibiting the activity of the cellular phosphatase PP2A, resulting in activation of cell growth signal transduction pathways (90, 100). Mice that are transgenic for LT transcriptionally regulated by tissue-specific promoters develop tumors in those tissues (for an example, see reference 105). Transgenic mice in which LT expression is regulated by the native viral promoter elements specifically develop tumors of the choroid plexus (6), the specialized epithelial structure of the brain ependymal lining that produces cerebrospinal fluid. This finding is interesting in view of the discovery of SV40 DNA in certain brain tumors, as discussed below.

After the discovery of SV40’s tumorigenic and cell transformation properties, a wave of studies in the 1960s and 1970s pursued the identification of viral oncogenic agents in humans (9). SV40 DNA was detected on rare occasions, usually in brain tumors, using relatively low-sensitivity Southern hybridization techniques, immunostaining for LT, and electron microscopy (2, 61, 62, 76, 104, 118). Also during this period, the distinctly human polyomaviruses BKV and JCV were identified, and the destructive brain white matter disease progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy was attributed to JCV infection (39, 86, 88). These human viruses were also shown to induce tumors in animals and to transform rodent and human cells in culture (20, 33, 94, 113, 127, 132). However, virtually all investigations failed to reveal any significant associations between human malignancy and these suspected oncogenic viruses. With the discovery of oncogenes, the emphasis in cancer research shifted from viruses to genomic mutations.

In 1992, Bergsagel et al. reported finding SV40-like DNA sequences in two types of rare childhood brain tumors, choroid plexus neoplasms and ependymomas, by use of PCR detection (3). This study was prompted by previous transgenic mouse studies and sought to determine whether the human polyomaviruses BKV and JCV might be present in these tumors. The PCR primers were designed to amplify the pRb binding domain of LT, which is highly conserved among all polyomavirus LT proteins. Unexpectedly, DNA sequences consistent with SV40 rather than BKV or JCV LT were amplified. Immunohistochemical nuclear staining for LT was also positive in a fraction of tumors. Subsequently, DNAs isolated from these same tumor types were evaluated by Lednicky et al., who verified the previous amplification results (67). In addition, they (i) found an unduplicated enhancer element, i.e., a single 72-bp repeat, characteristic of direct primate SV40 isolates but not laboratory virus strains (50), (ii) detected sequence variability in the carboxy terminus of different LT genes, and (iii) rescued infectious SV40 from one choroid plexus tumor whose DNA was directly isolated from fresh tumor tissue instead of from paraffin-embedded sections. Observations of SV40-like sequences in brain tumors continue to be reported (49, 59, 74).

With the same primers used by Bergsagel, Carbone et al. then detected SV40 sequences in human mesotheliomas (12). A mesothelioma is an aggressive tumor of the lung pleura, pericardium, or peritoneum and has been linked to asbestos exposure. Carbone et al. had previously found that SV40 could induce mesotheliomas when injected into the pleural cavities of experimental animals (17). In extracts prepared from human mesotheliomas, p53, pRb, p107, and p130 can be coimmunoprecipitated with LT (13, 23). Microdissection studies have shown that SV40 DNA is present in tumor tissue but not in the normal surrounding lung (111). Adenovirus vectors expressing antisense SV40 LT arrest the growth of SV40-positive mesothelioma tumor cells and cause them to undergo apoptosis (126). As is the case for brain tumors, however, LT expression is not detectable by immunohistochemistry in all mesothelioma tumor cells, and the calculated amount of SV40 DNA may be less than one copy per cell. The number of reports identifying SV40 DNA in mesotheliomas far outnumber that for any other tumor type.

Other human tumors frequently associated with SV40-like DNA sequences are osteosarcomas and related bone tumors (14, 37, 68, 78, 129). When PCR strategies similar to those described above are used, approximately 30 to 40% of analyzed bone tumors are positive for viral DNA. SV40 sequences have been detected by Southern blot analysis in osteosarcoma tumor DNA, but this finding is rare. Most recently, in studies using the same primers, adult large-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (NHL) were reported to contain SV40-like sequences (110, 125). Interestingly, the incidence of NHL has risen dramatically in the past three decades, similar to the increased incidence of mesotheliomas. In addition, throughout the past 10 years a potpourri of other tumors and tissues have been reported positive for SV40 DNA, although occasionally the results have not been independently confirmed by other groups (73, 74, 85). The search has extended to an association of SV40 with human renal disease, JCV with medulloblastomas and colon cancer, and BKV with neuroblastomas and urinary tract tumors (24, 32, 63, 64, 70, 81). The literature citations have proliferated, suggesting that SV40 has become epidemic or at least has developed into a cottage industry for PCR detection.

So why is there skepticism and controversy about the role of SV40 in human cancer? The following confounding technical issues remain problematic: (i) detection of SV40 DNA requires a large number of PCR cycles, i.e., 40 to 60, raising the question of how many cells contain viral DNA and how many genomes there are per cell; (ii) the method of DNA isolation has been questioned (e.g., some commercial extraction kits may lose small quantities of episomal viral DNA) (66); (iii) amplification of smaller genomic segments seems more prone to yield nonspecific products than amplification of larger fragments and these are often judged positive (e.g., the 572-bp fragment spanning the LT intron versus the 105-bp pRb binding region); (iv) DNA sequence verification of amplified products has not always been complete; (v) reproducibility among laboratories studying similar tumor types has not been universal (31, 55, 60, 99, 116, 128); (vi) lab contamination may confound some results (e.g., cloning vectors containing SV40 sequences have been suggested as sources of contamination, although those sequences should not be amplified by commonly used primers); (vii) the same PCR primer pairs have been used in most studies without attempts to improve upon their design or optimize their use; and (viii) the antibodies used for LT detection are not specific for SV40 but also cross-react with LT from JCV and BKV. Although detection of SV40 DNA by PCR for particular cancers (e.g., mesotheliomas and NHL) may reach 30 to 40% of cases, the lack of detectable SV40 DNA or LT in every cell of these tumors distinguishes the association from the recognized etiologic connection of high-risk human papillomaviruses with cervical cancer or Epstein-Barr virus with lymphoproliferative lesions in immunocompromised individuals (89, 131). This lack of uniform presence of the viral DNA, coupled with concerns about PCR techniques, a past history of negative associations, the litigious cloud of contaminated poliovirus vaccines, a paucity of information on the SV40 life cycle in relevant human cell types, and a scientific culture now emphasizing oncogenes rather than oncoviruses, have made the existence of SV40 in humans, let alone its causality in disease, a “hard sell.”

Gradually, however, the case for SV40 infecting humans and contributing to cancer has become more compelling, supported by both experimental and circumstantial evidence: (i) microdissection identified amplifiable SV40 DNA in mesotheliomas but not in adjacent normal tissues (111), (ii) SV40 DNA has been detected in an osteosarcoma by Southern hybridization (78), (iii) Li-Fraumeni syndrome patients appear to have a unique susceptibility to polyomaviruses (see below) (72), (iv) a single 72-bp repeat identified in the viral enhancer of SV40 DNA isolated from choroid plexus tumors is characteristic of virus isolates from monkeys (50, 67), and (v) infectious SV40 was isolated from choroid plexus tumor tissue (67). In an attempt to address the variance in detection, two multilaboratory studies were undertaken to examine the presence of SV40 in mesothelioma samples (51, 122). Unfortunately, both studies had technical flaws and their conclusions were contradictory, leaving the question of why there are differences in detection unsettled. However, analysis of samples from geographically distinct populations has provided unique naturally occurring controls. Mesothelioma samples from Finland, where contaminated poliovirus vaccines were not administered, are negative for SV40 DNA (46). A recent study of a Turkish community with a very high frequency of mesothelioma linked to environmental asbestos exposure also found no evidence for SV40 DNA in the tumors from this unvaccinated population (30). Thus, SV40 DNA is only found in mesotheliomas in areas of the world where the contaminated vaccines were used, indirectly suggesting a link between SV40 and the cancer.

If present, how might SV40 be selectively oncogenic in some tissues and/or individuals? Factors may include the sensitivity of the particular tissue to pRb and p53 dysfunction, activity of the viral promoter, tropism or targeting of the virus to specific cell types, genetic predisposition, and immune status. As demonstrated with transgenic mice, choroid plexus cells are unusually sensitive to p53 and pRb mutations, leading to rapid malignant transformation (15, 124). The choroid plexus may be functionally related to proximal renal tubular epithelium (i.e., an ion pumping machine), and thus factors in these cells may be similarly permissive for viral gene expression. In pRb-deficient patients, osteosarcomas are the second most common neoplasm after retinoblastoma. Thus, osteoblasts may be very susceptible to pRb deficiencies (69). Li-Fraumeni syndrome patients, who are heterozygous for germ line p53 mutations, seem unusually susceptible to SV40 infection, possibly because inactivation of the remaining wild-type p53 allele can be accomplished with lower T-antigen expression levels. It may also be possible that SV40 can establish an initial infection in these individuals more easily if there is less p53 present to interfere with viral replication. Li-Fraumeni syndrome patients have been described who develop choroid plexus tumors and osteosarcomas that contain SV40 DNA, but other tumor types within the same individual, such as muscle rhabdomyosarcomas, are not associated with SV40 DNA sequences (72). This tissue preference may occur because of cell type variations in viral promoter activity, virus receptors, or the relative importance of p53 and pRb for the initial oncogenic event.

More difficult to explain is the apparent lack of SV40 DNA (calculated) or protein (detected by immunohistochemistry) in all the cells of a tumor. Possible reasons include the following: (i) levels of LT protein expression below the limits of detection; (ii) a paracrine mechanism by which LT-expressing cells secrete a growth factor, e.g., insulin-like growth factor type I (IGF-I), affecting surrounding cells that do not contain SV40 (92); (iii) isolation of the tumor after most virus-containing cells have died (hit-and-run), leaving only tumor cells with additional mutations contributing to proliferation (i.e., LT and/or ST causes chromosomal instability [36, 96] and is then lost in the transformed cells); and (iv) SV40 not contributing to tumorigenesis but being present because the tumor growth state is permissive for virus replication or LT protein expression.

Cause and effect have been indirectly addressed by antisense LT expression in cultured cells, which implies that, at least in mesothelial cells, LT makes a significant contribution to the ability of these cells to grow in culture (126). One approach to explore a causal role of LT in malignancy might be to correlate the p53 and RB1 status of tumors with the presence of SV40 sequences. Inactivation of these pathways by mutation would not be necessary if LT was continuously produced and active. For example, the frequency of p53 and RB1 gene mutations is low in mesothelioma and thus LT may be functionally important (11). Osteosarcomas with wild-type p53 and those with defective p53 would be candidates for such a comparative analysis.

What is needed to enhance our understanding of SV40 infection in humans and the role of SV40 in human malignancies? Current data on SV40 replication and transmission in human populations are nearly uninterpretable and will not improve until a highly specific serological assay for SV40 is used to analyze clinical samples. Such an immunoassay has been difficult to devise because of extensive cross-reactivity of the SV40 capsid proteins with those of BKV and JCV. Virus neutralization assays are extremely labor-intensive and have not been directly compared among the viruses. Recently, however, recombinant VP1 capsid proteins for SV40, JCV, and BKV have been prepared as virus-like particle preparations for use in enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (K. Shah and D. Galloway, personal communications). The initial serological studies using these reagents have not detected specific or robust SV40 immune responses in any samples tested. A small fraction (5 to 7%) of sera (K. Shah, personal communication) have low-level reactivity with SV40 VP1 that may be due to cross-reactivity with JCV or BKV VP1 or to a transient SV40 infection. These assays will now permit case-controlled studies, however, comparing individuals with SV40-associated malignancies to control populations.

Seroepidemiologic studies would permit an assessment of SV40 prevalence in the population, suggest its mode of transmission, and correlate seropositivity with disease or perhaps even predisposition to disease. From current PCR data it appears that individuals who were never exposed to contaminated vaccines have been infected with SV40, suggesting that the virus has established itself as a human pathogen. The mode of transmission may be extrapolated from that of BKV and JCV. Studies have shown that these two viruses infect virtually 100% of most human populations, BKV during early childhood and JCV peaking in early adolescence (38, 87, 119). While both viruses ultimately establish a persistent infection in the urinary tract and perhaps in the central nervous system, recent reports have found the presence of viral DNA in tonsillar tissue (44, 79, 80). The presence of virus in the upper respiratory tract, along with the young age of seroconversion, suggests that SV40 may spread through a respiratory or fomite, i.e., hand-to-mouth, route. From this initial portal of entry, the virus must have access to the circulatory and/or lymphatic system in order to reach its presumed site of persistence, the kidney, or the tissues and organs that give rise to the tumors associated with the virus. By analogy with other viruses, such systemic virus spread, or virus replication at sites of tumor induction, should elicit a detectable immune response.

More information is needed concerning the SV40 life cycle in human cells. Are there differences in permissiveness among human cell types? Is there a correlation of oncogenicity with levels of p53 in different cell types, e.g., as seen in mesothelial cells? Are there differences among cell types in viral genome persistence? Are secondary cellular mutations induced when LT is highly expressed, and do the mutations lead to stable populations of dominantly replicating clones that now lack viral DNA? Finally, the role of the immune system in all phases of the disease process is undoubtedly profoundly important. Unlike most putative tumor antigens, SV40 T antigens are not self antigens and therefore ought to be recognized by the immune system. Does the tumor provide an immunoprivileged site in which these antigens are not detected? In rodent SV40 tumor models, the immune response against LT is robust and usually results in clearance of the virus, making this possibility unlikely (102, 103). Moreover, humans can apparently mount a cytotoxic lymphocyte immune response to LT (5). However, there must be some coexistence of the immune system and the virus to achieve persistence. Thus, defects in the immune system might permit virus persistence to develop into an oncogenic state. In this regard, it would be useful to study SV40 infections in immunocompromised individuals. Based on the evolving SV40 story, it also seems prudent to look more carefully at a possible role of BKV and JCV in human neoplasms, as there is no doubt that these viruses are endemic in most human populations.

At this time, some members of the jury remain undecided about a role for SV40 in human disease. Seroepidemiology and a basic understanding of virus biology in humans are essential pieces missing from the puzzle. Perhaps we expect SV40 to follow the “rules” for other oncogenic viruses such as human papillomavirus and Epstein-Barr virus. Rather, SV40 may be generating novel rules, leading the way as it has before into new paradigms of virus biology and pathogenesis.


  • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0942. Phone: (734) 763-9162. Fax: (734) 615-6560. E-mail:


  1. Alwine, J. C., S. I. Reed, and G. R. Stark. 1977. Characterization of the autoregulation of simian virus 40 gene A. J. Virol. 24:22-27.
  2. Bastian, G. O. 1971. Papova-like virus particles in a human brain tumor. Lab. Investig. 25:169-175.


  3. Bergsagel, D. J., M. J. Finegold, J. S. Butel, W. J. Kupsky, and R. L. Garcea. 1992. DNA sequences similar to those of simian virus 40 in ependymomas and choroid plexus tumors of childhood. N. Engl. J. Med. 326:988-993.
  4. Bocchetta, M., I. Di Resta, A. Powers, R. Fresco, A. Tosolini, J. R. Testa, H. I. Pass, P. Rizzo, and M. Carbone. 2000. Human mesothelial cells are unusually susceptible to simian virus 40-mediated transformation and asbestos cocarcinogenicity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:10214-10219.
  5. Bright, R. K., E. T. Kimchi, M. H. Shearer, R. C. Kennedy, and H. I. Pass. 2002. SV40 Tag-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes generated from the peripheral blood of malignant pleural mesothelioma patients. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 50:682-690.
  6. Brinster, R. L., H. Y. Chen, A. Messing, T. van Dyke, A. J. Levine, and R. D. Palmiter. 1984. Transgenic mice harboring SV40 T-antigen genes develop characteristic brain tumors. Cell 37:367-379.
  7. Brockman, W. W. 1978. Transformation of BALB/c-3T3 cells by tsA mutants of simian virus 40: temperature sensitivity of the transformed phenotype and retransformation by wild-type virus. J. Virol. 25:860-870.
  8. Brown, F., and A. M. J. Lewis (ed.). 1997. Simian virus 40 (SV40): a possible human polyomavirus. Developments in biological standarization, vol. 94. Karger, Basel, Switzerland.
  9. Butel, J. S. 2000. Viral carcinogenesis: revelation of molecular mechanisms and etiology of human disease. Carcinogenesis 21:405-426.
  10. Butel, J. S., and J. A. Lednicky. 1999. Cell and molecular biology of simian virus 40: implications for human infections and disease. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 91:119-134.
  11. Carbone, M., R. A. Kratzke, and J. R. Testa. 2002. The pathogenesis of mesothelioma. Semin. Oncol. 29:2-17.
  12. Carbone, M., H. I. Pass, P. Rizzo, M. Marinetti, M. DiMuzio, D. J. Y. Mew, A. S. Levine, and A. Procopio. 1994. Simian virus 40-like DNA sequences in human pleural mesothelioma. Oncogene 9:1781-1790.


  13. Carbone, M., P. Rizzo, P. M. Grimley, A. Procopio, D. J. Á. Mew, V. Shridhar, A. de Bartolomeis, V. Esposito, M. T. Giuliano, S. M. Steinberg, A. S. Levine, A. Giordano, and H. I. Pass. 1997. Simian virus-40 large-T antigen binds p53 in human mesotheliomas. Nat. Med. 3:908-912.
  14. Carbone, M., P. Rizzo, A. Procopio, M. Giuliano, H. I. Pass, M. C. Gebhardt, C. Mangham, M. Hansen, D. G. Malkin, G. Bushart, F. Pompetti, P. Picci, A. S. Levine, D. J. Bersagel, and R. L. Garcea. 1996. SV40-like sequences in human bone tumors. Oncogene 13:527-535.


  15. Chen, J., G. J. Tobin, J. M. Pipas, and T. Van Dyke. 1992. T-antigen mutant activities in vivo: roles of p53 and pRB binding in tumorigenesis of the choroid plexus. Oncogene 7:1167-1175.


  16. Chou, J. Y., J. Avila, and R. G. Martin. 1974. Viral DNA synthesis in cells infected by temperature-sensitive mutants of simian virus 40. J. Virol. 14:116-124.
  17. Cicala, C., F. Pompetti, and M. Carbone. 1993. SV40 induces mesotheliomas in hamsters. Am. J. Pathol. 142:1524-1533.


  18. Clayson, E. T., L. V. Brando, and R. W. Compans. 1989. Release of simian virus 40 virions from epithelial cells is polarized and occurs without cell lysis. J. Virol. 63:2278-2288.
  19. Cole, C. N., and S. D. Conzen. 2001. Polyomaviridae: the viruses and their replication, p. 2141-2174. In D. M. Knipe and P. M. Howley (ed.), Fields virology. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, Pa.
  20. Dalrymple, S. A., and K. L. Beemon. 1990. BK virus T antigens induce kidney carcinomas and thymoproliferative disorders in transgenic mice. J. Virol. 64:1182-1191.
  21. Dean, F. B., P. Bullock, Y. Murakami, C. R. Wobbe, L. Weissbach, and J. Hurwitz. 1987. Simian virus 40 (SV40) DNA replication: SV40 large T antigen unwinds DNA containing the SV40 origin of replication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84:16-20.
  22. DeCaprio, J. A., J. W. Ludlow, J. Figge, J.-Y. Shew, C.-M. Huang, W.-H. Lee, E. Marsilio, E. Paucha, and D. M. Livingston. 1988. SV40 large tumor antigen forms a specific complex with the product of the retinoblastoma susceptibility gene. Cell 54:275-283.
  23. De Luca, A., A. Baldi, V. Esposito, C. M. Howard, L. Bagella, P. Rizzo, M. Caputi, H. I. Pass, G. G. Giordano, F. Baldi, M. Carbone, and A. Giordano. 1997. The retinoblastoma gene family pRb/p105, p107, pRb2/p130 and simian virus-40 large T-antigen in human mesotheliomas. Nat. Med. 3:913-916.
  24. Del Valle, L., J. Gordon, S. Enam, S. Delbue, S. Croul, S. Abraham, S. Radhakrishnan, M. Assimakopoulou, C. D. Katsetos, and K. Khalili. 2002. Expression of human neurotropic polyomavirus JCV late gene product agnoprotein in human medulloblastoma. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 94:267-273.
  25. Diamandopoulos, G. T. 1973. Induction of lymphocytic leukemia, lymphosarcoma, reticulum cell sarcoma, and osteogenic sarcoma in the Syrian golden hamster by oncogenic DNA simian virus 40. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 50:1347-1365.


  26. Diamandopoulos, G. T. 1972. Leukemia, lymphoma, and osteosarcoma induced in the Syrian golden hamster by simian virus 40. Science 176:173-175.
  27. Dyson, N., R. Bernards, S. H. Friend, L. R. Gooding, J. A. Hassell, E. O. Major, J. M. Pipas, T. Van Dyke, and E. Harlow. 1990. Large T antigens of many polyomaviruses are able to form complexes with the retinoblastoma protein. J. Virol. 64:1353-1356.
  28. Eddy, B. E. 1962. Tumors produced in hamsters by SV40. Fed. Proc. 21:930-935.
  29. Eddy, B. E., G. S. Borman, W. H. Berkeley, and R. D. Young. 1961. Tumors induced in hamsters by injection of rhesus monkey kidney cell extracts. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 107:191-197.
  30. Emri, S., T. Kocagoz, A. Olut, Y. Gungen, L. Mutti, and Y. I. Baris. 2000. Simian virus 40 is not a cofactor in the pathogenesis of environmentally induced malignant pleural mesothelioma in Turkey. Anti-Cancer Res. 20:891-894.


  31. Engels, E. A., C. Sarkar, R. W. Daniel, P. E. Gravitt, K. Verma, M. Quezado, and K. V. Shah. 2002. Absence of simian virus 40 in human brain tumors from northern India. Int. J. Cancer 101:348-352.
  32. Flægstad, T., P. A. Andresen, J. I. Johnsen, S. K. Asomani, G.-E. Jørgensen, S. Vignarajan, A. Kjuul, P. Kogner, and T. Traavik. 1999. A possible contributory role of BK virus infection in neuroblastoma development. Cancer Res. 59:1160-1163.
  33. Franks, R. R., A. Rencic, J. Gordon, P. W. Zoltick, M. Curtis, R. L. Knobler, and K. Khalili. 1996. Formation of undifferentiated mesenteric tumors in transgenic mice expressing human neurotropic polyomavirus early protein. Oncogene 12:2573-2578.


  34. Fraumeni, J. F. J., F. Ederer, and R. W. Miller. 1963. An evaluation of the carcinogenicity of simian virus 40 in man. JAMA 185:713-718.
  35. Fraumeni, J. F. J., C. R. Stark, E. Gold, and M. L. Lepow. 1970. Simian virus 40 in polio vaccine: follow-up of newborn recipients. Science 167:59-60.
  36. Gaillard, S., K. M. Fahrbach, R. Parkati, and K. Rundell. 2001. Overexpression of simian virus 40 small-t antigen blocks centrosome function and mitotic progression in human fibroblasts. J. Virol. 75:9799-9807.
  37. Gamberi, G., M. S. Benassi, F. Pompetti, C. Ferrari, P. Ragazzini, M. R. Sollazzo, L. Molendini, M. Meril, G. Magagnoli, F. Chiesa, A. G. Gobbi, A. Powers, and P. Picci. 2000. Presence and expression of the simian virus-40 genome in human giant cell tumors of bone. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 28:23-30.
  38. Gardner, S. D. 1973. Prevalence in England of antibody to human polyomavirus (B.K.). Br. Med. J. 1:77-78.
  39. Gardner, S. D., A. M. Field, D. V. Coleman, and B. Hume. 1971. New human papovavirus (B.K.) isolated from urine after renal transplantation. Lancet i:1253-1257.
  40. Gerber, P., and R. L. Kirschstein. 1962. SV40-induced ependymomas in newborn hamsters. Virology 18:582-588.
  41. Girardi, A. J., F. C. Jensen, and H. Koprowski. 1965. SV40-induced transformation of human diploid cells: crisis and recovery. J. Cell. Comp. Physiol. 65:69-84.
  42. Girardi, A. J., B. H. Sweet, and M. R. Hilleman. 1963. Factors influencing tumor induction in hamsters by vacuolating virus, SV40. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 112:662-667.
  43. Girardi, A. J., B. H. Sweet, V. B. Slotnick, and M. R. Hilleman. 1962. Development of tumors in hamsters inoculated in the neo-natal period with vacuolating virus, SV40. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 109:649-660.
  44. Goudsmit, J., P. Wertheim-van Dillen, A. vanStrien, and J. van der Noordaa. 1982. The role of BK virus in acute respiratory tract disease and the presence of BKV DNA in tonsils. J. Med. Virol. 10:91-99.
  45. Hannon, G. J., D. Demetrick, and D. Beach. 1993. Isolation of the Rb-related p130 through its interaction with CDK2 and cyclins. Genes Dev. 7:2378-2391.
  46. Hirvonen, A., K. Mattson, A. Karjalainen, T. Ollikainen, L. Tammilehto, T. Hovi, H. Vainio, H. I. Pass, I. Di Resta, M. Carbone, and K. Linnainmaa. 1999. SV40-like DNA sequences not detectable in Finnish mesothelioma patients not exposed to SV40 contaminated poliovaccines. Mol. Carcinog. 26:93-99.
  47. Horváth, B. L., and F. Fornosi. 1964. Excretion of SV40 virus after oral administration of contaminated polio vaccine. Acta Microbiol. Acad. Sci. Hung. 11:271-275.


  48. Horvath, C. J., M. A. Simon, D. J. Bergsagel, D. R. Pauley, N. W. King, R. L. Garcea, and D. J. Ringler. 1992. Simian virus 40 (SV40)-induced disease in rhesus monkeys with simian acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Am. J. Pathol. 140:1431-1440.


  49. Huang, H., R. Reis, Y. Yonekawa, J. M. Lopes, P. Kleihues, and H. Ohgaki. 1999. Identification in human brain tumors of DNA sequences specific for SV40 large T antigen. Brain Pathol. 9:33-44.


  50. Ilyinskii, P. O., M. D. Daniel, C. J. Horvath, and R. C. Desrosiers. 1992. Genetic analysis of simian virus 40 from brains and kidneys of macaque monkeys. J. Virol. 66:6353-6360.
  51. International SV40 Working Group. 2001. A multicenter evaluation of assays for detection of SV40 DNA and results in masked mesothelioma specimens. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 10:523-532.
  52. Jasani, B., A. Cristaudo, S. A. Emri, A. F. Gazdar, A. Gibbs, B. Krynska, C. Miller, L. Mutti, C. Radu, M. Tognon, and A. Procopio. 2001. Association of SV40 with human tumors. Semin. Cancer Biol. 11:49-61.
  53. Jha, K. K., S. Banga, V. Palejawala, and H. L. Ozer. 1998. SV40-mediated immortalization. Exp. Cell Res. 245:1-7.
  54. Khoury, G., and E. May. 1977. Regulation of early and late simian virus 40 transcription: overproduction of early viral RNA in the absence of a functional T-antigen. J. Virol. 23:167-176.
  55. Kim, J. Y., I. J. Koralnik, M. LeFave, R. A. Segal, L. A. Pfister, and S. L. Pomeroy. 2002. Medulloblastomas and primitive neuroectodermal tumors rarely contain polyomavirus DNA sequences. Neuro-Oncol. 4:165-170.
  56. Kirschstein, R. L., and P. Gerber. 1962. Ependymomas produced after intracerebral inoculation of SV40 into new-born hamsters. Nature 195:299-300.


  57. Klein, G., A. Powers, and C. Croce. 2002. Association of SV40 with human tumors. Oncogene 21:1141-1149.
  58. Koprowski, H., J. A. Ponten, F. Jensen, R. G. Ravdin, P. Moorhead, and E. Saksela. 1962. Transformation of cultures of human tissue infected with simian virus 40. J. Cell. Comp. Physiol. 59:281-292.
  59. Kouhata, T., K. Fukuyama, N. Hagihara, and K. Tabuchi. 2001. Detection of simian virus 40 DNA sequence in human primary glioblastomas multiforme. J. Neurosurg. 95:96-101.
  60. Krainer, M., T. Schenk, C. C. Zielinski, and C. Muller. 1995. Failure to confirm presence of SV40 sequences in human tumors. Eur. J. Cancer 31:1893.
  61. Krieg, P., E. Antmann, D. Jonas, H. Fischer, K. Zang, and G. Sauer. 1981. Episomal simian virus 40 genomes in human brain tumors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78:6446-6450.
  62. Krieg, P., and G. Scherer. 1984. Cloning of SV40 genomes from human brain tumors. Virology 138:336-340.
  63. Krynska, B., L. D. Valle, S. Croul, J. Gordon, C. D. Katsetos, M. Carbone, A. Giordano, and K. Khalili. 1999. Detection of human neurotropic JC virus DNA sequence and expression of the viral oncogenic protein in pediatric medulloblastomas. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:11519-11524.
  64. Laghi, L., A. E. Randolph, D. P. Chauhan, G. Marra, E. O. Major, J. V. Neel, and C. R. Boland. 1999. JC virus DNA is present in the mucosa of the human colon and in colorectal cancers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:7484-7489.
  65. Lane, D. P., and L. V. Crawford. 1979. T antigen is bound to a host protein in SV40-transformed cells. Nature 278:261-263.
  66. Lednicky, J. A., and R. L. Garcea. 2000. Detection of SV40 DNA sequences in human tissue, p. 257-267. In L. Raptis (ed.), Methods in molecular biology, vol. 165. Humana Press, Totowa, N.J.
  67. Lednicky, J. A., R. L. Garcea, D. J. Bergsagel, and J. S. Butel. 1995. Natural simian virus 40 strains are present in human choroid plexus and ependymoma tumors. Virology 212:710-717.
  68. Lednicky, J. A., A. R. Stewart, J. J. Jenkins, M. J. Finegold, and J. S. Butel. 1997. SV40 DNA in human osteosarcomas shows sequence variation among T-antigen genes. Int. J. Cancer 72:791-800.
  69. Levine, A. J. 1993. The tumor suppressor genes. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 62:623-651.
  70. Li, R. M., M. H. Branton, S. Tanawattanacharoen, R. A. Falk, J. C. Jennette, and J. B. Kopp. 2002. Molecular identification of SV40 infection in human subjects and possible association with kidney disease. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 13:2320-2330.
  71. Linzer, D. I., and A. J. Levine. 1979. Characterization of a 54K dalton cellular SV40 tumor antigen present in SV40-transformed cells and uninfected embryonal carcinoma cells. Cell 17:43-52.
  72. Malkin, D., S. Chilton-MacNeill, L. A. Meister, E. Sexsmith, L. Diller, and R. L. Garcea. 2001. Tissue-specific expression of SV40 in tumors associated with the Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Oncogene 20:4441-4449.
  73. Martinelli, M., F. Martini, E. Rinaldi, L. Caramanico, E. Magri, E. Grandi, F. Carinci, A. Pastore, and M. Tognon. 2002. Simian virus 40 sequences and expression of the viral large T antigen oncoprotein in human pleomorphic adenomas of parotid glands. Am. J. Pathol. 161:1127-1133.


  74. Martini, F., L. Iaccheri, L. Lazzarin, P. Carinci, A. Corallini, M. Gerosa, P. Iuzzolino, G. Barbanti-Brodano, and M. Tognon. 1996. SV40 early region and large T antigen in human brain tumors, peripheral blood cells, and sperm fluids from healthy individuals. Cancer Res. 56:4820-4825.
  75. McCormick, F., and E. Harlow. 1980. Association of a murine 53,000-dalton phosphoprotein with simian virus 40 large-T antigen in transformed cells. J. Virol. 34:213-224.
  76. Meinke, W., D. A. Goldstein, and R. A. Smith. 1979. Simian virus 40-related DNA sequences in a human brain tumor. Neurology 29:1590-1594.
  77. Melnick, J. L., and S. Stinebaugh. 1962. Excretion of vacuolating SV-40 virus (papova virus group) after ingestion as a contaminant of oral poliovaccine. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 109:965-968.
  78. Mendoza, S. M., T. Konishi, and C. W. Miller. 1998. Integration of SV40 in human osteosarcoma DNA. Oncogene 17:2457-2462.
  79. Monaco, M. C., P. N. Jensen, J. Hou, L. C. Durham, and E. O. Major. 1998. Detection of JC virus DNA in human tonsil tissue: evidence for site of initial viral infection. J. Virol. 72:9918-9923.
  80. Monaco, M. C., J. Shin, and E. O. Major. 1998. JC virus infection in cells from lymphoid tissue. Dev. Biol. Stand. 94:115-122.


  81. Monini, P., A. Rotola, D. Di Luca, L. De Lellis, E. Chiari, A. Corallini, and E. Cassai. 1995. DNA rearrangements impairing BK virus productive infection in urinary tract tumors. Virology 214:273-279.


    CrossRefMedlineMorris, J. A., K. M. Johnson, C. G. Aulisio, R. M. Chanock, and V. Knight. 1961. Clinical and serological responses in volunteers given vacuolating virus (SV40) by respiratory route. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 108:56-59.
  82. Mortimer, E. A., M. L. Lepow, E. Gold, F. C. Robbins, G. J. Burton, and J. F. Fraumeni. 1981. Long-term follow-up of persons inadvertently inoculated with SV40 as neonates. N. Engl. J. Med. 305:1517-1518.
  83. Murakami, Y., C. R. Wobbe, L. Weissbach, F. B. Dean, and J. Hurwitz. 1986. Role of DNA polymerase alpha and DNA primase in simian virus 40 DNA replication in vitro. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:2869-2873.
  84. Pacini, F., A. Vivaldi, M. Santoro, M. Fedele, A. Fusco, C. Romei, F. Basolo, and A. Pinchera. 1998. Simian virus 40-like DNA sequences in human papillary thyroid carcinomas. Oncogene 16:665-669.
  85. Padgett, B. L., and D. L. Walker. 1976. New human papovaviruses. Prog. Med. Virol. 22:1-35.


  86. Padgett, B. L., and D. L. Walker. 1973. Prevalence of antibody in human sera against JC virus, an isolate from a case of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. J. Infect. Dis. 127:467-470.
  87. Padgett, B. L., D. L. Walker, G. M. ZuRhein, R. I. Eckroade, and B. H. Dessel. 1971. Cultivation of a papova-like virus from human brain with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. Lancet i:1257-1260.
  88. Pagano, J. S. 2002. Viruses and lymphoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 347:89-94.
  89. Pallas, D. C., L. K. Shahrik, B. L. Martin, S. Jaspers, T. B. Miller, D. L. Brautigan, and T. M. Roberts. 1990. Polyoma small and middle T antigens and SV40 small t antigen form stable complexes with protein phosphatase 2A. Cell 60:167-176.
  90. Ponten, J., F. C. Jensen, and H. Koprowski. 1963. Morphological and virological investigation of human tissue cultures transformed with SV40. J. Cell. Comp. Physiol. 61:145-163.
  91. Porcu, P., A. Ferber, Z. Pietrzkowski, C. T. Roberts, M. Adamo, D. LeRoith, and R. Baserga. 1992. The growth-stimulatory effect of simian virus 40 T antigen requires the interaction of insulin-like growth factor 1 with its receptor. Mol. Cell. Biol. 12:5069-5077.
  92. Porras, A., S. Gaillard, and K. Rundell. 1999. The simian virus 40 small-t and large T antigens jointly regulate cell cycle reentry in human fibroblasts. J. Virol. 73:3102-3107.
  93. Portolani, M., M. Borgatti, A. Corallini, E. Cassai, M. P. Grossi, and G. Barbanti-Brodano. 1978. Stable transformation of mouse, rabbit, and monkey cells and abortive transformation of human cells by BK virus, a human papovavirus. J. Gen. Virol. 38:369-374.
  94. Rabson, A. S., G. T. O’Connor, L. Kirschstein, and W. L. Branigan. 1962. Papillary ependymomas produced in Rattus (mastomys) natalensis inoculated with vacuolating virus (SV40). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 29:765-787.
  95. Ray, G. A., D. S. Peabody, J. L. Cooper, L. S. Cram, and P. M. Kraemer. 1990. SV40 T antigen alone drives karyotype instability that precedes neoplastic transformation of human diploid fibroblasts. J. Cell. Biochem. 42:13-31.
  96. Reed, S. I., J. Ferguson, R. W. Davis, and C. R. Stark. 1975. T antigen binds to simian virus 40 DNA at the origin of replication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 72:1605-1609.
  97. Reed, S. I., C. R. Stark, and J. C. Alwine. 1976. Autoregulation of simian virus 40 gene A by T antigen. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 73:3083-3087.
  98. Rizzo, P., M. Carbone, S. Fisher, C. Matker, L. J. Swinnen, A. Powers, I. Di Resta, S. Alkan, H. I. Pass, and R. I. Fisher. 1999. Simian virus 40 is present in most United States human mesotheliomas, but it is rarely present in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Chest 166:470S-473S.
  99. Rundell, K., and R. Parakati. 2001. The role of the SV40 ST antigen in cell growth promotion and transformation. Semin. Cancer Biol. 11:5-13.
  100. Saenz-Robles, M. T., C. S. Sullivan, and J. M. Pipas. 2001. Transforming functions of simian virus 40. Oncogene 20:7899-7907.
  101. Schell, T. D., and S. S. Tevethia. 2001. Control of advanced choroid plexus tumors in SV40 T antigen transgenic mice following priming of donor CD8(+) T lymphocytes by the endogenous tumor antigen. J. Immunol. 167:6947-6956.
  102. Schell, T. D., and S. S. Tevethia. 2001. Cytotoxic T lymphocytes in SV40 infections. Methods Mol. Biol. 165:243-256.


  103. Scherneck, S., M. Rudolph, E. Geissler, F. Vogel, L. Lubbe, H. Wahlte, G. Nisch, F. Weickman, and W. Zimmerman. 1979. Isolation of an SV-40 like papovavirus from human glioblastoma. Int. J. Cancer 24:523-531.


  104. Sepulveda, A. R., M. J. Finegold, B. Smith, B. L. Slagle, J. L. DeMayo, R.-F. Shen, S. L. C. Woo, and J. S. Butel. 1989. Development of a transgenic mouse system for the analysis of stages in liver carcinogenesis using tissue-specific expression of SV40 large T-antigen controlled by regulatory elements of the human α-1-antitrypsin gene. Cancer Res. 49:6108-6117.
  105. Shah, K., and N. Nathanson. 1976. Human exposure to SV40: review and comment. Am. J. Epidemiol. 103:1-12.
  106. Shah, K. V. 2000. Does SV40 infection contribute to the development of human cancers? Rev. Med. Virol. 10:31-43.
  107. Shein, H. M., and J. F. Enders. 1962. Multiplication and cytopathogenicity of simian vacuolating virus 40 in cultures of human tissues. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 109:495-500.
  108. Shein, H. M., J. F. Enders, and J. D. Levinthal. 1962. Transformation induced by simian virus 40 in human renal cell cultures. II. Cell-virus relationships. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 48:1350-1357.
  109. Shivapurkar, N., K. Harada, J. Reddy, R. H. Scheuermann, Y. Xu, R. W. McKenna, S. Milchgrub, S. H. Kroft, Z. Feng, and A. F. Gazdar. 2002. Presence of simian virus 40 DNA sequence in human lymphomas. Lancet 359:851-852.
  110. Shivapurkar, N., T. Wiethege, I. I. Wishuba, E. Salomon, S. Milchgrub, K. M. Muller, A. Churg, H. I. Pass, and A. F. Gazdar. 1999. Presence of simian virus 40 sequences in malignant mesotheliomas and mesothelial cell proliferations. J. Cell. Biochem. 76:181-188.
  111. Smale, S. T., and R. Tjian. 1986. T-antigen-DNA polymerase alpha complex implicated in simian virus 40 DNA replication. Mol. Cell. Biol. 6:4077-4087.
  112. Small, J. A., G. Khoury, G. Jay, P. M. Howley, and G. A. Scangos. 1986. Early regions of JC virus and BK virus induce distinct and tissue-specific tumors in transgenic mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:8288-8292.
  113. Stahl, H., P. Droge, and R. Knippers. 1986. DNA helicase activity of SV40 large tumor antigen. EMBO J. 5:1939-1944.


  114. Stratton, K., D. A. Almario, and M. C. McCormick (ed.). 2002. Immunization safety review: SV40 contamination of polio vaccine and cancer. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
  115. Strickler, H. D., J. J. Goedert, M. Fleming, W. D. Travis, A. E. Williams, C. S. Rabkin, R. W. Daniel, and K. V. Shah. 1996. Simian virus 40 and pleural mesothelioma in humans. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 5:473-475.
  116. Sweet, B. H., and M. R. Hilleman. 1960. The vacuolating virus, SV40. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 105:420-427.
  117. Tabuchi, K., W. M. Kirsch, and M. Low. 1978. Screening of human brain tumors for SV40 related T antigen. Int. J. Cancer 21:12-17.


  118. Taguchi, F., J. Kajioka, and T. Miyamura. 1982. Prevalence rate and age of acquisition of antibodies against JC virus and BK virus in human sera. Microbiol. Immunol. 26:1057-1064.


  119. Tegtmeyer, P. 1972. Simian virus 40 deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis: the viral replicon. J. Virol. 10:591-598.
  120. Tegtmeyer, P., M. Schwartz, J. K. Collins, and K. Rundell. 1975. Regulation of tumor antigen synthesis by simian virus 40 gene A. J. Virol. 16:168-178.
  121. Testa, J. R., M. Carbone, A. Hirvonen, K. Khalili, B. Krynska, K. Linnainmaa, F. D. Poley, P. Rizzo, V. Rusch, and G.-H. Xiao. 1998. A multi-institutional study confirms the presence and expression of simian virus 40 in human malignant mesotheliomas. Cancer Res. 58:4505-4509.
  122. Tjian, R. 1978. The binding site on SV40 DNA for a T antigen-related protein. Cell 13:165-179.
  123. Van Dyke, T. A., C. Finalay, D. Miller, J. Marks, G. Lozano, and A. J. Levine. 1987. Relationship between simian virus 40 large tumor antigen expression and tumor formation in transgenic mice. J. Virol. 61:2029-2032.
  124. Vilchez, R. A., C. R. Madden, C. A. Kozinetz, S. J. Halvorson, Z. S. White, J. L. Jorgensen, C. J. Finch, and J. S. Butel. 2002. Association between simian virus 40 and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Lancet 359:817-823.
  125. Waheed, I., Z. S. Guo, G. A. Chen, T. S. Weiser, D. M. Nguyen, and D. S. Schrump. 1999. Antisense to SV40 early gene region induces growth arrest and apoptosis in T-antigen-positive human pleural mesothelioma cells. Cancer Res. 59:6068-6073.
  126. Walker, D. L., B. L. Padgett, G. M. ZuRhein, A. E. Albert, and R. F. Marsh. 1973. Induction of brain tumors in hamsters. Science 181:674-676.
  127. Weggen, S., T. A. Bayer, A. von Deimling, G. Reifenberger, D. von Schweinitz, O. D. Wiestler, and T. Pietsch. 2000. Low frequency of SV40, JC and BK polyomavirus sequences in human medulloblastomas, meningiomas, and ependymomas. Brain Pathol. 10:85-92.


  128. Yamamoto, H., T. Nakayama, H. Murakami, T. Hosaka, T. Nakamata, T. Tsuboyama, M. Oka, T. Nakamura, and J. Toguchida. 2000. High incidence of SV40-like sequence detection in tumour and peripheral blood cells of Japanese osteosarcoma patients. Br. J. Cancer 82:1677-1681.
  129. Yu, J., A. Boyapati, and K. Rundell. 2001. Critical role for SV40 small-t antigen in human cell transformation. Virology 290:192-198.
  130. zur Hausen, H. 1987. Papillomaviruses in human cancer. Cancer 59:1692-1696.
  131. Zu Rhein, G. 1983. Studies of JC virus-induced nervous system tumors in the Syrian hamster: a review. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 105:205-221.


The Vaccine Hoax

Click on this link to THE CHILD HEALTH SAFETY BLOG for good information about vaccinations.

Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies

Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US.

Child VaccinationEducated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.

An extraordinary new paper published by a courageous doctor and investigative medical researcher has dug the dirt on 30 years of secret official transcripts of meetings of UK government vaccine committees and the supposedly independent medical “experts” sitting on them with their drug industry connections.

If you want to get an idea of who is responsible for your child’s condition resulting from a vaccine adverse reaction then this is the paper to read. What you have to ask yourself is if the people on these committees are honest and honorable and acting in the best interests of British children, how is it this has been going on for at least 30 years?

This is what everyone has always known but could never prove before now. Pass this information on to others so they can see what goes on in Government health committees behind locked doors.


Whooping cough outbreak at Massachusetts high school affected only vaccinated students


Unvaccinated children are supposedly the cause, according to state health officials, of a recent whooping cough outbreak that occurred in the posh Cape Cod area of Massachusetts. But as reported by CBS Boston, all of the children affected by the outbreak were already vaccinated, proving once again that vaccines don’t really work.

Some 15 children at Falmouth High School reportedly came down with the respiratory illness, which also goes by the name pertussis, sparking a wave of panic about a corresponding increase in vaccine exemptions. But as usual, nobody affected by the outbreak was unvaccinated, and no matter how hard the media tries to spin the issue, those who were vaccinated were not protected.


CDC issues flu vaccine apology: this year’s vaccine doesn’t work!

(NaturalNews) The following video from Gary Franchi of NextNewsNetwork reveals the shocking admission by the CDC that this year’s flu vaccine doesn’t work.

From the video:

For the first time we can remember, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are going on the record, saying the flu vaccine won’t work this year. The warning comes just before the busiest part of flu season, in January and February. Unfortunately, there won’t be any refund for any of the patients or insurance companies who spent money on flu shots earlier this fall.

But don’t worry. Just when you thought perhaps the CDC could boost their credibility, they found a way to put a sales pitch on the end of their warning. The CDC says if you do come down with the flu, there’s a cure. It’s just going to cost more money. Money that will end up profiting pharmaceutical giants, GlaxoSmithKline and Roche. CDC officials are urging doctors to prescribe two specific antiviral medications for any patients who come in with flu symptoms.

Just last week, the CDC issued a warning, prompting Americans to take the flu vaccine if they haven’t already. Health officials said they had 160 million flu shots on the shelves and ready to go. But just earlier this week, Italy launched an official investigation after about a dozen people died within 48 hours of getting the flu shot. Their national health agency issued an immediate warning, saying DON’T take the vaccine. Here in America, the CDC isn’t going that far. In fact, they found a way of turning this failed vaccine into a promotion for yet another big pharma drug.

Here’s the news report video:


Insert admits “no controlled trials”

Shockingly, the package insert for this flu shot readily admits the vaccine has never been subjected to scientific clinical trials:

“There have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with Flulaval,” the package insert claims in tiny text (that no one reads).

This is printed right on the insert, yet no one in the mainstream media will ever report this astonishing admission. This statement, all by itself, is a confession that flu shot marketing is a fraud.

Across the board, flu shots are heavily propagandized and promoted with the implication that they have zero risks while offering 100% protection. No one in the mainstream media ever questions this claim even though the package insert openly admits the claim is complete hokum and has never been subjected to scientific scrutiny.

No evidence of safety or effectiveness in pregnant women

But that’s not all the insert admits. It also says:

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval have not been established in pregnant women, nursing mothers or children.”

And yet everywhere you go in America, there’s a Walgreens, CVS or Wal-Mart pharmacy promoting flu shots for pregnant women. Never mind the fact that flu shot safety has never been established in pregnant women, and never mind the obvious fact that you should never inject a pregnant women with mercury in the first place!

Who needs scientific proof when you’ve got the full propaganda of the media and the government to back you up? Anyone who dares question the scientific validity of flu shot safety for pregnant women is immediately attacked as being an opponent of all vaccines.

Apparently, the only requirement to be accepted by the vaccine community is to believe in medical fairy tales while abandoning all critical thinking and scientific skepticism. In the vaccine industry, genuine science is simply not allowed. No wonder two former Merck virologists filed a False Claims Act with the federal government, accusing the company of knowingly fabricating its vaccine efficacy data to trick the FDA.

Never proven safe or effective in children, either

Flu shots are heavily promoted for children, right alongside mumps and measles vaccines. But it turns out flu shots are never scientifically tested for safety or efficacy in children.

Check out what the insert for this vaccine directly admits:

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval in pediatric patients have not been established.”

It’s right there in black and white… an open admission. Yet flu shots are aggressively marketed to parents and children as if they were Tic-Tacs. The real beauty of the entire vaccine industry scam is that no scientific evidence is required! You don’t have to have any proof, all you have to do is believe in vaccines as a matter of faith.

Never tested for cancer risk

Do flu shots cause cancer? The honest, scientific answer is that these shots are never tested for that. As the insert readily admits:

“Flulaval has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.”

Believe it or not, the Flulaval vaccine also warns that no one should be given this shot if they’ve already received another flu shot at some previous time:

“Do not administer Flulaval to anyone… following previous administration of any influenza vaccine.”

And yet, amazingly, people are encouraged to get flu shots year after year, even though the package insert directly warns against anyone taking a series of influenza vaccines.

Admission that flu shots contain formaldehyde and sodium deoxycholate

The same insert that admits this vaccine has never been proven safe in children or pregnant women also openly admits that it contains neurotoxic chemicals.

Per the insert, each dose of Flulaval contains up to 25 mcg of formaldehyde (a neurotoxin) and up to 50 mcg of sodium deoxycholate.

Total admission that flu shots cause seizures, convulsions and Guillian-Barre syndrome

Ever wonder what all these toxic chemicals and heavy metals cause in humans? Flu shots vaccines, it turns out, are already known to cause a huge number of devastating health effects.

Predictably, there is a massive disinfo campaign across the mainstream media, Wikipedia, medical journals and government propaganda agencies (CDC, FDA, etc.) to pretend that flu shots have no risks whatsoever. Yet the insert that comes with the vaccine openly admits the flu shot has been linked with a long, frightening list of serious adverse effects. As this Flulaval insert says (see photo below):

“In addition to reports in clinical trials, the following adverse events have been identified during postapproval use of Flulaval…

Here’s a photo of this section of the package insert, complete with the GlaxoSmithKline toll-free phone number:

If you take flu shots, you are being poisoned by quacks

The upshot of all this is that flu shots utterly lack any scientific evidence of safety of efficacy. We don’t know if they work at all, in other words, and neither does the vaccine manufacturer. Neither do the doctors or medical staff who administer them. Flu vaccines are injected into people purely as a matter of blind faith in the very same companies that have already been convicted of felony crimes.

GlaxoSmithKline, for example, not only manufacturers this Flulaval vaccine… the company also committed multiple felony crimes and got caught bribing doctors, ultimately agreeing to pay a multi-billion-dollar criminal settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Trusting a flu shot made by a corporation of felons is a lot like trusting the purity of heroin you buy from a street dealer. Both flu shots and street heroin have at least one thing in common, by the way: neither has ever been tested for safety.

(ed. There is much evidence, also, that the mediums used to culture vaccines are infected with multiple strains of viruses – often from diseased animals – that are unidentified and untested. Injecting these viruses into your body is an irreversible insult to your system that can cause trouble for the rest of your life.)


Last Year’s Flu Vaccine Killed and Injured Over 93,000 US Citizens – Will This Year be Any Different?


(NOTE: Americans are hearing a great deal about EBOLA and are scared. Fewer than a dozen Americans have contracted this disease, and fewer than a half dozen have died. By comparison, thousands of Americans die every year from flu. Are Americans being brainwashed to overreact to EBOLA?

What’s even more interesting, nearly 100,000 Americans are injured from flu shots each year. Of these, approximately 9,000 are hospitalized, and approximately 1,000 die. Flu shots have been proven to be worthless to prevent flu (in many cases they actually cause flu). Furthermore, flu vaccines carry God-only-knows how much additional foreign, unknown, undisclosed, contaminants and viruses that can cause life-changing diseases.

Which health risk should we be more concerned about? Ebola or flu shots? -ed)


By TLB Staff Writer: Christina England

Whilst governments around the world maximize their flu vaccine targets for this year, pushing the vaccine onto younger and younger children, last year two sets of parents were left wishing they had ignored their advice.

Story # 1 – Nine Year Old Marysue Left Visually Impaired and Paralyzed

Marysue was a happy, healthy little girl, who loved nothing more than to run and play and sing in the church choir. Four days after receiving last year’s routine flu vaccine however, she was left visually impaired, totally paralyzed and needing 24 hour a day nursing care from her family.

Nine year old Marysue, from Tampa, Florida, received her flu vaccination on November 21st 2013 and within days was left fighting for her life in hospital.

Marysue’s mother stated: “On November 20, 2013, received her annual flu shot. Then, on the evening of November 25, 2013, she played freeze tag with her friends, ate her dinner and went to bed. Marysue was fine when her father and I turned in around ten that night. The next morning, she did not get up at six as she normally did. I went in to check on her. When I called her, she did not respond. I attempted to wake her and could not at first. Finally, she opened her eyes but she did not speak to me which was not normal for her.

I immediately called Stephen (her father). We called 911; they sent an ambulance. After they evaluated her, they told me to get in the ambulance. I had to ride in the front. I later found out that on the way to the hospital she had a seizure. Later, we were told that during the night she had a previous seizure with lack of oxygen.”

Note: (Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (ADEM) is characterized by a brief but widespread attack of inflammation in the brain and spinal cord that damages myelin – the protective covering of nerve fibers. Although it can be caused by a viral or bacterial infection, vaccinations are also a known cause.)

Their ongoing campaign has managed to raise nearly $12,000 from people touched by her tragic story but in reality their kind donations are just a drop in the ocean compared with the figure Marysue’s parents need, to redesign their house and buy their daughter a van large enough to accommodate her wheelchair.

Story # 2 – Healthy Nineteen Year Old Killed By the Flu Shot

A healthy, active nineteen year old male from Utah, was also reported to have had a severe adverse reaction from the vaccine.

Chandler Webb had his whole life ahead of him the day that he was vaccinated with his first ever flu vaccination. Lori Webb, Chandler’s mother, told Fox News that the day after he received the vaccine, he became severely ill, suffering from severe headaches, shaking and vomiting. Fearing the worse, she immediately took her son to Salt Lake Hospital where he fell into a coma.

Sadly, Chandler never recovered from the coma and 28 days later a decision was made to turn off his life support.

His mother says that she has been left in no doubt that the flu vaccine was responsible for Chandler’s death and made the following statement to Fox News:

“He was so healthy. He was pure. He should have been able to fight the flu. I wish he would have gotten the flu rather than this vaccination.”

Once again health officials told the public that it was unlikely the flu vaccine was responsible for Chandler’s death and emphasized that the flu vaccine was safe.

However, despite health officials everywhere burying their heads in the sand and ignoring the facts, Chandler was just one of 1,080 flu vaccine deaths reported last year.

At Least 93,000 Adverse Reactions Reported Last Year

According to the National Vaccine Information Center (NIVC), the US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) received a massive 93,000 reports of adverse reactions following last year’s flu vaccine. These included 1,080 deaths and 8,888 hospitalizations.

NIVC stated:

“As of November 2013, there have been more than 93,000 reports of reactions, hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following influenza vaccinations made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 1,080 related deaths, 8,888 hospitalizations, 1,801 related disabilities and over 1,700 cases of GBS (Guilllain-Barré syndrome). In 2013 the Federal Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV) voted to add GBS to the Vaccine Injury Table within the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).

It is only when you take into consideration that these figures only represent the adverse reactions reported in the US, can you even begin to appreciate the true extent of the problem.


At this time of year there are advertisements on the flu vaccine just about everywhere you go and yet despite many doctors and health officials insisting that the flu vaccines are safe and effective, reports from around the World tell a different story.

Before parents decide to have their child vaccinated with a flu shot, they should ask themselves whether or not this vaccine is worth the risk.



Think you can avoid glyphosate by buying organic? Think again. A new investigation by Tropical Traditions reveals that many products in the organic grain market in the U.S. contain glyphosate residue at levels almost the same as conventional grains.

Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News Editor

With over 80% of the U.S. food supply now reportedly contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate (Roundup), many people are turning to USDA certified organic products to avoid this toxic chemical. Current USDA NOP (National Organic Program) standards do not allow the use of the herbicide glyphosate on organic crops.

However, a new investigation by Tropical Traditions has revealed that the U.S. organic grain market is contaminated with glyphosate.

Tropical Traditions has sold organic grains for years. After reading new research about the issue of “crop desiccation” done by using glyphosate on wheat and other grains just prior to harvest, Tropical Traditions decided to first test some commercial wheat products with wheat grown in Montana, North Dakota, and Canada. They sent the commercial samples to a well-known and respected laboratory to test for glyphosate.

All tested positive for glyphosate residue. The range was from 0.07 mg/kg to 0.09 mg/kg. Keep in mind this is glyphosate found in non-GMO crops. For a GMO crop such as GMO soybeans, which are sprayed heavily with glyphosate, the range is typically between 3.3 and 5.7 mg/kg. (Source.)

Next, Tropical Traditions tested the USDA certified organic grains from suppliers they had been using, sourced mainly from western states such as Montana and Idaho. Sadly, the presence of glyphosate residue was found in organic wheat and other organic grains, including organic barley, oats, spelt, and einkorn. The range was from 0.03 to 0.06 mg/kg, just slightly lower than the conventional grains that were tested.

The only organic grains that tested clean were organic rye and organic millet. There was also one variety of organic wheat from small-scale farmers in Wisconsin that tested clean from glyphosate.

Why Should We be Concerned about Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is in 80% of our food supply in the U.S., and some scientists believe it may well be the most toxic chemical ever approved for commercial use. Glyphosate is now linked to kidney disease, antibiotic resistant bacteria, inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, depression, ADHD, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, multiple sclerosis, cancer, cachexia, infertility, and developmental malformations. It destroys the microbiome of humans and plants, which is the root cause of many modern diseases.

To learn more about the dangers of glyphosate, see:

Glyphosate Herbicide Causes Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria, Kidney Disease, and Infertility

Is Glyphosate Responsible for your Health Problems?

Common Weedkiller Used in Modern Agriculture Could be Main Factor in Gluten Intolerance

Gluten Intolerance and the Herbicide Glyphosate: A National Epidemic

MIT Researcher: Glyphosate Herbicide will Cause Half of All Children to Have Autism by 2025

The Glyphosate Grain Problem

Since commercial wheat and other grains today are NOT GMO plants, a direct spraying of an herbicide containing glyphosate would kill them. So how are these grains ending up with glyphosate residues in them?

Dr. Don Huber, Professor Emeritus of Plant Pathology at Purdue University, explains why:

There are two reasons that a farmer wants to [use glyphosate on non-GMO crops]. It is for late season weed control in situations where he has patches of green weeds in the field that came up late. [This is commonly done with wheat and barley.] It is a little slower to harvest when weeds are present.

The other reason involves late season snow. In the northern region such as in the Dakotas, in certain parts of Montana, and in the Prairies of Canada, there is a very short growing season.   If it snows on the crop at harvest then you may lose the crop, because you can’t get back into the field to do the harvest.

In these regions, 70% of the wheat and barley are desiccated with glyphosate before harvest. [This kills the plant so that it will wilt and dry]. Farmers don’t want to take a risk in losing their entire wheat and barley crop, so they will take a cut in yield and quality by using glyphosate a few weeks before harvest, and then harvest the crop early.

Farmers don’t realize how much they are contaminating that food or feed product when they do this. They will accept the cut [in quality and quantity of the crop], because that can buy them a week advantage in harvest. It’s really more done for ease and planning. However, it is just the dumbest thing you could ever do from a health and safety standpoint.

In fact, beer brewers are having a problem with glyphosate. A few years ago, when one of my colleagues wanted to get more Abraxis test strips for testing materials for glyphosate residue, he was told that they had a 3 month backlog. He asked, what was causing this? He was told that every load of malt barley coming out of North Dakota has to be tested, because the glyphosate levels were so high that it kills the yeast in the brew mix. (Source.)

Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff published as study titled: Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases II: Celiac sprue and gluten intolerance in Interdiscip Toxicol. 2013; Vol. 6 (4): 159–184. They produced the following chart showing a correlation between glyphosate use on wheat and Celiac disease:


USDA Organic Standards Allow for Pesticide Residues


The USDA organic standards change so much that it is hard to keep up with what the latest standards are. For example, the EPA just increased the limit of glyphosate allowed in food in 2013, despite a loud public outcry. (See: EPA Raised Residue Limits of Monsanto’s Glyphosate Herbicide). Tropical Traditions has learned that the USDA has now allowed a certain amount of pesticide and herbicide residue, including glyphosate, in USDA certified organic products as well.

So it was not too surprising to learn that the levels of glyphosate found in organic grain products were within the limits allowed by the USDA for organic certification, which is based on a percentage of the EPA allowable limits for pesticides and herbicides. The organic standards for pesticide residue can be found here.

The EPA establishes the maximum allowed levels of pesticides, or EPA tolerances, which may be present on foods. Although most EPA -registered pesticides are prohibited in organic production, there can be inadvertent or indirect contact from neighboring conventional farms or shared handling facilities. As long as the operator hasn’t directly applied prohibited pesticides and has documented efforts to minimize exposure to them, the USDA organic regulations allow for residues of prohibited pesticides at or below 5 percent of the EPA tolerance.

Since the EPA standards for glyphosate are already very high, it was not surprising to find out that the levels of glyphosate residue Tropical Traditions was finding in USDA certified organic grains was well within their limits. If both the EPA standards and USDA organic standards were too low for pesticide residue, probably more than 90% of the U.S. food supply would not be eligible for sale. It would be too contaminated.

How is Glyphosate Residue Getting into Organically Grown Crops?

Crop Duster Silhouette

This is the big question that Tropical Traditions is researching now, as they work together with organic grain mills and suppliers to try to determine how this has happened. There are several possibilities.

The most alarming possibility is that glyphosate might be falling on crops through rainwater or irrigation. Some studies have actually shown that this is the case, particularly in the Mississippi River Basin. This is quite alarming, because it means all crops are suspect, not just grains.

Herbicide and pesticide drift is also a possibility. Many organic grains are grown in the same area where conventional grains are grown, and where desiccating with glyphosate is practiced. This is probably done by crop duster aircraft, and the herbicide is drifting. Other crops (besides grains) that Dr. Don Huber has stated use the practice of desiccating with glyphosate include: dry beans (chickpea, lupin, and faba), canola, field pea, flax, lentil, and soybeans.

Organic varieties of these crops might be in danger of containing glyphosate residue. Tropical Traditions has already removed products from its product line associated with these crops, pending further investigation, and verification by laboratory analysis that they are glyphosate-free. We are implementing our own Glyphosate-tested program that we will soon be applying to all foods that are threatened with glyphosate contamination, and seeking out farmers and suppliers committed to meeting our standard of ZERO percent glyphosate residue.

In Tropical Traditions’ own testing of organic grains so far, they found that barley has among the highest levels of glyphosate of the organic crops, and this corresponds to conventional crops where the EPA has raised the limits of glyphosate in barley to a higher level than other grains. Beer drinkers beware! Not even organic beer is safe if it is produced in the U.S.


10 American Foods That Are Banned in Other Countries



Farmed salmon are raised on a wholly unnatural diet of grains along with a concoction of antibiotics and other drugs. This diet leaves the fish with unappetizing grayish flesh, so to compensate, they’re fed synthetic astaxanthin made from petrochemicals, which has not been approved for human consumption. Farmed Salmon fed these chemicals are banned in Australia and New Zealand.




Most Hawaiian papaya is now genetically engineered to be resistant to ringspot virus. Mounting research now shows that animals fed genetically engineered foods, such as corn and soy, suffer a wide range of maladies, including intestinal damage, multiple-organ damage, massive tumors, birth defects, premature death, and near complete sterility by the third generation of offspring. GE papaya is banned in the EU.




The beta agonist drug ractopamine, which reduces the overall fat content of meat, is currently used in about 45 percent of US pigs, 30 percent of ration-fed cattle, and an unknown percentage of turkeys. Up to 20 percent of ractopamine remains in the meat you buy from the supermarket.



Citrus-flavored sodas and sports drinks sold in the US typically contain a synthetic chemical called brominated vegetable oil (BVO), which was originally patented by chemical companies as a flame retardant. BVO has been shown to bioaccumulate in human tissue and breast milk, and animal studies have found it causes reproductive and behavioral problems in large doses.




More than 3,000 food additives — preservatives, flavorings, colors and other ingredients — are added to US foods. Meanwhile, many of these are banned in other countries, based on research showing toxicity and hazardous health effects, especially with respect to adverse effects on children’s behavior.



Arsenic-based drugs are approved for use in animal feed in the US because they make animals grow quicker and make the meat appear pinker (i.e. “fresher”). The FDA claims these products are safe because they contain organic arsenic, which is less toxic than the other inorganic form, which is a known carcinogen. However, studies suggest the organic arsenic can transform into inorganic arsenic, which has been found in store-bought chickens sold in the US. The EU does not permit arsenic-based drugs in food animals.




The use of potassium bromate as an additive to commercial breads and baked goods has been a huge contributor to bromide overload in Western cultures. Bromated flour is “enriched” with potassium bromate. Studies have linked potassium bromate to kidney and nervous system damage, thyroid problems, gastrointestinal discomfort, and cancer. Use of potassium bromate is banned in Canada, China and the EU.




Olestra, aka Olean, created by Procter & Gamble, is a calorie- and cholesterol-free fat substitute used in fat-free snacks like chips and French fries. Adverse reactions include diarrhea, cramps and leaky bowels. More importantly, olestra also interferes with the absorption of fat soluble vitamins such as A, D, E and K. Olestra is banned in the UK and Canada.




BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) are commonly used preservatives. BHA is known to cause cancer in rats, and may be a cancer-causing agent in humans as well. US experts concluded that BHA “is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” BHA and BHT are banned in Japan and parts of the European Union, and the UK does not permit BHA in baby foods.




RBGH is a synthetic version of natural bovine somatotropin (BST). It’s injected into cows to increase milk production, but it is banned in at least 30 other nations because of its dangers to human health, which include an increased risk for colorectal, prostate, and breast cancer by promoting conversion of normal tissue cells into cancerous ones. The only way to avoid rBGH is to look for products labeled as “rBGH-free” or “No rBGH.” RBGH is banned in Australia, New Zealand, Israel, the EU, and Canada.




At least 15 kids dead in Syria after receiving measles shot


At least 15 children died after receiving vaccinations in rebel-held parts of northwestern Syria.

The children, some just babies, all exhibited signs of “severe allergic shock” about an hour after they were given a second round of measles vaccinations in Idlib province on Tuesday, with many suffocating to death as their bodies swelled, said physician Abdullah Ajaj, who administered the vaccinations in a medical center in the town of Jarjanaz.

It was unclear what killed the children, but Ajaj said in an interview via Skype that they all exhibited the same symptoms to varying degrees. He said it was the first time he had ever seen such a reaction to vaccinations.

“There was shouting and screaming, it was hard for the parents. You get your child vaccinated and then you find your child dying, it’s very hard,” Ajaj said. There weren’t enough respirators in the clinic, making the situation even worse, he added.

Video footage uploaded to social media showed a medic examining a young girl who was squirming. Another child, in an orange tee-shirt and blue pants, appeared lifeless as a medic administered CPR. He then opened the child’s mouth to reveal a swollen, blue-tinged tongue. The footage corresponded with Associated Press reporting of the event.

Syria’s conflict, now in its fourth year, has caused the collapse of its health system in contested areas, scattering medics, destroying clinics and making medicines and equipment difficult to obtain. Nationwide vaccination efforts have been thrown into disarray, and polio re-emerged in parts of Syria last year.

The Western-backed opposition based in Turkey said it had suspended the second round of measles vaccinations, which began on Monday. The campaign was meant to target 60,000 children. In a statement, it said the vaccines used Tuesday met international standards and did not say what may have caused the deaths.

It is extremely unlikely that the vaccinations killed the children, said Beirut-based public health specialist Fouad Fouad, who said spoiled vaccinations were more or less harmless. “It cannot cause death,” he said.

U.N. deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said UNICEF and the World Health Organization are “deeply concerned” and awaiting further clarification.

“Measles is a major threat to children in Syria and the campaigns are vital … and especially important for children who’ve been away from their homes and communities and are living in camps or in other unsanitary conditions,” Haq said.

Opposition representatives (western-backed) could not immediately be reached for comment.


(NOTE: The following article makes the case against using human fetal (aborted baby) cells in which to culture viruses for vaccines. I agree. I further assert that people need to realize that most vaccines are cultured on foreign cells from aborted babies, or cells from animals known to contain dangerous, unreported viruses that are virulent conveyers of disease. These diseases originating from the foreign DNA of aborted babies, as well as the deadly animal-born viruses, are responsible for untold plagues in America … especially since the government and the medical industry began vaccinating children by the millions back in the 1950s. If people knew what is being injected into their bodies by vaccines they might think twice before agreeing to them.  -ed.)


New Study in Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology Correlates Autism Disorder Increase and Human Fetal DNA, Retroviral Agents in Vaccines


Katie Doan

SEATTLE, Sept. 8, 2014 /Standard Newswire/ — A new study published in the September 2014 volume of the Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology reveals a significant correlation between autism disorder (AD) and MMR, Varicella (chickenpox) and Hepatitis-A vaccines.

Using statistical analysis and data from the US Government, UK, Denmark and Western Australia, scientists at Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) found that increases in autistic disorder correspond with the introduction of vaccines using human fetal cell lines and retroviral contaminants.

Even more alarming, Dr Theresa Deisher, lead scientist and SCPI founder noted that, “Not only are the human-fetal-contaminated vaccines associated with autistic disorder throughout the world, but also with epidemic childhood leukemia and lymphomas.”

Their study comes on the heels of recent breaking news that the CDC deliberately withheld evidence of the significant increase in autism among African-American boys who were vaccinated prior to 36 months of age. (See: )

So it should come as no surprise that the FDA has known for decades about the dangers of insertional mutagenesis by using the human fetal cell lines and yet, they chose to ignore it. Instead of conducting safety studies they regulated the amount of human DNA that could be present in a vaccine to no greater than 10ng. ( )

Unfortunately, Dr. Deisher’s team discovered that the fetal DNA levels ranged anywhere from 142ng – 2000ng per dose, way beyond the so-called “safe” level.

“There are a large number of publications about the presence of HERV (human endogenous retrovirus – the only re-activatable endogenous retrovirus) and its association with childhood lymphoma,” noted Dr Deisher. “The MMR II and chickenpox vaccines and indeed all vaccines that were propagated or manufactured using the fetal cell line WI-38 are contaminated with this retrovirus. And both parents and physicians have a right to know this!”

Certainly these discoveries by SCPI should generate an immediate investigation by FDA officials, if not an outright ban on the use of aborted fetal cell lines as substrates for vaccine production.

Dr Deisher’s study is available on the Academic Journals website at:

Dr. Theresa Deisher is a PhD in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University with over 20 years in commercial biotechnology, prior to founding AVM Biotechnology and Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute. As an inventor of 23 issued US patents she is world-renowned for her work in  adult stem cell research and the first to discover adult cardiac derived stem cells. Dr. Deisher was a plaintiff in the US federal lawsuit to prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for embryo destructive research, which resulted in steering science towards adult stem cell research and 14 US FDA approved adult stem cell products.



‘Pink Slime’ Meat Is Back

The attention was damning. In 2012, ABC News ran an 11-segment investigation on a low-cost meat product critics called “pink slime,” a moniker coined by a former USDA employee who argued the filler wasn’t really beef.

In an attempt to steer the public away from it, celebrity chef Jamie Oliver “recreated” it on his TV show by throwing beef scraps into a washing machine and dousing the results with ammonia. Soon, social media feeds were blanketed with photos supposedly of the product that made the meat look like soft-serve strawberry ice cream.

The backlash was intense. Though the USDA considers the product safe for human consumption, fast food giants like McDonald’s, Burger King and Taco Bell publicly renounced it and public schools around the country stopped serving it for lunch. By May 2012, Beef Products, Inc,, the South Dakota-based inventor of the product, was on the brink of collapse—closing three of its four plants and laying off 700 employees.

What a difference two years makes.

On Aug. 18, BPI reopened one of its shuttered plants. While production is nowhere near pre-freak-out levels, when the product BPI calls “lean finely textured beef” was estimated to be in 70% of the ground beef sold in the U.S., the company has been gradually regaining business. The reason is the same one that made finely textured beef successful in the first place: it’s cheap. And lower costs are particularly attractive to processors facing record high prices for ground beef. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the average price of ground beef in June was $3.88, up 14% from last year.

For that, you can thank the sustained drought that has gripped much of the American West and Great Plains, including cattle producing regions of Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas.

“The main issue is the drought,” says Dan Hale, an animal science professor at Texas A&M University. “A lot of the U.S., especially parts that raise cattle, have experienced a severe drought. And those animals are no longer available for producing calves that we can in turn generate for beef trimmings.”

In the summer of 2012, more than 50% of the country was considered in moderate or extreme drought. Those conditions forced ranchers to rush cows to slaughter, which led to fewer calves in the following years and lower head of cattle overall. Meanwhile, demand for beef kept rising, pushing prices higher along with it. With supply down, prices up and memories of the “pink slime” moment fading, the market for finely textured beef is growing again.

BPI makes its product by spinning discarded beef scraps in a centrifuge to separate the lean, edible trimmings and then treating the result with ammonium hydroxide meant to kill food-borne pathogens like E. coli. Processors blend it with other cuts as a cost-saving measure and the product can account for as much as 10% of the meat in a package of ground beef.

“If you can utilize more of the animal, that helps mitigate some of the low supply numbers,” says Lee Schulz, an agricultural economics professor at Iowa State University.

BPI remains embroiled in a a $1.2 billion defamation lawsuit against ABC News over the network’s coverage of its product. The company is now producing close to 1 million lbs. a week. of lean finely textured beef—down from nearly 5.5 million lbs in 2012. But BPI is optimistic that the worst days are behind it. The newly opened Kansas plant will work with global meat processor Tyson Foods, collecting its raw beef trimmings and shipping them to a BPI facility in Nebraska that will process the scraps into profit.

“BPI continues to experience growth and remains confident this growth will continue,” Craig Letch, BPI’s director of food quality and food safety, said in a statement. “This is certainly a step in the right direction.”



Baking Soda


Baking soda was one of the few products many years ago on the market for cleaning your teeth or settling an upset stomach. But did you know that Baking Soda nowadays can give more health benefits?  Baking Soda actually has saved a lot of lives in the emergency room and making headway in diseases like cancer and diabetes.

According to the result of research findings, cancer is the result of a lactic acid that is formed when a certain kind of fungus or mold lives in an environment devoid of oxygen. It was also discovered that by passing a very high concentration of oxygen molecules through cancer cells, it could destroy them completely.

It is really very difficult for anyone to wrap their head around the idea that a substance as common as sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) can offer much more benefits than most of the pharmaceutical drugs that cost so much. There is however fascinating evidence that proves that sodium bicarbonate can indeed cure a lot of serious diseases, such as cancer and diabetes. Medical practitioners have also been advised to use it since it offers amazing benefits.

Sodium bicarbonate, it must be noted, is a very widely researched substance, which has been used for several years even by oncologists. The toxicity of chemotherapy and radiation are such that could destroy vital organs of the body, like the liver and kidneys, therefore, sodium bicarbonate is usually given periodically to patients to prevent this possibility.

All over the world, multitudes add sodium bicarbonate to their drinking water with the intention of curing clinical acidosis and other adverse conditions. It is a well known fact that sodium bicarbonate has saved a lot of lives in the emergency rooms. The combination of baking soda with other natural substances like iodine and magnesium chloride produces a mixture that is a wonder in the medical world.


The Majority Of Inflammatory Diseases Start In Your Gut

chronic-inflammationBy looking at your diet and addressing inflammation in your body you could help heal/prevent a variety of diseases.

A wide array of health problems, including but not limited to obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, periodontal disease, stroke, and heart disease all have inflammation as a part of the disease.

Chronic inflammation in your gut can disrupt the normal functioning of many bodily systems. There also appears to be a connection between certain types of bacteria and body fat that produces a heightened inflammatory response and drives the inflammatory process.

For example, recent research suggests that superantigens—toxic molecules produced by pathogenic bacteria such as staph—may play a role in the development of type 2 diabetes through their effect on body fat cells. As reported by the featured article:

“The idea is that when body fat cells (adipocytes) interact with bacterial toxins they then trigger a chronic inflammatory process… Bacterial toxins stimulate body fat cells to release molecules called cytokines, which promote inflammation…

All staph bacteria make toxins called superantigens — molecules that disrupt the immune system. Schlievert’s research has previously shown that superantigens cause the deadly effects of various staph infections, such as toxic shock syndrome, sepsis, and endocarditis.

… The chronic inflammation caused by the superantigens may also hinder wound healing in diabetic foot ulcers. The ulcers, which affect 15 to 25 percent of people with diabetes, are notoriously difficult to heal and can often lead to amputation.”

‘Perfect Storm’ of Inflammation Promotes Diabetes

Previous research has shown that obese people have different intestinal bacteria than slim people. Lean people tend to have higher amounts of various healthy or beneficial bacteria compared to those who carry a lot of excess weight, who tend to have greater colonization of pathogenic bacteria.

Researchers have also discovered that certain gut bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus (staph) and E. coli, trigger body fat cells to produce inflammatory cytokines. Researchers have proposed that this interaction can provoke the development of diabetes, which is a well-known “side effect” of obesity.

The featured study found that when both staph and E. coli are present (both of which produce superantigens), the inflammatory cytokine response in body fat cells are further amplified, thereby boosting your risk of diabetes. According to the co-author of the study, Patrick Schlievert, Ph.D:

“The E. coli that resides in our gut produces LPS [lipopolysaccharide, a toxin] and every day a small amount of this toxin gets into our circulation, but it is generally cleared from the circulation by the liver. However, people colonized by staph bacteria are also chronically exposed to superantigens, which shut down the LPS detoxification pathway.

That creates a synergy between the ‘uncleared’ LPS and the superantigen. All these two molecules do is cause inflammation and cytokine production. So in essence, their presence together creates a perfect storm for inflammation.”

The Link Between Gum Inflammation and Heart Health

A related news item further highlights the role of inflammation in the development of chronic disease. According to Medical News Today:

“Researchers at Columbia University in New York suggest that if you look after your gums, you could also be reducing your risk of heart disease. They claim that improving dental care slows the speed with which plaque builds up in the arteries.

This isn’t the first time researchers have found that your oral health can have a significant impact on your cardiovascular and heart health. For example, a 2010 study found that those with the worst oral hygiene increased their risk of developing heart disease by a whopping 70 percent, compared to those who brush their teeth twice a day.

In this prospective study, improved gum health was shown to significantly slow down the progression of atherosclerosis which increases your risk of heart disease, stroke, and death. According to the featured article.”

Here, bacteria are again playing a preeminent role, as periodontal disease is the result of the colonization of certain bacteria in your mouth. This bacterial profile, by the way, is again linked to an imbalance of  beneficial and pathogenic bacteria in your gut.

It’s important to realize that periodontal disease involves both bone and the tissue that is in contact with that bone. From this contact, bacteria and toxic inflammatory compounds can easily enter your blood stream. Once in your blood stream, these toxic compounds can harm the lining of your blood vessels, which can lead to both strokes and heart attacks. So, reducing inflammation is of primary importance for your overall health, and brushing your teeth regularly is one way to combat chronic inflammation in your body.

Findings such as these offer potent testimony to the fact that heart disease is a condition that can be prevented, most of the time, by leading a healthy lifestyle — which includes the simple act of brushing your teeth regularly to prevent periodontal disease, and optimizing your gut health by eating foods that allow healthy bacteria to flourish and keep pathogenic bacteria in check.

Diet and Environmental Factors Affect Your Gut Flora

I have long stated that it’s generally a wise choice to “reseed” your body with good bacteria, ideally by regularly eating non-pasteurized, traditionally fermented foods such as fermented vegetables (like homemade sour kraut).

If for whatever reason you decide not to eat fermented foods, taking a high-quality probiotic supplement is definitely recommended.

As you can see, the running thread linking a wide variety of common health problems—from obesity and diabetes to heart disease and stroke—is chronic inflammation.

For example, whereas trans fats and sugar, particularly fructose, will increase inflammation, eating healthy fats such as butter and animal-based omega-3 fats found in fish oil will help to reduce them.

Consider eliminating grains and sugars (especially high fructose corn syrup).

For Optimal Health, Address and Avoid Chronic Inflammation

Remember, the micro-organisms living in your digestive tract form a very important “inner ecosystem” that influences countless aspects of health. More specifically, the type and quantity of organisms in your gut interact with your body in ways that can either prevent or encourage the development of chronic inflammation, which is at the heart of many diseases, including heart disease and diabetes. The composition of your microflora may even dictate the ease with which you’re able to shed unwanted pounds.

Cultured foods like raw milk yogurt and kefir, some cheeses, and fermented vegetables are good sources of natural, healthy bacteria. So my strong recommendation would be to make cultured or fermented foods a regular part of your diet; this can be your primary strategy to optimize your body’s good bacteria. If you do not eat fermented foods on a regular basis, taking a high-quality probiotic supplement would be a wise decision for most people.

Besides that, replacing processed foods, sugar/fructose and grains with whole foods is a critical step to address chronic inflammation.

Chronic inflammation can be caused by poor diet, toxic chemicals and stress and unfortunately these can be bought on by different aspects of our lives including environmental, physical and psychological areas. Your body does not know how to deal with this inflammatory overload and your defense system becomes overpowered and so confused that your immune system doesn’t know what is foreign and what is you and literally turns on itself, destroying healthy cells, tissue and everything else in its path.

It’s no secret that a healthy diet and lifestyle plays a major part in a healthy life. It cannot be stressed enough that dietary components can either trigger or prevent inflammation from taking root in your body. So to prevent inflammation follow these 5 simple rules.

1. Eat more whole, nutrient-dense foods. Cut out the foods which cause inflammatory, such as refined sugar and flour, processed junk, etc. If you add a variety of whole foods to your diet you will flood your body with the vitamins, minerals, cancer-fighting phytochemicals, antioxidants and fiber it needs to recover from chronic inflammation.

2. Focus on gut health. Your gut holds approximately 60-70% of your immune system, so if your gut is in bad shape then your immune system is more than likely going to be the same way. A great way to start is by taking a daily high quality pro-biotic.

3. Identify food allergies and chronic (or hidden) infections. You may have food allergies, the most common are gluten, wheat, soy, dairy, and yeast. You can get these checked with blood and urine tests.

4. Relax and rest more. When you are sleeping your body is hard at work repairing and restoring your cells. This is why most doctors recommend seven to eight hours of sleep per night. If you are getting less sleep over time you will prevent your immune system from fully repairing itself and making it harder for your body to fight off infections.

Stress goes hand in hand with a lack of sleep, when you are stressed out all the time, you’re also producing more of the hormone cortisol — inflammation’s BFF. You can easily reduce chronic inflammation by focusing on stress reduction, this can be done by increasing the hours you sleep, relaxation, long walks, less technology or a much needed vacation.

5. Reduce toxins in your food, home and personal care products. Eat plain simple and safe foods whenever possible. It will make a huge difference to your gut’s health and choose non toxic personal care and cleaning products to reduce your exposure to toxic chemicals.




Coconut Oil

by Paul Fassa

There have been three attempts since 2012 to create an effective and not too terribly toxic pharmaceutical solution to Alzheimer’s. They all failed and even caused worsening conditions with an occasional death during testing.

A few years ago Dr. Mary Newport’s discovery of using coconut oil to reverse her husbands advanced Alzheimer’s disease made a big splash in the alternative health media.

Some of this splash managed to wet a few pages of the mainstream media (MSM), and Dr. Newport wrote a book about her discovery for hubby’s turn-around called Alzheimer’s Disease: What If There Was a Cure?: The Story of Ketones.

Actually, the use of high saturated fat diets to create ketones was created by Johns Hopkins Medical Center in the 1920s. Ketones are processed easily from medium chain tryglicerides to provide fuel for brain cells when carbohydrate metabolism fails within the brain.

Facts about fats

However, the false dogma of cholesterol and saturated fats caught on later in the 1950s, and the processed food industry had a field day promoting low or no fat foods, margarine, and unsaturated processed oils (hydrogenated) for cooking and salads. Coconut oil was vilified, and margarine replaced butter.

The medical monopoly declared that saturated fats are bad and cholesterol, especially LDL, the “bad cholesterol”, just had be lowered to prevent obesity and heart disease. Since then, over a half-century ago, obesity, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s have soared to epidemic rates.

The processed food industry managed to make a longstanding financial killing while doctors repeated the dogma to their patients and patients turned that dogma into their mantras. The whole saturated fat/cholesterol has been a literally sickening affair for over a half-century. And Big Pharma’s attempts at eliminating all three disorders have been failures.

But those who followed up on Dr. Mary Newport’s success with coconut oil for her husband’s Alzheimer’s reversal have been duplicating that success with coconut oil’s easily digested medium chain triglycerides, which convert to ketones for brain cell fuel when oxygen/carbohydrate metabolism fails.

The brain is comprised of mostly fats, the saturated kind. Cholesterol is needed to fuel the neuron communication. It’s been discovered that high cholesterol blood level geriatric folks live longer without dementia than those whose cholesterol counts are lower. By the way, did you know that all cholesterol is the same?

It’s the tiny protein chylomicron shell carriers that differ to accommodate various cellular, structural, and arterial repair purposes for your benefit, including helping manufacture vitamin D from the sun. This helps explain why statin drugs are so harmful and promote heart disease and dementia.

Do you still really think saturated fats cause obesity and heart disease instead of point at the true culprits of fake fats and processed sugars and carbs?

If you do, you’re part of the majority, unfortunately. Even most alternative health practitioners and writers still keep touting foods and supplements that lower cholesterol. It’ll be a decade before that myth is completed outed.

Those of you who consider yourselves “science based” types that like to refute natural health articles without investigating other possibilities further are invited to read MIT researcher Stephanie Seneff’s brilliant article on these matters here (

Sources for this article include:

see also


Hospitals and commonly prescribed drugs are killing and harming the elderly

by Tony Isaacs

Prescription drugs and the combination of those drugs and other medications are taking a heavy toll on elderly Americans, leading to risky hospitalizations, mental decline and death. And some of those drugs are worse than others.

A study published last November in the New England Journal of Medicine found that blood thinners and diabetes drugs caused most of the emergency hospital visits for drug reactions among people over 65 years of age in the United States. According to the study, just four medications – used alone or in combination – were responsible for two-thirds of the emergency hospitalizations among older adults.

At the top of the list was the blood thinner wayfarin, also known as Coumadin, which accounted for 33 percent of emergency hospital visits. Insulin injections came in second on the list, accounting for 14 percent of the visits. Aspirin, clopidogrel and other antiplatelet drugs prescribed to prevent blood clotting were third with 13 percent and just behind them were oral hypoglycemic drugs for diabetes which were responsible for 11 percent of the visits.

Last July, another study reported in The Journal of the American Geriatrics Society found that over half the elderly were regularly prescribed dozens of painkillers, antihistamines and psychiatric medications called anticholinergics which lead to mental decline and death. Researchers found that those taking more than one anticholinergic drug scored lower on tests of cognitive function than those who were not using any such drugs, and that the death rate for the heavy users during the course of the study was 68 percent higher.

Hospital visits often turn into death traps, especially for the elderly

Thanks to rampant infections in our hospitals, patients who enter for one condition end up acquiring deadly bugs which often become fatal – and this is particularly true for the elderly.

The most common infection acquired in hospitals is pneumonia. The sixth leading cause of death in the US, pneumonia is the fourth leading cause of death among the elderly and hospitals appear to be helpless in preventing its spread. Hospitals likewise have been unable to prevent the often deadly medication-resistant staph superbug MRSA from spreading wildly in recent years.

As was reported last year in Natural News, an old bacterial nemesis named clostridium difficile (C difficle) is becoming more deadly and its incidence is increasing at alarming rates in hospitals across North America and Europe. Its primary cause is antibiotic drugs wiping out bacteria that compete with C difficile.

Another new infectious agent which has appeared in the United States is called CRKP (Carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae). By early 2011 CRKP had already been identified in hospitals in 36 states. CRKP is resistant to antibiotics, and patients who acquire it are at a high risk of death, usually within 30 days. Death rates for CRKP have been reported to be between 30 and 44 percent.

Other hospital complications common among the elderly include delirium, which occurs in one-third of hospitalized patients over the age of 65 and in more than 70 percent of older patients in Intensive Care Units, bedsores and malnutrition.

By the time a person reaches 65 years of age in the US, they are taking an average of nine prescription drugs each day. Add in over the counter medications and the number of drugs taken daily increases to a dozen or more. Since over 95 percent of all approved medications have side effects, each new medication increases the likelihood of further health problems.


Coconut Information

Coconut Therapy for Pets: A Review

by Bruce Fife


Cocos nucifera
(Southern Illinois University)

Cocos nucifera L.
(Perdue University)

Conquering Alzheimer’s with Coconut Ketones

By Bruce Fife, ND


Stop Alzheimer’s Now Interview

Joyce Riley interviews Dr. Bruce Fife. This is a 6 part interview.


Coconut and Alzheimer’s

An Interview with Doctor Mary Newport


Things You Probably Didn’t Know About Coconut Oil
An Interview with Bruce Fife, ND


The Doctors’ Prescription for Healthy Living
By Rachael Baseley


There Is A Cure for Arthritis

By Bruce Fife


How a PR Campaign Led to Unhealthy Diets
By Beatrice Trum Hunter
Consumers’ Research


Are High Saturated Fat Meals Dangerous?

A Classic Example of Mumbo Jumbo Science

By Bruce Fife, ND


Oil Pulling for a Brighter Smile and Better Health

by Bruce Fife
Coconut Oil and Heart Disease
By Bruce Fife, N.D.


The Coconut Oil Miracle: Where is the Evidence?

By Bruce Fife N.D.


Coconut Oil: Atherogenic or Not? (What therefore causes Atherosclerosis?)

By Conrado S. Dayrit, MD, FPCC, FPCP, FACC

Philippine Journal of Cardiology


Health Oils from the Tree of Life
(Nutritional and Health Aspects of Coconut Oil)
By Jon J. Kabara, Ph.D.


Coconut: In Support of Good Health in the 21st Century
By Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.


The Fat That Can Make You Thin
By Bruce Fife, N.D.


Health Benefits of Coconut Oil
By Raymond Peat, Ph.D.


Coconut Oil and Medium-Chain Triglycerides
By Bruce Fife, N.D.


Return from the Jungle
By Mark Konlee
Positive Health News


Cholesterol, HIV, and Coconut Oil
By Mark Konlee
Positive Health News


Coconut Water: Dew from the Heavens

 By Bruce Fife, ND


Buko Water of Immature Coconut is a Universal Urinary Stone Solvent

By E.V. Macalalag, Jr., M.D.


Coconut Oil in Health and Disease: Its and Monolaurin’s Potential as Cure for HIV/AIDS
By Conrado S. Dayrit, M.D.


Coconut For Clean Air
By Rafael S. Diaz


Coconut Oil May Help Fight Childhood Pneumonia

By Serena Gordon HealthDay Reporter, US News and World Report


Coconut Oil

Many now embrace it for a range of ills, contrary to warnings about its saturated fat.

By Beth Decarbo


Nutritional and Health Benefits of Coconut Sap Sugar/Syrup

Trinidad P. Trinidad Ph D.


Palm Oil Information  return to top of page


Red Palm Oil: The New Miracle of 2013 Video Part 1

Dr. Oz shows the benefits of red palm oil


Red Palm Oil: The New Miracle of 2013 Video Part 2

Dr. Oz shows the benefits of red palm oil


The Palm Oil Miracle
Sean Croxton interviews Bruce Fife, October 6, 2011, on Underground Wellness Radio


African Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis)

Purdue University


Red Palm Oil

A Daily Dose of Vitamins from A Cooking Oil

By Bruce Fife, ND


Nutritional Aspects of Palm Oil

Food and Nutrition Bulletin United Nations University Press

(A detailed technical description of the health and nutritional aspects of palm oil.)


The Soy Deception

How Palm Oil is Protecting the Amazon Rain Forest


Palm Oil Protects Your Brain

Study Shows Tocotrienols in Palm Oil Protects Brain Cells


Carotenoids Contents from Various Sources and

Their Potential Health Applications

By Alam Zeb and Sultan Mehmood


Palm Oil Recipes


Fats, Oils & Cholesterol return to top of page


Saturated Fat is Not the Culprit in Heart Disease, Alliance for Natural Health Europe


APOE-4: The Clue to Why Low Fat Diet and Statins May Cause Alzheimer’s

by Stephanie Seneff


Cholesterol Facts vs. Myths: By Jonny Bowden, PhD, CNS and Stephen Sinatra, MD, FACN, Authors of The Great Cholesterol Myth


What if It’s All Been a Big Fat Lie?

By Gary Taubes


Everything You Know About Cholesterol Is Wrong

Dr. Oz – 3 part video


Alzheimer’s Doctors Taking Note of Coconut Oil

By Lorie Johnson


Brain Shrinkage? Trans Fats Link to Alzheimer’s

By Lorie Johnson


Heart Surgeon Speaks Out On What Really Causes Heart Disease

By Dr. Dwight Lundell


Big Fat Fiasco

“Fat Head” producer Tom Naughton on how the misguided fear of saturated fat created a nation of obese diabetics.


Statins: Did Your Doctor Tell You…?

By Michael Babcock


Saturated Fat is Good for You

By Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD


The Dark Side of Fatty Acids: oleic acid and linoleic acid

Adapted from Sundram et al. (2003) Eur J Nutr, 42:188-194


Oils In Context
By Raymond Peat, Ph.D.


The Soft Science of Dietary Fat
By Gary Taubes


The Cholesterol Myth
By Barry Groves



The Cholesterol Myth
Excert from the book Heart Failure
By Thomas Moore



The Cholesterol Myths
By Uffe Ravnskov, M.D., Ph.D.



Polyunsaturated Oils and Cancer
By Barry Groves


Coconut Oil and Stomach Acid Reflux

by Dr. Sanford Pinna

The Helico Pylori Bacteria is one of the most common bacteria that infect the Human race. It is found in families, who pass the bacteria to each other. H. Pylori inhabits the stomach and the esophagus. It stimulates cells in the stomach to produce excessive amounts of gastric or hydrochloric acid.

This acid reflects back and up into the stomach causing “Heart burn” or, technically, Gastro-Esophogeal Reflux /Disease, commonly referred to as GERD.

This reflux is painful and can cause ulcers, gastritis and occasional gastric cancer, which can be deadly.


There are dozens of diagnostic methods for determining the presence of H. Pylori, and dozens of treatments devised by major pharmaceutical companies who make billions of dollars with disease.

The normal treatment consist of an accurate diagnosis using an analysis of breath from the patient which contains gas byproducts of the bacterium, followed by an average ten day treatment of six antibiotics daily, plus two proton pump inhibitors daily. (Prevacid, etc.) At the end, the patient is retested for the presence of H. Pylori.

There is an approximate 90 percent success rate, sometimes 70 to 80 percent.


1. COST: $300 – $500, if no insurance.

2. SIDE EFFECTS: diarrhea, stomach complaints, overgrowth of bad bacteria.

3. TIME COSTS: visits to doctors and laboratories.


Treating H. Pylori infections medically, is costly, time consuming, produces side effects and is not one hundred percent successful.


Many of my patients who have studied alternative medicine on the Internet, have asked my opinion about Virgin Coconut Oil for the treatment of Pylori Infections causing hyperacidity.


Coconut oil is an excellent “anti-biotic”. It kills bacteria and fungi on contact! Coconut oil is made of saturated fatty acids of the medium length variety. Its major Saturated Acid is called LAURIC ACID. The Lauric Acid invades the cell wall and destroys it.

Here is an excerpt from a scientific study:

“Studies on lipids in the 1960s by Kabara and colleagues showed medium-chain (C-8 to C-14) FAs and their monoglycerides to have antimicrobial effects against several laboratory organisms.

In the 1990s, more laboratory studies confirmed the antimicrobial activity of these lipids against gram-positive and some gram-negative organisms, including Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Helicobacter pylori, and Chlamydia trachomatis, as well as Candida albicans yeast and enveloped viruses.

Since 1998, some clinical studies have confirmed these laboratory data, specifically data on monolaurin, the monoglyceride of lauric acid from VCO. A 2% gel preparation of Lauricidin (Skin Sciences Laboratory, Inc, Pasig City, Philippines), which contains 90% pure monolaurin, significantly degermed SA cultured from health workers’ hands after hospital duty.

Another study cultured the skin lesions of 100 pediatric patients. The top isolates were SA, coagulase-negative SA, Streptococcus spp, Enterobacter spp, and Escherichia vulneris. The sensitivity of these organisms to penicillin, oxacillin, erythromycin, fusidic acid, mupirocin, and vancomycin varied significantly, demonstrating low to high susceptibility, across the different isolates (Fisher exact test = 0.000; p < .05).

In marked contrast, sensitivity to monolaurin (LAURIC ACID in coconut oil) did not significantly differ across the different bacterial isolates (Fisher exact test = 0.110; p > .05), reflecting high antibacterial activity.

There also was a statistically significant and marked difference in resistance rates. SA, coagulase-negative SA, and Streptococcus spp did not exhibit any resistance to monolaurin as opposed to the varying resistance observed with the other antibiotics in this study.”

We can easily see that “MONOLAURIN” or LAURIC ACID, the most common fatty acid in coconut oil is “highly antibacterial” and kills “H. Pylori.”


My patients, independent of my medical advise, decided to try their own experiments.

I, as a licensed physician, cannot advise them to experiment, with unknown and untested modalities of treatment. I offered them the information I had obtained from my research, conducted tests to determine if they were infected with H. Pylori, and offered them the standard medical treatment.

They refused my standard treatment and told me that they wanted to try virgin coconut oil, one teaspoon three times daily.

This method has proven to be above reproach and has yielded excellent results.


Millions of people in Asia ingest much larger quantities of coconut oil with no ill effects.

Question: Would coconut oil, which is bactericidal, kill the Helico Pyloric Bacteria in their gut?

In approximately one month, we had the answer. It was a resounding YES!

Upon repeat testing, none of my patients had evidence of H. Pylori. Also, their symptoms of acid regurgitation, stomach pain and burping disappeared.


I, am now, of the firm conviction, that in some people, the ingestion of Virgin Coconut Oil, three times daily, can eradicate H. Pylori infections.


Wheat Can Act As An Endocrine Disruptor: Study


A provocative new study published in the journal Hormone Research in Paediatrics confirms for the first time in a human trial that one of the adverse effects of wheat consumption includes a disruption of the levels of a hormone produced by the pituitary gland known as prolactin.

That wheat can act like an ‘endocrine disruptor,’ is not well known, but is not surprising considering that there are over 200 health conditions that have already been linked to the adverse effects of wheat to human physiology, as documented in the peer-reviewed published literature itself.[i]

In the new study titled, “Prolactin May Be Increased in Newly Diagnosed Celiac Children and Adolescents and Decreases after 6 Months of Gluten-Free Diet,” the researchers aimed to assess the prolactin (PRL) levels in newly diagnosed pediatric celiac disease patients, and if found to be elevated beyond normal ranges (a condition known as hyperprolactinemia), observe what would happen if they were put on a 6-month long gluten free diet.  The results of the trial, which included 67 patients and 39 healthy controls, were reported as follows:

Results: PRL was statistically higher in the CD patients (13.5 ± 9.2 ng/ml) than in the controls (8.5 ± 5.0 ng/ml). In the CD group, PRL was inversely correlated with the age at diagnosis (r = -0.326; p = 0.007). In patients with hyperprolactinemia at diagnosis, PRL decreased after 6 months of GFD. Conclusion: This paper confirms that PRL may be increased at diagnosis of CD and shows, for the first time, that it decreases after a short course of GFD. Changes in the levels of inflammatory cytokines in CD may account for changes in PRL levels. Younger patients seem more prone to develop hyperprolactinemia than older ones.

Prolactin is produced by the anterior pituitary gland. It is most well known for its role in the breast gland by stimulating physiological processes necessary for lactation, and it is involved in sexual gratification after sexual acts by counteracting dopamine, the neurochemical involved in sexual arousal. Elevated prolactin levels may also decrease testosterone in men and estrogen in women.[ii]

In reality, prolactin’s role is so vast that its complexity is incalculable, having been found to have approximately 300 separate actions in vertebrates.[iii] Any disruption therefore of its normal function or concentrations would have a wide range of downstream effects.

The researchers focused on elevated prolactin levels as a marker of autoimmune disease. They describe a number of conditions linked to hyperprolactinemia:

Hyperprolactinemia is described in a lot of autoimmune diseases, both systemic (rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic sclerosis and Sjögren’s syndrome) [23–25] and organ-specific (Addison’s disease, CD, type 1 diabetes mellitus, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, Graves’ disease, lymphocytic hypophysitis and multiple sclerosis) [26–31]

While this hypothesis may turn out to be accurate, previous animal research indicates that opiate-like components within wheat known as gluten exorphins may also be involved.  A 2004 study in the journal Nutritional Neuroscience found an elevation of serum prolactin levels after administration of the alimentary opioid peptide gluten exorphin B4 in male rats.[iv] An earlier 2003 study published in the journal Pharmacological Research found that gluten exporphin B4’s prolactin enhancing properties were mediated through classical opioid receptors,[v] revealing another mechanism beyond provoking inflammation through which wheat may disrupt prolactin levels.

The researchers concluded with the following remarks:

“In conclusion, we show that PRL may be increased in CD children and adolescents at diagnosis. In newly diagnosed CD patients, the mean PRL level is higher (especially in younger patients) than in healthy subjects, but in only 6 months of GFD it is possible to reduce this level. We hypothesize that PRL levels in CD are affected by inflammatory cytokines, whose production is associated with gliadin ingestion and increases when the autoinflammatory mechanisms are active.”

This latest study just adds to the increasing skepticism people have as far as wheat’s role in human health are concerned.  No matter what the exact mechanism of action, it is clear that wheat (especially modern, highly hybridized and gluten rich wheat) can no longer be considered the wholesome, glorified health food that it once was for decades, and even centuries – at least not for everyone.

To learn more about the dark side of wheat, read my essay on the topic: 


The Many Benefits Of Coconut Oil


We’ve known for some time that coconut oil is the best for frying since it withstands higher temperatures without scorching. We’ve also known that coconut oil is healthy for your heart, and nutritious. We knew that it is the all-around best oil for everyday use, along with butter.

What is now being brought to our attention is that coconut oil is also beneficial in nourishing the brain and nerves while at the same time battling against obesity. It actually is gaining reputation in preventing and reversing dementia and alzhiemers.

There are different brands of coconut oil, all of which appear to be getting less expensive as it becomes more commonly used in greater amounts. Some brands retain a bit of coconut flavor, while others have no flavor at all. We prefer the non-flavor variety for cooking, but enjoy the coconut flavor in the ones we take as supplement. Also available is a related inexpensive supplement called MCT OIL, made from coconut oil, that appears to address the issues, especially obesity, more aggressively.


Leading Geneticist: Human Intelligence is Slowly Declining


Would you be surprised to hear that the human race is slowly becoming dumber, and dumber? Despite our advancements over the last tens or even hundreds of years, some ‘experts’ believe that humans are losing cognitive capabilities and becoming more emotionally unstable. One Stanford University researcher and geneticist, Dr. Gerald Crabtree, believes that our intellectual decline as a race has much to do with adverse genetic mutations. But there is more to it than that.

According to Crabtree, our cognitive and emotional capabilities are fueled and determined by the combined effort of thousands of genes. If a mutation occurred in any of of these genes, which is quite likely, then intelligence or emotional stability can be negatively impacted.

“I would wager that if an average citizen from Athens of 1000 BC were to appear suddenly among us, he or she would be among the brightest and most intellectually alive of our colleagues and companions, with a good memory, a broad range of ideas, and a clear-sighted view of important issues. Furthermore, I would guess that he or she would be among the most emotionally stable of our friends and colleagues.”

Further, the geneticist explains that people with specific adverse genetic mutations are more likely than ever to survive and live amongst the ‘strong.’ Darwin’s theory of ‘survival of the fittest’ is less applicable in today’s society, therefore those with better genes will not necessarily dominate in society as they would have in the past.


Survey: Vaccinated children five times more prone to disease than unvaccinated children

Friday, January 11, 2013 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) An ongoing study out of Germany comparing disease rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated children points to a pretty clear disparity between the two groups as far as illness rates are concerned. As reported by the group Health Freedom Alliance, children who have been vaccinated according to official government schedules are up to five times more likely to contract a preventable disease than children who developed their own immune systems naturally without vaccines.

Released as its own preliminary study back in September 2011, the survey includes data on 8,000 unvaccinated children whose overall disease rates were compared to disease rates among the general population, the vast majority of which has been vaccinated. And in every single disease category, unvaccinated children fared far better than vaccinated children in terms of both disease prevalence and severity. In other words, the evidence suggests that vaccines are neither effective nor safe.

No study of health outcomes of vaccinated people versus unvaccinated has ever been conducted in the U.S. by CDC or any other agency in the 50 years or more of an accelerating schedule of vaccinations (now over 50 doses of 14 vaccines given before kindergarten, 26 doses in the first year),” wrote Louis Rain back in 2011 for Health Freedom Alliance about the survey.

As disclosed at, vaccinated children are nearly twice as likely as unvaccinated children to develop neurodermatitis, for instance, a skin disorder marked by chronic itching and scratching. Similarly, vaccinated children are about two-and-a-half times as likely, based on current data, to develop a pattern of migraine headaches compared to unvaccinated children.

The numbers are even more divergent for asthma and chronic bronchitis, where vaccinated children are about eight times more likely than unvaccinated children to develop such respiratory problems. Vaccinated children are also far more likely to develop hyperactivity, hayfever, and thyroid disease, with their likelihood three times, four times, and a shocking 17 times higher, respectively, compared to unvaccinated children.

You can view the complete data, as it currently exists, here:

Autism extremely rare among unvaccinated children

Where the gloves really come off on the issue, however, is with autism, the long-held point of contention in the vaccine safety debate. According to the data, only four of the 8,000 unvaccinated children that were included in the 2011 release of the study responded as having severe autism, which is a mere half of one percent of the overall population. Meanwhile the autism rate among the general population, as tabulated in the German KiGGS study used for comparison, is about 1.1 percent.

This means that vaccinated children are about 2.5 times more likely to develop severe autism compared to unvaccinated children, a shocking find when considering the medical establishment vehemently denies any link whatsoever between vaccines and autism. And as it turns out, the four unvaccinated children who reported severe autism all tested high for heavy metals, including mercury, which further indicts vaccines and their disease-causing adjuvants.

Though this correlation does not necessarily conclude causation, the overall disparity of disease rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated children at the very least points to a very strong connection that cannot be denied or dismissed. Even after accounting for bias, as the survey’s authors have tried to do over the years, the data continues to show much higher disease rates among vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children.

In a similar but unrelated study conducted back in the 1990s, researchers found that the death rate among vaccinated children for infection with diphtheria, tetanus, and whooping cough (pertussis) is also twice as high, on average, compared to unvaccinated children.



Polyunsaturated vegetable oils and Margarine are bad, and butter and eggs good!

For fifty years, big business, government agencies and medical organizations have campaigned deceptively against animal fats, meat, eggs, butter and other nutritious, traditional foods, leading to huge profits from the sale of toxic margarine, shortenings and liquid vegetable oils, and the foods that contain them. Scientific data contradicting current anti-animal fat public health policy was suppressed and censored for many years. Dr. Enig and Sally Fallon now tell you the truth about how that happened.

The Oiling of America will open your eyes to fraud and deception behind the lipid hypothesis of heart disease.  Topics include:

  • Why heart disease has increased in proportion to the use of vegetable oils.
  • How scientists cheat in scientific studies
  • Why cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease
  • The dangers of cholesterol-lowering diets and drugs
  • Why trans fatty acids and liquid vegetable oils are so dangerous to human health




Honest American academics all realize and admit that Americans in general are getting dumber. There are several reasons this is happening … the main reason is that Americans are losing their connection to Christ. Life without Christ brings men to the common denominator of stupidity and corruption.

This video explains one of the several facets of the problem. Brain function is being lost in Americans due to chemical poisoning. And, sadly, the dumber Americans get, the less able they are to address the problem. The often result is that even when they become aware of the problem they end up chasing after a false remedy and following nutty health gurus who are only interested in selling a product for profit.

American kids can’t learn now. In recent years American education status has gone from number one in the world to somewhere between 10 to 37 depending upon which source you read … and we are still falling. Many “Third-World nations” are ahead of America in education.

If you have the impression that people around you just don’t get it … you are probably right!


The Lyme Disease Health Crisis

Heather Callaghan


What have you heard about tick-borne Lyme for the last 30 years? That it’s rare, scary, acute, treatable? The government warns about its spread and implores people to go to a doctor upon seeing the telltale bulls-eye rash.

So, what happens when they actually do?

Many have researched the controversial beginnings of Lyme disease, but this article focuses on what happens to victims when they contract it, and the ongoing cover-up in the mainstream medical community and the CDC itself.

Under Our Skin is a documentary that lends a voice to the many who in fact suffer from chronic Lyme and are victims of a greater abomination.

Why do conventional doctors tell them it’s in their head? Why won’t they quickly test for it? Treat it? Acknowledge it? Why do medical boards shut down doctors who can treat and cure Lyme?

Lyme’s Disease is Not Rare – It is Bigger Than AIDS

In the late ’70s, a Lyme, Connecticut mom reported a mysterious new disease sweeping the town, leaving its people with debilitating, chronic symptoms. In 1981, Dr. Willy Burgdorfer discovered the Lyme bacteria, called Borrelia burgdorferi.

The bacteria spirochetes closely resemble syphilis in their make up. While a carrier tick is feeding, its backwash enters the host and transmits Lyme. The corkscrew spirochetes wreak havoc, drilling into any healthy cells and tissue. They create painful, crippling neurological and immunological damage.

In the beginning, doctors only knew that it resembled syphilis, but remained unaware of its wide spread, how to proceed, and the political-medical clash that awaited them.

In recent years, the CDC has reported over 35,000 new Lyme cases annually, but admits that since symptoms are so overlooked the actual number may be 12 times higher, up to 420,000 cases each year.

Think of how much more likely it is to contract Lyme than the media-touted fear of West Nile virus, which is only reported at around 1,300 cases annually. If the actual number of Lyme cases is even just a modest amount above the CDC’s 35,000, then Lyme is far more prevalent than AIDS, reported at 39,000 cases annually.

Since 1982, the number of cases continues to climb and spike prompting media reports and health officials to label it an epidemic as early as 1989. Reported cases have tripled since 1992. Every summer we hear the same cautionary reports. Yet, doctors constantly tell their patients: “You don’t have Lyme,”or “Lyme only happens in such-and-such state, not here.”

Lyme is a national health crisis in every state and has traveled the globe!

Since this infectious disease is viewed with eyes that won’t see and hands that won’t treat, the minuscule 35,000 reported cases are unquestionably a mere fraction of people sick with Lyme.

Patients often look normal and are told they have M.S., Lou Gehrig’s, psychological disorders, Parkinson’s, ADHD but not Lyme. Therefore, many walk around with Lyme and have no clue why they are so ill, why treatments don’t work and are left to wonder. Many are left to die.

Without Early Eradication Lyme is Chronic, Expensive, Does Not Leave Easily
Lyme patients often state that they’ve seen an average of 30 doctors, spent over $100,000 in medical care and waited up to 15 years for a Lyme diagnosis. Why??

Lyme disease antibodies can be detected early with a blood test. If caught early it can be treated with an inexpensive bottle of antibiotics. But that is rarely the case. Patients are told it’s not Lyme, it won’t be tested for, it’s something else and so the struggle begins.

When the patient remains ill, why, it couldn’t possibly be chronic Lyme because doctors view it as acute and are not allowed to believe chronic Lyme exists. If “acute” Lyme isn’t cured with two weeks of antibiotics, which it won’t be if the bacteria has taken hold due to waiting, then the patient is told it must be something else and years of sickness, pain, and ineffective treatments ensue.

Talk to someone who’s been through this battle. They will most likely tell you they were dismissed and referred to psychiatrists and multiple specialists.

Lyme can attack any area of the body and manifest endless symptoms. Lyme patients have seen specialists for chronic pain, arthritis, Chrohn’s, iritis, organ failure, brain and neurological problems, dyslexia, insomnia . . . you name it. All for one disease that could have been treated early. But doctors will not believe them, and after seeing so many specialists they are often labeled crazy, hypochondriacs, attention loving, and depressed.

The spirochetes can cleverly avoid the antibiotics and hide from the immune system. It’s frightening to think that specialists often prescribe immune suppressive drugs – the most counterproductive plan for Lyme patients.

The CDC now hints at chronic Lyme with sarcastic quotation marks and insists that it be called Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (PTLDS). They openly admit that the first round of conventional treatment might not bring a cure, and that the patient is in for a long ride of pain and sometimes years of antibiotics — the only recognized conventional treatment.

They lie and state that there is no credible scientific evidence that PTLDS is caused by persistent infection, that it must be residual damage, that the Lyme is gone. They also make a big point in telling people to avoid their own research on the Internet; not to believe the inaccurate information out there, just keep seeing the doctor who left them untreated for so long.

The CDC says before PTLDS treatment takes place, confirm the diagnosis – fat chance that will happen.

So how did that fiasco begin?

The Establishment Cover-up of Chronic Lyme Disease

Commercial viability is driving the research agenda in too many cases.


In 1980, the government started allowing patents on living organisms such as pathogens. Perfect timing for scientists to make a mad dash for parts of newly-discovered Lyme and keep the information locked away to protect future profits.

These so-called experts continue to research Lyme disease with federal funds, then start private firms and obtain patents. They write guidelines for insurance companies and HMOs so that the disease doesn’t exist (yet) or require coverage. Not only do Lyme victims spend hundreds of thousands for medical treatment, but they can’t be covered by insurance for Lyme!

The Biggest Blow In The Lyme Cover-up

The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), made up of a board of doctors, created within themselves an authority to write the rule book on all things Lyme. It is the absolute bane of both the Lyme community and conscientious doctors everywhere.

They are the ones who decided that there is no such affliction as chronic Lyme, that it’s easy to treat and cure, and will be cured within two weeks of oral antibiotics or else the patient has another infirmity. Doctors must follow their diagnosis and treatment guidelines or face punishment from state medical boards. Patients’ proof of cure never sways the boards – doctors broke the rules.

Out of the 400 references listed in the back of the guidelines, over half of them are directed at articles that they and their teams wrote. They have closed the door on any outside alternative medical research.

In turn, these are the very guidelines insurance companies consult to deny medical treatment coverage. The majority of complaints that lead to doctors’ suspensions come from insurance companies, not from patients or other physicians. The insurance companies wish to rid doctors who cost them the most.

The unholy trinity of insurance companies, Lyme guidelines written by establishment insiders, and Big Pharma corporate control, restricts consumer choice in medical care and extorts these patients.

While the IDSA acknowledges post-Lyme syndrome, they audaciously attribute it to the “aches and pains of daily living,”and that poor treatment results are due to prior traumatic stress. Are they really that dumb?

No, but they are cold blooded and know exactly the nature of the disease and the destructive human toll that it often takes.

Busted On The Money Trail!

Connecticut Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, investigated the ISDA panel members for possible violation of antitrust laws and conflicts of interest.

Of the 14 panel authors of the first edition guidelines, 6 of them or their universities held patents on Lyme or its co-infections, 4 received funding from Lyme or co-infection test kit manufacturers, 4 were paid by insurance companies to write Lyme policy guidelines or consult in Lyme legal cases, and 9 received money from Lyme disease vaccine manufacturers. Some of the authors were involved in more than one conflict of interest.

So why are guideline authorities taking money from companies who have a direct interest in specific outcomes? When will doctors speak up?

So How Does This Cover-up Saga Continue?

Corporate media keeps trumpeting the lies. CBS News recently published a story called “Lyme Disease Lies – And Truths.”Each segment features a FACT OR FICTION tidbit, which is really a confusing mash up rife with deception. They pull their information from the IDSA and Dr. John Halperin who wrote a book better used for toilet paper called Lyme Disease: An Evidence-based Approach.

The article calls the following people liars: those who claim to have “chronic” Lyme disease; those who believe they still have Lyme, because they test positive for antibodies after treatment; those who believe their brain fog results from Lyme; the Lyme “advocacy groups”that claim anyone actually died from it; anyone who claims this syphilis-like disease is spread sexually; and those who believe lengthier care is needed.

Dr. Halperin states that Lyme is benign, easy to treat, no one has died from it, patients are rarely hospitalized, and brain infection from Lyme is rare.

Doctors like Leo Galland are stepping out with more truth. His article on Huffington Post discloses more about chronic Lyme infection. At the bottom of his article, you will see that the majority of the 500 comments are Lyme victims sharing their nightmare stories.

Organizations that pretended to protect public health with no commercial interests (CDC, NIH, Universities) have partnered with Big Pharma and are not in the business of seeing anyone healed.

Maybe generations from now when there is enough of an outcry — when many have lived ill and died — some drug company will try to be the hero of the day and come up with a poisonous drug to treat Lyme.

Even that scenario is highly unlikely, as chronic Lyme is not allowed even to exist. But when it does, there will probably be a vaccine waiting for you.

So, in the meantime, Lyme victims serve as a tragic host for the parasitical medical establishment, lining corporate coffers until the patient finally bleeds out.

The real ticks (the poli-ticks) are the crux of the message.

Please watch Under Our Skin (on Netflix, or from, for more mind-blowing information. The full movie is available on NetFlix. Find out about the doctor who discovered an actual link between the Lyme spirochetes and disorders like dementia, Alzeimer’s, M.S. and more. One alternative health practitioner has not seen a single M.S., ALS or Parkinson’s patient in the last five years who did not test positive for Borrelia burgdorferi.

You will also see proof that Lyme-inflicted mothers experience multiple miscarriages and their babies are riddled with the disease. Babies who survive often develop late-stage neurological damage during childhood and adolescence. All are events that the IDSA swear have never happened. They insist that Lyme cannot be spread to the unborn child.

You will witness the families grieving over their dead loved ones. Lyme Disease is listed on their death certificates.

You will hear from doctors who were bullied, investigated, and ousted for attempting to actually treat Lyme, usually with intravenous and lengthier antibiotics. After all, isn’t that how other infectious diseases are conventionally treated – Tuberculosis, HIV, Hepatitis??

Conscientious doctors have to treat Lyme secretly if they want to help their patients without losing their license. They have to tell their patients, “Don’t mention Lyme.”How’s that for a cover-up?

Chances are, you know someone who is manifesting the aforementioned symptoms and is battling the never ending circle of finding proper diagnosis and treatment. They may or may not remember a tick bite. Since the truth about Lyme is so stifled it is more than likely spread through blood transfusions (as with Babesiosis) and shared between couples (as shown in Under Our Skin).

They most likely have been diagnosed with one of the mysterious “incurables”like MS, ALS, or even early Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. The latter two are increasingly diagnosed in younger patients.

Or perhaps they were dismissed as crazy and bear the misery of not knowing that they actually suffer from Lyme. Regardless, they suffer and believe they must wait until research catches up to them before they die.

It is the writer’s hope that this last installment of our Lyme series connects people to real help in getting their lives back from this menacing, covered-up disease. The first part delves into complications of detection and the last part into things to be careful for and some real options for relief.

The corrupted Infectious Diseases Society of America wrote guidelines on tick-borne diseases that included Lyme, Human Granulocytic Anaplasmosis, and Babesiosis. But the rise of Babesiosis, Ehrlichia (moving through Wisconsin and Minnesota), and other newly discovered vector-borne disease are more threatening in the lack of early symptoms and undetected presence in blood supplies. So those suffering from the many tick-borne infections are going to have the same runaround as Lyme victims. Those with the malaria-like Babesiosis parasite and other vector-bornes can also have Lyme and vice versa — plus a variety of debilitating co-infections.

Actually, there are around 137 different strains of Lyme and its sister tick-borne diseases, but only two are the most investigated and treated. Since it’s so shrouded in silence and ignorance, most blood banks don’t even screen for it and untold many don’t know they are infected.

One Northern US naturopath said in a phone interview that he helps with 2-3 cases per month and the clients don’t realize it’s there. Many don’t recall a tick bite, never saw the bullseye-rash, and sought his help after being diagnosed and unsuccessfully treated for Lupus, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and the “incurable” neurological diseases that are alarmingly on the rise in young people. He had to help his wife with undetected Lyme, and Lyme is no longer a part of her life.

Prevention is ideal, but obviously not foolproof. It can be spread through not only ticks, but mosquitoes, blood transfusions, sexual contact, and even flies. A tick bite or rash need not be present to have Lyme. This is all crucial information denied and silenced by the IDSA mob. Then they tell the patient, after a couple weeks, that they are cured and any issues must be in their head. That is the situation we are currently facing.

The political-medical battle over Lyme and newly discovered vector-borne disease was left to the dogs from the beginning. Many have struggled and found their own way, with alternative doctors and unconventional methods. The CDC would like you to believe that such unfortunates stumble on “goat’s blood”and false promises of stem cell help, but we know better than that.

Unfortunately, Under Our Skin only covered Lyme-literate doctors who were using aggressive antibiotic treatment for progressive Lyme. Even some of those doctors had their licenses revoked or were compelled to close their practice. Constant use of antibiotics are harsh and leave people with more health problems, possible resistance, and Candida yeast overgrowth. Many patients are stuck in a cycle of taking antibiotics for years because if they stop, the spirochetes come back and they feel ill again.

Very important: most people with Lyme are already familiar with using caution during any type of detox. Killing off the immense amount of spirochetes requires the body to quickly dump them. Not being able to rid the die-off causes intoxification, also known as a Herxheimer Reaction (healing crisis). The Herx effect is the “feeling worse, before feeling better.”

Following through with a program can be tedious but do-able. The bacteria go in cycles from cyst to spirochete and need to be killed in adult form – so a long program ensures that all the bacteria eventually die. Killing off the bacteria is only one part, rebuilding the immune system and organ health are equally crucial.

Colloidal silver is a must-have for every home and difficult disease. The high-voltage AC-made silver is the best indicated for Lyme patients due to its smaller micro-particles and efficiency for eradicating the spirochetes. Ideally, the silver should be 500 parts per million.

Please consider only doing a protocol with supervision from your chosen health care practitioner. Again, because of the Herx effect you want a gentle and thorough program.

It may give them the relief of finding out what is actually wrong, validate them (they are not crazy, it is not in their heads), and point them on the path to getting their life back. You may be the turning point for someone’s healing – or your own!

The deliberate deceit, cover-up, and profiting from the physical and emotional suffering of Lyme victims is downright revolting. It is so shameful that it has taken so long for helpful resources to surface, but there is truly hope.

Please share this with Lyme patients and any who are suffering untreated for Fibromyalgia, Lupus, M.S., ALS, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, dementia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. And for those who are told nothing is wrong, or that they should see a psych doctor.

It may give them the relief of finding out what is actually wrong, validate them (they are not crazy, it is not in their heads), and point them on the path to getting their life back. You may be the turning point for someone’s healing – or your own!

(ed. A reliable and reasonable cure for Lyme Disease remains to be found … or possibly it is being suppressed

In any case, Lyme Disease is a serious problem and if you think you have it please be diligent and careful to get effective treatment. Don’t opt for unproven or cheap theories that don’t work. Do your own research.

As information comes out I’ll keep you posted)





Aspartame, a chemical produced by Monsanto, is probably the worst of the several artificial sweeteners. It is known to cause neurological disease including brain disorders, muscle pain, nervousness, and a host of toxic reactions like parkinsons and autoimmune diseases.

Stay away from artificial sweeteners including Splenda (sucrolose). Sugar is a better sweetener than the chemical/artificial sweeteners. You just need to use common sense about how much sugar is acceptable in your diet. Natural sweeteners like stevia are the best. Maple syrup and honey are good. Low calorie sweeteners that are acceptable are erythritol, and xylitol made from sugar alcohols. 


(Watch this excellent video!)





Study: Combination tetanus, whooping cough vaccine linked to seizures in babies

Sunday, February 26, 2012 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer,

If you choose to have your baby vaccinated with the combination diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough (pertussis), polio and Haemophilus influenzae type 2 vaccine, a mega-jab collectively known as the DTap-IPV-Hib, your child may be at an increased risk of having a vaccine-induced seizure. A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association has identified a clear link between the vaccine and the onset of fever-related seizures, which the authors claim will not cause long-term damage.

Yuelian Sun from Aarhus University in Denmark and her colleagues evaluated data on roughly 380,000 babies born in Denmark between 2003 and 2008. Children in that country are recommended to get the vaccine at three different times — once when they are three months old, again when they are five months old, and a third time on their first birthday. Upon analysis, the researchers determined that about 7,800 of these children, or just over two percent, had been diagnosed with a fever-related seizure by the time they reach one-and-a-half years old.

The risk of having a fever-related seizure appears to increase after each subsequent jab with the vaccine, and particularly on the same day that it is administered. And yet the study authors and others insist the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine is safe because such seizures allegedly do not cause brain damage or other permanent harm. Dr. Eugene Shapiro, a pediatrics and infectious diseases researcher at Yale University, actually purports that these findings are “reassuring,” and that parents should not be concerned.

Even more absurd was study author Sun’s response to the findings, in which she suggested that perhaps injected babies who had a seizure in response to the vaccine were just genetically prone to seizures, and that the vaccine had nothing to do with it. This and other nonsensical responses to studies that identify health risks associated with vaccines are typical. It is always anything but the vaccine that is responsible for causing harm — “Have you ever drunk raw milk at any time in your life? That must have been the cause of the seizure!”

DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine loaded with bacterial components, antibiotics, and toxic chemicals and additives

According to the Vaccine Awareness Network, the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine contains diphtheria and tetanus toxoids, five components of the bordetella pertussis bacteria, filamentous haemagglutinin (the component of the bacteria which causes infection), pertactin (a highly immunogenic virulence factor), three types of inactivated polio virus, types 1, 2 and 3, a component of Haemophilus influenzae type B that has been attached to tetanus toxoid to make babies produce more antibodies, and three different types of antibiotics — neomycin, streptomycin, and polymyxin B.

Besides this barrage of pathogens and pathogenic components, the vaccine also contains deadly preservatives and additives like formaldehyde (rat poison), 2-phenoxyethanol (a detergent that is the main ingredient in anti-freeze), aluminum, and polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier implicated in causing male infertility).

There are also more than 3,500 reports in the Department of Health and Human Services‘ (HHS) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System(VAERS) about serious adverse events associated with the DTap-IPV-Hib vaccine. These include, but are not limited to, Moraxella catarrhalis, streptococcus pneumonia, asthma, anaphylactic reactions, pancreatitis, gastrointestinal dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and meningitis.





Raw milk: Good enough for Queen Elizabeth, but prohibited for ordinary Canadians

Monday, January 23, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Correction: The original version of this article incorrectly named Princes Harry and William as the sons of Queen Elizabeth rather than her grandsons. It has been updated to reflect this change.

Finding access to raw milk is difficult in many parts of the US, but the situation is even worse in Canada where national law prohibits the sale of raw milk anywhere in the country. Few people realize, however, that Queen Elizabeth and her two grandsons drink this supposedly “dangerous” food item, as do nearly all Canadian farmers surveyed in a 2010 study published in Preventive Veterinary Medicine.

A writeup on raw milk published in The Globe and Mail back in 2010 explains that Queen Elizabeth personally drinks raw milk, and that when her grandsons Harry and William were students at Eton College, she went out of her way to smuggle it in for them as well. The Queen apparently recognizes some value in raw milk beyond what health authorities are willing to admit.

On the same token, nearly 90 percent of more than 2,100 Canadian farmers who sell their milk to the country’s government-run dairy cartel revealed that they siphon off raw milk from their own cows to feed to their families before it gets shipped off for homogenization and pasteurization. Like the queen, these farmers are apparently unswayed by the pseudoscientific nonsense about the so-called dangers of raw milk.

And yet ordinary Canadians continue to be deprived of their freedom of choice in choosing what type of milk to drink. Those with lactose intolerance, for instance, are forced to simply stop drinking milk, as only raw milk contains the lactase enzyme that properly breaks down and digests lactose in the system. The process of pasteurization destroys lactase and all other enzymes, which makes it difficult for many to digest.

Like the US, Canada has had its share of government raids and tyranny against those that even just try to set up herd shares, which allow individuals to purchase shares in a cow or goat, and access the milk. Back in 2010, for instance, the Supreme Court of British Columbia issued an injunction against dairy farmer Alice Jongerden for boarding other people’s cows, and forced her to basically stop milking the cows altogether, which is a form of animal abuse (

But the fact that both Queen Elizabeth and thousands of Canadian dairy farmers drink raw milk proves that milk can be produced and consumed safely in raw form. It also represents a blatant double standard, where only the “elite” are privileged enough to make their own food choices, while everyone else is subjected to erroneous and arbitrary restrictions on a wholesome food item that has been consumed safely for centuries, long before tyrannical governments came along and prohibited it.

Sources for this article include:



Artificial hamburger meat successfully grown in vat of bovine fetal cells; You want some fries with that?

Monday, February 20, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

(NaturalNews) I’m not sure which is the more offensive way to create meat. There’s the current “factory farm” method where masses of hormone-jacked, antibiotics-injected cows are kept confined in what can only be called bovine concentration camps while they’re fed genetically modified corn, then slaughtered without compassion and subjected to diabolical meat-harvesting machinery that turns a cow carcass into corporate profits. On the other hand, there’s the new method being touted across the media: Test tube hamburgers made from thin strips of meat grown in a nutrient vat laced with bovine fetus stem cells. Yumm!

The test tube meat strips actually pulsate and twitch during their laboratory growth phase, by the way, and they’re ultimately ground up with strips of test tube fat grown in a similar way to produce a fatty hamburger-like substance. This has been accomplished by Professor Mark Post of Maastricht University in the Netherlands, who announced his team’s results at the American Academy for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) yesterday.

Test tube meat is here to save the world!

“In October we are going to provide a proof of concept showing out of stem cells we can make a product that looks, feels and hopefully tastes like meat,” says Mark Post at the announcement (…). Of course, what does processed meat actually taste like anyway? MSG, sodium nitrite and processed salt, for the most part. So making lab-grown meat taste like today’s factory-processed meat only requires the injection of a few additives into the growth culture. Imagine growing meat patties with MSG inside every cell!

Creating one hamburger will require 3,000 strips of meat, each just half a millimeter thick and grown in laboratory vats. Unlike a cow, which requires roughly two years to grow to the point of slaughter, a test tube burger can be produced in just six weeks.

The “benefits” of test tube hamburger production are being touted as substantial, including:

• More efficient conversion of plants to meat.
• Less environmental damage.
• More humane than killing animals.
• Is the only feasible way to feed more meat to the world.

Of course, they also said that GMOs would “feed the world.” Bill Gates calls genetically modified foods “high-tech agriculture” now, with the strong implication that technology is always superior to Mother Nature ( But I’m not so sure about that. In fact, this whole thing sounds more than a little creepy to me.

Test tube meat to feed the masses? Gee, what could possibly go wrong?

I’m skeptical any time technology claims to out-perform nature. Look what they’ve done with GMOs, chemical pesticides, vaccines, or nuclear power. In almost every case where “scientific progress” is touted as the solution for humankind, it ends up creating a nightmare that’s far worse than the problem it was trying to solve.

For the record, I choose not to eat cow meat. I’m not a vegetarian, but I’ve been around lots of cows on farms, and I see cows as conscious, aware mammals who have memories, emotions, families and social structure. They are every bit as intelligent as horses, and most people would cringe at the idea of eating a horse burger.

However, in a survival situation, I would have no hesitation eating grass-fed beef if it were from a healthy farm source. In fact, my personal supply of preparedness foods consists of several bags of USDA organic grass-fed beef jerky made without MSG or sodium nitrite.

But when it comes to growing hamburgers out of stem cells in a petri dish, the whole thing just smacks a little too much of soylent green. How are we to know what they really put in the nutrient solution? Maybe it contains growth hormones to speed production. Maybe it’s loaded with synthetic chemical vitamins instead of natural vitamins. Maybe it’s contaminated with Prozac or fluoride to make us all feel happy and oblivious while we eat synthetic meat. How are we to know what they do with it?

Artificial meat monstrosity

And then, of course, it’s only a matter of time before they start to genetically modify the test tube meat, perhaps using selected genes from the human genetic code to make the end product is more compatible with human biology while avoiding any risk of allergies. So then what do we have? Hybrid bovine / human meat.

…and a world full of cannibals who are eating something that’s partially human flesh.

See, modern science has already proven itself to be a pathetic collection of truly insane megalomaniacs who will gladly splice the genes of animals and insects into crops so that they can create vaccine crops, or vaccine-carrying mosquitoes, or goats that produce spider silk, or some other kind of monstrosity that serves the power-tripping globalists.

And the marvel of modern-day fast food has already proven that people will eat anything marketed to them as food. Case in point? Chicken McNuggets. That’s a hodge podge of industrial chemicals and so-called mechanically-separated chicken, which itself is a meat processing freak show. (

So I guess if you set up a test tube meat lab, splice together a bunch of genes from various species (humans, cows, dogs, insects, ogres, possums and Janet Napolitano) and then grow a vat of some sort of convulsing fibrous tissue that can be made into a 99-cent hamburger, then the great masses will eat it! Who cares what the tissues are floating in, right? As long as it’s offered with a combo meal that includes French fries and an aspartame-laced Diet Coke, people will chug it straight down while watching NBA games and declaring, “We’re winning!”

No doubt test tube hamburger makers will tout their meat as being “Cruelty Free” by saying “No animals were killed in the harvesting of this meat.” Maybe not, but how many humans will be killed in the consumption of it?

A mysterious financial supporter backs the entire thing

By the way, this whole freak show of artificial meat production is being financed by an “…anonymous and extremely wealthy benefactor who Prof Post claims is a household name with a reputation for ‘turning everything into gold’.”

I wouldn’t be surprised at all to learn that Bill Gates was behind it — or someone similarly motivated by a global depopulation agenda.

Bottom line: Artificial meat may be an extraordinary idea, but given the total lack of ethics found in the scientific community today, I wouldn’t trust these people any farther than I could hurl a cow chip.
Learn more: