Stuart Jeanne Bramhall's Blog: The Most Revolutionary Act , page 501

6 Reasons You Might Be at Higher Risk of Injury From a COVID Vaccine

By Marina Zhang

Epoch Times

Why do some people report adverse events after COVID-19 vaccinations while some do not?

This question is central to the controversy of COVID-19 vaccine adverse events.

Doctors have identified several factors that contribute to an increased risk of spike protein-induced disease, specifically, post COVID-19 vaccine injury.

Dr. Paul Marik, Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) co-founder, said at an FLCCC conference on Oct. 15 that long COVID and injury from the COVID-19 vaccines share many overlaps in their symptoms and mechanisms.

Both diseases are systemic, affecting multiple organs and tissues, and are both driven by a high load of spike protein accumulated in these organs and tissues.

These spike proteins trigger inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction and autoimmunity.

However, not everyone will experience these symptoms.

[…]

Spike protein exposure increases risk, severity

[…]

There is a dose response with the vaccine, such that the greater the number of vaccine doses, the higher the risk of spike protein injury.

“The more the patients are exposed to spike [proteins], the more severe the disease,” said Marik.

Both long COVID and injury from COVID-19 vaccines are driven by prolonged exposure to spike proteins through infection and vaccination respectively, he explained.

Dr. Flavio Cadegianni hypothesized that receiving COVID-19 vaccines after having had COVID-19 increases one’s risk of spike protein injury.

This is because vaccines likely trigger a higher amount of spike protein load in the bloodstream than a common COVID-19 infection.

[…]

Spike proteins from vaccination have been observed to be present even at nine months following vaccination, so subsequent shots and boosters could lead to more spike protein production, increased inflammatory complexes formation and higher risk of symptom onset.

[…]

Varied loads in vaccines

Not all vaccine vials are made the same.

How Bad is My Batch is a website that compiles data on adverse events from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) on COVID-19 vaccination.

By separating each adverse event into its corresponding vaccine batch, the website has shown that some vials were made different from others, as they are associated with a greater number of adverse events, deaths and disabilities.

This could be due to impurities in the vaccines.

Leaked emails from staff in the European Medicines Agency showed that the agency only asked for 50% mRNA integrity in their Pfizer vaccinations.

However, potential issues could also be due to the dosage; some vials may have a higher mRNA or DNA spike protein content than others.

Currently, doctors have no way to verify what is in the vials.

[…]

Genetic factors

“There’s a genetic predisposition,” said Marik. “If someone in the family is vaccine injured, it is very common that the brothers of that individual … [will also become] vaccine injured so there are genetic factors which we don’t understand.”

Marik has observed that certain genetic mutations may also put them at a greater risk of COVID-19 vaccine injury.

This included individuals with a methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene mutation and those with Ehlers-Danlos type syndromes.

Around 40% of people in the U.S. carry or are affected by the MTHFR mutation. It is an enzyme responsible for transforming folate (vitamin B9) into its active form.

[…]

Underlying chronic diseases and immune deficiencies

Metabolic diseases, especially high blood pressure and type 2 diabetes, have been associated with severe symptoms in COVID-19 infections and vaccination.

Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a renowned cardiologist, wrote in his paper that even “a single high blood glucose reading in non-diabetics admitted to hospital [for COVID-19] has been shown to be associated with worse outcomes.”

[…]

Spike proteins are also highly autoimmune, meaning that it is able to trigger the immune system to mount attacks against self-tissues.

[…]

Deficiencies in folate, cobalamin (vitamin B12) and vitamin D have been associated with an elevated risk of COVID-19 infection.

A pre-print study authored by UK researchers funded by the National Health Service found that supplementation in vitamin D and vitamin B12 relieved neurological symptoms caused by COVID-19 vaccination.

Vitamin D is anti-inflammatory and can boost immune action, while vitamin B12 is critical for neural health as it helps to produce myeline, which is a fatty coat wrapped around neurons, that helps protect neurons against scarring and improves neural messaging.

“Vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccines, are known to cause severe and/or chronic neurological reactions in rare cases. We support screening for vitamin B12 deficiency prior to vaccination in high-risk groups,” wrote the study authors.

Folate deficiencies have also been observed in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The vitamin plays a role in the formation of DNA and RNA for cellular protein.

Age and sex

Marik said that women are generally more at risk of injury from COVID-19 vaccination.

He based this statement on the results from a survey conducted by React19, a website that provides advice on vaccine injuries and early treatment.

There were 508 patients suffering from post-vaccination injury evaluated in October 2021 as part of the questionnaire.

The survey found that 81% of people reporting vaccine injury were females. Between the two sexes, patients aged between 30 to 50 were the most prevalent.

Results from REACT19 survey on vaccine injured people, survey conducted on Oct. 5, 2021. Credit: React19

Data from VAERS also showed that women constituted around 65% of the adverse event reports; 41% of these reports came from women aged 18 to 49 at the time of the report

Women in the 50 to 59 age bracket and the 65 to 79 age bracket also constituted a large fraction of the adverse event reports, taking up almost 35% of all reports in females.

Spike proteins trigger inflammation through many pathways.

One pathway is through binding to ACE2 receptors on cell surfaces. This receptor is important for reducing inflammation, and a reduction of ACE2 through spike protein interaction thus increases inflammation.

Though ACE2 receptors are found across many organs, studies show that it is particularly abundant in the ovaries and the eggs.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-vaccine-injury-risk-et/

 

Australia Govt Website Pays Funeral Expenses for Patients Killed by Covid Vax

Deceased COVID-19 vaccine recipient payments and funeral costs

In cases involving death you may be eligible for payment and support for funeral costs. We’ll make this payment to the deceased’s estate.

on this pageWhat proof you needHow to calculate payments and funeral costsWhat proof you need

Before you can claim, you need to get your doctor to complete a COVID-19 vaccine claims scheme medical report. You need this as proof when you submit the claim. We need your doctor’s responses to help us assess your claim.

You need to provide the following documents with your claim:

the deceased’s death certificate or medical cause of death certificateproof that you’re acting on behalf of the deceasedproof of any funeral costs and who paid, like receiptsproof of any amounts you got or will get from third parties, like funeral insuranceproof of the deceased’s partner and children dependent on the earnings of the deceased at the time of death, if applicable.How to calculate payments and funeral costs

You need to show your actual costs for the funeral. Remember to deduct any amounts you got or will get from third parties.

If your claim involves death, find out what you can claim in the COVID-19 vaccine claims scheme policy on the Department of Health and Aged Care website.

Next:How to claim

Complete these steps to make a claim under the COVID-19 vaccine claims scheme.

Via https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/deceased-covid-19-vaccine-recipient-payments-and-funeral-costs-you-can-claim-through-covid-19?context=55953#a1

Antidepressants Rarely Outperform Sugar Pills

By Dr Mercola

Story at a Glance

The serotonin hypothesis posits that low serotonin levels in your brain are responsible for symptoms of depression. However, there’s little to no evidence for this. A number of studies have debunked the serotonin hypothesis, which is the basis upon which drug makers market SSRI antidepressants like Prozac, Lexapro and ZoloftAccording to recent research, “The main areas of serotonin research provide no consistent evidence of there being an association between serotonin and depression, and no support for the hypothesis that depression is caused by lowered serotonin activity or concentrations”The primary effect of SSRIs is to superimpose an abnormal drug state over your symptoms, much like recreational drugs and alcohol would. The small benefits seen in some drug trials are due to emotional numbingThis numbing effect comes at a steep price, as it also prevents you from experiencing emotional highs and does little to counteract the loss of energy, interest and motivation that are so characteristic of depressionResearchers at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently published the most comprehensive analysis of antidepressant clinical trial data submitted to the FDA, including unpublished trials. The evidence showed antidepressants outperformed placebo in only 15% of patients, and almost exclusively in those with the most severe depression

As of 2018, 13.2% — approximately 1 in 8 — of American adults over the age of 18 were on antidepressant medication, with more than twice as many women taking them (17.7%) than men (8.4%).1 Curiously, though, only 7.2% had actually been diagnosed with a major depressive episode — a statistical discrepancy that hints at massive antidepressant overprescribing.

[…]

While those statistics are already staggering, depression rates have further risen since then, thanks to COVID lockdowns and the unprecedented fearmongering that has been a hallmark of this pandemic. As reported in “What Does the Best Evidence Say About Antidepressants?” 22.4% of American adults reported symptoms of depression in June 2022, compared to 7.1% in 2017.

No Evidence to Back Serotonin Hypothesis

The fact that antidepressants are still being used to this extent is a testament to how effectively the drug industry manipulates doctors and patients alike with less than truthful propaganda, as independent studies have repeatedly shown these drugs work no better than placebo.

As Irving Kirsch — associate director of the Program in Placebo Studies and the Therapeutic Encounter at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School and a long-time critic of antidepressants — told Newsweek:3

“People do get better on the drug — but in the vast majority of cases it’s not because of what’s in the drug. There are other treatments that are at least equally effective, and that don’t carry the risks.”

Indeed, a number of studies have solidly debunked the serotonin hypothesis, which is the basis upon which drug makers market SSRI antidepressants like Prozac, Lexapro and Zoloft.

In short, the idea is that low serotonin levels in your brain is responsible for symptoms of depression. The problem is, there’s little to no evidence for this.

[…]

Negative Emotions Are Part of the Human Condition

As explained by Moncrieff, the primary effect of SSRI’s is to “superimpose an abnormal drug state” over your symptoms, much like recreational drugs and alcohol would. She also stresses that the small benefits seen in some drug trials are due to emotional numbing.

This numbing effect comes at a steep price, however, as it also prevents you from experiencing emotional highs, and does little to counteract the loss of energy, interest and motivation that are so characteristic of depression. Moncrieff continues:7

[…]

The question is how to treat it. While many psychiatrists believe stress can cause changes in the brain that can be reversed by antidepressants, others, like Moncrieff, Horowitz and Kirsch, believe psychotherapy that centers on strengthening coping skills and emotional resiliency is a far better — and safer — option.

Most Comprehensive Analysis to Date

In 2022, another team, which included researchers at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, also came out with the most comprehensive analysis of antidepressant clinical trial data ever published.

Antidepressants outperform placebo in only 15% of patients, and almost exclusively in those with the most severe depression.

This paper,8 published in The BMJ, included all antidepressant clinical trial data submitted to the FDA between 1979 and 2016, including unpublished trials. In all, 232 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials involving 73,388 patients diagnosed with depression were analyzed.

Here, the evidence showed antidepressants outperformed placebo in only 15% of patients, and almost exclusively in those with the most severe depression. In short, the reason many believe they’re getting a benefit from these drugs is because of the placebo effect and nothing else.

This supports previous research, which found the placebo effect accounts for anywhere between 30%9 and 67%10 of the antidepressant treatment effect, and that placebo is just as effective as antidepressants in those with mild to moderate depression.11

[…]

Antidepressants Are Not for Long-Term Use

Importantly, SSRIs, even when they do work for someone, should not be used for years on end.

[…]

Dr. Michael Thase, professor of psychiatry at UPenn’s Perelman School of Medicine, agrees. While he believes antidepressants can be helpful by interrupting the damaging release of glutamate in the brain, he also believes the drugs should not be used for more than six to nine months. Beyond that, you need to have another treatment plan in place.14

This could go a long way toward avoiding the withdrawal symptoms that afflict 56% of those trying to wean off SSRIs.15 Since 2004, the average duration patients stay on SSRIs has doubled,16 and avoiding withdrawal symptoms appears to be a huge part of this trend. Doctors and patients also often misconstrue withdrawal symptoms for a relapse of depression.

Limiting their duration of use will also minimize other risks to your health, as antidepressants come with a long list of potential side effects, including:17,18

Self-harm, suicide and violence against others. Many mass shooters have been on antidepressantsIncreased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes,19 even after adjusting for risk factors such as body mass index20Thickening of the greater carotid intima-media (the lining of the main arteries in your neck that feed blood to your brain),21 which could contribute to the risk of heart disease and stroke. This is true both for SSRIs and antidepressants that affect other brain chemicals. Users of tricyclic antidepressants have a 36% increased risk of heart attack22An increased risk of dementia; as the dose increases, so does the risk for dementia23Depletion of various nutrients. In the case of tricyclic antidepressants this includes coenzyme Q10 and vitamin B12, which are needed for proper mitochondrial function. SSRIs have been linked to iodine and folate depletion24

[…]

Via https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/10/20/antidepressants-outperform-placebo.aspx

The Real Anthony Fauci: The Film

The Real Anthony Fauci

Directed by Kala Mandrake

Film Review

Yesterday I watched Part I of the new film based on Robert F Kennedy Jr’s best selling book The Real Dr Fauci. It’s which is free to view for the next eight days.

I found it riveting. It provides a stunning showcase for  the courageous high profile doctors and researchers who have spent 2 1/2 years of their life collecting and publicizing the sizeable scientific evidence negating the official Covid 19 narrative.

I found Mandrake’s collage of athletes collapsing (and dying) on the field one after another especially compelling.

I was also impressed by the film’s ability to weave together the numerous strands of the complex psyops that’s been imposed on us – starting with scenes from the planning exercise Event 201 from October 2019.*

Highlights that stood out for me were

The proven (via multiple studies) ineffectiveness of N95** and other face masks in filtering respiratory viruses.The pronouncement (by prominent mRNA researcher Dr Robert Malone MD) that suppression of effective early Covid19 treatment (ie Ivermectin and Hydroychloroquine) was a crime, causing the unnecessary death of tens of thousands of Americans.Compelling evidence that Fauci and fellow public health officials used burner phones to conceal their involvement om gain-of-function bat virus research in Wuhan China.Fauci’s role in suppressing growing evidence that HIV is not the main causative agent of AIDS, including his campaign to re-diagnose more than 5,000 US AIDS patients who tested HIV negative.Fauci’s role in foisting the toxic AZT (for which he engineered FDA approval after four months of limited safety trials) on healthy AIDS patients (and killing them) pasymptomatic approved after four months of limited human trials) as well as his role in outlawing effective non-pharmocological treatments for AIDS.***Fauci’s role in establsihing and funding gain of function “safety labs.”Fauci’s role in tampering with SARS and MERS studies to sell worthless SARS and MERS vaccines to numerous governments.Fauci’s long term relationship with so-called philanthropist Bill Gates, who earns a 20 to 1 return on his $10 million investment in vaccines.

I can’t wait until Part II gets released.

*The media clips from this exercise look and sound identical to real life soundbites that bombarded us from February 2020 on.

**Originally developed to filter dust particles, N95 masks are so named because they filter 95% of dust particles. The latter are 1,000 times larger than respiratory viruses.

***Including IV Vitamin C, ozone therapy and hyopthermia.

 

Film can be viewed free the next 9 days at https://www.therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/trailer

 

What Western Empire?

By Dmitry Orlov

Some observant people are beginning to suspect that not everything is going perfectly well with the mighty Western Empire headquartered in Washington, DC. Some of the more excitable of these observers are quick to claim that what they are witnessing are early stages of collapse. But these voices are few and far between, while the rest of the observant observers still feel compelled to follow this bit of mental discipline:1. The mighty Western Empire is mighty. This is a tautology and therefore self-evident, brooks no argument and requires no further proof.2. Dominating the whole world requires an absolutely astounding level of intelligence. That’s because the world is big and complicated.3. If the mighty Western Empire appears to do something stunningly stupid, then that’s because we ourselves are too stupid to understand the subtlety of its intelligence that’s masquerading itself as rank stupidity; see point 2 above as to why.4. If the mighty Western Empire appears to engage in what seems like a never-ending sequence of spectacularly dumb and self-destructive moves, then that iteratively reduces to a repeated application of point 3 above.But then there is the radical, extremist viewpoint: that the mighty Western Empire has already collapsed and continues to exist merely by physical and mental inertia while its leaders try to keep up appearances and postpone the inevitable in order to more thoroughly feather their individual nests. These conspiratorially-minded extremists have the gall imagine that there is no astoundingly brilliant and subtle strategic master plan beyond individual players’ efforts to keep getting while the getting is good—or something equally radical and extremist along these general lines.What is Pax Americana, defined in a single sentence? Pax Americana is a globalist parasitic regime that attempts to extract wealth from the rest of the world through the imposition of a transnational financial oligarchy backed by a system of worldwide military bases and an expeditionary force that exacts obedience through financial oppression and military violence. Its parasitism rests on two pillars: a monopoly on printing money and the ever-looming threat of horrible military violence. The US dollar monopoly (of which the rapidly declining Euro is a mere concession) was at first (right after World War II) backed not just by military might but by a large industrial base, huge fossil fuel reserves and more than sufficient gold. Over the intervening decades the industrial might has been whittled away and what now remains is a raw materials-based and agrarian economy with an overgrown services sector, all of it operating at a large and constant loss and accumulating debt at an ever-increasing pace.Oil production peaked around 1970, a run on the dollar followed and its gold backing had to be removed at around the same time. All that remained was a system of global banking backed by the threat of unspeakable military violence. This has worked well enough: the Washingtonians would figure out how to profit from foreign resources and labor and make their demands known. If these demands were not met, there followed economic and political sanctions. And if the sanctions didn’t work, then it was time to do some bombing and some genociding. Civilian casualties, a.k.a. collateral damage, were not even counted. What’s half a million Iraqis here, half a million Libyans there, a few hundred thousand Syrians, an unknown number of Afghanis?… but it all added up to quite an appalling act of genocide spanning many decades.But the era when the Washingtonians could threaten the whole world to compel obedience from it has come to an end. Its unsinkable aircraft carrier fleet is now very much sinkable using an entire array of modern weaponry that can be launched from a stand-off distance that is greater than the reach of an aircraft carrier’s on-board aircraft. This makes the US aircraft carrier fleet, once the pride of the US Navy that cost more than the entire defense budget of most countries, almost completely useless: still used for political posturing and showing the flag, but forced to scud off if there is a threat of military action nearby. The other pride and joy of the US military—its air defense systems—have been rendered useless by the newer and more advanced hypersonic missiles, while the new air defense systems that Russia has developed and sold around the world can knock down pretty much anything that the US has.And then there are the heroic North Korean rocket men. In September of 2022, DPRK has pronounced itself a nuclear power. Its nuclear doctrine is as follows: KNDR will use nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack, an attack with analogous weapons of mass destruction, and also when threatened (!) with such an attack. Reactions around the world ranged from quiet amazement (a reasonable reaction) to turning away while scoffing. Note to the Pentagon chiefs: do not threaten North Korea or they will nuke Guam, Kadena (Okinawa), and perhaps even California. And then what would they do. The surprising answer is: not much, really!Could the North Koreans pull this off? Most likely, yes. After announcing its new status as a nuclear power, DPRK conducted five launches of various rockets, including a ballistic rocket that flew over Japan and came down somewhere in the Pacific. According to Japan’s military sources, who were watching nervously, the missile flew 4.500km with a maximum altitude of 970km. The reentry speed was… wait for it… Mach 17! That’s hypersound—much too fast for any air and space defense system to intercept. The altitude is impressive too. Satellite generally orbit between 160 and 2.000km. The ISS hangs out at 420km. Comrade Un’s rocket touched the sky at 1000km. Not too shabby, eh? But Western mass media would prefer not to discuss such details. Instead, they prefer to recycle tired old fakes, such as the one about Putin handing out viagra to his troops, for them to better rape Ukrainian virgins (Whoa! Where did that come from?) previously used against Qaddafy in Libya.Instead of paying attention to such nonsense, let us tackle this question head-on: Could DPRK carry out a nuclear attack against the United States and survive? In response, most people scoff: “That would be suicide! The North Koreans have something like a dozen nuclear bombs. Even if their rockets do work as advertised, the US, with its huge nuclear arsenal, would wipe them off the face of the earth…”Not so fast! In the game of geopolitics, the DPRK holds an ace of trumps: geography itself. The Korean peninsula is relatively tiny and is parked right between China and Russia, which are two of the mightiest nuclear powers. Zoom out a bit, and DPRK is just a marker on the Russia-China border. This makes a nuclear strike on North Korea very difficult to distinguish from a nuclear strike on China and/or Russia. And that would be, to put it extra-mildly, a dangerous thing for Americans to do.Russia and China have integrated their early warning systems, and to them a US launch against North Korea would look very much like a launch against Northern China and/or Russian Far East. To be on the safe side, both Russia and China would respond by executing a launch-on-warning retaliatory strike against the US. This is why North Korea can launch rockets that fly over Japan and over US military bases. Air defense systems are activated and sirens sound, but nothing happens, because the US doesn’t have anything that can shoot these rockets down.[…]Via https://boosty.to/cluborlov/posts/caee778c-7cee-4dbb-a6b1-593ec56f8c4c

Scientists Call for Moratorium on 5G After Study Shows Regulators Ignoring Health Risks of Radiation

By  Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

The authors of a peer-reviewed study published Tuesday warned about the risks of exposure to radiation from 5G technology and said their research shows existing exposure limits for wireless radiation are inadequate, outdated and harmful to human health and wildlife.

The authors of a peer-reviewed study published Tuesday warned about the risks of exposure to radiation from 5G technology and said their research shows existing exposure limits for wireless radiation are inadequate, outdated and harmful to human health and wildlife.

The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF) conducted the study, which was published in Environmental Health.

The ICBE-EMF called for an independent assessment of the dangers and impacts of wireless radiation, a campaign to inform the public of the health risks associated with radiation and “an immediate moratorium on further rollout of 5G wireless technologies until safety is demonstrated and not simply assumed.”

In an ICBE-EMF press release, Dr. Lennart Hardell, an oncologist, author of more than 100 papers on non-ionizing radiation and lead author of the study, said:

“Multiple robust human studies of cell phone radiation have found increased risks for brain tumors, and these are supported by clear evidence of carcinogenicity of the same cell types found in animal studies.”

In interviews with The Defender, Hardell and Joel M. Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health, discussed the study’s findings, the ICBE-EMF’s new initiative to raise awareness of the risks of 5G and explained who is most susceptible to the potentially harmful effects of wireless radiation.

According to Moskowitz, exposure to cellphones and other wireless devices should be limited, especially for pregnant women and children.

Hardell and Moskowitz — both of whom are associated with ICBE-EMF and its study — also blamed regulatory agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) for ignoring the risks — despite hundreds of studies indicating the dangers of exposure to wireless radiation — and called for legal action and increased public pressure.

Study: wireless radiation exposure limits ‘harmful,’ ‘based on false suppositions’

[…]

According to the new ICBE-EMF study, the radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits established in the 1990s by the FCC and the ICNIRP “were based on results from behavioral studies conducted in the 1980s involving 40-60 minute exposures in 5 monkeys and 8 rats” — after which “arbitrary safety factors” were applied “to an apparent threshold specific absorption rate (SAR)” of 4 watts per kilogram.

According to a fact sheet accompanying the study’s release, this means that “no adverse health effects from RFR exposure” were claimed to exist “below the … SAR of 4 watts per kilogram for frequencies ranging from 100 kHz to 6 GHz.”

The paper argues these radiation exposure limits were based “on two major assumptions” — that any biological effects of exposure to wireless radiation “were due to excessive tissue heating and no effects would occur below the putative threshold SAR,” and “twelve assumptions that were not specified by either the FCC or ICNIRP.”

The limits set by the FCC and ICNIRP also ignore “the past 25 years of extensive research on RFR” which, according to the study, “demonstrates that the assumptions underlying the FCC’s and ICNIRP’s exposure limits are invalid and continue to present a public health harm,” and “are based on false suppositions.”

These harms, which have been observed even “below the assumed threshold SAR,” include “non-thermal induction of reactive oxygen species, DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, carcinogenicity, sperm damage, and neurological effects, including electromagnetic hypersensitivity,” plus “increased brain and thyroid cancer risk.”

Despite these documented risks, the study explains that in 2020, the FCC and ICNIRP “reaffirmed the same limits that were established in the 1990s” — limits that “do not adequately protect workers, children, hypersensitive individuals, and the general population from short-term or long-term RFR exposures.”

According to the ICBE-EMF press release, the FCC and ICNIRP “have ignored or inappropriately dismissed hundreds of scientific studies documenting adverse health effects at exposures below the threshold dose claimed by these agencies,” which is “based on science from the 1980s — before cell phones were ubiquitous.”

Scientists speak out on wireless exposure risks

[…]

“The proximity of small cell antennas near where people live and work could pose health problems in addition to wireless radiation exposure from 5G cellphones.”

Hardell said that with 5G technology, “the pulses can be extremely high and also be additive from different [wireless] sources,” adding that “risks are not studied, especially not long-term.”per second) with short lags (or latencies) between transmissions.

[…]

Moskowitz said there’s been no real research on the biologic or health effects of 5G, noting that out of 35,000 publications on electromagnetic fields found on the EMF Portal as of Aug. 1, 2022, only 408 pertained to 5G, and only seven were medical or biological studies.

However, even these seven studies are inadequate, Moskowitz wrote:

“A closer look, however, reveals that although these studies employed carrier frequencies used in 5G, none of these studies modulated or pulsed the signal as required by 5G or used other features of 5G technology (e.g., beamforming, massive MIMO, and phased arrays) that are likely to affect the nature and extent of biological or health effects from exposure to this radiation.”

[…]

Regulators bear ‘full responsibility’ for harmful health effects caused by exposure to wireless radiation

[…]

“For more than two decades, FDA officials have ignored the lack of consensus in the scientific community regarding the safety of RFR,” Moskowitz wrote in 2020. “The majority of scientists who study RFR effects now believe that current RFR national and international safety standards are inadequate to protect our health.”

[…]

“Since 2002, multiple robust epidemiologic studies of cell phone radiation have found increased risks for brain tumors, which are supported by evidence of carcinogenicity of the same cell types (glial cells and Schwann cells) from animal studies.”

[…]

Scientists call for moratorium on 5G deployment

Scientists associated with the newly released paper and the ICBE-EMF called for the deployment of 5G networks to be paused until its potential harms to humans and nature are more thoroughly studied.

Hardell told The Defender that “there should be a moratorium on 5G until studied,” describing this situation as “a sad story by industry, politicians and their affiliated scientists.” “Ignorance and doubt is their product,” he said.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/5g-cell-tower-health-risks-radiation/

Uber, Lyft drivers push local lawmakers to regulate their industry

Abdi Salah (L) and Eid Ali

With a shoestring organizing drive that began just four months ago, Twin Cities Uber and Lyft drivers are pushing elected officials to tighten regulation of the app-based companies, and fighting for safety, transparency and a collective voice in their industry.

The Minnesota Uber/Lyft Drivers Association (MULDA) will bring its fledgling campaign to St. Paul tomorrow with a rally at the Capitol, set to begin at 12:30 p.m.

Drivers’ demands include higher pay and greater transparency from Uber and Lyft about how they calculate fares. The companies have slashed rates from nearly $2 per mile to around 85 cents over the last eight years, while scrapping a firm, 20% cap on their commission, drivers said.

Abdi Salah, who drives for both Uber and Lyft, said the companies recently removed fare breakdowns from drivers’ online activity log, leaving them to glean information about their cut from conversations with passengers. He recalled a recent trip from Edina to Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, in which he claims he received just $14 out of a passenger’s $50 fare.

“This guy is going on vacation, and he’s pissed off,” Salah remembered. “He’s angry with me, and I was not late. He was mad at me because I was charging him $50. He said it was ridiculous for such a short trip.

“When I dropped him off, I showed him my receipt, and he was shocked. He gave me a $5 tip. Had I not engaged with him, he was going to give me a low rating, and I might not have been allowed to drive again.”

Salah and other drivers have concluded that Uber and Lyft are “charging anything they need to the customer, and the 83 cents per mile minus their (commission), that’s what they give to the driver,” he said.

During an interview earlier this month in the organization’s one-room office, located on the second floor a shopping center in Minneapolis’ Phillips neighborhood, MULDA President Eid Ali said the ride sharing companies’ practices amount to wage theft.

“We don’t trust Uber or Lyft, and there’s good reason why we don’t,” said Ali, who helped lead a successful push to regulate taxi companies in Minneapolis a decade ago. “The public is being ripped off, and so are the drivers. Uber and Lyft are getting as much money as they can from the riders, and in the end giving only a little bit to the driver.”

In meetings with Minneapolis City Council members and Mayor Jacob Frey, MULDA drivers have pushed for an ordinance that would regulate rates, as the city does with taxi cabs, and cap the percentage that ridesharing apps can take out in commission.

Drivers also have reached out to St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter and, with the rally tomorrow, hope to take their campaign statewide. MULDA’s first public event, a September meeting at the Embassy Suites in Bloomington, drew about 400 drivers and a handful of elected officials.

“They were really surprised,” Ali said of the legislators in attendance. “They were not expecting this type of organizing effort. Maybe they were underestimating us. Maybe they thought we were invisible, but that’s not true.”

While increasing pay and transparency are at the top of MULDA’s agenda, drivers have also raised concerns about safety and job security – issues they hope to one day address through collective bargaining.

The U.S. Department of Labor last week issued a proposal to bar firms like Uber and Lyft from classifying so-called “gig-economy workers” as independent contractors, which takes companies off the hook for benefits like workers compensation – and bars them from bargaining as a union.

Several drivers who came to MULDA’s meeting last month, Ali said, claimed to have been injured on the job, including a man who said he was shot by a passenger, leaving him paralyzed from the waist down.

“No one has bothered, not Uber and not Lyft, to help (him) because there’s not any protection, not any work compensation to protect those fellow drivers because we’re misclassified,” Ali said. “Up to today, he’s a piece of garbage in their eyes.”

[…]

Via https://advocate.stpaulunions.org/2022/10/19/uber-lyft-drivers-push-local-lawmakers-to-regulate-their-industry/

Mass Monitoring: A Digital Dictatorship on the Horizon?

Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glanceA little over a year ago President Biden proposed the establishment of a new biomedical research agency modeled after the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to propel cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s, diabetes and other diseasesThat agency — the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) — is now well on its way to being and up and running, with a $1 billion budget from CongressARPA-H appears to merge national security with health “security” in a way that could lead to the criminalization of illness and general “wrong-think”The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is now recommending that all U.S. adults aged 65 and younger should be screened for mental health issuesThe screening recommendation falls right in line with the original intent behind ARPA-H, which was to monitor Americans for neuropsychiatric warning signs by harvesting private data from consumer electronic devices and health care providers. AI would then be used to predict whether an individual might commit a crime, so that it could be stopped before it happens

A little over a year ago President Biden proposed a plan to set in place a new health agency to drive the U.S. down a futuristic road that would lead to cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s, diabetes and other diseases.

At the time, investigative journalist Whitney Webb, author of “One Nation Under Blackmail,” warned that the new biomedical research agency — modeled after the nation’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — actually is a plan to merge national security with health “security” in a way that would “use both physical and mental health ‘warning signs’ to prevent outbreaks of disease or violence before they occur.”1

[…]

ARPA-H — A ‘High-Risk’ Research Agency

That agency — formally named the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health2 (ARPA-H) — is now well on its way to being and up and running, with a $1 billion budget from Congress to start. Public law 117-103 was enacted March 15, 2022, which authorized its establishment within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), under the National Institutes of Health (NIH).3

[…]

ARPA-H seems to fit hand in glove with Biden’s September 12, 2022, “Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and Secure American Bioeconomy,”4 which essentially establishes a fast-tracked pipeline for transhumanist dream projects.

Specified in that order is the development of genetic engineering technologies and techniques “to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way in which we write software and program computers,” as well as genetic technologies to “unlock the power of biological data” using “computing tools and artificial intelligence.”

Additionally, “obstacles for commercialization” [ie regulation] will be reduced “so that innovative technologies and products can reach markets faster.” ARPA-H is a tailor-made vehicle for fast-tracked (read poorly tested and incredibly dangerous) biomedical research. Like DARPA, ARPA-H will focus on “high-risk, high-reward research.”

[…]

As it stands, ARPA-H is also housed under the umbrella of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), just like the NIAID [run by Fauci]. So, we basically have two biowarfare/defense agencies smack-dab in the middle of a public health agency.

[…]]

Total Information Awareness

According to Webb, ARPA-H’s connections to DARPA suggests the new agency is a new version of DARPA’s failed Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, a biosurveillance project launched in the aftermath of 9/11.

[…]

The Era of Digital Dictatorship Is Upon Us

There can be little doubt today that “biosecurity” is the favored justification for the need of a digital dictatorship. Stripping you of your freedom is “for your own safety,” and you’re supposed to be thankful. If you’re not, the biosecurity state labels you a homicidal bioterrorist.

[…]

US Military Spends Millions Spying on Americans

According to Vice, the U.S. Navy, Army, Cyber Command and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency have spent at least $3.5 million to access this tool. The question is why. As noted by Vice, rather than getting a proper warrant, U.S. agencies frequently simply purchase the desired data, be it cell phone data or internet use data, from private companies.

[…]

Google is also a frontrunner and expert in artificial intelligence, required for effective social engineering, and both are crucial components of The Great Reset’s social credit system.

[…]

Google — The Biggest Spy Machine of All

A key player in this digital prison being built around us, on the taxpayers’ dime, is Google. Not only is it a massive spy machine, capturing “every word of every email sent through Gmail and every click made on a Chrome browser,”20 it’s also a key censoring tool. Sure, it’s private and “can do what it wants,” but it’s actually doing the government’s bidding, so it’s not independent in any serious definition of the word.

[…]

Stop Feeding the Beast

Next, start weeding out any and all other Google products. All Google products are interconnected, and the data from all their different products and services are collected to build your personality profile.

That profile is then sold to third parties. It’s also used by Google to influence your thoughts, beliefs and behaviors using AI analytics.

[…]

Privacy Is Freedom, Freedom Is Privacy

[…]

Ditching Google products — all of them — will take a big chunk out of the data harvesting effort. So, don’t delay. Start today. Several of the most commonly-used Google traps are listed in the list below.

If you’re a high school student, do not convert the Google accounts you created as a student into personal accounts. Switch to a secure document sharing service — Ditch Google Docs and use another alternative such as Zoho Office, Etherpad, CryptPad, OnlyOffice or Nuclino, all of which are recommended by NordVPN.24 Digital Trends has also published a number of alternatives.25Delete all Google apps from your phone and purge Google hardware.Avoid websites that use Google Analytics — To do that, you’ll need to check the website’s privacy policy and search for “Google.” Websites are required to disclose if they use a third-party surveillance tool. If they use Google Analytics, ask them to switch!Don’t use Google Home devices in your house or apartment — These devices record everything that occurs in your home, both speech and sounds such as brushing your teeth and boiling water, even when they appear to be inactive, and send that information back to Google. The same goes for Google’s home thermostat Nest and Amazon’s Alexa.Don’t use an Android cellphone, as it’s owned by Google.Ditch Siri, which draws all its answers from Google.Don’t use Fitbit, as it was recently purchased by Google and will provide them with all your physiological information and activity levels, in addition to everything else that Google already has on you.Stop using Gmail — Use a privacy based encryption service like ProtonMail.Stop using Chrome browser and Google Search — Brave is the browser of choice and while you are there, you can use the new Brave search engine.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/10/19/arpa-h-digital-dictatorship-on-the-horizon.aspx

‘Haiti is a Great People. We Are Not Your Backyard’

Mass protest march in rural Haiti, Oct. 10, 2022. | Photo: Twitter/ @Saniz23893508

“Haiti is a great people. We are not your backyard,” Jean Charles Moiser said in front of the U.S. embassy.

During a demonstration in Port-au-Prince on Monday, Jean Charles Moise, the leader of the Pitit Dessalines party, called for continued social protests to prevent a foreign military intervention and achieve the resignation of Prime Minister Ariel Henry.

“I am not asking you to carry firearms. Buy machetes to lead the revolution,” the 55-year-old former senator told Haitians during a massive march, which began on Champ de Mars and headed toward the U.S. embassy.

“The time for revolution has come,” the Pitit Dessalines politician said, radically rejecting the interference of the United States and other countries in the internal affairs of Haiti.

The police fired an overwhelming amount of tear gas at the protesters and Moise, who suffocated and had to be treated urgently by his family and friends.

“Your grace period is over. Haiti is a great people. We are not your backyard,” the leftist leader said in front of the U.S. embassy, where he warned that Prime Minister Henry “will never sleep soundly if he doesn’t resign.”

Les manifestations contre la vie chère et le Premier Ministre se poursuivent depuis des semaines à Haïti. Le gouvernement a récemment lancé un appel au déploiement d'une force armée étrangère pour gérer la crise pic.twitter.com/yamNmbCBYD

— Anonyme Citoyen (@AnonymeCitoyen) October 17, 2022

The tweet reads, “Demonstrations against the high cost of living and the Prime Minister have been going on for weeks in Haiti. Recently, the government requested the deployment of a foreign armed force to manage the crisis.”

At 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday in New York, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) will analyze the Haitian crisis in an extraordinary meeting, which was called unexpectedly and will replace the discussion on the Somalian war.

Earlier on Monday, the UNSC discussed two resolutions on Haiti. In one of them, the Council would support a foreign armed intervention in the Caribbean country. In the other one, the Council would rule only in favor of imposing sanctions on the responsible for the violence.

So far, it is unknown whether the UNSC will vote today in favor of either of the two resolutions since Russia and China expressed their doubts about their desirability and effectiveness.

On Oct. 7, PM Henry asked the international community to send an armed force to support him. Two days later, UN Secretary Antonio Guterres proposed sending a “rapid action force” made up of military personnel from one or more countries. So far, however, no country has officially agreed to lead or organize such a force.

#Haiti | Thousands of people took to the streets of the country's main cities to demand the dismissal of Prime Minister Ariel Henry and the rejection of the possible international intervention requested by the PM last week. pic.twitter.com/9b7l7K0GOP

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 18, 2022

[…]

Via https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Time-for-Revolution-Has-Come-Haitian-Opposition-Leader-Says-20221019-0007.html

IS CDC Hiding Data Showing Cancer Deaths Linked to Covid Vaccine

By  Dr. Joseph Mercola

Analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report data suggests the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID-19 deaths since April 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal.

Story at a glance:Analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report data suggests the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID-19 deaths since April 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal.The signal is being hidden by swapping the underlying cause of death with main cause of death.Uncontrollable turbo-charged cancers the medical establishment had never seen before only started to occur after the rollout of the COVID-19 jabs.Before it was manipulated to eliminate the safety signal, data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, or DMED, showed cancer rates among military personnel and their families tripled after the rollout of the shots.After the rollout of the COVID-19 jabs in 2021, cancer patients have gotten younger, with the largest increase occurring among 30- to 50-year-olds, tumor sizes are dramatically larger, multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common, and recurrence and metastasis are increasing.

In a series of Twitter posts, The Ethical Skeptic — self-described as a former intelligence officer and strategist — has laid out a series of charts illustrating how cancer deaths are being mislabeled as COVID-19 deaths.

The suspicion is that this is an effort to hide the fact that the COVID-19 shots have resulted in soaring cancer rates.

The Ethical Skeptic also takes a deep dive into the data in “Houston, We Have a Problem, Part 1,” on TheEthicalSkeptic.com.

As noted in his article, seven out of the 11 International Classification of Diseases, or ICD, codes tracked by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics — including cancer — saw sharp upticks starting in the first week of April 2021.

“This date of inception is no coincidence, in that it also happens to coincide with a key inflection point regarding a specific body-system intervention in most of the U.S. population,” The Ethical Skeptic notes.

In other words, April 2021 was when large swaths of the American population were getting their first COVID-19 jabs.

 

$2 Million Match! Click Here to Double Your Impact!

 

Cancer diagnoses on the rise

The following graph, highlighted on Dr. Jennifer Brown’s Substack, illustrates the cyclical wave pattern of cancer diagnoses, from January 2015 and October 1.

As noted in the top-right text box:

“We should be at or near a seasonal nadir. Instead, we are at an all-time CA [cancer] excess, and heading up. Keep in mind there is substantial lag to CA reporting, so this likely under-represents true excess.”

At no point during the past seven years have we seen this rate of new cancer diagnoses.

Are the COVID-19 shots to blame? 

Probably, unless we can identify another widespread environmental factor or exposure that was introduced to the population, en masse, in early 2021, that didn’t exist before.

Credit: Dr. Jennifer Brown

CDC fudging death records to eliminate cancer signal

According to The Ethical Skeptic’s analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been filtering and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID-19 deaths since Week 14 of 2021 to eliminate the cancer signal.

The following two charts, posted on Twitter on October 1 and 2, illustrate how cancer mortality is being artificially suppressed.

As explained by The Ethical Skeptic:

“The set dynamics are complex, but the principle is straightforward. When a death cert lists Cancer as the UCoD [underlying cause of death] and COVID as MCoD [main cause of death] — the UCoD & MCoD are being swapped, and COVID is being listed as the UCoD 100% (425/wk).

Source: The Ethical Skeptic

“This results in 20% of all COVID deaths each week, also happening to be persons dying of Cancer — which is egregiously higher than it should be. This is clear over-attribution = equates to exactly the difference between the Cancer and All Other ICD-10 code lag curves.”

“The problem facing the CDC, is … What does one do when COVID Mortality is no longer substantial enough to conceal the excess Cancer Mortality?”

Source: The Ethical Skeptic

So, to rephrase, what The Ethical Skeptic is saying is that 20% of the weekly so-called COVID-19 deaths are actually cancer deaths, which is rather astounding.

But swapping the underlying and main causes of death, listing COVID-19 as the main cause, hides (to some degree) the fact that cancer deaths are going through the roof.

According to his analysis, the COVID-19 shot is killing 7,300 Americans per week.

COVID-19, meanwhile, is killing 1,740 people.

So, what will the CDC blame when COVID-19 disappears and they can no longer swap the underlying and main cause of death designations?

Department of Defense data showed massive cancer rise

Uncontrollable turbo-charged cancers the medical establishment had never seen before only started to occur after the rollout of the COVID-19 jabs.

Data from the DMED exposed by attorney Tom Renz and Sen. Ron Johnson (above), showed cancer rates among military personnel and their families basically tripled after the rollout of the shots.

As you may recall, within days of the DMED data being revealed, the database was taken offline, allegedly to “identify and correct” a supposed data corruption problem, and when it came back, the data had been altered to hide these glaringly obvious safety signals.

‘Turbo-cancers’ emerged after COVID jab rollout

Swedish pathologist, researcher, and senior physician at Lund’s University, Dr. Ute Kruger, describes the changes she has personally observed in the wake of the COVID-19 shots.

For example, she’s noticed:

Cancer patients are getting younger — The largest increase is among 30- to 50-year-olds.Tumor sizes are dramatically larger — Historically, 3-centimeter tumors were commonly found at the time of cancer diagnosis. Now, the tumors they’re finding are regularly 4 to 12 centimeters, which suggests they’re growing at a much faster rate than normal.Multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common.Recurrence and metastasis are increasing — Kruger points out that many of the cancer patients she’s seeing have been in remission for years, only to suddenly be beset with uncontrollable cancer growth and metastasis shortly after their COVID-19 jab.

These “turbo-cancers,” as Kruger calls them, cannot be explained by delayed cancer screenings due to lockdowns and other COVID-19 restrictions, as those days are long gone.

Patients, despite having access to medical screenings as in years past, are showing up with grossly exacerbated tumor growths, and she believes this is because the cancers are being “turbo-charged” by the mRNA jabs.

Dr. Ryan Cole has also discussed the explosion of cancer (see video below). He believes the shots are primarily accelerating already existing cancers, by way of immune dysregulation.

He noticed that cancers that could normally be controlled and kept in check, giving the patient several years of quality life, once they got the COVID-19 jab, the cancer would suddenly grow out of control and rapidly lead to death.

[…]

Via https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/cdc-cancer-deaths-covid-vaccines-cola/