Jump to content
muir

The health timebomb

Recommended Posts

Covert Chemical Warfare: 100,000 Deaths a Year from Prescription Drugs

Posted on December 16, 2019

By Jon Rappoport

Medical News Today reports that, in 2011, there was a modest uptick in the number of prescriptions written in the US.

The increase brought the total to: 4.02 billion.

Yes, in 2011, doctors wrote 4.02 billion prescriptions for drugs in America.

That’s an average of roughly 13 prescriptions for each man, woman, and child.

That’s about one new prescription every month for every American.

 

The Medical News Today article concluded, “…the industry should be heartened by the growth of the number of prescriptions and spending.” Yes, I’m sure the drug industry is popping champagne corks.

We’re talking about prescriptions here. We’re not talking about the number of pills Americans took. We’re also not counting over-the-counter drugs or vaccine shots.

Pharmacopoeia, a 2011 exhibition at the British Museum, estimated that “the average number of pills a person takes in his or her own lifetime in the UK is 14,000.” That’s as a result of prescriptions. Including over-the-counter drugs, the 14,000 number would swell to 40,000 pills taken in a lifetime.

What are the effects of all these drugs?

We are looking at a supreme Trojan Horse that is rotting out America and all other countries from the inside. Wars, no wars, economic deprivation, economic prosperity, the drugs continue to do their work, debilitating and ruining and terminating lives.

Many sources can be cited to confirm this assessment.

On January 8th, 2001, the LA Times published an article by one of the best medical reporters in the business, Linda Marsa: “When Good Drugs Do Harm.” Marsa quoted researcher Dr. David Bates, who indicated that, in the US, there are 36 million serious adverse reactions to medical drugs per year.

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the most stunning mainstream estimate of medical-drug damage in history: “Is US health really the best in the world?” The author was Dr. Barbara Starfield, a respected public-health researcher at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

Starfield concluded that medical drugs were killing Americans at the rate of 106,000 per year.

That’s a million deaths per decade.

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2019/12/covert-chemical-warfare-100000-deaths-a-year-from-prescription-drugs.html

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5G Problems and Solutions - Jerry Day on The Corbett Report

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interview with a Retired Vaccine Researcher

By Jon Rappaport

Dr. Mark Randall is the pseudonym of a vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the labs of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government’s National Institutes of Health.

Mark retired in the 1990s. He says he was “disgusted with what he discovered about vaccines.”

As you know, since the beginning of NoMoreFakeNews, I continue to launch attacks against non-scientific and dangerous assertions about the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

Mark was one of my early sources.

At the time this interview was originally published — in January 2002, Mark was a little reluctant to speak out, even under the cover of anonymity. But, with the push to make vaccines mandatory and with penalties like quarantine lurking in the wings (even back then), he decided to break his silence.

Like many of my sources, he developed a conscience about his former work. Mark was well aware of the scope of the medical cartel and its goals of depopulation, mind control, and general debilitation of populations.
 




(Q) Jon Rappoport

(A) Retired Vaccine Researcher (given the pseudonym of “Dr. Mark Randall”)
 




Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won’t say which ones.

Q: Why not?

A: I want to preserve my privacy.

Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

A: I believe I could lose my pension.

Q: On what grounds?

A: The grounds don’t matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

Q: Harassed by whom?

A: The FBI.

Q: Really?

A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

Q: So much for free speech.

A: I was “part of the inner circle.” If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall “brilliance” of modern medicine.

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It’s one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

Q: Why?

A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

Q: And then?

A: I did my own investigation.

Q: What conclusions did you come to?

A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

Q: What conditions?

A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don’t contract the diseases as easily.

Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I’m concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.

Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?

A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases — say, meningitis — that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.

Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.

A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.

Q: Which is?

A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.

Q: So you’re saying that we have been treated to a false history.

A: Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.

Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.

A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.

Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.

A: Well yes, that happened. But that’s not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I’m talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors — that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don’t know are in those kidneys.

Q: Okay, but let’s ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?

A: All right. I’ll give you some of what I came across, and I’ll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here’s a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called “brain-eating” amoeba.

Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I’ve found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.

Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don’t belong in the vaccines.

A: That’s right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don’t really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It’s a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don’t know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and poliovirus in these vaccines from time to time — which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn’t be there, but you don’t know exactly what you’ve got. I have found what I believed was a very small “fragment” of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called “foreign protein,” which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.

Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.

A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.

Q: How were your findings received?

A: Basically, it was, don’t worry, this can’t be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals’ tissue, and that’s where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I’m not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.

Q: This information is pretty staggering.

A: Yes. And I’m just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don’t find because we don’t think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.

Q: And beyond the purity issue?

A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn’t work that way. A vaccine is supposed to “create” antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related “killer cells.”

Q: The immune system is?

A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It’s all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.

Q: So the level of general health is important.

A: More than important. Vital.

Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?

A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you’ve concealed the root cause of the problem.

Q: And that happens?

A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it’s circular reasoning. It’s a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the disease.

Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?

A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.

Q: What was the turning point for you?

A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.

Q: Did you investigate?

A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.

Q: What do you mean?

A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.

Q: Why doesn’t it make sense?

A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn’t that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn’t that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?

Q: And that is what you found?

A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations, most of the time.Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.

Q: Has it been enough?

A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.

Q: Which is?

A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, “This vaccine is safe.” But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.

read on here https://www.davidicke.com/article/560943/interview-retired-vaccine-researcher

 

 
 
 
 
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BREAKING: TELECOM WORKERS DESTROY CELL TOWERS TO WARN PUBLIC OF 5G DANGERS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2019 at 5:55 PM, muir said:

BREAKING: TELECOM WORKERS DESTROY CELL TOWERS TO WARN PUBLIC OF 5G DANGERS

I’ve noticed on one of the routes I walk on there’s a fairly obvious buzzing sound and I found it was coming from a phone mast right outside a bunch of houses, what causes the buzzing as I’ve never heard it before until recently 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Seeker said:

I’ve noticed on one of the routes I walk on there’s a fairly obvious buzzing sound and I found it was coming from a phone mast right outside a bunch of houses, what causes the buzzing as I’ve never heard it before until recently 

 

scary stuff! You can measure the cell masts with an accousticom 2 i believe.

 

A basic EMF meter like a gausmeter is cheaper and will read the EMF's from your phone and computer and household appliances but not cell towers

 

The 5G masts need specialist gear that is super pricey so they will be even less monitored by the public

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London is the global capital of microplastic pollution: Study finds highest-ever levels of the tiny airborne fragments on a British rooftop amid growing safety concerns

  • Kings College researchers studied London, Hamburg, Paris and Dongguan
  • Collected and assessed amount of microplastics falling from the atmosphere  
  • Roof of nine-story London building was the most polluted site in the study
  • True extent of health impact on people is still unknown despite ongoing research

By Joe Pinkstone For Mailonline

Published: 15:03, 27 December 2019 | Updated: 15:03, 27 December 2019

Microplastics in the atmosphere are falling from the skies onto roofs and into human lungs in alarming quantities, scientists have found. 

Tiny pieces of plastic - measuring between 0.02mm and 0.5mm in length - were captured on top of a nine-story building in London as well as at sites in Hamburg, Paris and Dongguan. 

Eight samples were taken and measured in England's capital city, revealing it to be the city with the most polluted atmosphere. 

Scientists are desperately trying to understand how bad the ubiquitous invisible particles are for human health. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7830467/London-capital-city-microplastic-pollution-study-finds.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, muir said:

 

scary stuff! You can measure the cell masts with an accousticom 2 i believe.

 

A basic EMF meter like a gausmeter is cheaper and will read the EMF's from your phone and computer and household appliances but not cell towers

 

The 5G masts need specialist gear that is super pricey so they will be even less monitored by the public

I walked past it today with my acousticom 2, I was about 20m from it and it was averaging about 3 V/m which is dangerously high in the red zone, sadly kids were playing football right by it as their mum was sat on her phone. 

 

Interestingly with my acousticom I tried it in a room where there’s 20+ smart meters and it just breaks it, it won’t flash any light, I would guess if it was 5G and higher than 8Ghz frequency, the same would happen, I dread to think what the radiation would be 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O2 switches on 5G in THIRTEEN new UK cities on the last day of 2019

  • O2 has launched 5G in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool and Derby
  • The only non-city with O2 5G is Slough as that is where the company is based
  • It hopes to have launched in 50 cities by the summer of 2020 including Windsor
  • So far BT Group owned EE is the only operator with 5G available in 50 locations 

By Ryan Morrison For Mailonline

Published: 10:44, 31 December 2019 | Updated: 15:30, 31 December 2019

O2  has switched on 5G in 13 new cities on the last day of 2019 today - narrowly meeting its commitment of having the next-gen network available in 20 cities before 2020.

It has launched in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bradford, Sheffield, Coventry, Nottingham, Norwich, Bristol, Derby and Stoke 

The company says it plans to have the next-generation network available in a total of 50 locations by the summer of 2020 including in Windsor and Blackpool.

O2 originally turned on its 5G network in October, rolling out to seven cities including London, Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh. 

The only location where O2 5G is available outside of the 20 cities is the Berkshire town of Slough - the location of the O2 headquarters.

O2 has launched its 5G network infrastructure in partnership with technology providers Ericsson and Nokia, following a competitive tender earlier this year.  

The telecom operator says the new 5G offering will 'supplement rather than replace the existing 4G network'. 

It is also says it is investing more than £2 million per day to upgrade its existing 4G network ahead of a wider 5G rollout over the next few years.

Earlier in December EE switched on 5G in nine new locations across the UK, bringing its next-generation mobile service to a total of 50 towns and cities.

Vodafone launched its 5G service in July and is now available in a total of 30 UK towns and cities.

Three, meanwhile, announced last month that it is delaying the rollout of its 5G service for an undisclosed amount of time.

The company, which launched off the back of the 3G rollout, is only offering 5G as a home broadband service across parts of London. 

O2 plans to launch in Windsor, Eton, Reading, Blackpool, Bournemouth, and Guildford from March 2020.

A LIST OF ALL 02 5G LOCATIONS 

  • Manchester 
  • Birmingham 
  • Glasgow 
  • Liverpool 
  • Newcastle 
  • Bradford 
  • Sheffield 
  • Coventry 
  • Nottingham 
  • Norwich 
  • Bristol 
  • Derby 
  • Stoke 
  • Lisburn 
  • Leicester 
  • Belfast  
  • Cardiff 
  • Edinburgh 
  • London   
  • Leeds 
  • plus Slough 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7839939/02-switches-5G-13-new-cities-just-making-20-cities-2020-commitment.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2019 at 5:55 PM, muir said:

BREAKING: TELECOM WORKERS DESTROY CELL TOWERS TO WARN PUBLIC OF 5G DANGERS

 

 

I have to say video's like this are to be taken with a pinch of salt,

 

If you know what you are looking at the wMvolt reading is relatively low, in millivolts, mobile phones are far worse,

 

I have show my own tests done on a laptop which are many times higher than what you are seeing here in this video,

 

There is so much propaganda within these video's that it is unhelpful, the wifi on and wifi off model with the seedlings that are coming through the soil is non descript, how do we know if anything is turned on or not, we don't, and should not take their word for it.

 

If we don't want to be exposed to these towers then we have to stop using them, their owners are not going to put these up if nobody uses them, it is all down to costing.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Apprentice said:

If we don't want to be exposed to these towers then we have to stop using them, their owners are not going to put these up if nobody uses them, it is all down to costing.

 

i don't have a smart phone and i don't use wifi

 

but perhaps other people need to come to a realisation about how these things are harmful in order to make the choice, as i did, to shun that technology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, muir said:

 

i don't have a smart phone and i don't use wifi

 

but perhaps other people need to come to a realisation about how these things are harmful in order to make the choice, as i did, to shun that technology

How do you get onto the internet just out of interest, I’m looking to get away from wifi and smart phones too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Seeker said:

How do you get onto the internet just out of interest, I’m looking to get away from wifi and smart phones too

 

turn your computer wifi off and turn your hub wifi off (which you have to do online) then use a physical ethernet cable to connect your computer to your hub

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vaccines: “preventing every bad thing”

Jon Rappoport

17 hours ago

 

We begin with this: “Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules…”

In other words, the measles vaccine can create a worse form of measles. This is not the normal form of the illness, from which children routinely recover with the bonus of lifetime immunity. No, this is a severe, atypical, dangerous, synthetic, vaccine-induced disease.

Now read this: “…the window of vulnerability of an infant may be even greater in vaccinated women than in with women with natural measles infection.” (Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 79(5), 2008, pp. 787–792).

Translation: Measles occurring in infants—which is unusual and dangerous—is more likely to occur when the mother has been vaccinated against measles. Why? Because she no longer passes down, to her child, the natural components of immunity to measles.

This stunning finding can apply across the board, for all vaccines and all childhood illnesses.

Vaccinated mothers, who would ordinarily pass down natural immune factors to their babies, often don’t.

The vaccinators are creating a synthetic world of pretended immunity. And they want the global population to live inside that bubble—and suffer the consequences.

Medical experts have spewed a great deal of nonsense promoting how serious childhood diseases are. This is an attempt to refute centuries of evidence showing children recover nicely from these illnesses and thus acquire lifetime immunity.

The “seriousness” of the diseases, when they are serious, results from two factors: vaccinated mothers, and a general weakness of children’s immune systems. And that weakness results from sub-standard nutrition and a lack of nutritious breast-feeding.

Of course, breast feeding isn’t going to be naturally nutritious if the mother has been previously loaded with vaccines. It’s a vicious circle.

And remember this: no amount of vaccines is going to solve tremendously sub-standard childhood nutrition.

Claiming that undernourished children must be vaccinated up to their eyeballs—as “substitute protection” against disease—is an egregious and despicable lie.

The vaccine establishment is fully aware of what I’m discussing here, and it has covered it up.

There is no substitute for natural immunity derived from good nutrition.

Finally, if you revisit the first quote in this article, you’ll see another factor at work. The measles vaccine that paves the way for “severe, atypical” measles in children? The vaccine could be falsely exonerated on the grounds that the symptoms which develop in children don’t add up to measles at all. What these children have doesn’t look like measles—

And therein lies one of the greatest secrets about all vaccines. They appear to wipe out diseases, because, after vaccination, the signs and symptoms ordinarily associated with those diseases often don’t occur.

Instead, the old symptoms are altered or don’t appear at all. Therefore, medical experts can claim that mumps or measles or pertussis or diphtheria have been eliminated from the population—when in fact what is happening is the emergence of vaccine-induced disease with different symptoms.

And those symptoms are given different disease-names.

Polio? Gone. Now we have meningitis. Smallpox? Gone. Now we have “lesions of unknown origin” or Kaposi’s Sarcoma.

Vaccinated children become more ill than they would have, and children die. But it doesn’t matter for the sellers and enforcers of vaccines, because they can say, “Look, vaccines are extraordinarily successful wherever they’re given; they wipe out diseases.”

No they don’t.

They just transfer the pictures of symptoms.
 


 

And they cut off the population from natural and powerful immunity, the very same immunity that, along with improved nutrition, better basic sanitation, and a higher standard of living, made many serious diseases into light illnesses.

It’s all a shell game. If the vaccinators confessed, they would say something like this:

“Okay folks, here’s what we do. We give the mother and her baby a shot against Disease A. Disease A is a set of recognizable symptoms. After vaccination, that set of symptoms will occur far less often. Instead, a new set of far more dangerous symptoms will occur. We’ll call those symptoms Disease B. And we’ll say Disease A has been wiped out…”

This shell game is played with human lives sacrificed on the altar of profits, and the creation of more debilitation and death.

https://www.davidicke.com/article/561500/vaccines-preventing-every-bad-thing-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

lol seeker.

you know those ancient things called cables.

then use powerlines to send the internet round your house

you can even connect your ipad up via ethernet cable with an adapter.

i only turn the wifi on to print something as my new router won't find my wired print server

buy a £10 nokia 105 on ebay job done

 

 

 

Untitled8.jpg

Edited by bamboozooka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

two speeches by the same person back to back contradicting each other....what a shameless slime ball. To endanger public health so recklessly is criminal

W.H.O CHIEF SCIENTIST CAUGHT LYING TO THE PUBLIC

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Men in name only: New study shows testosterone levels in American males are dropping dramatically. Why would that be?

14 Jan, 2020 16:12 / Updated 16 hours ago

Peter Andrews is an Irish science journalist and writer, based in London. He has a background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in Genetics.

Pollution, sedentary lifestyles, soy and even social ‘feminization’ have been blamed for a deepening testosterone crisis. But finding the answer fast is important – the future of America’s population literally depends on it.

Alarming discoveries

Testosterone truly is the male hormone. It is what turns boys into men—upon puberty the testes drastically upregulate their production of it, triggering secondary sexual characteristics. These include the growth of muscle and bone, a deeper voice and the sprouting of body hair. Without testosterone, one suspects there would be a lot of noodle-armed, squeaky-voiced man-babies stalking the streets, perhaps in the vein of a Michael Jackson (rumoured to have been on hormone-blockers since childhood) or even a young Jeff Bezos (until he allegedly started pumping himself full of replacement testosterone).

 

But a new study published this month in the Journal of Sexual Medicine has found that testosterone is in crisis, at least when it comes to American Millennials and Gen Z-ers. Men’s testosterone is supposed to decline naturally with age, but this study, which was presented last October to the Sexual Medicine Society of North America, showed a shocking decline in the levels of cohorts of young American men throughout since 1999. The authors tested the serum testosterone (total amount of testosterone present in the blood) of 4,045 men aged between 15 and 39—making sure to control for confounding factors such as age, race, and level of physical activity—and still the results were unmistakable. In fact, they have been slashed by over one-quarter in the last two decades.

This is hardly surprising news. Data showing how sperm counts have fallen has been widely reported in recent years. Since the testes produce both testosterone and sperm cells, it is probable that the causes overlap partially or entirely. Laptops too close to the crotch, anyone?

Could the dratted men’s rights activists be right after all? 

Men’s rights activists, easily dismissed with that devilishly vague slur ‘conspiracy theorist’, warn of endocrine disruptors in the food supply, and xenoestrogens in the water. Identifying the cause, for now, is a bit like playing bingo for diagnosing modern-day malaise. The ubiquity of internet pornography? The decimation of manual labor among the working classes? Soy-based baby foods? Since studying the effects of any one of these things would never be funded for study by the educational-industrial complex, it is impossible to know how they might tie in.
 
The poor diets and sedentary lifestyles that many young Americans enjoy are certain to be among the major contributing factors, but that cannot explain all of the downturn. This is because the study authors also controlled for overweightness, a known enemy of testosterone, by looking at the decline in only those young men who had healthy BMIs. Even these men saw their testosterone scores drop by over one-fifth.

 

The feminization of society is an interesting hypothesis, although difficult or impossible to study (even if it were not politically incorrect). Could the entry of women into previous male-dominated workplaces have actually affected their endocrinology? Over the long-term and on a vast scale, it is perfectly plausible. Whereas once American workplaces were crucibles of masculine competition, worshipping a single God—real-world business success—and ruthlessly capitalistic in their incentive structure, now they are anything but. Even the private sector is strangulated by sprawling human resources departments holding bosses to ransom over innocuous jokes, and thereby incentivizing mediocrity and absolute subservience as a career trajectory. It is easy to see how the natural aggressive juices of men who have been defanged and declawed at work (to say nothing of their home lives) could be staunched.

Why America? 

Americans are getting it in the neck here, but are things even any different in other agribusiness-run hyper-feminized societies like, for instance, Western Europe? Here’s anxiously awaiting a similar study. It would be interesting if the authors next looked at American men’s levels of the female hormone estrogen, as well as American women’s levels of testosterone. Could both have increased? Women have only a fraction of the amount of testosterone as men do coursing through their blood, but any overproduction can lead to quite obvious changes, such as excess body hair and a deeper voice.

Make no mistake though, this is very bad news. Not only is low testosterone deficiency linked to a range of negative health outcomes, it is even associated with a higher risk of death—not to mention fertility. One who didn’t know better might say that plummeting testosterone levels are at once the cause of and a perfect metaphor for an existential crisis in American masculinity.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/478234-testosterone-crisis-america-future/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chemicals in tap water 'may cause 5% of all bladder cancer cases in Europe' as scientists find the UK has one of the highest rates of contamination

  • Study links  drinking, showering and bathing in tap water to 6,500 cancer cases
  • A fifth of these are in the UK alone, which breaches EU contamination levels 
  • Experts say cause is long-term exposure to chemicals known as trihalomethanes
  • The carcinogens are formed as an unintended byproduct of disinfecting water

By Connor Boyd Health Reporter For Mailonline

Published: 14:00, 15 January 2020 | Updated: 14:41, 15 January 2020

Tap water may be the cause of one in 20 cases of bladder cancer in Europe each year, a major study suggests.

Researchers have linked drinking, showering and bathing in the water to more than 6,500 cases of the disease in 26 countries across the continent.  

They estimate 1,356 bladder cancer diagnoses in Britain since 2005 were caused by contaminated water, making up a fifth of all cases in the EU.

Long-term exposure to a group of chemicals called trihalomethanes (THMs) is thought to be the cause.

The chemicals, shown to be carcinogenic in animal studies, are formed as an unintended byproduct when water is disinfected with chlorine at supply plants.

Average THM levels were above legal levels in nine countries – Britain (24.2ug/l) , Spain, Portugal, Poland, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Ireland and Italy.

The European Union has said the maximum limit is 11.7 micrograms per litre (ug/L). 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7886487/Tap-water-causes-5-bladder-cancer-cases-Europe-year.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2020 at 10:35 AM, muir said:

two speeches by the same person back to back contradicting each other....what a shameless slime ball. To endanger public health so recklessly is criminal

W.H.O CHIEF SCIENTIST CAUGHT LYING TO THE PUBLIC

 

 

She has just confired how we are being used as a testing laboratory.

 

First they administer the vacine

Then we analyse the data when it goes wrong

And then use non liability technique

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Apprentice said:

She has just confirmed how we are being used as a testing laboratory.

 

First they administer the vacine

Then we analyse the data when it goes wrong

And then use non liability technique

 

that's the model for everything they do

 

They have admitted that they haven't tested for the safety of 5G but they are going to roll it out anyway. So after 30 years a body of evidence will have been built up by independent scientists and the 'conspiracy theorists' that prove that the new thing is harmful and meanwhile the corporate media will play dumb and eventually the public have heard so much testimony from whistleblowers and independent research that they begin to question the thing and at that point the government steps in and says 'yes that thing is harmful we are going to regulate it' and the industry that introduced the thing will pay out of court settlements to the surviving victims who have sued them and the whole thing is brushed under the carpet and no one goes to jail

 

rinse and repeat

 

The senate commission asks industry if they have carried out health and safety research and they say no

Senate Commerce Hearing, Blumenthal Raises Concerns on 5G Wireless Potential Health Risk

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after about 6 minutes the interviewee mentions some relevant books on the subject for those interested....

The Truth and Vaccinations with Common Law Advocate Courtenay Heading

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than 110 million Americans may be drinking water contaminated with unsafe levels of toxic 'forever chemicals' linked to cancer and infertility, report finds

  • Researchers looked at drinking water with levels of PFAS, man-made chemicals linked to behavioral problems, cancer and infertility
  • The EWG found levels they deem unsafe in 43 of 44 samples, affecting as many as 110 million Americans
  • Brunswick County, North Carolina had the highest levels followed by Quad Cities, Iowa and Miami, Florida
  • Meridian, Mississippi was the only city with no detectable levels of PFAS
  • In 34 locations were PFAS was found, neither the EPA nor state environmental agencies had reported the contamination before

By Mary Kekatos Health Reporter For Dailymail.com

Published: 16:06, 22 January 2020 | Updated: 16:48, 22 January 2020

A new report has found, for the first time that dozens of US cities, such as Miami and New Orleans, have drinking water with PFAS chemicals, linked to birth defects and cancer (file image)

'We don't know how long these communities have been drinking PFAS-contaminated water, but we do know that these chemicals have been used and discharged all across the country for years,' said EWG President and co-founder Ken Cook.

PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are man-made chemicals that have been used in several industries around the world since the 1940s.

They are ubiquitous, appearing in everything from cosmetics to water-repellent clothing to products that scrub away grease and oil, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

PFAS can also be found in molded fiber bowls, which are served at numerous takeout locations and were meant to be the solution to large amounts of generated waste.  

For the report, the EWG collected tap water samples between May 2019 and December 2019, which were analyzed by an independent laboratory.   

The report included any place where the chemicals were detected, even if levels were below the Environmental Protection Agency's health advisory threshold of 70 parts per trillion.

The EWG says that a threshold even as low as one part per trillion (ppt) could result in ill health effects. 

Of the 44 samples collected in 31 states and the District of Columbia, only one - Meridian, Mississippi - had no detectable levels of PFAS.

And only two places - Seattle, Washington and Tuscaloosa, Alabama - had levels below the 1ppt limit recommended by the EWG. 

Results showed that a sample collected from Bellville Elementary School in New Brunswick County, North Carolina had the highest levels of PFAS at 185.9 ppt - more than double the safety level set by the EPA. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7916449/More-110-million-Americans-drinking-water-contaminated-toxic-forever-chemicals.html

Rounding out the top three were Quad Cities, Iowa with 109.76 ppt and Miami, Florida with 56.71 ppt. 

Other areas with high levels were Philadelphia, New Orleans and the northern New Jersey suburbs of New York City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×