Ætherna

Bulletin Board

BookRetreats
Home >> Feed aggregator >> Categories >> Consciousness

Consciousness

Because Politifact is in partnership with Facebook as a so-called “non-partisan,” 3rd party, fact-checker, they flagged our (Greenmedinfo) page as promoting “false news” and informed us, on April 22nd, that “Your Page has reduced distribution and other restrictions because of repeated sharing of false news.” Since then, our page no longer comes up when you search for pages with the keyword “GreenMedInfo,” and we have noticed a steep decline in our reach which on an average week would exceed 1 million.

Due to our long held commitment to publishing truthful, evidence-based information on the underreported, unintended adverse effects of conventional medical interventions like vaccination, we have been subject to a wide range of attempts to discredit, defame, and censor us, over the years. For instance, all the way back in 2013, UNICEF published a report titled “Tracking anti-vaccination sentiment in Eastern European social media networks,” where GreenMedInfo.com, along with other prominent natural health websites, was cited as spreading vaccine “misinformation,” despite the fact that we simply aggregate, disseminate and provide open access to peer-reviewed research on vaccine adverse effects and safety concerns extracted directly from the US National Library of Medicine

Lately, the censorship has been scaling up to disturbing levels. In December of last year, Pinterest deleted our account for posting information questioning vaccine safety and promoting research on evidence-based natural medicine. Ironically, they claimed we were endangering the health of their users by posting alternative information, even though Pinterest regularly allows minors to access pornographic and violent contentboth of which have well-established significant deleterious psycho-emotional and physical effects in adults, much less children.

So, how does Facebook determine who is of suitable integrity and impartiality to become a 3rd party fact-checker?

They use certification provided by the “non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network to help identify and review false news.” Guess who created the organization that calls itself the International Fact-Checking Network? Poynter.  Check it out yourself here: https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/

Yes, you read that correctly. Poynter, the owner of Politifact — the presumably impartial brand and judge of what is “false” or “true” news — certified itself as trustworthy and impartial.

It does not reflect well on Facebook that it allowed Poynter to certify itself as worthy to police the world’s news feeds in order to mete out algorithmic punishment to those whose views it does not agree with. Thanks to a Veritas exposé, we know how Facebook’s censorship strategy of”boiling works behind the scenes: 

How this machiavellian scheme has gone virtually unnoticed until now is hard to understand. But we hope that our example will help others understand the shadowy agendas at play between Poynter, Politifact, Facebook, and which are hidden in broad daylight for everyone to see.

But the red flags, and organizations involved, don’t stop there. Poytner’s fact-checking operation was funded by a $380,000 grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — an organization notoriously dismissive of the downside of mass vaccination programs, which includes injuries and deaths the government has paid over $4 billion dollars in compensation towards through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund inaugurated by an act of Congress in 1986.

But are they correct about the meme we posted? Is it really “fake news”?

 

And does a mere posting of a meme, whose authorship is unknown but certainly was not produced by GreenMedInfo or its contributors, justify reducing the reach of our entire page, which over 525,000 people around the world have voluntarily and organically opted into receiving information from over the past decade?

Embarrassing as it is for the Politifact editorial team, whose entire premise is that they can be trusted to be fact-based, they didn’t report on our name correctly, calling us Greeninfo.com:

“Now, another anti-vaccine claim has surfaced on Facebook on a page called Greeninfo.com, which describes itself as an “alternative and holistic health service.”

They condemned the post as follows:

The post reads:

“Think combined doses of vaccines have been tested? They haven’t. Not once. EVER. Our children deserve better.”

The post, which provides no details or evidence, has been shared over 600 times since April 15 and was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)

Let’s cut to the chase:

The claim is false – all vaccines are tested for years before and after being made available to the public, including “combined doses.”

How did they prove this statement?

They reached out to a single individual, Daniel Salmon, who is the director of the Institute for Vaccine Safety at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who presumably can verify by his word alone the veracity of the claim. He simply countered in email: “This is not a true statement,” and pointed to a December 2008 documentfrom the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The document nowhere references the existence of a true placebo-controlled vaccine safety study, where saline instead of another adjuvanted vaccine was used; nor does the document discuss the fact that the present-day vaccination schedule involves giving dozens of vaccine antigens to children by age 6, where none of the vaccines have been studied together for safety; much less in juxtaposition to a control group who received a true placebo (saline).

This glaring problem is discussed among mainstream medical sites and authorities as well. For instance, MEDPAGE TODAY’s KevinMD.com has an article written by Chad Hayes, MD, titled “The vaccine study you’ll never see,” wherein he admits:

“No, we don’t have a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing our vaccine schedule to placebo.”

Wouldn’t MEDPAGE and KevinMD also be labeled as false news according to the standard applied to our page, for again, simply reposting a meme?

When it comes to the CDC, presumably a trustworthy source because it is believed to be “evidence-based,” their page on Vaccine Safety Concerns for Multiple Vaccines provides little assurance because their statements have no scientific citations. This is a classical example of the CDC’s cult of authority, where they use “science by proclamation” or “eminence-based medicine” to promote their agenda, instead of referencing actual research like we do at GreenMedInfo.com:

Getting multiple vaccines at the same time has been shown to be safe.

Scientific data show that getting several vaccines at the same time does not cause any chronic health problems. A number of studies have been done to look at the effects of giving various combinations of vaccines, and when every new vaccine is licensed, it has been tested along with the vaccines already recommended for a particular aged child. The recommended vaccines have been shown to be as effective in combination as they are individually.  Sometimes, certain combinations of vaccines given together can cause fever, and occasionally febrile seizures; these are temporary and do not cause any lasting damage. Based on this information, both the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend getting all routine childhood vaccines on time.

Disturbingly, the CDC acknowledges on the same page as the excerpt above:

“A child who receives all the recommended vaccines in the 2018 childhood immunization schedule may be exposed to up to 320 antigens through vaccination by the age of 2.”

This reminds us of the absurdly irresponsible statement of Dr. Paul Offit, who while admitting that vaccination is a violent act, considers it safe for an infant to receive 10,000 vaccines at once (revised from a previous statement where he said an infant could receive 100,000 vaccines at one time). Offit’s faith in the safety of vaccines represents a deep conflict of interest, considering he is the patent holder for a highly profitable rotavirus vaccine which has profound safety issues, in that it has potentially infected millions of children with serreptitious, disease-producing retroviruses.

The reality is that no study has ever been performed on the interaction and potential synergistic toxicity of the admnistration of 320 antigens through vaccination by the age of 2. This was conclusively affirmed by a presentation given by Del Bigtree, where at minute 58:40 he references a 2013 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the safety of the entire immunization schedule, citing the following passage:

“No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes … between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children … [Furthermore,] studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted.”

Many other key safety concerns with vaccines emerged from that report, with a series of them summarized by NVIC here:

  • “Few studies have comprehensively assessed the association between the entire immunization schedule or variations in the overall schedule and categories of health outcomes, and no study has directly examined health outcomes and stakeholder concerns in precisely the way that the committee was charged to address its statement of task;” (S-4)
  • “No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes that some stakeholders questioned between entirely unimmunized populations and fully immunized children. Experts who addressed the committee pointed not to a body of evidence that had been overlooked but rather to the fact that existing research has not been designed to test the entire immunization schedule;” (S4-5)
  • “The committee believes that although the available evidence is reassuring, studies designed to examine the long term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted; (S-5)
  • “Most vaccine-related research focuses on the outcomes of single immunizations or combinations of vaccines administered at a single visit. Although each new vaccine is evaluated in the context of the overall immunization schedule that existed at the time of review of that vaccine, elements of the schedule are not evaluated once it is adjusted to accommodate a new vaccine. Thus, key elements of the entire schedule – the number, frequency, timing, order and age at administration of vaccines – have not been systematically examined in research studies;” (S8-9)
  • “The committee encountered….uncertainty over whether the scientific literature has addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The committee could not tell whether its list was complete or whether a more comprehensive system of surveillance might have been able to identify other outcomes of potential significance to vaccine safety. In addition, the conditions of concern to some stakeholders, such as immunologic, neurologic, and developmental problems, are illnesses and conditions for which etiologies, in general, are not well understood.” (S-9)
  • “The committee found that evidence assessing outcomes in subpopulations of children who may be potentially susceptible to adverse reactions to vaccines (such as children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies or children born prematurely) was limited and is characterized by uncertainly about the definition of populations of interest and definitions of exposures or outcomes.” (S-9)
  • “To consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule, the field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule (the “exposure”) and clearer definitions of health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in rigorous research that will ensure validity and generalizability;” (S-9)
  • “Public testimony to the committee described the speculation that children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies and premature infants might be additional 2 subpopulations at increased risk for adverse effects from immunizations. The 2012 IOM report Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality supports the fact that individuals with certain characteristics (such as acquired or genetic immunodeficiency) are more likely to suffer adverse effects from particular immunizations, such as MMR and the varicella vaccine;” (4-6)
  • “Children with certain predispositions are more likely to suffer adverse events from vaccines than those without that risk factor, such as children with immunodeficiencies that are at increased risk for developing invasive disease from a live virus vaccine. The committee recognizes that while the CDC has identified persons with symptoms or conditions that should not be vaccinated, some stakeholders question if that list is complete. Potentially susceptible populations may have an inherited or genetic susceptibility to adverse reactions and further research in this area is ongoing.” (4-9)
  • “Relatively few studies have directly assessed the immunization schedule. Although health professionals have a great deal of information about individual vaccines, they have must less information about the effects of immunization with multiple vaccines at a single visit or the timing of the immunizations. Providers are encouraged to explain to parents how each new vaccine is extensively tested when it is approved for inclusion in the recommended immunization schedule. However, when providers are asked if the entire immunization schedule has been tested to determine if it is the best possible schedule, meaning that it offers the most benefits and the fewest risks, they have very few data on which to base their response;” (4-10)
  • “Although the committee identified several studies that reviewed the outcomes of studies of cumulative immunizations, adjuvants and preservatives, the committee generally found a paucity of information, scientific or otherwise, that addressed the risk of adverse events in association with the complete recommended immunization schedule, even though an extensive literature base on individual vaccines and combination immunizations exists;” (4- 10)
  • “Research examining the association between the cumulative number of vaccines received and the timing of vaccination and asthma, atopy and allergy has been limited; but the findings from the research that has been conducted are reassuring.” (5-7) – 14 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee.
  • “The literature that the committee found to examine the relationship between the overall immunization schedule and autoimmunity was limited.” (5-9) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The evidence of an association between autism and the overall immunization schedule is limited both in quantity and in quality and does not suggest a causal association. “ (5-11) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The evidence regarding an association between the overall immunization schedule and other neurodevelopmental disorders [learning disorders, communication disorders, developmental disorders, intellectual disability, attention deficit disorder, disruptive behavior disorders, tics and Tourette’s syndrome] is limited in quantity and of limited usefulness because of its focus on a preservative no longer used in the United States.” (S-13) – 5 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee; 3
  • “The literature associating the overall immunization schedule with seizures, febrile seizures, and epilepsy is limited and inconclusive.” (5-15) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The committee reviewed six papers on the immunization of premature infants published since 2002…..Because small numbers of infants were monitored for short periods of time, it is challenging to draw conclusions from this review.” (5-15)
  • “The committee’s review confirmed that research on immunization safety has mostly developed around studies examining potential associations between individual vaccines and single outcomes. Few studies have attempted more global assessment of entire sequence of immunizations or variations in the overall immunization schedule and categories of health outcomes, and none has squarely examined the issue of health outcomes and stakeholder concerns in quite the way that the committee was asked to do its statement of task. None has compared entirely unimmunized populations with those fully immunized for the health outcomes of concern to stakeholders.” (S-15)
  • “Queries of experts who addressed the committee in open session did not point toward a body of evidence that had been overlooked but, rather, pointed toward the fact that the research conducted to date has generally not been conceived with the overall immunization schedule in mind. The available evidence is reassuring but it is also fragmented and inconclusive on many issues.” (S-16)
  • “A challenge to the committee in its review of the scientific literature was uncertainty whether studies published in the scientific literature have addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule (the “exposure”) and clearer definitions of the health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in research that is sufficiently funded to ensure the collection of a large quantity of high-quality data;” (S-16)
  • “The committee concluded that parents and health care professionals would benefit from more comprehensive and detailed information with which to address parental concerns about the safety of the immunization schedule; (7-2)
  • “The concept of the immunization “schedule” is not well developed in the scientific literature. Most vaccine research focuses on the health outcomes associated with single immunizations or combinations of vaccines administered at a single visit. Even though each new vaccine is evaluated in the context of the overall immunization schedule that existed at the time of the review, individual elements of the schedule are not evaluated once it is adjusted to accommodate a new vaccine. Key elements of the immunization schedule – for example, the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at the time of administration of vaccines – have not been systematically examined in research studies;” (7-3)
  • “The committee encountered during the review of the scientific literature…uncertainty over whether the scientific literature has addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The committee could not determine whether its list of health outcomes was complete or whether a more comprehensive system of surveillance might identify other outcomes of potential safety significance. In addition, the conditions of concern to some stakeholders, such as immunological, neurological and developmental problems, are illnesses and conditions for 4 which the etiology, in general, is not well understood. Further research on these conditions may clarify their etiologies;” (7-3)
  • “The committee found that evidence from assessments of health outcomes in potentially susceptible populations of children who may have an increased risk of adverse reactions to vaccines (such as children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies or children born prematurely) was limited and is characterized by uncertainty about the definition of populations of interest and definitions of exposures and outcomes. Most children who experience an adverse reaction to immunization have a preexisting susceptibility. Some predispositions may be detectable prior to vaccination; others, at least with current technology and practice, are not;” (7-3)

Given the IOM report’s findings that there has not been a single study conducted to prove the safety of the entire schedulethe meme we posted stands as factually true, and those who have used it as a justification for censorsing and defaming us are clearly acting from political motivations reflective of the interests of their primary funders, such as the Gates Foundation.

CALL TO ACTION 

It’s time to let us know you are listening, and reading this article. Our social media footprint has undergone massive censorship, and as we hope you have seen, this expose’ explains what’s behind it. Please share/like/comment on this article to help us compensate for what may be our soon-to-be exit from social media in general. Deplatforming is happening to the best of us. But there is a solution. Make sure you are signed up to our newsletter: http://bit.ly/2kjN4HH.

Support Independent Media – Join or Donate to GreenMedInfo

Join thousands of supporting newsletter fans who have become actively supporting members and take advantage of powerful features and upgraded content, including e-courses, e-books, and a research library of thousands of documents.

Learn More + Become A Member
or
Make A One Time Donation

Sayer Ji is founder of Greenmedinfo.com, a reviewer at the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine, Co-founder and CEO of Systome Biomed, Vice Chairman of the Board of the National Health Federation, Steering Committee Member of the Global Non-GMO Foundation.

Link to original article

We are having a Full Moon in Scorpio on May 18th which will fall on the 19th for those in the Eastern part of the world. The energies of it are strongest in the days before and after, however, it will still be a part of the backdrop over the following two weeks. This is the peak of the Lunar cycle which began on May 4th/5th with a New Moon in Taurus.

This is a ‘Seasonal Blue Moon’ which is when we have 4 Full Moons in one season (instead of 3), with the 3rd one being the Blue Moon. This is the original definition of a Blue Moon with the term first being coined by the Farmer’s Almanac over 100 years ago.

We have been in Taurus season since April 20th and this Full Moon occurs in the last 2.5 days of it before the Sun enters Gemini. Taurus is about practicality, thoroughness, food, beauty, and nature. It enjoys sensual pleasures and is a grounded energy. As a ‘Fixed Earth’ sign, it is like a rock, and is the most invested in the physical/material world in comparison to the rest of the signs. It can also be slow, rigid, and lazy.

This Full Moon is in its opposite sign of Scorpio, triggering a push-pull or integration effect between both of these signs. Scorpio is deep, complex, passionate, intuitive, driven, powerful, calculated, observant, primal, regenerating, transformational, mysterious, intense, desiring, and sexual. It is associated with fears, shadows, death, secrets, and the extremes of Love and Hate. Scorpio energy can also be controlling, obsessive, jealous, aggressive, vengeful, and manipulative.

Both signs are associated with money, resources, values, and worth; with Taurus’ expression of these things being more ‘self-oriented’ and Scorpio being more ‘relationship/shared oriented.’ Scorpio is associated with taxes, debt, credit, investments, inheritance, which all include more then one party to be involved. Both signs also share qualities of being loyal, stubborn, and possessive.

Full Moon Opposite Sun and Mercury Aligned With Algol

This Moon opposes Mercury hours prior to peak of it being Full. We may feel a conflict or a push-pull between our thoughts and feelings, or between our minds and intuition. This can can also manifest in our relations with others in which one person or party is perceiving things mentally and the other emotionally.

The potential intensity of the Scorpio moon can also reflect verbal conflicts with this configuration. Similarly, to the themes of Taurus-Scorpio opposition mentioned above, it’s wise to try to integrate or collaborate between these two sides of the mind and emotional instincts/needs.

The Sun and Mercury are close to the fixed star ‘Algol’ which has some similar themes as the sign of Scorpio such as passion and intensity. The most positive quality of Algol is that it is a highly creative star. It is also associated with rage, hysteria, and the expression of shadows. Throughout history there sometimes has been catastrophes and significant war related developments during major planetary alignments with Algol.

Mercury Superior Conjunction on May 21st

On May 21st Mercury makes its exact conjunction with Sun in what is called the ‘Superior Conjunction’. This is sort of like the peak of the Mercury cycle which has been building up since its last conjunction in March during the previous retrograde.

Mercury will be initiating its next phase in which it travels ahead of the Sun over the next month and a half. We are transitioning into a period where we can have greater clarity regarding certain issues that have been playing out or seeded since March.

In comparison to these last few months, our minds can be more aligned with our true needs and self-expression from May 21st onward. During this next phase, we can better implement our ideas and whatever we have been thinking about with greater confidence and direction. Some people may notice some significant developments during this day or the days surrounding it.

It is occurring right at the beginning of Gemini which could emphasize potential beginnings that it may bring to certain people. It may be connected to both Gemini and Pisces themes such as communication, writing, taking a multifaceted approach, learning, adaptability, creativity, spirituality, empathy, and compassion.

Mars in Cancer is Out Of Bounds, Sextile Uranus, and Square Chiron

Mars, the traditional ruler of Scorpio, has recently entered Cancer and will stay there until July 1st/2nd. Although this isn’t something that we may notice very strongly, Mars in Cancer (in comparison to other signs) can make our actions more fuelled by our emotions and sensitivity. We can be more protective, defensive, less directly assertive and more passive aggressive.

In late April, Mars went ‘Out of Bounds’. This is when a planet travels outside of the boundaries in which it usually orbits from our Earth based perspective. It will stay like that until mid-June. This energy is about doing things differently and taking an unusual approach outside of conventional norms. This is good for exploring new territory and tapping into originality.

Mars is moving towards a sextile with Uranus which is strongest from May 21st-23rd. Although this energy is short term, it has similarities to being ‘Out of Bounds’ and can trigger some of the themes mentioned above. This is great for trying new things. We may want to take an unconventional, innovative, liberating, or technological approach to something. It could be good for making positive changes and in some cases we may experience pleasant surprises.

Mars is also moving towards a square with Chiron which is strongest from May 22nd-24th and overlaps with the energy mentioned above. At best, this can be good for taking action towards healing and personal growth. It can support the Mars-Uranus and ‘Out of Bounds’ influence in helping us to do things in a different way. However, this energy can also trigger issues or wounds connected to anger, aggression, or sexuality.

Venus in Taurus Conjunct Uranus

Venus, the ruler of Taurus, recently entered its home sign of Taurus where it will stay until June 8th/9th. Just like Mars in Cancer, this isn’t something that we will notice strongly. Venus in Taurus (in comparison to other signs) can make us seek pleasure more so around stimulating the senses, material things, luxury, and food/substances. We may value quality and practicality more so than usual.

Venus makes an exact conjunction with Uranus hours before the Full Moon, however it may have even been a bit noticeable in the few days prior. This energy can be exciting, stimulating or surprising either socially or romantically or we may meet people who are interesting and unique.

We may be more drawn to, or participate in, unusual or fun experiences or do something that makes us feel free and liberated. We may want to make aesthetic changes to something and this can even be good for expressing creative energy in new ways.

There may be some surprising developments around money and resources which can be positive or negative. In some cases, there can also be a shift around certain values or how we value something. This energy can also reflect instability, disruption, rebellion, or a sudden change in our relations, financially, and can even happen in other ways not related to Venus.

Things To Consider At This Time

What are your feelings telling you at this time and do they conflict with your mind? How can you integrate deep or complex feelings with practical or rational consideration? Do you need to make any changes around values or finances? What are your true desires?

Do you need to take a different approach or shake things up in your social relationships or love life? Do you feel like you need to take a chance and apply yourself in a new or unconventional way? Is there anything that you can be doing that can potentially help you to feel more liberated? Does anything need to be purged or transformed?

These are just some examples of themes that could come up during this period; however, there may be other variations of this energy playing out as well.  If you wish to do any sort of intentional release connected to what has come up at this Full Moon, it is best to do so anytime over the two weeks following, when it is waning. The exact moment of this Full Moon is on the night of May 18th at 9:11pm Universal Time. You can click here to see what that is in your time zone.

Follow me on INSTAGRAM, FACEBOOK, and YOUTUBE for more astrology related content.

Looking for astrological insight into what is going on in your life? Or perhaps looking to better understand your life and its potentials? Get a personalized astrology reading with Carmen (author of this article) specific to you based on your exact birth date, time, and location. Click here for more information or to order. 

This message goes out to those readers who have enjoyed one or more of the almost 200 articles I have written for Collective Evolution since April 2018, and more broadly to those who believe in CE’s mission and mandate to provide conscious fact-based  journalism: Now is the time for us to come together as a community.

It is a time when our ability to speak out against the fraud, corruption and manipulation of the social media giants and the powerful financial elite that support them is being severely impacted by these very forces. And unless those who believe in the value of our work and our mandate are willing to put a stake in the ground at this time and really support our efforts to overcome mainstream perception and its agenda to keep people distracted and asleep, our voices may be snuffed out.

The profound irony of the situation is not lost on me. Allow me to explain.

Facebook Reach

A basic explanation of how Facebook works and its impact on CE’s revenues is in order.

Up until a few years ago, the basic algorithm that Facebook used for delivering content into individuals’ daily news feeds was pretty simple: the more the individual actually clicks on the content provided by a source, the more consistently it would be delivered into their news feed. This algorithm was really in service of the people, give them more of what they are indicating that they want to see in their news feed.

Of course this was of great benefit to companies like CE, who were consistently creating content that people wanted to read. And so a few years ago it would not be unusual for a CE article to get over a million views, from some of the over five million people who had ‘liked’ the CE Facebook page that was launching the articles. This number of views in turn generated advertising revenue that more than supported CE’s operating expenses and initiatives that helped them really get their message out.

Fast forward to today, where the Facebook algorithm is increasingly being used as a tool to limit the distribution of content that mainstream forces do not want proliferating amongst an awakening population. New organizations are cropping up in cyberspace that purport to have the authority, knowledge, and discernment to label certain content as inaccurate, misleading, or flat-out ‘fake news’ that is somehow a threat to the public. What’s worse, these organizations and their findings actually have an impact on the reach that media companies like CE get for their articles.

Is this a violation of freedom of speech? Not exactly–it’s even trickier than that. It’s as if you are running a newspaper business, and they tell you that they will not prevent you from writing what you want. Your newspaper sells out daily at all the newsstands. Slowly, they start pressuring the newsstands not to put out all the newspapers you sent them. Then they start buying up all the newsstands, and the newsstands now tell you that they are not sure your content is suitable for their customers–even though they are selling out. Then the newsstands just stop buying and selling your newspapers, and you’re out of business–all because your content is not what the powerful new owners want the public to see.

The Latest Hit Job

Many examples could be given of how this plays out in our modern social media infrastructure that is so crucial in terms of the information the average person gets to see. Let’s examine the latest hit job on CE in detail to get a really clear picture of what is going on and the hypocrisy that is inherent in it.

In early March of this year I wrote an article entitled “Unvaccinated Children Pose No Risk To Anyone, Says Harvard Immunologist“. It was an article revealing that immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych has substantial scientific insights that lead her to believe that unvaccinated children pose no greater health risk than vaccinated children. I would defy anyone to examine this article and find any place in it where I am promoting ‘false news’ or authoring ‘misleading content.’

The article centers around a 2015 ‘Open Letter To Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation’ she wrote where she argues to legislators, some of whom are poised to remove vaccine exemptions from their districts, that “discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted.”

Does making a factual statement and providing the details that a person said something or did something constitute false news or misleading content? Of course not. Nowhere in the article do I personally state that unvaccinated children pose no risk to anyone. I may as an individual believe that this assertion is possible, but I do not promote it as established fact. That’s journalism.

However look at what the ‘fact-checking’ effort pictured above really is. This newly-formed online watchdog is taking a fully UNPROVEN ASSERTION, that ‘Choosing not to vaccinate increases risk of potentially serious illness to self and others,’ and utilizing it as ESTABLISHED FACT without providing evidence. It is this ‘fact-checking’ group that is promoting misleading content and doing what they are accusing us of doing. All that I am doing is sharing the opinion and actions of an Immunologist who would like healthy debate and dialogue to be going on, challenging assumptions that are passed off as fact and providing fact-based testimony to substantiate her opinion. And she does so in the interest of the health and well-being of our children.

But here’s the kicker in all this. How does this company afford to operate? Who butters their bread? As Joe Martino reveals in a rare rant below (not to be missed) they are funded by groups like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, probably the most powerful advocacy group for mass vaccination in the world, working in lock step with the pharmaceutical industry. Do we see perhaps a slight conflict of interests between a group supposedly going on the internet doing objective fact-checking of content, and a massive financial supporter that is deeply invested in the mass proliferation of vaccines across the globe?

They contributed a staggering $382,997 to these ‘fact-checkers’. Do you think that these fact-checkers are not fully compromised by the agenda of the rich and powerful? Can you imagine what CE would be able to accomplish with that kind of money?

Full Disclosure And Transparency

I would like to offer full transparency as to how this ‘strike’ against CE affects the company and impacts me personally.

When I started off with CE in April 2018, I was offered a 3-month contract that would pay me $3400/month, and I was grateful for it. Living in Toronto, this amount is considered just above a living wage. When my contract was over, and because dwindling advertising revenues due to Facebook algorithm changes had already negatively impacted CE, I was told that the company would love to retain me, but that at this time they could only afford to offer me $2040/month, allowing for reduced hours. This affected not only me, but all employees of the company.

I understood, and accepted it with gratitude. This has been the best company I’ve ever worked for. I love and respect Joe Martino as a man of great integrity, courage and wisdom, and I share this feeling with all the great people who work here. In fact I consider CE to be a model for how evolved companies should operate in the future. There is no hierarchy, we are all treated with great respect, our input is always welcomed, and self-responsibility is engendered in a way that makes each of us want to go above and beyond to make things work.

However, as Joe reveals in the video above, these strikes against CE (all of which have reeked of censorship and the growing establishment control over content) has seen a reduction in our reach to the public that results in a monthly loss of about $10,000 in advertising revenues. This is equivalent to three times my previous full-time salary. We are at the stage where any more shortfall in advertising revenues will affect the company’s ability to pay its employees, including me.

In truth, if I could afford it, I would work for this company for free. I feel we have an important mission and I feel like I am a big part of it. However the reality is, with a 5-year old at home, I have to eventually get back to earning a living wage. And I certainly hope that I can do it as a member of Collective Evolution.

The Takeaway

The irony is, all this chaos and uncertainty may actually be the catalyst for something very positive. The efforts by Facebook and other social media players to drastically reduced our advertising revenues has forced us to look at a different revenue model, which involves community funding. In truth, getting off of the conventional advertising model and being directly supported instead by those who believe in what we are doing is more aligned with our values.

Now, rather than passively clicking on whatever content comes to them from their Facebook news feed, our supporters will have to make conscious choices as to what content they will access and give their attention to, if they want to see anything other than a monotonous litany of mainstream propaganda. And in taking the important step to directly support companies that are trying to make our world a better place, our community will begin moving off the mainstream grid and increasingly gain power to effect change in the world.

The support we have already gotten as a result of people joining CETV is one of the main reasons we are still in a position to fight for our existence. If you don’t know about it, CETV is our online video platform that features the news broadcast ‘the Collective Evolution show’ and other great weekly shows. Consider joining here.

We have many other great ideas that we are dying to implement that will truly bring our community together, but we are still working our way out of survival mode. If everyone pitches it, we could probably exit survival mode overnight and really get things into gear. So I’d like to offer a slogan I came up with for our CMM (Conscious Media Movement) Campaign, which you can donate to here: Help us survive, then together let’s thrive!

There is a lot of hysteria surrounding measles outbreaks right now, and a lot of mainstream media bombardment in North America whereby unvaccinated children are wrongfully blamed for multiple measles outbreaks. This media hysteria capitalizes on terms like “anti-vax conspiracy theorists” instead of actually acknowledging the points that are being made by vaccine awareness advocates, many of whom are scientists and doctors. The point is, when people are trying to shut down and block credible information and critical thinking, you know something is up.

When it comes to the measles, blaming these outbreaks on unvaccinated people makes absolutely no sense at all. Why? Because, since the introduction of the measles vaccine, outbreaks have occurred in highly vaccinated populations. Furthermore, ample evidence has been presented showing that vaccinated people might also be shedding their virus and infecting others with it.

For example, during the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccinees. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences. The media (Pharma-owned) generated high public anxiety. This fear mongering led to the demonization of unvaccinated children, who were perceived as the spreaders of this disease. Rebecca J. McNall, a co-author of the published report, is a CDC official in the Division of Viral Diseases who had the data proving that the measles outbreak was in part caused by the vaccine. It is evidence of the vaccine’s failure to provide immunity. (source)

There are dozens of studies on measles outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations that found that the cause of these outbreaks was not due to failure to vaccinate, but rather because of a failing vaccine. I will provide more examples further in the article, but for now, I want to get to some recently published information.

This research was published in the journal Vaccine, titled “Assessing measles vaccine failure in Tianjin, China,” and it’s another study showing measles outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations.

“Despite increasing global measles vaccination coverage, progress toward measles elimination has slowed in recent years. In China, children receive a measles-containing vaccine (MCV) at 8 months, 18– 24 months, and some urban areas offer a third dose at age 4–6 years. However, substantial measles cases in Tianjin, China, occur among individuals who have received multiple MCV doses.” 

The study explains how there has been an increase in global measles vaccinations, and they’re right. Despite this fact, mainstream media in America continues to blame low vaccination rates for these outbreaks, when that could not be further from the truth. Luckily, the CDC has a super-easy, interactive map that illustrates this data very clearly, and it would be great if members of the mainstream media actually started to take a look at the data. Vaccination rates in the States are actually very high. So why are they blaming the unvaccinated? Washington State, for example, has a 90 percent MMR vaccination coverage.

The study from China goes on to explain:

 Twenty-nine percent of those in the surveillance dataset and 54.4% of those in the case series received at least one dose of MCV. The minimum and median time-to-diagnosis since vaccination revealed an increase in time since vaccination for incremental doses. Considerable measles cases in Tianjin occur in vaccinated children, and further research is needed to understand the reasons for vaccine failure.

Another study published in the highly authoritative Bulletin of the World Health Organization looked at recent measles occurrences throughout China and found that there were 707 measles outbreaks in the country recorded between 2009 and 2012, with a steep upward trend in 2013. “The number of measles cases reported in the first 10 months of 2013 – 26,443 – was three times the number reported in the whole of 2012.” This is odd considering that since  2009 “…the first dose of measles-virus-containing vaccine has reached more than 90% of the target population.” (source)

A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases – whose authorship includes scientists working for the Bureau of Immunization, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA – looked at evidence from the 2011 New York measles outbreak, which showed that individuals with prior evidence of measles vaccination and vaccine immunity were both capable of being infected with measles and infecting others with it (secondary transmission). The study concluded that “measles may occur in vaccinated individuals, but secondary transmission from such individuals has not been documented.” (source)

Furthermore, according to a MedAlerts search of the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, as of 2/5/19, the cumulative raw count of adverse events from measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines alone was: 93,929 adverse events, 1,810 disabilities, 6,902 hospitalizations, and 463 deaths. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid out approximately $4 billion to compensate families of vaccine injured children. As astronomical as the monetary awards are, they’re even more alarming considering HHS claims that only an estimated 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). If the numbers from VAERS and HHS are correct – only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported and only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – then up to 99% of vaccine injuries go unreported and the families of the vast majority of people injured by vaccines are picking up the costs, once again, for vaccine makers’ flawed products.

From 2013 to 2017, measles killed 2 people, but the vaccine killed 127 people. The odds of dying from the measles are 0.01 – 0.02 percent, meaning you have a greater chance of getting hit by a lightning bolt multiple times. Furthermore, if your child contracts the measles, they will be immune for life, but that cannot be said for vaccinated children.

Our Episode About Vaccines On CETV

On a recent episode of CETV, we discussed the mainstream media and the way they fear monger and blame the unvaccinated without addressing important facts. We talked about the history of measles outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations, provided multiple clips from scientists and doctors sharing information related to the above, and cited examples of fraud, specifically with regards to the MMR vaccination and the CDC.

Below you can watch our discussion, and the first hour is free. To watch the other 2 hours of this episode, become a member of CETV.

Another Episode Specifically About The MMR Vaccine

In a later episode of The Collective Evolution Show on CETV, Joe, Richard and I discussed New York’s mandatory vaccination order as well as Del Bigtree’s analysis of the MMR studies he received and the reason that Big Pharma does not want to do proper, large-scale studies on the safety of vaccines.

A FOIA request by Del Bigtree reveals that the 8 studies supporting the release of the MMR vaccine were only 6 weeks long, used only 800 children, and led to respiratory and gastrointestinal illnesses in many of the children.

Related Recent & Important Articles On Vaccines

Biochemical Engineer Drops Bombshell Facts About Measles & The MMR Vaccine In Washington

Worlds Leading Authority On Aluminum Toxicity Has GoFundMe to Study Aluminum In Vaccines Shut Down

We now know that aluminum, once injected, does not leave the body but travels to distant organs and the brain. More information on that in the article linked above.

More Examples of Measles Outbreaks In Highly Vaccinated Populations

A measles outbreak in vaccinated individuals occurred in Israel during 2017—reported on by the CDC—where all but one patient had laboratory evidence of a “previous immune response” (secondary vaccine failure), and the one patient who did not display such evidence reported having received two doses of the vaccine (primary vaccine failure). In addition, the index patient—the one who launched the chain of transmission—had received three doses of the measles-containing vaccine.

If we go back in history a little bit:

Barratta et al. (1970) investigated an outbreak in Florida from December 1968 to February 1969 and found little difference in the incidence of measles in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. (source)

Robertson et al. (1992) wrote that in 1985 and 1986, 152 measles outbreaks in US school-age children occurred among persons who had previously received the measles vaccine. “Every 2-3 years, there is an upsurge of measles irrespective of vaccination compliance.” (source)

In 2010, there were a number of children in Croatia who had contracted measles that were fully vaccinated (source). The interesting thing about this case was the fact that not only had they become infected with measles from the vaccine strain, rather than the normal “natural” strain, but they were also contagious.

According to an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1987, “An outbreak of measles occurred among adolescents in Corpus Christi, Texas, in the spring of 1985, even though vaccination requirements for school attendance had been thoroughly enforced.” They concluded that “outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune.” (source)

An article published in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled, “A persistent outbreak of measles despite appropriate prevention and control measures,” looked into an outbreak of 137 cases of measles in Montana. School records indicated that 98.7% of students were appropriately vaccinated, leading the researchers to conclude: “This outbreak suggests that measles transmission may persist in some settings despite appropriate implementation of the current measles elimination strategy.” (source)

According to an article published in the American Journal of Public Health in 1991, “In early 1988 an outbreak of 84 measles cases occurred at a college in Colorado in which over 98 percent of students had documentation of adequate measles immunity…” due to an immunization requirement in effect since 1986. They concluded that “…measles outbreaks can occur among highly vaccinated college populations.” (source)

According to an article published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health in 1991, a 1989 measles outbreak was “largely attributed to an incomplete vaccination coverage,” but following an extensive review the researchers concluded that “incomplete vaccination coverage is not a valid explanation for the Quebec City measles outbreak.” (source)

According to an article published in the journal Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical, in a measles outbreak from March 1991 to April 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, 76.4% of those suspected to be infected had received measles vaccines before their first birthday. (source)

According to an article published in the South African Medical Journal in 1994, “[In] August 1992 an outbreak occurred, with cases reported at many schools in children presumably immunised.” Immunization coverage for measles was found to be 91%, and vaccine efficacy found to be only 79%, leading them to conclude that primary and secondary vaccine failure was a possible explanation for the outbreak. (source)

Furthermore, what about the bioaccumulation of vaccine ingredients? Studies have shown that injected aluminum does not exit the body, and can be detected inside the brain up to a year after injection.  There are several other concerning vaccine ingredients like aborted human fetal cells, formaldehyde, and MSG. Why are these never looked at when studies are being conducted? You can read more and access information and studies about aluminum here.

The Takeaway

How safe are our vaccines? Why does the mainstream constantly use terms like “anti-vax conspiracy theorists” to brainwash people instead of actually addressing the points made by vaccine awareness advocates? Why are they always attacking instead of just discussing? It’s OK to question vaccines, think for yourself, utilize critical thinking, and seek out information that mainstream media seems to ignore.

Legendary UFO researcher Stanton Friedman has passed away at the age of 84. Stanton was a long time UFOlogist, one of the “originals” who played a huge role in bringing credibility to a topic that was previously only ridiculed. Friedman was an accomplished writer who published dozens of papers about UFOs and wrote and co-authored several books. As CBC News points out, “He was also a familiar face in documentaries, radio and television, including multiple appearances on Larry King Live, and lectured about UFOs for hundreds of colleges and professional groups across the United States, Canada and many other countries.”

Friedman, like many others, was convinced that intelligent extraterrestrials have visited and are still visiting our planet. He was a nuclear physicist and an extremely intelligent man, just as many others in this field are with similar backgrounds to his.

He is one of many who recognized that the evidence in support of extraterrestrial intelligent life visiting our planet is far greater than the evidence we use to accept other well-known concepts like black holes. The evidence in support of extraterrestrial life is vast. It’s full of optical data (video footage, radar trackings), other physical evidence, high-ranking whistleblower testimonies from hundreds of sources, and much more. This is what Friedman did such a good job at: presenting the evidence in a credible, academic manner.

Friedman knew that the disclosure of this reality would affect all aspects of humanity, and that it was and still remains the best kept secret in human history thanks to the “official campaign of secrecy and ridicule.” ( Ex-CIA Director Roscoe Hillenkoetter )

This subject has permeated the mainstream in many ways. It’s gained a tremendous amount of credibility, and once you dive deep into the rabbit hole, you begin to ask yourself so many other questions that cannot yet be answered. The fact that we are not alone and are being visited is one small part of this giant puzzle. It’s simply the tip of the iceberg when it comes to discovering more about the nature of our reality.

Thanks to people like Friedman, we continue to unravel this strange and interesting phenomenon.

He was most well-known in the UFO community for bringing credibility to the Roswell incident. He was also a big proponent of the MAJESTIC 12 documents and believed that they were authentic. You can read what he had to say about those here.

For almost sixty years the public has been hearing about flying saucers and then UFOs. Press coverage has ebbed and flowed, but polls have always shown a very high awareness score. Motion pictures, tabloids, and TV programs have picked up the slack with a mélange of fiction and some truth. Unfortunately, much of what we have been told by the “powers that be” has been false. Many different government agencies have shared in the misrepresentation and have provided outright LIES as well. These include the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, United States Air Force, etc. The press and certain other academic and supposedly scientific groups, such as SETI (Silly Effort To Investigate) have often blindly accepted and promulgated nonsense without any effort to get at truth.  – Friedman

In honour of the legend, I thought I’d leave you with one of his many lectures. Friedman did a lot of investigations, visiting real sites and real archives where important documents are held.

The Takeaway

The UFO field is filled with credible information, and once you begin to analyze it, the more you know the more you realize you don’t know. At the same time, one thing seems to be certain, and that’s the fact that:

“There are objects in our atmosphere which are technically miles in advance of anything we can deploy, that we have no means of stopping them coming here … [and] that there is a serious possibility that we are being visited and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations. That it behooves us, in case some of these people in the future or now should turn hostile, to find out who they are, where they come from, and what they want. This should be the subject of rigorous scientific investigation and not the subject of ‘rubishing’ by tabloid newspapers.” – Lord Admiral Hill-Norton, Former Chief of Defence Staff, 5 Star Admiral of the Royal Navy, and Chairman of the NATO military committee

A lot of people in this field have disagreed on many things, but the point is that we are not alone, and that in itself has huge implications. As time goes on, the truth will continue to seep out like it has been doing for decades.

Stanton will be dearly missed.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—“Many of the things I’m going to say today would be slanderous if they weren’t true. And, if they are not true, then Merck should sue me. But Merck won’t do that. And they won’t do that because in the United States, truth is an absolute defense against slander.” 

This must-watch video details the many problems with the development and safety of Merck’s third-highest grossing product, Gardasil. Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD’s Chairman and Chief Legal Counsel, ask that you watch and share this video so that you, and others, may make an informed decision of whether or not to give your child, boy or girl, a Gardasil vaccine. It can also be a useful tool for pediatricians who are trying to understand how this vaccine, that is actually causing health problems with young people, could have been approved by FDA and then recommended by CDC. The video is full of jaw-dropping facts about Gardasil and the clinical trials leading up to its release upon an unsuspecting public.

Transcript of “The Science” presentation:

Download “The Science” Transcript

Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—Science Day Presentation for Gardasil

Hi, I’m Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and I’m making this video for the sake of parents who are trying to make an informed decision of whether or not to give their child, their boy or girl the Gardasil vaccine.

I’m also making this video as a tool for pediatricians who are trying to understand how this vaccine—if it’s actually causing all of these problems with young girls—could have been approved by FDA and then mandated by CDC.

Virtually all of the things that I’m going to talk about in this video are available to the public on public documents as I’m going to show.

Finally, I want to say this about Merck which is the company that makes the Gardasil vaccine.

Many of the things that I’m going to say today would be slanderous if they were not true. And if they’re not true then Merck should sue me. But Merck won’t do that and they won’t do it because in the United States truth is an absolute defense to slander. And second of all Merck knows that if they sue me, I’m going to immediately file a discovery request, and many, many, more documents are going to emerge that illustrate even more fraud by this company on the American public and the people all over the world.

Finally, as a footnote I’m not going to talk today about the specific biological mechanisms that allow this vaccine to cause harm in human beings. That information is out there it’s in dozens of peer-reviewed, published scientific documents. Many of these are described on our website and I urge people to go to the Children’s Health Defense website to educate themselves on those issues.

Today we’re going to talk about the clinical trial about Merck’s fraud in that process…and this is Merck’s claim:

The HPV vaccine will “eliminate cervical cancers and other HPV associated cancers.”

The danger of dying from HPV cancer in this country is 1 death in 43.5 thousand people.

Imagine you have a deck of cards but instead of 50 cards. There’s 43,500 on a on a big, big table and one of those cards is a black card. If you get that, you die.

So, Merck’s deal is that it’s going to remove that black card from the deck. But in order to play the game and make sure that Merck removes the black card, everybody who participates has to put in $420 because that’s the cost of the three-dose Gardasil vaccine.

So, here’s Gardasil by the numbers. So, the cost of the three-jab series average is about $420. There are 76 million children who essentially have been mandated by CDC to receive these vaccines. A blockbuster product from Merck, and global revenues from this vaccine today are about $2.3 billion dollars. It’s the third largest product in the company’s inventory.

The cost of saving one American life is 18.3 million dollars. People could argue whether or not that’s a reasonable value of a human life. What I would say was is that the criteria that we should use for evaluating reasonableness—is there a cheaper way to save more lives? And people would argue that Pap smears are the most effective way that 80 percent of cervical cancer deaths have already been eliminated by Pap smears. And this is the most effective technology.

Incidentally in another context HHS has already put a value on human life and the value is $250k. That is the maximum number that the vaccine compensation program will pay for killing an American citizen.

Prior to marketing the vaccine, the FDA licenses the vaccine, and in that licensing process Merck had to show that the vaccine was safe. According to Federal regulations the word “safety” means “relative freedom from harmful effects, taking into consideration the character of the product in relationship to the condition of the recipient at that time.”

So, what is the condition of the recipients of that target group for this vaccine. And this vaccine targets millions of preteens and teens, for whom the risk of dying from cervical cancer is practically zero. Cervical cancer’s median age of death is 58. It is first diagnosed at age 50 (median).

A teenage girl or boy has zero chance of dying of this illness. Which means the threshold for giving this medication is very, very high.

Secondly it is mandated in some jurisdictions So the government is actually—government officials are actually—coming in and ordering people to take this medical intervention. So, we have to be sure that the threshold for risk, “the risk profile” for that medical intervention should be very, very low.

Third, unlike other medical interventions Gardasil recipients are perfectly healthy. So, when you give medication to a healthy individual you have to make sure that the risk profile is practically zero. And in order to determine risk, there is a standardized protocol. And it’s called double-blind placebo studies. What does that mean?

It means that the drug company that’s trying to license this product gives the medication to one group of people, maybe 5,000 or 10,000 people, and gives a placebo, an inert placebo, either an identical looking pill that is inert—it’s either saline or sugar—to a similarly situated group of 5,000 or 10,000 people and it’s double blind meaning that neither the patients nor the researchers knew who got the placebo and who got the actual medication.

And you can see here, here’s what the NIH says about the National Institute for Health placebos: an inactive substance that looks like a drug.

So here are typical examples:

Lipitor was given during its study phase to about 17k subjects. Half of them received Lipitor half of them received a sugar pill that looked identical to Lipitor and they were observed and studied for up to 3.3 years.

Why for so long? Because many of the injuries that are caused by medication are latent—they don’t show up for two or three or four or five years cancer for example may not show up for four or five years after the exposure. Autoimmune diseases and allergies and these kind of things take a long time to diagnose. Enbrel for that reason was delayed for 6.6 years and against a control group that received a saline injection.

Botox, there was a national emergency to get Botox to market so people could get their wrinkles cured, was studied for 51 weeks and it was studied against a saline injection.

Now I’m going to show you one of the really outrageous frauds that Merck committed during the clinical trials. This is an insert that is part of every vaccine package. And you can go on the Internet right now and look up that Merck product and search and find these two tables.

In the initial table you can see a there are three columns and this is a table that just looks at injuries at the vaccine site for redness and itching and bruising and pain at the vaccine site and they use one…there were 5,000 girls—5,088 girls who got the Gardasil vaccine.

Number two, there were 3,470 girls who got the AAHS control, what is that? That is the adjuvant in the vaccine. That is a toxic neurotoxin, that’s put in the vaccine to make it more long-lasting to provoke an immune response in the subject of the vaccine.

And most people believe that it is that aluminum adjuvant that is causing all of these injuries in the girls who are getting the vaccine. And there were 3,470 people who received just the neurotoxin with no antigens and no other vaccine components.

And you have a third group which is the placebo group. What I want you to look at is at these numbers. That in the Gardasil and AAHS control there is virtually the same number of injuries.

And when you get to the saline placebo, that injury rate is cut in half.

Now let’s go to the table where they talk about real systemic injuries…autoimmune diseases, and instead of showing us real science, which is to show us what happened to the saline group, they hide the saline group as a way of fooling you, your pediatrician and the regulatory agency by compressing it into the aluminum group and they never tell us. They say this is a combination of the aluminum adjuvant and the saline placebo. They don’t tell us how many in each category were compressed there. The real thing that you need to watch here is what happened.

These are all very, very serious injuries. These are injuries that in some cases people would feel were worse than death—and that affect people and debilitate for a lifetime in many cases.

And if you look at the bottom of the Gardasil group an astonishing 2.3 percent of the girls in the clinical study who received the Gardasil vaccine got ill from autoimmune diseases, many within seven months of taking the vaccine.

And look what happened in the aluminum group—the same number exactly. 2.3 percent.

Nobody, no parent would allow their daughter to take a substance that had a one-in-40 chance of giving them a lifetime disability.

World Health Organization says that using a spiked placebo, or a faux-cebo as Merck did with Gardasil, puts you at a methodological disadvantage that “it may be difficult or impossible to assess vaccine safety.”

Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who developed the polio vaccine…who developed the pertussis vaccine, who developed the rotavirus vaccine—the Stanley Plotkin award is the Nobel Prize of vaccinology it’s given to the top vaccinologist every year—and what he says is:

Unless you have a true control group you are in LA LA LAND.

Finally, the American Medical Association says the absence of double-blind placebo testing and short-term studies of chronic disease are “the indicia of marketing masquerading as science.”

And that’s what Merck gave us.

The Cochrane Collaboration—thirty thousand scientists from all over the world who came together to create an independent assessment of medical protocols which they saw as being increasingly controlled by the industry—The Cochrane Collaboration said the use of active comparators probably increased the occurrence of harms and the comparative group thereby masking harms created by the HPV vaccine.

And that indeed was Merck’s point…to hide those harms.

So, if you do the math women are 100 times more likely to suffer serious adverse events from the Gardasil vaccine than they are to be protected from cervical cancer.

So now we have a very different bargain in this card game that we’re playing with Merck.

If 43 thousand cards and the black card—the death card is gone—but now, there are a thousand blue cards which if you pick one of those by mistake you have a good chance of getting an autoimmune disease. Nobody would take that bargain.

So, in order to get the FDA license to market this vaccine Merck did a number of studies, which are called protocols. We don’t know how many they did because they’re not telling us they never disclosed it.

The one we’re most concerned with is protocol 18. The reason protocol 18 is critical is because that was the basis for FDA giving Merck the license to produce and market the vaccine.

Why is that? Because protocol 18 is the only one in which the target audience for this vaccine. 11- and 12-year old girls was actually tested, and had a control group. The other ones looked at big cohorts of women were 16 to 25-year old and 16 to 26-year old women.

Protocol 18 looked at girls and boys from ages 9 to 15. It was a total of 1200 children. and almost 600 controls. That is a very, very, tiny group of people to study in order to determine the safety of a product is going to be marketed to billions of children around the world.

Now I’m going to show you one of the key fraudulent flimflams that Merck used to get this license. FDA said they approved Gardasil based on protocol 18 because protocol 18 was of particular interest because it’s the only protocol in which Merck used a true saline placebo instead of the aluminum adjuvant as a control.

That’s what Merck told FDA and the CDC but Merck was lying. It actually did not use a true saline placebo. It used what Merck called the “carrier solution.” Which is all of the components of the vaccine except for the aluminum and the viral particles the antigen.

Among the compounds that we know were in the carrier solution are Polysorbate 80 which we have no idea what the safety profile is because it’s never been tested for safety independently in vaccines. Sodium borate which is borax which is banned by FDA in food products and all food products in the United States, and is banned altogether in Europe, genetically modified yeast, (there’s no safety test ever been done on it in vaccines) L-histidine, the same, and possibly DNA fragments.

I say possibly because we know there are DNA fragments in the final vaccine, we don’t know how they got there. And Merck has lied about the DNA fragments from the outset.

And despite these potentially toxic components of compounds that are in the vaccine, the 596 children that were given the carrier solution fared much better in the other than any other cohort in the study. The girls and boys who receive the carrier solution were the only significant cohorts with no serious adverse events for the first 15 days.

And here’s another one of the gravamen of the fraud that Merck committed in its Gardasil trials, but it turns out in the protocol 18 study, it appears Merck cut the amount of aluminum that was given to the vaccine group in half. They tested a completely different formulation. If true, we theorize that they took the aluminum out to reduce the number of injuries and to mask the really bad safety profile of this vaccine.

And since the protocol 18 data are not based on the Gardasil vaccine formulation, the trial itself constitutes rank scientific fraud.

Here’s another bag of tricks that was used by Merck in order to skew the clinical trials results in favor of Gardasil.

Merck and its researchers use what they call exclusion criteria—for example people who had zero allergies, people who had prior genital infections were thrown out of the clinical trials. People who had over four sex partners in their entire lives were excluded from the trials. Anybody who had a history of immunological or nervous system disorders, people with chronic illnesses and seizure disorders, people with other medical conditions, people who had reactions to vaccine ingredients including the aluminum, yeast and the benzonase. or anybody with a history of alcohol and drug abuse.

If you really wanted to know whether the vaccine was helping people—if it was effective—wouldn’t you want those people in your study wouldn’t you want people who had a genetic vulnerability to cancer in your study to see if it actually was capable of preventing cancer.

Then Merck had one catch all exclusion category which was any condition which in the opinion of the investigator might interfere with the evaluation of the study objectives. Well, that gave Merck and its paid investigators complete control to throw people out of the study who they thought might make the study look not successful. All of these exclusionary categories gave Merck the ability to limit the study to people who were like All of these exclusionary categories gave Merck the ability to limit this study to people who were like an elite club of superheroes…the people who get the vaccine are not the same people they tested on. They tested it on the Avengers. They didn’t test it on, you know, Joe Bag-of-Donuts … the people are actually receiving this vaccine in day to day life. And by doing that they were able to mask whatever injury might show up in a larger and more vulnerable population who are actually receiving the vaccine.

Experts used an arsenal of sloppy protocols to again, hide vaccine injuries. Among these, Merck gave report cards—the daily journal report cards— only to 10 percent of the people who they tested the vaccine on and told those people only make reports for 14 days after the injection. And the report cards were only designed to collect jab site information. So, redness, itching, bruising, fever.

And they ignored altogether the autoimmune diseases and menstrual cycle problems and fertility problems and pain and dizziness and seizures and all of the other things that we’ve now seen are associated with the vaccine. In fact, there are numerous girls who report that they were injured that they attempted to report those injuries to Merck, and that Merck rebuffed them.

Furthermore, Merck gave extraordinary discretion to its researchers to determine what was a vaccine injury in what was not a vaccine injury and because there was no inert placebo, it was completely within their discretion. If a girl came back with seizures or autoimmune disease or menstrual cycle problems they could just say to the girl, well that’s not related to the vaccine.

In some cases, we know that Merck actively covered up and lied about injuries that it had a duty to report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. For example, in the case of Christina Tarsell, a Maryland girl, who died from the Gardasil vaccine, Merck lied about that death in its official reports of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It told the system that Christina’s doctor had told Merck that her death was the result of a virus.

And the doctor adamantly denies that. Merck has refused to remove the misinformation from the VAERS system.

Furthermore, Merck lied to the girls who participated in these studies, telling them No.1, that the placebo was saline and that it contained no other ingredients. And No. 2, that the study in which they were participating was not a safety study. They were told that there had already been safety studies and that the vaccine had been proven safe.

What did this do for Merck? It made it so the girls were less likely to report injuries associated with the vaccine. Because they believed that the vaccine that they were receiving had already been proven safe and that any injuries they did experience maybe a month or two months or three months after the vaccine must be simply coincidental and had nothing to do with the vaccine.

Despite all of these efforts by Merck to discourage those from reporting vaccine injuries during the clinical trials, half of the girls in the Gardasil group and half of them in the aluminum adjuvant group reported serious injuries after receiving the vaccine.

In order to conceal the link between these injuries and the vaccine, Merck invented a brand new medical metric that had never been heard of before called “new medical conditions” and it dismissed all of these new injuries which affected 50 percent of the girls who received the vaccine and the adjuvant as “new medical conditions”, unrelated to the vaccines, simply sad coincidences.

Many of these diseases were serious diseases—blood lymphatic diseases, anemia, endocrine diseases, autoimmune diseases, G.I., Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, vaginal infections musculoskeletal injuries, arthritis, neoplasm, Hodgkin’s disease, neurological diseases, psychiatric diseases, depression, reproductive and breast disorders, menstrual irregularities, and pain. Over 3 percent of the girls—1 in 30—in both groups required surgical and medical procedures.

So, this card game that we’re playing with Merck has now become a really bad bet.

Merck has removed the one black card but you now have a 1 in 40 chance of drawing a blue card and getting an autoimmune disease that may afflict you for the rest of your life and you have a 1 in 2 chance of having some other serious medical condition.

So now let’s look at Merck’s central claim which is that the Gardasil vaccine will prevent cervical cancer.

Merck’s in a sweet position here, let’s face it because the target group vaccine is 11-year olds, and the median age of death for cervical cancer is age 58. Merck essentially is making this bargain.

It’s telling the 11-year old girl if you take our vaccine 47 years from now you won’t die of cervical cancer. And of course, that truth is you can’t make a vaccine that proves that it’s going to prevent cancer 47 years from now. There’s no way to test for that.

So, Merck used a shortcut. It said we’re going to prove that it prevents these what it called surrogate end points. The best thing that Merck had come up with was CIN2 and CIN3 lesions which it called precancerous lesions even though most of those lesions never mature into cancer.

So how can you call something precancerous when it was never going to turn into cancer?

And here’s what a study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology said about Merck’s scheme: CIN3 is an imperfect diagnosis of precancer, and an intermediate surrogate for cancer.

Their own attorneys told them for these products, the indication is the surrogate, not the ultimate.  Promotion cannot make any claim, vis-a-vis the ultimate end point, based upon the fate of a surrogate endpoint.

Merck has another problem. Recent peer reviewed scientific studies indicate that perhaps only a third of cervical cancer cases are even associated with the HPV vaccine. That would completely put the lie to Merck’s claims that Gardasil is going to eliminate cervical cancer altogether.

So now we have a really dubious deal because we need to put that black card back in the deck because now, we have doubts about whether or not this vaccine can prevent cervical cancer at all.

But the news gets worse. Gardasil may actually cause cancer. Gardasil’s insert states Gardasil has never been evaluated for potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity. And Gardasil’s ingredients include possible carcinogens including human DNA.

And look at this…This is Merck’s own pre-clinical trial records and those records show that girls or women, who already had HPV—had been exposed at some point in their life to it—actually had a negative efficacy of 44.6 percent.

What is negative efficacy? It means those girls had a 44.6 increased risk of getting those precancerous lesions. To make things even worse, there are recent scientific studies that suggest a phenomena of what is known as type replacement—some 200 different strands of HPV, some of them are more cancerous than others, and the current HPV vaccine goes after 9 of those 200 viral types. What these studies indicate is by eliminating those particular strains of the virus it opens up an ecological niche in the woman so that more lethal and virulent viruses can actually colonize that spot and dramatically increase the risk of cervical cancer.

So now Merck’s deal is looking really grim. Not only do we have a one-in-40 chance of getting an autoimmune disease and a 50 percent chance of getting some serious medical condition but now the cancer risk has been reinserted and actually amplified.

And now let’s look at some of the non-cancer injuries that Merck found in its preclinical studies.

The miscarriage rate in the preclinical studies after Gardasil doubled the background rate. The birth defects in the Gardasil group were five times the rate of birth defects from the control group. As to reproductive disorders an astonishing 10.9 percent of the women in the pool group reported reproductive disorders within seven months of receiving Gardasil compared to 1.2 percent in the placebo group. The death rate in the Gardasil group and the clinical trials was 8.5 per 10 thousand.

Death risk from this vaccine according to Merck’s own studies is 37 times the risk of dying from cervical cancer.

Oh, now look at the deal that Merck has offered us they’ve actually increased our risk of dying by 37 times.

So now let’s look at post-licensing surveillance. So, Merck can argue that we might have missed something in our pre-licensing studies but surely if there were any injuries being caused by this vaccine we would see them in post-licensing surveillance.

And the problem with that is that the post-licensing surveillance system, the principle one, is called the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The system is a voluntary system that simply does not work. It’s broken. In fact, in 2010 HHS hired another federal agency the agency for healthcare research quality and a group of Harvard researchers to study Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and those researchers found fewer than 1 percent of adverse events of vaccines are ever reported.

But even under that system, Gardasil has distinguished itself as the most dangerous vaccine ever invented.

In fact, when you compare it to Menactra which is a meningitis vaccine that’s given to the same age group—teenagers—Gardasil had an 8.5 times more emergency room visits, 12.5 times more hospitalizations, 10 times more life-threatening events and 26.5 times more disabilities than Menactra.

The vaccine court which is within HHS has made awards for numerous deaths and very, very serious injuries from the Gardasil vaccine. So, HHS itself admits that this vaccine kills people and it’s given compensation to the families that were injured.

The same wave of serious injuries and deaths that have been seen in nations around the globe, when they adopt mandates for the Gardasil vaccine. Even Gardasil’s own insert, the package insert that the company provides, acknowledges that the injuries that can be caused by this vaccine include death, pancreatitis, fatigue, malaise, immune system disorders, autoimmune diseases, anaphylaxis, musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, nervous system disorders, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, that’s brain injuries, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and other neuron diseases, paralysis, seizures, Transverse myelitis, and vascular disorders.

In Australia, in 2015, the Australian Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration reported that the adverse rates in girls is 17 times the incidental rate for cervical cancer throughout their lifespan. The country only looked at a handful of conditions including demyelinating disorders, complex regional pain syndrome and premature ovarian failure. There are many, many other injuries that included hospitalizations that were not subject to that study.

India suspended its Gardasil trials after numerous deaths and serious injuries.

A south Asian Journal of Cancer found that “a healthy 16-year old is at zero immediate risk of dying from cervical cancer but is faced with a small, but real risk of death or serious disability from a vaccine that has yet to prevent a single case of cervical cancer.”

Japan de-recommended Gardasil three months after it had added the vaccine to the immunization schedule. Japan’s health ministry discovered adverse events reported after Gardasil’s approval were many times higher than other vaccines on the recommended schedule—these included seizures severe headaches partial paralysis complex regional pain syndrome and an undeniable causal relationship between persistent pain and the vaccination.

Japanese researchers found that the adverse event rate for the HPV vaccine was as high as nine percent and that pregnant women injected with the vaccine aborted or miscarried 30 percent of their babies.

In 2015 the Japanese Association for Medical Sciences issued official guidelines for managing symptoms of injuries caused by the Gardasil vaccine and the association announced there was no proof that this vaccine even prevents cervical cancer.

Alarmingly Merck’s own studies indicate that the Gardasil vaccine may disproportionately impact Asian women. For example, in protocol 19 there were 8 deaths among 3800 women and 7 those were Asians. That was 87 percent for Asian women, while only 31 percent of study participants were Asian.

Denmark in 2015 announced the opening of five new HPV clinics to treat women who were injured by the Gardasil vaccine. The day that they announced that opening there were 1300 applicants for treatment in those clinics.

In Colombia in 2014 800 girls in the town Carmen de Bolivar were grievously injured by Gardasil vaccine. Protests erupted all over Columbia. The attorney general of Colombia ordered the National Health Service of that country to immediately begin treating girls who were injured by the Gardasil vaccine and 2017 Colombia’s highest Constitutional Court ruled that the HPV vaccine would no longer be considered mandatory in Colombia and ordered that girls who showed symptoms after receiving the vaccine be given appropriate medical care.

Pompilio Martinez, who now teaches at the National University of Colombia, described the HPV vaccine as “a crime against humanity.”

Recent studies have shown that in nations with robust HPV vaccination programs and heavily vaccinated populations—in the UK and Sweden and Australia—were actually seeing dramatic upticks rises in the rate of cervical cancer rather than the downtrends that Merck promised everybody.

Now I’m going to show you some of the reasons why your pediatrician is insisting despite all of this evidence that your daughter or son gets the HPV vaccine. And the reason is the pediatrician is getting his information from agencies that have compromised through financial entanglements with Merck.

This is what the FDA is telling the public about vaccine safety:  it says that vaccines are regulated by FDA and undergo a rigorous review of laboratory and clinical data to ensure the safety efficacy and purity and potency of these products.

But this is a very different story the FDA is acknowledging in-house, (and this comes from a 2007 document—this is the year that Gardasil got its license from the FDA), FDA’s inability to keep up with scientific advances mean that American lives are at risk. FDA is evaluations and methods have remained largely unchanged over the last half century. The world looks to FDA as a leader today. Not only can the agency not lead, it cannot even keep up with the advances in science.

But, the most troubling problem at FDA is it has nothing to do with incompetence. It has to do with corruption. The panel within FDA that licenses new vaccines and anoints them as safe is called the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, the acronym is VRBPAC. And in 2000 Congress investigated VRBPAC because of charges of corruption from outside the agency.

And here’s what the congressional committee found: the overwhelming majority of members, both voting members and consultants have substantial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

Conflicts of interest rules employed by FDA have been weak enforcement has been lax. Committee members with substantial ties to pharmaceutical companies are given waivers to participate in committee proceedings. In many cases significant conflicts of interest are deemed to be in conflict at all.

And here are some specific examples of the conflict of the advisory committee that approves vaccines:

  • Three out of five FDA advisory committee members who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in December of 1997 had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members had a 9 plus million dollar contract for a rotavirus vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members was the principal investigator for a Merck grant to develop the rotavirus vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members received approximately a million dollars from vaccine manufacturers toward vaccine development.

Once they get by FDA, vaccine companies then go to CDC, where another committee, which is called ACIP Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, will then take that vaccine that FDA has licensed and they will put it on the recommended list which means it becomes essentially mandatory for 76 million American children.

A listing on CDC’s recommended list is the holy grail for vaccine companies. It means a bonanza of wealth for those companies. If ACIP votes to add your vaccine to the recommended list, it means:

  • mandating the vaccine to millions of American children, (half of those are paid for by the government);
  • Immunity from liability for the manufacturers so nobody can sue them no matter how dangerous that vaccine is, no matter how toxic its components no matter how grievous your injury, you cannot sue that vaccine manufacturer for damages liability;
  • Inclusion of the Vaccine for Children’s program which is a program that guarantees that half the vaccines that you manufacturer are going to be purchased by the CDC at full cost.

This means billions of dollars for companies that are fortunate enough to get their vaccines listed on this recommended list. It means that you’re going to sell 74 million vaccines to people who have no choice—you have no marketing cost you have no advertising cost, you have limited testing expenses, and you have no liability for injuries caused by your vaccine.

In 2006 and 2007 while Gardasil was getting its approvals, ACIP did not pretend to base its recommendations on scientific evidence. It only adopted evidence-based standards in 2011.

But what did it base its recommendation on? It turns out it was mainly just friendships and money.  The conflicts at ACIP are as bad as the conflicts within the FDA.

This is from the same year—2000— investigation by Congress quote the CDC grants blanket waivers to ACIP members each year that allow them to deliberate on any subject regardless of their conflicts for the entire year. ACIP members are allowed to vote on vaccine recommendations even when they have financial ties to the drug companies related to similar vaccines.

The ACIP’s prolific use of working groups to track vaccine policy is outside the specter of public scrutiny, opens the door to special interest access. ACIP’s policy of allowing government employees to vote encourage the system where government officials make crucial decisions affecting American children without advice or consent of the governed.

Here is a typical committee panel that approved Merck’s rotavirus vaccine. The majority of ACIP’s members were conflicted and their most recent vote. Again, this is Congress’s words not mine.

  • The chairman served on Merck’s immunization Advisory Committee the same committee that approved Merck’s vaccine.
  • Another member who shares the patent on a vaccine underdeveloped for this same disease at $350,000 grant from Merck to develop this vaccine and was a consultant from Merck.
  • Another member was under contract with the Merck Vaccine Division.
  • Another member received salary from Merck and other payments.
  • Merck another member was participating in vaccine studies with Merck.
  • And another member received grants from Merck.

And unfortunately, that congressional investigation had virtually no impact on the way CDC does and continues to do business. For example, a 2009 report by the inspector general of HHS on the same conditions existed at CDC had systematic lack of oversight. Ninety seven percent of committee members’ conflict disclosures had omissions. 58 percent had at least one unidentified potential conflict. 32 percent of the committee members had at least one conflict remained unresolved and the CDC continues to grant waivers.

This shows that CDC is really just an arm of the vaccine industry it shouldn’t be regulating the industry. It’s part of it.

This is CDC’s entire budget $11.5 billion, and almost half of that almost 5 billion dollars goes to purchasing and promoting vaccines. And this little sliver here is the Immunization Safety Office.

That’s how much money, less than 1 percent of the total goes to vaccine safety.

Not only that but Merck exercises control over CDC through the CDC Foundation. Merck contributes millions of dollars every year to the CDC Foundation. The CDC Foundation has received six hundred and twenty million dollars from Merck and other pharmaceutical companies to pay for 824 programs at the CDC.

Merck representative sit on the CDC Foundation Board and control the agency activities.

This is what the British Medical Journal said about those conflicts:

“Most of us were shocked to learn that the CDC takes funding from the industry. It is outrageous that industry apparently is allowed to punish the CDC if the agency conducts research that has the potential to cut into profits.”

Corruption is systemic at FDA too shockingly 45 percent of FDA’s budget comes from the industry. Pharmaceutical companies pay billions of dollars in fees annually to FDA to fast track drugs. Between 2000-2010 pharmaceutical companies paid 3.4 billion dollars to FDA to get drug approvals, and those payments by industry have caused FDA and CDC to treat the vaccine makers not as a regulated entity but as partners and clients and friends.

According to Michael Carome, who is a former HHS employee “Instead of a regulator and regulated industry, we now have a partnership that relationship has tilted the FDA away from public health perspective to an industry friendly perspective. And that’s why your doctor does not know the truth about Gardasil.”

This is another thing your doctor probably doesn’t know. The government agency NIH actually developed the key component for the Gardasil vaccine and NIH owns part of the patent and receives royalties on it. Not only does NIH the agency receive millions and millions of dollars annually from the vaccine, but also the individual scientists who worked on the vaccine within the agency are entitled to make one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year in royalty payments from Merck.

Oh, every time your pediatrician sells one of those four hundred and twenty dollar vaccines to your child or you, NIH scientists and HHS scientists and the agencies themselves are making money on that transaction. And that’s why your doctor doesn’t know what’s happening because he’s getting his information or her information from those agencies.

So, there are many, many, other shocking conflicts that I don’t have time to talk about today between Merck and the other regulated vaccine makers and the industry that’s supposed to be protecting the public from that regulated industry.

I just want to talk for a moment about one example. From 2002 to 2009 Julie Gerberding was the director of CDC and she oversaw all, all of this crooked science that went into the approvals in 2006 and 2007 of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine. She was rewarded by Merck.

When she left the agency in 2009, she was hired by Merck as the president of its vaccine division and Merck gave her a salary of 2.5 million dollars a year, and 38 million dollars in stock options. And that kind of dough buys a lot of loyalty from regulators.

They know what’s at the end of the line for them if they behave and if they do what Merck and the other company has asked them to do. And these are the reasons that your pediatrician, who’s giving your daughter that Gardasil vaccine believing that it may someday save her life doesn’t know about the risk and perils and the inefficacy that are attended to that vaccine cause that regulators from whom he’s getting or she’s getting her information have been corrupted by this company.

And most of you probably know this is a difficult issue for people like myself who are concerned with vaccine injuries to address, because the press will not cover these issues because there’s 5.4 billion dollars that go from these companies to advertising on TV and radio and newspapers and on the web every year and nobody wants to lose advertising revenue. And the Congress has been bought off the regulatory agencies have been captured and we can’t use the courts because you can’t sue a vaccine maker for injuring yourself or your child.

We’ve figured out ways around those laws and we’re going to sue Merck. And if you are Merck and you’re listening to this tape.

We’re going to come for you and we’re gonna get justice for these girls and these boys who you’ve injured because of your greed.

And if you’re a mother or a father who are listening to this, we’d like your support. It’s just the fact that the more monetary support the Children’s Health Defense has, the more of these cases that we can bring and we’re going to get justice. And we’re going to bring these cases, and sue companies like Merck until we get that justice. We want your money and we want your support and we want your membership.

But more than anything, we want you to protect your child on this vaccine and for other injuries and for that reason we made this tape. Not only so that you can be informed about the science and you can ask the questions of your pediatrician or you can give him a copy of this tape and ask him to watch it and respond to it.

And if you’re a pediatrician I would ask you to actually look at the science and not resort to appeals to authority because, to say “well I know it’s safe because CDC says it’s safe”, or WHO says it’s safe or the AAP says it’s safe because all of those agencies and organizations have been corrupted by pharmaceutical industry money. You need to actually look at the science.

And you need to read the science critically and if you do that, you’ll find that the things that I’ve talked about in this tape are real. That these injuries are real and that we have got to save our children from this cataclysm.

I want to thank you for listening to this video and urge you to join Children’s Health Defense.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

Belief in subterranean worlds has been handed down as myths or legends among generations of people from all over the world. For example, Socrates spoke of huge hollows within the Earth that were inhabited and vast caverns where rivers flowed. The Cherokee Indians tell that when they first came to the southeastern United States, they found many well-tended gardens but not the people who cared for them. Eventually, they discovered a group of people who lived underground and came out only at night to tend the gardens. They harvested the food and took it underground to their cities.These people were small, had blue skin and large black eyes. The sun rays were too harsh for them so they built their cities underground and only came out at night using the light of the moon. The Cherokee called them the “Moon People.”

The quote above comes from Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw and has been researching the Star People for many years, collecting encounters between them and Native Indians. I recently published two articles detailing indigenous stories of encounters with the “Star People.” One was regarding an indigenous elder who shared a story about the “Star People” that crashed on his reservation, which you can read here. The second article, published a few days ago, was about an elder who showed Dr. Clarke a petrified alien heart, which he claimed belonged to the Star People, and you can read that here.

These people were also mentioned in a 1797 book by Benjamin Smith Barton, who explains that they are called “moon-eyed” because they saw poorly during the day. Later variants add additional details, claiming the people had white skin and that they created the area’s pre-Columbian ruins. Barton cited his source as a conversation with Colonel Leonard Marbury.

In her book, Clarke recounts a story told to her by an 84 year-old elder, who she called “Uncle Beau.” According to him, “The old ones tell stories about people from the stars who lived underground near Tanana. There are many stories the old ones told about the Star People who live among them and went underground near Tanana. The Inupiat believe they came to Earth on a spaceship.”

Clarke then asked him if he’d ever seen a spaceship, to which he replied:

Plenty of times. I was born here in Athabaskan territory. I was here before Alaska became a state and my people lived here for thousands of years before any white man ever came here. There were spacecrafts visiting Alaska when it was called Alaxsxaq, and they will be visiting long after there is no more Alaska. I think they have always been here, just as the old ones said. The government knows about it, but there is little they can do. They were here long before there was a government. I think at this point, the military just tries to contain them and keep it quiet. They don’t want us to know about it.

There is also a military base near where Beau lives, and when Clarke asked if he had ever talked with anyone at the base about UFOs, he responded:

One of my niece’s boys used to work at the base about 10 years ago. They employed about one hundred civilians at the base. He said that one morning he went to work and the base was closed. They told the workers to go home. When he reported for work the following day, one of his friends who was stationed there told him that a UFO had landed the previous night. He said there was a place up there where the UFOs go underground. He said (his nephew) it was guarded night and day. No one was allowed near the site, but he said his friend who has a high security clearance told him about it.

He went on to explain how he thinks it’s a place where “the aliens and the military collaborate and where the aliens can go underground freely without us regular people seeing them. I don’t know what they are doing together, but I think that is how they use the place. My nephew’s friend said the aliens look like us. So maybe they are the ancestors.”

Now, having been working in this field for a long time, I’ve come across some very interesting connections. Tanana, Alaska, is right next to mount Hayes, Alaska. For those of you who don’t know, the US Government in conjunction with the CIA and Stanford Research Institute initiated a program called STARGATE, and one of its functions was to study remote viewing, which is the ability to perceive and describe a distant location regardless of distance. It’s an ability that allows the ‘viewer’ to be able to describe a remote geographical location up to several hundred thousand kilometres away (even more) from their physical location — a location that they have never been to.

Long story short, it was extremely successful, reputable, and accurate for intelligence collection. After its declassification in 1995, or at least partial declassification, the Department of Defense and those involved revealed an exceptionally high success rate.

To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods, and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the [remote viewing] phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise… The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions.” (source)

Multiple remote viewers from that program, after it was declassified, all of a sudden started talking a lot about extraterrestrial phenomena. One of the things discussed was the locations of multiple ET bases here on Earth. One of the program’s top viewers had successfully remote viewed 4 extraterrestrial ‘bases’ stationed on Earth.  One was located underneath Mount Ziel, another was under Mount Perdido in Spain, another was under Mount Inyangani in Zimbabwe, and another was underneath Mount Hayes, Alaska. You can read more about that specific story here.

Lyn Buchanan, one of the STARGATE army remote viewers, claims that he was tasked to find out information on extraterrestrial groups that were/are visiting the planet. He also mentions these bases. You can read more about that here. (You can read more about that here: source)

These names are ever present within the CIA’s electronic reading room, so you can look them up and verify their credibility. After the declassification of the program, most of the people involved within the program also became publicly known.

So, what’s the point? Mount Hayes is right next to Tanana, Alaska, where Elder speaks of (as mentioned earlier in this article). And with regards to his nephew, there are multiple military bases within the vicinity such as Eielson Air Force Base. 

It’s interesting that I read this story shared by Dr. Clarke and then come across this connection with the remote viewing program.

Joe and I recently sat down and went a lot deeper into underground civilizations and how it relates to the extraterrestrial phenomenon. Below is a clip from our hour-long discussion on the topic on The Collective Evolution Show. Check out the clip below, and if you want to watch the entire broadcast you can sign up for CETV.

Another interesting story as told by Dr. Clarke comes from Mary Winston. At age 87, she was regarded as one of the only traditional artists still living. There are so many stories from indigenous elders about the Star People, it’s truly amazing and overwhelming.

According to Winston:

We have a story that our ancestors were brought to this land in great metal flying machines by the Star People. The ancestors lived on a cold planet, much like the arctic region. So they brought us here to colonize this planet. At that time ice covered the Earth. It was not like the Earth of today. We knew of the Star People from our grandparents. The stories were passed down for thousands of years. We were brought here by the Star People who live at the top of our world. They live under the North Pole. That is the top of the world. My grandfather talked with them when he was alive. He said they looked like us but that they had bigger eyes because on the home planet everyone lived underground. He said when we were first brought here we had big eyes too, but the sun and snow made our eyes small slits.

Clarke goes on to cite several other very interesting interviews with indigenous elders about living underground on our planet.

The Takeaway

Several ancient texts from various cultures mention beings from ‘another world’ that exist within our own. One such world, referenced in Tibetan Buddhist and Hindu traditions, is Shambhala, which is described as a hidden kingdom within our own planet, a place we do not understand and is difficult to find. We’ve never really been down there ourselves, at least as far as we know.

It’s interesting to imagine what the Earth looks like at its core. Even though instruments can be used to determine the make up of it, to see it in its entirety would be fascinating.

Perhaps we should not be so quick to dismiss these stories.

When it comes to pedophilia in Hollywood, it’s not a secret anymore. Multiple famous child actors like Elijah Wood have spoken up about this problem that plagues the industry. Corey Feldman, one of the biggest childhood actors of all time, said that pedophilia is “the biggest problem in Hollywood.” This is an issue that is tied to a great deal of power, and it seems some very powerful people are involved and that’s why the issue continues to occur. Smallville actress Allison Mack, for example, was recently arrested for her involvement in a “sex cult,”  a few months after these revelations, billionaire Clare Bronfman was indicted on racketeering charges. These charges were connected to her role as “Operations Director” for NXIVM (the sex cult that Mack was involved in and arrested for). Clare Bronfman is the daughter of Charles Bronfman, a Canadian/American businessman and philanthropist. You can read more about that story here.

Why don’t these wealthy elite ever face consequences? Was mack just the “fall” person? The Bronfman family has been referred to as the “The Rothschild’s of the New World” by author Peter C. Newman, a well-known Canadian journalist and writer. The Bronfman family has also been in business with the Rothschild family for quite some time. One of many examples is their wealth management company, Bronfman Rothschild.

All of these people are connected to enormous amounts of power and wealth.

Then we have the case of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who has very close ties to global elitists, actors, actresses, politicians and the royal family. In more recent news, U.S. Attorney Byung “B.J.” Pak of the Northern District of Georgia asked a federal judge for a 60-day period to consult with Epstein’s victims, followed by a lengthy briefing schedule that, according to lawyers for two of the victims, could delay justice for months if not longer. These victims all mention high profile people, ones that Epstein has been seen publicly with on many occasions, like Prince Andrew. You can read our last article on him, here.  In this article, you can see a picture with one of Epstein’s accusers with Prince Andrew, as well as one with Andrew and Epstein.

Steve Pieczenik is a former high ranking United States Department of State official and a Harvard trained psychiatrist, he had this to say about the Clintons and Epstein’s plane, known as the “The Lolita Express.”

“We know that both of them have been a major part and participant of what’s called The Lolita Express, which is a plane owned by Mr. Jeff Epstein, a wealthy multi-millionaire who flies down to the Bahamas and allows Bill Clinton and Hillary to engage in sex with minors, that is called Pedophilia.” (source)

The point is, all of this stuff is well known, and not long ago, along came Isaac Kappy. Kappy has been in Hollywood circles, not as a huge star but he’s been there. He was in Thor and Terminator: Salvation, among other hit films and did a lot of writing. Approximately a year ago, he began speaking up about Hollywood sex cults and pedophilia, and he named a lot of names like Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Seth Green and many many more.  These videos are all over Youtube. At the same time he began speaking out, many mainstream outlets all of sudden, like TMZ, were publishing weird information about him, like the idea that he was supposedly involved in abusing and choking Paris Jackson, a former good friend of his, for example. It was weird to say the least, especially given the fact that it happened when he began to share what he was sharing. Again, you can find many of his videos about that all over Youtube.

The latest news on Kappy is quite sad, as it appears he has passed away. It’s being reported that he recently jumped off a bridge in Arizona and committed suicide. Apparently, several witnesses were around and tried to stop him from doing so.

Kappy is not the only one who has been vocal about these issues, apart from the examples above, there are people like the example below as well.

Below is a tweet from Sarah Ruth Ashcraft, a supposed MK Ultra child sex slave victim,

This is me at 13, the age I was when @tomhanks purchased me from my father for sex as a dissociated #mindcontrol doll. I wonder how much he paid? I wonder how much $$$ my father made for breaking my mind & selling my child body throughout my life. Will I ever get to know? pic.twitter.com/nxOzCk5kHS

Obviously, this type of rhetoric has been labeled false and mainstream circles are using their platforms to ridicule and make jokes of it, as they still do today. Whether the claims of Kappy specifically are real or not, it’s important to acknowledge the fact that high-level child trafficking amongst powerful people is a serious reality.

With all of the revelations that have come out lately, especially within Hollywood, someone like Kappy garnered a lot of attention and a lot of credibility.

His last Instagram past was one of self-reflection, one where he felt ‘bad’ for calling out the darkness of others instead of healing the darkness that lives within himself. He was very critical of himself and explained how he has been a ‘bad guy.’ His social media accounts were halted not long after he began speaking up and naming names.

It’s unfortunate what happened. I personally believed based on everything I have looked at that this man was speaking the truth, that he had a lot of inside information and he did know a lot of people that were involved in this type of thing. It’s because I’ve come across information, for example, that’s come from people like retired Detective Jim ‘Jimmy Boots’ Rothstein, who was a member of the New York City Police Department, and various ‘out of state’ agencies for over a decade where he was assigned to investigate sex trafficking.  His job brought him to travel the world investigating how these rings operate. He shared what he saw over his career as an investigator into human trafficking. He estimates 35-40% of Politicians are involved in the coverup. You can read more about that here.

Ex Nebraska policewoman, Kathryn Bolkovac, who served as a UN peacekeeper and worked under DynCorp, a military contractor, where she learned about elite level sex trafficking involving the UN, the State Department & Military has also revealed some disturbing realities.  The latest example to come out of the UN would be from the ex-chief advisor for the United Nation’s Child Labour Program, Peter Dalglish, who was recently arrested for pedophilia. In early 2017 the United Nations Secretary-General admitted to 145 incidents involving 311 victims in 2016 alone, mainly in peace operations. We covered this earlier this year.

There are literally so many examples.

There is also no doubt in my mind that this man, Kappy, was possibly suicidal, but who really knows the circumstances of his death. It’s not hard to find his videos and testimonies online if you’re looking at them. I believe he was a very brave person for saying what he was saying, especially coming from the circles he was coming from and being close to a number of celebrities and Hollywood figures.

But again, the reality of high-level child trafficking is not up for debate. The International Tribunal For Natural Justice is a great place to start if you’re looking for more information from some very credible sources.

Our Interview With A Real Elite Level Child Sex Trafficking Victim, Anneke Lucas

One of the reasons that first-hand information about the true nature of elite Satanic ritual abuse and pedophilia is so rare is that child sex slaves are destined to be killed off–brought to the chopping block, in the case of Anneke Lucas and the elite Belgian pedophile ring she was ensnared in–once they were no longer useful to the network and their continued existence posed a threat. What makes it all the more remarkable that Anneke Lucas was removed from the butcher’s block mere moments before she would be killed was the fact that those in the network who knew her as intelligent, defiant, and powerful–even at the age of eleven–must have had some concerns that at some point, she may recover enough from her trauma to expose the network and its heinous Satanic practices.

The video clip below from CE’s exclusive 4-part interview  (CETV, A platform we created to combat the censorship we are experiencing and allow us to continue with our work) with Anneke launched on January 17 describes a portion of the training she was forced to go through.

Richard Enos conducted the interview, a writer here at Collective Evolution who has published a number of articles on the topic. He received a lovely note from Anneke before the interview:

I’m writing to thank you for your articles about the nature of power, pedophilia and Satanic practices. As a survivor, it is refreshing to find someone writing about these issues with such clarity, with both awareness of the problem and the dawning awakening of humanity to this darkness.

The Takeaway

Never before has so much ‘wrongdoing’ in various areas been exposed. It continues to happen here on planet Earth, and despite the fact that mainstream media continues to ridicule and remain silent on topics as such that are an unfortunate reality, truth continues to come out. Our world is shifting, the way people perceive our world is shifting, and ‘dark’ realities are simply part of the human experience that long went unknown. Once we start knowing, and become aware, it’s clearly something that the majority of humans do not resonate with and thus that intention alone helps shift the reality of this experience. Truth is being exposed, and the more it is, the more difficult it becomes for such experiences to continue. It’s simply a micro reflection, one of many, of several realities on Earth that do not resonate with the human soul. We are living in a time of great change, and one thing is for certain, ignorance is not the answer, but rather shining light into the ‘darkness’ is.

Secrecy runs rampant in our world, and multiple investigations have uncovered that trillions upon trillions of our tax dollars are going towards programs that we have no idea even exist. It’s amazing how much money is scraped off of each paycheque, and how much money multiple small and big businesses pay.

We are told that it’s necessary, that this is the money going towards various programs that are responsible for building our schools, employing people for necessary services and infrastructure, among many other things. It’s truly amazing how much money governments rake in from taxes, and it’s even more astonishing how much of this money is funding black budget programs and other programs that aren’t in favour of the people.

Black budget programs include Special Access Programs (SAPs). These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.”

How much money are we talking about? The most recent investigation was conducted by economist and Michigan State professor Mark Skidmore, alongside some of his graduate students as well as Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development. They discovered trillions of unaccounted for dollars missing from the Department of Housing & Urban Development as well as the Department of Defense. You can read more about that here.

In episode 4 of The Collective Evolution Show on CETV, we discussed the Black Budget in much deeper detail, if you’re interested in that. CETV is a platform we created to combat the censorship we are currently experiencing, as our revenue streams have been taken away and are now extremely limited.

Some of these programs involve the construction of deep underground military bases, known as (DUMBS). Furthermore, some of this money is also going towards the construction of under-ocean, and in-bottom (of the ocean) military bases.

These bases employ a very high and sophisticated level of technology, and what is happening down there is extremely secretive.

In 1987, Deputy Director of Engineering and Construction for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Lloyd A. Duscha, gave a speech at an engineering conference titled “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons.” In the first paragraph of his speech he states the following:

After World War II, political and economic factors changed the underground construction picture and caused a renewed interest to “think underground.” As a result of this interest, the Corps of Engineers became involved in the design and construction of some very complex and interesting military projects. Although the conference program indicates the topic to be “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons,” I must deviate a little because several of the most interesting facilities that have been designed and constructed by the Corps are classified.  Lloyd A. Duscha, “Underground Facilities for Defense – Experience and Lessons,” in Tunneling and Underground Transport: Future Developments in Technology. Economics and Policy, ed. F.P. Davidson (New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc., 1987, pp. 109-113.)

I’ll leave you with that, but if you’d like to learn more and listen to our discussion, you can do so in Episode #11 of the Collective Evolution show on CETV. Below is a little tidbit of that discussion:

You can listen to this entire segment of episode 11 on our podcast here.

Olivia Rosane, EcoWatch
Waking Times

An America man completed the deepest-ever solo underwater dive May 1. But when he reached the bottom of the Challenger Deep in the Mariana Trench, he found that another representative of the human world had gotten their first: plastic.

Victor Vescovo said he found a plastic bag and candy wrappers on the sea floor, some 35,853 feet below the surface, CNN reported Tuesday.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Vescovo made the trip as part of his Five Deeps expedition, which is being filmed by the Discovery Channel. The 53-year-old financier and retired naval officer is conducting detailed sonar maps of the deepest parts of the ocean. Trips to the Atlantic Ocean’s Puerto Rico Trench, the South Atlantic’s South Sandwich Trench and the Java Trench in the Indian Ocean have already been completed. The details of the Mariana Trench trip were just released Monday. Finally, Vescovo will explore the Arctic’s Molloy Deep this August.

“I criss-crossed all over the bottom looking for different wildlife, potentially unique geological formations or rocks, man-made objects, and yes, trying to see if there was an even deeper location than where the Trieste went all the way back in 1960,” Vescovo told CNN of his most recent trip. (The Trieste was the first submersible to explore the Challenger Deep.)

In addition to the plastic, Vescovo’s team think they have discovered four new species of prawn-like crustaceans, BBC News reported. However, the scientists plan to test if the animals collected have already encountered humanity in the form of microplastics. A 2017 study found microplastics in crustaceans in six of the deepest parts of the ocean, including the Mariana Trench.

The deepest ever sub dive to the seven miles deep Mariana Trench didn’t discover Megalodon, it found something worse…a plastic bag https://t.co/FLQUBgnzDm pic.twitter.com/uqvEdoZBA3

— The Daily Jaws (@thedailyjaws) May 14, 2019

Vescovo isn’t the first to find plastic at the bottom of the ocean’s deepest trench. A 2018 paperdocumented at least 3,000 pieces of litter in the trench, including a plastic bag at 36,000 feet below sea level. At least eight million tons of plastic enter the world’s oceans every year, and, if this continues, there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by 2050.

The previous record for a solo dive was held by Titanic Director James Cameron in 2012, CNN reported. In his new record-breaking trip, Vescovo and his team made five dives.

“It is almost indescribable how excited all of us are about achieving what we just did,” he told BBC News.”This submarine and its mother ship, along with its extraordinarily talented expedition team, took marine technology to a ridiculously higher new level by diving — rapidly and repeatedly — into the deepest, harshest, area of the ocean.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Sayer Ji, Green Med Info
Waking Times

Today a jury in Oakland, California awarded more than $2 billion to a couple who charged that Bayer AG’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer caused their cancer. How will Bayer continue to sustain such punishment without filing bankruptcy?

According to a report on Bloomberg.com, this marks the largest jury award in the U.S. this year, and the eigth-largest ever in a product-defect claim. This also marks the third such ruling, after two other recent California trials over the herbicide causing cancer yielded combined damages against Bayer AG of $159 million.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The jury agreed that Alva and Alberta Pilliod’s use of the glyphosate-based Roundup herbicide was a “substantial factor” in causing them to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. While both Pilliods have diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, Alva’s invaded his pelvis and spine and Alberta’s developed in her brain.

The Pilliod’s used the herbicide for residential landscaping, over a 30 year period, and believed, as the manufacturer long touted, that it was exceedingly safe. Their lawyer sought $55 million for the couple’s medical bills and pain and suffering, and requested an additional $1 billion to punish the company.

This ruling has potentially devastating consequences for Bayer AG, which acquired Monsanto Co. last june for $66 billion dollars. Since then, Bayer’s market cap has plummeted 40%, and likely will continue to spiral further downward after news of this third ruling spreads. In fact, Monsanto is named in about 13,400 additional lawsuits by plaintiffs in the US. alone.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Bayer is anticipated to appeal this decision, due in part to the fact that courts usually punitive damages no more than 10 times higher than compensatory damages. That said, with three successful verdicts against Bayer now established, indication is that jurors are convinced by the evidence presented against the company. Also, in June of last year Ian Hilliker, an analyst at Jefferies LLC in London, estimated in a note to clients that based on a class action lawsuit involving [at the time] 8,700 plaintiffs believed to have cancer as a result of glyphosate exposure, Monsanto’s liability could reach $800 billion dollars. Obviously, with 13,400 plaintiffs on the list now, that figure could reach to well over a trillion dollars of liability. Could a Bayer bankrupcy be on the horizon? 

To learn about previous rulings against Bayer/Monsanto, read the following articles: 

To view the peer-reviewed research on the known toxicity of Roundup herbicide, use our Database on the topic: Roundup (herbicide).

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

To learn more about the history of the Bayer/Monsanto merger, watch the video below: 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Sayer Ji is founder of Greenmedinfo.com, a reviewer at the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine, Co-founder and CEO of Systome Biomed, Vice Chairman of the Board of the National Health Federation, Steering Committee Member of the Global Non-GMO Foundation.

**© [05/13/19] GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.**

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of WakingTimes or its staff.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge
Waking Times

Guess who wrote the following text:

When Alexa runs your home, Amazon tracks you in more ways than you might want

Would you let a stranger eavesdrop in your home and keep the recordings? For most people, the answer is, “Are you crazy?”

 

Yet that’s essentially what Amazon has been doing to millions of us with its assistant Alexa in microphone-equipped Echo speakers. And it’s hardly alone: Bugging our homes is Silicon Valley’s next frontier.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

If you did not say the Washington Post, arguably the most influential political newspaper which for the past few years has been owned by the world’s richest man, Amazon founder and Donald Trump nemesis, Jeff Bezos, you could be forgiven: after all, the last thing your newspaper should be publishing is an in depth analysis into how you are spying on virtually every person who was gullible enough to buy your products which turned out to be nothing but a massive espionage operation that would make the NKVD blush.

But lest the point of the article is lost a quick glance at the title should help: Alexa has been eavesdropping on you this whole time.

What we find strange, however, is that even though it has now been fully documented and thoroughly disclosed that Alexa is a not so hidden microphone allowing Bezos and his minions, potentially including journalists from the WaPo, to listen in on every single word that is said in Alexa’s vicinity, Americans not only have not boycotted the product but continued to buy it: yes, they are paying to be spied upon!

That said, one can always hope that a casual glimpse into just how much information Alexa has collected on each and every American, will finally stop this ludicrous behavior. Luckily, there’s a website for that.

Following the recent pieces from Bloomberg and others exposing Alexa’s mass surveillance operation, everyone can listen in to their own Alexa archive at the following address, by clicking on “Review Voice History.

 

But wait it gets better: as the WaPo writes,” Amazon says it keeps our recordings to improve products, not to sell them. (That’s also a Facebook line.) But anytime personal data sticks around, it’s at risk. Remember the family that had Alexa accidentally send a recording of a conversation to a random contact? We’ve also seen judges issue warrants for Alexa recordings. ”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

And it’s not just Alexa: Inspired by what the WaPo’s tech columnist Geoffrey Folwer found in his Alexa voice archive, he wondered: What other activities in my smart home are tech companies recording? His answer:

I found enough personal data to make even the East German secret police blush.

 

When I’m up for a midnight snack, Google knows. My Nest thermostat, made by Google, reports back to its servers’ data in 15-minute increments about not only the climate in my house but also whether there’s anyone moving around (as determined by a presence sensor used to trigger the heat). You can delete your account, but otherwise Nest saves it indefinitely.

 

Then there are lights, which can reveal what time you go to bed and do almost anything else. My Philips Hue-connected lights track every time they’re switched on and off — data the company keeps forever if you connect to its cloud service (which is required to operate them with Alexa or Assistant).

 

Every kind of appliance now is becoming a data-collection device. My Chamberlain MyQ garage opener lets the company keep — again, indefinitely — a record of every time my door opens or closes. My Sonos speakers, by default, track what albums, playlists or stations I’ve listened to, and when I press play, pause, skip or pump up the volume. At least they hold on to my sonic history for only six months.

 

And now the craziest part: After quizzing these companies about data practices, I learned that most are sharing what’s happening in my home with Amazon, too. Our data is the price of entry for devices that want to integrate with Alexa. Amazon’s not only eavesdropping — it’s tracking everything happening in your home.

So for all those addicts who still need to feel at the forefront of the technological revolution and just can’t part ways with their in home eavesdropping devices carefully disguised as products meant to make your life easier, we have just one piece of advice:

For everyone else, well, we hope you enjoy having your most intimate secrets and details of your life be the talk of the town in some secretive Amazon office half way around the world.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Collective Evolution has been creating awareness about the potential dangers of sunscreen since the beginning of 2009. When we started to, despite presenting credible peer-reviewed scientific publications and interviews with doctors and scientists, many simply thought this wasn’t true. The idea that our federal health regulatory agencies are really looking out for our health and the idea that we can put absolute trust into these agencies as well as the products that they approve are no longer valid. Enormous amounts of corruption have been exposed over the past decade, which goes to show that we really need to rely on ourselves, utilize our critical thinking, and do our own research instead of allowing government authoritative bodies to do it for us.

Sunscreen, and the entire cosmetics industry for that matter, is a great example of how a lack of oversight exists when it comes to the approval of these products. How were they ever approved and marketed as safe?

A new study published Monday in the peer-reviewed medical journal JAMA found that several active ingredients in different sunscreens enter the bloodstream at levels that far exceed the FDA’s recommended threshold without a government safety inspection.

The study used 4 commercially available sunscreens, which all resulted in plasma concentrations that exceeded the safety levels established by the FDA. These safety levels themselves should also be questioned, as any amount of toxic chemicals is not really safe in the body, even in trace amounts.  The study also points out that it’s questionable that the FDA waved “some nonclinical toxicology studies for sunscreens.” Clearly more are needed. The study concluded that “the systemic absorption of sunscreen ingredients supports the need for further studies to determine the clinical significance of these findings,” although, strangely, it did mention that the results “do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen.”

It’s odd that the authors would state that, perhaps they did so because it’s a study that was conducted by the FDA? You would think that “plasma concentrations” that exceed safety levels would have the authors urging individuals to seek out less harmful sunscreen products, since these are available at multiple natural health stores.

The big takeaway here is that, what goes on your skin goes into your skin, and it doesn’t take long. The study mentioned observed chemicals seep into the bloodstream via sunscreen in just 24 hours.

It’s interesting how this particular study caught the attention of the mainstream, when numerous studies have shown the same thing. For example, a study led by researchers at UC Berkeley and Clinica de Salud del Valle Salinas demonstrated how taking even a short break from various cosmetics, shampoos, and other personal care products can lead to a substantial drop in the levels of hormone-disrupting chemicals present within the body. (source)

After just a three-day trial with the girls using only the lower-chemical products, urine samples showed a significant drop in the level of chemicals in the body. Methyl and propyl parabens, commonly used as preservatives in cosmetics, dropped 44% and 45%, respectively, and metabolites of diethyl phthalate, used often in perfumes, dropped by 27%, and both triclosan and benzophenone-3 fell 36%.

Pretty, crazy, isn’t it?

Back to sunscreen! As far back as 2004, a study conducted at the Faculty of Pharmacy at the University of Manitoba, Canada, sought to develop a method for quantifying common sunscreen agents. Results demonstrated a significant penetration of all sunscreen agents into the skin, meaning all of these chemicals are entering multiple tissues within the body. (source)

What type of chemicals are we talking about? Oxybenzone is present in multiple popular sunscreens, for example. There are multiple studies that have outlined the dangers of this chemical, as it’s linked to several ailments. For example, a study out of the Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology from the University of Zurich determined that oxybenzone may also mimic the effects of estrogen in the body and promote the growth of cancer cells.

Prompted by multiple studies, a study out of the Queensland Cancer Fund Laboratories at the Queensland Institute of Medical Research in Australia recognized the significance of systemic absorption of sunscreens. Researchers discovered that oxybenzone inhibited cell growth and DNA synthesis and retarded cycle progression in the first of the four phases of the cell cycle. They determined that sunscreen causes mitochondrial stress and changes in drug uptake in certain cell lines.

These are a few of multiple examples, and it’s only for one chemical out of the multiple hormone disrupting, harmful chemicals found within sunscreen.

Furthermore, various studies have shown that sunscreen ingredients, like oxybenzone, actually increase the absorption of other harmful chemicals, like herbicides, which we are constantly exposed to as well.

Agricultural workers are encouraged to use sunscreen to decrease the risk of UV-related skin cancer. Our previous studies have shown certain commercial sunscreens to be penetration enhancers. The focus of this project is to determine whether active ingredients in sunscreen formulations (i.e., the UV absorbing components and insect repellants for the sunscreen/bug repellant combinations) also act as dermal penetration enhancers for herbicides in vitro. Additional studies demonstrated that the penetration enhancement seen across hairless mouse skin also occurred with human skin. Thus, the active ingredients of sunscreen formulations enhance dermal penetration of the moderately lipophilic herbicide 2,4-D. (source)

Again, the main point here is that what you put on your body goes into your body. If you’re putting on sunscreen, or make-up, and you read all of the ingredients, all of those ingredients are also entering into your bloodstream.

So, What’s The Solution?

Are we really supposed to avoid the sun? It doesn’t seem too natural, as it provides us with an enormous amount of nourishment. Not just us, but all life on Earth. Was fear of the sun simply used as a marketing tactic to avoid it and sell these products? Sure, sunburns are bad and can cause cancer, but simple sun exposure is not bad for you. We burn because our skin is not used to so much sun exposure, as we now live unnatural lives out of the sun. When we all of a sudden spend more time outdoors, our skin doesn’t have the time to adjust, and so it burns.

If you want to wear sunscreen, the answer is simple: Seek out sunscreen products without harmful chemicals. Go to a natural health store, do your own research, look online, seek out natural alternative products, and perhaps slowly begin to spend more time outside so your skin adjusts and becomes less prone to burning.

Should we really be spending more time in the sun? According to a study published in the Journal of Internal Medicine, the life expectancy of people that avoided sun exposure was reduced by about 2 years compared to those who regularly sun bathed. The study even pointed out that nonsmokers who stayed out of the sun had a life expectancy similar to smokers who had the highest level of sun exposure. (source)

In the study, the researchers looked at data from 29,518 Swedish women. The women were 25-64 years of age at the start of the study. The study was originally designed to evaluate the rate of melanoma, a type of skin cancer, so sun exposure was one of the variables that was being examined.

The results showed that women who regularly sun bathed lived longer because they had a lower rate of death, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and deaths that were not due to cancer or CVD as compared to those who avoided sun exposure. However, these women did have a higher rate of death due to cancer, which was in part because they lived longer.

Because nonsmokers who avoided sun exposure had a life expectancy similar to smokers in the highest sun exposure group, the researchers concluded that avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor for death of a similar magnitude as smoking.

This isn’t a big surprise, as the sun gives us vitamin D, which plays a huge role in our overall health, especially when it comes to our cardiovascular strength, organ function, blood pressure, bone health, and our immune system. We need sun exposure, and if we are putting on sunscreen every time we are out in the sun as a result of fear propaganda, we are not getting all of those health benefits.  Please understand that this list of important benefits represents a fraction of the many ways in which vitamin D helps optimize your health. And, although you can obtain vitamin D from natural food sources, experts agree on one thing: Sunlight is by far the best way to get your vitamin D. The so-called experts who advise you to avoid all sunlight and religiously apply sunscreen are actually encouraging you to increase your risk of cancer, not lower it.

A huge and growing amount of research has now shown that avoiding sun exposure has created an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency. Current estimates are that at least 50% of the general population and 80% in infants are deficient in vitamin D. Low levels of D3 are now known to play a major role in the development in many of the chronic degenerative diseases. In fact, vitamin D deficiency may be the most common medical condition in the world and vitamin D supplementation may be the most cost effective strategy in improving health, reducing disease, and living longer. Those deficient in vitamin D have twice the rate of death and a doubling of risk for many diseases, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, asthma and autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis. – Dr. Michael Murray (source)

There are so many more studies that back up the information shared in this article. One study revealed that melanoma patients who had higher levels of sun exposure were less likely to die than other melanoma patients, and patients who already had melanoma and got a lot of sun exposure were prone to a less aggressive tumor type. Perhaps there are more prominent causes of skin cancer than the sun?

An Italian study, published in the European Journal of Cancer in June 2008, also confirms and supports earlier studies showing improved survival rates in melanoma patients who were exposed to sunlight more frequently in the time before their melanoma was diagnosed.

This suggests sunlight can actually help skin cancer.

Let’s be clear, healthy sun exposure may not cause skin cancer, but a bad sunburn and unhealthy exposure can. We do need shade, but spending a day out in the sun may be natural and not as dangerous as it’s been made out to be. You can also cover up with clothes, which is more effective than sunscreen as it doesn’t block 100 percent of UV rays.

Many natural oils have also been shown to have SPF protection, so you could do some more research on this if you’re interested.

Below is a video of Dr. Elizabeth Plourde, a licensed Clinical Laboratory Scientist who also has degrees in Biological Science and Psychology. Dr. Plourde has degrees from California State University, Pepperdine University and San Diego Univeristy for Integrative Studies. Currenty, Dr. Plourde uses her experience in her fields of study as well has her work in medical laboratories to focus attention on the hazards of sunscreen, among other things.

The Takeaway

A lot of fear has been pumped into the population, to the point where people are terrified to go out into the sun without putting on sunscreen every single time. We are now only starting to understand the long term health consequences of such a practice, and this could be one of many environmental causes contributing to several age-related diseases. Don’t be too scared — it’s not like you’ll develop cancer or a hormone disrupting disease after using conventional sunscreen once. This requires long-term exposure to these chemicals, which is in part why so many people don’t care about what they put on their bodies.

At the end of the day, there are other things you can do, but just know that sunlight is really nothing to fear. It’s very healthy in appropriate amounts, and given the amount of time we spend indoors, the more sunlight we are exposed to the better.

Matt Agorist, The Free Thought Project
Waking Times

Philadelphia, PA — Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner told the media this week that his office is “very close” to the prospect of refusing to kidnap and cage people for possessing drugs. This would make Philadelphia a leader in the nation and the first nail in the coffin that is the violent and immoral war on drugs.

Krasner told “Axios on HBO” that instead of kidnapping and caging people for possessing substances deemed illegal by the state—which has shown to be a horrifyingly violent and corrupt failure—those resources will be spent helping the person get clean.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

“Possession is different than dealing, it’s different than carrying a bunch of drugs you intend to sell or deliver later, it’s just possession. We are talking about people who are using drugs, the vast majority of them suffering from addiction. I do not see value in convicting people like that, thereby making it harder for them to get a job,” said Krasner. “It seems to me to make a lot more sense to hold them accountable in ways that do not require a conviction. We are very close.”

Indeed, helping people fight addiction instead of locking them in a cage is a far more effective solution to the drug problem then locking them in cages or giving them a felony charge which makes them unemployable.

Naturally, the police—who maintain job security, constant pay raises, and acquisition of military gear through enforcing the immoral drug war—disagree with Krasner, and are fear mongering about the possible repercussions of such a policy.

“It’s not a good idea,” said John McNesby, the president of the Fraternal Order of Police. “Small amounts of marijuana, fine, but once you start getting into the other scheduled drugs, it’s kind of a recipe for disaster.”

But multiple studies and actual real life applications of such a failed policy show that McNesby is dead wrong. For decades, the US has been kidnapping, caging, and killing people for drug use and the problem has gotten worse—not better. We now find ourselves in the midst of one of the worst drug epidemics in history and no amount of police force or violence is doing anything to solve it. In fact, it does the exact opposite.

Richard Nixon, in his effort to silence black people and antiwar activists, brought the War on Drugs into full force in 1973. He then signed Reorganization Plan No. 2, which established the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Over the course of five decades, this senseless war has waged on. At a cost of over $1 trillion — ruining and ending countless lives in the process — America’s drug war has created a drug problem that is worse now than ever before.

This is no coincidence.

For years, those of us who’ve been paying attention have seen who profits from this inhumane war — the police state and cartels.

The reason why the drug war actually creates a drug and violence problem is simple. And those who profit most from the drug war — drug war enforcers and cartels — all know it. When the government makes certain substances illegal, it does not remove the demand. Instead, the state creates crime by pushing the sale and control of these substances into the illegal black markets. All the while, demand remains constant.

We can look at the prohibition of alcohol and the subsequent mafia crime wave that ensued as a result as an example. The year 1930, at the peak of prohibition, happened to be the deadliest year for police in American history. 300 police officers were killed, and innumerable poor people slaughtered as the state cracked down on drinkers.

Outlawing substances does not work.

Criminal gangs form to protect sales territory and supply lines. They then monopolize the control of the constant demand. Their entire operation is dependent upon police arresting people for drugs because this grants them a monopoly on their sale.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

It is incredibly racist too. The illegality of drug possession and use is what keeps the low-level users and dealers in and out of the court systems, and most of these people are poor black men. As Dr. Ron Paul has pointed out, black people are more likely to receive a harsher punishment for the same drug crime as a white person.

This revolving door of creating and processing criminals fosters the phenomenon known as Recidivism. Recidivism is a fundamental concept of criminal justice that shows the tendency of those who are processed into the system and the likelihood of future criminal behavior.

The War on Drugs takes good people and turns them into criminals every single minute of every single day. The system is setup in such a way that it fans the flames of violent crime by essentially building a factory that turns out violent criminals.

The system knows this too — as the very existence of the police state is dependent upon the drug war. When drugs are legal, there are far fewer doors to kick in, fines to collect, profit prisons to fill, and money to steal.

When drugs are legalized, gang violence drops too — drastically. Not only does it have a huge effect on the localized gangs in America, but the legalization of drugs is crippling to the violent foreign drug cartels too. 

This is why the Free Thought Project and other open-minded groups all advocate bringing this bloody and criminally ineffective drug war to a sudden and grinding halt.

Hopefully, this move in Philly is the beginning of a snowball effect that will bring the war on drugs to its knees.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on TwitterSteemit, and now on Minds.

**This article (Philly to Set Massive Precedent and Stop Arresting People for Drug Possession – of ALL Drugs) was originally featured at The Free Thought Project and is re-posted here with permission.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

John Vibes, Truth Theory
Waking Times

This month, George Orwell’s legendary novel Nineteen Eighty-Four turns 70 years old, and the warnings contained within the story are now more relevant than ever. Orwell’s predictions were so spot on that it almost seems like it was used as some type of accidental instruction manual for would-be tyrants.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

In the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, there is an all-encompassing surveillance state that keeps a watchful eye on everyone, in search of possible rebels and points of resistance. Censorship is the norm in this world, and is so extreme that individuals can become “unpersons” who are essentially deleted from society because their ideas were considered dangerous by the establishment. This is an idea that is very familiar to activists and independent journalists who are being removed from the public conversation for speaking out about government and corporate corruption on social media.

Orwell is famous for coining the term “double-speak,” which is a way to describe the euphemistic language that government uses to whitewash their most dirty deeds. For example, in Orwell’s story, the ministry of propaganda was called the Ministry of Truth, just as today the government agency that was once known as “The Department of War,” is now called the “Department of Defense.”

There was also never-ending war in Orwell’s story, the conditions of which would change on a regular basis, keeping the general population confused about conflicts so they give up on trying to understand what is actually going on. Some of these predictions were merely recognitions of patterns in human history, since the idea of “unpersons” and war propaganda is nothing new. However, Orwell had an incredible understanding of how technology was going to progress over the 20th century, and he was able to envision how technology would be used by those in power to control the masses.

The technological predictions made in the book were truly uncanny, as they give a fairly accurate description of our modern world. Orwell described “telescreens,” which acted as both an entertainment device and a two-way communication device. This type of technology was predicted by many futurists at the time, but Orwell’s prediction was unique because he suggested that these devices would be used by the government to spy on people, through microphones and cameras built into the devices.

Unfortunately, just like in Orwell’s book, people in the modern world are so distracted by entertainment and the divided by politics that they have no idea they are living in a tyrannical police state. This police state was also a strong deterrent in the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, because although many of the citizens in the book had a positive opinion of “big brother,” it was still something that they feared, and it was a force that kept them in control. Of course, this is not much different from the attitude that the average American or European has when confronted with police brutality and government corruption.

Many of the ideas about power and authority that were expressed in Orwell’s classic are timeless and as old as recorded history but his analysis of how technology would amplify the destructive nature of power was incredibly unique, especially for his time.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

John Vibes is an author, researcher and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter-culture and the drug war. In addition to his writing and activist work he organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference, which features top caliber speakers and whistle-blowers from all over the world. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. You can find his 65 chapter Book entitled “Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance” at bookpatch.com.

**This article (Nineteen Eighty-Four Turns 70 Years Old in a World That Looks a Lot Like the Book) was originally featured at TruthTheory and is posted here under creative commons.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw has been researching the Star People for many years and collecting encounters between them and Native Indians. This article shares one of many encounters, but I recently shared another she described in an article published a few days ago.

Here is a great quote at the beginning of her book, Encounters With Star People, Untold Stories of American Indianswhich is where this information comes from.

I first learned about the “Star People” when my grandmother told me the ancient legends of my people. My childhood reality included narratives that traced the origins of the indigenous people of the Americas to Pleiades; stories of little people who intervened in people’s lives; and legends about the magical gift of the DNA of the “Star People” that flowed in the veins of the indigenous tribes of the Earth. I embraced the stories of the celestial visitors who lived among the Indian people as part of my heritage.

The book is fascinating to say the least, and describes many encounters of ‘star beings,’ both benevolent and malevolent in nature. Since I’ve been a UFO/extraterrestrial researcher for a very long time myself, it’s very interesting to see how some of these stories corroborate with some of the information I’ve come across from other sources over the years.

The following story comes from an elder who believed that “aliens not only once walked upon this land, but that they continued to do so. To prove his declaration, he displayed an alien artifact of a most personal nature – a petrified heart, which he maintained belonged to an ancient alien.”

His name was Sam, and he was a respected elder in his community. He worked at his community school as a surrogate grandfather counselling troubled youth. Clarke had developed a relationship with Sam, who was 92 years old at the time of this experience that Clarke shared in her book. One day, among many others, they had a very spiritual conversation, and life on other planets came up. He told Clarke that “our ancestors knew a lot more about the Universe than anyone has acknowledged, I have something I want to show you.”

According to Clarke he pulled back the blanket on his lap and held up a bundle.

My grandfather gave me this when I was a boy. He was almost 90 years old at the time. I was six or seven.” He unwrapped the object and handed it to me. “It’s a petrified heart,” I said, somewhat shocked by the object I was holding.

Clarke then proceeded to ask a number of questions. The elder answered, as Clarke describes:

“This is the heart of a star traveler. If you look closely, you will see that it is not quite like a human heart.” I turned it over in my hands and looked at it. Within the adult heart are two parallel independent systems, each consisting of an atrium and a ventricle. This heart was different. Instead of four chambers as found in the human heart, it had five chambers with three auricles and three ventricles. When I pointed that out to Sam, he nodded. “The Start People have hearts that are slightly different from ours. They beat much slower, too. According to my grandfather, the heart belonged to a star traveler. It was given to him by his grandfather who obtained it from his grandfather and so on and so on. Back in the old days, the Star People lived on Earth. They mated with our women and we became one with them.”

The last point is interesting, that they used to live here among the indigenous populations. This corroborates with various other indigenous stories shared from many others as well. As far as mating and interbreeding, stories about ‘gods’ interbreeding with human beings is also in the lore of not just indigenous people, but can be found in Christian lore too, specifically the “Nephillim.

The elder went on to explain to Clarke that they were here until the white man came, according to the elder:

They knew the white man was coming to this land. They warned us and suggested that we leave this planet. Many spaceships came to take the people away. Some of the people went back to the stars to live. Many were strong-willed and stubborn and decided to stay behind. They believe they could resist the white men since they knew he was coming. They would have the advantage of surprise. It was not so. The white man’s weapons were greater, their words stronger, their numbers bigger. Some of the people even believed them to be gods and chose them  over their own people. Our ancestors from the stars never came back to save us. We were left to our own destiny.

 He then went on to describe his experiences with the star people and how he has been taken aboard crafts and seen many worlds. Many worlds and civilizations that lived in the past, off the land and not as technologically advanced yet. He was also told about the ones who abduct people, and how many star groups avoided them, claiming that “they are no longer humans. They intentionally bred from their race the ability to feel love, compassion, and pain – all emotions. They believed it would make for a better world. One without emotions could lead to greater advancement.”

The abduction phenomenon is very real, and backed by a lot of great research from multiple professors and researchers. I published an article about it not too long ago, and if you’re interested, you can read that here.

Sam passed away at the age of 97. A photo appeared in the local paper of him in a headdress of eagle feathers and a beaded shirt. The headline read, “The Last Chief of the Northern Plains dies.”

The Takeaway

Whether or not this story and others in Clarke’s book are true is not the point, although I have very little doubt that many of them are. It’s truly a shame what happened in our recent past with regards to colonization, leading to the loss of many stories that were once prominent in indigenous culture because indoctrination ensued. That was a dark time, a time that humanity is just beginning to climb out of and I feel that it’s important to share stories that were once a strong tradition amongst the indigenous people. We are not alone, and we are much more than we’ve been made to believe we are.

The notion that we need to have an authority figure tell us what to do and what not to do is coming more and more into question in modern times. In fact, wresting away the power we have given to our authority may turn out to be the single most important challenge we face in our collective awakening.

To some extent, we can look at human history as the struggle between those who have aspired to hold the mantle of authority, each one promoting their paradigm in a kind of competition with the aim of consolidating and expanding their power over the people. The rise of democracy has turned this struggle from one that mainly employed brute force to one that uses the subtle arts of persuasion and manipulation to garner consent for their rules and rulership.

All this to say that when something that our authority had previously called ‘illegal’ (meaning its commission could result in fines or imprisonment) is suddenly legal, it is worth examining whether this truly represents a victory for personal freedom, a small step towards the unshackling of the bonds of authority.

The Psilocybin Mushroom Initiative

In the shadow of the trend towards the legalization of marijuana in Western society, the decriminalization of so-called ‘magic mushrooms’ in Denver has come in a little bit under the radar. Here is what voters in Denver were asked to consider in Initiated Ordinance 301, Psilocybin Mushroom Initiative

Shall the voters of the City and County of Denver adopt an ordinance to the Denver Revised Municipal Code that would make the personal use and personal possession of psilocybin mushrooms by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older the city’s lowest law-enforcement priority, prohibit the city from spending resources to impose criminal penalties for the personal use and personal possession of psilocybin mushrooms by persons twenty-one (21) years of age and older, and establish the psilocybin mushroom policy review panel to assess and report on the effects of the ordinance?

Note that this move does not actually remove the illegality of the personal use or possession of psilocybin, for actually making it legal would be a sign that our authority truly wanted to give some of its power back to the people. Rather, they chose to make it a law to ‘prohibit the city from spending resources to impose criminal penalties’ in order to keep the reigns of control over the matter and more easily reverse it if their ‘review panel’ deems it too dangerous.

The Arguments For And Against

The organization Decriminalize Denver made the following argument in favor of decriminalizing psilocybin mushrooms on its website:

We envision a society where individuals can use psilocybin mushrooms without fear of criminal or civil penalties. Psilocybin is shown to reduce psychological stress and suicidality, reduce opioid use and dependence, and be physiologically safe and non-addictive.

The Libertarian Party of Colorado stated that Decriminalize Denver’s “effort matches the Libertarian Party of Colorado’s platform planks of ‘The Individual’ and ‘Victimless Crimes.'” Meanwhile, the Denver Green Party stated that the “psilocybin effort encompasses six of the Green Party’s Ten Key Values: Grassroots Democracy, Social Justice, Ecological Wisdom, Non-Violence, Respect for Diversity, and Personal and Global responsibility.”

Opposing the measure, Jeff Hunt, director of Colorado Christian University’s Centennial Institute, stated, “Denver is quickly becoming the illicit drug capital of the world. The truth is we have no idea what the long-term health effects of these drugs are going to do to the people of Colorado … At a certain point, parents are going to look at the city of Denver and say, ‘I don’t want to take my kids to that city.’ And I don’t think tourists are going to want to come to this state.” (source)

The Results And What They Suggest

According to online results from the Denver Elections Division, 89,320 people voted in favor of decriminalizing, while 87,341 others voted against it.

People may have had many reasons for voting for or against the issue. Perhaps many didn’t care. One could argue that what one flaky, oddball city in the United States decides to do has no major impact on a country, let alone the movement of consciousness in the world. However, one fundamental thing can be said about the decriminalization of the personal use and possession of psilocybin mushrooms in Denver: a majority of the population has said that it would prefer to leave the decision to the individual rather than to the state.

It may very well be that this represents a further awakening of society to the potentially positive benefits of natural psychedelics in the same vein as the positive benefits for marijuana were promoted, first for strictly medical reasons and then for general consumption. It could represent a victory over Big Pharma who undoubtedly would have wanted to maintain a monopoly on the market for products that treated psychological stress and maintain the demand for opioids.

I will leave the question to others as to whether the consumption of psychedelics in and of itself is beneficial for the individual and society. CE has touched upon this in several articles including ‘New Study Shows The Science of How Psychedelic Drugs Repair Neurons In The Brain‘ and ‘How The New Science of Psychedelics Can Teach Us About Depression, Trauma & Much More…

Perhaps the best CE has touched on the psychedelic question is in a podcast episode having a deep discussion on it here.

The questions here are whether or not we are seeing signs that our authority’s grip on power is weakening, if our growing awareness is leading to a reduction in the prosecution of victimless crimes, and if a growing number of us as individuals are reaching more for the reins of self-responsibility while actively looking for ways out of the yoke of control long held by our authority.

If this is taking place–and I think in the long view it ultimately must be, though perhaps not accelerating as quickly as many of us had hoped–then we may be able to take solace in some of the changes we are seeing taking place in our society that would not have been considered possible just a short time ago.

The Takeaway

Our individual sovereignty is a right and is the natural order of things, endowed by creation, as the Constitution states. I believe it is the most important thing to devote our energy to, the most important thing to fight for. I believe it is our destiny as a collective. It is incumbent upon us as members of the Awakening Community to bring notice to the small steps we are taking in that direction, and perhaps the decriminalization of ‘magic mushrooms’ in one city in America is such a step.

Hydrogen peroxide is praised for its antiseptic and healing properties. In fact, there is a new urban myth proclaiming that hydrogen peroxide is universally beneficial for all the body organs and tissues. Regarding dental health, this couldn’t be further from the truth as evidence shows that hydrogen peroxide is actually toxic for the cells in the inner part of the teeth, also known as the dental pulp. Without a doubt, hydrogen peroxide does a really good job at bleaching and disinfecting teeth; hydrogen peroxide- based bleaching gels are essential for dentists and there is solid evidence demonstrating the efficacy of these protocols. On the other hand, there is a lot of uncontrolled information and advice, recommending hydrogen peroxide as an ideal everyday mouthwash. Taking into account that over-the-counter hydrogen peroxide concentrations can be as high as the formulas used by dentists in bleaching sessions (20-30%) and the growing popularity of hydrogen peroxide as an alternative therapy, the danger of potential long-term teeth damage by using high concentrations of hydrogen peroxide as a casual mouthwash are unknown, underestimated and largely under-discussed.

Hydrogen peroxide releases superoxide anions (powerful free radicals), which are responsible for its significant bleaching and antiseptic properties. However, its beneficial properties stop right here because research shows that it can penetrate the tooth enamel and dentin and reach the very inner tooth chamber called dental pulp. Hydrogen peroxide has low molecular weight and the ability to destroy proteins, which facilitate diffusion through enamel and dentin. The dental pulp is where the blood vessels and nerves of each tooth reside, which makes this area particularly sensitive. A unique class of cells, called odontoblasts also reside in the periphery of the dental pulp area, which support the teeth by depositing new dentin layers throughout life and are also believed to play a protective/reparative role in response to dental carries or other environmental factors that harm teeth. The problem with hydrogen peroxide is that it has a cytotoxic effect on the dental pulp cells, which means that it literally kills them. A study published in 2013 in the Journal of Endodontics shows that even low concentrations of hydrogen peroxide trigger molecular mechanisms in pulp cells, which activate programmed cell death.

According to another study published in the same journal in 2013, even the bleaching protocols used by dentists seem to be harmful for the dental pulp, since the damage in that area is directly correlated to the number of bleaching sessions. Odontoblasts, are directly damaged or show a significant decrease in their metabolic activity as a result of the bleaching sessions using 35% hydrogen peroxide gel. It is believed that this effect may result in tissue irritation and tooth sensitivity. A study published in the journal Scientific World Journal in 2013 shows that the higher the concentration of hydrogen peroxide, the faster it reaches the inner tooth tissues. The authors tested 35% and 20% concentrations of hydrogen peroxide and report that the 35% hydrogen peroxide diffused faster into the pulp chamber than the 20% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel.

It is speculated that lower concentrations of hydrogen peroxide may have significantly less toxic effects on dental pulp cells, because there is more time to dilute and degrade the peroxide that reaches the pulp. However, the long-term or even short-term effects of daily use of hydrogen peroxide as a mouthwash have never been evaluated. If a few bleaching sessions can cause detectable damage in the dental pulp, then, based on the existing evidence, it is reasonable to assume that using hydrogen peroxide mouthwash on a daily basis may not be the safest option at all.

References

Wu TT, et al. 2013. Hydrogen peroxide induces apoptosis in human dental pulp cells via caspase-9 dependent pathway. J Endod. 39(9):1151-5.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23953289

Torres CR et al. 2013. Influence of concentration and activation on hydrogen peroxide diffusion through dental tissues in vitro. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013:193241.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24163616

Cintra LT et al. 2013. The number of bleaching sessions influences pulp tissue damage in rat teeth. J Endod. 39(12):1576-80.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24238450

Dias Ribeiro AP, et al. 2009. Cytotoxic effect of a 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel on odontoblast-like MDPC-23 cells. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 108(3):458-64.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19716511

Arana-Chavez VE, Massa LF. 2004. Odontoblasts: the cells forming and maintaining dentine. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 36(8):1367-73.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15147714

Eleni Roumeliotou is a mom, clinical nutritionist, environmental toxins expert and founder of Primal Baby, a health sanctuary for modern families. Through her work, Eleni helps parents and parents-to-be create a safe, non-toxic environment for their baby to grow up and thrive. She also helps pregnant women adopt the right diet and lifestyle to minimize complication risk and ensure the immediate and long-term health of their little one.

Link to original article. For more information from Greenmedinfo, sign up for their Newsletter here

Mandy Froelich, Truth Theory
Waking Times

If you’ve tried holistic and allopathic treatments to remedy your depression, but still feel as if you’re at the end of your rope… psychedelic toad milk could be the answer. According to a new study published in the journal Psychopharmacology, smoking the milky, psychoactive secretion of the Colorado River toad, or Bufo alvarius, could provide a fast-acting and extremely potent alternative for managing depression.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

As IFLScience reports, the North American toad excretes a whiteish substance that contains a compound called 5-MeO-DMT, or DMT. The component is also found in the mild-altering psychedelic brew ayahuasca. Researchers found that when the “toad milk” is dried and smoked, a short yet mind-blowing psychedelic experience takes place. As the ego dissolves, one supposably receives (or remembers?) mystical insights. It is for this reason the toad gunge is being used at alternative healing retreats by underground therapists as a means of resolving psychological and emotional disorders.

The researchers wanted to determine the efficacy of toad milk, so they conducted a series of psychiatric tests to examine the impact of smoking the secretion on 42 participants. The authors determined that the average depression ratings decreased by 18 percent within one day of inhaling the substance. Furthermore, anxiety was reduced by 39 percent and stress by 27 percent.

Four weeks after the initial trial, the team conducted a follow-up analysis. They found that depression ratings had declined 68 percent below baseline levels. Meanwhile, anxiety and stress dropped 56 and 48 percent respectively.

The researchers hypothesize that the anti-depressant effect is caused by an increase in neurogenesis, based on previous findings that 5-MeO-DMT can stimulate neuronal growth and development. “Alternatively, they say that the compound may help to alleviate neuropsychiatric diseases by binding to sigma-1 receptors in the brain, which then has a regulatory effect on inflammation,” reports IFLScience.

Despite the encouraging finding, the authors are hesitant to share their work. The primary concern is that the toad may be exploited through the black market. However, synthetic 5-MeO-DMT should be easy to synthesize in a lab. In fact, a study by John Hopkins University researchers found that 80 percent of people who used the synthetic version reported a reduction in both depression and anxiety.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Mandy Froelich is an RHN, plant-based chef, freelance writer with 6+ years of experience, Reiki master therapist, world traveler and enthusiast of everything to do with animal rights, sustainability, cannabis and conscious living. I share healthy recipes at Bloom for Life and cannabis-infused treats at My Stoned Kitchen.Read More stories by Amanda Froelich

**This article (Smoking Psychedelic Toad Milk Could Alleviate Depression For Up To 4 Weeks) was originally featured at Truth Theory and is re-posted here with permission.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Mayukh Saha, Truth Theory
Waking Times

December marked a historic moment in the United States with the hemp legalization. No wonder the industry is now flourishing. It has been estimated that the industry might go up and stand at a value of about $13.03 billion by the year 2026. You might have already come across hemp-derived products in the market, but now Levi Strauss & Co. is capturing a part of the fashion world by using hemp for sustainable clothing.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Levi’s is a denim icon and many people will swear by its name. But to keep up with its goodwill, as well as do something for our planet, Levi’s is going for sustainable clothing. While you might think that cotton is a harmless product, the water requirement of cotton is huge, almost 2,655 liters of fresh water, just for cultivation. With processing and finally using it in garments, it takes about 3,781 liters of fresh water. These are data that has been collected from the Stockholm Environmental Institute. Using alternatives like hemp can cut down the water use by 2/3rd.

So, in March, Levi’s collaborated with the Outerknown label, to introduce a jacket and a pair of jeans made out of 69% cotton and 31% hemp blend which gives the pure cotton fuel. The cannabis plant uses a lot less chemicals and water than cotton but is a bit difficult to manage too. While cotton is derived from the puffy bud found on top of the plant, indicating its softness, hemp fibers are taken from the trunk. It’s coarse and stiff, according to Paul Dillinger, the head of Levi’s global product innovation. It can be converted into a sturdy rope easily but for clothes – it just doesn’t seem like the ideal material.

But Levi’s knows how to mix and match ideas and come up with a working solution. Dillinger observed the growth trajectory of cotton demand and compared it with the fresh water requirement in both cotton processing and cultivation. It was pretty apparent that alternatives had to be found. Hemp was not in his mind, until the company discovered a cutting-edge research that was being conducted in Europe in places where hemp was legalized. Details of the breakthrough or the partners involved were not revealed by the company but within three years, the final product was in their hands, ready to be integrated into their clothing.

If cottonized-hemp can be integrated completely with the products of the industry, it can make way for a revolution. But Dillinger does not want people to get their hopes too high for now. This process is still in a novice state, and overnight revolution will not be possible. More research should be conducted before a shift can be made. It’s more likely that hemp will become another natural cotton alternative rather than a replacement of the versatile cotton.

Dillinger does not believe it will be a fad either. Generally, when people go for a sustainable product, they have to sacrifice some quality which the non-sustainable product boasted of. Oftentimes, they would make that sacrifice out of ‘choice’ or because it’s ‘cute’. But for cottonized-hemp, such a sacrifice would be unnecessary. According to Dillinger, customers won’t be able to spot a proper difference from pure cotton. Once proper research is done, he believes that within 5 years, such a product and the revolution is possible.

If it really turns out the way Dillinger hopes it would, we can save up a lot of freshwater. With the planet’s depleting resources requiring rapid preservation, this can be a massive development. Kudos to Levi’s, if they can make this work.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

*This article (Levi’s Is Using Hemp In Their New Line Of Sustainable Clothing) was originally posted at Truth Theory and is re-posted here with permission.**

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Pages

Connect with us

Subscribe to our rss and social networks accounts...

On the Subject of US

Ætherna Guild is a free will, clean energy & sustainable living community resource website. More

Navigation

Browse Ætherna's resourceful info!

Ætherna Guild



Energetic Balance Frequencies

Ætherna Guild's Mission

Awaken mankind's universal consciousness to find equitable solutions for a real, honest, best and prosperous Guild, based on unity and sharing, peace, respect and love, in harmony with nature and our environment to foster the achievement of collective goals leading to a higher intelligence and collective consciousness.

A Sovereign Space for One Hearth Guild ॐ

More