Bulletin Board

Home >> News


Tracy Kolenchuk, Contributor
Waking Times

Are you depressed? Anxious? Hyperactive? Attention Deficit? Psychotic? Delusional? Schizophrenic? Bipolar? Social anxiety disorder? Panic attacks? Do you have a disease? Has it been diagnosed? Is there a cure?

The DSM-5, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, is the official medical bureaucracy book of mental disorders. You might be surprised to learn that there are no cures for any mental disorder listed in the DMS-5. Not one. The DSM-5 does not recommend treatments, much less cures. The only reference to the word cure that I can find is “eventual cures for these conditions“. Cured is not defined for any mental disorder. At this time, by omission, according to the DSM-5, there are no cures.  Maybe, someday, eventually, but today? Not.

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

How can this be true? Can this be true? Have all of the cures of modern medicine disappeared? Actually, it’s true due to a strange logic (or illogic) trick. I’ll use depression as an example, but you can pick your disease – similar rules apply.

Let’s suppose someone is depressed. Diagnosed with depression, using the DSM-5. Then suppose they are cured of their depression.  How might this happen? Well, there are lots of causes of depression. If the cause is addressed, the illness is cured. That’s how cures work.

Nutritional deficiencies can cause depression. If depression is caused by a nutritional deficiency, then it can be cured by addressing deficiency. There are lots of different foods to address any nutritional deficiency.  Lots of cures for depression caused by nutrient deficiencies. There’s only one small problem.

  • If it was cured by addressing a nutritional deficiency – then it wasn’t really depression.  It was malnutrition.  The depression was just a symptom – not a disease. So it wasn’t a mental disorder. Mental disorders cannot be cured.

Or maybe the depression was caused by poisons, by drugs, or toxic chemicals. If so, then it might be cured by removing the toxic chemicals, by removing the drugs. Depending on the source of the poison, there might be many ways to address the cause, many ways to cure the depression. There’s only one small problem.

  • If it was cured by removing drugs or toxic chemicals, then it wasn’t depression, it was poisoning. The depression was just a symptom – not a disease. So it wasn’t a mental disorder. Mental disorders cannot be cured.

But wait, there’s more. Depression might be caused by physical or mental abuse. If it was caused by mental abuse, gaslighting, or by physical abuse, then it might be cured by addressing the abuse. There’s only one small problem.

  • If it was cured by addressing the abuse, then it wasn’t depression, it was abuse. So, it wasn’t a mental disorder. Mental disorders cannot be cured.

Chronic depression takes it a step further.  Chronic depression has a chronic cause.  If the cause is nutritional, or poison, or abuse, it might cause a short-term depression – cured naturally when the cause disappears.  But if the cause persists, the result is chronic depression.  A chronic illness is not cured by addressing the cause – it can only be cured by addressing the chronic nature of the cause.

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

For example, if someone’s diet is chronically deficient in nutrients, or chronically toxic, or if their social relationships are chronically toxic, resulting in physical or mental abuse – they might acquire a chronic case of depression.  Feeding them a healthy meal or two, free of poisonous chemicals, with a group of supportive friends, might give some relief – but it will not cure. The chronic cause must be addressed. If someone is chronically depressed because they are chronically malnourished, and they are chronically malnourished because they are chronically poor – a few healthy meals will not cure the depression. It’s necessary to address the chronic cause, chronic poverty, which is causing chronic malnutrition, which is causing chronic depression.

But, same same.  If the depression is cured by lifting the patient out of poverty, then either… “it wasn’t really cured – maybe it’s just remission“, or “it wasn’t really depression – it wasn’t really a mental disorder, it was poverty“. Real depression is incurable.

Are you getting the idea?  The same concepts apply to many mental disorders. Anxious? Hyperactive? Attention Deficit? Psychotic? Delusional? Schizophrenic? Bipolar? Social anxiety disorder? Panic attacks?

If it can be cured, it is cured by addressing the cause.  But if it is cured by addressing a cause – then it was caused by the cause. And if it was caused by the cause, then it’s not a mental disorder.

And that’s not all. If you cure your depression, anxiety attacks, ADHD, or any mental disorder – you can’t prove it’s cured.  Because cured is not defined, there is no test for depression cured. No test for anxiety attacks cured, ADHD cured. There is no test for cured for any mental disorder. You might cure your depression. But you can’t prove it is cured. You might cure someone else’s depression. But you can’t prove it is cured. Proof of cured is not possible until cured is medically defined.

So look around.  If you are depressed, or you know someone who is depressed (or has any other mental disorder), you’ll see lots of “medical news”.  You’ll see recommendations for “treating” depression, for depression “prevention”, for “resolving” depression.

But you won’t see any claims of “curing” depression. You won’t find anyone who claims to cure depression – because depression cured is not defined, depression cured cannot be tested, depression cured cannot be proven. It’s official. All mental disorders are incurable. If a mental disorder is cured, either it’s not really cured – or it’s just been proven to be… “not a mental disorder”.

That’s the current state of cure, with regards to all mental disorders. Cured is not defined. Therefore, no cures are possible. If someone has a mental disorder, they can be “treated” with drugs that aim to reduce the signs and symptoms. But they can’t be cured.

If anyone claims to have cured their depression, panic attacks, psychosis, etc., the medical system’s response is “just ignore them.  They must be crazy. Maybe give them some drugs to prevent a relapse“.

(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");

How to Cure Depression

If depression cannot be cured “officially” can it be cured? Of course, it can. Depression is only incurable according to the bureaucracies of conventional medicine.

If you want to cure depression, it is necessary to go outside of conventional medicine.

Maybe you noticed, in each of the above example cases – the depression was not cured by a medicine.  It was cured by health.  Depression caused by malnutrition is cured by a healthy diet.  Depression caused by toxic chemicals is cured by removing the toxic chemicals.  Depression caused by toxic relationships is cured by addressing the cause, not by any medicine.

The Elements of Cure

Every illness can be cured.  An illness is cured when the cause has been addressed when, healing has completed, and when no more medicines are required.

Of course, sometimes, it’s more complicated. Sometimes, a case of depression is simple, elementary. But sometimes, a single case of depression has several causes. When a case of depression has many causes, it consists of many elements of illness. Each element must be cured by addressing the elementary cause.

Curing depression, sometimes, can be trivial. So trivial – that it is cured before it is diagnosed as depression. Sometimes, depression is cured – even after it has been diagnosed, but the medical bureaucracies are forced to judge it to be “in remission” or maybe it wasn’t really a depression “disease”.

Depression caused by malnutrition can lead to toxic relationships, to consuming toxic chemicals or drugs. Depression, simple depression, can become a downward spiral of illness. When a case of depression has a long and complex history – the cure can also be long and complex. But depression can be cured.

The fact that cured is missing, lost from the medical texts – is a deficiency of understanding, not a deficiency of cures.

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

About the Author

Tracy Kolenchuk is the founder of Healthicine.org. Author of two books about healthicine; Healthicine: The Arts and Sciences of Health and Healthiness Healthicine: Introduction to Healthicine.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times

According to interim estimates1 released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on February 15, 2019 — which uses data from 3,254 adults and children enrolled in the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network between November 23, 2018, and February 2, 2019 — the overall adjusted effectiveness of the 2018-19 flu vaccine against all influenza virus infection associated with acute respiratory illness (ARI) needing medical attention was 47 percent.

While the media has played this up as “good news,”2 and the CDC calls the results “encouraging,”3 the fact of the matter is the vaccine failed to offer any protection more than half of the time, and for adults over 50, it’s more or less useless.

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

This Year’s Flu Vaccine Is an Abysmal Failure for Those Over 50

Among children aged 6 months to 17 years, the 2018–19 seasonal flu vaccine had an average effectiveness of 61 percent.4 However, among adults over 50, which is the most vulnerable group, the vaccine had a mere 24 percent effectiveness against all influenza types, and an abysmal 8 percent against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection, which was by far the most common type.

According to the CDC, the A(H1N1)pdm09 virus was responsible for 74 percent of all influenza A infections for which subtype information was available. What’s more, the CDC notes that,5 “Among the 3,254 children and adults with ARI … a total of 465 (14 percent) tested positive for influenza virus by real time RT-PCR …”

In other words, of all the people who came down with acute respiratory illness, only 14 percent actually had confirmed influenza. In the vast majority of cases — 86 percent — their respiratory illness was associated with a viral or bacterial infection caused by something other than a type A or B influenza virus.

This is important to remember, as people have a tendency to jump to the conclusion that when they have influenza-like illness (ILI) symptoms they have influenza when, in fact, chances are the majority of the time they don’t.

The influenza vaccine contains only three or four type A or B vaccine strain influenza viruses. Even if those vaccine strain viruses are a perfect match for influenza viruses that are circulating in a given flu season, the vaccine does not prevent the majority of other respiratory infections that are experienced by people. As noted by the Cochrane Collaboration:6

“Over 200 viruses cause ILI (influenza-like illness), which produces the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches, pains, cough and runny nose) as influenza. Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot distinguish between ILI and influenza because both last for days and rarely cause serious illness or death.”

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

It’s difficult to find another example of where a commercial product can fail to work more than half the time and still be recommended and even mandated for children and adults.

Obesity Is a Major Cause of Influenza Outbreaks and Vulnerability

In related news, research suggests widespread obesity may be a significant contributor to influenza outbreaks and general vulnerability, as obesity makes you shed and transmit virus for a longer period of time, thereby increasing the opportunity for spreading infections to others. According to this study,11 published in the September, 2018 issue of The Journal of Infectious Diseases:

“[O]besity increases the risk of severe complications and death from influenza virus infection, especially in elderly individuals … Symptomatic obese adults were shown to shed influenza A virus 42 percent longer than nonobese adults … no association was observed with influenza B virus shedding duration. Even among paucisymptomatic and asymptomatic adults, obesity increased the influenza A shedding duration by 104 percent.”

Aubree Gordon, Ph.D., senior author from the University of Michigan School of Public Health, told reporters,12 “This is the first real evidence that obesity might impact more than just disease severity. It might directly impact transmission as well.”

Additional research is underway to analyze whether influenza virus shed over longer periods is still equally infectious. The answer here, of course, would be to normalize your weight and strengthen your immune function. You can find more information about these strategies in the hyperlinked articles.

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

Flu Vaccine Still Allows Transmission of Disease

Obesity isn’t the only thing that might contribute to influenza outbreaks. A study13 published in the journal PNAS January 18, 2018, found infectious influenza viruses in the exhaled breath of people who had gotten seasonal flu shots and contracted influenza. Those vaccinated two seasons in a row had an even greater viral load of shedding influenza A viruses. According to the authors:

“Self-reported vaccination for the current season was associated with a trend toward higher viral shedding in fine-aerosol samples; vaccination with both the current and previous year’s seasonal vaccines, however, was significantly associated with greater fine-aerosol shedding in unadjusted and adjusted models.

In adjusted models, we observed 6.3 times more aerosol shedding among cases with vaccination in the current and previous season compared with having no vaccination in those two seasons … The association of vaccination and shedding was significant for influenza A but not for influenza B infections …

Finding infectious virus in 39 percent of fine-aerosol samples collected during 30 minutes of normal tidal breathing in a large community-based study of confirmed influenza infection clearly establishes that a significant fraction of influenza cases routinely shed infectious virus … into aerosol particles small enough to remain suspended in air and present a risk for airborne transmission …

The association of current and prior year vaccination with increased shedding of influenza A might lead one to speculate that certain types of prior immunity promote lung inflammation, airway closure and aerosol generation …

If confirmed, this observation, together with recent literature suggesting reduced protection with annual vaccination, would have implications for influenza vaccination recommendations and policies.”

Mounting Body of Research Questions Validity of Annual Flu Vaccination as a Public Health Measure

On the whole, there’s really very little evidence to suggest annual flu vaccinations are a good way to combat influenza and save lives. On the contrary, the medical literature is burgeoning with studies questioning the validity of this public health measure. For example, studies have shown that:

With each successive annual flu vaccination, the theoretical protection from the vaccine can diminish14  A 2012 Chinese study15 found a child’s chances of contracting a respiratory infection after getting the seasonal flu shot rose more than fourfold, and research published in 2014 concluded that resistance to influenza-related illness in persons over age 9 years in the U.S. was greatest among those who had NOT received a flu shot in the previous five years.16

More recent research suggests the reason seasonal flu shots become less protective with each dose has to do with “original antigenic sin.” Here, they found that influenza vaccine failed to elicit a strong immune response in most participants,17 which was explained as follows:18

“What’s at play seems to be a phenomenon known as ‘original antigenic sin.’ Flu vaccines are designed to get the immune system to produce antibodies that recognize the specific strains of the virus someone may encounter in a given year.

These antibodies target unique sites on the virus, and latch onto them to disable it. Once the immune system already has antibodies to target a given site on the virus, it preferentially reactivates the same immune cells the next time it encounters the virus. This is efficient for the immune system, but the problem is that the virus changes ever so slightly from year to year.

The site the antibodies recognize could still be there, but it may no longer be the crucial one to neutralize the virus. Antibodies produced from our first encounters with the flu, either from vaccines or infection, tend to take precedence over ones generated by later inoculations. So even when the vaccine is a good match for a given year, if someone has a history with the flu, the immune response to a new vaccine could be less protective.”

71 people have to be vaccinated for a single case of influenza to be avoided, and vaccination has “little or no appreciable effect on hospitalizations or number of working days lost” — In its 2014 meta-analysis19 of the available research on inactivated influenza vaccines, the Cochrane Collaboration reviewed evidence related to influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI) that people experience during flu seasons, concluding that:

“Injected influenza vaccines probably have a small protective effect against influenza … as 71 people would need to be vaccinated to avoid one influenza case … Vaccination may have little or no appreciable effect on hospitalizations … or number of working days lost.”

The flu vaccine can increase your risk of contracting other, more serious influenza infections — Canadian researchers found that people who had received the seasonal flu vaccine in 2008, on average, had twice the risk of getting sick with the pandemic H1N1 “swine flu” in 2009 compared to those who did not receive a flu shot the previous year.20

These findings were replicated in a 2014 ferret study.21 Similarly, a 2009 U.S. study compared health outcomes for children between age 6 months and 18 years who did and did not get annual flu shots and found that children who received influenza vaccinations had a three times’ higher risk of influenza-related hospitalization, with asthmatic children at greatest risk.22

The concept of heterologous immunity may account for these findings. Heterologous immunity refers to the concept that your immune system is directional, and that once you’ve encountered a pathogen, your body is better equipped to fight pathogens that are similar. However, in the case of influenza vaccines, this directionality appears to work against you.

By learning to fend off certain influenza virus strains contained in the vaccine, your immune system becomes less able to fend off other influenza strains and disease-causing pathogens. As noted in a 2014 paper on heterologous immunity:23

“Immunity to previously encountered viruses can alter responses to unrelated pathogens … Heterologous immunity … may be beneficial by boosting protective responses. However, heterologous reactivity can also result in severe immunopathology. The key features that define heterologous immune modulation include alterations in the CD4 and CD8 T cell compartments and changes in viral dynamics and disease progression.”

In other words, while influenza vaccine may offer some level of protection against the three or four viral influenza strains included in the vaccine, depending on whether the vaccine used is trivalent or quadrivalent, it may simultaneously diminish your ability to ward off infection by other influenza strains and types of viral or bacterial infections.

Heterologous immunity is also addressed in a 2013 paper,24 which notes that “vaccines modulate general resistance,” and “have nonspecific effects on the ability of the immune system to handle other pathogens.” Researchers stated that:

“[O]ur current perception of the immune system is … simplistic. It was, to a large extent, shaped in the 1950s with the formulation of the clonal selection hypothesis.

This line of thinking has emphasized the adaptive immune system and the specific antigen recognition and specific memory, which have been crucial in vaccine development, perhaps at the expense of examining cross-reactive features of the immune system as well as the memory capacity of the innate immune system.

Although tens of thousands of studies assessing disease-specific, antibody-inducing effects of vaccines have been conducted, most people have not examined whether vaccines have nonspecific effects because current perception excludes such effects.”

Flu vaccine doesn’t work well in statin users — Statin drugs may interfere with your immune system’s ability to respond to the influenza vaccine.25,26 After vaccination, antibody concentrations were 38 percent to 67 percent lower in statin users over the age of 65, compared to nonstatin users of the same age.27 Antibody concentrations were also reduced in younger people who took statins. Flu vaccine does not prevent most types of influenza — Independent scientific reviews have also concluded that flu shots have only a “modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost,” and have no effect on complications of influenza.28,29

Moreover, the influenza vaccine fails to prevent influenza-like illness associated with other types of viruses responsible for about 80 percent of all respiratory or gastrointestinal infections during any given flu season.30,31,32,33,34 Vaccination does not lower mortality in the elderly — Research35 published in 2006 analyzed influenza-related mortality among the elderly population in Italy associated with increased vaccination coverage between 1970 and 2001. Researchers found that after the 1980s, there was no corresponding decline in excess deaths, despite rising vaccine uptake.

According to the authors, “our study challenges current strategies to best protect the elderly against mortality, warranting the need for better controlled trials with alternative vaccination strategies.”

Another 2006 study36 showed that, even though seniors vaccinated against influenza had a reduced risk of dying during flu season compared to unvaccinated seniors, those who were vaccinated were also even more unlikely to die before the flu season ever started.

This finding has since been attributed to a “healthy user effect,” which suggests that older people who get vaccinated against influenza are already healthier and, therefore, less likely to die anyway, whereas those who do not get the shot have suffered a decline in health in recent months. “New and improved” flu shot also fails to protect seniors — The Flucelvax vaccine introduced during the 2017-2018 flu season is grown in dog kidney cells rather than chicken eggs. Touted as a new-and-improved flu shot that would protect more people, Food and Drug Administration research found no significant difference between it and the conventional flu shot in protecting seniors.

While flu vaccines overall had a 24 percent effectiveness in preventing flu-related hospitalizations in people aged 65 and older, the Flucelvax vaccine had an effectiveness rate of only 26.5 percent in that population.37 Flu vaccine does not lessen influenza severity — While health officials claim getting a flu shot will lessen your symptoms should you contract influenza, a 2017 study38 by French researchers assessing the veracity of that claim found it to be false. Looking at data from vaccinated and unvaccinated elderly patients diagnosed with influenza, all they found was a reduction in initial headache complaints among those who had been vaccinated. According to the authors:

“Compared to nonvaccinated influenza patients, those who had been vaccinated had a slightly reduced maximum temperature and presented less frequently with myalgia, shivering and headache. In stratified analyses, the observed effect was limited to patients infected with A(H3) or type B viruses.

After adjusting by age group, virus (sub)type and season, the difference remained statistically significant only for headache, which was less frequent among vaccinated individuals.”

Flu vaccine is associated with serious disability — Permanent disability such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) is a risk you need to take into account each time you get a flu shot. As early as 2003, the CDC recognized the flu vaccine causes an excess of 1.7 cases of GBS per 1 million people vaccinated.39

Data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services shows GBS is the top injury for which people are receiving financial compensation through the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP), and the flu vaccine is now the most common vaccine cited by adults seeking a vaccine injury compensation award.40

Shoulder damage is another risk, caused by improper injection technique.41,42,43 Shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) includes chronic pain, limited range of motion, nerve damage, frozen shoulder and rotator cuff tears, and is typically the result of the injection being administered too high on the arm. This risk is particularly high when people get vaccinated outside of a doctor’s office or other clinical setting.

Many people getting flu shots in a public setting like a grocery store or pharmacy simply roll up their sleeves or pull down the top of their shirt, exposing only the upper part of their deltoid, thereby increasing the risk of getting the injection in the joint space rather than the muscle.

GBS and SIRVA were both added to the Vaccine Injury Table of the VICP in 2017.44,45 By adding those vaccine complications to the table, vaccine-related GBS and SIRVA cases brought before the “Vaccine Court” in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., will be more likely to receive federal vaccine injury compensation.

In this lecture, immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych, Ph.D., author of “Vaccine Illusion: How Vaccination Compromises Our Natural Immunity and What We Can Do to Regain Our Health,” explains how vaccines damage your immune function, which can result in any number of adverse health effects.


(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");

Why Pregnant Women Should Avoid the Flu Vaccine

In recent years, pregnant women have been told to get a pertussis-containing Tdap vaccination and an influenza vaccination during each pregnancy.46 According to federal guidelines, the flu shot can be given during any trimester.47 This is irresponsible public health policy, as there’s a shocking lack of scientific studies to confirm the safety of that policy for mother and child.48

For starters, drug companies did not test the safety and effectiveness of giving influenza vaccine to pregnant women before the vaccines were licensed in the U.S.,49,50 and data on inflammatory and other biological responses to vaccination during pregnancy that could affect pregnancy and birth outcomes is still lacking.51

As far as the scientific evidence is concerned, it’s still unknown whether the influenza vaccine can cause fetal harm or affect your reproductive capacity,52 which is why the vaccine manufacturer product inserts state that the influenza vaccine should only be given to a pregnant woman if it’s “clearly needed.”

Pregnant women are essentially expected to stick to recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and medical trade associations out of sheer faith, since vaccine recommendations are not based on weighty scientific evidence. In fact, health statistics suggest there’s something very wrong going on in the U.S., seeing how we have one of the highest maternal and infant mortality rates in the world.

As of last year, global rates for maternal mortality had fallen by half — except in the U.S., where the number of women who die from pregnancy-related complications has significantly increased.53 Infant mortality rates are also far higher in the U.S. than in any of the other 27 wealthy countries surveilled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).54

Could this be related to the fact that American babies and pregnant women receive the greatest number of vaccines? While there’s no research clearly proving this, there’s also no evidence to refute the hypothesis that excessive vaccinations may be part of the problem.

While limited, there is at least some evidence that getting the flu vaccine during pregnancy may put that pregnancy at risk. Initial suspicions were raised in 2009, when reports of miscarriage following administration of the H1N1 swine flu vaccine started emerging.55

Dozens of women claimed they lost their babies just hours or days after getting the vaccine, which had not been tested on pregnant women or, if it was, the evidence was never published. Not surprisingly, these instances were passed off as coincidental. After all, miscarriages do happen, and for any number of different reasons.

Then, a CDC-funded study56 published in September 2017, found that women who had received the 2009 pandemic swine flu (pH1N1) vaccine containing influenza shot two years in a row were indeed more likely to suffer miscarriage within the following 28 days.

While most of the miscarriages occurred during the first trimester, several also took place in the second trimester. The median fetal term at the time of miscarriage was seven weeks. In all, 485 pregnant women aged 18 to 44, who had a miscarriage during the flu seasons of 2010/2011 and 2011/2012, were compared to 485 pregnant women who carried their babies to term.

Of the 485 women who miscarried, 17 had been vaccinated twice in a row — once in the 28 days prior to vaccination and once in the previous year. For comparison, of the 485 women who had normal pregnancies, only four had been vaccinated two years in a row. Commenting on the study, which was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Amanda Cohn, CDC adviser for vaccines stated:57

“I think it’s really important for women to understand that this is a possible link, and it is a possible link that needs to be studied and needs to be looked at over more [flu] seasons. We need to understand if it’s the flu vaccine, or is this a group of women [who received flu vaccines] who were also more likely to have miscarriages.”

Despite those findings, the CDC has not made any changes to its recommendation for pregnant women.

Vitamin D Substantially Outperforms Flu Vaccine

Is the flu vaccine really the most effective way to protect yourself against influenza, despite being less than 50 percent effective overall? Studies have repeatedly demonstrated the excellent track record of vitamin D for preventing respiratory infections.

For example, a 2017 scientific review58 of 25 randomized controlled trials found that vitamin D supplementation cut rates of acute respiratory infections among all participants. Overall, the number needed to treat (NNT) was 33, meaning that for every 33 people taking a vitamin D supplement, one person was spared from acute respiratory infection. (And, remember, the NNT for the flu vaccine preventing a single case of influenza is 71.59)

Among those with severe vitamin D deficiency at baseline, the NNT was 4. Those with blood levels below 10 ng/mL, which is a serious deficiency state, cut their risk of infection by half, while people with higher vitamin D levels reduced their risk by about 10 percent.

According to this international research team, vitamin D supplementation could prevent more than 3.25 million cases of cold and flu each year in the U.K. alone.60 In my view, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies available to prevent respiratory illness of all kinds.

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

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Makia Freeman, Contributor
Waking Times

The Green New Deal, submitted by new US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is more like a green fantasy wish-list than a political bill. This so-called Green New Deal, which can be read here, promotes a broad, utopian-like future where magically everyone gets all their energy from non-polluting sources, everyone has a high-paying job with paid vacation, everyone has high-quality health care and everyone has retirement security. Not surprisingly, it does not spell out how the USG (United States Government) and its taxpayers are supposed to pay for all this. Even the name “Green New Deal” contains the phrase “New Deal” which refers to the sweeping socialistic changes to US law and society made in the 1930s by then US President Roosevelt, which included starting the Social Security Administration, confiscating the gold of Americans and substantially expanding the power and jurisdiction of the Federal Government.

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

Green New Deal = Agenda 2030

Ocasio-Cortez is just a naive poster woman for a sinister agenda about which she is ultimately clueless. She has been given an undue and exorbitant amount of media attention for a freshman congresswoman (just 1 congresswoman out of 435), not because she’s intelligent or unique, but because the people really pushing this agenda own the MSM and can dictate what the public focus on. The truth is that the Green New Deal is just another incarnation of a far-reaching plan to bring about a One World Government via the UN (United Nations) Agenda 2030 (formerly Agenda 21). This Global Governance as they like to call it is planned to be a worldwide totalitarian socialist dictatorship; there is nothing utopian about it. Below are 5 ways in which the Green New Deal very closely mimics the wording, aims and targets of Agenda 2030.

Similarity #1: Green New Deal Aims at Changes Being Done by 2030

Agenda 21 was replaced by Agenda 2030, so-called because it contained a list of 17 goals and 169 targets that were to be achieved by the year 2030. Interestingly enough, the Green New Deal also aims at achieving its objectives by this date as stated in the US Green Party’s summary of it:

The Green New Deal starts with a WWII-type mobilization to address the grave threat posed by climate change, transitioning our country to 100% clean energy by 2030 … The centerpiece of the Green New Deal is a transition to 100% clean energy by 2030.

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

Similarity #2: Sustainable Energy for All

The Green New Deal states that it is the “duty” of the Federal Government to meet “100 percent of the power demand in the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.” Goal 7 of Agenda 2030 states: “Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.” Sustainable energy for all – sounds great. Who’s going to pay for it? What are we going to have to give up to get it? Privacy? Autonomy? Can we only get this new sustainable energy if we move house into an “approved” area (i.e. a Smart City Megalopolis) and submit to being on the grid 24/7 with Smart Meters radiating us? Who granted the US or UN the authority and jurisdiction to “care” for all their citizens like this? The more we allow these governing bodies to take responsibility for an aspect of life, the more power they assume.

Similarity #3: Climate Change is a Threat

The Green New Deal states (pg. 4) that “climate change constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States.” Goal 13 of Agenda 2030 is to “take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.” Notice the term keeps changing from “manmade global warming” to “manmade climate change” to simply “climate change” to continue the charade. Of course the climate is changing; it always has and it always will. Most skeptics of AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) readily admit that the climate changes. The question is how much humanity is causing it. The point is also that it cannot scientifically be due to the minuscule amounts of CO2 humanity emits. Note how both the Green New Deal and Agenda 2030 make sure to get the propaganda in that we must rally around saving the environment (and submit to a NWO [New World Order] in the process as a side effect). The Green New Deal spares no exaggeration by saying that climate change (a rise of 2ºC) will cause “mass migration from the regions most affected by climate change” and cost the US “$500 billion in lost annual economic output by the year 2100.” It also blames climate change for “wildfires that, by 2050, will annually burn at least twice as much forest area in the western United States than was typically burned by wildfires in the years preceding 2019” however the real reason for those lies elsewhere.

Similarity #4: Millions of Magical High-Paying Jobs

The Green New Deal proposes “(1) to create millions of good, high-wage jobs in the United States; (2) to provide unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States” while in Goal 8, Agenda 2030 wants to “promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.” Sounds great as always, but how? Who is going to organize and enforce all this? More government? You betcha.

Similarity #5: Central Planning

For me, the word “mobilization” creepily and eerily denotes some kind of central, military-like authority with the power to mobilize citizens like troops, treat people like human resources, order them around and put them to work on whatever projects it sees fits – all the for “greater good” of the collective. As the article The Green New Deal Plus Modern Monetary Theory = Socialism states:

The GND essentially calls for conscripting the American workforce and putting us to work in accordance with what the elite government planners want instead of what “we, the people” want. They propose to replace our market economy, in which privately owned businesses compete to see who can best supply the needs and wants of the people, with a command economy in which government is the master and citizens build what the planners say must be built.

Conclusion: Green New Deal Sure Smells Like Agenda 2030

The Green New Deal, no matter how well-intentioned, is a rehash of an old plan to use threats to the environment (real or imagined) as a way to get people to rally behind a NWO. The Green New Deal is bogged down by total impracticality and scientific illiteracy – in one section it states that its goal is to “remov(e) greenhouse gases from the atmosphere” (pg.9)! This is absurd as these gases are part of the natural water cycle, and also a precondition of human life on Earth, i.e. plants need CO2 for photosynthesis so they can provide oxygen for animals like humans. It’s funny how at every step of the way the solution is always more government. That truth alone is hopefully enough for people to wake up to this monstrosity and see it for it truly is, despite the sugar coating and glossy veneer.

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

About the Author

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com (FaceBook here), writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. Makia is on MindsSteemit and FB.

**Sources embedded throughout article.

This article (5 Ways the Green New Deal Exactly Mirrors Agenda 2030) was originally created and published by The Freedom Articles and is re-posted here with permission. 

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.
China’s plans to loosen its solar subsidy policy will keep growth of the world’s largest market intact, according to the head of JinkoSolar Holding Co., which is increasing production capacity by as much as 20 percent this year.
On March 4, Hanwha Q CELLS filed a patent infringement complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) against JinkoSolar, LONGi Solar, and REC Group. The company also filed related patent infringement complaints with the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against the same companies. In Germany, Hanwha Q CELLS filed patent infringement complaints with the Regional Court of Düsseldorf against JinkoSolar and REC Group.

Socialism seems to be the only thing that mainstream media wants to talk about when they interview Bernie Sanders: Are you a socialist? Will the United States be a socialist country under the Democratic party if Bernie Sanders is President?

Yes, in part, this is mainstream media’s way of trying to dumb-down the conversation for its viewers. To be clear, Bernie Sanders is not afraid to say he is a socialist, but in mainstream scrums he prefers to be specific about what he is in favor of: free national single-payer healthcare, free post-secondary education, and a higher minimum wage. But to look into whether Sanders is truly a socialist, and whether it actually matters, let’s start by defining and distinguishing between socialism and capitalism in order to gain clarity on the ideological context that Sanders is dealing with in the United States.

This Investopedia article helps provide context:

Capitalism and socialism are the two primary economic systems used to understand the world and the way economies work. Their distinctions are many, but perhaps the fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism lies in the scope of government intervention in the economy. The capitalist economic model relies on free market conditions to drive innovation and wealth creation and regulate corporate behavior; this liberalization of market forces allows for the freedom of choice, resulting in either success or failure. The socialist-based economy incorporates elements of centralized economic planning, utilized to ensure conformity and to encourage equality of opportunity and economic outcome.


In a capitalist economy, property and businesses are owned and controlled by individuals. The production and prices of goods and services are determined by how in demand they are and how difficult they are to produce. Theoretically, this dynamic drives companies to make the best products they can as cheaply as they can, meaning that consumers can choose the best and cheapest products,. Business owners should be driven to find more efficient ways of producing quality goods quickly and cheaply.

This emphasis on efficiency takes priority over equality, which is of little concern to the capitalist system. The argument is that inequality is the driving force that encourages innovation, which then pushes economic development. In a capitalist economy, the state does not directly employ the workforce. This can lead to unemployment during times of economic recession.


In a socialist economy, the state owns and controls the major means of production. In some socialist economic models, worker cooperatives have primacy over production. Other socialist economic models allow individual ownership of enterprise and property, albeit with high taxes and stringent government controls.

The primary concern of the socialist model, in contrast, is an equitable redistribution of wealth and resources from the rich to the poor, out of fairness and to ensure “an even playing field” in opportunity and outcome. To achieve this, the state intervenes in the labor market. In fact, in a socialist economy, the state is the primary employer. During times of economic hardship, the socialist state can order hiring, so there is full employment even if workers are not performing tasks that are particularly in demand from the market.

Special Considerations

In reality, most countries and their economies fall in-between these two extremes. Some countries incorporate both the private sector system of capitalism and the public sector enterprise of socialism to overcome the disadvantages of both systems. These countries are referred to as having mixed economies. In these economies, the government intervenes to prevent any individual or company from having a monopolistic stance and undue concentration of economic power. Resources in these systems may be owned by both state and individuals.

The American Context

One could rightly say that socialism, not capitalism, was the first system brought to American soil by European colonists. When a group of early settlers arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1620, their plan was to establish collective property ownership. Their charter called for farmland to be worked communally and for the harvests to be shared. The results were frightening. Many settlers were unwilling to work hard for the common good, and then those who were doing their share lost their motivation to continue to ‘carry the load’ themselves. As a result, many fields were largely untilled and unplanted. Famine came as soon as they ate through their provisions. After famine came plague, and half the colony died.

In his memoirs, Plymouth governor William Bradford explained what happened next:

At length, after much debate of things, the Governor… gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves… And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end.

This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression. (source)

Not only did the colonists work much harder, but they were motivated to innovate. They traded with the Indigenous population and were eager to learn from them how to plant maize, squash and pumpkin and how to rotate these crops from year to year. This resulted in bountiful harvests. On the strength of this real-world experience, and other similar ones from surrounding colonies, the American identity of hard work and innovation was founded, having a significant impact not only on their thirst for independence, but on the content of the Constitution on which their Republic is based.

Needless to say, Americans have historically rejected socialist doctrines, and for similar reasons have vehemently rejected and fought against the influence of communism, which was seen by Marx as the logical endpoint of socialism. To be seen as a ‘socialist’ in American politics has long been a campaign-wrecker.

So Why Is Bernie Sanders Popular?

Note in the ‘Special Considerations’ section above that the economies of most countries fall between the ‘extremes’ of capitalism and socialism. That is because in its purest form, unbridled capitalism inevitably leads to an ever-increasing wealth disparity between the haves and the have-nots, while pure socialism, as in the above example, stifles motivation to work, learn and innovate. Both of these ideologies, in extremes, can lead to a complete disintegration of social and economic order.

The reason Sanders has gained popularity in recent years is that the United States is nearing the breaking point in terms of wealth disparity between the rich and the poor, with the middle class rapidly eroding. Bernie Sanders preaches a brand of socialism he calls ‘Democratic Socialism,’ in which he alleges ‘the people’ will control the means of production rather than the financial elite who are at the top end of the wage disparity.

Details about how this actually works are sketchy. Amid fears that socialism really centralizes the power within ‘Big Government,’ the Democratic Socialists of America website had this to say:

Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Of course, logic dictates that it would be very unwieldy and inefficient to have the country run by popular consensus, and that a massive and all-powerful bureaucracy within a centralized government would currently seem inevitable. While Sanders uses examples of different countries in the world considered to be socialist in nature, he hand-picks small and specific successes in certain countries, like universal healthcare or free education, but is not able to point to any particular country that has fully and successfully implemented ‘Democratic Socialism.’ Countries like Sweden, which is often used as an example, actually credit a return to some capitalistic principles to explain their return to economic viability in the past few decades. (source)

Why It Doesn’t Matter

Many of the ideals of socialism may be appealing, but as we saw in the Plymouth example, they are not easily implemented in the real world. In all likelihood, if Bernie Sanders is elected President and he maneuvers the United States into some kind of socialist country, he will only be shifting the power from private corporations and banks to a centralized industrial-governmental entity that controls the means of production, which would wield unprecedented power in the American economy. In practical terms, that means the corrupt global elite who bribed, threatened, and murdered their way into controlling the American economy will just start to shift roles and arrange to occupy the seats of this new power. In other words, the Deep State will still be in charge. And consolidating power within a large bureaucratic institution makes it much easier for that power to be insulated and maintained.

In addition, I believe Bernie Sanders is really a political hack who is only interested in getting a prime seat within the ruling class. Why do I say that? Simply by the fact that, after becoming aware that the 2016 Democratic Party nomination was literally stolen from him by Hillary Clinton and her full control over and illegal activities within the Democratic National Committee (a committee that is supposed to be neutral and impartially supportive of all candidates), he did not do what some of his more ardent supporters wanted him to do: disavow the DNC, lambaste Hillary Clinton, and perhaps even take her to court and run for the presidency as an independent. Instead, he remained quiet and eventually supported Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, just like someone who had been promised the moon to toe the party line. And in supporting Clinton and remaining with the Democratic Party, all signs indicate that he is aligned with the Deep State and will be prepared to do their bidding if he gets elected, whether he wants to call it ‘Democratic Socialism’ or anything else.

No, Bernie Sanders and his version of socialism are not the answers to the woes of American citizens. The matter at hand is not whether to choose capitalism or socialism, or even finding a way to strike the right balance between the two. The matter at hand is overcoming Deep State control and enslavement and restoring the power to the Constitution and the freedom of individuals that it protects. While Donald Trump could be accused of many things including engaging in crony capitalism, a growing number of people believe that the main reason he decided to run for President in the first place was to help an alliance of insiders take down the Deep State. If this turns out to be true, and they are successful, then this is where the resurrection of the United States of America, and perhaps even the world as a whole, will be found.

The Takeaway

Only our discernment of the true source of the problems in America and throughout the world gives us the context to evaluate whether a move to become more of a socialist nation really matters. In the case of Bernie Sanders ever becoming President, corruption and control from the top would likely be left unchanged. As we continue to become aware that unelected powers have long enjoyed massive control over our social and economic fate, we become agents of change that will help bring down these forces, leading us to a much higher level of freedom and prosperity no matter where on the continuum between capitalism and socialism we decide to operate from.


One of the greatest health-hacks has not so much to do with what we eat, but rather with which foods we eat together.

It’s called proper food-combining, and understanding its intricacies is a powerful way to support your digestive health and overall vitality.

In his book, Food Combining Made Easy, natural hygienest Herbert Shelton shares his detailed understanding of how the wrong combinations of foods wreak havoc on our digestion. Shelton spent over fourty years in the study of dietetics, having directed and cared for thousands of people during his lifetime. He, like many natural hygienists today, saw the fundamental flaws in man’s modern eating habits, the main one being that we eat too many different types of food in the wrong combinations. Instead of the buffet-style spread, Shelton advocated for a diet of simplicity, much like that of the animal kingdom around us.

“Animals eat very simply and rarely combine their foods. Certainly the meat-eating animals eat no carbohydrates with their proteins. The deer grazing in the forest combines his food very little, and the squirrel is likely to get their fill of nuts and take no other food. Birds have been observed to eat insects at one time of day and seeds at another. No animal in nature has the great variety of foods spread before it at a meal such as civilized man does today,” Food Combining Made Easy, pg. 8.

Shelton believed that the digestive enzymes of the human digestive tract have well-defined limitations, and when we eat in a manner that overrides these limitations, we run into digestive issues. He called proper food combining “merely a sane way of respecting our enzymatic limitations.”

And by combining our foods properly, Shelton asserted that much of our digestive ailments would be solved. He even claimed that allergies would dissipate given a period of time eating the right food combinations. “An amazing number of food allergies clear up completely when supposedly allergic individuals learn to eat their foods in digestible combinations.” He writes that what they are suffering from are not allergies at all, but rather symptoms of indigestion.

The Different Types of Food Material & Their Digestion

Shelton’s definition of food is quite simple: Material which can be incorporated into and become part of the cells and fluids of the body. To be a true food the substance eaten must not contain useless or harmful ingredients.

Proper food material is composed of water and a few organic compounds known as proteins, carbohydrates (sugars, starches), fats, mineral salts, and vitamins.

As proteins, carbohydrates and fats are not useable by the body, they must first undergo a disintegrating, refining process known as digestion. While digestions has its mechanical components such as chewing and swallowing, it is primarily a process of chemical changes as the food makes its way through the digestive tract. What creates these chemical changes are known as enzymes. Enzymes are the catalysts which break complex compounds (such as proteins) down into their simpler components (amino acids) which can then be used by our cells.

Each enzyme is specific in its action; they only act upon one class of food substance. For example, the enzymes that act upon carbohydrates cannot act upon proteins or fats. Enzymes are so precise that even within the carbohydrate class there are different enzymes for different types of sugars and starches. The same goes for proteins.

Most enzymes work in organized sequence, that is, each stage of digestion depends on the enzymatic action preceding it. For example, if the enzyme pepsin has not first converted a complex protein into a peptone, then it prevents the further breakdown of peptones into amino acids.

Enzymes are also very sensitive to pH changes. If the alkaline salivary enzyme, ptyalin, interacts with an acidic food in the mouth such as a protein, the enzyme that would normally break down starches is rendered inactive by the change in pH.

Similarly, in the stomach, the protein enzyme pepsin can only act in an acidic environment, and if it combines with an alkaline food it is rendered useless. Pepsin is a crucial enzyme in the first stage of protein digestion, and without it the proteins will not further digest but rather ferment and putrefy.

In the case of foods composed of both carbohydrates and proteins, such as bread, our digestive system utilizes a unique sequence of enzymatic secretions to breakdown the food. At first only little hydrochloric acid is poured into the stomach—the enzymatic juice secreted is almost neutral in reaction to allow the starch component of the bread to breakdown first. But once the starch is digested, more hydrochloric acid is then poured into the stomach to digest the protein component of bread.

The entire digestive process is highly organized yet very sensitive to changes in pH, which means that combining even a small amount of the wrong foods can cause proper digestion to halt.

And what happens when proper food digestion halts? As Dr. Morse states in The Miracle Detox Sourcebook, “fermentation and putrefaction then become the digesters, instead of digestive enzymes. This causes improper food breakdown and many unwanted chemical changes, all leading to malabsorption, acidosis and cellular starvation.”

The Two Most Important Food-Combining Tips

The two most important food-combination tips are first, to never mix proteins (acid foods) with carbohydrates (alkaline foods), and second, separate your consumption of fruits and melons from any other types of food.

As mentioned previously, mixing proteins with carbohydrates causes neutralization, putrefaction, and fermentation. Fungi (yeast especially) love the byproducts of fermentation (alcohol sugars), and this is why so many people suffer from candida and various parasitic overgrowths. Sadly, protein and starchy carbohydrates make up much of the world’s diet (meat and potatoes, anyone? How about chicken and rice?). It seems we have come to accept the symptoms of stomach pain, bloating, gas, and heartburn as if they are a rite of meal-time passage. Yet all of these symptoms are completely preventable with the proper understanding and application of food-combining.

Separating fruit from other foods is another crucial rule in food combining. Fruit digests the quickest out of any other food; therefore, when fruit is mixed with foods that require many hours to digest (such as eggs or meat), then the fruit quickly ferments into alcohol sugars that signal the yeast to begin their feeding frenzy. Always opt to eat fruit in the morning hours on an empty stomach. This will hydrate your body and begin to flush out the digested waste in your GI tract.

Also worth mentioning is that within the category of fruit, there are specific combinations of fruits that some will be more sensitive to than others. For more information about this, see the food combining chart below.

Beyond those two rules, food-combining can be made simple by knowing a few more tips.

Non-starchy vegetables such as broccoli, carrots, cabbage, celery, leafy greens, sprouts, and zucchini can be combined with fats, starches, and proteins. So when deciding what to eat with your dinner main, always keep vegetables in mind. Non-starchy vegetables are full of fibre, amino acids, and minerals, great for rebuilding a weakened body and sweeping the digestive tract of waste material.

Lastly, when eating concentrated protein starches such as beans or lentils, be sure to soak or sprout them to make them easier to digest, and avoid mixing with starches like rice or bread. Protein starches should be eaten sparingly, and always with non-starchy vegetables.

Understanding proper food-combining can do wonders for your digestion and absorption. One thing to remember is that some people will be more sensitive than others, so experiment yourself and observe how your digestion improves. As I always say, when in doubt, try it out.


In late February, in testimony on measles for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Dr. Anthony Fauci—director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)—admitted with a chuckle that he and most of the Committee members sitting before him had uneventfully experienced measles as children and had recovered completely. These national leaders reaped many benefits by getting measles in childhood—accruing lifelong immunity and protection against cardiovascular disease, among other benefits—but that has not stopped them from fomenting public panic about measles or pushing for more vaccine mandates. This week, the Senate followed up with its own similar hearing. The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee said that the hearing’s purpose was to consider “what is driving preventable disease outbreaks,” but rather than examine this question fully or fairly, the event featured a hand-picked line-up of speakers who are—one and all—promoters of a “no ifs, ands or buts” vaccine party line.

Many studies illustrate both types of vaccine failure [primary and secondary] as well as the concerning potential for vaccinated individuals to transmit disease to others.

Congressional hearings on vaccine safety in the early 2000s were more balanced, at least allowing multiple viewpoints to be aired (if not acted upon). Why are current legislators exhibiting so little curiosity and ignoring long-published evidence that infectious diseases “routinely break out in highly vaccinated communities”? Logically, flares of illness in vaccinated groups should prompt some serious questions about vaccine failure, rather than hostile condemnation of the very small proportion of families who, for medical, religious or philosophical reasons, do not comply with one hundred percent of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) childhood vaccine schedule (currently almost six dozen doses of sixteen vaccines by age 18—and counting). In their fixation to scapegoat and corral unvaccinated individuals, the CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Fauci’s own NIAID are displaying a dangerous indifference to vaccination’s unintended consequences.

Increased susceptibility…due to vaccination

Vaccines are supposed to “exploit the immune system’s ability to ‘memorize’ encounters with previously unknown microbes.” As published studies describe, however, this goal often fails or even backfires. In “primary” vaccine failure (estimated to affect at least 2% to 10% of healthy individuals), a vaccinated individual never produces any meaningful antibodies after initial (or booster) vaccination; in the case of “secondary” vaccine failure, protection wanes “after initial effectiveness.”

Many studies illustrate both types of vaccine failure as well as the concerning potential for vaccinated individuals to transmit disease to others. In a 2017 measles outbreak in vaccinated individuals in Israel—reported on by the CDC—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 nonetheless having received two doses of vaccine (primary vaccine failure). In addition, the index patient—the one who launched the chain of transmission—had received three doses of measles-containing vaccine.

Other recent studies highlight an even more troubling ramification of vaccine failure, which has become more apparent with each successive vaccinated generation: vaccination is increasing the number of susceptible individuals in the population over time.

In a 2011 measles outbreak in New York City, “all cases had prior evidence of measles immunity,” and a twice-vaccinated individual—whose “clinical presentation” was just like natural measles—was shown to have transmitted measles to others.

Other recent studies highlight an even more troubling ramification of vaccine failure, which has become more apparent with each successive vaccinated generation: vaccination is increasing the number of susceptible individuals in the population over time. In 2017, Korean researchers warned that measles susceptibility is increasing in that country because:

  1. “Measles-specific antibodies wane in the absence of boosting by the wild-type virus.”
  2. “The number of potential measles-susceptible individuals progressively accumulates.”
  3. “Vaccine-induced immunity is less effective than naturally acquired immunity.”

Other investigators observing the same patterns are scratching their heads. For example, Australian researchers noted last year that “countries with sustained measles control have now demonstrated that measles-specific…antibodies decline with time since vaccination” and helplessly concluded that the implications are “unclear.”

Other notoriously ineffective vaccines

These phenomena do not apply just to measles vaccination but to many other types of vaccines as well. As described by Children’s Health Defense previously, flu shots, which are notoriously ineffective, are even less useful in individuals who dutifully get their shots every year. This is because repeat vaccination “blunts” the protection while actually increasing susceptibility to other strains of influenza. Flu shots also have been shown to make people more susceptible to other severe respiratory viruses.

Vaccine failure problems are also well documented with regard to pertussis vaccination. In fact, the Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society just published an article outlining pertussis vaccination “mistakes” and their serious consequences. The author, a high-level UCLA researcher who has made a career out of studying pertussis vaccines, describes:

  • The regular occurrence of “major pertussis epidemics” in vaccinated populations;
  • A vaccine that is known to be inefficacious and to have a “shorter duration of protection”; and
  • Vaccinated children who will actually be “more susceptible to pertussis throughout their lifetimes.”

At a loss for a solution to this vaccine-created conundrum, the UCLA expert says, “there is no easy way to decrease this increased lifetime susceptibility” [emphasis added].

“School officials have emphasized that the outbreak cannot be attributed to the unvaccinated students.”

The UCLA researcher’s observations are not “new” news either. Back in 2012, researchers wrote in The New England Journal of Medicine about a pertussis outbreak in vaccinated children in Oregon. A public health official in that state commented, “The [pertussis] vaccine is not going to eradicate pertussis. It isn’t good enough to wipe out the disease, and it’s going to be around indefinitely.” As if in further illustration of these remarks, The Hill, the LA Times and other news outlets just reported on a 2019 pertussis outbreak at an elite, 1,600-student private school in Los Angeles (virtually in UCLA’s backyard). Notwithstanding a “really high vaccination rate,” 30 (almost 2%) of students—all vaccinated—developed pertussis, again demonstrating that “people who have had the vaccine can still get sick.” Meanwhile, none of the handful of unvaccinated students at the school (18 students with medical exemptions) have contracted pertussis. School officials have emphasized that the outbreak cannot be attributed to the unvaccinated students.

A CDC representative made the same point during a 2012 pertussis outbreak in Washington State. Describing pertussis as “a bacterium that’s cyclical in nature,” the CDC spokesman asserted that pertussis outbreaks simply occur “from time to time” and “are probably not the result of the increase in the number of parents choosing not to vaccinate their children.” Ironically, while acknowledging that “even people who are vaccinated may be susceptible to the disease,” the official then fell back on the CDC’s tired mantra: “get vaccinated.”

“In MMR-related lawsuits against Merck, former Merck scientists avow that Merck “fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA [False Claims Act].”

Our legislators’ failures

The topic of vaccine failure is not new, having been discussed since the earliest days of smallpox vaccination—and modern-day descriptions of vaccine failure continue to multiply. There is also growing evidence that vaccine manufacturers have made false claims about their products’ effectiveness. In MMR-related lawsuits against Merck, former Merck scientists avow that Merck “fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA [False Claims Act].” According to a report by Huffpost, the company’s “far-ranging” fraudulent activities were designed to help Merck monopolize the mumps vaccine market, even though Merck “expected outbreaks to occur” as a result of its shoddy vaccine. Merck has also been accused of fraud and negligence related to other vaccines.

A recent article in U.S. News says that many families’ desire for vaccine choice stems from “accumulated distrust of organized medicine, federal regulators and pharmaceutical companies.” Although U.S. News does not say so, this “accumulated distrust” is well deserved!

Rather than tarring and feathering individuals who, for a variety of well-founded reasons, do not vaccinate—or worse, forcing them to inject their children with vaccines that are not only ineffective but harmful—our legislators should be investigating the powerful entities that are trying to hide vaccines’ inability to deliver what they promise.

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.

Elva Thompson, Contributor
Waking Times

“Chance is but a name for Law not recognised.” ~ The Kybalion

“A life lived of choice is a life of conscious action. A life lived of chance is a life of unconscious creation.” ~Neale Donald Walsch

If most people were asked if they lived a conscious life they would probably answer yes – is it not self evident? Consciousness is consciousness, right?

But if a consciousness has been indoctrinated from birth with other people’s ideas, prejudices and truths…. is that a ‘conscious’ consciousness? – or is it a sense bound awareness programmed to be a clone of a greedy, egoistic materialistic culture. A consciousness living life on auto pilot – stuck in a daily routine of sameness – and mouthing the rhetoric of someone else’s thinking in a life that stands still. The mystic Gurdjieff called this state a constant waking sleep.

Is your life standing still – passing you by? Are you tossed like a matchstick on the waves of chance – worried about everything – not knowing what you want or where you are going – if the answer is yes then you are at the mercy of unconscious creation.

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

Thunderbolts of Unseen Action

Our thoughts are energetically alive, they are thunderbolts of unseen action and if not controlled can wreak havoc in our lives. We are not taught that our thinking creates our reality and when shit hits the fan we call it bad luck – or that’s life! When in truth it has got nothing to do with luck and life….. and everything to do with our thinking. But we don’t know the metaphysical laws that govern this ‘whirled’ so we carry on as normal – do what we always do because that’s what we’re used to doing. We don’t realise that our lives are a reflection of our habitual state of mind.

A Bit of a Shock

When we investigate our thinking and begin to observe our thoughts we are likely in for a shock. It’s quite sobering to discover how much of our fleeting lives we spend bogged down in the cancelled cheque of the past – dwelling on grievances and personal sleights – or day dreaming and wishful thinking on the promissory note called the future. The only time we are truly alive is in the negotiable now – and most of us it would seem don’t visit very often!

Anchored Consciousness

It’s not easy to change our lives – break free of worn out thought patterns and routines. We have to take control in the now and live the life we want, and not let others interfere or tell us what we can or cannot do – what we deserve or don’t deserve.

This is easier said than done but if we want to have a smoother, calmer panorama in life we must persevere…and take stock of the people in our lives – and ask the question: are they inspirational and uplifting, or destructive and exhausting?

Unfortunately toxic people don’t come with a warning sticker plastered on their foreheads but we’ve all met them – in our home life, at work or down the pub. The arrogant superior type who likes to put us down – the spiteful gossiper who can’t tell fact from fiction – the perpetual whining victim who blames everybody else for their circumstances – the control freak who knows everything about everything and can’t wait to ‘put us straight’ – the envious who just hate it when something good happens to us… and the angry, resentful Mr. Negative who has nothing good to say about anything or anybody.

These mindsets make it very hard for us to live a conscious life – they deplete our energy – fracture our thought patterns and anchor us to unconscious creation….in other words they bring chaos into our lives and need to be avoided like the plague.

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

Conscious Creative Living

Conscious living is about being mindful – having mental clarity not confusion. It means taking responsibility for our lives – packing our own parachute as they say in sky diving circles and not leaving it to others.

Creative living involves a continuous and progressive cleansing – a purification of soul and body.

The change from unconscious creation to conscious action begins in our thinking…. We choose what we want in life rather than settling for the cards we are dealt. Our life is present – it is directed action in motion forever moving with the flow of life.

Re-Connecting With the One Life

“To seek freedom is the only driving force I know. Freedom to fly off into that infinity out there. Freedom to dissolve; to lift off; to be like the flame of a candle, which, in spite of being up against the light of a billion stars, remains intact, because it never pretended to be more than what it is: a mere candle.” ~Carlos Castaneda, Don Juan: the Sorcerer.

Living consciously means we are totally aware of our surroundings – alert in the now and not lost in some nebulous no mans land. Conscious awareness observes the ways of nature, sees the harmony of the dance of life and death. Revels in the singing of the wind, the sshh of waves upon shingle, welcomes the warm sun upon bare skin and marvels at the intricate patterns of butterflies. A conscious life intuitively recognises the energy of the One Life that powers all the dna spacesuits on this planet whether furred, scaled or feathered – feels the pulse of the one Heart in all creation…and knows that separation is just an illusion cast by the matrix to keep us in the sacrificial game.

In the words of the metaphysical poet Thomas Traherne:

“You will never enjoy the world alright till the sea itself floweth in your veins, till you are clothed with heavens and crowned with the stars; and perceive yourself to be the sole heir of the whole world, and more than so, because men are in it who are every one the sole heir as well as you…..”

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

About the Author

Elva Thompson was born in England in 1947 and moved to Rosebud Lakota reservation in 1987. She is the author of the Heartstar Series; Book One: The Key made of Air, and Book Two: The Gates to Pandemonia. Her other interests include organic gardening, ancient phonetic languages, sonic sound and their application in the healing arts. She is also a medical intuitive and teaches sonic re-patterning using sound, colour, and essential oils. Elva Thompson is on Amazon Author Central @ amazon.com/author/heartstar

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Jake Anderson, TMU
Waking Times

There’s no other airport in the world with as many conspiracy theories attached to it as the Denver International Airport (DIA). Claims of the 35,000 acre structure—the second largest airport in existence—being home to a clandestine military installation have dogged DIA since its bloated $4.8 billion construction came to a finish in 1995. Airport executives are aware of the conspiracies and, in an attempt to dispel the myths, just built an interactive gargoyle to converse with wayward travelers.

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

The conspiracy theories related to the Denver Airport stem largely from the outlandish—and sometimes disturbing—murals, decor, and art exhibits festooning both its interior and exterior. There is, for example, the 32-foot tall steel armature sculpture of Blue Mustang, nicknamed Blucifer, who rears toward the sky with glowing red eyes. The sculpture gained special notoriety when, during construction, its head fell off and severed an artery of creator Luis Jiménez, ultimately killing him.

Inside the airport, travelers pass by a ‘time capsule’ capstone engraved with a Masonic symbol. The dedication was created by the New World Airport Commission and is meant to be opened in the year 2094. Then there are the infamous murals of Leo Tanguma, which depict enormous, haunting tableaus of the world’s children ensconced in a fiery apocalypse and huddled populations overlooked by an armed skeletal sentry that many have described as looking freakishly Naziesque.

Some conspiracy theorists assert, persistently though largely without credible evidence, that there’s more going on at this airport than the usual flights and cheap peanuts. A 2013 article reported on a whistleblower claiming to have inside information confirming that the airport’s aerotropolis, or “Airport City”, which ferries 50 million travelers annually, also contains an underground military station contracted by the Department of Defense. This base, which ostensibly connects to a vast network of subterranean military installations via miles of tunnels, constitutes a top-secret Continuity of Government (COG) base that would serve as a fallback in case a severe national emergency compromised our central government.


The new interactive exhibit—a giant animatronic gargoyle—is voiced by a full-time actor who engages in humorous conversations with travelers as they pass by. In a video of the strange new feature, the glistening gargoyle, whose head and eyes swivel about like a robotic puppet at Chuck-e-Cheese, pokes fun at the airport’s conspiratorial reputation.

Welcome to Illuminati Headquarters… I mean, Denver International Airport,” it says to delighted, and sometimes shocked, passersby.

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

The responses by the gargoyle, who states that he’s 243-years-old, are impromptu but so synchronized with peoples’ specific characteristics that it’s creepy. Check out this video from the airport:

While one might view this exhibit as an improbable or even inappropriate feature for an airport, DIA’s executives say it’s a strategic response to the conspiracy theories: harnessing the chaos and embracing the spectacle.

(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");

Spokesperson Emily Williams remarked:

I think that we recognize that conspiracy theories are part of our brand. It’s a fun way that we can engage with our passengers.”

And, indeed, this isn’t the first time the airport has trolled travelers. Last year, they posted a series of advertisements illustrated with alien imagery and Illuminati iconography.

Yes, Den’s got some secrets,” one ad read. “Since the airport’s opening in 1995, there have been endless rumors and theories. People say our underground tunnels lead to secret meeting facilities for the world’s elite. Our blue horse is thought of to be cursed. Some believe we are connected to the new world order, the Freemasons, and are home to the lizard people.”

While many observers have expressed delight at the interactive gargoyle, the response on YouTube has not been as kind, with some suggesting the gambit is little more than a PR stunt to hide the truth.

On the video posted to Denver Airport’s YouTube page, one commenter wrote:

Nothing to see here folks (at the Denver airport.) Just pay attention to this talking gargoyle with uplifting music behind it. Ignore the murals of genocide and freemason symbolism on statues throughout the complex. Life is good, you are not a slave.”

Another commenter astutely pointed out:

Interesting that the gargoyle said he’s 243 years old and mentions illuminati conspiracy. Adam Weishaupt supposedly founded the illuminati in 1776. 243 years ago.”

While the Denver Airport probably does not harbor a den of Illuminati operatives in its underground chamber, it might be worth considering the long-term consequences of disturbing the hell out of people right before they squeeze onto a crowded airplane. On the other hand, talking gargoyles and artful renditions of the apocalypse might be preferable to awkward small talk over $15 airport beers.

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

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Makia Freeman, Contributor
Waking Times

Venezuela lies abound. Both the USG (United States Government) and its lapdog MSM (Mainstream Media) have been going into overdrive, exaggerating or just plain lying about the state of affairs in Venezuela. Truth is always a casualty of war, and it’s also a casualty of pre-war, as the NWO prepares the ground for military intervention by demonization and propaganda. Here are 8 lies about Venezuela which are being used to justify yet another coup in a long, long history of US coups in foreign lands.

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

Venezuela Lies #1: The Venezuelan People Have No Food and the Shelves Are Bare

In these videos (here and here) on the ground in Caracas, Max Blumenthal exposed one of the lies about Venezuela that is constantly repeated, i.e. that the people have no food and the supermarket shelves are bare.

Venezuela Lies #2: The US Only Wants to Send Aid

If by “aid” you mean “weapons and barbed wire for radical opposition forces,” then yes, the US only wants to send aid. However, if by “aid” you mean actual medicine, then no. This VenezuelaAnalysis report quotes a NYT reporter and USAID itself. They either don’t have medicine as part of the inventory or state outright that there was no medicine:

“According to New York Times reporter Anatoly Kurmanaev, the trucks that the opposition tried to force across the border contained “no medicine” at all, with reports that a “small” amount of medicine was being stockpiled in Cucuta not confirmed by USAID. Initial inventories from USAID made no mention of medicine, listing only basic food and personal hygiene products amongst the “aid”.”

The Venezuelan Government is accepting aid from Russia and other countries it can trust, just not the US, since US “aid” may just “accidentally” happen to contain weapons for anti-Maduro agitators (or, as the Spanish say, compradores). Hmm, wonder how those arms got in the food truck?

As I covered in the article NGOs: Choice Tool of Subversion for the New World Order, NGOs have become a weaponized tool of soft power through which the NWO expands its empire – meddling, destabilizing, toppling and installing, all the while using the NGO as a humanitarian pretext. USAID is just another in a long-line of NGOs loyal to the US Government and NWO, willing to put a nice PR happy face on their agenda of subversion.

Venezuela Lies #3: Juan Guaido Has Legitimacy in Declaring Himself President

As I covered in my previous article Is This the Most Blatant US Coup Ever?, Juan Guaido is a US-CIA stooge through and through. He’s an agent-provocateur “opposition leader” who has been carefully groomed to play his role in the coup. His claim to be interim president of Venezuela under Article 233 of the Venezuelan Constitution is, legally, utter nonsense, since Maduro has not abandoned the presidency and Maduro held free, open and fair elections as adjudged by outside independent parties.

Venezuela Lies #4: Many Countries Support Guaido

The US claims many nations and groups support its efforts to topple Maduro and install Guaido. In reality, these countries are basically vassal states or other nations controlled by the US that don’t want to upset the apple cart. Notice the strategy of the US: try to co-opt the United Nations HRC (Human Right Council) into following US coup efforts, and try to strong-arm groups like the OAS (Organization of American States) and the Lima Group into betraying their brother nation Venezuela.

The US tried this same trick with the Syrian War by creating and controlling a group called “Friends of Syria.” Here is what Venezuela’s Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador Jorge Valero said:

“the self-proclaimed “Lima Group” is a cartel made up of satellite governments of the imperial government to break Latin American and Caribbean unity, and, due to the failure of using the Ministry of the Colonies, which is the OAS to isolate Venezuela in this organization. The empire and its minions couldn’t approve Article 20 of Inter-American Democratic Charter of the Permanent Council of the OAS and resort to the United Nations Security Council, where they also failed. The creation of puppet governments by the US is not new.”

Venezuela Lies #5: The US Cares about the Venezuelan People (Just Like It Cares about the Iraqi, Libyan, Syrian and Iranian People)

The NWO uses the US to bring all nations into its fold, but it like to do so with the veneer of democracy so as to gain more public support and engender less resistance. Subversion, NGO soft power and covert operations are more palatable than overt control and boot-in-the-face oppression. In this vein, the USG likes to pretend it truly cares and has deep compassion for the people of nations like Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, Venezuela and any other place it plans to subvert, invade or bomb … even though it has never professed such care in the past and will probably never again profess it in the future once its new puppet leader is installed.

Just look at the kind of lies, hypocrisy and nonsense Pence and a “deeply concerned” Pompeo tweeted about Iran when the USG set it sights on igniting a coup there in 2018:

Venezuela Lies #6: Venezuela is Only in the Condition It is Because of Chavez, Maduro and Socialism (They’re the Bad Guys)

Nothing is black and white. It is possible to look at the unfolding Venezuelan crisis and acknowledge that Maduro has mismanaged things while at the same time seeing the gross foreign interference he and his government have been subjected to. As I covered in other articles such as Venezuelan Economic Crisis: The Real Cause is Not Socialism, US-NWO foreign meddling is by far the biggest factor here. For instance, did you know that Bank of England has effectively stolen USD$1.2 billion from Venezuela by toeing the NWO line and blocking Venezuela from accessing it? Did you know that the US has effectively stolen USD$11 billion from Venezuela by freezing its US accounts? How is a small nation supposed to function as normal when such massive amounts are stolen from it?

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

Venezuela Lies #7: Yes, the US Has Toppled Governments Worldwide, But “This Time It’s Different”

Once you study enough history, you begin to see the lies of tyrants and empires. The lie remains the same. The US wants Venezuela’s gold and mineral reserves. It’s only 5 days from the US, whereas the Middle East is around 20 days from the US and in a very volatile part of the world. There is also the strategic acquisition of the mineral coltan. They also want to teach the successive government to Hugo Chavez a lesson after he thumbed his nose at the US-NWO Empire. This isn’t any different from other subversions and invasions. It fits the pattern exactly.

Venezuela Lies #8: It’s a “Grassroots Uprising” against a “Brutal Dictator”

This entire coup has been planned, orchestrated and executed from Washington. Period. There is no “grassroots uprising.” Ever wondered why Assad and Maduro are “brutal dictators” but bin Salman, El Sisi and other US-CIA stooges are not? It’s all about branding the enemy, marketing foreign interference and controlling perception. Today’s friend is tomorrow’s enemy and vice versa. Al-Qaeda is bad and now Al-Qaeda is good. Were we fighting Eastasia or was it Eurasia?

Who is the brutal dictator? Who is imposing economic warfare and deprivation, starvation and misery by sanction? Who is fomenting regime change on innocent nations? Who is funding and supporting terrorists to topple any government they don’t like?

Final Thoughts: The US vs. Russia/China Proxy War Continues

Both Russia and China have invested a lot in Venezuela, including actual investments in their oil, military assistance and financial loans. They are not about to let the US get away with this – even if Venezuela is in the USA’s backyard, geographically speaking. The Monroe Doctrine, which started out in the 1800s as a policy by which the US would protect fellow American nations from European invasion, has now been turned on its head. Raving warmonger John Bolton recently mentioned the term as yet another excuse for the US to dominate whomever it wants on the 2 American continents. However, despite all the Venezuela lies emanating from Washington DC and the MSM, Venezuela is going to be a tough nut to crack, and many American and Westerners are already aware of the propaganda being used to foment war.

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

About the Author

Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com (FaceBook here), writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance. Makia is on MindsSteemit and FB.

**Sources embedded throughout article.

This article (8 Venezuela Lies the US Government & Mainstream Media Want You to Believe) was originally created and published by The Freedom Articles and is re-posted here with permission. 

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.
Instead of a wall, build a first-of-its-kind energy park that spans the 1,954 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico to bring energy, water, jobs and border security to the region.
Instead of a wall, build a first-of-its-kind energy park that spans the 1,954 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico to bring energy, water, jobs and border security to the region.
Instead of a wall, build a first-of-its-kind energy park that spans the 1,954 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico to bring energy, water, jobs and border security to the region.
One of the most game-changing news events in the electric vehicle and energy storage industry, is the acquisition of Maxwell Technologies by Tesla for $218 million, according to Frost & Sullivan.
New Hampshire is preparing to follow the lead of other New England states and create a system for procuring renewable energy on behalf of residents.
New Hampshire is preparing to follow the lead of other New England states and create a system for procuring renewable energy on behalf of residents.
New Hampshire is preparing to follow the lead of other New England states and create a system for procuring renewable energy on behalf of residents.
As of the end of 2018, China’s renewable energy installation capacity had reached 728 GW, an increase of 12 percent from a year earlier, according to statistics released by China’s National Energy Administration. This breaks down into 352 GW (up 2.5 percent) for hydro, 184 GW (up 12.4 percent) for wind, 174 GW (up 34 percent) for photovoltaic (PV) and 17.8 GW (up 20.7 percent) for biomass. Renewable energy accounted for 38.3 percent of the country’s total installed power capacity, a rise of 1.7 percentage points.
As of the end of 2018, China’s renewable energy installation capacity had reached 728 GW, an increase of 12 percent from a year earlier, according to statistics released by China’s National Energy Administration. This breaks down into 352 GW (up 2.5 percent) for hydro, 184 GW (up 12.4 percent) for wind, 174 GW (up 34 percent) for photovoltaic (PV) and 17.8 GW (up 20.7 percent) for biomass. Renewable energy accounted for 38.3 percent of the country’s total installed power capacity, a rise of 1.7 percentage points.


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


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