Home Blog Page 138

Law(lessness) and (Dis)order in Seattle and Elsewhere

0

What would you think if local politicians decided to cut the size of their fire department while buildings in their city were ablaze? What about a general who orders his soldiers to stop fighting and surrender to the enemy? Something similar has occurred in the once tranquil city of Seattle, Washington, where in the midst of riots and over the objections of the mayor and police chief, the city council has voted to defund the police and reduce by 100 the number of officers on the force. The city council added to the indignity by cutting the chief’s salary. Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best resigned in her own form of protest. Seattle has about 1,400 police officers, clearly not enough given the ongoing lawlessness. The council vote to reduce the force is far less than the 50 percent cut demanded by the Black Lives Matter organization, which increasingly seems to be running — and ruining — Seattle and other cities. This decision could be seen as a victory for mob rule and could encourage more cities to take a knee before criminals. Not that more evidence is needed that the mob is winning, but in Chicago, which has become an almost daily shooting gallery, Cook County Prosecutor Kim Foxx has decided to drop felony cases, including charges of murder and other serious offenses. An analysis by the Chicago Tribune found that during Foxx’s tenure, “25,183 people have had their felony cases dismissed through November 2019, up from 18,694” under her predecessor. Last weekend, overnight, rampaging looters streamed into Downtown Chicago by caravan and then proceeded to smash their way into businesses along the Magnificent Mile, stealing high-end merchandise and anything else they could get their hands on. Why don’t reporters investigate who organized the raid? Where did these people come from? Who, what, when, where and why? Aren’t those the questions every good journalist should ask? Journalism was once a proud profession. What happened? Deep beneath the lawlessness spreading like coronavirus across the land is a moral and spiritual drought that politicians do not have the power to fix. In previous generations, fiery preachers would remind citizens of the consequences of living unrestrained and unaccountable lives. They called it “sin,” but that diagnosis has virtually disappeared, along with the generation of Billy Graham, and we are left with the current moral desert. We can’t say we have not been warned by history and experience about the dangers inherent in unrestrained living. America’s second president, John Adams, said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Which begs the question as to what happens to our Constitution and our nation when a growing number of those among us become immoral and irreligious? That great sage, Benjamin Franklin, remarked at the end of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia: “I agree to this Constitution … and I believe, further, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other.” Franklin’s basic philosophy of sound government was that personal and national freedom are in jeopardy if the people become wicked and immoral. He believed that when such behavior becomes widespread and people fear for their lives and property, demands for a police state become almost inevitable so that order might be restored. Given what is occurring in Seattle and elsewhere, it would appear we are edging closer to the day when Franklin’s prophecy is fulfilled.

Read more: newsbusters.org

Don’t Relinquish Civil Liberties for False Sense of Security

0

Dr. Mercola Interviews the Experts

This article is part of a weekly series in which Dr. Mercola interviews various experts on a variety of health issues. To see more expert interviews, click here.

Barbara Loe Fisher is the co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), which is the oldest and largest consumer-led nonprofit organization in the U.S. providing accurate and objective information to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and help people make informed health choices.

As noted by Fisher, the rapid movement by governments and the pharmaceutical industry toward mandatory vaccinations against COVID-19 and the proposed tracking and tracing of all individuals under the guise of public health is a culmination of everything we have been talking about for decades.

“Back in 1993, I started to predict that the day would come when Americans would not be able to participate in society without showing proof they’ve been vaccinated with whatever the government says they have to be vaccinated with,” Fisher says.

Utilitarianism Demands Sacrifice ‘for the Greater Good’

Legal proponents such as Alan Dershowitz, who has represented the notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and other prominent individuals, is now using a 1905 Supreme Court ruling to justify government officials literally detaining Americans and forcibly vaccinating them if they do not agree to get vaccinated voluntarily. Fisher explains:

“Dershowitz … was quite reckless in the language he used. He basically said that the Supreme Court in 1905 (Jacobson v. Massachusetts), [gives] the right of state governments to come in and forcibly inject you with a vaccine. That’s not really what Jacobson v. Massachusetts said …

In that case, it was smallpox, because that was the only vaccine they had in 1905, but you have to read the Supreme Court decision very carefully to understand everything that the justices said.

They basically concluded — and I think wrongly so, because utilitarianism … is based on a mathematical equation that some can be inconvenienced or sacrificed for the greater good of a majority of people — that people [who] opposed smallpox vaccination could be required to be vaccinated during epidemics.

Even religious objections could be overridden. But there’s also language in that decision that says that the court is not to be interpreted as meaning that if an individual was at risk for being harmed by the vaccination, they were not meant to [have concluded] that “cruel and inhuman to the last degree” would be the standard that would be used.

I think Dershowitz overstated the opinion, although it is a utilitarian opinion. It gives authority to the states to mandate vaccines because anything that is not defined in the Constitution as a federal activity is reserved for the states.

Public health laws, by and large in this country, are written by the states, and the federal authority is requiring vaccination for people crossing territorial borders of the United States [and the federal government] could mandate vaccines for interstate travel, crossing state borders. But most public health laws that legislatures make are for the residents of the states, which is why we have a patchwork of [vaccine] laws in this country …

I’m very worried that some attorney is going to try to challenge the Jacobson [ruling] in the 21st century. I think that, probably, in any court right now, you’re going to get that ruling upheld and you’re going to get it strengthened. I would advise against [challenging] that one in the Supreme Court.”

Enforcement Will Become a Hot Issue

If the worst-case scenario occurs and your state decides to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine, or any other vaccine, the practical question will be how they’re going to enforce it. They’ll most probably rely on local police and/or the county sheriff.

Thankfully, county sheriffs are elected by the people and are directly accountable to the citizens in their county, the state Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution, and have the legal authority to deny what they consider to be an unlawful governmental order.

For this reason, I believe it is important to know who your county sheriff is. Get to know and develop a relationship with them. Educate them about why it is important to defend the human right to make informed, voluntary decisions about medical risk taking, including vaccine risk-taking.

It is important to remember that, although the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jacobson v. Massachusetts affirmed the constitutional authority of elected representatives in state legislatures to pass public health laws requiring vaccination, state legislators also have the constitutional authority to choose NOT to mandate vaccines and/or to include flexible medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions in state public health laws.

This is why, in 2010, the National Vaccine Information Center created the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online communications tool that monitors vaccine-related state legislation and alerts residents when proposed bills are moving in their state. They also provide fact-based talking points you can share when contacting your legislators.

The bottom line is that we need, as a nation, to start developing personal relationships with the elected legislators and officials, including our county sheriff. They need to know we will not accept tyranny in America.

“Let’s hope that what has happened this year is a lesson to the people that [they must] elect legislators who are going to reflect their values and beliefs — traditional values and beliefs that have been respected in this country for 245 years. If we don’t elect good people, we’re not going to have good laws,” Fisher says.

“The millennials and the Gen Xers have got to start running for office if they want to have a future where they’re going to be able to enjoy freedom of speech and conscience, freedom of religion and the right to assembly.

All of these things [are] protected in the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights. We have to elect people at the state and federal level who are not going to sell out, who are not going to sacrifice their integrity for money.

We know the pharmaceutical industry is the biggest lobby on Capitol Hill … we’ve got to build a firewall between government and industry that has been completely broken down in the last 40 years.”

H.R. 6666 Violates Several Constitutional Amendments

For example, H.R.6666, the COVID-19 Testing, Reaching and Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act, introduced in the House of Representatives May 1, 2020, has 64 co-sponsors1 (all Democrats; one Republican has withdrawn his name) and that bill would give $100 billion to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to hire people to go door-to-door to test the population for COVID-19 for fiscal year 2020, with more funds to follow, as needed, in subsequent fiscal years.

If you test positive, they’ll trace all your contacts and demand that you quarantine in your home or in a mobile unit. Children could be taken into child services if parents are quarantined.

“This is a violation of a number of amendments in the Constitution that protect our right to life and liberty, that protect our right to be free in our homes, and not be taken out of our homes and put somewhere the government wants to put us,” Fisher says.

“If we do not start to become aware of these laws that are being passed by legislators on Capitol Hill and [in] our state legislatures, we are going to be a captive people who don’t have civil liberties anymore …

We’re seeing this erosion of civil liberties because, unless you take liberty from the people — and they’re doing it in the name of safety — you cannot do the kinds of things that we’ve been talking about [such as restricting work, education, travel and social engagement unless you are vaccinated and implementing biometric tracking of the population] …

Having sat here for almost 40 years watching this vaccine empire unfold, I know that Bill Gates … has changed everything. He was a big proponent of public-private partnerships because he’s a businessman … He is a big believer in vaccinating the world and Gavi [the Gates-funded Vaccine Alliance] … is all about pharma.

All these companies are involved in vaccinating the world, and COVID-19 vaccines are being fast-tracked to licensure with additional funding from governments like the U.S. government — half a billion dollars to one company and half a billion dollars to another.

Moderna is an NIAID-supported vaccine. A lot of money has been given to these companies to fast-track these COVID-19 vaccines using technology that’s never been licensed before — DNA, messenger RNA [and] nanoparticle [vaccines].”

Operation Warp Speed

The fast-tracking of a COVID-19 vaccine to licensure and subsequent widespread use has been termed Operation Warp Speed. What we must remember here is that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for any damage their vaccines do. Since 2011, drug companies making and selling vaccines are even shielded from design defect lawsuits, which means they have absolutely no incentive for making vaccines less harmful.

The 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act also indemnifies all drug companies making vaccines used during a public health emergency or a pandemic. So, vaccine companies, as well as any person who administers, mandates or enforces vaccine mandates, does not face any liability whatsoever if a new coronavirus vaccine turns out to be a catastrophe.

What’s more, when a COVID-19 vaccine does come out, there likely will be little or no information about its side effects, particularly long-term side effects. Moderna, which is a top contender in the race to be the first to get a licensed COVID-19 vaccine on the market, began human trials of its experimental mRNA vaccine in March 2020.

According to a May 18, 2020, press release,2 “After two doses, all participants evaluated to date across the 25 microgram and 100 mcg dose cohorts seroconverted with binding antibody levels at or above levels seen in convalescent sera.” The vaccine also “elicited neutralizing antibody titer levels in all eight initial participants …”

The words are important here, as high-binding antibodies are associated with paradoxical immune enhancement.

As explained in “Fast-Tracked COVID-19 Vaccine — What Could Go Wrong?” previous attempts to create coronavirus vaccines have failed due to coronaviruses triggering production of two different types of antibodies: one that fights disease, and one that triggers paradoxical immune enhancement that often results in very serious disease and/or death when the vaccinated person is exposed to the wild coronavirus.

Based on the historical coronavirus vaccine failures, this could become one of the biggest public health disasters in history. And, no one involved will be accountable or face any repercussions. Instead, they will all profit. 

It’s also important to realize that only healthy people are enrolled in these human trials, yet only 4 in 10 Americans are actually free of chronic disease.3 What’s more, according to recent NHANES data,4 87.8% of Americans are metabolically inflexible, which impairs their immune function.

The NHANES data is over 4 years old and our metabolic health has only declined since 2016, so the number is likely higher than 90%, or 9 in 10 Americans are unhealthy to some degree.

On top of that, vitamin D deficiency is rampant, yet public health authorities are not stressing the importance of optimizing your vitamin D levels to reduce your risk of infection. If you do nothing else, make sure you raise your vitamin D level above 40 nanograms per milliliter, at bare minimum, and ideally 60 ng/mL, before this fall, when another predicted “second” wave of COVID-19 may hit.

They’re determined to somehow implant, or in some way have our bodies carry our vaccination records … They’re going for it all right now … American people are going to have to really take a look and figure out, do they want to give up their civil liberties for an illusion of safety?

COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery

Now, aside from using entirely novel manufacturing methods like messenger RNA (mRNA), DNA and nanoparticle genetic engineering technology, some of the COVID-19 vaccines being fast tracked to licensure also will be using novel vaccine delivery methods.

One new type of vaccine delivery, which the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has funded and promoted, uses a microneedle array rather than conventional injection. The microneedles are equipped with fluorescent quantum dot tags. The resulting invisible mark can then be read by a smartphone equipped with a special sensor.

“This is definitely something that Bill Gates has been pushing,” Fisher says. “He has been pushing not only that everybody in the world has to get all these vaccines, but also that governments need to be able to track [people’s vaccination status].

Certainly, this type of administration of a vaccine is a double bubble because not only do you get the vaccine in the person, but you also are able to track them … They’re determined to somehow implant, or in some way have our bodies carry our vaccination records …

They’re going for it all right now … the American people are going to have to really take a look and figure out, do they want to give up their civil liberties for an illusion of safety? It’s really an illusion of safety.”

COVID-19 Vaccine Will Alter Your RNA and DNA

As noted by Fisher, the mRNA vaccines being developed against COVID-19 will alter your RNA and DNA, which is of tremendous concern. The idea behind them is to turn your body into a protein manufacturing plant, and if your immune system is hypersensitive, it could overreact, causing severe problems. Considering how many people have autoimmune diseases and allergies, these vaccines could have devastating effects for many.

“When you try to stimulate strong inflammatory responses in the body through the use of genetic manipulation, squalene oil-based adjuvants and nanoparticle technology — one vaccine is even using electricity to try to hyperstimulate an immune response — what is this going to do to people who don’t resolve inflammation in the body and become chronically inflamed and chronically ill and disabled?

This is what vaccines do. They stimulate inflammation in the body. They have to in order to provoke an antibody response, but this is atypical. When you’re trying to do this in the body, this is not a normal way that the body mounts an inflammatory response to a microbe.

They’ve turned everything upside down and we are just accepting it. Why are we not thinking critically? Why do people think that they shouldn’t really do the research and look at the science and look at what’s being done before they take a pharmaceutical product or a vaccine? This is what I don’t understand. We’ve totally given up our critical thinking ability and said the experts are going to do it for us …

I think that what people need to do — and I’ve been advocating this for 40 years — is you need to get educated, you need to get the accurate facts. Mercola.com and NVIC.org, we do our research.

We reference all of our information because we want you to have accurate information, and you need to share that information with your family, friends, community leaders and legislators because the only way that we’re going to be able to change government is by electing people who are going to reflect our values and beliefs — people who understand that we have a right, a human right, to make voluntary decisions about medical interventions — any medical procedure that can injure or kill us or our children.

It’s basic. It’s not hard. We’re governed by the laws that are made by the people we elect, and those people also appoint judges at the state and federal level. It all depends upon who we elect. At the end of the day, if … people are going to tyrannize us [and] violate our human rights, then we have to make a decision.

Everyone has to make a decision. The police, the sheriffs, every American is going to have to decide: Am I going to be somebody who is going to violate the civil rights and the human rights of my fellow citizens, or am I going to be somebody who follows my conscience and who understands the cultural values and beliefs that have guided this country for more than two centuries? …

I am praying that most Americans understand that we have got to fight for our freedom and for our civil liberties. It’s what has kept this country free for two centuries.”

Be Prepared to Protect State Authority

Fisher is particularly concerned about the precedent set in Virginia in 2019, when the state legislature, which is now dominated by one political party, decided to eliminate the ability of duly elected legislators to decide which vaccines are mandated for children to attend school.

The legislature voted to immediately codify into Virginia law the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule. In the future, every new vaccine the CDC recommends for children (such as a COVID-19 vaccine) will be automatically mandated in Virginia for school attendance without public hearings and input from citizens and without a vote by legislators.

“This is very dangerous,” she says. “Why? Because Jacobson v. Massachusetts affirmed the authority of the state legislatures to make vaccine laws. What Virginia has done is they’ve handed over that power. They’ve given away that power to the CDC and made the CDC a de facto law-making body for the state of Virginia.

Now they are going to try to do this in every state, so that basically there will be no more hearings on proposed vaccine additions … This is extremely dangerous. I urge everyone to sign up for our free [NVIC Advocacy] Portal because it’s a public service we provide, and we want you to be informed.

We give fact-based talking points you can use with your legislators. This issue is going to become more and more important because of the power grab that has occurred in the last few months over this pandemic. Please be prepared. Please stand up for your right to make voluntary vaccine decisions.”

sign up nvic advocacy portal

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination in October 2020

October 16 through 18, 2020, NVIC will sponsor the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination. The theme is “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st century.” The conference will bring together well-known speakers from around the world presenting information on vaccine science, policy, law, ethics and civil liberties and will feature formal presentations, panel discussions and live chat rooms.

NVIC has held four previous hotel-based conferences in the Washington, D.C., area but, this time around, the conference will be held online due to the unpredictability of government regulations related to COVID-19, including travel and social distancing restrictions that may still be in play in October.

So, mark your calendars and check NVIC.org for more information that will be posted soon about the conference.

In the meantime, be sure to sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal. It’s free, and you will stay informed about proposed vaccine-related legislation happening in your state that could further restrict or eliminate your legal right to make voluntary vaccine decisions for yourself and your children.

Read more: articles.mercola.com

Common Cold May Trigger Positive COVID-19 Antibody Test

0

Right now, there are three types of COVID-19 tests:1

Molecular — Also known as a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, this test detects whether genetic material of the virus is present in the sample collected from your throat or sputum (the back of your sinuses) Antigen — This test, sometimes referred to as “rapid test,” detects viral proteins Antibody — Also known as a serology test, it detects the presence of antibodies in your blood

The first two, molecular and antigen, are so-called “viral tests” that detect active infections, whereas the antibody test will tell you if you’ve developed antibodies in response to a previous coronavirus infection. It typically takes your body one to three weeks after an infection clears to start making antibodies against the virus in question.

Common Cold Can Trigger Positive COVID-19 Antibody Test

Each of these COVID-19 tests have their issues and controversies. The problem with antibody testing is that there are seven different coronaviruses known to cause respiratory illness in humans.2 Four of them cause symptoms associated with the common cold:

229E NL63 OC43 HKU1

In addition to the common cold, OC43 and HKU1 — two of the most commonly encountered betacoronaviruses3 — are also known to cause bronchitis, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia in all age groups.4 The other three human coronaviruses — which are capable of causing more serious respiratory illness — are:

SARS-CoV MERS-CoV SARS-CoV-2

The tricky part is that the antibodies created by these different coronaviruses appear very similar, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention admits recovering from the common cold can trigger a positive antibody test for COVID-19, even if you were never infected with SARS-CoV-2 specifically. As explained on the CDC’s “Test for Past Infection” web page:5

“Antibody tests check your blood by looking for antibodies, which may tell you if you had a past infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. Antibodies are proteins that help fight off infections and can provide protection against getting that disease again (immunity). Antibodies are disease specific … 

A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.”

Unclear if Cross-Reactive Antibody Tests Are Still Being Used

In a July 10, 2020, interview with KTTC news, Mayo Clinic chair of clinical microbiology, Dr. Bobbi Pritt, said:6

“Early on we had labs using tests that have not received that [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] review and some of those tests … may have given you a false positive and detected the normal coronavirus that circulates and causes the common cold. I would say the vast majority have been extensively tested to show that they do not cross react and give you false positives due to the common cold [anymore].”

While experts at the Mayo Clinic claim these cross-reactive antibody tests were an early problem that has since been corrected and eliminated, the CDC does not confirm or deny the accuracy of this statement on its “Test for Past Infection” web page.7

So, it’s unclear whether the antibody tests manufactured and used today are still capable of delivering a positive result if you were recently exposed and recovered from the common cold virus.

Back on April 29, 2020, infectious disease specialist and CNN medical analyst Dr. Kent Sepkowitz noted that “deciphering between the common cold antibody and the COVID-19 antibody is a real challenge scientifically,”8 but that doesn’t mean it cannot or hasn’t been done.

On a side note, labs are now reporting a shortage of chemicals and disposable pipette tips required to perform COVID-19 tests, which means longer wait times — again. As Scott Shone, director of the North Carolina State Laboratory of Public Health, told The New York Times,9,10 July 23, 2020, “It’s like Groundhog Day. I feel like I lived this day four or five months ago,” referring back to the early days of the pandemic when test supplies were in short supply.

Some Coronaviruses May Impart Resilience Against COVID-19

While the CDC warns it’s still uncertain whether COVID-19 antibodies prevents reinfection, or if it does, for how long, researchers in Singapore have presented evidence11,12,13 suggesting the immunity is likely to be long-lasting.

They discovered common colds caused by the betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 appear to make you more resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the resulting immunity might last as long as 17 years.

The authors suggest that if you’ve beat a common cold caused by a OC43 or HKU1 betacoronavirus in the past, you may have a 50/50 chance of having defensive T-cells that can recognize and help defend against SARS-CoV-2. As reported by the Daily Mail:14

“Scientists have found evidence that some immunity may be present for many years due to the body’s ‘memory’ T-cells from attacks by previous viruses with a similar genetic make-up — even among people who have had no known exposure to Covid-19 or SARS …

Blood was taken from 24 patients who had recovered from COVID-19, 23 who had become ill from SARS and 18 who had never been exposed to either SARS or COVID-19 …

Half of patients in the group with no exposure to either Covid-19 or SARS possessed T-cells which showed immune response to the animal betacoronaviruses, COVID-19 and SARS. This suggested patients’ immunity developed after exposure to common colds caused by betacoronavirus or possibly from other as yet unknown pathogens.”

According to the researchers, their findings demonstrate that:15

“Virus-specific memory T-cells induced by betacoronavirus infection are long-lasting, which supports the notion that COVID-19 patients would develop long-term T-cell immunity. Our findings also raise the intriguing possibility that infection with related viruses can also protect from or modify the pathology caused by SARS-Cov-2.”

Added support for these conclusions were published May 14, 2020, in the journal Cell. This study16 found that not only did 70% of samples obtained from recovered COVID-19 patients have resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level but so did 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to the virus. According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.”

Other Researchers Report Low Immunity Post-Recovery

The immunity issue isn’t entirely cut and dry, though. Other research, which looked at antibody levels in recovered COVID-19 patients in Germany, found they lost their antibodies after two to three months.

“Clemens Wendtner, a chief physician at the hospital, tested COVID-19 patients for immunity after they had been treated for the disease at the end of January 2020. The tests showed a significant decrease in the number of antibodies,” DW reported in a July 14, 2020, article.17

“Wendtner says ‘neutralizing’ antibodies, which stop a viral attack, fell in four out of nine of the patients who were tested, within two to three months. Those findings coincide with a similar investigation done in China.

That study also found that antibodies in COVID-19 patients do not persist in the blood. Further research is still required. But these initial findings suggest that a second infection is possible …”

However, it is important to realize that loss of the ability to determine antibody levels may not necessarily reflect lack of immune protection, as there may be innate cell mediated immunity that provides protection that is not being measured by the humoral antibody production.

Will COVID-19 Behave Like the Common Cold?

If reinfection is possible, then COVID-19 would behave much like the common cold and seasonal influenza, which can strike more than once — if not in a single season, then certainly in any given year. If that’s the case, then “immunity passports” and most other COVID-19 interventions, such as school closings and business shutdowns, become even more questionable than they already are.

If the novel coronavirus behaves like common cold viruses, then talk of “immunity passports” and herd immunization is pointless.

If SARS-CoV-2 ends up behaving like other human coronaviruses that cause the common cold, immunity may only last six to 12 months, a European study18 says. Here, they did not look at SARS-CoV-2 antibodies but, rather, antibodies against the other four coronaviruses that cause the common cold, none of which were long-lasting. According to BGR, which reported the findings:19

“‘Frequent reinfections at 12 months post-infection and substantial reduction in antibody levels as soon as 6 months post-infection’ were observed for those viruses.

If the novel coronavirus behaves the same way, then talk of ‘immunity passports’ and herd immunization is pointless. A person who recovered from COVID-19 could get it again in six to 12 months without another vaccine shot …

The researchers note that the human coronaviruses are ‘biologically dissimilar’ and ‘have little in common, apart from causing the common cold.’ But SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t have to be similar to any of them to follow the same immunity pattern.”

Is Herd Immunity Against COVID-19 Possible?

The issue of reinfection also raises questions about whether herd immunity is ever going to be possible. Studies cited by The Daily Mail20 claim herd immunity against COVID-19 could be achieved if just 10% to 43% of people develop lasting immunity.

This is a far cry from the percentages typically required for vaccine-induced “herd immunity” (which is really a misnomer, as vaccine-induced immunity doesn’t work like natural immunity, and herd immunity is really only achieved when enough people recover from the illness in question). According to The Daily Mail:21

“The concept of herd immunity hinges on people only being affected once, so that when a certain number of people have been infected with the virus already it can’t spread any more.

It remains a mystery as to whether this is the case for COVID-19 but, if it is, then herd immunity could offer some protection during a second wave of the disease …

Researchers now say it could work to some extent if only one or two out of 10 people have been infected naturally and become immune to the disease … Another study has taken a similar line and suggested herd immunity could develop at around 43 percent of the population getting infected … Immunity among the most socially active people, scientists say, could protect those who come into contact with fewer others.”

Optimizing Vitamin D May Be Your Best Bet

Considering the many questions surrounding the possibility of reinfection and herd immunity, I believe one of your best bets is to address an underlying weakness that can have a significant impact on your COVID-19 risk, namely vitamin D insufficiency.

Rather than waiting for a likely harmful vaccine, get proactive and start optimizing your vitamin D level. You can learn more about this in “The Most Important Paper Dr. Mercola Has Ever Written” and “How to Fix the COVID-19 Crisis in 30 Days.” Also start working on reversing any underlying comorbidities such as insulin resistance and obesity.

When Should You Get Tested?

As for testing, I do not recommend getting a viral test (which checks for active infection) unless you have COVID-19 symptoms and need it to guide your treatment. Swabbing the back of your nasal cavity has its risks, and can actually introduce an infection or, some speculate, even some more nefarious agents.

Getting tested just for the heck of it doesn’t really make sense. Even if you test negative, you can get infected at any point after leaving the test site. If you have to get tested in order to travel or return to work, an antibody test may be more appropriate. Even if your antibodies wane with time, you’re still going to be immune for a while.

The best test are your clinical symptoms. If you have symptoms suggestive of coronavirus infection, then my best recommendation is to start nebulizing food grade hydrogen peroxide at 0.1% as suggested in the video below and discussed in my article on the topic.

I would also make sure that your vitamin D levels are adequate, as discussed in my paper on the topic. If you don’t know your vitamin D level and have not been in the sun or taken over 5,000 units of vitamin D a day, it would likely help to take one bolus dose of 100,000 units, and make sure you are taking plenty of magnesium, which helps convert the vitamin D to its active immune modulating form.

Another great option that is less expensive, easier to get and likely more effective than hydroxychloroquine, would be quercetin with zinc as discussed in my recent article on the subject.

Read more: articles.mercola.com

The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy

0

Patrick Wood — an economist, financial analyst and American constitutionalist — has devoted a lifetime to uncovering the mystery of what is controlling most of the craziness we’re currently seeing, and which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

He’s written two books on this topic: “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.” I was intrigued by his work as my own approach is to seek to understand the foundational cause of any given problem.

“I think that’s a really important takeaway for listeners,” Wood says. “Don’t just confine your view to the microcosm, like what’s in front of you. Always try and look for the big picture … Once you have the big picture, it’s hard to unsee it. Once you see it, it’s hard to not see it. It guides everything else you do within your life at that point, and that’s really important.

It’s certainly important in medicine, because if a doctor or researcher doesn’t really understand the whole picture, how can he understand a little part of the picture when you get right down into some nitty-gritty detail? It’s very difficult.”

Wood’s foray into the ideology of technocracy began with a chance meeting with Anthony Sutton at a gold conference in the early 1970s. Sutton has written several books about political science, primarily about the Trilateral Commission, which Wood had studied from a financial angle.

They developed a relationship and eventually wound up collaborating on a newsletter and two books, “Trilaterals Over Washington: Volumes 1 and 2,” which have recently been re-released.

“Having been mentored by somebody like Anthony Sutton, who was a world-class researcher, left indelible marks on my life. I couldn’t do what I do today without his coaching, instruction, watching him do things, watching his mind work,” Wood says.

“He would sit down every morning and spend his two or three hours just flipping through the newspapers. Looking for stories in the front page, back page, middle page, classifieds, whatever. He was really intent on keeping his mind focused on his subject, and digging in the right places and stuff. So that’s helped me today, to do what I do.”

Definition of Technocracy

So, what is “technocracy”? As explained by Wood, technocracy is a movement that got started in the 1930s during the height of the Great Depression, when scientists and engineers got together to solve the nation’s economic problems. It looked like capitalism and free enterprise was going to die, so they decided to invent a new economic system from scratch.

They called this system “technocracy.” It was to be a resource-based economic system. Rather than basing the economic system on pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand, this system is instead based on energy resources and social engineering. In a nutshell, under this system, companies would be told what resources they’re allowed to use, when, and for what, and consumers would be told what to buy.

“They actually proposed to use an energy script instead of money, and let energy be the determining factor on what was produced, bought and sold, and consumed, and so on. But being engineers and scientists, in 1938 when this definition came out, which I’m going to read, they had capsulized what they viewed as the scientific method and the scientific approach.

It’s important to see that today, because we see the same subtleties, the same mindsets, the same thinking processes that they had back then. I will contend that’s a very dangerous thing. It’s a dangerous thinking process. But here’s what they concluded in 1938:

‘Technocracy is the science of social engineering. The scientific operation of the entire social mechanism, to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.’

First off, you’ll see that it’s the science of social engineering. That ought to be enough to make the hair stand up on the back of your head, because who wants to be scientifically engineered by somebody that you don’t know, somebody that doesn’t know you, but rather has this idea that they can reform you, remake you?

But most importantly, you see the economic aspect that they had in mind, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism — that’s all the people in society — to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.

This was an economic system from the get go, not a political system. And what’s really important to see in that — the big takeaway here — is that technocracy viewed politics and politicians as an unnecessary, irrelevant, and even just a stumbling block to getting on down the road with society.

They proposed to get rid of all the politicians. Just dismiss them. Dismiss the Senate, the Congress, all the elected officials. They basically wanted to set up an organization chart, like a corporation would have today, where you have the president and you have vice-presidents doing different things. Then you have directors over certain departments and so on.

And they would just disappear the political system per se, leaving no citizen representation of government. Of course, that means the Constitution [is] immaterial, too, because that defines the political structure.

In fact, they openly called on FDR to declare himself dictator, so that he could just implement technocracy. He didn’t take them up on it. We can thank God for that. We only got the New Deal instead. By comparison, it’s much better … So, this was the genesis of technocracy and technocrats.”

Scientists Stand Above All Other Individuals

As explained by Wood, the technocrats “had this crazy idea that they were better than everybody else.” This philosophy and mindset can be traced back to Henri de Saint-Simon, a French philosopher from around 1800. Saint-Simon is considered the father of scientism, social sciences, transhumanism and technocracy.

He said in one of his essays, “A scientist … is a man who foresees. It is because science provides the means to predict, that it is useful, and the scientists are superior to all other men.” This was the mindset of technocrats in the 1930s, and it’s the same today. In essence, science is used to manipulate society and keep the economic engine running.

Top Technocrats Rescued Through Operation Paperclip

While technocracy began in the U.S., the first country to ever implement it was Nazi Germany under Hitler. However, it’s important to realize that technocracy is not Republican or Democrat. It’s not Marxist or Capitalist. It’s not a Nazi philosophy. It’s an independent ideology.

When technocracy first began in the U.S., it was a membership organization. At its peak, there were more than 500,000 card-carrying, dues-paying members in the United States and Canada. Incidentally, the head of technocracy in Canada was the grandfather of Elon Musk, founder of Tesla and SpaceX. Around the same time, a technocratic organization also got started in Germany.

“As Hitler rose to power, he realized that the technocrats, as an organization, would be competitive with him becoming a dictator. So, he outlawed the Technocratic party in Germany. At about the same time, technocracy was outlawed in Canada [for two years]. For a number of reasons, they thought that somehow the two were connected and that technocracy in Canada would be supporting Hitler …

It was discovered later by historians that these technocrats, who were banned from meeting, were actually very active during the course of World War II, during Hitler’s reign. They were the statisticians, the mathematicians, the physicists, the engineers for business and so on; that really enabled Hitler’s expansion and dictatorship.

That’s not to say that they were all in lockstep with his goals, but they had a good time supporting all those things, because they were highly prized by Hitler and his leadership.

During the war, they found out also that these technocrats were communicating between the columns of power in Nazi, Germany. Hitler was rather paranoid about keeping all of those different areas separate so they would not communicate, but they did communicate during the war.

After the war … a top-secret operation [took place] in the United States … called Operation Paperclip, which brought some 1,200 of these top scientists and engineers from Germany to the United States. They sanitized their resumes and installed them into positions of scientific prowess in the United States, like at the national technology agencies.

So, the very same people that were helping Hitler do what he did, completely bypassed the Nuremberg trial. Some of them should have been there, I’m sure. But they were brought to the United States and given high positions of prestige, to continue to practice their science and engineering.”

Beauty and the Beast

The Trilateral Commission’s co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Columbia University professor, brought the concept of technocracy into the Commission in 1973, with the financial support of David Rockefeller.

“Brzezinski wrote this book called ‘Between Two Ages — America’s Role in the Technetronic Era.’ It caught Rockefeller’s eye. And so, Rockefeller and Brzezinski became like the beauty and the beast. They went on to form the Trilateral Commission, which declared, from Day 1, that they wanted to foster a new international economic order.

They said that repeatedly in their literature, and this is what got Sutton excited, and me too. What is this new international economic order you’re talking about? What do you mean? We have an economic order. It seems to be working. Why do you want to change everything? What is your idea here?”

The Trilateral Commission more or less took over the Jimmy Carter administration, and has dominated the political structure ever since. Regardless of their party affiliations, U.S. presidents have been members of the Trilateral Commission.

Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton were all members. Within two weeks of his inauguration, Barack Obama appointed 11 Trilateral Commission members to top-level positions in his administration, equivalent to 12% of the Commission’s entire U.S. membership.1 The ramifications of this are described in Wood’s article,2 “Obama: Trilateral Commission Endgame.”

“What happened here is that they were after the mechanism, because America was the greatest economic engine in the world at that time,” Wood explains. “They wanted to get control of the economic engine of the world so that they could manipulate it for their own benefit and convert it, transform it if you will, into technocracy …”

Personal Freedom Is the Enemy of Technocracy

It’s important to realize we’re fighting an enemy that has literally spent the last several generations compiling their power base. They’ve done it progressively, slowly and very consistently over time with the endgame in mind at all times. They engineered circumstances that allow them to amass more and more power.

What the technocrats are doing is making an end run around national sovereignty. Rather than a frontal assault on the system, which has never been successful, they’ve simply eroded national sovereignty piece by piece.

Their last great power grab in the U.S. was the 9/11 tragedy. It allowed them to push through the Patriot Act, which sacrificed many of our freedoms in one fell swoop. They’re in the process of doing it again with the current pandemic. It’s quite clear the pandemic is being used to move us toward an authoritarian tyranny.

However, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a platform that will dwarf their 9/11 power-grab and radically increase their ability to continue to erode our civil liberties and control our society. If you find this line of reasoning interesting, I think you will enjoy the video below from Really Graceful, which reviews whether or not you’d even notice if you were living under tyranny.

Technocratic Infrastructure

It’s also crucial to understand that the only reason they’ve not yet been able to overtake the U.S. is because of our Constitution. We’re the biggest barrier worldwide to implementing technocracy, which is why there’s been so much focus on dismantling the freedoms of Americans.

“The strategy has been to build infrastructure for their system. Infrastructure is the schematic diagram that makes things work. For instance, we have roads in our country. We have railroads. We have physical roads. We have freeways. We have telecommunications systems. We have telephone lines. We have airports and things that connect everything together.

The concept of infrastructure is basic to any economic system. You have to have some type of infrastructure, so that the whole system will work. And so, today when the government passes a $2 trillion infrastructure bill, you and I will think, ‘Oh, finally, we’re going to get those potholes fixed on our street or something.’

In the technocrat mind, in the larger scheme, setting up the infrastructure involves so many more things today than it ever did.

For instance, the infrastructure of technocracy now has to do with anything called smart: smart growth, smart cities, smart phones, smart devices, the internet of things that ties everything together, all of the sensors and the cameras. This is the new infrastructure of the digital era. It’s all technology based, I might add.

So, infrastructure started way back when the Trilateral Commission was first started. A case in point: One of the early founding members of the commission was [the late] Caspar Weinberger, who happened to be the president of Bechtel Engineering. That’s the largest private engineering company in the world. They’re huge. They’re are private. Nobody knows much about them. But they were part of the Trilateral Commission group …

They’ve always realized that without building this infrastructure, they have nothing. They can get nowhere. They must have it in order to move on down the road. We’ve seen this emphasis on infrastructure ever since 1973 in ways that people hardly can understand anymore, because it’s so technological.

But the infrastructure being laid today includes such things as the internet of things, where sensors and everything connect together to feed data back to, who knows, some mainframe somewhere.

All of the financial transactions, all of the data transactions [get sent] back to some computer somewhere where artificial intelligence is sitting on top of it all to make sense of all the data coming in.

The same artificial intelligence programs now are taking that data, working it, getting some sense of meaning out of it, then turning around and issuing things that we should do in response. In other words, how it should change us.

This is the science of social engineering. It’s engineering by algorithm. They saw this even back in the 1930s, even though there was no such thing as artificial intelligence back then.

They realized that science eventually would be to the point where their algorithms could be automated to the point where they would be able to replace the political structure, to keep everything in line, to keep everything working.

Rule by algorithm. Operation by algorithm. This is the big predominant thing we see today. When something doesn’t fit into the algorithm, you’ll hear the term ‘Science says.’ We should do that thing.”

To give you just one rather hilarious real-world example of the technocratic “science says” strategy, here’s a sentence from a recent article in The Sun:3 “People who refuse to wear a face mask to reduce the risk of coronavirus have lower cognitive ability, new research has found.”

Not only is it laughable because it’s illogical, it’s also completely irrelevant, since there’s not a single well-designed study showing that mask wearing lowers the spread of viral infections. For the scoop on this, see my interview with Denis Rancourt.

Rule by Algorithm

Initially, science is used to issue suggestions, but those suggestions rapidly turn into mandates. We’ve repeatedly seen that with vaccines, for example. But the COVID-19 pandemic has also revealed there’s a much larger plan that includes implantable digital identifications, medical records and vaccine passports, digital currency and banking — all of which will ultimately be tied together so that algorithms and automation will be able to keep everyone in line, everywhere, all the time.

“People who buck the system won’t be able to participate in all the things in society that other people do who got the vaccines and just took the program without questioning. The algorithm will control everybody, will manipulate everybody.

So, it goes from, ‘Science says’ to the algorithm, and then it becomes automated. Then they don’t have to say ‘Science says’ anymore. They just push the button. The algorithm takes care of it and you get the shot and that’s the end of it.

This business of infrastructure is very sophisticated. Today it’s called supply chain, by the way. That’s a big term you’ll hear, too. The supply chain, moving goods and services to get just in the right place, just in time.

No warehouse is necessary. Just kind of ship it and it’s there exactly the day you need it. This has all been automated as well. It’s part of the infrastructure they need to implement technocracy one day.”

Data Is the New Oil

In her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” professor Shoshana Zuboff exposes the stunning capacities currently available to surveil, analyze and manipulate our behavior. It’s crucial to realize that as bad as it is today, the predictive power of technology is advancing at an exponential rate, which means their ability to manipulate behavior is increasing at a pace we cannot fully comprehend.

“Data is the new oil of the 21st century,” Wood says. “We said that for years now, and it’s really true. Whoever owns the data, controls the system. Data is more valuable to technocracy than any other commodity that you could conceivably imagine. And Google has been collecting this data for a long time.

They’ve been analyzing it for a long time, and they have a number of techniques now where they can use that data, weaponize it in a sense, turn it back on us and cause it to modify our behavior. And this is right in line with the scientific social engineering concept.

Several years ago, Eric Schmidt [former long-time Google CEO and, later, chairman of Alphabet,] was invited to be a member of the Trilateral commission. He’s also hobnobbing with our government to create systems for surveillance and data collection. Google now has been in a position to weaponize that data … Google does this in several ways.

Not only do they condition the feed that you see when you search for a certain term, but also … when you start to type in a search, it will give you the answers [and] you pick one. It won’t give you the ones that you might really be looking for, but it’ll give you what they think you should pick. This has a huge, psychological impact on people. Just huge.”

What’s the Ultimate Goal?

For instance, years ago, if you searched for a holistic medicine topic, many of my articles would appear at the top of your search. In June 2019, Google quietly started to eliminate Mercola.com from search results. I discussed this in “Google Buries Mercola in Their Latest Search Engine Update, Part 1 and Part 2.”

“You haven’t done anything different. You’re still doing exactly what you did, but Google is treating you as a non-person now,” Wood says. “It reminds you a little bit of ‘1984,’ where Winston worked in the ministry of information and his business half the time was scratching out people from history. They just ceased to exist.

Every record, even their birth record was erased and nobody would ever hear that person’s name again. If they went to look, they couldn’t find him. And then people started thinking ‘Maybe it was just my imagination. I never really knew somebody like that.’

Google has this power to present information that it wants you to hear or see, and they can manipulate minds and mindsets. It’s just amazing. They even said, internally, that they believe they have the power to take the 2020 election away from Trump because of this very feature. Well, wait a minute.

If any person or organization sets themselves up intentionally to overthrow the government of the United States, I think there’s a term for that. It’s called sedition. It might give way to insurrection as well, but that doesn’t bother these people. There’s no ethical guide whatsoever that tells them this is wrong and don’t do it. They feel this is perfectly normal. They’ve got the data, they make the rules.

So, they’re influencing people, they’re nudging people in one direction or another direction. And it’s extremely dangerous because those who are susceptible to that kind of manipulation, once they are in that manipulation channel, they can get them to do anything.

Once it gets a hold of a person and really starts messing with their mind, then they can feed all kinds of stuff into it and get them to do all kinds of things they would not have otherwise done.

And that’s true for Facebook and Twitter and other entities like that as well. But you can’t look at Google, Facebook and Twitter and say these are communists. You can’t do that. They’re technocrats. They march to a different tune completely and they could care less about the political ideology behind it.

I don’t care who you are, what your political persuasion is, but if you start writing against vaccines, for instance … you’ll find yourself censored just right along with everybody else and your stories will disappear. There’ll be shadow banned. There’ll be pushed down the stack where they don’t appear in the searches anymore.

It doesn’t really have to do with a class of people that they’re censoring, it has to do with the topics that are being censored. That’s the key thing here to understand. One of the key topics today that they are so in love with is this idea of global manipulation of the human [gene] pool, to get the medical hooks into your body.

This is social engineering at its extreme, where they’re not only engineering the society around you, the environment around you, they also want to engineer you personally. This is their mindset right now. We’ve seen evidence of this all over the place. I don’t want to go into it and confuse this conversation, but this is where it’s going.”

Sustainable Development Isn’t What You Think

Wood also explains why “sustainable development” goals, which sound like a good thing, really aren’t. The United Nations has declared that sustainable development is going to be the new economic system of the future. It’s a resource-based economic system based on energy.

“A couple of years ago, the head of climate change at the UN, Christiana Figueres, gave a press conference in Europe and she said, ‘This is the first time in the history of mankind that we’re setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.’

That’s a direct quote from her lips. I dedicated a chapter in my book to demonstrate that sustainable development is technocracy from the 1930s. It has all the same markers. It has all the same elements in it. It was brought to the United Nation by members of The Trilateral Commission, by the way …

Their vision for the future of society is this sustainable future where they will control all the resources and all the consumption. In other words, they will tell businesses what they’re allowed to build and they will tell consumers what they’re allowed to consume. Period, end of subject. You don’t need to be involved in this. They figure this all out for you in advance.

This is the science of social engineering here. They have the science, you just have to follow and do what they tell you to do. It’s very insidious. Of course, they have nice platitudes like we’re going to eliminate poverty, we’re going to have education for all, we’re going to have jobs with dignity.

That’s all wonderful stuff, but when you get down to the bottom of their so-called sustainable development [and green deal] goals, you see [that] all you have to do to get those things is let us have all the control over the resources and the management of those resources on a global basis.”

Taking Back Local Government Is Key

Importantly, what the technocrats are doing is making an end run around national sovereignty. Rather than a frontal assault on the system, which has never been successful, they’ve simply eroded national sovereignty piece by piece. Wood also reviews what we can do to save our republic and thwart the steady march of technocracy:

“I believe very strongly that local activism is the only way to rebuild our country, if there is going to be any rebuilding at all. Local activism — because this is how they got us. They built [the technocratic system] from the bottom up. We cannot tear their house down from the top down. It’s simply is just not going to happen. They’re too powerful,” Wood says.

“There is no national government or any element of national government that’s going to save us from these technocrats and technocracy. There’s no state government, either, or local government, the way it stands now, unless that local government gets influenced and populated by people who know better and who are willing to tell these others:

‘Go away, you don’t belong here. This is not the way we’re going to run our community, our town, our city,’ whatever it is, and we have access to those people.”

One of the most important elected local officials that you should concern yourself with is your sheriff. They are responsible for enforcing tyrannical edicts from local, state and federal government, and if they choose not to, government has no power. City councils also have a lot of power. They can pass binding resolutions to protect citizens against the technocratic agenda.

“There was a city in California, I can’t remember the name right now, but somebody got to the city council and educated every one of them. The city council held a referendum and passed a binding resolution that says there will be no agency of the city or any other activity of the city that will support Agenda 21. They banned Agenda 21 from their city, lock, stock and barrel. It was just a small city, but I thought, ‘Yeah!'”

What is Agenda 21? It is the keystone document for Sustainable Development. It was developed in 1992 at the Rio de Janeiro conference of the United Nations’ first Earth summit. This became the agenda for the 21st century. The doctrine that came to be known as Agenda 21 came from a book written by Trilateral Commission member Gro Harlem Brundtland, called “Our Common Future.”

Citizens for Free Speech

We cover a lot of information in this interview, so be sure to listen to it in its entirety, or read through the transcript for more. Also consider picking up one or both of his books, “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.”

Wood’s nonprofit organization, Citizens for Free Speech, is another excellent resource where you can learn more about your constitutional rights and how to communicate your ideas to others. For a small donation, Citizens for Free Speech also offers a laminated No Mask Card that you can wear on a lanyard, explaining your First Amendment Right to disobey local mask mandates.

“I started Citizens for Free Speech with the idea that technocracy is attacking the First Amendment,” Wood says. “It’s censoring our ability to communicate. It’s keeping us from communicating with each other and with our government and with our adversaries, those who may not agree with us fully.

Our ability to communicate has been completely decimated in America. We’re so dysfunctional. Everybody’s at everybody else’s throat all the time. There’s no patience, there’s no civil discourse anymore. And I believe that what people really have to learn, if they’re going to be local activists, they need to learn how to communicate their ideas.

Once they get ideas, they need to learn how to communicate those ideas to other people. Maybe those people agree with them, maybe they don’t, but nevertheless, they need to be able to express their ideas in a way that everybody in the room doesn’t get triggered and start hammering on you.

This concept of appropriate communication is what restoring the First Amendment at this point is all about … The First Amendment is under an intense attack by these people. That’s part of their strategy. Get rid of the First Amendment effectively, and what else do you have? Well, you have the Second Amendment. That’s the first thing you see.

I don’t even want to talk about the Second Amendment. I support it totally, don’t get me wrong, but if we lose the First Amendment, the Second Amendment was put there to take care of the loss of the first. And that’s the strategy that the enemy has, to break America down.

[Once you] get rid of the First Amendment, they figure America will fall into chaos, probably armed conflict, and that will make it just right for them to sweep in and take over when people then beg for anybody to put government back together, put the country back together.

So, the idea of supporting and defending the First Amendment is critical right now. People can get the issues, but if they cannot communicate those issues effectively, what’s the point? Why just sit on your couch and know everything there is to know if you have no ability to communicate that to somebody else? …

People … understand the value now, or maybe the necessity, of civil disobedience. This is a very touchy subject. I don’t want to go down the road too much. But we have reached a point where technocracy has pushed us into a corner …

If we do not resist and say, ‘We’re not going along with your program,’ then they will continue to push us into the corner until we simply cannot get out of that corner. The time has come for people to do what they know is right, and to protect themselves first — not to think about ‘the greater good’ all the time …

Once people see through the pseudoscience of face mask and social distancing, contact tracing, and all these mechanisms that are being thrown down at us, once they start to see through the statistical models being totally erroneous, they’re beginning to understand we just need to stop this behavior and not obey them …

We must restore our Constitution, which is the framework for everything else in our nation. We must restore the effective application of the constitution to our society …

There’s public shaming, the cancel culture, it all comes to bear on this right now. This is part of the communication process that we need to overcome. We need to push this line of thinking back and restore personal individual liberty to America.”

Read more: articles.mercola.com

The COVID-19 Curve Has Been Flattened

0

Even though the COVID-19 mortality curve has been flattened, mainstream media outlets continue to push doomsday predictions of an impending explosion of deaths. The New York Times, for example, published articles July 21,2 and July 3,3,4 2020, basically warning everyone to not get excited about plummeting mortality rates, as the trend could change at any moment.

“Why Virus Deaths Are Down but May Soon Rise,” its July 2 headline states. The article goes on to claim “coronavirus trends in the United States are pretty dark right now” — based on surging case numbers, meaning positive test results, not hospitalizations or people exhibiting actual symptoms.

The article attributes the steady and relatively rapid drop-off in deaths to improved medical treatment and older people being more cautious, but warns that “Deaths may be on the verge of rising again,” because “middle-aged and younger people are acting as if they’re invulnerable” and have increased their social activities.

“Their increased social activity has fueled an explosion in cases over the last three weeks, which in turn could lead to a rise in deaths soon,” The New York Times states,5,6 adding:

“With testing now more widespread, it’s possible that the death data will lag the case data by closer to a month. (In a typical fatal case, the death comes three to five weeks after contraction of the virus.) If that’s correct, coronavirus deaths may start rising again any day.”

This, however, completely ignores data showing that the COVID-19 fatality rate for those under the age of 45 is “almost zero,” and between the ages of 45 and 70, it’s somewhere between 0.05% and 0.3%.7,8,9 

COVID-19 mortality — which had declined for the last 10 weeks straight — is currently at the epidemic threshold, meaning if it slides down just a little more, COVID-19 will no longer meet the CDC’s criteria for “epidemic” status.

In other words, the fact that young and middle-aged adults are testing positive in droves is not a warning sign of an impending onslaught of deaths, as the risk of death in these age groups is minuscule. If anything, it seems to show herd immunity is building which, ultimately, will help protect the most vulnerable among us.

Why Did They Want to Flatten the Curve?

The primary justification for the tyrannical governmental interventions of COVID-19 was to slow the spread of the infection so that hospital resources would not be overwhelmed, causing people to die due to lack of medical care. These interventions were not about stopping the spread or reducing the number of people that would eventually get infected.

It was only intended to slow it down so, eventually, naturally-acquired herd immunity — the best kind — would prevent its spread. Well guess what? They have changed the narrative. That is why you now do not hear anything about flattening the curve. Instead they transitioned the fear-mongering to alarm the public that the number of “cases” are increasing.

Bear in mind that you do NOT need any test to be classified as a COVID case. All you need is a simple upper respiratory infection and you can legally be classified as a COVID-19 case to artificially inflate the totals.

Fatality Rate No Longer Cause for Hysteria

The fatality rate data given above were cited by Stanford University’s disease prevention chairman Dr. John Ioannidis — an epidemiologist who has made a name for himself by exposing bad science — in a June 27, 2020, interview with Greek Reporter,10,11,12 in which he criticized global lockdown measures, saying they were implemented based on flawed modeling and grossly unreliable data.

“0.05% to 1% is a reasonable range for what the data tell us now for the infection fatality rate, with a median of about 0.25%,” Ioannidis told Greek Reporter.13

“The death rate in a given country depends a lot on the age-structure, who are the people infected, and how they are managed. For people younger than 45, the infection fatality rate is almost 0%. For 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05-0.3%.

For those above 70, it escalates substantially, to 1% or higher for those over 85. For frail, debilitated elderly people with multiple health problems who are infected in nursing homes, it can go up to 25% during major outbreaks in these facilities.”

When asked whether the curve had indeed been flattened in the U.S., seeing how no health care system had been completely overwhelmed, Ioannidis answered:14

“The predictions of most mathematical models in terms of how many beds and how many ICU beds would be required were astronomically wrong. Indeed, the health system was not overrun in any location in the USA, although several hospitals were stressed. Conversely, the health care system was severely damaged in many places because of the measures taken …

Major consequences on the economy, society and mental health have already occurred. I hope they are reversible, and this depends to a large extent on whether we can avoid prolonging the draconian lockdowns and manage to deal with COVID-19 in a smart, precision-risk targeted approach, rather than blindly shutting down everything …

I hope that policymakers look at the big picture of all the potential problems and not only on the very important, but relatively thin slice of evidence that is COVID-19.”

COVID-19 Close to Epidemic Threshold

The fear-mongers also ignore recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statements15 saying the COVID-19 mortality — which had declined for the last 10 weeks straight — “is currently at the epidemic threshold,” meaning if it slides down just a little more, COVID-19 will no longer meet the CDC’s criteria for “epidemic” status.

nchs mortality reporting system

The percentage of doctors’ visits for influenza-like illness (ILI) for all age groups has also dropped below the 2019-2020 baseline, as seen in the CDC graph below, published July 3, 2020.16

percentage of visits for ILI

The graph below shows the percentage of visits to emergency departments, specifically, related to suspected ILI and COVID-19-like illness (CLI). While ER visits for suspected COVID-19 have seen a slight uptick, it’s not an extreme increase.

nssp percentage of visits for ILI and CLI The Truth About Increasing COVID-19 Cases

The video above reviews why the rise in COVID-19 “cases” is misleading at best, and not a viable measure of a public health threat. It presents a historical overview of what happened during the 2009 swine flu pandemic, and how it parallels the current COVID-19 pandemic.

In summary, fear of a novel illness — pandemic swine flu — led to a dramatic spike in testing, making it seem like a significant threat as many tested positive. Yet the death toll was insignificant. We’re seeing the same thing happening now. Two things are driving the numbers of positive tests skyward: The sudden availability of tests, and widespread testing of asymptomatic people.

Put another way. The sharp increases in “cases” are not proof of disease spread but rather the spread of testing. When you don’t have a test for the infection, you cannot tally positive cases. Hence it looked like there were virtually no COVID-19 cases in January 2020.

The sudden jump in cases in February correlates with the emergence of test kits sent out by the CDC. Once those test kits were used up, the number of “cases” again dried up. Then, once test kits became readily available again in early April, the number of cases skyrocketed — as you’d expect. But again, this doesn’t mean the disease was spreading like wildfire.

It was probably in circulation throughout and countless people were already walking around with it, feeling no worse than normal. The only difference is that test kits became available and massive amounts of people — whether they had symptoms or not — were being tested.

Increased Testing = Increased ‘Cases’

In short, the graphs showing “cases” in large part simply illustrate the availability of testing. Granted, even this is an oversimplification and is not going to be exact, and there’s more than one reason for this. For example, during the third week of May, the CDC admitted it had combined the results from viral and antibody tests in its national results.17

This provides a really inaccurate picture, since the two tests describe very different things. The viral test is supposed to identify active infections (regardless of whether you have symptoms or not), whereas the antibody test tells you if you’ve been exposed to the virus in the past and fought it off by developing antibodies. Hence, an antibody test should not be counted as an active infection or active “case.”

Some data18 also suggest positive test results have declined even as testing has increased. The question is, could this be an indication that people who are being tested for active infection have already fought off the virus and have antibodies? Could it be a sign of rising herd immunity?

Unfortunately, COVID-19 test data has been so mishandled and the way the data is compiled has changed enough times that it’s virtually impossible to make sense of it at this point. The quality and reliability of the tests themselves, both viral and antibody, also appear to be less than stellar.

The CDC has admitted that prior exposure to coronaviruses responsible for the common cold can result in a positive COVID-19 antibody test,19 and during an April White House Coronavirus Task Force briefing, Dr. Birx explained that COVID-19 tests are “not 100% sensitive or specific,” and that when prevalence is low in the community, the false positive rate will be high.

“If you have 1% of your population infected, and you have a test that’s only 99% specific, that means that when you find a positive, 50% of the time will be a real positive and 50% of the time it won’t be,” Birx said. In other words, if the prevalence of infection in the community is 1%, about half of all positive tests will be false positives.

Only as the overall infection rate gets higher does the viral test become increasingly reliable. Who knows, perhaps this is why some of the data suggest the number of positive tests is actually decreasing even as testing continues to increase?

What Happened to the Death Toll Reporting?

As you may recall, early on, the media focused on the death toll and hospitalizations. We had daily news ticker tapes providing us with the numbers of severe and critical cases, and the number of deaths.

These statistics were used to justify draconian lockdown orders to prevent hospitals from becoming overwhelmed. Now you hear virtually nothing about hospitalizations or deaths.

It’s all about the rising number of “cases,” meaning infected individuals, which is to be expected when you test a population in which the virus has already infected the majority. But that doesn’t mean it poses a threat, since deaths continue to drop.

It seems many are simply unwilling to accept the good news and allow the population to return to normal living. Instead, “rising cases” — especially among previous low-risk age groups — is now being used to justify continued stay-at-home orders, even though hospitals are at no risk of being overwhelmed since a vast majority of these cases are asymptomatic and need nothing in terms of health care.

In its April 13, 2020, issue, the German magazine Blauer Bote20,21 lists a collection of 75 expert opinions about the COVID-19 threat. Among them is a statement from Gerd Bosbach,22 professor emeritus of statistics, mathematics and empirical economic and social research, and author of the book, “Lying With Numbers,” who said (translated from German to English using TranslationLookup.com23):24

“The tripling of the tests resulted in a little more than tripling the number of those who tested positive. This tripling was presented to the citizens as a tripling of the infected …

Far-reaching decisions require secure foundations. This is exactly what has been neglected so far. The repeated equation of the number of positively tested people with the number of infected clouded the view …

The government’s standard of when measures should be weakened is based on an apparent number of infected people, which has nothing to do with reality …

So we have a muddle of terms, which is ultimately explained by the fact that we keep talking about infected people instead of positive people. The high numbers remain in memory, such as the mortality rate of 3.4% stated by the WHO. And that creates fear …

We should ensure that the media do not use the power of images to generate emotions that influence our judgment. If you get pictures of coffins and death departments from Italy or pictures of completely empty shelves, then their effects exceed the facts mentioned.”

Herd Immunity Likely Much Higher Than Suspected

In related news, several recent studies suggest a majority of the population may already have immunity against COVID-19, via one mechanism or another. According to a Swiss study,25,26 SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are only found in the most severe cases — about 1 in 5. That suggests COVID-19 may in fact be five times more prevalent than suspected. This also means it may be five times less deadly than predicted. According to the authors:

“When symptomatic, COVID-19 can range from a mild flu-like illness in about 81% to a severe and critical disease in about 14% and 5% of affected patients, respectively.”

They also found that even though people who had been exposed to COVID-19 had SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies in their mucosa, there were no virus-specific antibodies in their blood.

IgA is an antibody that plays a crucial role in the immune function of your mucous membranes, while IgG is the most common antibody that protects against bacterial and viral infections and is found in blood and other bodily fluids. As explained by the authors:27

“As with other coronaviruses, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 disease causes an acute infection with activation of the innate and adaptive immune systems. The former leads to the release of several pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-6 …

Subsequently, B and T cells become activated, resulting in the production of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, comprising immunoglobulin M (IgM), immunoglobulin A (IgA), and immunoglobulin G (IgG).

Whereas coronavirus-specific IgM production is transient and leads to isotype switch to IgA and IgG, these latter antibody subtypes can persist for extended periods in the serum and in nasal fluids. Whether SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG antibodies correlate with virus control is a matter of intense discussions.”

Majority of People Appear Resistant to COVID-19

Another study28,29 published in the journal Cell found 70% of samples from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19 had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level. Curiously, 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 also had resistance to the virus on the T-cell level.

According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” In other words, if you’ve recovered from a common cold caused by a particular coronavirus, your humoral immune system may activate when you encounter SARS-CoV-2, thus rendering you resistant to COVID-19.

May 14, 2020, Science magazine reported30 these Cell findings, drawing parallels to another earlier paper31 by German investigators that had come to a similar conclusion. That German paper,32 the preprint of which was posted April 22, 2020, on Medrxiv, found helper T cells that targeted the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in 15 of 18 patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Yet another study,33,34,35 this one by researchers in Singapore, found common colds caused by the betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 might make you more resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the resulting immunity might last as long as 17 years.

The authors suggest that if you’ve beat a common cold caused by a OC43 or HKU1 betacoronavirus in the past, you may have a 50/50 chance of having defensive T-cells that can recognize and help defend against SARS-CoV-2.

81% of Unexposed Individuals May Be Resistant to SARS-CoV-2

Two additional studies suggesting herd immunity is near were reported36 by Reason, July 1, 2020. These include a Swedish study,37,38 which found “SARS-CoV-2 elicits robust memory T cell responses akin to those observed in the context of successful vaccines, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe COVID-19 also in seronegative individual.” Similarly, a German study39 concluded:

“SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell epitopes enabled detection of post-infectious T-cell immunity, even in seronegative convalescents. Cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 T-cell epitopes revealed preexisting T-cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals, and validation of similarity to common cold human coronaviruses provided a functional basis for postulated heterologous immunity in SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

Flattening the Curve Was a Fool’s Errand

So far, many efforts to curb COVID-19 infection have proven to be ill advised. Evidence shows the illness spreads mostly indoors,40,41,42 for example, casting doubt on the sanity of closing parks and beaches, especially during the summer. As reported by The Baltimore Sun,43 scientists are now considering using ultraviolet light to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 in indoor air. Step outside, and you get that effect for free.

The total all-cause mortality is not significantly different than in previous years as discussed by my interview with Denis Rancourt. Many other deaths have been shifted to COVID-19, bringing a high spike in deaths, but when you look at the area under the curve for total deaths, it really doesn’t differ from previous years.

This was also echoed by the American Institute for Economic Research.44 Back in April 2020 they referred to the COVID-19 pandemic as “An egregious statistical horror story” that resulted in “a vandalistic lockdown on the economy,” which:

“… would have been an outrage even if the assumptions were not wildly astronomically wrong. Flattening the curve was always a fool’s errand that widened the damage …

The latest figures on overall death rates from all causes show no increase at all. Deaths are lower than in 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2015, slightly higher than in 2016. Any upward bias is imparted by population growth.

Now writing a book on the crisis with bestselling author Jay Richards, [statistician William] Briggs concludes: ‘Since pneumonia deaths are up, yet all deaths are down, it must mean people are being recorded as dying from other things at smaller rates than usual.’ Deaths from other causes are simply being ascribed to the coronavirus.

As usual every year, deaths began trending downward in January. It’s an annual pattern. Look it up. Since the lockdown began in mid-March, the politicians cannot claim that their policies had anything to do with the declining death rate.

A global study45 published in Israel by Professor Isaac Ben-Israel, chairman of the Israeli Space Agency and Council on Research and Development, shows that ‘the spread of the coronavirus declines to almost zero after 70 days — no matter where it strikes, and no matter what measures governments impose to try to thwart it.’

In fact, by impeding herd immunity, particularly among students and other non-susceptible young people, the lockdown in the U.S. has prolonged and exacerbated the medical problem. As Briggs concludes, ‘People need to get out into virus-killing sunshine and germicidal air.'”

Read more: articles.mercola.com

How to Fix the COVID-19 Crisis in 30 Days

0

In a June 22, 2020, Orthomolecular Medicine News Service press release,1 Damien Downing, president of the British Society for Ecological Medicine, outlines how we could resolve the COVID-19 pandemic in 30 days for about $2 per person, simply by taking affirmative action to raise vitamin D levels. The downside or risk of doing this is basically nil, while the potential gain could be avoiding another COVID-19 spike altogether.

“If we could arrange to give everyone vitamin D, and it failed to protect them, so what? The risk from not acting is much greater than the risk from acting,” Downing says, adding: “If you caught the COVID19 virus right now, having a good vitamin D status (from already having taken a supplement) would

Reduce your risk of the disease becoming severe by 90% Reduce your risk of dying by 96%

This is not ‘proven’ or ‘evidence-based’ until we have done controlled trials comparing it to placebo … But the data, already strong, has been pouring in since the start of the pandemic.”

Although the required prospective randomized controlled trials using vitamin D have not yet been completed, they are indeed underway and results from many will be in before year’s end. You can visit the clinical trials registry to review the current state of these trials.2,3 As of June 2020, there were over 20 studies in progress on the use of vitamin D in COVID-19.

Vitamin D and COVID-19

Downing goes on to cite research and supporting data. Among them is a study4 from the Philippines, which found that for each standard deviation increase in serum vitamin D, the odds of experiencing only mild disease rather than severe illness was 7.94 times greater, and the odds of having a mild clinical outcome rather than a critical outcome was 19.61 times greater. According to the author:

“The results suggest that an increase in serum 25(OH)D level in the body could either improve clinical outcomes or mitigate worst (severe to critical) outcomes, while a decrease in serum 25(OH)D level in the body could worsen clinical outcomes of COVID-2019 patients.”

Another study5 from Indonesia, which looked at data from 780 COVID-19 patients, found those with a vitamin D level between 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L) and 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) had a sevenfold higher risk of death than those with a level above 30 ng/mL. Having a level below 20 ng/mL was associated with a 12 times higher risk of death. As noted by Downing:6

“With a deficient vitamin D status (<50nmol/L) the mortality rate from COVID-19 was 98.8% against 4.1% with adequate vitamin D (>75nmol/L). The Hazard Ratio is 24.1 … A Hazard Ratio of 4 means that in one condition, for instance vitamin D deficiency, you are 4 times more likely to suffer the ‘hazard’ than in another condition, say vitamin D adequacy.”

A third paper,7 which provides data from 20 European countries, also found that “the probability of developing COVID-19, and of dying from it, is negatively correlated with mean population vitamin D status, with both probabilities reaching zero above about 75 nmol/L,” (30 ng/mL) Downing notes.8

A vitamin D3 blood level of at least 75 nmol/L (30 ng/ml) is needed for protection against COVID-19.

In their preprint submission of this paper,9 the authors concluded, “We believe that we can advise vitamin D supplementation to protect against SARS-CoV2 infection.” Downing created the following graph10 to illustrate the data in that paper.

vitamin D supplementation to protect against SARS-CoV2 Vitamin D Level Above 30 ng/mL Protects You Against COVID-19

Downing also addresses the issue of dosage and safety, highlighting how warnings about “excessive vitamin D intakes” being dangerous are very misleading and unwarranted, as toxicity has not been demonstrated until you hit blood levels above 200 ng/mL (500 nmol/L).

The recommended blood level for optimal health is currently between 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) and 80 ng/mL (200 nmol/L). In other words, there’s a significant margin of safety, even if you manage to exceed the optimal range.

“The three papers11,12,13 mentioned above show that a vitamin D3 blood level of at least 75 nmol/L (30 ng/ml) is needed for protection against COVID-19,” Downing writes.14

“Government recommendations for vitamin D intake — 400 IU/day for the UK and 600 IU/day for the USA (800 IU for >70 years) and the EU — are based primarily on bone health. This is woefully inadequate in the pandemic context.

An adult will need to take 4,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 for three months to reliably achieve a 75 nmol/L level.15 Persons of color may need twice as much.16 These doses can reduce the risk of infection, but are not for treatment of an acute viral infection.

And since vitamin D is fat-soluble and its level in the body rises slowly, for those with a deficiency, taking an initial dose of 5-fold the normal dose (20,000 IU/day) for two weeks can help to raise the level up to an adequate level to lower infection risk.”

Become Metabolically Flexible and Insulin Sensitive

As discussed in my interview with Dave Asprey, featured in “How Ketones May Be Useful Against COVID-19,” being metabolically flexible is another important lifestyle component. The reason for this is because insulin resistance makes you more susceptible to cytokine storm, a primary cause of death among COVID-19 patients.

The single most important step you can take to attain metabolic flexibility is to cut down the hours during which you eat. More than 90% of people eat for more than 12 hours a day, and more than half eat for more than 16 hours a day. The key is to reduce your eating window to six to eight hours, making sure the last food you eat is at least three hours before you go to bed.

When you restrict your eating window you will decrease insulin resistance, become more metabolically flexible and able to seamlessly switch back and forth between burning fat or carbs as your primary fuel. I wrote an entire book on how to become metabolically flexible, “Fat for Fuel,” but a simple summary is as follows:

Time-restrict your eating window to six to eight hours Eliminate all industrially processed vegetable oils Limit carbs to 50 grams a day until metabolically flexible and then increase to 150 grams of healthy carbs twice a week

This strategy is absolutely vital in light of the prevalence of insulin resistance. Over 90% of the U.S. is vitamin D deficient; 90% of the population is also insulin resistant. Research17 published in Metabolic Syndrome and Related Disorders in February 2019 concluded that 87.8% of the U.S. adults sampled were metabolically inflexible, which means they cannot efficiently burn fat for fuel.

Ketones May Also Be Useful Against COVID-19

When you are insulin sensitive, metabolically flexible and eating a cyclical low-carb diet, you will be able to generate healthy ketone levels. Remember that constant ketosis and low-carb is an unhealthy strategy. It is fine to go low-carb for a few months, but for optimal health you need to cycle healthy carbs back in once or twice a week, ideally when you are doing your hardest exercise or resistance training of the week.

When you burn sugar for fuel, you need to break glucose down to two molecules of 3 carbon pyruvate. Pyruvate is then used by your mitochondria after it is converted to acetyl CoA. Insulin resistance, in turn, can impair the enzyme that converts a breakdown product of glucose into pyruvate so it can be shuttled and burned as energy in your mitochondria.

diagnosis of covid-19

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

The problem with COVID-19 is that the cytokine storm inhibits the enzyme converting pyruvate to acetyl CoA, which radically limits your mitochondrial ATP production. An additional consequence of this is that it also reduces NADPH.

NADPH is the battery of your cell, the reservoir of electrons that actually cause endogenous antioxidants like glutathione, vitamin E and C to be recharged so they can continue to work and mitigate against the free radical damage resulting from all this oxidative stress. One way to compensate is to make sure you have enough NADPH, and ketones radically upregulate NADPH.

thioredoxin reductase

NADPH also turns off NLRP3 inflammasome that produces cytokines like TNF alpha, NF Kappa B, IL1B, IL6 and IL18 (interleukins) that are causing all the damage.

nadph protects from free radical damage

All of that said, it’s important to realize that ketone esters will not treat the primary cause of the disease, which is an impaired immune system, typically due to insulin resistance. Ketone esters can, however, be used acutely, as they’ve been shown to provide rapid improvement in some patients with COVID-19. For an illustration of this, see the video above.

To address insulin resistance and metabolic inflexibility in the long term, your best bet is to implement a cyclical ketogenic diet, described in my book “Fat for Fuel,” as well as many previous articles that you can find by using the search bar on my site.

Molecular Hydrogen

Molecular hydrogen (H2 gas) has powerful antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects,18 making it useful for COVID-19 by reducing inflammatory cytokines, as explained in this video by Tyler W. LeBaron, founder of the science-based nonprofit Molecular Hydrogen Institute.

In his video, LeBaron reviews the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and explains why H2 is being clinically investigated by discussing the proposed mechanisms of how molecular hydrogen might ameliorate this particular disease.

Molecular hydrogen or H2 has the ability to activate the Nrf2/keap1 pathway, thereby replenishing your endogenous antioxidants. In so doing, H2 helps regulate and maintain homeostasis in the whole system, preventing the infection from getting out of control and causing cell death.

Hydrogen can also downregulate NOX and NOS enzymes, thus lowering superoxide and nitric oxide production respectively. This is good, as when these two molecules are increased too much they instantly combine to create the pernicious peroxynitrite molecule. H2 also supports your mitochondrial function. Importantly, H2 selectively reduces peroxynitrites and hydroxyl radicals.

H2 also steps in to prevent a cytokine storm from occurring. For a written summary of LeBaron’s video lecture, see “How Molecular Hydrogen Can Help Against COVID-19.” H2 will also help improve NADPH, and works synergistically with time-restricted eating and cyclical ketosis.

Quercetin Plus Zinc May Lower COVID-19 Risk Further

In addition to vitamin D optimization, quercetin — which acts similarly to the drug hydroxychloroquine — and zinc19 may further lower your risk of COVID-19. Compelling evidence suggests the reason hydroxychloroquine appears so useful in the treatment of COVID-19 is a zinc ionophore, meaning it improves zinc uptake into the cell.

Quercetin has the same effect. In fact, one study20 has suggested the biological actions — which include antiviral effects — of quercetin may in fact be related to its ability to increase cellular zinc uptake.

Zinc is vital for healthy immune function21 and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore (zinc transport molecule) was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes.22 Conversely, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function.23 As noted in a 2013 paper on zinc deficiency:24

“Zinc is a second messenger of immune cells, and intracellular free zinc in these cells participate in signaling events. Zinc … is very effective in decreasing the incidence of infection in the elderly. Zinc not only modulates cell-mediated immunity but is also an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory agent.”

The problem is that zinc is largely insoluble and cannot easily enter through the fatty wall of your cells. Getting all the way into the cell is crucial, as this is where the viral replication occurs. This is where zinc ionophores such as quercetin come in.

Quercetin is also a potent antiviral in its own right, and has the added advantage of inhibiting the 3CL protease25 — an enzyme used by SARS coronaviruses to infect healthy cells.26 According to one 2020 study,27 the ability of quercetin to inhibit SARS coronaviruses “is presumed to be directly linked to suppress the activity of SARS-CoV 3CLpro in some cases.”

To this you could also add niacin (vitamin B6) and selenium, as both play a role in the absorption and bioavailability of zinc in the body. For example, a study28 published in 1991 demonstrated that when young women were on a vitamin B6-deficient diet, their serum zinc declined, suggesting B6 deficiency affected zinc metabolism such that “absorbed zinc was not available for utilization.”

A more in-depth exploration and explanation of both niacin and selenium’s relationship to zinc is provided in the 2008 paper, “Zinc, Metallothioneins and Longevity: Interrelationships With Niacin and Selenium.”29

The MATH Protocol

If you are hospitalized with COVID-19, early treatment becomes paramount. While there’s a great deal of controversy over which treatment is best, clinical evidence clearly suggests mechanical ventilation should be avoided at all costs. I discussed the reasons for this in “Ventilators May Increase Risk of Death From COVID-19.”

Furthermore, while hydroxychloroquine combined with zinc appears effective, I believe one of the best treatments suggested so far is the MATH+ Protocol. The protocol was developed by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group,30 which includes Dr. Paul Marik, chief of the Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School Norfolk, and boasts a near-100% effectiveness rate.

The MATH+ Protocol is designed to treat the second phase of COVID-19 infection — the stage when the hyperinflammatory immune response sets in. For best results, it must be administered early enough, though. The MATH+ protocol31 calls for the use of the following three medicines, all of which need to be started within six hours of hospital admission:

Intravenous methylprednisolone, to suppress the immune system and prevent organ damage from cytokine storms — For mild hypoxia, 40 milligrams (mg) daily until off oxygen; moderate to severe illness, 80 mg bolus followed by 20 mg per day for seven days. On Day 8, switch to oral prednisone and taper down over the next six days. Intravenous ascorbic acid (vitamin C), to control inflammation and prevent the development of leaky blood vessels in the lungs — 3 grams/100 ml every six hours for up to seven days. Subcutaneous heparin (enoxaparin), to thin the blood and prevent blood clots — For mild to moderate illness, 40 mg to 60 mg daily until discharged.

Optional additions include thiamine, zinc and vitamin D. In addition to these medications, the protocol calls for high-flow nasal oxygen to avoid mechanical ventilation that can damage the lungs.

Together, this approach addresses the three core pathological processes seen in COVID-19, namely hyperinflammation, hypercoagulability of the blood, and hypoxia (shortness of breath due to low oxygenation).

COVID-19 Doesn’t Have to Remain a Crisis

Health experts are warning we’re likely to see a second wave of COVID-19 this fall. I believe the strategies reviewed in this article can go a long way toward minimizing fatalities.

The first thing I recommend everyone do is to optimize your vitamin D this summer. Again, the optimal blood level for health and disease prevention is between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL. (In Europe, the measurements you’re looking for are 150 to 200 nmol/L and 100 nmol/L respectively.)

However, simply getting above 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) may dramatically reduce your risk of serious infection and death, and doing so is both easy and inexpensive. As stated by Downing, we could fix the COVID-19 pandemic in as little as 30 days simply by making sure everyone is taking vitamin D in sufficiently large doses.

More detailed information about how vitamin D works and why it’s so important against COVID-19 can be found in my Vitamin D Report. Download and share! You can also find a summary of the key steps you need to take to optimize your level in this previous vitamin D article. Here is the link to my comprehensive science report.

dr. mercola's report

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

I want to thank those of you who read the above report and provided constructive feedback. I want you to know that I did read those suggestions. I had already planned on writing a short summary, but the responses were nearly universal in support of that.

So, when you click the button below, you will get the condensed report that you can send to your friends and family and get them on board with the Vitamin D Campaign, which not only can save many lives, but can help prevent the country from shutting down again and worsening our already damaged economy.

Taking quercetin and zinc is another preventive strategy worth remembering, as is the advice to implement cyclical nutritional ketosis to make sure you’re metabolically flexible and not insulin resistant. Again, you can do this by following three powerful strategies:

Time-restricted eating window of six to eight hours Eliminating all industrially processed vegetable oils Limiting carbs to 50 grams a day until metabolically flexible and then increasing to 150 grams of healthy carbs twice a week

More acutely, ketone esters may offer rapid relief of COVID-19-related symptoms such as shortness of breath, and the MATH+ Protocol, administered within six hours of hospitalization, could be a life saver.

While the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group has been struggling to get the word out to doctors and hospitals, you could (at bare minimum) request your doctor contact them and urge them to implement the protocol should you or someone you love get ill and need hospitalization.

Read more: articles.mercola.com

Fauci says US has ‘a serious problem’ with the coronavirus, as younger people drive the surge of new cases

0

dr fauci testimony jun 23Kevin Dietsch/AFP via Getty Images

 

Anthony Fauci says everyone needs to work together to get the coronavirus outbreak in the US under control.  During the White House coronavirus task force’s press conference, Fauci said the US has a “serious problem” with the outbreak in certain areas. He said it’s likely that as cases surge, parts of the country that are not seeing the rise in cases could soon see more infections.  For the third day in a row, the US recorded the highest number of single-day new coronavirus cases with more than 40,000 known infections on Friday.  Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories

Anthony Fauci, the top infectious disease expert, warned that the US has a “serious problem” with coronavirus outbreaks. He spoke Friday during the White House coronavirus task force’s first press conference in two months. 

“So what goes on in one area of the country ultimately could have an effect on other areas,” Fauci said, according to the BBCSee the rest of the story at Business Insider

NOW WATCH: Inside London during COVID-19 lockdown

See Also:

Trump pulled support for testing sites in 5 states as he’s trying to push coronavirus test numbers downward. Health officials say the move could have ‘catastrophic cascading consequences.’2 months of progress on the US’s coronavirus outbreak could be wiped out as the country breaks its single-day record for new infectionsResidents of Palm Beach County, Florida, erupted at a county commission meeting where masks were made mandatory. Twitter users compared the intense backlash to episodes of ‘Parks and Recreation.’

Read more: feedproxy.google.com

FOLLOW US

21,805FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -

RECENT POSTS