Ross Walter Nutritionist & Naturopath - Ross Walter Nutritionist and Naturopath health articles and blog

Cancer scare in hand sanitisers

7/6/2022

Are you still using hand sanitiser? Perhaps you shouldn't, as an independent investigation in the US found toxic amounts of cancer-causing benzene chemicals in many hand sanitiser products. Benzene is known to cause Leukaemia, a type of blood cancer.

An independent laboratory (Valisure) that tests drug products for safety tested 260 hand sanitiser products and found elevated levels of benzene in 21 of them (CBS New York, 2022). Benzene was still found in most of them, but within alleged "safe" limits, which might also be questionable. Some products did have no detectable benzene in them (Valisure, 2022).

The US regulator of such products, the FDA, apparently relaxed their standards on benzene in products, which allowed companies to get away with adding more into hand sanitiser and not be investigated.

So this is another warning message to always check the ingredients list of products you buy, whether it be food or washing or cleaning products, make-up, or anything that can come in contact with your skin.

Check your hand sanitiser product ingredients and if there is any benzene in it, throw it out. Just using soap and water is enough to keep your hands clean.

Be healthy!

References:

CBS New York. (2022). Hand Sanitizer Study Finds Elevated Levels Of Cancer Causing Chemical In 21 Out Of 260 Hand Sanitizers. Retrieved 4th May 2022 from https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/hand-sanitizer-benzene/

Valisure. (2022). Valisure detects benzene in hand sanitizers. Retrieved 4th May 2022 from www.valisure.com/valisure-newsroom/valisure-detects-benzene-in-hand-sanitizers

May 12th is Fibromyalgia awareness day

7/6/2022

May 12th every year is Fibromyalgia Awareness Day, to raise awareness of people living with this condition, and other chronic pain conditions of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS).

People with Fibromyalgia (FM), ME or CFS cannot often do their daily routines of working or physical activity or exercise, as these conditions can be so debilitating.

Many people suffer from physical pain, which can arise from many causes, including:

1. Physical injuries or accidents
2. Specific medical conditions
3. Nerve damage
4. Unknown or undiagnosed causes.

Fibromyalgia, ME and CFS typically are thought to be in the category of "unknown or undiagnosed causes". But I differ in opinion, as I have seen huge improvements in many clients with these conditions.

There are many health conditions which cause pain, or that are diagnosed as the result of the pain such as:

1. Inflammatory conditions - any diagnosis ending in "...itis" (like arthritis, appendicitis, colitis etc) is just inflammation in that part of the body. It can be inflammation that causes pain in many people, such as those with FM and ME
2. Hypoxia and poor circulation and anaemia - due to low iron levels and other nutrient deficiencies, or reduced thyroid or lung or heart conditions, cells of the body will not get enough oxygen or nutrients and will be "screaming out in pain for them"
3. Low thyroid function - the thyroid gland is the master controller of your metabolic rate, and hence energy production and function of all cells in your body. Low thyroid function can cause chronic fatigue, but there are many factors which can affect thyroid function which need to be checked and fixed in these conditions.

Pain or fatigue are major symptoms of the body telling you that something is not right and you need to change or fix what is wrong. Continuing to do the same things with your diet and lifestyle won't make the pain or fatigue go away.

Pain medications are a band-aid and don't fix the causes of them problem. They just try to hide the pain so you feel better for a short time. But pain medications cause a lot of other symptoms from their side effects and damage to the body, especially to the liver, digestive system, kidneys and other areas. Hence why you shouldn't rely on these medications, but to find and fix the root causes of the pain and to fix those root causes. This is what I do.

Don't struggle to live with fatigue or pain. There are other and better ways to find and fix the causes and improve your quality of life again.

Be healthy!

The many coincidences of a Monkeypox outbreak

7/6/2022

You might have seen recent news stories of another infection suddenly appearing, this time being monkeypox. Geez, we've only had a few weeks of flu propaganda after 2 solid years of coronavirus BS, and now monkeypox wants its share of the headlines!

But judging by the many memes that are circulating on social media already in just a few days, and comments on news and government posts on the topic, no-one is buying into the BS.

I did post about smallpox/monkeypox in 2021 when there were more than a few "coincidences" that ocurred around that time, or in recent times on this topic, including:

1. In an interview in November 2021, Bill Gates warns of a smallpox terror attack, and recommends governments put billions of dollars into funding prevention (Independent, 2021)
2. 1 week after Bill mentioned smallpox in an interview, there were news reports of 15 vials of smallpox found in a freezer in a pharmaceutical company (Merck) freezer and the FBI and CDC were called to investigate (Yahoo News, 2021)
3. Or a group of Canadian scientists in 2017 who RECREATED a horse pox virus, similar to smallpox, which was previously extinct (Centre for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, 2017). Pretty much for laughs... They said "This shouldn't surprise anyone. This is just molecular biology, and we've had the ability to do this for ages"
4. The CDC announced a monkeypox infection found in the US in November 2021
5. US Government buys 1.7 million doses of smallpox vax in 2021. And the Canadian military bought $2.3 million of smallpox doses, and Public Health Canada another $12.8 million
6. In 2015-2017, SIGA Technologies trialled their new TPOXX smallpox vaccine in Africa and USA
7. The FDA approved the new TPOXX vax for smallpox in July 2018! (FDA, 2018)
8. The FDA approved a new and fast-tracked medication for smallpox in July 2021! (FDA, 2021).

Why all this fuss, research and many millions or more in funding, all for an infection which was allegedly announced as eradicated in 1970 by the WHO?! Are they expecting this infection, or a variation of it, to be coming back again, or a new pandemic?

As per the current pandemic, something truly stinks in these new developments in the last few days of moneypox, erm, sorry that was a typo...

Be sceptical, aware, and informed. Be healthy!

References:

Centre for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. (2017). Canadian group creates poxvirus, prompting dual-use discussion. Retrieved 18th November 2021 from www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2017/07/canadian-group-creates-poxvirus-prompting-dual-use-discussion

FDA. (2018). FDA approves the first drug with an indication for treatment of smallpox. Retrieved 21st May 2022 from www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-drug-indication-treatment-smallpox

FDA. (2021). FDA approves drug to treat smallpox. Retrieved 21st May 2022 from www.fda.gov/drugs/news-events-human-drugs/fda-approves-drug-treat-smallpox

Independent. (2021). Bill Gates warns of smallpox terror attacks as he seeks research funds. Retrieved 18th November 2021 from www.independent.co.uk/news/science/bill-gates-smallpox-terror-attack-b1958789.html

Yahoo News. (2021). FBI investigating vials labeled 'smallpox' found in lab near Philadelphia. Retrieved 18th November 2021 from www.yahoo.com/news/vials-labeled-small-pox-found-in-lab-near-philadelphia-003127682.html

World Health Organisation (WHO). (2021). Smallpox. Retrieved 18th November 2021 from https://www.who.int/health-topics/smallpox#tab=tab_1

How monkeypox started - another coincidence?

7/6/2022

On October 19th 2019, just a few weeks before the coronavirus outbreak started at the end of 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, along with the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, organized “Event 201,” a “high-level pandemic exercise” to simulate a global pandemic of a coronavirus infection (Centre for Health Security, 2019).

A coincidence? I highly doubt it.

In March 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), in conjunction with the Munich Security Conference, held a pandemic simulation involving of a deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus that first emerged in the fictional nation of Brinia and spread globally over 18 months (NTI, 2021).

The NTI's monkeypox simulation was caused by a terrorist attack using a genetically-modified pathogen engineered in a laboratory with inadequate biosafety and biosecurity provisions and weak oversight. By the end of the exercise, the fictional pandemic resulted in more than three billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide. Participants to this simulation included representatives from pharmaceutical companies, the WHO, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation...

Another coincidence?

What are the odds of the same people being involved in 2 pandemic simulations shortly before they eventuate?

How about this then - the initial deliberate terrorist attack in the monkeypox simulation occurred on May 15th, 2022. The first or index case, as confirmed by the WHO was found in the UK on 5th May 2022 (WHO, 2022).

The timing of this new infection is also interesting, right at the time that the WHO is currently in the middle of their World Health Assembly conference to discuss a Global Pandemic Treaty with all "member states" (Forbes, 2022), meaning that in the event of a new pandemic, the WHO will direct and control all the actions for all countries in a non-democratic, dictatorial manner, and you will likely have no say or choice in anything. More on this in a new article soon.

Do you believe in coincidences?

Be suspicious. Be informed. Be healthy.

References:

Centre for Health Security. (2019). Event 201. Retrieved 24th May 2022 from https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

Forbes. (2022). The WHO To Discuss Global Pandemic Treaty At World Health Assembly May 22-28. Retrieved 24th May 2022 from www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/18/the-who-to-discuss-global-pandemic-treaty-at-world-health-assembly-may-22-28/?sh=7ae5f7552896

NTI. (2021). Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats. Retrieved 24th May 2022 from www.nti.org/analysis/articles/strengthening-global-systems-to-prevent-and-respond-to-high-consequence-biological-threats/

World Health Organisation. (2022). Monkeypox - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Retrieved 24th May 2022 from www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2022-DON383

A common but misunderstood gut issue: gas, wind, or farts!

7/6/2022

One of the most common health issues that I find in most clients is having a bloated tummy and "gas" or flatulence, farts, or wind!

This can be source of endless entertainment, mainly for children and boys/men!

But it's NOT normal to look like you're 3-months pregnant after you have a meal!

What may appear to be a problem with the lower digestive system that is causing the gas and bloating is not the real problem - it's more what is going wrong with the UPPER digestive system...

Gas and bloating, which can also be accompanied by constipation, diarrhoea, pain and discomfort, is really caused from:

1. The foods you eat
2. How well, or more accurately, how badly your stomach is functioning to digest your meals.
If your stomach isn't working well, your meals are not going to be digested properly or fully, which then causes the following symptoms or issues:
1. Reduced absorption of nutrients, as you can't absorb food that has not been broken down, leading to nutrient deficiencies
2. FERMENTATION of the undigested food in the large intestine, as there's trillions of bacteria there
3. Fermentation of undigested foods produces GAS
4. Increased gas production from fermentation causes bloating
5. Bloating from fermentation causes pain, discomfort, and in some people, constipation or diarrhoea
6. Fermentation also produces ALCOHOL (!) in the large intestine, similar to fermentation in the making of wine, beer and spirits! The alcohol can be reabsorbed into the body to cause feelings of drunkeness including waking with a mild hangover, and some people produce so much alcohol in their gut that it can affect blood alcohol readings. Surprisingly, there is a real diagnosis for this, called "Auto Brewery Syndrome"!

My focus in my clinical practice is always to find all the root causes of health conditions and symptoms in each person, and to treat and fix all those root causes for long-term resolution and prevention. That's not the medical model, which is just about hiding the symptoms with medications, but medications never fix the root causes!

While lower tummy symptoms of gas and bloating etc are not caused by lower tummy issues, but more from your foods and stomach function, the stomach itself isn't the root cause either as there are many possible causes of poor stomach function. The true root causes of poor stomach function are many and need to be investigated, identified and treated. Simply taking probiotics will NOT prevent or fix this!

There's too many causes of poor stomach function that leads to lower tummy symptoms of gas and bloating and other issues, and therefore many possible recommendations or treatments. But if you, or someone in your family, delights in amusing people with excessive or toxic farts, or is embarrassed by them or the bloating, then they need to get some holistic treatments for long-term resolution.

Be healthy.

The importance of organic foods and to reduce cancer risks

7/6/2022

A recent investigation by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) on the US Department of Agriculture data found that nearly 60% of kale samples tested were contaminated with a likely carcinogenic (cancer-causing) pesticide (EWG, 2022).

The toxic pesticide, known as DCPA or Dacthal, was classified by the US Environmental Protection Agency as a possible carcinogen in 1995, but only recalled by its manufacturer 10 years later in 2005 (but only on some crops), banned in the European Union in 2009, is STILL being used in the US on crops such as kale, broccoli, sweet potatoes, eggplant and turnips. Other leafy greens in the US were also found to be contaminated with the same chemical. And this was not the only chemical used on these plant crops.

Kale production has increased by 56% in recent years due to more interest in their nutritional value.

Dacthal is also being used in Australia for brassica vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, kale, cabbage, spinach etc), legumes, alliums (onions, garlic, etc), potatoes, carrots and many other crop types (NuFarm, 2022).

This information stresses the importance of knowing what you are eating, and what your foods are exposed to, such as pesticides, herbicides, and other chemicals. Just because someone is natural, green, or plant-based, doesn't mean it's going to be good for you. This is why certified organic foods or home grown vegetables can be healthier and safer for you to eat.

Be healthy.

References:

Environmental Working Group (EWG). (2022). More than half of kale samples tainted by possibly cancer-causing pesticide. Retrieved 5th June 2022 from https://www.ewg.org/foodnews/kale.php

NuFarm. (2022). Dactal 900WG. Retrieved 5th June 2022 from https://nufarm.com/au/product/dacthal-900wg/

Calories are unscientific, ridiculous, and should not be used (Part 2)

19/4/2022

This is Part 2 of my "Calories are unscientific, ridiculous, and should never be used" article! (See my post of yesterday for Part 1).

One of many issues with nutrition science is the concept of a calorie, and using calories as a ridiculous measurement of how healthy a food is, or the effects of the foods on the body. The model of using calories is often referred to the Calories In-Calories Out or CICO model. This is explained as the number of calories measured in your food intake vs the calories expended or used in exercise.

Here are many, many reasons why the CICO model is complete BS, including all the following:

Calories of metabolic processes are different in each person, and can't be measured anyway - only the alleged food intake can be measured and the exercise done - what about all the energy consumed or produced by other metabolic processes, re-use of nutrients, re-absorption of nutrients, and waste products (from breath, sweat, urination and poo)?
How is a "calorie" used in the body?! What are the biochemical reactions which use calories?! (Answer: none)
The CICO model does not take into account each person's own metabolic rate, typically driven by their thyroid gland. Someone with a low functioning thyroid will have a tendency to have low energy, slow metabolism and easy weight gain, but difficulty losing weight, even on a healthy diet
The CICO model assumes that physiological mechanisms or environmental factors or other biochemical hormones have no impact on energy balance - that it is all based on how foods are "BURNED"
CICO does not distinguish between "good" calories and "bad" calories. We all know an apple is better and healthier than a choc-chip cookie... but a cookie may have the same or less calories?!
In the CICO model, they forget to include how many calories are produced or needed to digest that food. For example, a lollipop might take 10% of its calories to be used by the body, but a steak can use 30% of its alleged calories to be digested
The CICO model suggests that 500 calories from brownies is just as fattening as 500 calories of kale! It's just ridiculous!
A low calorie food does not imply that it is healthy for you, and a high calorie food also does not imply that the food is unhealthy
Similar to good vs bad calories, the CICO model does not look at nutrient density of the foods, or their macronutrient breakdown into protein vs carbs vs fats or vitamins and minerals, or how the nutrients in the food affect your body in good or bad ways
CICO assumes everyone is the same, or that the energy output from a calorie in one person is the same as for another, which is not possible
With the CICO model, artificial sweeteners with zero calories (but are known to cause metabolic dysfunction, diabetes, weight gain and cancer) are allegedly better for you than high calorie healthy fats or an avocado for example?!
CICO assumes that the body "oxidises calories" in the same way and amount as in a bomb calorimeter (and at sea level etc, in the definition of a calorie)
CICO assumes that EVERYTHING you eat is going to be digested and absorbed, with NO waste! CICO does not take into account the "energy" or heat of your poo for example!
CICO doesn't take into account the adaptive metabolic processes in each person - someone MAY lose weight in the short term on a low calorie diet, but then due to hormones, thyroid changes, and other factors, weight loss can stall or plateau and then increase again due to the "starvation" effect and the adaptive slowing of metabolic processes to conserve energy for longer-term survival
Maintaining a healthy weight and good health is more about WHAT someone eats, not how much (or little) they eat based on calories
Weight gain is about over-storage of excess foods (or types of foods) not on over-eating of those foods or calories. One person eating the same foods as another will store more of those foods, while someone else will be using the foods for metabolism
Muscles needs more NUTRIENTS for the muscle health and function, and hence more nutrients from foods are used instead of being stored as body fat
A typical Keto/ketogenic diet has more calories than a low-fat diet, yet people on a keto diet will lose more weight (as body fat), more consistently, and for longer than someone on a low fat (ie, high calorie) diet
Since the 1960s we have been told that we need to be more aware of the calories we eat and to reduce high calorie foods - which means cutting fats as they have the most calories per gram. Look where that got us - with the highest rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancers, and other chronic inflammatory conditions ever in history
Proteins suppress appetite to make you eat less, but carbs do the opposite, yet they have the same calorific value
Healthy fats suppress appetite for longer than proteins, yet they have the highest number of calories
Low carb diets (generally higher calories) lead to more weight loss than low carb diets (lower calories)
Carbohydrates and proteins have the same calorie value at 4 calories per gram. But replacing carbs with the same amount of protein, as shown in many studies, will result in weight loss from reduced fat stores, and sparing or improving muscle mass. Hence again, weight loss has NOTHING to do with calories of the foods you eat
The CICO model blames the individual for eating too much or not exercising enough, when there are MANY factors and hormones which are causing their weight gain, or preventing the usage of the fat stores for energy.

If anyone recommends that you should count your calories, or choose your food based on calories, especially for weight loss, then run away!

As you can see from above, there are a LOT of reasons why calories are irrelevant, useless, unscientific, and not representative of how foods and nutrients get used in your body!

Be informed. Be healthy!

Calories are outdated, unscientific and should not be used

18/4/2022

Choosing foods based on calories as being a measurement of how healthy they are is unscientific and ridiculous! Calories should never be used as a measurement of food quality or of their health to your body.

Let's review what a calorie really is... A calorie (or more correctly, a kilocalorie) is defined as the amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one kilogram of water by one degree Celsius (specifically from 14.5C to 15.5C) at sea level! A kilocalorie (which we usually refer to as "one Calorie" with a capital C) really is 1000 calories. Kilojoules are the metric measurement of energy from foods, so they are also and irrelevant and ridiculous measurement of the health or energy of foods.

The measurement of the calorie content of a food is done in a device called a "bomb calorimeter", a closed container containing oxygen, and the food is physically BURNED in this device, to measure its energy output as heat. This is supposed to be a representation of how our bodies use nutrients, which it clearly isn't! Our bodies are NOT an enclosed device, and our bodies do not BURN food to create heat in the same way! We have many thousands or even millions of processes and chemical reactions which occur in our bodies to convert our food into far more than just heat, but also into many other products which change in more chemical reactions to finally allow us to live and function (but not burn up!). It is actually impossible to measure the amount of energy a food really gives us in our bodies, so the concept of calories has been used. But calories have been taken too far as a measurement of food quality, when it never should be.

My other issue about using calories for foods is the belief that low calorie foods are better for you, when they are not! This concept has been used for decades by weight loss companies, dietitians, doctors, food companies, and the general public, but again it's wrong!

Consider the following comparison of the calorie content of the major macronutrients:

Carbohydrates (vegetables, fruit, grains etc) - 4 kilocalories per gram
Protein (meats and plant-based protein) - 4 kilocalories per gram
Fats (animal and plant based oils and fats) - 9 calories per gram
Alcohol (ok, not a macronutrient, but it is a good comparison) - 7 kilocalories per gram.

Then see the attached graphs for comparing the blood sugar levels of each of these macronutrients - ie., how foods containing these affect your body...

Carbohydrates get converted quickly into glucose (ie, sugar) and raise your blood sugar levels quickly. Your body responds to the high blood sugar by secreting insulin to force cells to take up more glucose and insulin also forces the fat cells to take in the glucose that is converted to fat. Hence a high carb diet leads to fat storage and weight gain. Carbohydrates do not give a long-lasting energy.

Some proteins get more slowly converted into glucose, but generally most proteins will be broken down into their amino acid building blocks, to be rearranged into other proteins the body can use. Proteins are more filling, and give a longer-lasting energy to delay hunger for longer.

Here's an important question for you - carbs and proteins have the same calorie content, but which one has a better effect on your body, with less blood sugar spike, less insulin required, but a much longer lasting energy?!

Healthy fats generally don't raise blood sugar! However they do give a long lasting energy, are much more filling than carbs and proteins, and healthy fats don't cause the same inflammatory and oxidative damage that carbs do.

Ignore calories, ignore calorie measurements of foods as a marker of their health benefits, and ignore counting calories for weight loss or even for general health!

Focus instead on 1) the NUTRIENT content of foods, especially of whole, real, fresh, seasonal foods, and 2) avoiding processed, refined, packaged, and artificial foods which cause INFLAMMATION in your body, which is a major cause of our chronic disease epidemics today. Inflammation is the real cause of obesity, not calories! Inflammation comes from many other sources to cause weight gain, such as from hormone imbalances, stress, lifestyle factors, dysbiosis, exposure to toxins and chemicals, infections, and many more sources - most of which are unrelated to your food intake an unrelated to calories!

When all the root causes of one's weight gain are investigated and treated, you will lose weight easily and consistently, without hunger and cravings, and you will be able to reach and maintain your healthy goal weight long into the future! This is what I can help you with!

In the next article I will expand more on why calories are useless and unscientific, and should never be used as a measurement of the health of a food or for weight loss.

Be informed. Be healthy.

Authorities censor and silence scientists who publish study finding issues with COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women

28/3/2022

I wrote an article based on 2 published studies relating to the alleged safety (or otherwise) of the CV-19 vaxes being given to pregnant women:

The first study was poorly designed, with a bad methodology, and the authors found issues with the mRNA shots causing spontaneous abortions and miscarriages which was clear in the data, and yet they concluded that there were NO issues of safety in pregnant women.
The second study repeated the first study by reviewing the same data, and was more explicit in its findings, and concluded that the original study was badly designed, the original authors misinterpreted their data, and ignored the 82-92% pregnancy loss when the mRNA shots were given in trimestes 1 or 2, or 12.9% in trimester 3.

Obviously with these findings being truly tragic, I had to make them more known, and to prevent others from having the same outcomes.

The authors of the original study initially got a lot of positive publicity as it was what the authorities wanted to hear, but later turned into negative publicity because of their poor study and their deliberate hiding of the facts, and their study conclusion which was a lie - but then the fact-checking began.

But instead the authors of the second study got even more negative response, but only because their findings went against the "scientific" vax agenda. The authors who work as professors at a NZ university, were demanded to retract their review of the original study by their employer... no doubt a threat of their job was made, which is all too familiar at the moment. Not because of a poor study, but because of WHAT they said in it, despite the data being there as clear as day, and their study being peer-reviewed and approved for publishing in a major medical journal...

Sadly this is an all too familiar situation, and another very poor reflection of "science" at the moment:

That the purpose of science is to question everything, especially the popular opinion of the day, to test whether the current believe is actually true, or to come up with new truths.
Just because a study is published doesn't mean that it is actually true... Sadly the scientific community are not immune to corruption, bias, poor methodologies, corporate funding in return for favourable study outcomes, hoax studies being published, misinterpretation of data, manipulation of data, rubber stamp peer reviews (or none at all) and many other issues
I've yet to see any any real quality science being used, recommended or mentioned by the authoprities in almost 2 years of this pandemic circus
Many proven preventions or treatments (from quality studies) have been ignored, suppressed or banned by the authorities when these could have improved health and prevented cases and deaths
There is good quality science and bad quality science too
Social media "fact-checkers" are being paid by their relevant platforms to follow the government and medical agenda, and to discredit, censor and remove any posts, memes or studies which question the agenda
Even good quality studies have been forcibly retracted or pulled, even after being peer-reviewed (for quality and acceptance of the data) because of outrage in the media or in medical circles, because the authors of the studies dared to question the accepted belief and published findings which showed that the current vax agenda has serious issues of concern or safety
Even when I fully reference my articles with the published studies or data, this still isn't good enough for FB and the "fact-checkers". Their opposing "science" doesn't negate mine...

Hence if we cannot question the current beliefs, then this is not science but propaganda, dogma or scientific censorship, and this needs to end. This current situation is about peoples' lives, not about playing politics, taking control of other people, or abusing or suppressing science for some agenda that they have... The people in authority who are pushing this anti-science or misinformation message (under the guise of it being "science") have blood on their hands and need to be stopped and dealt with accordingly.

Believe nothing. Question everything. Speak your truth. Stay healthy.

Shocking findings of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women

28/3/2022

In April 2021 the CDC funded a published study which investigated the many reported cases of spontaneous abortions (ie, miscarriages) in pregnant women who had received the mRNA vaxes.

The study (Shimabukuro et al., 2021) investigated 35,691 data records of women from a vaccination database and the US VAERS adverse events database. Despite 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, and finding that the most frequently reported pregnancy event was spontaneous abortion (of 46 cases), the study was generally positive for the use of the CV-19 vaxes in pregnant women. Never mind that none of the manufacturers tested their vaxes on pregnant women in their clinical trials, as that is banned for safety and ethical reasons. The study concluded that "Preliminary findings did not show obvious safety signals among pregnant persons who received mRNA Covid-19 vaccines." but that was not entirely accurate.

This study had a bad and biased design, and you needed to look into the details as they deliberately hid or did not report the very high pregnancy loss rate. Firstly, they loaded the study with dissimilar numbers of pregnant women in the 3 trimesters, with 700 included in T3, but 127 across T1 and T2. That is bad study design. The authors claim "miscarriage" numbers across all 3 trimesters, when medically this only occurs in T1 and T2 and only up to 20 weeks. After that is called a "stillbirth". The study explicitly states (in Table 4 of the referenced study) that 104 spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) occurred within 20 weeks of pregnancy, yet they included the 700 women who had the shot in the third trimester in this calculation - 104 losses / 827 births = 12.6% pregnancy loss. BUT the calculation should have been 104/127 births (losses vs births from vaccines given in the T1 and T2, as it's not clear how many vaccines were given just in the first 20 weeks). More accurately that means an 81.9% pregnancy loss. From the mRNA vaccines being given to pregnant women. 81.9%.

To make things worse for CV-19 vaccines in pregnancy, the same Table 4 states: "A total of 96 of 104 spontaneous abortions (92.3%) occurred BEFORE 13 WEEKS of gestation". That is all within Trimester 1 plus 1 week. Yet this major detail was just a side note to one of the tables, and completely contradicted the study's conclusions but was not mentioned again in the rest of the paper.

A new study has been published (Brock & Thornley, 2021) which reviews the data and conclusions of the original Shimabukuro study. The authors of this new study confirm the statistical errors and that the true incidences of spontaneous abortions in pregnant women who had the mRNA shots was 82% (within 20 weeks of start of pregnancy) to 92.3% (within 13 weeks). 7-8 times higher than the original study found. A truly shocking and tragic finding. This study found many other faults or missing data, such as not reporting on which mRNA shot was used) or not reporting pregnancy losses between the first and second shots, and other incorrect interpretations or omissions of the data.

This new study also investigated the use of Pfizer's own clinical trials of their mRNA vaxes on pregnant rats, which claimed no pregnancy losses. But the authors of this study reviewed their data to again find poor study design or incorrect interpretations of their data, which in fact did show increased losses and many types of foetal abnormalities (birth defects).

The study also said there are other causes of concern of getting the mRNA vaxes in pregnancy or breastfeeding, from other studies and VAERS records, including skin rashes caused from clotting issues (TTP), gastrointestinal upsets, anaphylactic reactions, and deaths in babies from exposure to breastmilk in a recently vaccinated mother. Other issues of concern include production of auto-antibodies, indicating the development of autoimmune conditions (found in all pregnant women in one study), destruction of red blood cells, elevated liver enzymes (indicating liver damage), low platelet count (causing poor clotting and blood loss), reduced placenta development, impaired male fertility, and more.

This info shows that you cannot just read the title, the abstract or even just the conclusions of studies, as little details are hidden that they sometimes don't want you to see... The Shimabukuro study concluded that it was safe for CV-19 vaxes in pregnancy and said they found no adverse issues, which was clearly incorrect from their poor study design, incorrect interpretations and likely deliberate hiding of their findings. Newer studies show some major issues of these new vaxes in pregnancy or breastfeeding, including up to 92% pregnancy loss. Recommending the mRNA vaxes in pregnant and breastfeeding women is criminal and immoral, and recommendations for these vaxes in pregnancy must be stopped. The study authors recommend withdrawal of the mRNA vaxes in pregnancy and breastfeeding, as well as in children, until better and long-term safety studies are available in these groups.

Stay healthy.

References:
Brock, A.R., & Thornley. S. (2021). Spontaneous Abortions and Policies on COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Use During Pregnancy. Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law, 4. 130–143

Shimabukuro, T.T., Kim, S.Y., Myers, T.R., Moro, P.L., Oduyebo, T., Panagiotakopoulos, L., Marquez, P.L., Olson, C.K., Liu, R., Chang, K.T., Ellington, S.R., Burkel, V.K., Smoots, A.N., Green, C.J., Licata, C., Zhang, B.C., Alimchandani, M., Mba-Jonas, A., Martin, S.W., Gee, K.M., & Meaney-Delman, D.M. (2021). Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons, New England Journal of Medicine, 384 (24), 2273–2282. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2104983

COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers manipulate their clinical trial data to give false effectiveness % to get approval for use

1/6/2021

The 3 major COVID vaccine manufacturers in 2020 proudly and publicly self-flagellated over their alleged efficiencies of their vaccines at 94-95%. The media and medical industries and pro-sciencism fanatics went wild with the hopeful news that humanity would be saved from a deadly virus (that 99% of the population never got, and 99.9% of those who actually did get it survived anyway!). Hooray!

But never mind the skipped and fast-tracked clinical trials that would normally have taken 7-10 years to produce a vaccine (but questionable on the "safe and effective" descriptions).

How did the manufacturers come up with their approx 95% effectiveness rate? Briefly, they excluded unhealthy people - the very people that are being targeted for the vaccine - and also excluded pregnant women and children too. They gave half a group of healthy people the vaccine and half got a placebo. In the very short study period, the vaccinated group got a small number of infections, but the placebo group got a lot of infections. The ratio of placebo group infections to vaccinated group infections was about 95% : 5%. While this might seem statistically to be quite definitive and successful, the studies deliberately did not actually determine the "effectiveness" of the vaccine (Tenny & Hoffman, 2021):

- in producing antibodies - that wasn't checked for when it should have been
- in preventing a COVID infection - not tested for
- in reducing severity of symptoms - not checked
- in reducing visits to hospitals - not checked
- in preventing complications from the infection - not checked
- in or even reducing the death rate (or causing no deaths) - not checked.

How on earth then can the vaccines be 95% successful?! Simple, they aren't.
There is a concept in the statistics of clinical trials called Relative Risk - being the ratio of the risks for an event in the exposure group compared to those in the control or placebo group (Tenny & Hoffman, 2021). This is the sneaky technique that the vaccine manufacturers used in their trials to come up with 95% : 5% and therefore 95% "effective". But it's not...

However, the Relative Risk does not provide information about the true Absolute Risk of the event occurring. The Absolute Risk is the ACTUAL risk of the event happening, or success or effectiveness rate, and considers the whole population.

The attached pictures show a visual example of the difference between the Relative Risk vs the Absolute Risk for the Pfizer vaccine trial results.

A study published in the prestigious The Lancet medical journal (Olliaro, Torreele & Vaillant, 2021) investigated the statistics used by the major vaccine manufacturers in their trials, and instead of their sneaky Relative Risk or effectiveness %, they calculated their ACTUAL Absolute Risk percentage of each the vaccines. The true effectiveness of them are:

AstraZeneca - 1.3% (previously reported as 95% effective!)
Pfizer - 0.84% (previously reported as 95% effective!)
Moderna - 1.2% (previously reported as 94% effective!)
J&J - 1.2% (previously reported as 67% effective!)
Gamalaya (Russian Sputnik vaccine) - 0.93% (previously reported as 90% effective!)

Another technique used in the statistical analysis of vaccine clinical trials is the concept of the Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNV), being the number of people needed to be vaccinated to prevent ONE incidence of COVID-19 in this case. The NNV for these vaccines are:

AstraZeneca - 78
Pfizer - 117
Moderna - 76
J&J - 84
Gamalaya - 80.

That's a LOT of people who need to be vaccinated to prevent just one case of COVID-19.

It is important in your decision to decide getting the vaccine as to whether the effectiveness of a particular vaccine is worth the risk of the side effects. If you are not being told the true or correct effectiveness or even the actual risks, then it makes it an unrealistic and incomplete decision. In any case, YOU are an individual with your own personal risks, based on your health history, age, existing conditions, and other factors. It is impossible to work out your personal risk ratio. But you need the best information to help you decide (which is called "informed consent") - but you are not being given this information by the authorities or from your doctor.

What you have been told are lies and statistics, being one and the same thing. Statistics and science, sadly, can be manipulated by clever people to trick and confuse other people, such as in this situation. The authors of the Lancet study mentioned above, showed that the efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines is not as straightforward as it seems.

Be informed. Stay healthy!

References:
Olliaro, P., Torreele, E., & Vaillant, M. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness—the elephant (not) in the room. The Lancet, 2021. DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(21)00069-0
Tenny, S. & Hoffman, M.R. (2021). Relative Risk. Retrieved 31st May 2021 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430824/

TGA update as of 23-May-2021 (part 2) - TGA says death rates were not as high as expected?!

1/6/2021

Following on from my previous post of today, I wanted to mention more from Australia's medicines regulator, the TGA, and their latest update of reported adverse events from the COVID vaccines.

The TGA say in their latest weekly update article some conflicting information (TGA, 2021), including:

Adverse events and deaths are reported to the DAEN database, but the TGA say that "the Information in the database also cannot be used to determine whether a medicine or vaccine is safe or not"!
the TGA say that many of the deaths (after the COVID vaccination) were in "frail elderly people (over 85 years old)"
but then also state of the vaccine death reports, "Most of these reports (93%) were for people 65 years of age and over, and over three quarters were 75 years of age and over. Many of the deaths relate to elderly aged-care residents"
and with the COVID vaccination "it is possible in frail older people that even relatively mild and expected adverse reactions following the vaccination may contribute to deterioration of an underlying illness"
"Each year in Australia, there are about 160,000 deaths, equating to 13,300 a month or 3050 each week. By the end of May that would equate to about 15,250 deaths from all causes. But we have had just ONE death from COVID-19... and 210 deaths from the vaccine
And of more concern - "The TGA reviews all deaths reported after vaccination and monitors for safety signals. Part of our analysis includes comparing expected natural death rates to observed death rates following immunisation. To date, the observed number of deaths reported after vaccination is actually less than the expected number of deaths". They were expecting MORE deaths after the vaccination, but they continue to downplay the vaccine as being the cause by saying this is coincidental?!

It would be more helpful to know if those who had adverse reactions or died, if they had any of the COVID vaccine doses beforehand. That might be in the unreleased TGA database.

Despite the TGA's statements of downplaying the risks of adverse reactions and deaths, the Queensland government dropped the AZ vaccine on the 20th May 2021 due to blood clotting issues (The West Australian, 2021).

Approximately 25 other countries have banned or suspended the AZ vaccine because of deaths and clotting issues. When will the TGA wake up and investigate all these reports properly?

Reference:
Therapeutic Goods Administration. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine weekly safety report - 27-05-2021. Retrieved 30th May 2021 from https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report-27-05-2021

The West Australian. (2021). Qld govt abandons AZ for Pfizer, Moderna. Retrieved 31st May 2021 from https://thewest.com.au/news/coronavirus/pm-not-briefed-on-quarantine-qld-premier-c-2885476

TGA Update as of 23-May-2021 shows many more deaths from the covid-19 vaccines than deaths from the virus in Australia

1/6/2021

Australia's medicines regulator, the TGA, has been publishing a weekly summary report on adverse events from the COVID vaccines. Because of their policies, they have not been publishing all the details of any adverse side effects from the vaccines, not until 3 months after the event.

This week they did publish a little more of their data, which has been summarised in the attached pic...

Since the COVID-19 vaccines started in Australia, there have been (TGA, 2021):

1 death from COVID-19
210 deaths from the COVID-19 vaccine
22,031 adverse events reported from the vaccine.

Considering that not every case of death or adverse reaction gets officially reported, these numbers are likely to be MUCH higher in reality.

In just the last week, another 9 reports of blood clotting issues which can potentially be fatal, and 1609 adverse reactions.

The TGA also reported that in an average year 160,000 people in Australia die, or 13,500 per month, or 3,050 per week. As of end-May, we would have 15,250 deaths in Australia. Out of those estimated 15,250 deaths, we've had 1, just ONE, death from COVID-19 all year, but 210 from the vaccine. The "treatment" or "cure" is supposed to be safer than the disease or infection, but that is certainly not the case here.

With the survival rate of COVID-19 being well over 99%, I will continue to support my immune system to do what it is supposed to - find and fight every infection that I may come in contact with...

Is the risk of an untested and experimental vaccine worth it? These numbers make it clear.

Stay healthy!

Reference:
Therapeutic Goods Administration. (2021). COVID-19 vaccine weekly safety report - 27-05-2021. Retrieved 30th May 2021 from https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report-27-05-2021

Facebook to no longer censor posts suggesting that the coronavirus was man-made

1/6/2021

I reported very early in 2020 of a pre-published scientific study that proposed that the SARS-2 coronavirus was likely NOT of a natural origin and more likely was man-made. The authors of the study looked at the genetic sequence of the coronavirus and found that it was mostly comprised of genes from the earlier SARS virus, but also had several other sequences from the HIV virus not found in other coronaviruses. Those HIV sequences couldn't have just appeared or mutated from other coronaviruses. The authors of this study were hounded and ridiculed, and were forced to retract their study under pressure. Facebook then started their censorship of posts on this topic (such as mine) with their unscientific "fact-checking" processes, or deleting such posts.

Within a few months, another 6 published studies also investigated the coronavirus genetics and reported that the virus was not and could not have originated naturally - that it was indeed man-made. I published articles on these too, with more censorship from FB to hide this information.

In early February 2021, nearly 12 months after the first study appeared questioning the natural origins of the coronavirus, Facebook reaffirmed their policy of fact-checking and removing "false claims" related to the coronavirus including that it was "man-made or manufactured".

But in a new policy update on 26th May 2021, Facebook's Vice President of Integrity (a little ironic department in FB!) published an announcement that they will no longer remove posts that suggest that the coronavirus was man-made! (Facebook, 2021)

To all the denialists out there, including my own colleagues, who abused me and said I was spreading fear and conspiracy theories - I TOLD YOU SO...

Facebook said "In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured from our apps".

If this critical piece of news is now seen as "not fake news" or "an accepted truth", what else in this saga that has been suppressed, censored or hidden actually true also? Or another thought, if the coronavirus WAS man-made, then WHY and for what purpose? I guess we will be finding out more truths soon!

I wonder what other topics they will reverse their "fact-checking" on? Let's hope they return to being a social media platform again, not a government- and corporate-sponsored propaganda and censorship platform. The same goes to mainstream media and news outlets - stop censoring doctors, medical experts and scientists, just because they publish information that goes against the government narrative.

Fact-check this FB!

And stay healthy!

References:
Facebook. (2021). An Update on Our Work to Keep People Informed and Limit Misinformation About COVID-19. Retrieved 29th May 2021 from https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/

Research study finds plastic, heavy metals & more in rice

11/5/2021

A very recent Australian study has been published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials on the finding of high concentrations of plastic particles in packaged rice. Having rice contaminated with plastics is oviously not going to be good or healthy for you.

Some key points from this study (Dessì et al, 2021):

• The researchers found micro- and nano-sized plastic contaminants in EVERY rice product, regardless of the type of rice (jasmine, basmati, brown, or other rice type) or if the rice was organic or not, or where the rice was grown
• The amount of plastic in the rice wasn't related to the product being packaged in plastic or whether it was in paper packaging - hence the contamination is not coming from its own packaging but from other sources
• Instant or pre-cooked rice designed to be quickly heated in the microwave oven contained 3-6 times as much plastic contaminants as all other dried rice products
• Washing or rinsing rice before cooking DOES reduce the amount of plastic contaminants significantly, by approximately 20-40%, but not completely
• Plastics are often contaminated with additive chemicals such as BPA and phthalates (oestrogen mimicking chemical, known to cause male and female hormone imbalances), flame retardants, and others which have negative health effects. Heating the plastic increases the release of these chemicals into the food, which you don't want.

As a result of this study, the researchers recommend that store-bought rice be washed or rinsed before being cooked, and avoid the pre-cooked microwavable rice which had MUCH higher concentrations of plastic contaminants.

Rice is also contamined with other things, including agricultural chemicals and heavy metals. Rice has a tendency to absorb more arsenic than other crops. This is concentrated more in the outer layers of the rice - such as in "brown rice", hence one of several reasons why brown rice should be avoided.

The researchers also noted that plastic contaminants have also been found in other foods - honey, beer, meat (packaged on plastic trays), milk, sugar, table salt, bottled water, energy drinks, soft drinks, teas, and other sources.

We have been made aware of how damaging plastics are to the environment and animals, but we should also now be aware that plastics are in many of our foods - mostly in processed and packaged foods. There will be much less contamination of fresh foods which we should be eating more of!

With rice being a staple food for over 50% of the world's population, the findings in this study are a concern. This article is also a reminder to not use plastic water bottles or food containers, especially if the temperature rises (such as when heated or exposed to hot food or the sun)- as more chemicals leach from the plastic into your food. This causes many adverse health effects.

Reference:
Dessì, C., Okoffo , E.D., O’Brien, J.W., Gallen, M., Samanipour, S., Kaserzon, S., Rauert, C., Wang, X., & Thomas, K.V. (2021). Plastics contamination of store-bought rice. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 416, 125778. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125778

Why the COVID vaccines will not enable freedom or normality again

2/5/2021

What if someone offered you a birth control shot, but after taking it:

• you can still get pregnant
• you can still get others pregnant
• you still needed to wear a condom or take a contraceptive pill
• or you might become infertile
• or you might suffer a serious adverse reaction
• or you might die...

Would you still take that shot? Would you allow your family, parents, or children to get this shot?

Are there better and safer alternatives?

Obviously this post is an analogy about the COVID vaxes, and similar questions need to be asked, and personal research needs to be done before taking any such action. Because full informed consent, body autonomy, and personal choice are not being given or allowed at the moment.

Stay healthy.

Is it worth dying for?

2/5/2021

This is a tragic real story of what can happen with pharmaceutical companies testing new drugs on real people.

In 2006, a drug company developed a new medication for the treatment of cancers, code-named as "TGN1412". Pre-clinical studies, especially on animals (rodents and monkeys) showed no toxic responses, so the company moved to human trials on 6 healthy male volunteers. Two people were in the control group and 4 received the medication.

Within about 1 hour, those who got the medication were having severe allergy-like reactions, which resulted in headaches, nausea, vomiting, difficulty breathing, high fever, muscle pain, organ failure, low blood pressure and blood clotting symptoms... Sound familiar?!

All volunteers were transferred to intensive care hospitals , where one person died, and others lost limbs from clotting issues or permanent organ damage, or other major health complications.

This particular medical trial resulted in the European Medicines Agency to change the guidelines for testing drugs in humans. The tragic events in this trial serve as a reminder that animal trials do not confirm safety in humans, or that becoming a volunteer for medical trials for new and experimental medications or vaccines is not worth risking your life for...

Despite the dangers and effects of the medication, another company is continuing research on this medication.

This story is relevant for a couple of reasons:
1) The major manufacturers of the recent un-named vaccines skipped clinical trials on animals and went straight into testing on human volunteers with simultaneous production of their vaccines
2) Animal trails often find issues with the medications or vaccines before they are tested on humans, but humans are NOT the same as rats or monkeys, with different physiological and biochemical responses. Hence a medication or vaccine which appears to work in animals may not in humans
3) The current vaccine manufacturers have documented their "Phase 3 clinical trials" as still being current, until 2022 or 2023... meaning that the population who are getting their vaccines ARE their guinea pigs - THEY are the clinical trial.

This true situation has resulted in a movie (called "The Facility") being loosely based on what happened. A BBC documentary on this tragic story is also available to watch.

Stay healthy. Don't mess with nature - your immune system knows what to do!

References:
Here's more on the story - https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/how-six-fit-young-men-9860903

Many studies on the drug, called "TGN1412" can be found here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/tgn1412

Authorities find links to AZ vaccine causing blood clots and platelet issues, and increased risks of these in women

10/4/2021

More and more incidences of post-COVID-19 vaccine side effects are being reported in international adverse events databases, particularly of blood clotting issues, but many other issues, including deaths...

The authorities keep saying that there is no link to the vaccine, until very recently (9th April 2021) with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) reporting links between the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine and the blood clots and low platelet counts in many people who have had this vaccine (TGA, 2021). These findings fully justify the concerns that many countries (approximately 25) who have either banned, suspended or restricted the use of the AZ vaccine. Perhaps, based on the new findings and new research, the restrictions should be expanded or even having the AZ vaccine completely banned, to protect everyone from this and other side effects - which are much higher than the other COVID-19 vaccines.

The TGA also notes that while any specific links to gender are not known, but there have been many more adverse clotting events in women than men. This is a concern as there are more female health-care workers (TGA, 2021).

The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) has recently (8th April 2021) changed its recommendation for the AZ vaccine to be used in adults under 50 years of age, because of the increasing risks of clotting issues in older adults.

The TGA recommends reporting any side effects from the AZ or other vaccines to your country's adverse events database, so these issues can be monitored and investigated. If you know of anyone who has any side effects from any of the COVID-19 vaccines, make sure they report the issues to their country's adverse events register.

References:

Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). (2021). AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-S COVID-19 vaccine: Updated safety advisory – rare and unusual blood clotting syndrome (thrombosis with thrombocytopaenia). Retrieved 9th April 2021 from https://www.tga.gov.au/media-release/astrazeneca-chadox1-s-covid-19-vaccine

New study finds no benefit from wearing masks for preventing coronavirus infection, but they cause many issues

9/4/2021

The heavily debated topic of wearing masks as a preventative against the SARS-2 coronavirus is still an issue. On one hand it may appear to the media, the general public and politicians that wearing of masks makes sense to reducing your risks of this or other respiratory infections. But many published studies actually show that the wearing of masks has very limited scientific evidence, despite what you may have heard in the media or from health authorities.

A new study published in January 2021 has investigated and summarised many other studies on the use of different types of masks (or no masks) on the prevention of transmission of the SARS-2 coronavirus, as well as the health risks and complications that the wearing of masks may cause (Vainshelboim, 2021). This new study is very appropriate, with many people currently affected by governmental mask mandates.

Some interesting points in this new study, found these observations (which were found in other studies too):

N95 respirator masks are tight-fitting commercial masks which have a filter for the incoming air to reduce exposure to infectious or damaging particles. The filter makes breathing more difficult. However N95 respirator masks offer NO protection to other people, if the wearer has any respiratory infection, as there is no filter on exhaled breath, hence can INCREASE the transmission of infections to others!
Surgical masks are designed to be used in STERILE environments (such as in hospitals) more as a barrier against splashes, spit and other body fluids to prevent contaminating the wearer. As they are very loose fitting, they offer very little protection from infections to other people
Fabric and cloth masks offer the most minimal protection or filtration
The majority of COVID deaths were in the elderly with chronic health conditions already. The SARS-2 virus may exacerbate existing conditions but rarely causes death by itself
Masks can restrict breathing, to cause hypoxemia (low oxygen pressure in the blood), hypercapnia (high carbon dioxide in the blood), increased respiratory complications, self-contamination (from repeated touching of surfaces and the mask, or breathing in contaminated air), and exacerbation of existing chronic conditions
Conversely, increasing breathing and especially oxygen intake levels has been used for medical treatments for hospitalised patients and especially those with COVID-19 symptoms
Mild or moderate hypoxemia or hypercapnia from wearing masks can change energy metabolism, decrease pH levels (towards acidic) in cells and blood, and cause toxicity, oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, immunosuppression (poor immune function, at a time you really need it working!), and health deterioration
Severe hypoxemia and hypercapnia can cause cardiopulmonary and neurological conditions, including heart attacks, arrhythmias, dizziness, high or low blood pressure, fainting, fatigue, headaches, and other issues including death
Using surgical masks for a longer time (60 mins) can reduce the blood oxygen saturation by more than 1%
Masks are ineffective at blocking viral particles that are much smaller than the gaps in the threads of the masks, and filtration of masks is very poor
Breathing through masks increases the temperature and humidity of the mask and respiratory tracts, causing the release of toxic chemicals from the mask's materials, increasing the risks of breathing in other pathogens and toxic contaminants
There have been studies looking at the effects that masks have on reducing transmission or infectivity between people infected with SARS-2. There was no difference in transmission rates between those who wore masks or not.
Another study found no transmissions from an asymptomatic SARS-2 carrier to 445 others, even in a shared quarantine space for an average of 4-5 days
Even amongst healthcare workers, masks and respirators were not effective against transmission of viral infections, in many studies
One RCT study looking at cloth masks found a 13-times higher risk of flu-like illness, compared to those wearing a surgical mask or no mask
More studies comparing N95 respirators and surgical masks found no reduction in virus transmissions in the community (even with over 33,000 participants)
The World Health Organisation (WHO) changed their guidance on wearing masks from early 2020 to say that "masks were not required as no evidence was available for their benefit", to a few months later say that even cloth masks "can prevent the infected wearer transmitting the virus to others, and offer protection to the HEALTHY wearer against infection", but based on limited or no evidence
The CDC has stated that only people with symptoms should consider wearing a mask, and in asymptomatic people the wearing of masks was not recommended
There are many possible physical facial harms to the wearer of masks, such as lesions, dermatitis, worsening acne, and other discomfort
People with mental health disorders, developmental disabilities, hearing problems, or living in humid environments, children, or those with respiratory conditions, are at SIGNIFICANT health risk for complications and harm
Wearing of masks remove self-identity and affects social interactions and relationships, resulting in poor mental and physical health
Wearing of masks was associated with a 50% increase in mortality due to depression, anxiety, and suicide
The fear associated with the pandemic and effects of wearing masks activates the "flight or fight" response of higher cortisol (stress hormone) and its effects on the body - reduced brain function, and greatly reduced immune system function, being the natural and fundamental body system that is needed at this time to protect you from infections or to fight them
The long-term consequences of wearing masks can be severe and devastating, as a result of physiological and psychological stresses and the hypoxemia and hypercapnia effects - including increased risks of heart disease and cancers, due to effects on the blood and a reduced function of the immune system.

The study concludes with the following points:

Scientific evidence is lacking for the wearing of masks to reduce mortality or morbidity from infectious or viral diseases including the SARS-2 coronavirus
Both medical and non-medical masks are ineffective to reduce human-to-human transmission and infectivity of SARS-2 and COVID-19
Wearing of masks has adverse physiological and psychological effects
Long-term consequences of wearing of masks on health are severely detrimental.

Local, state and federal governments, businesses and companies, public health advisors, doctors, and other healthcare practitioners MUST give quality advice based on the scientific evidence, NOT on what may appear to be common sense (that the wearing of masks in this alleged pandemic may appear to be). There is very little scientific evidence (or none that I have seen) that shows that wearing of any type of mask offers protection to the wearer or to others, for the prevention of transmission of viral respiratory infections, including the SARS-2 coronavirus.

All health authorities should reconsider the mask mandates in light of this study, and many others. There are other better ways to reduce the risks of this virus, and improve immune system function and overall health, to prevent infections or protect you from them. That is what they have NOT done thus far in this pandemic and this has to change.

Sadly you can't quote this and other studies as a reason to not wear a mask. But you can and should use the available medical exemptions to not wear one, especially for children, or those with respiratory conditions, mental health conditions, disabilities, or other valid reasons.

Stay healthy!

References:
Vainshelboim, B. (2021). Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis. Medical Hypotheses, 146, 110411. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110411

Genocide of the elderly (Senicide/geronticide) - Part 1

9/4/2021

The three greatest risk factors of mortality from the coronavirus are:
1. Older age
2. Having more than one chronic health condition
3. Having a low functioning immune system.

In the elderly, all of these risk factors are very common. Hence why they have the highest morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

It should be common sense then to reduce mortality of those at risk, that public health advice would be to help reduce the risks to people in these groups. But what advice have the authorities given to them:
1. Wash your hands
2. Stay away from others
3. Wear a mask (after months of saying "don't wear a mask").

And that's it. Pathetic.

It is well known that the elderly or those with many chronic health conditions have a lot of factors affecting their health such as:
• Nutrient deficiencies - from a poor diet
• Vitamin D deficiency - a MASSIVE problem, as it hugely reduces immune system function (Arnljots, Thorn, Elm, Moore & Sundvall, 2017)
• Reduced organ function
• Stress, loneliness, loss of partners or friends, and limited contact with family during COVID restrictions
• Medications - many medications reduce immune system function or cause adverse side effects.

The elderly, and those in aged care or nursing homes need the most support and beneficial preventatives and treatments. They are our most vulnerable people.

The elderly frequently suffer from malnutrition (up to 57%), deficiencies of multiple nutrients (of protein, water, vitamin D, B-vitamins, and more. These will affect their physical and mental health, and especially the function of their immune system. The elderly are more likely to die from infections than younger age groups. Nutrient support through improved dietary advice or supplementation CAN improve their nutritional status and immune system function (Wells & Dumbrell, 2006).

But never once has any Western government throughout this pandemic given any true and proven recommendations to the elderly, to improve their immune system function with preventions or treatments - such as very simple, cheap and very effective interventions of vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc etc. These treatments have been proven effective in multiple studies (Wells & Dumbrell, 2006).

Instead, the governments of the world have kept the elderly locked up, hidden from view and contact from their family. This doesn't help their mental or physical health.

Governments, health departments, and public health officials, and perhaps owners of aged care and nursing homes, have ignored the health of the elderly in this pandemic. They have NOT addressed the physical or mental health of them, or really ANYONE, in this pandemic, nor their nutritional status or immune system function to prevent or treat any respiratory infection. They could have done a LOT more to help. The government and health authorities have caused more deaths in the pandemic by their lack of action. They have contributed to the Genocide of the Elderly and those with chronic health issues. Genocide of the elderly is also called Senicide or Geronticide.

There is a lot more that can be done to protect our elderly. If the authorities are not doing anything, then YOU can.

I will expand on this more in my next article on this topic...

References:
Arnljots, R., Thorn, J., Elm, M., Moore, M., & Sundvall, P-D. (2017). Vitamin D deficiency was common among nursing home residents and associated with dementia: a cross sectional study of 545 Swedish nursing home residents. BMC Geriatrics, 17 (229).
Wells, J.L. & Dumbrell, A.C. (2006). Nutrition and Aging: Assessment and Treatment of Compromised Nutritional Status in Frail Elderly Patients. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 1 (1): 67–79. doi: 10.2147/ciia.2006.1.1.67