Ross Walter Nutritionist and Naturopath health articles and blog

This is not a real pandemic...

25/7/2020

0 Comments

This is not a real pandemic.

A real pandemic doesn't need:

Faulty virus models that showed huge incidence rates and death rates, which didn't eventuate or come anywhere near close to those predictions from so-called experts
Pathetic advice to "wash your hands" and "stay at home", but not give any proven advice to improve your immune system function with good nutrition, supplements, and lifestyle improvements
Government authorities banning recommendations of proven advice by health professionals for improving your immune system
A world pandemic spokesman who is an IT nerd pretending to be a doctor, giving all sorts of health and medical guidance and recommendations to governments, the UN and WHO, while at the same time being the highest contributor for funds to the WHO, while also funding EVERY aspect of this pandemic, for his own financial benefit
A man-made GMO virus, created in a lab in Wuhan China, and funded for by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a US government agency
A useless WHO, who sat back for over 2 months or more as the epidemic initially spread through China, and who actually believed the Chinese communist government when they said that there was either "no problem" with people falling sick, or it was "all under control", when it wasn't. This allowed many people to move around or leave China to spread the infection worldwide
Rigged incidence rates from faulty PCR test results showing 80% false positive results in people with no symptoms
Inaccurate and scaremongering news reporting from all major media sources, based on those faulty incidence rates
Staged hospital scenes of overflowing hospital wards, when in reality doctors and nurses are being told to take extra holidays and take leave because the wards are almost empty of patients
Manipulated death certificates, from dodgy WHO guidelines to classify deaths from coronavirus based on assumptions or symptoms, without any testing, from non-health professionals (mortuary staff), or without autopsies to confirm the true cause of death
To bribe asymptomatic people with money to get tested for coronavirus, to increase the incidence rates when those rates and deaths had dropped to almost nothing
To recommend not wearing a mask for 5 months of the pandemic, then turn this completely around and mandate wearing of masks when incidences and deaths are at their lowest levels
To cause unemployment of millions of people in businesses, from the forced closure and shutdowns, but not reduce the government workforce
Restrictions to basic human rights, and the implementation of new guidelines and recommendations, which aren't LAW but give the impression that they are, and using police and armed forces to implement these new guidelines or face fines or imprisonment
Forced testing, or the need to bribe people to get a test in asymptomatic people (ie, that you DON'T have symptoms)
To mandate vaccination against the flu for work purposes (in childcare, nursing, healthcare, and aged care) or to visit your isolated loved ones in aged care, when a flu vaccination won't protect against the coronavirus, but actually makes you more susceptible to other respiratory infections such as coronavirus
Dobbing in your neighbour or anyone else, if they aren't complying with government recommendations (ie, that are NOT actually laws)
You to be living in fear of possible viral contamination
Closed businesses and services, and a wrecked economy
Recommend everyone stay home, except teachers and children who still have to go to school and sit in a classroom that's not possible to social distance from everyone, and not wear a mask (up until recently), because schooling is more important than possibly catching a deadly infection that will affect everyone else
To silence people on social media platforms, who have valid reasons to criticise the often idiotic decisions made by governments, businesses, and "health" authorities
People being arrested if they don't comply with a "stay at home" order, but then authorities are letting convicted criminals out of prison (in the USA) so they don't get coronavirus. (Why not just give them a mask, if masks are so effective?!)
You to install an app on your phone which doesn't work, to allegedly try and trace people who may have been within a short distance of you who may test positive at a later time, when not having a compatible phone or operating system makes it impossible to install, or not turning on Bluetooth, or not starting the app, or not updating the app when you test positive, or not having the IT infrastructure (in government) to actually analyse the data, or that someone needs to be within spitting/coughing/sneezing distance of you for more than 15 minutes in order to record their details, or it won't work!
You to know that it has only caused all this disruption to lives, businesses, the economy, when it has only caused deaths in 0.0004% of the population
To have a natural survival rate of 99.9%, when we are told that "there is no cure", or "that we do not have any immunity to", or when there is no vaccine to save you.

This isn't a real pandemic. It's a PLANdemic.

Be informed. Be empowered. And stay healthy!

0 Comments

Is global communism and control coming out of covid-19?

21/7/2020

0 Comments

For many months since the coronavirus outbreak, I have been joining more of the dots in the whole plandemic, and especially the planned outcomes from it. Here's another one...

In this whole saga the ever-present Gates Foundation, has just announced another funding venture for worldwide control of every person, with a new project called Trust Stamp. This is a vaccination-based digital identity program, also being part of the "war on cash", as it's in partnership with Mastercard and GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisations).

Trust Stamp will link your biometric digital identity to your vaccination records and your financial and banking access. The Gates Foundation and the United Nations have already collaborated on the COVI-PASS digital identity project using implanted microchips that will be your digital identification "passport" to be used for banking, travel, access to facilities, and more. I have written about the COVI-PASS here: https://www.facebook.com/rawnutritionist/posts/2878895548891138.

The COVI-PASS came out of another project called ID2020, for a worldwide digital identity because they believe it is a human right to "prove one's identity". No, a right to PRIVACY is an essential human right!

The "trust" part of the Trust Stamp name comes from the fact that if you are not vaccinated, you will be locked out of the system based on your "trust" score. So it is a type of "social credit system" as being used in communist China. It looks like communist control is coming to you all, folks.

As such, the project will use the digital identity for surveillance and "predictive policing". So you will be seemed as being effectively "guilty" first and in need of constant tracking and monitoring, even if you have done nothing wrong?

The Trust Stamp program launched in 2018, partnered with Mastercard in 2019, and the Gates Foundation and GAVI partnership more recently. Trust Stamp will be rolled out in Africa first, then replicated around the world. More on Trust Stamp can be found here: http://truststamp.ai

In summary, Trust Stamp will link your digital identity (from an implanted microchip), to your electronic health records, vaccination status, and financial and banking accounts. You will be tracked and monitored all the time, given a social credit score, and you might get rewards (or punishments) based on your score, similar to the system in China.
If you decline this (if that's even possible) you likely won't be able to get a job, get any money, get any government services, travel, access any facilities, or perhaps even buy food...

Are you ready for worldwide communism, or Big Brother, 1984, A Brave New World, or other dystopian future science-fiction stories to become reality? When will this madness end?

Isn't all this conveniently occurring now, hidden under all the coronavirus scare campaigns, as a proposed solution (or excuse) for worldwide control, monitoring and tracking of everyone?

Be informed and empowered. And stay healthy!

0 Comments

The PCR test for COVID-19 cannot prove you have the virus!

20/7/2020

0 Comments

I have written a few times before on the testing for the coronavirus, based on studies showing its inaccuracies (and therefore ineffectiveness) of its use, why the media scaremongering campaigns should be ignored, and why various governments should NOT be implementing policies based on the PCR test results.

Here's some more detail, as to how the PCR process works, or really DOESN'T work, and why it cannot prove that you have the coronavirus.

The PCR testing process was developed by Dr Kary Mullis in 1985, who received a Nobel prize for chemistry in 1993 for his invention. The PCR process was designed to amplify or replicate pieces of DNA (ie a subset of a known RNA/DNA sequence) to increase their numbers substantially, to allow for this to be used for research purposes. Dr Mullis always stated that the PCR process should not be used for diagnostic testing for many reasons:

1) The small subset of an RNA/DNA sequence that is used in the PCR process is not the actual virus! It might be a very small part of it, or the sequence might actually match RNA/DNA of another virus, or it could be a contaminant

2) The PCR process is highly affected by contamination. If there are any other RNA/DNA or contaminants in the sample, they too will be amplified and replicated and thus affecting the outcome of the process to cause false positive or false negative results

3) The PCR process is run a number of times, called cycles, to repeat the process and further amplify the number of RNA/DNA subsets in the sample, until sufficient numbers are produced

4) The outcome of the PCR test is a sample with an exponential number of RNA/DNA pieces. The test outcome is just a count or number of those RNA/DNA pieces. The test result does NOT give a "positive" or "negative" outcome!

5) How do the labs determine the number of DNA/RNA particles in a test sample is deemed "positive" or "negative"? That depends on the lab and how they decide to interpret the result!

6) There is no standard or universally accepted protocol for the number of cycles used in the PCR process. Different countries use a different number of cycles, and even use a different number of cycles for different tests. If a too-small number of cycles is performed, ALL test results will have small numbers and all people will receive a "negative" test result. Or if too many cycles are run, EVERYONE will return a "positive" result!

From the TGA's own website (TGA, 2020), they say:

"The reliability of COVID-19 tests (using PCR) is uncertain due to the limited evidence base. Available evidence mainly comes from asymptomatic patients, and their clinical role in detecting asymptomatic carriers is unclear"
"The extent to which a positive PCR result correlates with the infectious state of an individual is still being determined".

The other coronavirus testing used in Australia is a serology (blood spot) test, which determines whether someone has been exposed to the coronavirus and developed antibodies, and therefore if they have immunity to the virus. This testing is also flawed because (TGA, 2020):

It cannot be used in someone who currently has a respiratory infection (a cold, flu or COVID-19), as development of antibodies takes approximately 2 weeks or longer to produce
Someone who has recently had COVID-19 may not have developed antibodies yet when tested, and so this can give a negative result to this test
The blood spot antibody testing is not specific enough to the coronavirus - as antibodies to other human coronaviruses (such as the common cold virus) will give a positive test result! (TGA, 2020). Hence someone who has not had the coronavirus may show positive to having antibodies.

The TGA confirm these issues on their website, saying there is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available COVID-19 tests (TGA, 2020). It seems that the Australian and state governments aren't listening to their own medical regulator on COVID-19 testing.

To make matters worse, the WHO have given recommendations to governments and their health systems to record COVID deaths based on assumptions (ie, not testing), and when someone dies WITH COVID, rather than FROM it. This is highlighted when 98% of those who allegedly die from COVID have 2 or more chronic health conditions. In many countries and cases, deaths have been recorded as from COVID from suicides, shootings, accidents and other unrelated deaths. The WHO and health authorities seem to want to inflate the incidence and death rates - why?!

Even with the very inaccurate PCR test, the average rate of positive COVID-19 test results in Australia is just 0.3% of all COVID-19 tests performed! In reality, that figure, if the test was accurate, would be much, much lower.

Here's some more very interesting statistics:

The total COVID-19 mortality rate in Australia is only 122.
The mortality rate in Australia of positive tests is only 0.01%.
The mortality rate in Australia as a percentage of the population is just 0.0004%.
Or more positively, 99.99% of Australians survive this virus.

In the early days of the outbreak, the government and health officials were predicting over a hundred thousand deaths, which if had occurred, would justify some of their restrictions, lockdowns and changes to our way of life. But not for the statistics we have here.

So why are our health authorities and governments causing such a fear campaign over such low incidence and mortality statistics? Why are the same people relying on these inaccurate and unscientific tests to control everyone for longer?! Because there's a lot of other things going on in this plandemic... No sane or well-meaning politician would be implementing the restrictions and recommendations they are doing, based on these statistics, for something which has such a miniscule impact on your health or on the country. There is another agenda going on that they don't want you to know about.

Question everything. And stay healthy!

0 Comments

the coronavirus is insignificant and shouldn't even be news

9/7/2020

0 Comments

Here's some perspective of the coronavirus situation...

Over 4 million people this year have died from hunger, with around 9 million dying every year from a lack of food. A further 815 million people (over 10% of the world's population) suffer chronic undernourishment (World Hunger, 2017), which is not just confined to developing countries, as many in western countries are also suffering hunger and a lack of nutrition. Over 45% of all child deaths are from poor nutrition (Global Nutrition Report, 2015).

If you believe the statistics, around 500,000 people have allegedly died from coronavirus around the world. But these statistics are based on corrupt WHO recommendations for classifying deaths from assumptions being made, no testing to confirm, no autopsies being recommended, and an inaccurate PCR test that is not designed for diagnostic purposes.

What would be the true numbers of covid deaths, we might never know. But one thing is for sure - the coronavirus should be a very minor player in world health issues at the moment. But it isn't because of clever planning and marketing by those who only want you to see that the virus is the only thing that is affecting people.

I haven't even gone into the statistics of other causes of death due to chronic diseases or other infections such as influenza, which kill many, many more people in the world each year.

But we have a media scare campaign over a man-made virus to which just 0.3% of people test positive for, and a mortality rate of those who test positive of just 0.1%... This virus should not even be a published news story, because it is so insignificant in the overall picture of health in the world.

Have you seen any doctor, health official, government, or media outlet during this whole scare campaign, recommending that you can reduce your risks of coronavirus by getting the right nutrition or addressing nutritional deficiencies? No, of course not. Why?

How do you know if you have nutritional deficiencies? You have some if you:
1) Get an infection
2) Have a chronic disease condition
3) or if you have any symptoms at all.

You can easily get tested to see what deficiencies you may have, and then get the results analysed holistically and naturopathically to look for these deficiencies. Sadly, a doctor or GP doesn't interpret your results to look for these as they aren't trained to. This is where I can help!

If you do eat the right nutrition and address deficiencies, you can improve your immune system to better protect you from the coronavirus, as well as solving the world's hunger and malnutrition problems, and also reducing and preventing all chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, mental health and neurological conditions, and even cancer.

See my earlier articles on how to support your immune system better for reducing your health issues.

And stay healthy.

0 Comments

Bayer settles glyphosate (RoundUp) damages for $10Billion

6/7/2020

0 Comments

I have previously written several articles about the dangers and health effects of glyphosate, one of the active ingredients in the RoundUp herbicide. The use of RoundUp on many food crops is licensed and regulated, but how would you know whether your foods are exposed to this cancer-causing chemical? Well, you don't and won't know...

Despite the safety claims of the manufacturer, Monsanto, glyphosate or RoundUp greatly damages the environment (in the soil and waterways), affects animals and plants, and damages our health too, as shown in many published studies.

In some recent high profile court cases, Monsanto were ordered to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation for RoundUp causing cancer in several people. This brought many tens of thousands of similar lawsuits against Monsanto and its new owner, Bayer, who bought out Monsanto in 2018. The court cases showed beyond doubt that RoundUp was causing cancer, and that Monsanto had covered this up, paid for studies that faked the safety of their product to hide the truth, and used legal action against farmers who tried to speak out about the product.

One of the ways Monsanto were able to get away with selling this carcinogenic and environmentally damaging chemical for so long was that it managed to corrupt the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the USA. Instead of the EPA protecting the environment and the health of farmers, their families and the public in general, they turned a blind eye to the toxicity and damage that RoundUp was doing. A recent court case in the US (June 2020), found that the EPA broke the law in approving RoundUp and other glyphosate chemicals. The court case found that the original approval should not have been allowed, and it is now illegal for farmers to use these herbicides, as the EPA's approval of them has been cancelled!

Following recent discussions, Bayer have agreed to pay approximately US $10 BILLION (or $15.9 BILLION in Australian dollars) to settle about 95,000 lawsuits in the USA alone, related to health effects of RoundUp! This settlement will only cover about 75% of the current lawsuits against the company.

Despite the agreement to settle the large number of lawsuits against the company, Bayer is still defending the product and does not plan to add a cancer warning label to the product! In 2019 the German government (with Bayer being a German company) approved a ban on glyphosate, but not until 2023.

The huge settlement did very little to the company's stock price, which is disappointing. But we can all help by not buying or using RoundUp or any other similar herbicide containing glyphosate, for your health and that of the environment.

Let's hope the end is near for RoundUp and glyphosate, one of the most toxic and dangerous chemicals to the environment and your health.

0 Comments

Do masks protect you or prevent coronavirus infections?

6/7/2020

0 Comments

There is a growing push in these times of the coronavirus, bizarrely many months into the plandemic, to wear a mask for alleged prevention of the virus. So what is the truth of wearing a mask - can a mask prevent a coronavirus infection or reduce your risks? We'll see...

The push to wear a mask for coronavirus prevention and protection seems to be much more in the USA than other countries, possibly due to the highest incidence rates of the virus, combined with a media industry which borders on propaganda more than facts, and vulnerable people who believe the media scare campaigns. Sadly, the mask-wearing people have taken that propaganda and turned against those who are not wearing a mask in public, with verbal abuse, beatings, and preventing people from shopping for groceries or travelling to work. The abusers seem to have lost their brains, that if you are wearing a mask and you believe it will protect you, then it is of no concern of yours what other people do, or not do such as not wearing a mask if they choose to! This is ironically similar to the vaccine issue, but that's a whoooole other topic for another day!

Being in Australia as I am, next to no-one is wearing a mask when going out in public to the shops etc. You would be lucky to see one person in a thousand wearing a mask!

Here are some facts regarding the use of masks for coronavirus protection or prevention:

Look at the boxes of sterile medical masks and note what the box says. It will usually have statements such as "resistance to penetration by synthetic blood", "single use only", "Re-use or extended use, beyond ONE HOUR may lead to infection or cross-contamination", "store in a cool, dry place. Avoid excessive heat (40C or 104F) (but in hot weather or a fever and on your face, this is a problem!), "this mask should not be used in any surgical setting or where significant exposure to liquid, bodily or other hazardous fluids may be expected", "should not be used in a clinical setting where the infection risk levels through inhalation exposure is high" or "Wearing an ear loop mask (ie, a "surgical mask") does not reduce the risk of contracting any disease or infection" or "<company name> makes no warranties, either express or implied, that the mask prevents infection or the transmission of viruses or diseases", or more specifically for the coronavirus with one box of masks quoting "this product will not provide any protection against COVID-19 (coronavirus) or other viruses or contaminants". Seems like a pretty accurate assessment of their own product...
The standard "ear loop" surgical masks are not meant to be worn for long, and appear to only offer minimal protection from larger splashes of body fluids like blood or mucus from coughing or sneezing (FDA, 2020), but are not designed to filter or stop tiny viruses! In addition, these masks are loose fitting and often have gaping holes in the sides, top, or bottom, hence only very minimal protection.
The N95 respirator masks (also known as P2 masks in Australia) that sold out within days of the coronavirus outbreak, may offer more protection in that they are more fitting to the face and less gaps around the edges. These are for the protection from airborne particles and liquid contamination to the face (FDA, 2020). These are named as they filter out 95% of airborne particles (CDC, 2020a). These should be discarded after each patient encounter.
The Centers of Disease Control (CDC) in the US does NOT recommend that the public wear N95 respirators to protect themselves from respiratory diseases including coronavirus (COVID-19). But these N95 respirators must be reserved for health care workers (FDA, 2020).
But instead, the CDC recommends that the general public use simple cloth face coverings when in public to slow the spread of the virus! (FDA, 2020).
People with chronic respiratory, cardiac, or other medical conditions that make breathing difficult should check with their doctor before using N95 masks, as they can make it more difficult to breathe! (FDA, 2020). N95 respirators are also labelled as "single-use" or disposable devices.
N95 masks are not designed for children or those with facial hair, as a proper fit cannot be achieved (FDA, 2020).
Some N95 masks come with a valve, to make breathing easier. But these valves permit droplet release from the mask, thus putting others at risk! As such, these masks may protect the wearer only, but not those around them who are more at risk of a viral infection (Healthline, 2020).
If the medical-grade masks or respirators have the above warnings on them, do you think your wearing of these masks for more than an hour, or even wearing your fancy home--made masks made from spare fabric are going to give you any better protection?! Nope.

So what does the science say? Here goes:

A very recent article published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (Klompas et al., 2020) quoted "wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection", and "The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic", no doubt from media scare campaigns and politicians who know nothing about health.
The same NEJM article suggested that masks are symbols that "may help increase health care workers' perceived sense of safety" in their workplaces. And a similar symbolic benefit could also apply to the general public who might wear a mask, so if you wear one but someone around you doesn't, you are protected right?! No need to abuse that person for exercising their right to not wearing one. Perhaps they have a medical condition that precludes them from wearing one on advice from their doctor - it's none of your business!
A recent study (MacIntyre & Chughtai, 2020) investigated the results of multiple trials on the use of masks and respirators in the community and healthcare settings. Trials in healthcare workers found that respirators (ie the N95/P2 type mentioned above) were effective if worn continually in a shift, but not effective if worn intermittently. Surgical masks were not effective, and cloth masks were even less effective and can even increase the risk of infection.
An RCT study on using cloth masks in a hospital situation for 4 weeks found an increased risk of respiratory illnesses in people who wore them. The study also found that these masks allowed 97% penetration of infectious airborne particles compared to other medical masks at 44% (MacIntyre et al., 2015).
The CDC recommends some people should NOT wear a mask - children younger than 2 years old, anyone who has trouble breathing, or anyone who is unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance (CDC, 2020b).
The CDC also recognise that masks may not be possible in every situation or for some people. Wearing a mask may exacerbate a physical or mental health condition, lead to an emergency or cause other safety concerns (CDC, 2020b). Under privacy laws, someone does NOT have the right to ask why you are not wearing a mask! It's illegal to ask, so you don't have to tell them.
The CDC recommends that masks not be worn while engaged in activities that may cause the mask to become wet such as swimming or if the mask causes difficulty breathing, such as when exercising, or in hot and humid weather (CDC, 2020b). There have been reports of runners, cyclists, and even drivers suffering heat-related illnesses or breathing difficulties, or fainting and having accidents from wearing masks. Use common sense if you must wear a mask!

Our bodies are constantly in contact with microbes of many types, with most being benign or harmless or even beneficial to us! Only a few can cause infections. We cannot prevent contact with all of these microbes, hence it is best to focus instead on strengthening your immune system!

One possible benefit for wearing masks, however, is that those people participating in the recent BLM riots in the US and elsewhere were not likely to be able to be identified on CCTV cameras and therefore get away with their crimes. Perhaps similarly, those wearing masks might be able to evade the increasing number of facial recognition cameras and tracking systems that are being rolled out at the moment.

Some final questions to ponder:

If the 1.5m social distancing recommendation works, then why do we now need masks 4 months into the plandemic?
If masks work, then why do we still need to social distance ourselves?
If both social distancing and masks work, then why do we still need the lockdowns?

The use of masks to prevent contracting a respiratory infection like the coronavirus or others, appears questionable based on evidence from published studies. Since both social distancing and masks don't work, the government recommendations to follow these instructions are all about compliance, and not for your protection or health.

References:
Centers of Disease Control (CDC). (2020a). Understanding the difference: surgical mask vs N95 respirator. Retrieved 1st July 2020 from https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/pdfs/UnderstandDifferenceInfographic-508.pdf

Centers of Disease Control (CDC). (2020b). Considerations for Wearing Cloth Face Coverings. Retrieved 4th July 2020 from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover-guidance.html

Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2020). N95 Respirators, Surgical Masks, and Face Masks. Retrieved 1st July 2020 from https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-and-face-masks

Healthline. (2020). A Certain Type of N95 Mask May Do More Harm Than Good. Retrieved 1st July 2020 from https://www.healthline.com/health-news/certain-type-n95-mask-harm-covid19-spread

Klompas, M., Morris, C.A., Sinclair, J., Pearson, M., & Shenoy, E.S. (2020). Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era. New England Journal of Medicine, 382: e63. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp2006372

MacIntyre, C.R., Seale, H., Dung, T.C., Hien, N.T., Nga, P.T., Chughtai, A.A., Rahman, B., Dwyer, D.E., Wang. Q. (2015). A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open, 5 (4): e006577. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577

MacIntyre, C.R. & Chughtai, A.A. (2020). A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 108: 103629. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103629

0 Comments

This is not a real pandemic...

Is global communism and control coming out of covid-19?

The PCR test for COVID-19 cannot prove you have the virus!

the coronavirus is insignificant and shouldn't even be news

Bayer settles glyphosate (RoundUp) damages for $10Billion

Do masks protect you or prevent coronavirus infections?

COPYRIGHT

Archives

Categories