“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
A Carefully Concealed Re-Framing of What a Boeing Insider Told Me
Sometimes it pays to simply be in the right place at the right time, and to REALIZE IT.
I have learned to stay IN THE MOMENT – to REALIZE IT IS A MOMENT – and to REMEMBER IT.
The world is a weird place. Every day, whether you fully understand it or not, you come into contact with people who have EXTREMELY interesting stories. You simply don’t hear them, most of the time.
So that person whose parent worked on the Manhattan Project, or that survivor of a serial killer, or the person who baby-sat Bill Gates – you meet them, you talk to them, but unless they open up about it for some reason, you will never know it.
There was a local radio station I remember, which had a segment called “Brushes With Fame”, and it was amazing to hear the MANY stories – because everybody has a few. You do. I do. And every poster on this site does, too.
My most recent brush with fame, was somebody with the inside story on Boeing’s problems. And this isn’t just “hearsay” – meaning it wasn’t just an insider who HEARD the story – it was somebody who knows – with their own eyes – all the details. How the story came out – I cannot say – it’s too unique.
I was SHOCKED. The story makes sense. It matches what we suspect. But most importantly, it EXPLAINS EVERYTHING.
This really needs to be said – and every member of Boeing’s board of directors needs to know this stuff – but I have to be very careful not to give so many details that the “whistleblower” is found.
And you KNOW “they” will try, because it’s what “they” do.
But this is important, so WE will try to get the word out – safely.
TL;DR – The basic problem at Boeing is terrible craftsmanship.
OK – we suspected that. But….
Why???
Here’s why.
The building of planes is being OUTSOURCED to sloppy companies, where workplace practices, procedures, and personnel are more like the roofing and cheap housing construction industries, than they are like aircraft mechanics.
The workers are young, poorly trained, barely educated, and either ignore or are not given rigorous assembly procedures. Safety checks are not done. Turnover is high. The untrained have to train the unqualified. Opportunities for wrong tools, wrong parts, and wrong procedures are everywhere and omnipresent. Those who understand disciplined assembly practices are shocked by what they see happening.
If you can imagine “clean room” technology, this is the opposite.
Management has known about this, but ignored it until the accidents and crashes made the problem too visible. They are only now reacting, and have not even BEGUN to do what should have been done years ago. And they are STILL not addressing the full problem.
The whistleblower had first-hand knowledge of all of his. I use the word “whistleblower” with some caution. This person may or may not have told any of this to other people. They may or may not have told Boeing management. I am hiding many shocking and highly validating details to make sure that the person cannot be found. But I will say this.
Boeing is not the only place where outsourcing (both foreign and domestic) created more problems than it solved. I saw the exact same thing, first-hand, in the tech and science world. QUALITY was very frequently sacrificed because the top-down orders were “global or else”, and “global” was basically some connected Chinese or Indian company getting a “didn’t earn it” job. These bad decisions were the outcome of boardroom combat by highly-paid stiffs – often people who didn’t truly understand the business, but had finagled their way into power by connections and influence, or otherwise, themselves, “didn’t earn it”.
Who can be more “global” than the other person? Who can be more cunning, in negating any criticism of sloppy work as xenophobic or nativist? Who can denigrate American quality in the smartest way – and then sell us all out – for a BONUS?
I’m not saying that Boeing is using foreign companies for outsourcing, although perhaps they are. I am saying exactly what I heard – that whoever Boeing is outsourcing to, domestic or not, it’s not working.
I do have some suspicion that CHINA is involved here – that they are sabotaging Boeing’s domestic workforce so that the economics will favor a CHINESE SOLUTION, with a CHINESE WORKFORCE, much like Apple and other companies that are now addicted to Chinese labor. That would also explain whistleblower deaths. The ChiComs are ruthless, when they think they can get away with it.
Whatever – bottom line – Boeing needs to get its act together – and that will NOT happen with “China Joe” in the White House.
Time to FIX IT. And getting Donald Trump back in the White House is a big part of MY proposal for how to do it.
This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).
Our various sister sites, listed in the Blogroll in the sidebar
Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.
Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.
We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.
Joe Biden didn’t win.
And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.
Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Week:
doppelganger
noun
A ghostly double of a living person, especially one that haunts such a person.
An evil twin.
A remarkably similar double.
Alter ego.
A person who has the same name as another.
A book by anti-Trump feminist Naomi Klein, about Trump-friendly feminist Naomi Wolf.
From Wikipedia
A doppelgänger (/ˈdɒpəlɡɛŋər, -ɡæŋər/), sometimes spelled as doppelgaenger or doppelganger, is a biologically unrelated look-alike, or a double, of a living person. In fiction and mythology, a doppelgänger is often portrayed as a ghostly paranormal phenomenon and usually seen as a harbinger of bad luck. Other traditions and stories equate a doppelgänger with an evil twin. In modern times, the term twin stranger is occasionally used.
The Book Cover
MUSIC!
How about a “fiddle chicks X bagpipe grlz” video?
It turns out there is actually a song called “Doppelganger”. It’s not bad at all, but kinda sad.
How about some fresh country? Just found this song!
OK, let’s finish with a TRUMP RALLY SONG! WOOHOO!!!
THE STUFF
The stuff, this week, is about Naomi Klein vs. Naomi Wolf.
I began by picking up the recent “Naomi vs. Naomi” book, Doppelganger.
You’re all most likely familiar with feminist Naomi Wolf, that perennial guest of Steve Bannon. She, the anti-COVID-vaccine-fighter extraordinaire, whose stellar work on the Pfizer FOIA documents caused Rochelle Walensky to flee her harpy perch at CDC for better cover.
There is another feminist who is sometimes confused with Wolf, named Naomi Klein. Klein is a cabal defender, ultimately, but she has managed a bit of some weak “insider” criticism on the left – enough to be considered an intellectual – not enough to lose her perks and privileges.
Supposedly because Klein is sometimes mistaken for Wolf, and takes wrongly directed criticism from the left for it, Klein decided to attack Wolf, and hence the book. Or at least, that is her story.
Right now, both the Kindle version and the hardback version of Klein’s book are $15, which means that the hardcover is NOT doing well in those cabal bookstores like Barnes & Lucifer.
“WHAT???!!!” – you may be saying. Why would this Wolf (“DA WOOF”) be picking up RADICAL LEFT TRASH?
The book is basically one long REEEEEEEEEE!!!!!, and it’s glorious, and that is why I bought it.
More specifically, the book is a left-wing, globalist, overly verbose, incredibly narcissistic, and eye-rollingly navel-gazing attack by stereotypical “New York culture, Canada address” feminist Naomi Klein on “MAGA-friendly liberal” feminist Naomi Wolf.
Once I realized how much of a REEEEEEEEEE!!! this book was, I began laughing in the store at every breathless outrage, and eventually realized that I needed to buy it.
The thing is, Naomi Klein is OBSESSED with Naomi Wolf, and the more one reads, the more one understands that FAKERY is chasing AUTHENTICITY – obsessed – because Fakery cannot stand to be in the same room as Authenticity, and yet it MUST be in that room, getting all the attention, so it has to ATTACK what it cannot be.
In the same way that people like Romney, Pelosi, Obama, Kasich, and all the rest are OBSESSED with Trump, and simply MUST try to destroy him – in the same way that Satan is OBSESSED with Christ, and must try to destroy Him, so Naomi Klein is obsessed with the “other Naomi” whose coattails she rode in on, and from whose coattails she exited, in the name of holding onto respect by the media, the government, and the rest of the elite.
It is my belief that Naomi Klein is the real doppelganger, and that her work is a kind of sub-critical hysterical confession. IMO, Klein always benefited from confusion with Naomi Wolf – until Naomi Wolf “walked the walk” right into the fire – in a way that Naomi Klein could not follow, nor even pretend to “talk the talk” without losing her seat at the elite table.
Wolf lost her academic position for speaking the truth. Klein still has hers. Do the math.
Klein wrote a book called The Shock Doctrine, which was a very insightful look at how neo-liberal corporate capitalism piles into crisis to make money. Klein was basically starting to see the phoniness of things like the Green New Deal. The problem was, she could never go far enough, because she’s too close to the agenda. Whether Klein can’t see, won’t see, or is just pretending not to see, it doesn’t change the outcome – she doesn’t see.
Klein can never see – nor admit that she sees – the corruption of centralized government, working hand-in-hand with phony crisis capitalism.
COVID and the vaccines provide a perfect example. Klein simply can’t leave the plantation. She stays safely on the “Bad Wolf” designated cheer circle, criticizing Wolf for departing from “the science” into “conspiracy theories”, and utterly refusing to admit that “the science” is no longer interested in saving pleb lives, when government money, taken from the plebs, is there for the taking.
Does Klein know? Is she wise to the globalist scam? Probably, IMO.
Klein also takes some interesting heat from the left.
For example, Klein is seen as a bit too friendly toward big-government-big-corporation-big-NGO-big-academia solutions, and the “gang-green” take her out for not going totally Maoist and anarchist on climate change, like those brave souls who glue themselves to roads, art exhibits, and whatnot.
Whatever. The bottom line is that I took one for the team, to figure out what’s up with this Klein broad. Save your money – don’t buy the book unless you want to “see the REE“!
In cases of religious mass suicide/homicide, such as Jonestown, Heaven’s Gate, and Aum Shinrikyo, it is very difficult to regain a humanitarian understanding of the key participants after the infamy of defining events sears the conscience and redefines reality.
Even more difficult, however, is the opposite – to BEGIN to think the unthinkable and speak the unspeakable, that we all seem to know is true, but which we can only comprehend in principle, not in reality.
It is almost impossible to leave the past where we could trust – and yet, we were warned about this.
Who are we taught to trust the most? This will not be easy. The END. Q
You don’t understand “revolutionary suicide”. But you need to understand it – and soon.
Those who believe in “revolutionary suicide” for most of humanity as a “solution”, are acting on that belief, because “there’s no time”.
This message about “there’s no time” was not meant as much for you, as it was meant for the people with the pitchers of Koolaid, and the people with the guns, stationed around the perimeter of the compound.
Put on your seatbelts. The truth about what is going on is going to blow you away.
Those who first noticed and described the “religion of climate change” likely had no idea that they were literally correct, but they were. It’s a cult.
The Frankfurt Marxist experiment called “Peoples Temple” and its fateful concept of “revolutionary suicide” explains all aspects of the current deadly social experiment, from Green New Deal, to Great Reset, to the semi-failed population control shot, meant to transition us into integrated population control as part of [socialized] medicine.
The climate-conned progressives had a dream. That dream, being built on a stolen election, is already “pre-failing”, but not fast enough.
We are dealing with a cult. As in the case of many cults, they are a group of well-meaning, good-intentioned people, who have a bit too much faith in their human leadership obsessed with human solutions, and not quite enough faith in God.
When the convincing argument met a pesky commandment, exceptions were made.
Now before you tell me I’m wrong, and that they’re all distinguishably and remarkably evil, unlike us, the good guys and better girls, take a minute to cool off and remember why your Bible said why we should not take too much pride in ourselves, my fellow sinner. Kurt Vonnegut turned the clarity of his PTSD-enhanced vision for our hypocrisy into a career. We could all use a bit of that vision.
Oh, there is evil mixed in – swirled into the goodness like poison until it’s tasteless – and that’s exactly why it’s hard to detect.
It’s easy to think of cults as purely evil and therefore incomprehensible, but it’s not a great way to comprehend their danger. It is when you examine their humanity, as we walk among them and smile, and they smile back with an equally human face, that you see WHERE and HOW the danger arises.
I have learned so much about God in following this story. Hopefully some of that EXTREMELY important part will help to freely convince you that you, too, need God – even if that God exists for you in the most abstract way possible – to keep you from falling into mental traps which, paradoxically, come from our human self-reliance and “realism”.
God is a weird idea that almost has to exist by emergent self-creation from our reality, like calculus does. Where does God come from? For that matter, where does math come from? What is the weird mathematics of infinity a subset of?
Simply believing there is more, and that it is not inherently against us, but for us, as demonstrated by our own existence, seems to be key to avoiding error. If you can accept that much of a Cartesian “God”, good. It is enough.
Ground yourself in God before you go on reading this. It is our lifeline back from diabolical error.
Why [Sometimes] Jones Was Right and We Were Wrong
I’m shocking you with that title of this section for a reason.
Jones was not right about everything, obviously. But he was right about enough, that if you can use that to begin to understand his motivations, and his correct thinking on some things, you can see where and how he and his followers were led astray.
This quality of being “right about too much, but misleading in the end” is VERY typical of communism, and Jones was, if you read Peoples Temple thinking, a communist of the Frankfurt School type. His Peoples Temple was a living experiment in resolving all the accused bugaboos of Western society – the “oppressions” – that critical theory challenged.
Jones saw unnecessary, systemic, racial problems and wanted to do something about them. Jones saw marginalization of women and felt it inherently wrong. Jones saw the collectivist aspects of earlier forms of Judaism and Christianity, and felt that they could not be ignored. Ironically, he did not see the power and possibility of the “greatest collective” – all of us living independently and harmoniously in a free and truthful world – but that is what made Jones perfect as a micro-reactor experiment for the creation of a very progressive “woke Christianity”. And that is exactly what he was. Woke Christianity, only 40 or 50 years ago.
Jones saw that American Christianity could be made more “social” – or socialist – and discovered that it actually worked, when judged by metrics of earthly success.
When I began to read some writings by a leftist sympathizer of Peoples Temple, based largely on the viewpoints of insiders and survivors, and she described my own deficient thinking about the People’s Temple correctly, and how I was part of the misunderstanding and minimizing thereof, I gained deep insight into not only the truly leftist nature of the Peoples Temple, which was clearly a fellow traveler of cultural Marxism, but also how seductive both critical theory is, and the Peoples Temple was. Even the analysis itself was seductive, in correctly describing the flaws of my own views of Jonestown. However, the devil is in the details, because sympathy for the people of Jonestown can easily whitewash the truth about bitter flaws in their collective, and collectivist, dream.
In the end, it’s Jesus versus Stalin. Stalin, sadly, beat Jesus in the world of Jim Jones.
Stalin will mislead you into demanding or committing harm of others for the good of the whole, whereas Jesus will lead you as an individual into sacrifice of self for the good of others.
It’s a subtle difference, but it makes all the difference in the bigger outcome.
To gain the same insights I got, you can beneficially read the same writings I did. Start here.
Not the least reason to read this, is that it reviews the FACTS of the history and the shocking, sad end of the Jonestown experiment.
Even more importantly, this reading exposes and explains strong parallels to the Climate Cult. It does so by exposing the thinking of Peoples Temple members from the inside. This thinking very obviously maps to the thinking of the Climate Cult.
Formation of the collective – mass formation psychosis – creates a world layered on this one, beautiful and addictive as hell, and soon to be enhanced by the “metaverse”. But threaten that world, or merely create the perception of threat, and the mass can be manipulated into remarkable behaviors.
Ah, the FURY that Malone’s utterance of “mass formation psychosis” provoked in the media.
To provide some contrast with the Jonestown collective’s broken view of itself, I am providing a short “outsider bibliography” on the Jonestown cult, which is differently broken, as you can see from the demonstrated preconceptions, psychological defenses, and capitalist myopias that the insider narrative points out. But be careful. Sympathy for the Jonestown victims, and understanding of them as good people much like us, can lead to sympathy for the devils that seduced them. Just because our devils hounded them, doesn’t mean that their devils didn’t destroy them.
Same goes for the Climate Cult.
If you ever had any sympathy for the Branch Davidians, you will get what I’m saying. It is much easier to see the evil in Cankles and her crew of nogoodniks in the Climate [Control] Cult, by having at least some sympathy for one of their victims – the flawed Christian cult of David Koresh. (Yeah, that gets complicated.)
Anyway, some comparisons. Here – let’s trivialize the victims!
This next one is a rough gem – very anti-Jones, but exposes the dynamic of the suicidal closest layer of followers, who are willing to be homicidal to the greater outer layer – and THAT is exactly what applies to the Climate Cult.
Now – I told you that you didn’t understand “revolutionary suicide” – so let’s fix that.
Revolutionary Suicide
What is revolutionary suicide? It is – at its core – simply taking the ultimate exit from an unjust society, instead of fighting against it. Here is Jim Jones in his own words:
We committed an act of revolutionary suicide protesting the conditions of an inhumane world.
Looking beneath that statement, trying to understand what constitutes “the conditions of an inhumane world”, I believe that what we find is the failure of the Peoples Temple cult to navigate reality. Jim Jones tried everything he could, to make his utopian vision take hold in reality, but his vision ran into more and more conflicts with the real world outside his cult, until the legal and judicial systems had Jones in a state of constant challenge. Even fleeing America itself did not work. In Guyana, the conflicts grew, until legal actions against Jim Jones were imminent. Jones correctly realized that he had nowhere left to go, and thus could not maintain his vision of the Peoples Temple. Jones could not even flee to the Soviet Union – one of the options that was always on the group’s table of discussion. Jones knew that he was politically radioactive, and no longer useful to the Soviets.
“Revolutionary suicide” is the ultimate “take your bag of marbles and go home” move – but remember – THAT is also a perfect description of individual suicide.
As a number of individuals in the Jonestown cult felt the world crashing down upon them, with the increasing problems of the cult, some felt suicide was the answer. Jones was sorely tempted by this route.
I have to ask – was the Climate Cult moved ahead in its schedule by external forces? Ask the question, because it seems to me that the answer is yes. The very defects in their plan that allowed us to see it all, may have been the result of schedule changes forced by the Trump election.
Whether individuals or groups are hounded by their own perception of external criticism, or by actual hounding, it doesn’t matter – suicide can be the result. See January Sixth, as well.
The greatest moral problem with all group suicides, including “revolutionary suicide”, is that these deaths are not free of hounding or worse, this time internal, and themselves approach or even constitute murder. Hounding, tricking, and otherwise coercing the GROUP to fully participate is the reality of the act.
Innocent people who want to LIVE are forced to DIE.
Thus, there is a HUGE footprint of MURDER in “revolutionary suicide”. This is clear in the records of the Jonestown incident. A layer of “diehards” and “inner circle” were used to enforce the group decision, leaving only a few who managed to escape by using their wits.
Shades of the jab.
Most people do not want to commit suicide. Most religions teach against it. But not all, and I believe that the truest believers at the center of the Climate Cult are quite ready to kill and be killed for their goals.
If a CIA operative suggested “revolutionary suicide” to the Jonestown cult, it would not surprise me. Their collectivist nature was highly vulnerable to this form of exploitation. Indeed, the same may apply to other cult suicides.
Either way, whether spontaneous or provoked, the possibility of group error, including group entry into a suicidal choice, is a viral vulnerability of social beings.
So now, let’s apply this fully to the Climate Cult.
Revolutionary Climate Justice
It is my contention that the Climate Cultists who are knowingly behind the Population Control Shot are mostly recruited true believers, much like those closest to Jim Jones. This would be the most obedient layer. Beyond them, however, are many who believe most of the climate cult canon, but could not be counted on to obey morally contradictory orders such as murder or suicide.
So who took the shots? Did they all play “climate roulette”?
Doubly Vaxxed and Boosted
AND logic is your friend here. Some of the “knowing” likely virtue signaled to the climate goal by taking the statistically lethal depopulation shot – others less courageous and more cowardly rationalized their “need to survive for the sake of climate justice” and did not. Bill Clinton is a great example of the latter type of thinking – his view of actual obedience to feminism in men was that “exceptions need to be made for the leaders”.
Hypocrisy. It seems to be “baked in” in communism.
Either way, shot or no shot, the true-believing “there’s no time” climate cultists are, I am certain, committed to the group goal of “saving the world from climate destruction by acting now”.
You can see this in every OTHER hare-brained scheme they are rushing forward now. The “clot shot” was merely one avenue of “saving humanity”. The others are happening right now, as food and energy systems are being destroyed, both economically and physically.
Shades of Pol Pot. Who even the Vietnamese communists knew was wrong.
Yes. It’s all backwards. It’s all deluded. It’s all destructive.
They had to show us. And we are being shown.
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.
Does this all seem a bit overwhelming? Having doubts? Is it just too much?
Here are two “public” explanations I have given for “higher credibility”. First on Steve Kirsch’s blog, then on Sundance’s post on The Burning Platform. These are the same explanation, only a bit softer and easier to digest.
Great article and statement of principled science.
People refuse to speak up about the nuttiness of it all, even though most know something is wrong, and many suspect that there is an intentional component.
I’ll spell it out. Somebody has to go first. I’m retired. I can’t lose a license or chair, or my pension (yet).
To me this was a fairly smart attempt to integrate top-decided and down-to-the-individual-tunable (see “bad batch phenomenon”) population control into medicine, and in fact a rather ingenious strategy, too. A vaccine – hero of a media-led crisis – unquestionable by the masses or the media – with a known dose-response mortality curve (see again “bad batch phenomenon”) that can in principle be dialed up to achieve ZPG, as long as denial of adverse events is enforced by holding all questions outside the Overton window. The dual nature (decrease BOTH longevity and fertility/productivity) is quite smart. It’s a bit “cinematic” and even “sci-fi”, but it worked pretty well due to human psychology.
The phony climate crisis (“there’s no time!”) was surely used to recruit many of the needed life scientists to carry it out or protect the plan. THAT was ingenious. Use an alleged crisis in one part of science to find unquestioning believers as recruits in a different part of science, who could “do something” about it.
Something very interesting here, is that this theory – which I find neatly explains all the “mistakes” people in charge have made – is crystal clear once you have “sympathy” for solving the population problem. Our leaders have encouraged desperation over the “climate crisis” in the susceptible population, and scoffing in the remainder – a very useful division for concealing the plan. The desperation messaging thus bounces off the very people who would have any inclination to look critically for such a plan or planners. Those people don’t understand the desperation of a scientist driven to “save humanity”, and thus would never bother to REALLY look for such a plan. It just seems too fantastic. One has to open up to the possibility that they might, in principle, be right, just to make the idea conceivable. But just try it. What if people REALLY BELIEVED we were going to all die in ten years, or some other typical “climate scare story”? Would you “join a global team out to save the planet”? Almost sounds like something people have been trained to do by our “entertrainment”.
So have sympathy for the devil – I mean the plan – or at least its motivation – the idea that people who really think we all will die if some are not sacrificed now – why then it all makes sense.
Now, as Steve points out, the numbers aren’t there yet on the shot, although I suspect that the long numbers on cardiac and immune deaths are more than we know yet. And beyond that, perhaps this is a bit like Hiroshima and Nagasaki – a THREAT to force us to get population under control by other means. I suspect they have a strong “Plan B” for us catching them. What is it?
I don’t like being brought to a negotiation at gunpoint, and having grabbed their gun, I’m a bit pissed. But nevertheless, here we are and it is now (and I know that what I’m selling smells like moonshine, but bear with me). Are they going to try something else, or are we going to talk about this reasonably? Judging from CDC falling back to the real science now, methinks the inevitable cover-up is going on. While I myself hang around with a crowd that screams “tribunals”, and look across the aisle at Democrats who would be the first to cry “amnesty for the climate do-gooders” (I suspect the plan counted on this), I think it does behoove us to make this stuff not able to happen again, as the most important solution. Whatever phony “lessons” come out of CDC, just ain’t gonna cut it. Human science and medicine have been damaged incredibly, but I think not irreparably, as I have faith in the truth winning in the end.
I know it all sounds fantastic, but go back over the “errors” people have made, driving toward “fair” universal deployment of the shot, and imagine that they were “trying to help”. Things start to make sense. But yes – it would be a bit cult-like, and it helps VERY much to read about the very lefty People’s Temple and “revolutionary suicide”, which is almost a model for this.
I will say this. These are NOT unforeseen consequences. They are “necessary consequences” in the eyes of the true-believing “climate cult”. A literal cult which was very intentionally created. Created to do exactly what it’s doing. And I have some new thinking on it that is difficult to speak just yet, but essential to understand.
I am now absolutely convinced that the “dumb vaccine” was a very intentional plan by these same people to achieve the same goal.
When people assert that the CIA was behind Jim Jones and Jonestown, or studied Jonestown – oh – they don’t know the half of it.
If you know anything about the Frankfurt school, their fingerprints are all over this lab experiment.
They were WAY ahead of us.
In the last couple of days, I have come to understand the relationship of Jones as a model for the Climate Cult. Even the race obsession and CRT figures into prepping this psychological attack on humanity. The weird racial and sexual psychology of that cult was a key feature, also present now.
There is a joke meme about Jonestown and Fauci, but ironically, the very communist followers of Jim Jones who survived have an excellent, critical theory-based, Frankfurt-school critique of how we, the capitalist dupes, joke about their “revolutionary suicide”, as they called it, and don’t take anything they did seriously.
They can describe us accurately. We need to describe THEM accurately. This is no longer a joke.
That mentality has been WEAPONIZED against not just America, but THE WORLD.
I’ll have more about this later today, in my “population control shot” series.
The point is, it all ties together. “They” – whoever “they” are at the top – have used a CULT they have created – to “downsize” and “disempower” humanity against its will, in defiance of all common sense.
It’s VERY culty behavior – the irrationality and schizoid behavior of the key participants (Pete Buttigieg and his SUV-to-show-bike stuff) is a feature, not a bug.
Hopefully those explanations have helped you formulate your own opinions – whether you now think I’m onto something, whether you just can’t buy any of this stuff, or something in between.
Either way – where do we go from here?
Reject Climate Insanity Completely
The world is being destroyed by foolish choices, based on insane “solutions” to BAD SCIENCE which was LOCKED IN BY MONEY.
But don’t worry – we have time.
Trump is right – we can “build back a third time” after their latest destruction, even if many lives are lost or worsened in the process.
It’s tough, but accepting bad elections has consequences. Both GOPe and RINOs need to suffer for their sins. Smart solutions will now take time, where rush jobs (like AGW) lead to HACK SOLUTIONS like Windows Me or the spike protein, take your pick.
I’m not in a rush – I think we can wait until we’re at the brink, so that everybody agrees – this is all nuts.
BUUUUUT – I do have a solution, of how to get to that brink of “all the sane people agree” much faster.
In many ways, I am going to back up Sundance’s approach.
Stated differently, SCREW THE VIRTUE SIGNALS. We can’t afford to politely agree with the CRAP any more. Let people KNOW that it’s crap, that you don’t agree with it, and that you will not vote for anybody who even puts up with the crap when THEY are faced with it.
The CRAP is destroying the world, and WE don’t go along with it.
I repeat. You need to stop virtue signaling to the mainstream narratives, and most importantly THE CLIMATE NARRATIVE, in any form.
It you want to know the ONE REASON why Trump was not “allowed” to be President, I can tell you with near certainty – it is because he REJECTS the “climate games” in their entirety.
Trump LOVES the environment, but he REJECTS the weird corporate “bad science” that was layered into it, with the absurd CO2-based climate change story. And so do I. I reject their bad science and even more their toxic workarounds that stem from the bad science.
[Note: I have watched “climate science” from the beginning, and I have NEVER seen science that convinced me of anthropogenic global warming climate change being real – much less a threat to humanity, even if it was real. Indeed, I see an incipient ice age as the far greater threat – and one that is EASILY dealt with by following the path we were on before SOMEBODY decided to downgrade humanity rather than upgrading our technology. ]
No. Just NO. We don’t put up with climate insanity (please call it that), nor do we put up with those who TOLERATE IT. Not just those who advocate it. Those who TOLERATE IT.
And THAT gets to the SECOND point.
This point bears on Sundance’s shrewd recognition of the “DeSantis problem”.
We need to goad all GOP candidates into the “WEF unacceptable zone”.
Why is DeSantis acceptable to the establishment Republicans? Is it because he will tolerate climate nuttiness? The ONE necessity for a nod from Davos?
Personally, I like DeSantis, but I see clearly that the other side is using him to derail Trump. They have a smart strategy there. Evil, but smart.
Well, one way to thwart that is for DeSantis to join Trump in denouncing the climate insanity in no uncertain terms. In terms that are so strong, they make him utterly unacceptable to WEF and the quislings in GOPe.
“It’s wrong. It’s a hoax. It’s destroying the planet. It has to stop.”
And then, to spread it, a little criticism of even the slightest climate belief as a RINO position should put the fear of God in Washington.
Oh, DeSantis’s RINO advisors will go through the ROOF, but tough times call for tough measures. Klaus Schwab, Larry Fink and the Rothschild entourage need to burn in anger at the rejection. And while we’re on Fink, ESG needs to DIE. Kill it, before it kills humanity.
Climate insanity is crap, and it needs to end. NOW.
This means that a lot of GOP need to feel the STING – the BURN – of rejection.
When they so much as NOD to the bullshit, they PAY WITH THE BASE.
Are we clear? GOOD.
BURN THEIR GOD, CLIMATE CHANGE, AT THE STAKE.
Final Thoughts
We have to grab the steering wheel. It’s that simple. We’re not going to kill anybody. We’re not going to have an “insurrection”. We’re going to demand that these assholes who have fucked everything up, stand down with their insanity and their corruption.
EVERY. SINGLE. FUCKING. DAY. You are going to have to make these people feel like CRAP for supporting INSANITY and causing HAVOC.
Get tough. It’s the only way forward. But you can do it.
How Two Fallen Theories of Medicine May Herald the Fate of Global Warming / Climate Change
Bad science does not stand forever, but it may stand long enough for people to make a lot of money on it. THAT will be the THEME of the three huge science scandals I’m going to discuss.
In case you’re short on time, the TLDR…..
TL;DR – Two fresh scandals showing how industry money and scientific misconduct kept bad theories “alive” for decades, may explain why the bad science behind politically useful climate alarmism persists.
I. Serotonin Uber Alles
The “serotonin scandal” is very diffuse, which is why it’s in many ways analogous to “climate change”. The bottom line is that what the pharmaceutical industry tells patients about antidepressants, and what scientists know about antidepressants, are not the same thing.
It’s best to start off with the following Tucker Carlson video.
An extremely important selling point of antidepressants, used by both doctors and the pharmaceutical industry, is the idea that people who are depressed, and therefore “need” to take them, actually have some kind of chemical imbalance in their brain that needs to be fixed. More often than any other chemical alleged to be “imbalanced” is serotonin – and hence the emergence of SSRIs, meaning serotonin-selective reuptake inhibitors.
Carlson’s centerpiece is a recent metaanalysis of antidepressant research which showed there is little or no evidence for this “chemical imbalance” assertion.
Antidepressants may work in some people, and thank God they do, but IF they do, and WHEN they do, the simple “chemical imbalance theory” is probably not the reason why.
There is a very good explanation of the study HERE:
No evidence that depression is caused by low serotonin levels, finds comprehensive review
After decades of study, there remains no clear evidence that serotonin levels or serotonin activity are responsible for depression, according to a major review of prior research led by UCL scientists.
The new umbrella review – an overview of existing meta-analyses and systematic reviews – published in Molecular Psychiatry, suggests that depression is not likely caused by a chemical imbalance,and calls into question what antidepressants do. Most antidepressants are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which were originally said to work by correcting abnormally low serotonin levels. There is no other accepted pharmacological mechanism by which antidepressants affect the symptoms of depression.
Lead author Professor Joanna Moncrieff, a Professor of Psychiatry at UCL and a consultant psychiatrist at North East London NHS Foundation Trust (NELFT), said: “It is always difficult to prove a negative, but I think we can safely say that after a vast amount of research conducted over several decades, there is no convincing evidence that depression is caused by serotonin abnormalities, particularly by lower levels or reduced activity of serotonin.
“The popularity of the ‘chemical imbalance’ theory of depression has coincided with a huge increase in the use of antidepressants. Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen dramatically since the 1990s, with one in six adults in England and 2% of teenagers now being prescribed an antidepressant in a given year.
“Many people take antidepressants because they have been led to believe their depression has a biochemical cause, but this new research suggests this belief is not grounded in evidence.”
Just for the record, I am personally NOT a fan of these sorts of “metaanalysis” papers. In my opinion they tend to be QUASI-OPINIONS with a veneer of science. However, in my own opinion, metaanalyses can be useful when highly conclusive or by reinterpreting data – but should be trusted even less than normal observational science.
Now – it is important to point out that this metaanalysis is not actually telling us anything NEW. Most scientists in the field ALREADY KNEW from all the various studies that were looked at by the metaanalysis, that the simple “chemical imbalance” idea was a load of crap. They’ve known this for YEARS.
REALLY? Yes. Really.
A good description of the state of things is here:
A Popular Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” by a New Review
The title is a bit deceptive – at least more so than the link which adds “it got debunked years ago”. Ah, the techniques of clickbait!
Anyway, the title could rightfully say:
A Still-Popular But Unproven Old Theory About Depression Wasn’t “Debunked” By A New Review – It Was Simply Confirmed To STILL Be Unsupported By The Data, Despite Being Pushed For Decades By Doctors And Big Pharma Who KNEW It Wasn’t True
Please click the link if you want all the details, but my proposed title says it all. People kept using the theory as a sales and prescription gimmick. Big Pharma “suggested” the theory to doctors, and doctors “suggested” the theory to patients, to get them to take a kind of drug that patients are sometimes very resistant to taking.
Remember – antidepressants do, in fact, work for many patients – particularly for very serious cases of depression. Many people who in the past had to be hospitalized, can now live happy, functional lives in society because of these drugs.
It’s understandable that doctors try to convince patients to take the drugs they think will work to treat their problems.
But should your kids be getting antidepressants because of “school trouble”?
A whole ‘nuther question.
Because THAT is the end result of the little white lie that “people can have an imbalance that needs these drugs.”
We NORMALIZED antidepressents by NORMALIZING an ABNORMALITY that didn’t even exist.
ANYWAY – if the very fact that a WRONG THEORY has been KNOWINGLY spoon-fed to you by “the experts” for DECADES, is not giving you ideas about “climate change” – particularly in the post-COVID world…..
BUT WAIT.
Not quite yet. We have ANOTHER scandal to look at, first.
II. It’s Bush’s Beta Amyloid’s Fault!
This scandal is at the opposite end of the spectrum, from the above one, in which an entire industry and all of medicine KNOWINGLY told a little white lie to the public.
In this case, ONE SCIENTIST tipped the scales inappropriately, sending the entire world, including the rest of science, on a wild goose chase.
The LIE was only caught after years, and almost accidentally.
This is a rather long and interesting story, and I’m not going to recount it all here. But I will give you links and extensive quotes. It’s FASCINATING.
One of the best quick summaries is in, of all places, The Daily Kos.
Last month, drug company Genentech reported on the first clinical trials of the drug crenezumab, a drug targeting amyloid proteins that form sticky plaques in the brains of Alzheimer’s disease patients. The drug had been particularly effective in animal models, and the trial results were eagerly awaited as one of the most promising treatments in years. It did not work. “Crenezumab did not slow or prevent cognitive decline” in people with a predisposition toward Alzheimer’s.
Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) narrowly approved the use of Aduhelm, a new drug from Biogen that the company has priced so highly that it’s expected to drive up the price of Medicare for everyone in America, even those who never need this drug. Aduhelm was the first drug to be approved that fights the accumulation of those “amyloid plaques” in the brain. What makes the approval of the $56,000-a-dose drug so controversial is that while it does decrease plaques, it doesn’t actually slow Alzheimer’s. In fact, clinical trials were suspended in 2019 after the treatment showed “no clinical benefits.” (Which did not keep Biogen from seeking the drug’s approval or pricing it astronomically.)
Over the last two decades, Alzheimer’s drugs have been notable mostly for having a 99% failure rate in human trials. It’s not unusual for drugs that are effective in vitro and in animal models to turn out to be less than successful when used in humans, but Alzheimer’s has a record that makes the batting average in other areas look like Hall of Fame material.
And now we have a good idea of why. Because it looks like the original paper that established the amyloid plaque model as the foundation of Alzheimer’s research over the last 16 years might not just be wrong, but a deliberate fraud.
This story is fantastic, and so I recommend starting with the above Daily Kos article.
Before going into more detail, let me begin to give you my perspective on Alzheimer’s drugs.
I’ve watched a lot of drug classes accumulate new and improved drugs over nearly half a century of interest in the topic, but the TWO categories that have stood out to ME as the WORST in terms of success have been antivirals and Alzheimer’s drugs.
Antivirals first.
As you have seen over the last two and a half years, antivirals are not impossible to find, and while they don’t work 100% of the time, they’re still sometimes VERY helpful.
What has been more shocking to me is that it’s clear that the pharmaceutical industry frequently and reliably OPPOSES successful antivirals, when they can’t make money off them. The industry wants NEW antivirals they can patent, and they are willing to DEFAME and DENY old antivirals, even SUPERIOR and SAFER antivirals, just to create a market for new ones.
New antivirals that may be CRAP, and dangerous as hell. And they will even LIE to the Commander In Chief about them.
But set the antivirals aside for now, knowing that the situation is corrupt.
Anti-Alzheimer’s drugs are even worse, because THEY JUST DON’T WORK. They’re notorious for not actually working. They’ve never worked. In desperation, the FDA occasionally approves these worthless drugs, if only for investigation, but they are “mercy punts”. The drugs get approved, as long as they don’t show too many side effects, because they are “better than nothing”. But that’s it.
The drugs out there for dementia, senility and Alzheimer’s are WORTHLESS.
A LOT of people thought this was suspicious. I was one of them. Every once in a while, when researchers would reveal just how BAD the next drug actually was – how terrible and limited the results were – I would “go back to my mental drawing board” and ask the question:
“Why don’t these drugs work? Maybe the theory behind them is wrong. What could the truth possibly be?”
HA! I had no idea! No clue!
NOBODY – and I mean nobody – suspected that it was because of FRAUD.
At least, not until recently.
So let’s move on to the fraud in more detail. SCIENCE MAGAZINE.
I am including a long segment which is just the beginning of the article. Please note an important point – the investigator was actually looking at a DIFFERENT fraud in the same field of Alzheimer’s research, when he found this one.
BLOTS ON A FIELD?
A neuroscience image sleuth finds signs of fabrication in scores of Alzheimer’s articles, threatening a reigning theory of the disease
In August 2021, Matthew Schrag, a neuroscientist and physician at Vanderbilt University, got a call that would plunge him into a maelstrom of possible scientific misconduct. A colleague wanted to connect him with an attorney investigating an experimental drug for Alzheimer’s disease called Simufilam. The drug’s developer, Cassava Sciences, claimed it improved cognition, partly by repairing a protein that can block sticky brain deposits of the protein amyloid beta (Aβ), a hallmark of Alzheimer’s. The attorney’s clients—two prominent neuroscientists who are also short sellers who profit if the company’s stock falls—believed some research related to Simufilam may have been “fraudulent,” according to a petition later filed on their behalf with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Schrag, 37, a softspoken, nonchalantly rumpled junior professor, had already gained some notoriety by publicly criticizing the controversial FDA approval of the anti-Aβ drug Aduhelm. His own research also contradicted some of Cassava’s claims. He feared volunteers in ongoing Simufilam trials faced risks of side effects with no chance of benefit.
So he applied his technical and medical knowledge to interrogate published images about the drug and its underlying science—for which the attorney paid him $18,000. He identified apparently altered or duplicated images in dozens of journal articles. The attorney reported many of the discoveries in the FDA petition, and Schrag sent all of them to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which had invested tens of millions of dollars in the work. (Cassava denies any misconduct [see sidebar, below].)
But Schrag’s sleuthing drew him into a different episode of possible misconduct, leading to findings that threaten one of the most cited Alzheimer’s studies of this century and numerous related experiments.
The first author of that influential study, published in Nature in 2006, was an ascending neuroscientist: Sylvain Lesné of the University of Minnesota (UMN), Twin Cities. His work underpins a key element of the dominant yet controversial amyloid hypothesis of Alzheimer’s, which holds that Aβ clumps, known as plaques, in brain tissue are a primary cause of the devastating illness, which afflicts tens of millions globally. In what looked like a smoking gun for the theory and a lead to possible therapies, Lesné and his colleagues discovered an Aβ subtype and seemed to prove it caused dementia in rats. If Schrag’s doubts are correct, Lesné’s findings were an elaborate mirage.
Schrag, who had not publicly revealed his role as a whistleblower until this article, avoids the word “fraud” in his critiques of Lesné’s work and the Cassava-related studies and does not claim to have proved misconduct. That would require access to original, complete, unpublished images and in some cases raw numerical data. “I focus on what we can see in the published images, and describe them as red flags, not final conclusions,” he says. “The data should speak for itself.”
A 6-month investigation by Science provided strong support for Schrag’s suspicions and raised questions about Lesné’s research. A leading independent image analyst and several top Alzheimer’s researchers—including George Perry of the University of Texas, San Antonio, and John Forsayeth of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)—reviewed most of Schrag’s findings at Science’s request. They concurred with his overall conclusions, which cast doubt on hundreds of images, including more than 70 in Lesné’s papers. Some look like “shockingly blatant” examples of image tampering, says Donna Wilcock, an Alzheimer’s expert at the University of Kentucky.
The authors “appeared to have composed figures by piecing together parts of photos from different experiments,” says Elisabeth Bik, a molecular biologist and well-known forensic image consultant. “The obtained experimental results might not have been the desired results, and that data might have been changed to … better fit a hypothesis.”
Early this year, Schrag raised his doubts with NIH and journals including Nature; two, including Nature last week, have published expressions of concern about papers by Lesné. Schrag’s work, done independently of Vanderbilt and its medical center, implies millions of federal dollars may have been misspent on the research—and much more on related efforts. Some Alzheimer’s experts now suspect Lesné’s studies have misdirected Alzheimer’s research for 16 years.
“The immediate, obvious damage is wasted NIH funding and wasted thinking in the field because people are using these results as a starting point for their own experiments,” says Stanford University neuroscientist Thomas Südhof, a Nobel laureate and expert on Alzheimer’s and related conditions.
Lesné did not respond to requests for comment. A UMN spokesperson says the university is reviewing complaints about his work.
To Schrag, the two disputed threads of Aβ research raise far-reaching questions about scientific integrity in the struggle to understand and cure Alzheimer’s. Some adherents of the amyloid hypothesis are too uncritical of work that seems to support it, he says. “Even if misconduct is rare, false ideas inserted into key nodes in our body of scientific knowledge can warp our understanding.”
This article goes deeply into the fraud. It’s a great detective story. It raises a whole bunch of tangential issues.
For starters, the fact that you are even hearing about this is because the investigator (Matthew Schrag) didn’t wait for NIH to do anything – particularly after it AWARDED MORE MONEY TO THE FRAUDSTER.
Yes – you got that right.
He [Lesné] became a leader of UMN’s neuroscience graduate program in 2020, and in May 2022, 4 months after Schrag delivered his concerns to NIH, Lesné received a coveted R01 grant from the agency, with up to 5 years of support. The NIH program officer for the grant, Austin Yang—a co-author on the 2006 Nature paper—declined to comment.
Notice how the “revolving door” nature of the science is on display. “Insiders” who are buddies with and coworkers of “outsiders”, give those outsiders the precious grants.
However, Schrag was not caught with his pants down by NIH “Comeyism” (failure to discipline friends). Schrag had also taken his evidence to Science magazine. SMART MOVE. But then, it appears that Schrag was raised by Mennonites, home-schooled, and in the military. Interesting.
More from the Science article:
IN HIS WHISTLEBLOWER REPORT to NIH about Lesné’s research, Schrag made its scope and stakes clear: “[This] dossier is a fraction of the anomalies easily visible on review of the publicly accessible data,” he wrote. The suspect work “not only represents a substantial investment in [NIH] research support, but has been cited … thousands of times and thus has the potential to mislead an entire field of research.”
The agency’s reply, which Schrag shared with Science, noted that complaints deemed credible will go to the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity (ORI) for review. That agency could then instruct grantee universities to investigate prior to a final ORI review, a process that can take years and remains confidential absent an official misconduct finding. To Science, NIH said it takes research misconduct seriously, but otherwise declined to comment.
See how that works? Seriously – you CANNOT trust NIH, any more than you can trust Anthony Fauci.
NOW – things are starting to get interesting as all this news is hitting the mainstream media.
Gil00 brought me a link, in which the most famous coworker of the fraudster, Karen Ashe, finally responded to inquiries. Meanwhile, the fraudster has remained silent publicly. NOTE that in Schrag’s investigation (see below), Ashe was found innocent. ONLY in papers working with Lesné, were any of Ashe’s papers ever found to contain fraudulent images. Ditto for other authors. Lesné was the nexus of the fraud.
BUT the problem WAS spotted long ago, and yet this knowledge never bubbled up to a level of effectiveness in mainstream science. An early French coworker of Lesné found his images suspect, and refused to work with him after that.
From the Science article:
Questions about Lesné’s work are not new. Cell biologist Denis Vivien, a senior scientist at Caen, co-authored five Lesné papers flagged by Schrag or Bik. Vivien defends the validity of those articles, but says he had reason to be wary of Lesné.
Toward the end of Lesné’s time in France, Vivien says they worked together on a paper for Nature Neuroscience involving Aβ. During final revisions, he saw immunostaining images—in which antibodies detect proteins in tissue samples—that Lesné had provided. They looked dubious to Vivien, and he asked other students to replicate the findings. Their efforts failed. Vivien says he confronted Lesné, who denied wrongdoing. Although Vivien lacked “irrefutable proof” of misconduct, he withdrew the paper before publication “to preserve my scientific integrity,” and broke off all contact with Lesné, he says. “We are never safe from a student who would like to deceive us and we must remain vigilant.”
Schrag spot checked papers by Vivien or Ashe without Lesné. He found no anomalies—suggesting Vivien and Ashe were innocent of misconduct.
SO – what does Karen Ashe have to say?
University of Minnesota scientist responds to fraud allegations in Alzheimer’s research
While defending results, U researcher said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images.
A senior University of Minnesota scientist said it is “devastating” that a colleague might have doctored images to prop up research, but she defended the authenticity of her groundbreaking work on the origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
Dr. Karen Ashe declined to comment about a U investigation into the veracity of studies led by Sylvain Lesné, a neuroscientist she hired and a rising star in the field of Alzheimer’s research. However, she criticized an article in Science magazine that raised concerns this week about Lesné, because she said it confused and exaggerated the effect the U’s work had on downstream drug development to treat Alzheimer’s-related dementia.
“Having worked for decades to understand the cause of Alzheimer disease, so that better treatments can be found for patients, it is devastating to discover that a co-worker may have misled me and the scientific community through the doctoring of images,” Ashe said in an e-mail Friday morning. “It is, however, additionally distressing to find that a major scientific journal has flagrantly misrepresented the implications of my work.”
I’m undecided about this lady. This is a bit of a tangent, but it may be significant.
I trust her to some extent, based on the fact that Schrag found Ashe’s work CLEAN when it was NOT associated with Lesné. In my opinion she’s innocent.
AND YET, Ashe’s background is PERFECT for a two-stepper ChiCom, potentially brought to America as the child of secret socialist sleepers. [NOTE: “Two-steppers” are basically bi-generational spy families, with extreme cover used on the parents to throw off suspicions on the second generation as plants.] Ashe’s background – similar to that of the notorious Vindman twins, is also almost identical to several classic Chinese two-steppers in American media and politics, including relentless Trump character assassin, Weijia Jiang.
Video: Disenguous, pathetic stuff from @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang, questioning the President's testing motives as suppressing them so as to tamp down case numbers and death tolls and then suggest he's playing politics with reopening state economies while Democratic governors aren't pic.twitter.com/acjiINrXxX
Video: @CBSNews's @Weijia Jiang came back for round two, bashing Trump for talking about testing like it's a "global competition" when so many are dying. Trump replies that she should ask China that question. So the media want Trump to ramp up testing, then hit him when he does?! pic.twitter.com/YYF13b3JrS
And don’t think this is just aimed at Karen Ashe – that I’m just blaming the innocent victim, which she may very well be. Let’s look at Sylvain Lesné. Let’s do a deep dive on the possibility that he was intentionally sabotaging science for more than just personal advancement.
This is just a theory to add to the pile of theories. But it’s a very intriguing theory, with enormous consequences, like – oh, say – “climate change”.
French communists, both agrarian and urban, are THICK in Normandy – where Sylvain Lesné grew up and went to university. The urban centers of Caen, Le Havre, and Rouen are communist strongholds.
You can see that Caen leans even further to the left than “worker’s paradise” Le Havre, where bleak Stalinist architecture rules. The vote against Le Pen was strong in Le Havre, but even stronger in Caen.
There is a reason why communism is persistent in Normandy. Not only is there a regional historical tradition of Jacobin thought – there was aggressive spread of Soviet-style communism to the area by Stalin, both before World War II and afterwards, in the devastation of the Allied liberation.
This was a significant part of the motivation for the Marshall plan – to not let the war feed Stalin’s slow but relentless ambitions, already at work in post-war France.
We already know that French “above-ground” communist Agnès Buzyn, who is weirdly allied with “conservative” Emmanuel Macron, was indicted for a plethora of COVID-19 “mistakes”, in which she seemed to aggressively “do the wrong thing” as COVID-19 began spreading into France.
We here in America are more familiar with one of these aggressive scientific mistakes – the “hiding” of hydroxychloroquine from the public by changing it from OTC to prescription only. (Please note that this “error” was at the bottom of the list, and is not even mentioned around the time of the indictment, which focused more on Buzyn’s downplaying of COVID dangers.)
Now – it’s very instructive to see how the French media (particularly the left-media, but all of it, really) has aggressively covered up for Buzyn on this point, with “fact-checking” in the Snopes style, where there are both clickbait strawmen and evasion on technicalities.
While the FORMAL reclassification of the drug HCQ from OTC to prescription occurred in January of 2020, which would make it seem more vindictive against Didier Raoult, and reactive against the treatment of the disease, that was merely the date of the effective reclassification.
The connection to Didier Raoult is a bit of a red herring, provided largely by his fan base. That is a typical irony useful to disinformation.
It turns out that the reclassification action itself took place in November of 2019. This point is then alleged by the fact-checkers to prove Buzyn’s “innocence”. As we now know, the deepest players in the COVID scam KNOWINGLY took many actions in September, October, and November of 2019.
Thus, in my opinion, these “fact checks” attempting to exonerate Buzyn’s scientific misconduct are in fact even more indicting, and indicative of her premeditated criminality.
Thus, if an analogous theory is correct, that Sylvain Lesné was intending to prop up bad science for more than just his own advancement, then there must be some VALUE in doing so.
Gil00 provided a possible answer to this – in thinking that perhaps there was an immunological connection to the scandal. THAT jumped out at me like a red flag. An immunity connection in Alzheimer’s is not only a known competitor of the beta amyloid theory – it fits in with my recent belief that the entire depopulation plot is connected to and being implemented through a very intentional and surreptitious set of actions leading to a decrease of individual human immunity, to make us EACH more vulnerable.
Thus, Lesné’s actions, which sent the majority of Alzheimer’s research down a primrose path to nowhere, may have been a DIVERSION away from the immunological origins of Alzheimer’s disease.
You know – an origin such as VACCINES.
Yes. Timing is everything.
NOW – even if Ashe and Lesné are completely innocent (and that would include brainwashing by communists), I think this is an EXCELLENT time to look at Alzheimer’s AGAIN, as a potential product of things like viruses and vaccines, which we KNOW can have neurological effects.
Yes. Vaccines which “go wrong” can affect the BRAIN through autoimmune actions.
Just sayin’.
III. Could Global Warming Concern in the Face of an Imminent Mini-Ice Age and an Incipient Full Ice Age Actually be Some Kind of Really Bad Science?
It should now be totally apparent that BAD SCIENCE on a global scale is not just possible – it’s EASY. This is without even bringing in the COVID debacle.
PLANET VULCAN, ANYONE?
You’ve seen it here in part I. BILLIONS of dollars have kept LIES alive and well in pharmaceutical science.
If it pays everybody to tell people there is a chemical imbalance that means they need a drug, it will be done, to sell the drug, or to tell the patient that there is hope. The bad information will be forwarded to doctors, and then to patients, to make those patients feel OK taking the drug. Eventually, it just becomes part of Fake Normal.
Consider (part II) that even a single author on a single scientific paper, followed by a few more images from that author on maybe a few dozen more papers, carrying subtle but convincing false evidence, can send BILLIONS of dollars, maybe tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, down a blind alley.
Not only that – the system will try to keep that money flowing in the same way, even when it is KNOWN by government bureaucrats to be based on faulty data.
Is it impossible that this kind of ERROR could extend to TRILLIONS of dollars?
I mean, who would actually WANT trillions of dollars?
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.
There is NOTHING in “anthropogenic global warming” or “climate change”, explained by the current theories, that cannot be explained equally well by the idea that a carbon dioxide prediction boondoggle (remember COVID models?) has occurred, as the result of BAD SCIENCE.
Indeed, the multiple and long-running FAILURES of the climate field would seem to this “poor” scientist to be rather similar to the FAILURES in anti-Alzheimer’s drugs. This kind of failure SHOULD point to severe theoretical problems in any NORMAL science situation, once freed from TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS of bad economic bets by politicians and financiers.
I remember – PERSONALLY – when we scientists were told by the leadership of the American Chemical Society that “anthropogenic global warming” was “settled science”. I knew MANY scientists in all branches of science – who were all SCIENTIFICALLY AFFECTED by this idea – who were still very actively debating the topic – and who like me were not convinced of AGW being real, true, or important, even if it did exist. The entire enterprise seemed HASTY and WRONG.
It seemed TOP-DOWN. It seemed IMPOSED. It seemed to contradict everything we knew about how science was supposed to operate – with major ideas normally taking YEARS if not DECADES of FIGHTING INSIDE SCIENCE to become crystal clear.
And OH YES – we had TIME.
SO – after reading about these two incidents of WRONG science being perpetuated by industry or academia, both knowingly and unknowingly, I do NOT think that “climate change” should be granted a pass.
I think the whole question of climate needs to “go back to the people”. That includes both SCIENTISTS who tell us WHAT IS FOUND, and THE PEOPLE who tell us WHAT MATTERS, once we find the truth.
Everybody else – the money, the media, the “leaders”, the shills, and the malevolent liars – need to get out of the way.
In particular, the MEDIA that pushes scientists’ opinions around with their “fake normal” and “fake science news” needs to STFU.
Don’t “trust the science”.
LET SCIENCE DISTRUST ITSELF.
And maybe, in fact definitely, YOU THE PEOPLE can help US, THE SCIENTISTS to DISTRUST SCIENCE……
I had already seen the video I’m about to show you, when I watched the press conference in which Florida Governor Ron DeSantis powerfully chastised the media for mischaracterizing his administration’s position of OPPOSING the mRNA vaccines for kids, as PROHIBITING the vaccines for kids – something which DeSantis reminded the idiot media that he cannot do.
However, DeSantis didn’t “hide” his opposition in the least. He still seemed to be doing everything in his power to get parents to look at Pfizer’s clinical trial data (or lack thereof) allegedly justifying this needless – if not counterproductive – if not downright dangerous vaccine.
Thus, when I saw how STRONGLY DeSantis held his ground, I thanked God that somebody in his administration surely saw the same video that I had seen.
YOU NEED TO SEE IT, TOO.
Just watch this. It’s short and to the point.
BOMBSHELL: Dr. Clare Craig Exposes How Pfizer Twisted Their Clinical Trial Data for Young Children
Gov. Ron DeSantis clarifies Florida's position on COVID shots for children, saying he's not surprised that the White House would lie and legacy media amplify it.
He adds countries with similar approaches to Florida "have been right on COVID way more than Fauci and his crew." pic.twitter.com/biRQf9Es2z
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) June 20, 2022
Twitter will try to remove this tweet from the historical record, so let’s just make a copy.
In my opinion, this Pfizer clinical trial is nearly 100% BAD SCIENCE.
That such bad science is not merely allowed to pass without comment by America’s major scientific organizations, such as the AMA and the ACS, but was in fact used by the FDA to approve utterly needless vaccines – this kind of failure of American science is SOUL-DEADENING.
It’s not just one person here or a research group there. This is multiplicity of large-group institutional failure.
Personally, I blame this shocking failure on the triumph of Chinese ethics over traditional Western ethics.
Pfizer, with its global HQ for clinical trial data in Wuhan (SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!) is now allowing China and the CCP to effectively run all its clinical trials. This horrible, shoddy trial just REEKS of a sick combination of malignant Chinese battered anarcho-capitalism and corrupt Chinese communism. This is typical “top down” forcing of mistakes due to POLITICS and GREED.
I have been telling people that I will NEVER take another drug from Pfizer.
Day two of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland started off on a concerning note.
Some of the chief architects of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores met during a session called “Global ESG for Global Resilience,” and have clearly decided to double down on their objective for a new global economic order that transcends national borders and replaces free-market capitalism.
Destroying free-market capitalism in favor of a new “stakeholder” model, in which global elites hold all the power, has been their objective for years. A single ESG system gets them much closer to this goal, and will be significantly more effective at eroding national sovereignty, circumventing democratic processes, coercing companies into compliance, and ultimately restricting individual choice.
Early in the session, Hong Kong Stock Exchange Chairman Laura Cha got right to the point. She revealed, “To make ESG disclosures meaningful, we need to have a harmonized standard… It would be very good in terms of the work that the ISSB (the International Sustainability Standards Board) is doing to bring about standardized global measures.”
Don’t look at me to go “nervous Nellie” on this – or to ignore it.
DO NOT think for a second that we are going alarmist, Eeyore, despondent, or defeatist on this. OH NO.
We’re going to beat the SHIT out of ESG, and every WOKE will go BROKE as they cry over their own self-destruction.
We have SLAIN the CRT dragon, to the point that “they” of all stripes are already crying over that little dying monster.
WE *WILL* defeat ESG.
And we will have a good time doing it.
We already have a great head start on this.
ANDREW TORBA was way ahead on this stuff with his “parallel economy” thinking. His contention is that our best fight is to simply REPLACE the dying, suicidal, elite-controlled, leftard economy.
EMERALD ROBINSON was also way ahead on the solution, with her thinking that RELIGION / CULTURE / POLITICS are LINKED IN A STREAM, and that religion is upstream of all the “issues” of contention.
Combining these two ideas leads straight to a TRANSFORMATION of ESG into RCF, and RCF is a PARALLEL way for us to judge, criticize, reject, and not be part of THEIR religious, cultural, political, and economic suicide.
Let me explain.
Environmental —> Religious
We all know that “climate change” (formerly “global warming”) is part of the left’s insane, misdirected, knee-jerk, corrupt, herd-like, virtue-signal-filled version of environmentalism, which largely serves to enrich virtue-signaling elites, destroy America and develop China. Every “mistake” that leftist environmentalism makes (see masks in the ocean, dead eagles, coal plants in China) is excused, as it answers to nobody while ACTUALLY destroying the environment through insane policies which cause unplanned consequences in unpredictable places. Compliant companies, governments, and even individuals do things that make no sense, and push compliant science to say it knows things for certain, when it does NOT know them, largely for “woke cartel” profiteering.
This is where the right to debate man’s place in this universe has been stripped away from the people themselves, and given to self-serving elites, via their lapdog “experts” who are willing to embrace financially predetermined policies.
ESG may seem that it only allows “them” (globalist elites) to do what they have already been doing for years, but the trick is that it allows them to do it PUBLICLY and without the slightest guilt. It gives shocking legitimacy to political, cultural and religious discrimination in finance.
Environmentalism as practiced “religiously” by the left, is basically a way to allow an anti-human religion to take hold and control humanity, which is deemed “environmentally sinful”.
Environmentalism, by the left’s standards, IS the secular left’s religion.
To counter it, we need to remember what the Boy Scouts always thought was important – RELIGION. Real religion. Real, time-tested, CONSERVED, religion.
To COUNTER the left, we need to evaluate companies, governments, organizations, and even individuals of the left on their RELIGIOUS values, actions, and record.
Will there be screaming?
YES. And it will be music to our ears.
One of the great advantages of going full-bore to RELIGION in “rating” the left in opposition to “environmental”, is that it will not only spotlight the horrible record of woke Christianity and Judaism – it will directly attack Hollywood and the woke, mass-shooter-producing gaming industry with the very thing they THOUGHT they had run out of town in the 1970s – the moral guidance of the Catholic Church and Orthodox Judaism. By having a certain amount of moral control over movies, “decency standards” were able to rein in some of Hollywood’s worst behavior. Sadly, the Soviet Union and cultural Marxists in the United States destroyed any morality control in Hollywood, by MOCKING decency controls.
Too bad for them. We bring it back under OUR CONTROL this time.
Our TRUE religion, applied as ratings, will leave their weak and worthless environmental religion where it belongs – in the dustbin of history.
Social —> Cultural
When the leftists and the globalists say “social”, it really means SOCIALIST. This is where ESG basically says “we will discriminate based on politics”.
This is absolute bullshit. To counter it, we flip THEIR word for our word – the one used over and over by Steve Bannon as being “upstream of politics”. That word is CULTURAL.
CULTURAL includes both the “social” and the “individual”, because a good and decent culture can and should RESPECT the individual as a critical part of building a healthy society.
This one is pretty easy, and VERY powerful. This is where we FIGHT BACK against cultural Marxism. If it is detrimental to our CULTURE, our SOCIETY, our NATION, and our PEOPLE, including INDIVIDUALS regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, etc., then it is CULTURALLY NEGATIVE.
That doesn’t mean that when “groups” step out of line, culturally, they get a pass.
Black is fine. BLACK LIVES MATTER RIOTING and RACE-HOAXING are culturally rotten.
Jewish is fine. ANTI-CHRISTIAN machinations (CRT, ESG, SEL, hoaxes) are culturally rotten.
White is fine. Actual, real, WHITE SUPREMACY and NAZISM are culturally rotten.
See? This is easy. It’s like falling off a log.
Trump and MAGA do “high cultural rating” in their SLEEP.
Is “culture-rating” going to make the radical left and the globalists cry? Get ready for tasty, salty, liberal tears on globalist ice.
Governance —> Freedom
This is a DIRECT counterattack on the idea that “governance” (more like meddling) is what is needed.
Where THEY will rank things low on “governance”, WE will rank highly on FREEDOM.
This allows us to ENCOURAGE FREEDOM in every place where the left claims somebody has a low governance score.
We will MOCK the left’s ESG when we counter it – eventually allowing low ESG scores to be a BADGE OF HONOR – backed up by high RCF scores.
And we can grow the idea of “freedom” scoring well beyond their “governance” boundaries, because YEAH, WE’RE FREE TO DO IT.
See how great it is to NOT be constrained by their thinking, by merely DEFENDING?
Going on OFFENSE in COUNTERATTACK has its advantages.
We will come up with scoring that makes the conniving, scheming, globalist SCUM have a BAD DAY EVERY DAY.
TL;DR –
THEY want to politicize finance?
WE will do it even better, even bigger, and when we do…..
We are NOT serving mercurials or arsenicals today – or EVER – but we ARE serving MODERN SUBSTITUTES like penicillin – to the non-allergic, of course.
While our beloved REAL bartender takes a needed break of unknown duration, we continue to ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE.
Christmas Spirit
And now, the rules of the pub.
HOUSE RULES
God bless us, every one! Tiny Tim had such a beautiful soul. He hadn’t a mean bone in his body…unlike most of us. But in keeping with Christmas, we promise to honor Wolf’s rules and keep Scrooge at bay. The Utree is where the Ghost of Christmas Present will conduct you should you need to rattle some chains. Another option, should all hell break loose is here.
Now, back to business.
AMEN!
Free the January Brothers
Current Art On The Wall
We have a really RETRO shipment this week. All designed to go along with our FEATURE PRESENTATION.
These are presented in the order that they came out of the box.
PATENT MEDICINE PILL, 1890.
Advertisement for Beecham’s Pills from an American newspaper of 1890.
Interestingly, Beecham’s Pills were actually USEFUL. They contained aloe, ginger, and SOAP, the latter meaning that they were much like stool softeners – a gentle laxative.
Not so sure about snake oil…..
The following is a subtle ad for CHILD DEWORMERS.
With this picture, we begin some ads for Dr. D. Jayne and his products. His company lasted for around a century. He was an actual trained doctor, and tended to use pharmaceuticals with real physical effects, like digitalis, opiates, etc., rather than quack ingredients.
American children tended to have roundworms and pinworms – Dr. Jayne’s “vermifuge” apparently worked on both.
Jayne used a lot of artwork in his marketing – thus many of his product advertisements can still be found.
The following is very subtle propaganda.
Jayne’s was still around as WWII loomed. Many of our childhoods were not long after this. Bear this in mind later in this post.
More “Jayne’s art”.
The expectorant apparently contained ipecac, opium and digitalis.
Nothing like a good salve!
Stabler’s apothecary was run by multiple generations of a family of pharmacists. The founder, Edward, was an interesting herbalist, trained in Pennsylvania. He was an abolitionist in Virginia who would purchase slaves to set them free. http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2006/feb/01/herbal-remedy/
I hope you have some idea now about medicine in the 19th century.
Do you think we’ve advanced much?
Let’s move “forward” now, to “state of the art” 19th century prescription medicine.
Seatbelts.
Mercury and Arsenic as the mRNA and Remdesivir of Pre-Fauci America
In the process of reading about how COVID vaccines are now setting off syphilis tests (a topic which we covered last Friday), I chanced upon a boatload of information about early treatments of syphilis, and what I read simply blew me away.
The scandals of syphilis are WAY, WAY more than the “shame of the disease itself”, and WAY, WAY more than the Tuskegee syphilis experiment.
These scandals are SMALL POTATOES compared to the scandal of TREATMENT OF SYPHILIS WITH MERCURY.
This is history you will NOT learn under globalists and progressives.
A scandal which was SO BAD – just like “treatment” with these demonic mRNA vaccines – that medicine started QUIETLY – without admitting fault – looking for an exit strategy. And part of that was motivated by this fact:
BLACKS and other groups who were not getting “treated” with mercury, were not suffering many of the WORST end-stage “symptoms of syphilis”.
You see what I mean? It was JUST LIKE THE CLOT SHOT. Just like remdesivir. BLAMECASTING the errors of the BAD but moneymaker treatments onto the disease.
This is NOT NEW STUFF.
In fact, it is MOST IRONIC that the Tuskegee experiment STARTED OFF by literally SAVING the participants from treatment with mercury – only to then DENY THEM penicillin when that became available, so that they could continue the experiment.
Because the experiment was not merely about “not treating people”.
It was REALLY about NOT TREATING PEOPLE WITH MERCURY.
And THIS explains why there was so much determination to get these participants to the end-stage WITHOUT TREATMENT. Because it was end-stage effects that they were so interested in observing.
What I discovered was that the history of medicine in America is FILLED with stuff every bit as bad as the DEMON Anthony Fauci, the disaster of AIDS and AZT, toxic drugs like remdesivir, and medical killers like the untested mRNA vaccines. Much of it is exposed by the history of syphilis, so that is where we will begin.
The Wikipedia article on syphilis doesn’t say much about the actual treatment of syphilis with mercury, despite it having a fairly extensive section on treatment. A much better coverage is found in the article on the History of syphilis.
However, even THAT does not really give you a sense of the magnitude of what might gently be called “the problem of mercury as a medicine”.
Let me put it this way. When it turned out that MALARIA and ARSENIC were both superior and more importantly SAFER treatments of syphilis relative to the “consensus treatment” of MERCURY, you know that mercury was BAD SHIT as a medicine.
Obviously, if they tried MALARIA and ARSENIC, people KNEW that mercury was a bad drug.
In fact, I was shocked to find that the current confrontation between “natural therapies” and “pharmaceuticals” is a VERY old conflict that never went away. While there has been SOME reduction in the mortality difference between “do no harm, save a few” natural remedies and “kill a bunch of people, save a few” pharmaceuticals, we are still talking about millions of Americans killed by pharmaceuticals intended – or maybe just “purported” – to save them.
Anyway, here is the big picture.
The “clot shot” and the people who maliciously pushed it are entirely believable in the long, dark shadow of “killer calomel”.
SO – let’s get started with Hg2Cl2.
My parents actually had a bottle of calomel (not calamine – the neighbor kids had that) in the medicine cabinet when I was a kid. It was somewhat more modern than the above, with a metal screw-cap. Indeed, my parents had a lot of very old-school medical stuff from the 40s and 50s.
As children, we treated all our wounds with the mercury compound thiomersal, a.k.a. merthiolate. You know – the bad stuff in vaccines. This is the “new” bottle which I loved – we had older glass bottles with a glass dipping rod, before these handy squeeze bottles.
Calomel has a LONG history as a therapeutic. Although it got its start back in alchemy, by the time it got to America, it was a common medicine.
From Wikipedia:
By the 19th century, calomel was viewed as a panacea, or miracle drug, and was used against almost every disease, including syphilis, bronchitis, cholera, ingrown toenails, teething, gout, tuberculosis, influenza, and cancer. During the 18th and early 19th centuries pharmacists used it sparingly; but by the late 1840s, it was being prescribed in heroic doses[7]—due in part to the research of Benjamin Rush, who coined the term “heroic dose” to mean about 20 grains taken four times daily.[8] This stance was supported by Dr. Samuel Cartwright, who believed that large doses were “gentlest” on the body.[9] As calomel rose in popularity, more research was done into how it worked.
J. Annesley was one of the first to write about the differering effects of calomel when taken in small or large doses.[9] Through experimentation on dogs, Annesley concluded that calomel acted more like a laxative on the whole body rather than acting specifically on the vascular system or liver as previous physicians believed.[9] In 1853, Samuel Jackson described the harmful effects of calomel on children in his publication for Transactions of Physicians of Philadelphia.[7] He noted that calomel had harmful effects causing gangrene on the skin, loss of teeth, and deterioration of the gums.[7] On May 4, 1863, William A. Hammond, the United States’ Surgeon-General, stated that calomel would no longer be used in the army as it was being abused by soldiers and physicians alike.[7] This caused much debate in the medical field, and eventually led to his removal as Surgeon-General.[10] Calomel continued to be used well into the 1890s and even into the early 20th century.[7] Eventually calomel’s popularity began to wane as more research was done, and scientists discovered that the mercury in the compound was poisoning patients.
Calomel was the main of the three components of the pill number 9 of the British army during the First World War. [11]
But if you REALLY want to understand the history of calomel as both a poison and a drug, this is the article you need to read.
This article totally gets it, as you can tell from the opening quote.
New drugs present greater hazards as well as greater potential benefits than ever before—for they are widely used, they are often very potent, and they are promoted by aggressive sales campaigns that may tend to overstate their merits and fail to indicate the risks involved in their use. . . There is no way of measuring the needless suffering, the money innocently squandered, and the protraction of illnesses resulting from the use of such ineffective drugs.
John F. Kennedy, in his Consumers’ Protection Message of March 15, 19621
Is the whole “Q” thing starting to make sense? Just as an aside. JFK clearly had some of the same enemies as Trump.
Anyway, this article shows how the use of mercury and arsenic compounds for medicines was controversial even from the START, with Paracelsus himself admonishing fellow alchemists not to use too much mercury in treatments.
The problem with calomel is that it’s insoluble MOST of the time, and in that state it can be used in excess, because it just flushes through the body. It’s a lot like barium sulfate – a totally safe version of highly toxic barium – in that respect. But if calomel oxidizes, or becomes impure, or otherwise emits other forms of mercury, it can be very harmful.
Thus, calomel got good results in some hands, but in the hands of other physicians, and in the bodies of other patients, it was a killer. It was easily abused, and even some of the “megadose” treatments were abusive from the git-go – to say nothing of giving it to children, and doing life-long damage.
But now, let’s look at what calomel and other mercury compounds did for syphilis. For THAT we go to another great article.
This article does a deep dive on use of mercury to treat syphilis, and does not hold back on the contention that much of the symptomology of syphilis that was seen before penicillin, was really due to mercury poisoning and NOT due to syphilis itself.
Sound familiar?
This article in particular contends that the end-stage dementia of tertiary syphilis in the West, which was observed much less frequently in certain populations like blacks, Indians, and Norwegians, who avoided mercury, was mostly due to the treatment with mercury, not syphilis.
In case you’re thinking that’s unlikely, just consider patient-killing remdesivir, which we’ve covered extensively.
Now, there IS an great academic look at the skeletons of syphilitic patients, some of whom were treated with mercury, trying to determine if mercury made things worse. The results are inconclusive, but in any case, the background material is excellent reading.
More Harm than Healing? Investigating the Iatrogenic Effects of Mercury Treatment on Acquired Syphilis in Post-medieval London.
Molly K. Zuckerman
DOI 10.1515/opar-2016-0003 Received October 26, 2015; accepted March 29, 2016
Abstract: Mercury was commonly used to treat syphilis in post-medieval Europe, but debate persists about whether it ameliorated infection or exacerbated it. As there are no in vitro studies on mercury’s effectiveness, Hg levels were characterized using an established technique, portable X-Ray Florescence Spectrometry (pXRF) in syphilitic skeletons (N=22) from six post-medieval London cemeteries. Levels were assessed against proxies for syphilitic infection severity (lesion type, episodic involvement, extent of involvement), oral health indicators, and age at death. The findings are equivocal, likely obfuscated by background poor oral health and high mortality, and cannot elucidate whether mercury ‘killed or cured’.
Keywords: syphilis, mercury, pXRF, post-medieval, London, trace element analysis, paleopathology.
The history of treatment with mercury in America serves as a strong precedent for what we are seeing now with “vaccines for everything”. The mendacity of some and the fecklessness of others regarding COVID treatments is not new – it all happened before with the mendacious and feckless medical establishment – and MERCURY.
And just for my fellow lovers of history-of-science porn, click on the following for the full-sized image.
From Wikipedia.
L0057102 Mahogany medicine chest, England, 1801-1900
Credit: Science Museum, London. Wellcome Images
images@wellcome.ac.uk
http://wellcomeimages.org
The mahogany medicine chest contains boxes, bottles and tubes of medications to treat a number of conditions. The chest includes treatments to purge the body by vomiting (emetics), by sweating (diaphoretics), as well as general purgatives such as rhubarb, jalap and calomel. Other medications include pain relief, such as opium plus astringents and stimulants, including ginger and lavender. The chest contains a handwritten inventory listing the medications. The chest also includes a set of scales, weights, a pill tile and a spatula. The set was probably used in the home or by a chemist or apothecary.
maker: Unknown maker
Place made: England, United Kingdom
made: 1801-1900 Published: –
Copyrighted work available under Creative Commons Attribution only licence CC BY 4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
And don’t forget to…….
ENJOY THE SHOW.
Thank you all for being here. Have a great weekend.
Trudeau is threatening to confiscate bank accounts. Steve Cortez and others has been warning of coming Stagflation. Steve has been a part of Wall Street as a trader and strategist for almost two decades. Others such as Clif High warn of a coming dollar collapse.
Ed Dowd, a former Blackrock Portfolio Manager, reports on Falling Pharma Stocks And Coming Financial Collapse. Edward has said elsewhere how COVID-19 may have been used to cover global debt, and how he predicts a financial collapse is ahead of us.
… the bilateral currency swap agreement on 22 March 2012. The agreement allows exchange of local currencies between the two central banks…’” thus cutting out the US Dollar as the exchange currency.
The China-Australia Currency Swap Agreement.
Given these circumstances, I thought a discussion about Central Banks and the US dollar was appropriate. I hoped the Q tree could benefit from having this information all in one place.
“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation — these bear lightly on the happiness of the mass of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. Our own history has recorded for our instruction enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice, and the intolerable oppression, on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by government.”
Daniel Webster (1782 -1852) Statement to the Senate in 1832
With encouragement from Senators Clay and Daniel Webster, Mr Nicholas Biddle, then President of the Second Bank of the United States, applied for a renewal of the Bank’s charter in 1832. President Jackson vetoed the renewal, stating “. . . It appears that more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners and the residue is held by a few hundred of our citizens, chiefly of the richest class. . .” LINK
So it should not surprising that Senator Aldrich (R) read that Webster quote at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 on the eve of the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. He was NOT advocating AGAINST a Fractional Reserve Currency but rather FOR IT! — SEE: aIV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914))
For those who might not know the history of Fractional Reserve Banking see: The Magic of Fractional Banking. In essence it is counterfeiting.
One of the biggest victories achieved by modern economists and modern central bankers is changing the definition of inflation. Inflation used to mean an increase in the money supply – full stop.
Money is metal coins, currency (Bank IOUs) and credit (fairy dust created out of thin air) or even beads and obsidian arrowheads. Money needs to be durable, accepted and dividable which is why precious metals were often the choice.
Money is a generally accepted, recognized, and centralized medium of exchange in an economy that is used to facilitate transactional trade for goods and services.
Capitalism is a private individual’s wealth, labor and resources reinvested to produce more wealth.
Capitalism is an economic system in which capital goods are owned by private individuals or businesses. The production of goods and services is based on supply and demand in the general market.
E.M. Smith aka Chiefio, who trained as an economist, gets into the definition of capitalism and other definitions surrounding capitalism: Monopoly, Monopsony, Oligopoly, Collusion And Economics 1“Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism” is a short comment by EM describing the continuum between straight capitalism and Communism.
One of the best explanations of the Federal Reserve is by G Edward Griffin. A Talk by G. Edward Griffin-The Creature from Jekyll Island. Unfortunately Griffin is a member of the John Birch Society and is therefore attacked on that basis by the defenders of the Fed. So I am presenting more rigorous sources.
Some of the most frank evidence on banking practices was given by Graham F. Towers, Governor of the Central Bank of Canada (from 1934 to 1955), before the Canadian Government’s Committee on Banking and Commerce, in 1939… Most of the evidence quoted was the result of interrogation by Mr. “Gerry” McGeer, K.C., a former mayor of Vancouver, who clearly understood the essentials of central banking. Here are a few excerpts:
Q. But there is no question about it that banks create the medium of exchange? Mr. Towers: That is right. That is what they are for… That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287) The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238) Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238) Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans. As loans are debts, then under the present system all money is debt. (p. 459)
Q. When $1,000,000 worth of bonds is presented (by the government) to the bank, a million dollars of new money or the equivalent is created? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. Is it a fact that a million dollars of new money is created? Mr. Towers: That is right.
Q. Now, the same thing holds true when the municipality or the province goes to the bank? Mr. Towers: Or an individual borrower.
Q. Or when a private person goes to a bank? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. When I borrow $100 from the bank as a private citizen, the bank makes a bookkeeping entry, and there is a $100 increase in the deposits of that bank, in the total deposits of that bank? Mr. Towers: Yes. (p. 238)
Q. Mr. Towers, when you allow the merchant banking system to issue bank deposits which, with the practice of using the cheques as we have it in vogue today, constitutes the medium of exchange upon which I think 95 per cent of our public and private business is transacted, you virtually allow the banks to issue an effective substitute for money, do you not? Mr. Towers: The bank deposits are actual money in that sense, yes.
Q. In that sense they are actual money, but, as a matter of fact, they are not actual money but credit, bookkeeping accounts, which are used as a substitute for money? Mr. Towers: Yes.
Q. Then we authorize the banks to issue a substitute for money? Mr. Towers: Yes, I think that is a very fair statement of banking. (p. 285)
“Banks typically have 3% of their assets in cash in order to meet customer needs. Since 1960, banks have been allowed to use this “vault cash” to satisfy their reserve requirements. Today, bank reserve requirements have fallen to the point where they are now exceeded by vault cash, which means lowering reserve requirements to zero would have virtually no impact on the banking system. US banks are already operating free of any reserve constraints. The graph below shows reserve requirements falling to zero over the last fifty years….”
E.M. Smith and other economists, such as Steve Bannon and those he has on the War Room as well as other financial experts are trained (and believe in) Keynesian Economics (IMF.) I prefer Mises and have had arguments with E.M to that effect. (He has started to come around a bit.) It should be noted that Communist spy Harry Dexter Whiteof the US Treasury and Fabian Socialist John Maynard Keyne are the two who saddled the world with the IMF and World Bank via the 1944 Bretton Woods system. I mentioned recently Structural Adjustment Policies, the noose the IMF & World Bank Banksters put around the neck of countries that go bankrupt. There is another Economic Philosophy not connected to the Communists and Fabian Socialists. It was developed by Mises.
This is very long so I want to highlight a few critical points.
#1. Because money is not capital, he [Mises] concluded that an increase of the money supply confers no identifiable social value. If you fail to understand this point, you will not be able to understand the rest of Mises’s theory of money. On this assessment of the value of money, his whole theory of money hinges.
An increase in the quantity of money can no more increase the welfare of the members of a community, than a diminution of it can decrease their welfare. Regarded from this point of view, those goods that are employed as money are indeed what Adam Smith called them, “dead stock, which . . . produces nothing”
#2. New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people’s bank accounts or under their mattresses. [New] Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money.
It is these losses of the groups that are the last to be reached by the variation in the value of money which ultimately constitute the source of the profits made by the mine owners and the groups most closely connected with them
[This is a critical point and the reason Bankers can steal our wealth]
This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises’s monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game. Mises did not use this terminology, but he used the zero-sum concept. Because the free market always maximizes the utility of the existing money supply, changes in the money supply inescapably have the characteristic features of a zero-sum game. Some individuals are made better off by an increase in the money supply; others are made worse off. The existing money is an example of a “fixed pie of social value.” Adding to the money supply does not add to its value.
MISES ON GOLD
…the attempt by modern governments to regulate in any way an international gold standard is always a political ruse to undermine its anti-inflationary bias. “The international gold standard works without any action on the part of governments. It is effective real cooperation of all members of the world-embracing market community. . . . What governments call international monetary cooperation is concerted action for the sake of credit expansion”
“Now, the gold standard is not a game, but a social institution. Its working does not depend on the preparedness of any people to observe arbitrary rules. It is controlled by the operation of inexorable economic law” (p. 462)…..
. . . The role played by ingots in the gold reserves of the banks is a proof that the monetary standard consists in the precious metal, and not in the proclamation of the authorities (p. 67).
In order to effect the acceptance of fiat money or credit money, the State adopts a policy of the abolition of its previous contractual obligations. What was previously a legal right of full convertability into either gold or silver coins is abolished by a new law. The State removes the individual’s legal right to exchange the State’s paper notes for gold or silver coins. It then declares that the new, inconvertible fiat paper money or bank credit money is equal in value to the older redeemable notes, meaning equal to the value of the actual coins previously obtainable through redemption. But the free market determines otherwise. The two forms of money are not equal in value in the judgment of the market’s individual participants. Gresham’s law is still obeyed….
Gresham’s law
The State can set legal prices, meaning exchange ratios, between the various kinds of money. The effects of such fixed exchange rates are identical to the effects of any other kind of price control: gluts and shortages. The artificially overvalued money (glut) replaces the artificially undervalued money (shortage). This cause-and-effect relationship is called Gresham’s law.
MONEY:
Mises therefore defined money as the most marketable commodity. “It is the most marketable good which people accept because they want to offer it in later acts of impersonal exchange” (Human Action, p. 401.).
Money serves as a transmitter of value through time because certain goods serve as media of exchange.
Money transmits value, Mises taught, but money does not measure value. This distinction is fundamental in Mises’s theory of money.
Mises was adamant: there is no measure of economic value.
….Mises concluded that money is neither a consumption good nor a capital good. He argued that production and consumption are possible without money (p. 82). Money facilitates both production and consumption, but it is neither a production good nor a consumption good. Money is therefore a separate analytical category.
“It is illegitimate to compare the part played by money in production with that played by ships and railways. Money is obviously not a ‘commercial tool’ in the same sense as account books, exchange lists, the Stock Exchange, or the credit system”
Because money is not capital, he concluded that an increase of the money supply confers no identifiable social value. If you fail to understand this point, you will not be able to understand the rest of Mises’s theory of money. On this assessment of the value of money, his whole theory of money hinges….
This theory regarding the impact that changes in the money supply have on social value is the basis of everything that follows. Mises offered here a unique assessment of the demand for money. He implied here that an individual’s demand for production goods or consumption goods, when met by increased production, confers an increase in social value or social welfare.
If a producer benefits society by increasing the production of a non-monetary good, later finding a buyer, then society is benefitted because there are at least two winners and no losers.
Therefore, if a producer of gold and a buyer of gold both benefit from an exchange – which they do, or else they would not trade – yet society receives no social benefit, then the analyst has to conclude that some other members of society have been made, or will be made, worse off by the increase in the money supply. This analysis would also apply to decreases in the money supply.
There are two conceptually related issues here: (1) money as a separate analytical category, neither a consumption good nor a production good; (2) changes in the money supply as conveying neither an increase nor decrease in social value.
With that as a background in economics, we look at the Federal Reserve Bank through the eyes of Congressman Wright Patman (D) in 1964 before President Nixon had to close the gold window.
Again this is very long, which is why I have posted excerpts. However if you want to understand our Central Banking System this is a very good document to read.
President Lincoln said :
“Money is the creature of law, and the creation of the original issue of money should be maintained as an exclusive monopoly of the National Government. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of the Government, it is the Government’s greatest opportunity.” [pg 16]
This is very important. Although US citizens can not exchange Federal Reserve notes for treasury gold, official and semi official foreign banks can.
Behind the Federal Reserve notes is the credit of the U.S. Government. If you happen to have a $5, $10, or $20 Federal Reserve note, you will notice across the top of the bill a printed statement of the fact that the US government promises to pay not the Federal Reserve promises to pay. Nevertheless most Americans to do not understand what the US Government promises to pay: American citizens holding these notes cannot demand anything for them except (a) they can be exchanged for other Federal Reserve notes or (b) that they be accepted in payment of taxes and all debts public and private. Certain official or semiofficial foreign banks may exchange any “dollar credits” they may hold-that is, deposits with the commercial banks-for an equal amount of the Treasury’s gold. Americans themselves may not exchange them for gold . [pg 19]
Of the 19 Federal Reserve officials 12 are elected by bankers so HOW the money supply is increase and WHO gets the interest on the US treasury bonds can get very interesting.
The Federal Reserve officials can always decide to create a large portion of any increase in the money supply themselves, though, of course, a larger portion of the supply will always be provided by the private banks under present law. Still the larger portion of Reserve-created money, the more the U.S. Treasury benefits-because all income of the Federal Reserve after expenses reverts to the Treasury. Thus the Treasury receives a good share of the income earned from the Government securities purchased in Reserve money-creating operations.
On the other hand, if the Federal Reserve officials decide that the increase in the money supply they want is all, or substantially all, to be made by the private banks, the private banks acquire and hold more Government securities than in the first case, and the interest payments on these securities go into bank profits. So, whether the Federal Reserve officials decide to favor the U.S. Treasury or the private banks does make a difference-millions of dollars of difference-in the amount of taxes you, I, and all other taxpayers must pay. After all, one of the biggest items of expense of the Federal Government is the interest it must pay on its debt. [pg 36]
[JUMPING FORWARD IN TIME]
“…Although the money in the Federal Reserve is not in anyway “owned” by private banks they get paid interest on it…. In its latest power play, on October 3, 2008, the Fed acquired the ability to pay interest to its member banks on the reserves the banks maintain at the Fed. Reuters reported on October 3:”
“The U.S. Federal Reserve gained a key tactical tool from the $700 billion financial rescue package signed into law on Friday that will help it channel funds into parched credit markets. Tucked into the 451-page bill is a provision that lets the Fed pay interest on the reserves banks are required to hold at the central bank.”
[An incorrect but ] typical explanation runs this way: John Jones deposits $100 in cash with his bank. The bank is required to keep, say, 20 percent of its deposits in reserves, so the bank must deposit $20 of this $100 as reserves, with a Federal Reserve bank. The bank is free to use the other $80, however, to make loans to customers or invest in securities. The expansion of money thus begins. This kind of explanation not only leads to misunderstanding, it also leads to misguided Government policies and rather constant agitation on the part of bankers for other such policies. Many of the smaller bankers who are, on the whole, not as well versed with the mechanics of the money system as they might be, actually believe that they have deposited a portion of their money, or their depositors’ money, with the Federal Reserve. Thus they feel they are being denied the opportunity to make profitable use of this money. Accordingly, there is always agitation to have the Federal Reserve pay the banks interest on this money which they think they have “deposited” with the Federal Reserve.
Furthermore, they are quite certain that the Federal Reserve System has “used” their money to acquire the Government securities which the Federal Reserve may buy in the process of reserve creation. Believing this, the bankers naturally feel that they are entitled to some share of the tremendous profits which the System receives from interest payments on its Government securities. Many bankers know better. The leaders of the bankers’ associations certainly do. But some of these leaders have not hesitated to play on general ignorance and misunderstanding to mobilize the whole banking community behind drives that are nothing but attempts to raid the Public Treasury.
The truth is, however, that the Private banks, collectively, have deposited not a penny of their own funds, or their depositors funds, with the Federal Reserve banks. The impression that they do so arises from the fact that reserves, once created, can be, and are, transferred back and forth from one bank to another, as one bank gains deposits and another loses deposits. [pg 37]
Under Secretary of the Treasury Robert V. Roosa, formerly a Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, while testifying before the House Committee on Banking and Currency in 1960, described the misconception as follows:
“There is another misconception which occurs much more frequently-that is, the banks think that they give us the reserves on which we operate and that, too, is a misconception. We encounter that frequently, and, as you know, we create those reserves under the authority that has been described here.”
The writer [Wright Patman] has had a couple of personal experiences which ‘have provided some amusing confirmation of the fact that the source of bank reserves is not deposits of cash by the member banks with the Federal Reserve banks. having seen reports that the Federal Reserve System had, on a given date, Government securities amounting to a proximately $28 billion, I went on one occasion to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York where these securities are supposed to be housed, and asked if I might be allowed to see them. The officials of this bank said, yes, they would be glad to show them to me; whereupon they opened the vaults and let me look at, and even hold in my hand, the large mound of Government securities which they claimed to have and which, in fact, they did have.
Since I had also seen reports that the member banks of the Federal Reserve System had a certain number of millions of dollars in “cash reserves” on deposit with the Federal Reserve bank, I then asked if I might be allowed to see these cash reserves. This time my question was met with some looks of surprise; the bank officials then patiently explained to me that there were no cash reserves. The cash, in truth, does not exist and never has existed. [pg 38]
When the Federal Reserve purchases a $1 million Government bond and gives some bank credit for $1 million in its reserve account, that bank also credits the bond dealer’s checking account with $1 million. I n other words, to acquire $1 million of reserves, the bank also assumes a liability to pay its customers $1 million. If the transactions stopped here, the bank would, of course, come out even, neither gaining anything nor losing anything. But the fact that there is now $1.million more of bank reserves than existed before means that the private banks as a group can create $6 million more money than existed before. In other words, by acquiring this $1 million more in bank reserves, the private banks have the privilege of creating another $6 million of bank deposits, in the process of which they acquire $6 million in interest-bearing securities or loan paper, less an allowance for leakage into the cash (currency) balances of the public. [pg 43]
What amount of Government securities have the private banks acquired with bank-created money?
On January 31, 1964, all commercial banks in this country owned $62.7 billion in U.S. Government securities. The banks have acquired these securities with bank-created money. In other words, the (banks have used the Federal Government’s power to create money without charge to lend $62.7 billion to the Government at interest.
On January 29, 1964, commercial banks had total assets amounting to $304.7 billion, and all of these had been paid for with bank-created money, except $25.4 billion which had been paid for with their stockholders’ capital. In other words, less than 10 percent of the banks’ assets have been acquired with money invested by stockholders in the banks. [pg 46]
The make-up of the Federal Reserve Directors changed in favor of the bankers
The Federal Open Market Committee. There are 19 participants in this powerful body, 7 appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate of the United States. Once appointed, however, a man serves for a period of 14 years, and cannot be removed by the President or by any other official body, except for cause. The other 12 men in this select group are elected to their places through the votes of private commercial bankers. there are 12 voting members of the Federal Open Market Committee. The voting members consist of 7 members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, plus some 5 of the 12 Federal Reserve bank residents. [pg 65]
Because of this, the balance of power over the money supply lay securely, it was thought, with the public side of the System through authority of the Board of Governors. But when the move toward the alternative open-market technique of control was given legislative blessing by Congress in 1933 and 1935 and a full-fledged central bank thereby created the balance shifted radically toward the private, commercial banking side of the System. [pg 72]
.
.
“ownership” of the fed reserve: Confusion due to stock and elected board members: The position of the Federal Reserve officials thus seems to be clear :
The Federa1 Reserve banks are not owned by the commercial banks. The viewpoint of the individuals quoted above has also been borne out by the presidents of the Federal Reserve banks in hearings before the House Banking and Currency Committee. However, officials of the Federal Reserve banks are sometimes inclined to take the opposite position. [pg 78]
Do bankers believe that they own the Federal Reserve banks. Yes. [100% of the “stock” is owned by the private banks. Also after instigating “the Accord” It was later revealed by testimony of some of the Federal Reserve officials to committees of Congress that the Open Market Committee had held a meeting on August 18 and decided not only to raise the discount rate, but to “go their own way” on the Government longer term bond rate as well, despite what the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the head of the Office of Defense Mobilization might do”….Therefore the Federal Reserve is not answerable to the President or Congress or the electorate, nor even to a government audit or even Congressional funding!]
The original act required that the banks invest 6 percent of their capital stock in the Federal Reserve banks.
Why was the Federal Reserve Act written to require member banks to invest in the so-called stock of the Federal Reserve banks?
The framers of the Federal Reserve Act gave many reasons, but the main, reason was this: it was expected that the Federal Reserve would issue money, not mainly against Government securities as is now the practice, but against commercial and industrial loan paper-“eligible paper” as the reader knows.
It was in view of these considerations that Congress, in framing the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, required member banks of the Federal Reserve System to put a certain percentage of their capital into the .’stock” of the Federal Reserve banks; this “stock” was a safeguard against a misuse of the Government’s credit which was being delegated to these banks. The 1013 act placed on the member banks, furthermore, a “double liability” for their “stock” in the Federal Reserve banks. In other words, if a Federal Reserve bank failed, the member banks would lose not only their invested capital, but an equal amount of capital which they would also forfeit. [pg 79]
The 1933 act also prohibited commercial banks from making stock market loans, and investment banks from accepting public deposits. This was an effort to prevent a wave of stock market speculation like that of the twenties by keeping commercial banking and investment banking separate and distinct. [pg 84] [Clinton got rid of that and other limits on the banks.]
What changes were made the Banking Act of 1935?
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was made permanent, and the Board of Governors was given power to change reserve requirements. The act of 1935 had other important revisions :
(1) The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System was changed. Membership no longer included the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency, and the number of members was cut from nine to seven. The name, the Federal Reserve Board, was changed to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The reorganized Board, with its increased powers really gave us a central bank for the first time, in place of a system of individual Federal Reserve banks which were largely on their own.
(2) Also of primary importance in creating a true central bank was the establishment of the Federal Open Market Committee to determine purchases and sales of Government securities for the entire System.
(3) Another change made by the 1935 act related to loans of the Federal Reserve banks. This act allowed the Federal Reserve banks to extend reserve bank credit on any type of credit which the commercial bank possessed.
4 ) The 1935 act also contained provisions concerning regulation of bank holding companies. [Pg 84]
Private banks enjoy a very special relationship with the Federal Government. After all, most business firms employ private capital or privately owned resources to produce a product or provide a service which can be profitably sold in the marketplace. Most business firms pay for the raw materials and services they receive, and, furthermore, in the case of most kinds of business firms, the business itself is a risk-taking venture. The firm succeeds or fails in competition with other business firms.
But the conditions under which private banks operate are very different. In the first place, one of the major functions of the private commercial banks is to create money. A large portion of bank profits come from the fact that the banks do create money. And, as we have pointed out, banks create money without cost to themselves, in the process of lending or investing in securities such a Government bonds. Bank profits come from interest on the money lent and invested, while the cost of creating money is negligible. (Banks do incur costs, of course, from bookkeeping to loan officers’ salaries.) The power to create money has been delegated, or loaned, by Congress to the private banks for their free use. There is no charge.
On the contrary, this is but one of the many ways the Government subsidizes the private banking system and protects it from competition. The Government, through the Federal Reserve System, provides a huge subsidy through the free services the System provides for member banks. “Check clearing” is one of the services; i.e., the collection and payment of funds due one bank from another because of depositors’ use of their checkbook money. The costs of this service alone runs into scores of millions of dollars.
The gross expenses of the combined Federal Reserve banks totaled $207 million in 1963, most of which was incurred as a cost of providing free services to the private banks. Other Federal agencies also receive services from the Federal Reserve. But these are not free. The System received about $20 million for “fiscal agency and other expenses” in 1963.
In addition, the Federal Government provides private banks with a large measure of protection from competition, and the hazards of failure. … This means, in brief, that nobody can enter the banking business by opening a national bank, unless the proposed bank is to be located where it will not cause an inconvenient amount of competition to other banks already in business. [pg 89]
In mid-August of 1950, however, the Federal Reserve raised the discount rate and short-term Treasury bills jumped toward 11/2 percent, although there were requests from the Secretary of the Treasury and the President for the System to continue a low-rate policy. It was later revealed by testimony of some of the Federal Reserve officials to committees of Congress that the Open Market Committee had held a meeting on August 18 and decided not only t o raise the discount rate, but to “go their own way” on the Government longer term bond rate as well, despite what the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the head of the Office of Defense Mobilization might do…. Since the signing of the so-called accord, in March of 1951, this event has been widely interpreted as an understanding, reached between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, that the Federal Reserve would henceforth be “independent.” It would no longer ” peg Government bond prices. It would raise or lower interest rates as it might see fit, as a means of trying to prevent inflation or deflation.
These are understandings which have been grafted onto the accord over the years. Certainly, no such understandings were universal at the time the accord was signed. ….
At the end of 1951, then, the Federal Reserve had both self-proclaimed independence, as a result of the accord, and an operational policy which aimed at maximum credit effects through minimum changes in interest rates….. the Federal Reserve people were quite sure that they could do a better job of running the country than the President, and with only slight increases in interest rates. …
It then added another string to its bow- the “bills only” policy. … Henceforth when the Treasury issued bonds or medium-term securities, it was to dump these issues on the market and watch the natural consequences-first a drop in bond prices, then a gradual recovery as the market absorbed the bonds. Any private rigging or manipulations of the market were to go without interference from the Federal Reserve, as were any speculative booms or panics short of a “disorderly” market. The “bil1s-only” policy had only one reservation: The Federal Reserve would buy long-term bonds in the event that the Open Market Committee made a findings that the market was disorderly. [ full details starting on pg 103]
The [Eisenhower ] administration announced at the outset that it would re1y on monetary policy exclusive1y for its economic regulation and would respect the complete independence of the Federal Reserve to carry out these policies as it saw fit …..
Thirteen years have now passed since the accord and the liberation of the Federal Reserve. What have been the results? The major result is shockingly obvious. Interest rates have climbed steadily, with slight interruptions, during the entire post accord period. (See table 3.) The period has been marked, then, by a continual shift of income to the banks, other major financial institutions, and individuals with significant interest income. The rest of the country provided this income. …
Another result of post accord monetary policy is that the U.S. economy has unwittingly become a low investment economy… The Federal Reserve has chosen the high interest, slower growth option for this country.
In fiscal year 1963, the U S Government paid out approximately $10 billion as interest on the national debt. The budget deficit for the same year was $8.8 billion. Much political hay was made with the deficit. It was potential inflationary dynamite, ran the ”no deficit” claim. And these same people strongly supported tighter money and higher interest rates to prevent the otherwise inevitable inflationary explosion. Yet if these people were really worried about the deficit they should have been rabid partisans of a low-interest policy. For it can be shown that last year’s deficit would have been $5 billion less if the Government had not been forced by Federal Reserve policy to pay increasingly more on its outstanding debt. I n fact, the total national debt would now be $40 billion less if the interest rates of the early 1940’s had prevailed in the postwar period.
Moreover, the system eludes even the audit control exercised by the General Accounting Office, whose function it is to make sure that other Federal agencies not only handle their financial affairs properly but also pursue policies and practices that are in accord with the law. The system provides for its own auditing; clutching its mantle of independence, it has stoutly resisted repeated congressional suggestions that the General Accounting Office perform an annual audit.[ pg 121]
Congress has never given authority for determining monetary policy to the Federal Reserve System-and certainly not to a committee within the System containing members who owe their selection to private bank interests. This basic authorization has not been changed by any amendments to the Federal Reserve Act made to date. Yet two evolutions have taken place within the Federal Reserve System, in one instance, without authorization, and, in the other, directly contrary to the expressed intent of the Federal Reserve Act. In brief, the Federal Reserve’s “monetary policies,” as they are practiced today, were never authorized by law…There is little doubt in the author’s mind that if any legal challenge were ever raised to the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies, the courts could hold them unconstitutional.
The First Annual Report of the Board of Governors after passage of the 1935 act opened with a statement that the act “places responsibility for national monetary and credit on the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee”-although the act contained no reference whatever to monetary policy nor any provision which indicated a change in the convertibility concept on which the 1913 act was drawn. In brief, the Federal Reserve’s “monetary policies,” as they are practiced today, were never authorized by law.
The monetary powers, as has frequently been pointed out, are reserved to the Congress by the constitution. There is no doubt that it is within the prerogative of the Congress to delegate these powers either to the executive branch of the Government or to an independent agency. But it is not within Congress’s constitutional means to delegate these powers without prescribing policy objectives and clear guidelines detailing how the powers may be used. Inevitably, the Supreme Court has held unconstitutional those grants of powers made without any spelling out of the specific objectives and limitations placed on their use [pg 128]
This second change, whatever else it accomplished, did open the door to private banker influence in the formation of monetary policy. T h e regional bank presidents have become policymakers. At the very least, the type of man chosen to become the president of a regional bank affects the bent of Open Market Committee thinking. Now the private bankers have the dominant voice in choosing the regional bank presidents. They are hardly likely to choose and retain man as presidents whose approach to monetary matters does not in general conform to their taste.
I hope you take the time to read these excerpts and do not blow your blood pressure too high.
“Capitalists with government help are the worst of all economic phenomena.” — A. Rand
Rand was wrong, the absolute worst economic phenomenon is “Capitalists with government help ALL paid for by counterfeit money printed by the Robber Baron Bankers”
Yeah, we still have staffing problems, but who doesn’t under China Joe?
While off to a rocky start, we are staying open as many days of the week as possible, just like some of the small businesses that I patronize.
Keep up that LOCAL PRESSURE on the Biden cabal by going to school board meetings and supporting TRUE non-monopoly capitalism – it SKEERS Kapo and Little Red Jen somethin’ FIERCE.
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays! To the White House press– thank you for challenging us, for questioning and for holding us accountable as we all work to keep the American people informed. And to the press team–you are simply the best. Grateful every day to work with you. pic.twitter.com/xxBwLMzh2L
Likewise, patronize those SMALL BLOGS that provide new viewpoints and ideas!
We Serve Whiskey And Guns To Indians Here!
Yup! FREEDOM is GOOD TROUBLE, and we’re in favor of it, for everybody, much to the consternation of our local maskies and vaxxies.
I had the special pleasure of being “refused service” by a maskie recently – he simply walked away from the cash register and went into the back. Some of it was due to race. Having been “not served” because of race before, I can spot that fairly easily, and this person was not exactly “hard to read”.
Three other staffers (all forced to wear masks, sadly) came to my assistance and took my order.
I maintained a pleasant demeanor, as part of one of several psychological warfare tactics that I have adopted recently, in fighting against the VAXZIS and MASKZIS.
While our beloved REAL bartender takes a needed break of unknown duration, we continue to ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE.
So what’s on the ODD BAR’S CRAZY MENU this week?
We’ve served alcohols our first week, including menthol, ivermectin, and hydroxychloroquine.
Next, we served amines , including second generation antihistamines.
Today, we’ll toast each other with an element that we’ll borrow from Steve…..
…..and some very special natural alcohols and derivatives, including among the 4 of them, 3 terpenoids, 2 phenols, 1 ester, and 1 ether.
More on these wonderful “liqueurs” later!
Christmas Spirit
There’s still time to spread omicron! GET BUSY!!!
While we do have some members out with Omicron now, including Brave and Free, the real question is whether we’re going to see a big peak in March and April, like we did in 2020.
And if you’re gonna get sick, you might at least consider having some willing cohort, looking for that natural immunity, to get sick with you!
Ah, thanks to SMILEY for reminding me of the goofy fun of these wonderful but stupid GIFs called “Blingees”!
And now, the rules of the pub.
HOUSE RULES
God bless us, every one! Tiny Tim had such a beautiful soul. He hadn’t a mean bone in his body…unlike most of us. But in keeping with Christmas, we promise to honor Wolf’s rules and keep Scrooge at bay. The Utree is where the Ghost of Christmas Present will conduct you should you need to rattle some chains. Another option, should all hell break loose is here.
Now, back to business.
AMEN!
Current Art On The Wall
Now for something a bit different…..
Vector background. Molecules and chemical formulas
…..and something a bit more familiar.
David Teniers the Younger (1610–1690), The Alchemist, ca. 1643–45. Oil on panel, 20 1/8 x 28 in (51 x 71 cm). Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, Braunschweig (139)
As one of the early “discoverers” of The Ethical Skeptic on Twitter, I was happy that I was able to get a few people interested in his precise and well-considered thoughts on things – especially regarding the phony scamdemic. TES was always utterly perturbed by the bad science of the “pandemic”, and worked on a daily basis to “correct the fact checkers” – which was all of hilarious, sad, and joyful.
After I was kicked off Twitter, I rarely saw him, due to my own laziness, really, but in 2021, some GREAT links to The Ethical Skeptic’s work popped up here. THANK YOU, to all who follow him and keep us informed.
This one got us all thinking about “coof kits”, and GA/FL suggested some of us putting up our own versions. I initially thought that this might not be a good idea, because people’s needs and medical situations really VARY – one of the main reasons that “practicing medicine without a license” is actually a bad idea in normal times. I thought it better to have a broader discussion.
However, I just realized that I did put up a kind of “minimal” kit last week, and it’s worth looking at it.
This kit was designed for people who DON’T have a smart plan already figured out, and don’t want to investigate “hard to find” things like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Here is what I had, followed by my earlier reasoning. The main change is adding Vitamin C, as discussed below.
Wolf’s COVID Care Package
Thermometer (thermal digital is easiest)
Antigen test kit(s) (yeah, good luck finding one, although they are coming back after New Years)
Antihistamine of your choice (Claritin, Zyrtec, and Allegra are the easiest – 1-2 a day)
Aspirin (regular, or low-dose if your stomach doesn’t like it – 1 a day)
Listerine or Betadine mouthwash/gargle for mouth and throat
Vitamins C and D, Zinc, Calcium, Magnesium, Multivitamin including Selenium.
Quercetin (including natural sources) or Green Tea
Saline or other nasal spray, rinse, or wash of your choice
The thermometer tells you when to use your precious test kit – when you suddenly have a fever and a sore or tingly throat.
The test kit gets you a positive diagnosis that opens doors for things like antibodies, or an official test.
A positive test means you can BEGIN TREATMENT at THERAPEUTIC DOSES.
The antihistamine insures that YOU WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY NOT DIE, because it stops the second, allergic, inflammatory stage of COVID in its tracks.
The aspirin makes doubly sure you won’t get clots, but be careful – don’t take it if you’ve had trouble with aspirin. Talk to your doctor if unsure.
The gargles (Listerine or Betadine) massively reduce viral load and speed time to recovery.
The saline and nasal washes lower viral load, and maintain nasal breathing.
The quercetin and green tea help zinc’s antiviral action by increasing cellular zinc levels.
The vitamins and mineral supplements keep you at antiviral levels of these things. In particular, zinc and vitamin D3 need to be at non-deficient levels.
Please consult authoritative sources from TRUE medical doctors like the ones at https://flccc.net.
Cthulhu noted that I hadn’t mentioned Vitamin C – I have now added that, because it’s likely to help and can’t hurt (“First, do no harm”) and also follows the McCullough Principle (“Signals of Benefit, Acceptable Safety”). I don’t think it’s nearly as important as the antihistamine and “clot-blocker”, but I do have to admit that Vitamin C was certainly far better than nothing when I survived Wuhan with only mild lung damage.
What I’m going to do now is to encourage all of YOU to talk about your “war chests” and “coof kits”, and explain your reasonings about things.
This will help people who are deciding what THEY might want to add to their kits – OR REMOVE, if there is something better for their particular situation.
Remember – everybody has their own unique medical needs.
I will put my thoughts in the comments, just like everybody else.
NOW – about those natural “essential oils” in Listerine.
Let’s look at them.
Menthol
Thymol
Eucalyptol (2 views)
Methyl salicylate
These are all natural substances of roughly the same molecular size and composition (mostly carbon and hydrogen with 1-3 oxygen atoms), all of them being either pungent oily liquids or smelly, vaporous crystalline solids.
There are some relations between these things.
Thymol is basically menthol where the 6-membered ring has been made benzenoid – meaning like benzene – with 3 double bonds.
Notice that methyl salicylate is also benzenoid. Methyl salicylate is related to aspirin, and has similar activities. Don’t drink Listerine, even though the amounts are (believe it or not) rather small.
Eucalyptol is also structurally related to menthol, although it’s harder to see. Try to see it.
All of these natural substances, when isolated from their sources, were very early pharmaceuticals. They ALL have pharmacological activities, which many would regard as “primitive” by today’s standards, and yet, gargling Listerine is PROVEN to be extremely effective in reducing viral load of COVID-19 variants – about 80% as effective as iodine solutions.
Why might this be? Here is just ONE small line of immunological evidence.
To be honest, we’re a bit late to the game here. Native Australians from the first wave of immigration, roughly 65,000 years ago, discovered the utility of eucalyptol by their own investigations.
There is a great picture of what is essentially a native doctor’s medical bag in the second link. When it freaks you out a bit, let it. This is a way of getting you to appreciate human intelligence outside your modern experience.
Lastly – IODINE.
I have not tried this, and I am not sure I would like it, but it’s a viable option, IMO. I actually like Listerine, and it worked for me on delta, so I’m happy with that. I did NOT try Listerine in the nasal cavity. Not sure that I’d like that. I stuck to saline.
I did find a paper that showed Listerine to be roughly 80% as effective as povidone-iodine.
Here is link to a review which states something similar, and a summary of the review.
A review of literature was conducted regarding the use of commercially available antiseptics and SARS-CoV-2.
Results
Povidone-iodine (betadine), ethanol and essential oils (Listerine) and a combination of xylitol and iota-carrageenan (purified from red marine algae) were shown to reduce viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro by 3–4 log10 in 30 s.
Chlorhexidine, a widely used oral rinse, does not act as quickly in reducing viral load in 30 s as povidone-iodineI, but binds to cell proteins, extending protection.
Hydrogen peroxide is not as effective as other oral rinses in vitro and cell toxicity is a concern.
Hypertonic saline is not directly virucidal, but halts replication by increasing hypochlorous acid inside the cell.
Conclusion
Several commonly used nasal antiseptics and gargles have shown efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and clinical trials are currently underway to study their impact on disease course and transmission.
Future perspective
These commercially available products should be further evaluated due to their potential ability to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses that are yet to emerge.
You can also make your own povidone-iodine gargles and nasal rinses – Dr. McCullough has retweeted a nice recipe for this. Click through to Twitter for more information.
This is another GREAT article, talking about one of my FAVORITE complaints about modern science, which has resulted from a really SICK and UNHEALTHY compartmentalization, as well as insulation of scientists from internal criticism (lack of “herd review”). This condition has allowed all sorts of pathological science to gain ascendancy without check, balance, or proper community criticism.
For example, CLIMATE CHANGE gets more input from FINANCIERS than it does from the many scientists like me who think we are acting irrationally and presumptuously on ERRORS. These errors have been induced by the WRONG forces – beneficiaries not committed to truth – within a small pathologically influenced community – much like what’s going on with improperly influenced government science and the “clot shot”.
This piece by The Ethical Skeptic contains a graphic using a BULLSEYE which you really need to see. It makes a very important point about science – which I can apply DIRECTLY to Anthony Fauci.
Fauci’s extreme focus on antibodies to the spike protein as a nearly sole measure of “success” of the “clot shot”, is a perfect example of what TES is talking about.
I have referred to Fauci’s over-focus as “antibody hypnosis”. In fact, I see this kind of obsession and compulsion repeatedly throughout his career, and would wager that:
it’s why he always “wins” against the Judy Mikovitses and the Kary Mullises
it’s why he’s so highly paid
it’s why he’s tied to so many “grim reaper” experiments
it’s why corrupt industry loves him, and is in bed with him
TES makes a general point about the kinds of information which actually provide STRONGER PROOF – and this set includes something I love – INDEPENDENT CONFIRMATION BY ALTERNATE LINES OF REASONING – not just “duplication of results” and “confirmation of results” – which are both sadly lacking as well, but not nearly as important.
I have powerful, direct experiences in science with the need for RESOLVED DIVERSE INPUTS and AVOIDANCE OF HYPNOTIC REASONING as safeguards against pathological science.
However, THEY (and I mean “they”) are using various forms of hypnosis, including MASS, COMMUNITY, PEER, and INDIVIDUAL to advance science in ways that THEY want.
Human science is far more controlled than we either admit or understand.
Anyway, back to the article.
There is a quote from Elon Musk therein which is really worth your while, and which TES puts in the context of what he is talking about.
Bluntly, it feels wonderful to know that SOMEBODY GETS IT.
What Musk is talking about here is basically the “bullseye” metaphor that TES uses. And THAT is related to the following item.
While Fauci is very committed to the LEVELS of his antibodies, he has not properly processed feedback that would indicate he’s OPTIMIZING THE WRONG THING.
Here is a link to Steve Kirsch’s interpretation of Sucharit Bhakdi’s and Arne Burkhardt’s analysis of people who died after vaccination, showing that these deaths were ALMOST ALL related to the “clot shot”.
Kirsch REALLY explains this well. Malone takes note of this, too.
IMO, it would appear that Fauci is optimizing the WRONG ANTIBODIES in the WRONG WAY, because the vaccines are CREATING the WRONG ANTIBODIES in the WRONG PLACES.
Please read Kirsch’s article and then the Bhakdi-Burkhardt paper to understand this.
Now, Fauci may be optimizing the wrong antibodies in the wrong places for a variety of reasons. Those exact reasons are not nearly as important as the fact that they are simply WRONG.
I believe Bhakdi, Burkhardt, and Kirsch – this is a risky vaccine, and now we begin to understand WHY.
Based on this knowledge, I personally will not be taking these vaccines.
In my opinion, these results CLEARLY show that vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 should not be effected by IM injections of a full SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and even more emphatically so, NOT by genetic vaccines delivered by IM injections. In my very early opinion, this is going to be a CLASSIC case for using RBD antigen (protein) and/or nasal delivery as a concession to the virus – with nasal delivery being used as a SAFETY feature and NOT merely a convenience.
To have SAFER vaccines for DISCRIMINATING SHOPPERS like me, we’re going to have to compromise with the virus. That’s just the way it is.
There may be SOME who thought that we could arrive at a compromise that would reduce human populations, but frankly I don’t like that deal.
In my opinion, ANYBODY with vascular, cardiac, clotting, or other issues like WANTING TO HAVE KIDS SOMEDAY, or NOT RISKING CANCER, should absolutely avoid the current clot shots.
In my opinion, the clot shot is stupidity advanced by greedy people who are controlled and manipulated by really evil people. In other words, it’s not stupid, greedy, or evil – it’s ALL OF THE ABOVE.
The DISEASE is no picnic, and I can see some people making the risk-benefit calculation in favor of the vaccine – particularly newer RBD antigen vaccines like Corbevax (Hotez/Baylor/India/open-source). But if people are dying in 5 years from experimental mRNA vaccines with the full spike protein – well, that is exactly like the RISK that one takes with SMOKING SOMETHING YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND.
Seriously, most Americans would refuse to take a novel “legal” or illegal designer drug, given stories like the “bath salts” and “Parkinson’s heroin” experiences which shocked the public in horror headlines.
Parkinson’s from Designer Heroin (Ironically related to Paraquat)
This is what I really wanted to show you, right here.
The Ethical Skeptic, or TES, or “ThEthSkep“, as I sometimes call him, has proven to my satisfaction that CCP lied even MORE than we previously thought possible.
Is this hard to believe? That we got CHUMPED by CHINA yet again?
Yeah. Getting chumped by China YET AGAIN is a thing.
I am tempted to try to construct an “elevator pitch” of ThEthSkep’s argument, and have even asked him (in a moderated comment) if he could provide such a short explanation that I could pitch to others.
If he DOES provide one, I will do an entire post on it.
For the moment, I will just give you my “two paragraph description” of his very long and elegant post, which post I can guarantee most here will have trouble following.
TES argues that setting an earlier date for the actual initial Chinese release of an ancestral pathogen to current SARS-CoV-2, provides a far better explanation of the facts at hand, as well as some facts which he generated through analysis of the genetics of SARS-CoV-2 variants, than does the “standard model” of a late 2019 release, whether that late release is taken from the early Chinese LIES about a zoonotic outbreak in December 2019, or from the October 2019 Wuhan lab activities which have always struck me as potential disinformation.
In particular, an early 2018 release of a less pathogenic ancestor explains the omicron variant’s surprisingly early 2020 appearance and low pathogenicity so well, and China’s population resistance to the more pathogenic Wuhan variant, whether that was a descendant or (my thinking) a new release, that IMO it is the duty of the “standard model” to explain all of the facts better than the TES theory.
Now, like I said, this post by TES is not an easy read, even for those with some knowledge of the field, and even for those experienced in reading the scientific literature. He moves at “review speed” through a lot of reasoning and even his own work, which is not all shown, but which is all fully described and referenced.
I am actually WAITING for my first reading to fully sink in, but I can tell you this. As soon as I “freed myself” from the necessity of a late 2019 release, everything “coof” just started falling into place.
This is one of those things that starts generating RESETS in my mind, on everything I had thought before. Once you see what TES is getting at, it’s almost impossible to unsee it.
AND I CAN GO FURTHER.
I talk to a LOT of people, and listen carefully to their thinking about COVID. One of my sources is somebody who has a lot of contacts in Europe and Asia, especially India, due to working for an international firm.
That person strongly believes, based on illnesses within the corporation as well as associated entities, that something like COVID-19 was already circulating worldwide during ALL of 2019.
I had set this aside, unable to fit it into everything else I knew. NOW, however, it makes easy sense. In fact, the details which I don’t want to give, fit his model of spread EXACTLY.
If TES is correct, and I believe he is, then WE WERE DEALING WITH VARIANTS EVEN BEFORE THE CDC BEGAN TALKING ABOUT VARIANTS. In fact, they never told us that THE ORIGINAL WAS LIKELY JUST A VARIANT OF SOME PRIOR VARIANT.
And THIS explains much better why Fauci, Baric, Dazsak, and all the others were ready to cover up – because a virus related to their research had already gotten out in 2018. Going along with the Chinese story was a RELIEF to them – and they grabbed on tightly.
In other words, a conspiracy of aligning interests, not something discussed on paper or by phone. It’s a brilliant Chinese move, actually. Proffer a lie and see if our own scientists will join them in it.
The USEFUL IDIOT American media? NO PROBLEM.
And not just THAT stuff, but now we have much more evidence that these bugs could have been “in the wild” EVERYWHERE – including possibly just outside the Baric lab, near where Gail Combs picked up a “coofy” bug much earlier than would have been possible with a late 2019 release. (I will let her address the time-frames.)
Consider that China could even have been trying to FRAME or intimidate Baric with a stateside release in the vicinity of his lab. Why? Because NOW we have MOTIVE.
Does it make sense NOW that these highly contagious bugs could have been getting out willy-nilly from these laboratories? Or that China has been playing fast and loose with biological releases?
What does this mean?
It means that the whole NIH-Fauci-Wuhan complex has been in cover-up mode, trying to SAVE THEIR DANGEROUS RESEARCH which they know is VERY likely to be SHUT DOWN BY A CONGRESS RUN BY THE PEOPLE – no matter WHAT THE CAUSE OF THIS RELEASE.
Remember how I said the President Wolf Moon would send a cruise missile into every BSL level 4 that didn’t shut down immediately upon his inauguration? Those missiles armed with whatever insured that all viruses were FRIED?
See the motive to get rid of Trump now? WE THE PEOPLE cannot be allowed to interfere with their “holy” research.
And wait – there’s MOAR.
Somewhere in the years between 2005 and 2010, around the time I got an extremely SARS-CoV-2-like infection, complete with anosmia, exhaustion, and “sore lung”, I took note of the fact that all of my Asian colleagues in the “anti-CCP” camp became very religious about taking COVID-like precautions in our CCP-Chinese-infested workplace. These precautions included isolation, surface and aerosol measures, like wipes, air filters, and even clothing choices.
Most of us dismissed it as an “Asian thing” like masks, even though it was a sudden and new social phenomenon, but because I had contacts in that community who were sometimes sources of insight on CCP skulduggery, I noticed that ONLY the “antis” were engaging in the protective behaviors – the mainlanders and pro-CCP Hong Kongers/Taiwanese were not.
Interestingly, I was not getting any good information on the trend – unlike other scuttlebutt at the time.
Was it real or disinformation? Was it an op to flush out the antis? Was it “anti” paranoia?
I have no idea. But I personally think that China has been up to “bio-tricks” for a LONG time – as in back BEFORE SARS (2003).
If 2018 is the first time China released any biologicals, I would be VERY surprised.
SO – see what you think. Read this sucker, and then think about it.
I think TES is onto something.
A Note About January 6 – and More
I have been avoiding all things January 6, largely because I don’t want to give Nancy Gambino any “lift” as far as her phony “investigation” into HER OWN CRIME.
I understand her game plan, and I’m not going to play along.
I would have loved to have recounted that amazing day in another long, glowing, “all about me and my experiences” post, but no.
THIS IS WAR.
In my opinion, we can bring down these horrible communists faster by focusing on whatever WE want to focus on.
Nancy says “the fight is over here”.
NOPE. Go to hell, Mafia Bitch. We know what you did. With Kapo’s dirty FBI. And the backing of Mitch McConnell and SCOFFLAW SCOTUS.
Some may want to join the fight against Pelosi right now, and please feel free to “follow Darren Beattie into Pelosi’s breach”, but I think that MANDATES are going to kill these bastards at the polls, if we just help them commit electoral suicide.
Expose the “clot shot” risks more fully, and show that the mandates are MORE EVIL.
We need to make Democrats – destroying America for GREED under the cover of virtue signals – absolutely unelectable, and I think we can.
ENJOY THE SHOW.
Thank you all for being here. Have a great weekend.
Hopefully, this great couple is getting some REST, because they may NEED IT.
I am telling y’all – the Trumps may very well be on their way back to the White House in 1-3 years.
In fact, the way Obammunism has been “performing” – stumbling in disarray behind the HUMAN SHIELD Joe Biden, it looks like even the core plotters are having regrets and doubts now.
Mark “Drop Box Treason” Zuckerberg isn’t buying up land for his giant hideaway in Hawaii – only a SUBMARINE RIDE AWAY FROM CHINA – for no reason. He knows that there is a limited future for this insane, incompetent, incorrigible, and unelected OBOLA-BIDUNG regime, that he helped force upon ALL OF US.
SPIT!!!
The Business At Hand
This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).
And indeed, it’s Monday…again.
But we WILL get through it, TOGETHER.
The Rules
Boilerplate, more or less, but worth reading again and again, if only for the minor changes, and to stay out of moderation.
The bottom line is Free Speech. Theories and ideas you don’t agree with must be WELCOME here, and you must be part of that welcoming. But you do NOT need to be part of any agreement.
FOR EXAMPLE:
WE, the LINTARDS, the FLYNNTARDS, and the WeAin’tNeverGonnaWinTards are all welcome here, as long as we’re NICE ABOUT IT. The mutually odious viewpoints of disagreeing patriots are ALL welcome – those views just have to be expressed nicely, without accusing each other of being this, that, or the other.
Disagree with the material, not the character of the presenter.
Remember – Everybody is somebody else’s Ace Ventura.
As an alternative to character assassination, allow THE HOUSE to suggest better and more compelling material than the other person.
We must endeavor to persevere to love our frenemies – even here.
Those who cannot deal with this easy requirement will be forced to jump the hoops of moderation, so that specific comments impugning other posters and violating the minimal rules can be sorted out and tossed in the trash.
In Wheatie’s words, “We’re on the same side here so let’s not engage in friendly fire.”
We do have a site – The U Tree – where civility is not a requirement. Interestingly, people don’t really go there much. Nevertheless, if you find yourself in an “argument” that can’t really stay civil, please feel free to “take it to the U Tree”. The U Tree is also a good place to report any technical difficulties, if you’re unable to report them here. Please post your comment there on one of Wolf’s posts, or in reply to one of Wolf’s comments, to make sure he sees it (though it may take a few hours).
We also have a backup site, called The Q Tree as well, which is really The Q Tree 579486807. You might call it “Second Tree”. The URL for that site is https://theqtree579486807.wordpress.com/. If this site (theqtree.com) ever goes down, please reassemble at the Second Tree.
If the Second Tree goes down, please go to The U Tree, or to our Gab Group, which is located at https://gab.com/groups/4178.
We also have some “old rules” and important guidelines, outlined here, in a very early post, on our first New Year’s Day, in 2019. The main point is not to make violent threats against people, which then have to be taken seriously by law enforcement, and which can be used as a PRETEXT by enemies of this site.
In the words of Wheatie, “Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.”
A Moment of Prayer
Our policy on extreme religious freedom on this site is discussed HERE. Please feel free to pray and praise God anytime and anywhere.
Thus, please pray for our real President, the one who actually won the election.
You may also pray for our enemies, the Crazy Mask-Wearing Democrats. Note that Benadryl and some of the other antihistamines that can save their lives from COVID cooties, also act as antipsychotics.
We’ll get to more about THAT in a moment.
MUSICAL INTERLUDE
For your listening enjoyment, and general encouragement, we continue Wheatie’s tradition of fine music videos, shipped fresh from the seas of information by our intrepid authors.
Today’s gonna be a real grab-bag. Don’t click on what you may not like.
THE SCROLLBAR OR MOUSE WHEEL COULD BE YOUR FRIEND.
This one is a bit too “heavy metal” for many of us, but it brings to my mind some of the questions of TRANSHUMANISM.
Food for thought.
OK – maybe we should balance that out with a little country, like last week? Maybe a bit “old pop country” – whatever! Enjoy this flash-in-the-pan country duo act, who look far too much like something from the Monica Lewinsky era.
Well, we can’t have Country without “Western”!
So how about something very familiar, but maybe you never really thought about how WEIRD it is that it actually IS familiar………?
OK – this is really straying pretty far afield from WHEATIE MUSIC.
So how about a little more of THAT? In fact, how about 90 minutes of it?
Alright! THAT was sufficient preparation for MORE WEIRDNESS.
I used to love this song. Kinda glad the styles changed since then, however.
So how about some Vitamin B – as in BOLLYWOOD?
This stuff is surprisingly listenable.
https://youtu.be/9XJkQ2tnbO8
You know what? Let’s COOL IT ON DOWN with some CHURCH ORGAN, CITY STYLE……
And finally, let us CLOSE with an OPENING HYMN!
There you go. Around the world in 8 music videos.
Call To Battle
Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.
Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.
CAN AH GIT AN EYE-ROLL???
We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.
Joe Biden didn’t win.
And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.
Featured Story – Benadryl Could Have Saved Grandma / The Gatesification of Science
The Pub is OPEN again! With a blend of humor and seriousness, like any good bar, we celebrate this grand re-opening of WOLF’S PUB on Christmas Eve, December 24, 2021, by actually opening near closing time on Christmas Eve Eve, but what the heck. IT’S ALMOST CHRISTMAS. While our beloved bartender takes a needed break …
ARE YOU SEEING IT YET?
We will keep working on it until you do.
Today’s message is how BENADRYL provides ONE MORE EXAMPLE of a drug that showed a strong signal of benefit AND acceptable safety AND – shockingly – was very likely in the medicine cabinets of hundreds of thousands of people who died of COVID-19 NEEDLESSLY – simply because American medicine has been taken over at the top by the pharmaceutical industry and their financial backers.
They had to show us.
And they did.
If you are not familiar with my…..
finding of
explanation of
personal use of
support for
and
promotion of
…..the use of ANTIHISTAMINES as a simple, reliable, proven, and readily available “cure”, if you will, for “death by COVID”, then let me give you a quick list of my previous commentary and REFERENCES to this wonderful FACT.
Everybody underestimates Spain. The last letter in “PIGS” is far less of an insult than an error. Years ago, when I was at a conference, and Japanese industrial spies were getting me drunk (it was a great red wine), I decided that I had to give them SOMETHING for their time and effort, if only …
I. The Clot Shot First things first. Nobody would be calling ALL of the various full-length stabilized SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit spike protein vaccines “the clot shot” if there weren’t some clear and obvious problems with the full-length stabilized SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit spike protein ITSELF. We already know that clotting dysfunction is key to COVID-19 pathogenicity. …
OK, people. It is time for THE WOLF to GET PATTON ON YOUR ASSES. As you may know, we now have many of our dear members actively fighting COVID-19, including one (gil00) in the hospital. Several have received Regeneron. Thus far, praise God, we have not lost anybody – and I intend to keep it …
After a lost week of human self-experimentation to survive multiply mutated Fauci-Baric China Virus, Wolf has obtained answers to a thousand questions. Here are just a few of those answers. Over the last week, overcoming my SECOND case of the China virus, I have been able to learn quite a bit about the enemy’s weaponry …
This is a quick update that is almost entirely GOOD NEWS, and that needs to SPREAD AROUND LIKE WILDFIRE – just like OMICRON. I will try to be brief and only comment as needed. 1 – A Case of Omicron Treated With HCQ Remember that case of COVID treated with ivermectin, that was published as …
The Pub is OPEN! Of course we’re open on New Year’s Eve, for goodness sake! However, the crooked and despicable Clot Shot Casino is now CLOSED (more details later), for outrageous offenses like THIS. Colorado casino customers prosecuted for playing abandoned slot credits Prepare to be outraged, even though this story is from over 5 …
If you follow through these SIX posts, you will see the progression of my thinking.
recognition of cheap, common antihistamine therapy as lifesaving at nearly 100% levels
dawning of realization that NIH, CDC, and big pharma were not truly looking out for patients
realization that individuals needed to be ready to save themselves and their friends, family, neighbors and loved ones with various therapeutics
what I learned by treating my own confirmed case of delta with selected therapeutics
confirmation of the generality and stage 2 mechanism of H1 antihistamine therapy
how antihistamine therapy was hidden by the media as compared to HCQ and ivermectin, on behalf of the larger plot to control humanity
Indeed, I now see the suppression of knowledge of the most readily available, inexpensive, extremely safe COVID therapeutics, as one of the greatest, saddest, and most horrifying instances of GASLIGHTING in history – not merely the history of science.
Humans on this planet were HYPNOTIZED into NOT USING the two most obvious drugs in their medicine cabinets – aspirin and antihistamines – which could have saved them from a new and sometimes deadly “cold”.
Ironic, isn’t it? The media tried to talk us us out of aspirin just before it would have saved millions of people from both the “clot disease” and even the “clot shot”.
Funny, that. But it gets worse.
My doctors and their nurses distinctly and repeatedly tried to steer me to acetaminophen (Tylenol) for COVID, despite the fact that there was, at that time, ESTABLISHED, PUBLISHED, SOLID, PEER-REVIEWED LITERATURE showing that low-dose aspirin reduces hospitalization and death from COVID-19 by around half. And the reason is obvious to anybody with a wisp of scientific understanding – even at high-school levels. Aspirin is a blood thinner and anticoagulant, and the bad effects of the disease (and the shots) are thrombotic. Simple.
If there was ever a time to take aspirin, it was for COVID. The suppressed FLCCC.net treatment recommends it. Why not the AMA?
Can’t they read the damn signal?
Can’t they understand relative risk and benefit?
Like I said, VACCINE HYPNOSIS.
Peter McCullough talks about this phenomenon of vaccine hypnosis in the scientific and medical communities, in his great interview with Joe Rogan, above. I think he uses a different term for it, but we’re talking about the same thing.
The hypnotic blindness toward active use of therapeutics was bad for HCQ and ivermectin, but it was even worse for antihistamines, because the deception got past even the most active members of the “therapeutic” community – MYSELF INCLUDED.
I was a HUGE backer of [HCQ + disease-conferred immunity] as the best therapeutic path forward, from the very beginning. I later began appreciating ivermectin, too, as the data rolled in.
Enjoy one of my memes inspired by Cari Kelemen on Twitter, with her great quote at the bottom.
The problem is, at the deepest part of the conspiracy, we were GASLIT into focusing on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, and not gaining social momentum toward more readily available drugs (aspirin and common antihistamines) that could have REALLY changed the game – but which would have VERY RAPIDLY moved the global outcome away from the pointless, problematic, Gates-controlled vaccines.
Once you understand that we were CHUMPS who were CONNED away from antihistamines, you understand how smart these people REALLY are.
They’re tricky – SO tricky.
Hydroxychloroquine, and then ivermectin, WERE part of the gaslighting. We loved them, and still do, but don’t kid yourself. They are GOOD, SAFE, EFFECTIVE drugs. But BOTH are prescription drugs. They require doctors, and this brilliant chess move distracted the few honest doctors, looking for therapeutics, by a hidden, unconscious, alignment with “what they could do to help”.
THE PERFECT BAIT – for the “please help” scam.
It’s like putting a firehose in front of a fireman when there is a fire, and seconds to stop it. The fireman may not know that down under all that burning wood is a fire that would go out faster and better with something other than water, but they do the right thing, and go for the first and most obvious solution that appears, consistent with their own abilities.
We don’t like to think that we were suckered by a SECOND LAYER OF THE SCAM, but we were.
I was actually suckered by such a scam, years ago, in assisting the deceitful implementation of the current highly broken version of affirmative action in universities. It’s an interesting story, but I’ll save it for another time.
The point is, the best way to CON people is to GET THEM TO BUY IN ENTHUSIASTICALLY.
People usually don’t catch these masterful crimes until the crooks are long gone and got what they wanted. It’s infuriating, but the multi-layer “please help” scam is effective as – well – HELL.
Hollywood, of course, is quite familiar with such “plots”.
BUT ANYWAY…..
Let’s get down to business.
Up until now, the two, large-scale, clinically proven sets of antihistamines for COVID-19 have been the newest (cetirizine, loratadine, and fexofenadine) and one of the oldest (promethazine), but not one of the most obvious possibilities – diphenhydramine, otherwise known as Benadryl.
Well, it turns out that Benadryl has been showing ENORMOUS promise in the laboratory.
Now this particular researcher has been looking at a synergistic combination of diphenhydramine (Benadryl) with human lactoferrin, which achieves STUNNING results, in terms of ANTIVIRAL activity, albeit in vitro.
To quote the article:
The scientist who combined two widely available over-the-counter compounds that inhibited the novel coronavirus by 99% in early tests told WND he’s hopeful his treatment will be available “within months.”
“An FDA-approved treatment could be in sight within months if pharmaceutical companies utilize existing clinical trial resources,” said Dr. David Ostrov in an email interview with WND.
Let’s just quote that again for effect:
“An FDA-approved treatment could be in sight within months if pharmaceutical companies utilize existing clinical trial resources,” said Dr. David Ostrov in an email interview with WND.
To which the only proper response is…..
But wait – there’s moar!
Sadly, I’m sorry, but anybody who is still embedded in Fake Science and Fake Medicine needs to understand what I figured out while I was in the belly of the beast.
The people at the top, in Washington, DC, are no longer there to help the people.
They are there to help themselves.
Solutions are controlled by RETURN ON INVESTMENT – not by saved lives – THAT is secondary.
Which is too bad, because antihistamines are a solid cure against DEATH, per the Spanish study, and have a robust mechanism in both Stage 1 AND Stage 2 of COVID, with Ostrov’s work proving actual Stage 1 antiviral activity.
Please read the following comments by the scientist, Dr. David Ostrov, behind the study.
The story started before SARS, when my lab was studying drugs that bind ACE2, the molecule that turned out to be the receptor for SARS and SARS-CoV-2.
We previously found that an antihistamine (hydroxyzine) bound ACE2, and in 2020 were able to test the ability of this drug to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in the lab. It was an “aha” moment when the data clearly showed that a common antihistamine inhibited the virus that causes COVID. Different scientists at the University of Florida College of Medicine used different isolates of SARS-CoV-2, and the results agreed with each other. An antihistamine can inhibit the virus!
We then realized that there may be similar drugs that could inhibit the virus, perhaps even over-the-counter drugs. But which drugs?
We collaborated with investigators and UCSF where they examined the medical records for more than 219,000 people tested for SARS-CoV-2. They found that usage of diphenhydramine was associated with a lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2. In other words, in this population, people were less likely to be infected with COVID if they used diphenhydramine.
Why would taking an allergy pill lead to lower risk of COVID? There could be many reasons, but is it possible that a simple allergy pill can directly inhibit the virus that causes COVID?
We did the experiments at the University of Florida College of Medicine, and the data was published in a peer reviewed journal. Diphenhydramine exhibits direct antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Diphenhydramine inhibits virus replication, inhibits virus shedding and inhibits host cell killing.
This is all wonderful news, but it NEVER penetrated the “vaccine hypnosis”, and here is why. Again, a quote from the investigator, Dr. Ostrov.
My prediction is that antiviral drug combinations, such as diphenhydramine and lactoferrin, will provide a similar level of benefit as Regeneron monoclonal antibodies, Pfizer and Merck antivirals, at less than 1/100 the cost of those therapies.
There you go. Right there. “Less than one one-hundredth the cost” is NOT what these companies, bureaucrats, and politicians want to hear. They may nod and say “wonderful”, but if it does not cause as much “other people’s money” to move as the vaccines, then nobody will champion it.
However, that does NOT mean that WE THE LAB RATS can’t use the knowledge to save ourselves.
Ostrov is not stupid, and he gives up some crucial data while preserving his scientific credibility.
AND I QUOTE:
Ostrov told WND he’s been in communication with people who wonder if their use of the compounds has helped prevent them from getting COVID-19.
He noted that “anecdotal stories are certainly not proof of efficacy,” but many people have contacted him about diphenhydramine and lactoferrin, and their results “are difficult to ignore.”
“For many people, they say everyone around them got COVID, but not them,” Ostrov said.
And they ask the professor if diphenhydramine and/or lactoferrin.
“Without placebo controlled clinical trials, we will not have a definitive answer,” he said. “The answer for now, though, is maybe.”
Ostrov mentioned a contact who takes a daily dose of Benadryl and regularly drinks milk. She said she had been in close contact for hours with someone who was hospitalized the next day for COVID-19. But after waiting five days from the time of exposure, she tested negative for COVID.
He cautioned that people “considering their own concoction should understand that our experiments were carried out with human lactoferrin, not cow.” And the lactoferrin he used was purified in a special way to enhance its antiviral properties and is not likely to be found on the shelf.
People should consult with their physician, Ostrov said, before taking any drug for a use other than its intended use.
“Even though historically there are relatively few adverse events reported for diphenhydramine and lactoferrin, it should be noted that long term use of any medication, or combination of medications, could have unexpected consequences,” he said.
Ostrov said he hopes that once FDA-approved, “people may benefit from this antiviral drug combination for two-to-three month intervals during each wave of COVID infections.”
Notice that while Ostrov VERY HELPFULLY admits there is some real life usage of the drugs going on, and some success, he also downplays the admission to a politically correct level, using excuses that are completely mitigating against accusations of “recommendation”. The man is not stupid. He’s getting the word out, while staying in the lanes that Fake Science demands he stay in.
BUT – and this should be very clear – it’s obvious that people CAN and WILL make use of this cure – particularly the Benadryl. Thus, Ostrov makes a nicely balanced warning about long-term use of Benadryl, which is known to be potentially problematic, but also probably not an issue for most people who are treating or occasionally/periodically preventing COVID-19.
And, of course, there are many other antihistamines which are KNOWN TO BE SAFE for long-term usage, which are (IMO, based on the Spanish work) acceptable substitutes for Benadryl.
Let me add some other links on Benadryl that people may find useful.
One of the things to notice here is that this article was published over a year ago (December 2020), describing work that occurred over years before that, but that then ramped up under COVID during 2020.
In that ENTIRE TIME, at the same time Ostrov was doing foundational research, the clinical efficacy of THREE antihistamines was discovered, tested, demonstrated in a group of people, and published (March to September 2020) by the nursing home doctors in Spain. AND, during that time Dr. Chetty in South Africa demonstrated the clinical utility of promethazine in thousands of patients.
In a sane world, as soon as the Spanish results were RECEIVED for publication (September 2020), there should have been immediate emergency pre-publication for the benefit of clinicians. Instead, the paper was basically held until January 2021, when the vaccines were safely in production.
The SYSTEM is not designed to save lives in anything near an optimal fashion. It is designed to make money as a primary motivation, and – perhaps – THE primary motivation.
So why has Ostrov’s work apparently advanced no further toward treating people IN PRACTICE?
Because NOBODY in government or industry wants it. And they have OUR MONEY invested elsewhere.
Of course, that doesn’t mean there isn’t GREAT research going on. Just look at this confirmation of Dr. Chetty’s contention that antihistamines are useful in the treatment of “long COVID”.
“Well, I wouldn’t be so sure they do it alone, dude.”
Here is a guy – a recoveree – whose blood was found to be very lethal against SARS-CoV-2 – far more than most people’s blood.
Interestingly, the guy is something of a Benadryl addict due to allergies, and he took it during COVID.
Whether he took Benadryl prior to sample collection in July 2020 is unknown, but Benadryl is metabolized in the liver, otherwise by excretion to a lesser extent, so it’s possible that serum Benadryl could have enhanced the ability of any antibodies, by blocking ACE2 receptors while antibodies then bound to viral spike protein – a rather nifty tag-team effect.
You will see that this story is filled with coincidences – for example, the writer is the director of communications at the university that was running the study, and already knew the head of the study. He then volunteered to be tested, directly to that person, while doing a story.
And you know what I think of “their” journalists. LOW-GRADE SPIES AND PROVOCATEURS.
I don’t want to speak for Sadie, but if she throws a “Suspicious Cat at this story, I’m ready to throw FOUR of them.
AND I QUOTE:
I didn’t know it at the time, but my unlikely story had begun after becoming heavily congested to start the last week of March 2020. I had NO other symptoms whatsoever besides repeatedly having to blow my nose. Pollen was everywhere that time of year as per usual, so I just naturally attributed my sudden nasal issues to that. I loaded up on Benadryl and was feeling 100 percent again by week’s end four days later. There was never as much as a single thought that I had contracted COVID-19.
John Hollis
So the writer had COVID during the last week of March 2020, loaded up on Benadryl, finished out a very typical “good” case in 4 days, and very likely continued taking Benadryl, at least on occasion, for allergies.
AND I QUOTE AGAIN:
The George Mason antibody study, which began in April, was unique in that it was a saliva-based test rather a blood-based one and would eventually be used to screen students, faculty and staff. Mason was among the nation’s first universities to take this approach in the fight against the spread of the virus and maintains one of the only 13 National Institutes of Health-sponsored Biosafety Level 3 Biomedical Research Laboratories equipped to handle live COVID-19 samples from which Dr. Liotta and his team could quickly test.
Now jump to mid-July 2020.
As George Mason University’s Communications Manager, I had received word in mid-July that the scientists had come across some positive initial results.
I soon met with Dr. Liotta at his office on George Mason’s Science and Technology Campus in Manassas, Virginia to discuss their findings. I’ve known him for a few years now after having previously worked with him on other projects, so we’ve had a good relationship for a while. I was about to leave his office when I casually mentioned to Dr. Liotta that the guy I lived with had become terribly sick with the virus in early April. I had been so certain at that time that a similar fate or worse also awaited me that I even penned a letter to my teenage son just in case. I considered myself incredibly lucky to have gone unscathed.
This is when he volunteered for the test.
Or so I believed at the time.
So I figured there was no harm in asking if I could join the several hundred volunteers who had already participated in the study. Dr. Liotta agreed and I returned a few days later to give blood and saliva samples as a late addition to the research. The whole process took maybe 30 minutes.
This is how the story wraps up.
I was still of the belief that I had somehow dodged the bullet back in April and never even considered that I might have already contracted the virus, let alone that it may have been I who passed it on to my housemate. I had no reason to anticipate anything whatsoever coming of my lab results.
But after further careful analysis of my blood, Dr. Liotta and his team soon confirmed that I had contracted an American strain of the virus while also explaining to me exactly how and where the “super” antibodies had attacked and entirely eradicated the virus from my body. My blood has since proven equally as effective in killing every different strain of COVID-19, including the latest highly transmissible variants from both the U.K. and South Africa. I can’t even be a carrier for the virus.
I’ve been told this is somewhat akin to the medical equivalent of finding the Holy Grail.
I was one of eight people who participated in the study found to have “super” antibodies, with each person showing varying levels of natural protection from the virus. In addition to its ability to so effectively neutralize COVID-19, my blood is unique because the “super” antibodies in it have remained highly concentrated nearly a year after my infection. Most people’s antibodies typically wane significantly after 60 to 90 days.
How and why my body does this remains the million dollar question, but it means that I and others like me are best-suited to possibly help scientists mass reproduce antibodies like mine in the hopes of creating a treatment for COVID-19 and a lasting and far more effective vaccine.
It’s been sobering to think that my blood and that of others like me could potentially save thousands of lives or perhaps more.
So then imagine the irony of my having been randomly selected seven times for COVID testing between late September 2020 and March 2021. Each of the occasions—all with negative results—were part of George Mason University’s comprehensive Safe Return to Campus plan. It’s made for some good laughs and I’ve never once minded the very slight inconvenience. It’s like taking a test when you’ve been given all the answers in advance.
I’ve been very fortunate and feel blessed beyond measure.
Notice the TWOKICKERS which are to me indicative of a non-protein, small-molecule therapeutic in his plasma, with a longer half-life than more denaturable and strain-specific antibodies.
My blood has since proven equally as effective in killing every different strain of COVID-19, including the latest highly transmissible variants from both the U.K. and South Africa. I can’t even be a carrier for the virus.
I was one of eight people who participated in the study found to have “super” antibodies, with each person showing varying levels of natural protection from the virus. In addition to its ability to so effectively neutralize COVID-19, my blood is unique because the “super” antibodies in it have remained highly concentrated nearly a year after my infection. Most people’s antibodies typically wane significantly after 60 to 90 days.
SO – honestly – I think it would be very interesting to discover exactly how much Benadryl was in his blood samples when he took tests, and which may still be in those samples.
Why, this story could get even more interesting.
Are they toying with us?
I don’t know. Toying is a way of testing, is it not?
I can certainly think of the propaganda value of converting the strength of the “enemy position” – the “evolutionary solution” (therapeutics like Benadryl) into a story about antibodies (the “revolutionary solution”) – which supports both new vaccines and new, expensive, antibody therapies.
(See my prior discussion of Faucism as modern Lysenkoism for that to make sense.)
Anybody seeing how that works? It’s very Marxist, actually.
Is there some Gramsci in Fauci? Maybe nearby? Interesting times.
BACK TO ETHICAL QUESTIONS
The ever-vulgar, ever-right Karl Denninger CLUED ME IN, by virtue of a rather ranty rant, to a post by one of the best voices in the world of SCIENCE and REASON – a guy named The Ethical Skeptic.
TES, as he is known, is framing the “go home and take Tylenol and die or don’t die from COVID” therapy that most of us got, as a kind of INVOLUNTARY CONTROL EXPERIMENT – including DENIAL OF TREATMENT – without our informed consent.
I think his approach is VERY powerful.
AND I QUOTE:
In other words, I was allowed to choose whether I would be a member of the ‘no treatment allowed’ control group or alternately one of the vaccine test groups; however, through denying me timely treatment, I was not offered the ethical choice of not participating in the experiment altogether.
Neither was I informed as to the nature of this experiment, nor was I made aware that other treatments or therapies were at my avail, should I decline participation. I was fraudulently coerced by a medical professional (and by advising health officials) into the belief that I had no choice, I had to participate. My life was endangered and I was exposed to unnecessary amounts of suffering and expense as a result of this coerced experiment. I was not offered the remedies or recourse to address the situation in the instance where the experiment failed (it did fail) or failed to ensure my safety, nor was I given the opportunity to bring the experiment to an end.
What this really shows us is how BADLY medicine has been overrun by both corporate and government interests, which are now allied against medical freedom, and even against truth itself in science and medicine.
Back to McCullough.
SIGNALS OF BENEFIT and ACCEPTABLE SAFETY.
Not what we’re seeing with the limited choices being offered by establishment medicine and government, and which are clearly being LIED about by the narrative enforcers of social media.
The fact that Anthony Fauci and Gilead Pharmaceuticals would promote a drug (remdesivir) that had – AT BEST – no better signals of benefit than hydroxychloroquine – BUT that had FAR WORSE SAFETY – and that also had – admittedly – a higher profit margin……
Well, that pretty much tells you all you need to know about “ethics” in “Deep Science”.
And remember – Anthony Fauci’s WIFE is some kind of “ethics czarina” at NIH. A VERY interesting family, including a daughter at Twitter.
I have been a poor and rotten servant of the Lord during my too long and too miserable life. I have made innocent women cry. I have led others astray. I have turned away from those in need in their time of need, and I have lied to myself and to God about why I …
There will be justice for Veronica Wolski, because we will DEMAND IT. And until there IS justice, we will drag the CRIMES of Anthony Fauci and Gilead “Pharmaceuticals” and their SLEAZY ASSOCIATES thorough the headlines, over and over, until people SPIT IN THEIR PATH as they walk down the streets. So where do we begin? …
Well, they can lock us out of The Q Tree, but they can’t stop the truth from getting out. Enjoy a post first over on The U Tree and now HERE. Here is a quickie in my WAR ON REMDESIVIR. Fellow Treeper barkerjim dropped an interesting document today, from back in July, which showed the …
My dear wife is the one who found this, so let me start off by thanking her. After working outside Tuesday night, I came in the front door, and my wife IMMEDIATELY told me to start watching what was on OAN. It was an anonymous Rumble video about ivermectin and remdesivir that OAN re-bannered and …
The point is simple.
Benadryl is EVEN SAFER than hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, by many standards, seeing that it is considered safe for OTC, and those other drugs are not.
Benadryl meets the McCullough Criteria – Signals of Benefit and Acceptable Safety.
And Benadryl is already out there – ready to help people get through COVID.
We also have other, more modern antihistamines – PROVEN to save lives from COVID-19, in the Spanish study.
In my opinion, antihistamine therapy is the baseline outpatient therapy that should have been mass-introduced globally, to practically eliminate death from COVID.
But DEEP SCIENCE had other ideas.
Just as I believe there was a conspiracy of interest against hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, I believe there was an even deeper conspiracy against the more readily available antihistamines.
And I believe that unless people answer for these crimes, there will be more like them in the future.
Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Day:
eleutherophobia
noun
fear of freedom
From Ancient Greek ἐλευθερία (eleuthería, “freedom”) + -phobia.
el-ūth-er-o-fō′bi-a, el-ūth-er-o-mā′ni-a, etc.
Used in a sentence:
The eleutherophobia of many rank-and-file Democrats is a useful tool of the miseleutheric Democrat / Communist leadership. The eleutherophilia if not eleutheromania of the true patriot is rarely found among Democrats these days, thanks to socialist infiltration and control of the party.
Used in a video:
This guy is a bit of a trip – not exactly our style of patriot, but he belongs to an interesting bunch.
They could use a bit more Biblical wisdom, IMO, and perhaps a bit less “woo”, but at least they’re not eleutherophobes.
