Zika Spraying Enriches Chemical Companies While Endangering Public Health

Image result for zika pesticide dangers
Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mecola
September 14, 2016

As you may recall, the Zika virus made big headlines back in January and February when the Brazilian government blamed Zika-carrying mosquitoes for an uptick in reports of microcephaly,1,2 a condition in which babies are born with unusually small heads.

Like many other nations, the U.S. overreacted to the news by increasing states’ mosquito eradication efforts. 3 Some early models estimated that 200 million Americans, about 60 percent of the U.S. population, would become infected with Zika this summer4 — estimates that were clearly vastly overblown.

Sounds just like President Bush who 11 years ago claimed that over 200 million would not only get infected with Bird Flu but would actually die from it. They must have figured most people forgot about this and it was time for another scare to sell more chemicals and vaccines.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) statistics5 reveal we’ve come nowhere near such numbers.

The two states with the highest rates of laboratory-confirmed Zika infections, New York and Florida, have had 625 and 507 cases respectively so far. New York accounts for 23 percent of all U.S. cases; Florida accounts for 19 percent of the total.

It’s worth noting though that the vast majority of all Zika cases in the U.S. occurred during travel elsewhere. Florida alone had 35 cases of locally acquired infections. All other states report zero locally-acquired cases.

Among the U.S. territories, Puerto Rico was worst beset, with 13,791 locally-acquired cases as of August 31, 2016. The U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa report 221 and 47 locally-acquired cases respectively.

Call for DDT Has (Fortunately) Been Left Unanswered

As the Zika scare grew to a fever pitch, groups like the Manhattan Institute and various journalists for prominent media outlets started calling for the return of DDT6 to address the mosquito problem. For example, in a June 6 article, The New York Post wrote:7

“The Zika virus outbreak makes it clearer than ever: It’s time to end the ban on DDT — a ban that was never sensible in the first place, but now is downright unjustifiable.”

Never mind the fact that DDT passes freely through the placenta during pregnancy,8 where it gains direct access to the developing fetus and its brain.9 DDT has also been linked to decreased fertility, premature delivery, Alzheimer’s10 and even microcephaly,11 making this recommendation about as ignorant as it gets.12

Fortunately, the ban on DDT has not been lifted. However, there’s no shortage of other dangerous insecticides on the market, and they’ve been heavily employed in many states.

Florida and New York Being Heavily Sprayed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPHmzZMIINs

In Miami-Dade County, Florida, the aerial spraying campaign against Zika-carrying mosquitoes has been referred to as a “blitz” that “could be one for the record books if the [CDC] records it as a success.”13 The area began spraying the insecticide Naled from low-flying planes on August 4.

Naled is banned in the European Union (EU), and when residents in Puerto Rico found out the CDC was going to use the chemical against Zika-carrying mosquitoes there, the streets filled with protesters. Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla finally forced the CDC to take the shipments back.14

Concerned residents took to the streets in Wynwood, Miami, as well, but it didn’t have much of an impact.

Neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn, New York, were doused with Duet15 and Anvil insecticides from trucks on the nights of August 31 and September 1, 2016, to combat mosquitoes known to carry either the Zika or West Nile virus (Asian Tiger, Aedes Aegypti and Culex mosquitoes).16,17 Duet has also been used in Orange County, California.18

Duet19 contains two pyrethroid pesticides, Sumithrin and Prallethrin, plus a synergistic compound called piperonyl butoxide (PBO), which boosts the effectiveness of the former two.

Sumethrin is an endocrine disruptor, neurotoxin and likely carcinogen, and PBO has been shown to be harmful to the fetal brain, causing “profound developmental defects in children exposed in utero.”

According to recent research, children living in areas exposed to annual aerial spraying of pyrethroids (such as Duet and Anvil) have a 25 percent higher risk of autism compared to areas where mosquito control is done primarily through pellets distributed on the ground.

This suggests the method of application can make a big difference when it comes to human health.20,21 In another study, exposure to pyrethroids during the third trimester increased the chances of the child having autism by 87 percent.22

Low-flying helicopters also released pellets of Altosid and VectoBac over four New York City boroughs earlier this summer, including Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and The Bronx. As noted by The Vaccine Reaction:23

“What might be of particular concern to the New York City’s residents is the ironic possibility that using these chemicals against mosquitoes to control the perceived threat of the Zika virus could actually have the effect of creating a serious local health crisis where there was previously none.

While the CDC seems convinced that Zika is behind the microcephaly cases in Brazil … other organizations such as Médicos de Pueblos Fumigados (Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages) of Argentina … has argued that an insect growth regulator similar to Altosid may be responsible for the microcephaly cases.”

Aerial Spraying Is Not an Effective Strategy for Controlling Zika

Many have also argued that aerial sprayings against the Zika-carrying mosquito Aedes aegypti is futile, exposing the population to toxic chemicals for no good reason.24

These tiny black and white striped mosquitoes have a very limited range of flight, and since it’s so difficult to catch them airborne, insecticidal sprays and foggers are mostly useless for controlling them.25 Reporting on recent research, WebMD writes:26

“Female mosquitoes can transmit the Zika virus to their eggs and offspring, and this may make it harder to contain outbreaks, a new lab study suggests. Control programs that focus only on adult mosquitoes may not halt Zika’s spread, the researchers warned …

‘Spraying affects adults, but it does not usually kill the immature forms — the eggs and larvae,’ said [study co-author Dr. Robert] Tesh. As a result, ‘spraying will reduce transmission, but it may not eliminate the virus’ …”

CDC Relies on Unpublished Data to Support Aerial Spraying

Curiously, CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden defended the use of aerial insecticide sprayings in a recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) citing a non-peer-reviewed presentation by a New Orleans mosquito control board employee named Brendan Carter.

According to Carter, aerial disbursement of “ultra-low volumes of insecticide” reduced caged Aedes aegypti by more than 90 percent in a New Orleans field trial. However, as reported by Kaiser Health News:27

“Carter earned his master’s degree in 2014 from the Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine … Even so, other experts in mosquito-borne diseases were unconvinced when asked about Carter’s finding as described in Frieden’s commentary for JAMA.

‘I know of no published reports that support this figure,’ said Durland Fish, [Ph.D.] a Yale University professor emeritus of microbial diseases as well as a professor of forestry and environmental studies there.

Fish worked with public officials in Dominica in 2014 to counter chikungunya virus, another disease spread by the Aedes aegypti mosquito. ‘This is a domestic mosquito, meaning they live inside the house — in closets, under the bed, in the sink. Spraying outside won’t be very effective,’ he said.”

Micro-Mist May Work by Entering Your Home, but Is That Wise?

Many others agree with Fish’s conclusion, noting there’s virtually no scientific evidence to support the use of aerial spraying to control Aedes mosquitoes. However, Joseph Conlon, spokesman for the American Mosquito Control Association, is not on that list.

According to Conlon, the idea that aerial spraying against Aedes mosquitoes doesn’t work is an outdated notion, since Naled can now be sprayed in a micro-fine mist, “capable of wafting into homes through screen doors and bathroom vents.”28 But what about the residents, including infants and pregnant women, inside those homes who then breathe in this super-fine mist?

Naled, an organophospate insecticide is known to interfere with cholinesterase activity, an enzyme essential for the proper working of your nervous system. Organophosphates as a group are also linked with shortened pregnancies, lowered IQ and increased risk of attention deficit disorder (ADD).29

According to the Extension Toxicology Network, “Naled is moderately to highly toxic by ingestion, inhalation and dermal adsorption. Vapors or fumes of Naled are corrosive to the mucous membranes lining the mouth, throat and lungs, and inhalation may cause severe irritation.”30

It is also readily absorbed through your skin and should be immediately washed off if contact occurs. High temperatures and/or UV light enhances its toxicity — an added concern when sprayed in hot and sunny areas like Florida.

I live in Florida full-time now and this is a significant issue for me personally. This is one of the reasons why I use my infrared sauna three times a week to help me detox not only from these admitted exposures but also from all the other ones that we have no idea of but nevertheless have exposure to.

Naled Decimates Bee Populations in South Carolina

Naled was also sprayed in Dorchester County, South Carolina, in the morning hours between 6:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. on August 28, 2016 — with devastating consequences. In one Summerville apiary, 46 hives totaling 2.5 million bees died that same morning. Many other beekeepers also claim massive losses. As reported by The Washington Post:31

“[T]o the bee farmers, the reason is already clear. Their bees had been poisoned by Dorchester’s own insecticide efforts, casualties in the war on disease-carrying mosquitoes … Given the current concerns of West Nile virus and Zika … Dorchester decided to try something different … It marked a departure from Dorchester County’s usual ground-based efforts. For the first time, an airplane dispensed Naled in a fine mist, raining insect death from above …”

Naled is known to be highly toxic to bees, which is why counties that use it will typically spray it at night, when honey bees are not out foraging. Provided they have sufficient warning, beekeepers can also shield their hives to prevent exposure. According to Dorchester County administrator Jason Ward, all but one beekeeper on the county’s contact list was notified of the spraying.

However, many local beekeepers were not on the county’s list to begin with, and the county only requested a more complete list from the Lowcountry Beekeepers Association after the fact. In a WCSC-TV interview, local beekeeper Juanita Stanley said: “Had I known, I would have been camping on the steps doing whatever I had to do, screaming, ‘No you can’t do this.'”

Florida Governor Has Financial Stake in Zika Mosquito Control

Considering the limited risks of Zika and the significant risks of aerial insecticides on critical pollinators like bees and human health, one wonders what’s really driving the decision process. When you start to dig, you’ll often find financial incentives. In Florida, people are now wondering whether Governor Rick Scott may have a personal stake in unleashing chemical warfare.

On June 23, 2016, Scott allocated $26.2 million in state emergency funds to combat Zika. As it turns out, an undisclosed conflict of interest could potentially have influenced this generous release of funds. According to Florida Bulldog:32

“… Rick Scott has an undisclosed financial interest in a Zika mosquito control company in which his wife, Florida First Lady Ann Scott, owns a multi-million dollar stake through a private investment firm she co-owns. The company is Mosquito Control Services LLC of Metairie, LA. According to its website,

MCS ‘is a fully-certified team of mosquito control experts — licensed throughout the Gulf Coast, including Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida’ … It is not known whether MCS, whose services include monitoring and aerial spraying, stands to benefit from Florida government funds … MCS did not respond to two requests for comment.”

Is Zika Being Hyped to Save Toxic Insecticides From Being Banned?

In a recent Health Nut News article,33 Erin Elizabeth pieces together a long list of events and players suggesting the real reason for the Zika hype may be related to the fact that the primary chemical weapons against Zika — Naled and Malathion — are both up for re-evaluation at the EPA under a special provision of the Endangered Species Act. If found to harm endangered species, they will be banned — unless there’s sufficient political pressure to keep them on the market, that is.

Moreover, the Clean Water Act stipulates you must have a NPDES permit34 in order to be “allowed” to discharge pollutants into U.S. waters. Insecticides are a significant water pollutant, and mosquito control applications that result in water discharges must have an NPDES permit, which includes limits on the discharges and has certain monitoring and reporting requirements to ensure the chemical does not hurt water quality and human health.

Should Naled and/or Malathion be found harmful to endangered species, operators would not likely be able to get an NPDES permit for the chemicals even if they somehow were not outright banned under the Endangered Species Act.

Interestingly enough, the American Mosquito Control Association has lobbied Congress to pass HR 935, which would exempt mosquito control operations from the NPDES permit requirement altogether, allowing them to discharge whatever chemical without limits, monitoring or reporting requirements.

When Congress remained unreceptive to the idea, HR 935 was suddenly renamed the “Zika Control Act.” Once Congress comes back from recess, they could potentially be forced to vote yes on this disastrous bill if there’s sufficient panic about Zika.

The Senate is also scheduled to vote on whether to set aside another $1.1 BILLION in funding to fight Zika — a virus that so far has not seriously harmed a single person in the U.S., and has not conclusively been proven responsible for the microcephaly cases in Brazil either. In short, this whole thing appears to be little more than a gift to the chemical industry at the expense of public health. As noted by Erin:

“The American Mosquito Control Association and the chemical companies can only benefit from huge hype and fear surrounding Zika. They NEED the populace to fear Zika so that Congress is forced to approve a terrible bill that would pollute/erode the Clean Water Act and eventually allow for Malathion and Naled [to] continue to be used despite data showing their effect on endangered species.”

Some States Now Offer Free Mosquito Repellents

In related news, in addition to boosting mosquito sprayings across entire neighborhoods, some states have decided to hand out free mosquito repellents. Universal Studios, Walt Disney World and SeaWorld in Orlando, Florida, now offer free bug repellents to visitors35 and, in Texas, pregnant women on Medicaid are eligible to receive free DEET mosquito repellent at pharmacies without a prescription.36

However, DEET is by no means harmless. On the contrary, DEET has been shown to harm brain and nervous system function and is so poisonous that even the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says you should wash it off your skin when you return indoors, avoid breathing it in and not spray it directly on your face. Why focus on distributing a highly toxic chemical to pregnant women rather than giving them something that’s actually safe?

Neem-based products, for example, are a viable alternative that can keep mosquitos at bay without risking your and your baby’s health. Citronella oil and geraniol can also be used, and both are safe for the whole family, including infants. Products containing either 20 percent picaridin or 30 percent oil of lemon and eucalyptus have also been shown to outperform DEET in tests.

Picaridin resembles the natural compound piperine, an essential oil in black pepper. Lemon eucalyptus oil and picaridin are not actual repellents; they primarily work by masking the environmental cues that mosquitoes use to locate their target. Side effects of both picaridin and lemon eucalyptus include potential skin or eye irritation, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states picaridin should not be used on children under age 3. Still, they’re both likely FAR safer than DEET!

Biological Warfare Is a Risky Game

Are we doing the right thing by waging war against pests with toxic chemicals? It needs to be understood that there’s a price to pay, both in human and environmental health. We’re poisoning our world, and ourselves, in the name of protecting public health. There’s something inherently wrong with that position. Some are quick to say we have no other options. But this isn’t necessarily true.

In the short term, there are safer options to guard against mosquitos than aerial insecticides and topical DEET. But we also need to take a much wider view. What’s needed is the political and societal will to make necessary changes, and this involves fully embracing ecologically sound, regenerative methods of agriculture. Why? Because when nature is in balance, pests fail to gain the upper hand. They still exist, but they’re kept in check naturally.

It may not be as effective as releasing a potent toxin, but if we keep going the way we’re headed, we’re just going to encounter more of the same problems. Is it really worth putting our children’s health and future at risk? Is it worth decimating pollinators, on which our food supply depends? I believe the answer is no, but at the very least, we need a more open discussion about what we’re doing and what the options are. We also need to implement more farsighted solutions.

Again, this is all based on the likely flawed assumption that what the media, CDC and public health authorities are saying about Zika is true. In my view, this is merely a repeat of the Bird Flu Hoax, which is a New York Times best-selling book I previously wrote. They just fast-forwarded the clock a decade and hoped they could use the fear-based tactics to push their pernicious agenda yet again.

Read More At: Mercola.com

The Benefits Of Open-Minded Skepticism: A Foray Into Virology

believnothingTheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
September 7, 2016

“The best protection against propaganda of any sort is the recognition of it for what it is.  Only hidden and undetected oratory is really insidious.  What reaches the heart without going through the mind is likely to bounce back and put the mind out of business.  Propaganda taken in that way is like a drug you do not know you are swallowing.  The effect is mysterious; you do not even know afterwards why you feel or think the way you do.”
– Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren, How To Read A Book, pg. 194.

News and the truth are not the same thing...”
– Walter Lippman

About two years ago, Ebola propaganda began growing quite considerably.  Predictably, the mainstream media manipulation machine ran rampant with fear of every shade in the spectrum.  Similarly, now the mainstream media is lathering Zika propaganda quite saliently.

In any case, being open-minded, this was cause for concern.  However, being a skeptic, my suspicious meter went into the red zone because information like this is always presented as if the issue at hand is a slam-dunk, concrete, case-closed issue.  Thankfully, experience has taught me rarely is that ever the case.

Being naturally curious, the thought came to me to examine what others might have said regarding this bothersome subject.  This is where independent reporter Jon Rappoport from NoMoreFakeNews.com & JonRappoport.wordpress.com comes in.

Rappoport’s been doing investigative work into the field of health for decades now, and he’s put out quality verifiable information at every turn, which is greatly appreciated in the age of media spin.

Nigh two years ago, he wrote a piece entitled:

Bombshell: Scientists Finds No Reliable Evidence Ebola Virus Ever Isolated From A Human Being

In it, Rappoport presented information shared by Dr. Rasnick, Ph.D., where Rasnik questioned the veracity of the Ebola virus.

Rappoport sunk his teeth into the heart of the matter:

Was the Ebola virus ever purified and isolated from a human?

Here is what Rasnick wrote, after his search of the published literature:

“I have examined in detail the literature on isolation and Ems [EM: electron microscope pictures] of both Ebola and Marburg viruses. I have not found any convincing evidence that Ebola virus (and for that matter Marburg) has been isolated from humans. There is certainly no confirmatory evidence of human isolation.

I searched the CDC’s website and came up dry.

“The CDC claims 7728 Ebola virus cases have been ‘laboratory-confirmed’.

I asked the CDC what constitutes isolation of Ebola virus from human specimens. I also asked for the protocol for isolating Ebola virus. [No reply from the CDC as of this date.]

“Virtually everything that is known and done with these viruses is in animals and cell culture.” [Bold Emphasis Added]

Rasnick continued:

“There is the possibility that Ebola and Marburg viruses represent laboratory artifacts. I’m inclined to think this is the case. What I mean is the viruses are real but may exist at very low levels in wild animals and even humans, well-below pathogenic [disease-causing] levels. These ‘passenger’ viruses may be activated and amplified in laboratory culturing conditions designed for that purpose in order to produce enough viral particles to be characterized.

“Viruses causing real pathology are abundant in the diseased tissues. You can see them using EM on the primary tissue. You do not need to amplify the virus in cell culture. I’m always suspicious when cell culture is the only way a virus is observable by EM.” [Bold Emphasis Added]

Rasnick’s findings are a direct challenge the foundation of the establishment, the basis of what was the whole “Ebola outbreak.” If indeed the Ebola virus has never been isolated from a human being, the so-called epidemic was unproven.

At the outset, that will sound shocking to many.  That is because the media is often viewed as the gatekeepers of reality, and thus, infallible. This is why people rarely ever question the media. In fact, many will often reference the media as their source, rather than doing some of their own investigation.

Soon after reading Rappaport’s interview of Rasnick, things just got even more interesting.

The mainstream media was stating that the sky was falling and the Ebola plague was coming [1].  Heck, even the alternative media was falling all over themselves in many instances.  Not many people were taking investigations further.  This seemed quite bothersome.  This is why Rappoport’s piece stood out.

For starters, it wasn’t lathered in fear.  His investigation followed a pattern of logic.

Secondly, as Rappaport, Dr. Mercola and others have shown, the media’s history regarding pandemic scares that never pan out did not start at Ebola.

Third, every time the word pandemic is thrown in media, it generates fear, which could potentially generate tens of millions in profits for Big Pharma and their vaccinations, which is another motive to keep in mind as to the propaganda.

For me, further investigation was warranted.  This is where an insatiable appetite at getting to the truth came in handy.

Not being one to like being lied too, it was apparent that to further buttress my understanding of the matter, some additional books would have to be read.  The books below[2] are the ones that were chosen to me at the time right after Rappoport’s article became known to me.

OMS.jpg
Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Accident Or Intentional?  By Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
The Great Bird Flu Hoax by Dr. Mercola
Aids Inc. by Jon Rappoport
AIDS & The Doctors Of Death: An Inquiry Into The Origins Of The AIDS Epidemic by Dr. Alan Cantwell Jr. M.D.
Inventing The AIDS Virus by Scientist Peter H. Duesberg

Reading the books above set depth charges at the foundation of everything that ever stood for “fact” from the media.   The word staggering doesn’t even begin to describe what was found in those books.

It was as if many months of examination into this mystery led to this keen instance lucidity.

To make several long stories short, what the authors in the books made clear in their examination of the evidence of viruses in each of their respective books that tackled AIDS, Ebola & Bird Flu, was that what we as a society know about virology is not only fraught with issues, but it’s laden in immense deception, and downright fraud.

In many instances, viruses are stated as being the cause for issues[3], when the isolation process of them has never taken place, as Rappoport has shown of Rasnick’s work above.

What the above instance has taught me is to question everything that comes my wayBy keeping open-minded skepticism as an ace in the hole, its helped me have parameters to follow when the media claims there’s a certain problem taking place.

At any rate, this is an example.  You, the reader, are not being asked to believe any of it. In fact, don’t believe one iota. 

Do yourself a favor, and research whatever topic comes your way, or is in your interest.  The second someone takes information at face value is the second they become hooked to the narrative, without ever having done any leg work.  And that’s when individuals become cash cows for corporations and the establishment exacerbating fear.

Only by vetting what information passes muster will you be able to see how the deception takes place.

Don’t sell yourself short.

______________________________________________________________

[1] Watch for Zika propaganda to ramp up especially as more ‘cases’ are found even though Zika has been known to be around for decades without causing any major issues.
[2] Notice, going to one source wasn’t good enough.  When attempting to delve deeply into the core of the matter its vital to collate data from various sources to make a thorough syntopical analysis.
[3] Please keep in mind, what is being said is not that people aren’t getting sick whatsoever.  Some of the people experiencing symptoms could easily be experiencing side effects from herbicides/pesticides/insecticides/et al.  [Example Here]  That’s not something that’s ever considered though, because it blows the cover on the whole issue.

The CDC Medical Police State: The Right To Detain Anyone

This is How The CDC Lies and Manipulates Statistics to Promote ...
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
September 5, 2016

—Understand the implications of new CDC rules, if you want to know where the medical dictatorship is heading.

Arbitrary apprehension of citizens, detainment, forced medical treatment, vaccination.

Let me paint a scenario:

You live in a polluted city, so you have a low-level cough. On your flight to another state, the cough becomes worse because the air in the plane cabin is foul. Unknown to you, a passenger complains to a flight attendant. The passenger is a typical meddler. When you arrive at your destination, a health-agency employee is waiting at the gate for you. He apprehends you and takes you to a room, to decide whether you have a communicable disease. His first standard question—are you up to date on your vaccinations? And things go downhill from there…

It can get worse: the same story as above, except when the detained passenger is injected with a load of vaccines, he then becomes very ill, or even dies. Using plane passenger lists, health authorities search out and detain everyone who was on the flight, claiming the deceased passenger died as a result of a disease—not the vaccinations—and now all the passengers will be detained and “treated,” because they are “infected.”

The CDC is doubling down.

The agency is on the verge of expanding its power to detain and force medical treatment on anyone.

The new proposed CDC regulations are contained in the Federal Register dated August 15, 2016, under the heading, “Control of Communicable Diseases—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.”

Reading between the lines, the stark message is: any person in the US suspected of carrying a serious communicable disease, even if his disease is in an “invisible” stage, can be detained, isolated, quarantined, and medically treated (e.g., forcibly vaccinated). Upon conditional release, the person can be monitored, and this can involve wearing electronic tracking devices.

Those are the broad strokes of the new policy, and, obviously, they’re broad enough to cover anyone.

Tortured linguistic gibberish from the CDC guarantees that any American can be assessed with a disease, justifying arrest. Force yourself to wade through the next paragraph, and you’ll get a feel for the lunatic bureaucratic doublespeak, and the loopholes through which the government can drive a truck:

“…to authorize the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release of an individual traveling interstate, CDC must reasonably believe that the individual is infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage…As defined by the statute, a ‘qualifying stage’ means that the communicable disease is in ‘a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals’ or ‘a communicable stage’…it is necessary to define the precommunicable stage of a communicable disease to adequately inform the public of when quarantine, isolation, or conditional release may be authorized. HHS/CDC defines precommunicable stage to mean the stage beginning upon an individual’s earliest opportunity for exposure to an infectious agent and ending upon the individual entering or reentering the communicable stage of the disease or, if the individual does not enter the communicable stage, the latest date at which the individual could reasonably be expected to have the potential to enter or reenter the communicable stage…”

Is that clear as mud? The “qualifying stage” of a disease? Translation: “we can arrest you whenever we want to, and we can say you have a disease.”

Here’s more garble from the CDC. Notice the absurd Orwellian definition of “agreement”:

“…HHS/CDC believes that it is important to define for the public what is meant by the term ‘apprehension.’ Apprehension means the temporary taking into custody of an individual or group for purposes of determining whether quarantine, isolation, or conditional release is warranted…When an apprehension occurs, the individual is not free to leave or discontinue his/her discussion with an HHS/CDC public health or quarantine officer….In certain circumstances, the individual may remain apprehended pending confirmation that he or she is not infected or not reasonably believed to be infected with a quarantinable communicable disease…Generally, however, HHS/CDC does not expect that the typical public health apprehension will last longer than 72 hours…HHS/CDC is proposing a definition for ‘agreement’ which refers to an agreement entered into between the CDC and an individual expressing agreement between the parties that the individual will observe public health measures authorized under this part, as the CDC considers reasonably necessary to protect the public’s health, including quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment.”

Translation: Any person can be arrested, held, and vaccinated, without his consent. That’s what “agreement” means.

And finally: “HHS/CDC has proposed a definition for ‘electronic or internet-based monitoring’ that defines this term as referring to mechanisms or technologies allowing for the temporary public health supervision of an individual under conditional release, including electronic mail, SMS texts, video conference or webcam technologies, integrated voice-response systems, entry of information into a web-based forum, wearable tracking technologies, and other mechanisms or technologies as determined by the Director or supervising health authority.”

Translation: Once released from custody, an individual can be monitored electronically, including by the attachment of tracking devices.

To prepare the public for this version of fascism, the CDC has been promoting a whole series of phony epidemics over decades, using scare tactics. SARS, MERS, bird flu, Swine Flu, West Nile, Ebola, Zika—they’ve all been duds. The CDC has only cared about one thing in this campaign: softening up the public to accept a medical police state.

And as this new document indicates, the CDC is turning the screw several times in that direction.

In 1987, I began warning the public that medical ops are the most dangerous, because they appear to have no political partisan bias. They’re promoted on the basis of “we’re the healers and we only want to protect you.”

Well, what I’ve discussed above is ultimately the kind of protection they’re talking about at the CDC.

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
____________________________________________________________
Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Propaganda Machine Takes Aim at Zika Virus

Bacteria
Source: Mercola.com
Dr. Mercola
February 16, 2016

It’s that time again — time for the pandemic outbreak propaganda machine to cry “Wolf!” and justify the mass use of vaccines and the necessity for chemical remediation. The World Health Organization (WHO) has already declared another global public health emergency.1

We’ve seen a string of these over-hyped virus scares over the past six years, from the bird and swine flu to Ebola — all of which died down as suddenly as they emerged, without causing the predicted widespread catastrophic damage in the real world.

This year, it’s the Zika virus, which is being blamed for a rash of reports of microcephaly2,3 among infants born in Brazil. The condition, in which babies are born with unusually small heads, is said to have surged from an average of about 150 cases annually to more than 4,780 cases since October 2015.

Microcephaly Cases Vastly Over-Reported

The Brazilian government has already admitted that overly generous parameters resulted in dramatic over-reporting of the rare condition public health officials have associated with the Zika virus, which has been dubbed by the media as the “shrunken head” virus.

To be on the safe side, when Zika-affected areas began seeing a rise in microcephaly, the Brazilian government asked health officials to report any case in which a child was born with a head circumference smaller than 33 centimeters.

False positives were expected, and when they realized that most of these babies were in fact healthy and normal, the threshold was lowered to 32 centimeters in December. The limit may be lowered even further, to 31.9 centimeters for boys and 31.5 centimeters for girls.

As reported by The New York Times:4

“Of the cases examined so far, 404 have been confirmed as having microcephaly. Only 17 of them tested positive for the Zika virus

Another 709 babies have been ruled out as having microcephaly … underscoring the risks of false positives making the epidemic appear larger than it actually is. The remaining 3,670 cases are still being investigated.” [Emphasis mine]

As noted by The New York Times, there’s actually very little scientific evidence tying the Zika virus to this particular condition.

Still, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Zika virus a global health emergency5 on February 1, noting that the “main worry” is the virus’ potential link to microcephaly and subsequent brain damage.

According to WHO, the Zika virus may have infected as many as 4 million people in the Americas, and public health officials in Brazil, Colombia and El Salvador are reportedly all researching the effects of Zika infection in pregnant women.

Poverty, Pollution, and Vitamin Deficiencies May Affect Microcephaly Rates in Brazil

The Zika virus was initially identified in 1947 in Uganda, where it was originally limited to rhesus monkeys. It’s an arbovirus, meaning the disease is transmitted via mosquito, tick or flea bites.

According to ATCC,6 a “global biological materials resource…organization whose mission focuses on the acquisition, authentication, production, preservation, development, and distribution of standard reference microorganisms,” the Zika virus7 — which they sell for about $500 — causes paralysis and death.

In humans, Zika infection typically causes only mild flu-like symptoms, if any, and there does not appear to be any prior evidence suggesting it might cause birth defects.

That certainly doesn’t exclude the possibility, of course, but there are many other factors and co-factors that offer a far more likely and rational explanation for the rise in microcephaly in this area of Brazil, besides Zika-carrying mosquitoes.

For starters, the “outbreak” is occurring in a largely poverty-stricken agricultural area of Brazil that uses large amounts of banned pesticides.8,9,10

Between these factors and the lack of sanitation and widespread vitamin A and zinc deficiency, you already have the basic framework for an increase in poor health outcomes among newborn infants in that area.11

Environmental pollution12,13 and toxic pesticide exposure have been positively linked to a wide array of adverse health effects, including birth defects. When you add all these co-factors together, an increase in microcephaly doesn’t seem like such a far-fetched outcome.

Vitamin A Deficiency Linked to Microcephaly

Vitamin A and zinc deficiency is considered endemic in Brazil,14,15,16 and both of these nutritional deficiencies are known to depress immune function.17,18,19

More importantly, vitamin A deficiency has been linked to an increased risk of microcephaly specifically,20,21 and zinc is known to play an important role in the structure and function of the brain.22

Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lists malnutrition and exposure to toxic chemicals as two of the three known risk factors. The third is certain infections during pregnancy, including rubella, cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis, and others.23

Researchers24 have also noted that microcephaly follows “an apparent autosomal recessive pattern,” and may be the result of a recessed gene.

Atrazine Also Implicated in Microcephaly

The pesticide Atrazine also appears to be a viable culprit. According to research25 published in 2011, small head circumference was listed as a side effect of prenatal Atrazine exposure.

Atrazine is used to prevent pre- and post-emergence weeds and is the second most commonly used herbicide after Roundup. As noted by Sott.net:26

“The most obvious cause of birth defects in this area is direct contact and absorption of pesticides. A study of pesticide use on tomatoes27 in the Northern State of Pernambuco, Brazil, indicates high exposure to pesticide workers and poor application methods which threaten the ecology of the area.

Women washed the pesticide application equipment, generally in the work environment, without protective clothing or without observing the recommended three-fold washing process … Of the women workers, 32% reported being pregnant more than five times … Almost three-quarters of the women (71%) reported miscarriages, and 11% reported having mentally and/or physically impaired offspring.”

Why Is Brazil Overlooking Teratogenic Larvicide Added to Drinking Water in Affected Area?

A report28,29 by an Argentine physician’s organization called “Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns” also challenges the theory that Zika virus is responsible for the microcephaly cases in Brazil. They note that for the past 18 months, a chemical larvicide that causes malformations in mosquitoes (pyroproxyfen) has been applied to the drinking water in the affected area of Brazil.

Pyroproxyfen is manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical, long-term strategic partners of Monsanto, and has been used in a state-controlled program to eradicate mosquitoes.

This chemical inhibits growth in mosquito larvae, thereby producing malformations that disable and/or kill the mosquitoes. According to “Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns,” it’s also an endocrine disruptor and teratogenic, meaning it causes birth defects. The organization also points out that Zika virus has never been associated with birth defects previously, even in areas where 75 percent of the population has been infected. According to the report:

“Malformations detected in thousands of children from pregnant women living in areas where the Brazilian state added Pyroproxyfen to drinking water are not a coincidence, even though the Ministry of Health places a direct blame on the Zika virus for this damage.”

Continue Reading At: Mercola.com