Zika, HIV: The Abstract Vs. The Concrete In The Pursuit Of Logic

TruthFact
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
June 26, 2017

Medical Warning: this article may require THINKING. Ask your doctor if thinking is right for you.

When a philosopher has no more room to move and finds his back up against a cold wall in the middle of the night, he usually throws up his hands and surrenders his abstract position to concrete interests (like money, position, and power). I watched this happen in the late 1980s, when I saw my first book, AIDS INC., come into print.

The book took on CAUSATION, one of the interests of both the medical and philosophical profession. My investigation centered on: how do you decide a particular germ causes a particular disease?

I won’t bother going into all the details here. Suffice it to say, when I contacted a few academic folks I knew from my days as a college student studying philosophy, they shut their eyes tight and pretended they were having a bad dream, nothing more. They built a wall of silence. You see, asking them for a comment about causation was now treading on medical territory—far more real than the realm of their usual philosophical fiddling. If it turned out the entire medical cartel was tap dancing and faking a concept of causation, in order to falsely blame certain viruses for causing certain (high-profit) diseases, THAT was a scandal of immense proportions. And these academic philosophers wanted no part of it. They didn’t want to see their cozy positions in ivory towers ripped asunder. They didn’t want the concrete to intrude on the abstract. It was all well and good to cite Hume and Ayer and various logicians on the issue of causation, when nothing was at stake, but to move forward into a world where, depending on your view of cause and effect, some people made billions of dollars while other people died unnecessarily…that was out of the question. Therefore, my book was “reckless.” Therefore: no comment. Therefore: “Leave us alone. We never meant for you to grab these ideas and actually use them, logically, to shake up the invisible power structure. You’re doing something unseemly. You’re reflecting badly on us. You’re endangering reputations.”

Aha.

Do not upset apple carts. Do not expose crimes.

In my book, AIDS INC., I performed an obscene act. I implied that, by any reasonable standard of cause and effect, HIV had never been proved to cause the condition called AIDS. I was suddenly a philosopher with a weapon. I was shining a light in a cave where researchers were plundering logic to fake a proof. And, to continue the exercise, I was therefore demonstrating that AIDS was not one condition at all. It was an array of circumstances that produced, in different ways, in different people, the destruction of the immune system—and if you wanted to heal THAT, you had to find, in each afflicted person, what had attacked his immune system (not HIV), and then you had to try to reverse that affliction. In doing so, you could save lives. If, on the other hand, you persisted with the HIV myth, and utilized highly toxic drugs like AZT, you would kill people. Many people.

But the “philosophers” I approached saw no benefit in examining that investigation. The benefit (to them) was in ignoring it.

I would have welcomed an honest debate. But no offer was forthcoming.

I already knew, from my college years, that the walled off Territory of the Abstract was its own province; but this experience with my book, in 1988, was the last straw.

I was trying to approach cowards.

Unfettered, reasoned free speech was not their aim.

Up to a point, advanced education exists. But when you go beyond that point, you’re in the Empty Quarter. You’re staring at a vast parched desert.

Turn around. Walk away. You’re on your own. Your education now takes on a completely different cast. You learn how to apply analysis and do investigation independently.

That process, speaking from experience, is exhilarating.

The mines, and the caves in them, contain gold.

Here’s a quick contemporary analysis of causation: the Zika virus. In a nutshell, Brazilian researchers, working at “ground zero of the purported microcephaly (birth defect) outbreak,” declared Zika to be the cause. However, they admitted—before they cut off all communication on the subject—that traces of Zika could only be found in roughly 15% of babies with microcephaly. This correlation was astonishingly weak.

No matter what version of cause and effect you might favor, there is no way under the sun you can conclude that Zika causes microcephaly, when it can’t be found in 85% of cases.

Any honest researcher will tell you this is a reason to reject Zika as the cause and go back to the drawing board.

But that hasn’t happened. In fact, several groups are conducting studies on a Zika vaccine. They’re plunging forward.

One of these candidate-vaccines delivers synthesized genes into the body…where the genes…permanently alter the recipient’s DNA.

In this case, lying about causation leads to unbridled tinkering with populations’ genetic structure.

But why should academic philosophers care about that? They’re in their safe world, apart from, what shall we call it, LIFE.

HIV faced a similar problem that Zika does. Researchers correlated a diagnosis of AIDS with a positive HIV antibody test: many people who tested positive were later diagnosed with AIDS. There was a problem, however. The HIV antibody test will register positive for at least 60 reasons that have nothing to do with the presence of HIV in the body.

Independent researcher Christine Johnson documented this fact. Her classic investigation has been reprinted at aliveandwell.org. Here is just a partial list of factors that will cause an HIV antibody test to read positive for reasons that have nothing to do with HIV:

1. Anti-carbohydrate antibodies (52,19,13)
2. Naturally-occurring antibodies (5,19)
3. Passive immunization: receipt of gamma globulin or immune globulin (as prophylaxis against infection which contains antibodies) (18, 26, 60, 4, 22, 42, 43, 13)
4. Leprosy (2, 25)
5. Tuberculosis (25)
6. Mycobacterium avium (25)
7. Systemic lupus erythematosus (15, 23)
8. Renal (kidney) failure (48, 23, 13)
9. Hemodialysis/renal failure (56, 16, 41, 10, 49)
10. Alpha interferon therapy in hemodialysis patients (54)
11. Flu (36)
12. Flu vaccination (30, 11, 3, 20, 13, 43)
13. Herpes simplex I (27)
14. Herpes simplex II (11)
15. Upper respiratory tract infection (cold or flu) (11)
16. Recent viral infection or exposure to viral vaccines (11)
17. Prior pregnancy (58, 53, 13, 43, 36, 65)

Fake causation. It’s a big one.

There is much, much more to the HIV story (including serious doubts about whether HIV actually exists). But you get the general idea. The correlation between HIV and AIDS is irreparably weak…

I had a brief conversation about this with an academic philosophy professor. It went this way:

—So, Professor, you see that this is an issue of causation. If the correlation is very weak, the whole assumption of causation fails.

—Well, I don’t know about that. Other factors could be involved.

—Such as?

—That’s the whole point. We don’t know what the other factors are.

—We know enough. If researchers are going to say a particular virus causes a particular disease, they have to establish, at minimum, strong correlation. They have to prove, for starters, that the virus is present in the overwhelming percentage of cases of the disease.

—So this is the kind of thing you’ve been doing since you graduated from school?

—Yes.

—I think you need to reassess your approach.

—Why?

—Disease causation is an issue best left to medical experts.

—Why?

—It’s their field.

That’s where the conversation ended.

Beautiful, just beautiful.

Read More 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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Advertisements

Medical Fake News Is The Mt. Everest Of Fake News

fakenews

Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
January 24, 2017

Deep medical fraud and the destruction of health: this was the subject that prompted me to exit the news business.

As I probed deeper into that swamp, I found editors running away from my story-pitches. They didn’t want to go there. It was too scary. Too threatening to the status of their newspapers and magazines.

Lesson learned in the late 1980s: if you want to go deep, go independent.

I never looked back.

Here are three examples of going deep:

ONE: Proponents claim a vaccine stimulates a person’s immune system to produce antibodies, which are immune-system scouts.

This is supposedly a rehearsal. The immune system gets a chance to respond to a “test run,” so that when the real disease hits, the immune-defense will be ready and will knock out the disease quickly.

Except there are many diagnostic tests for disease that look for antibodies, and if antibodies show up, the doctor tells the patient he has the disease.

It’s absurd.

Antibodies from a vaccine=immunity. Same antibodies produced by the body in response to a germ entering the body=illness.

On top of this insanity, antibodies are only one component of a very complex immune system. The production of antibodies doesn’t guarantee a person’s whole immune system is in good shape.

In 1987, when I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., I queried the FDA about the development of an HIV vaccine. Here is what I was told: if a vaccine was ever deployed, it would produce antibodies to HIV and the person would be given a letter to carry around with him in case he was ever tested for HIV.

The letter would say, this person is immune from HIV. The antibodies are an indication of immunity, not disease.

You see, the two standard diagnostic tests for HIV were the Elisa and the Western Blot. They both tested for antibodies. If a person tested positive, he was told he had AIDS.

But if the SAME antibodies were produced by the vaccine, he’d be designated immune from AIDS.

And it’s instructive. You find out where the boundaries are. You learn, in your gut, how shallow and fear-ridden the mainstream news business is, behind its pompous front.

You discover what “going independent” really means. That’s very important. Because if you’re going to leave the fold, your commitment to what you’re writing has to become relentless.

Fortunately, I discovered “relentless” was right up my alley.

It makes a cloudy day turn sunny.

Since those days when I made my exit, I’ve watched many reporters I know stop being reporters. Some of them went into real estate. Some started selling cars. Some became teachers at prep schools. Some landed jobs with partisan think-tanks and foundations.

And some are still around, turning out fake news like pancakes at a diner. Their faces are gray. They’re standing over their griddles like robots.

In off-the-cuff conversations, I told them they were making a mistake. They didn’t want to listen. I told them how vastly bored they would become.

They said it wasn’t a problem.

But it is a problem. Especially when the truth is the first casualty.

It always is the first casualty, in the news biz.

No, that couldn’t be.

Yes, it could be and was.

TWO: Obamacare is about control, so it’s an answer to the prayers of the medical cartel.

So what do we know about their mainstream medicine, the hospital-based drug-addled modern version?

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a landmark review by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000. (a conservative estimate)

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise.

This is the dirty secret.

Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple.

THREE: The gold standard test for disease diagnosis is called the PCR.

Example: ABC New York reports (in “Mount Sinai patient likely does not have Ebola, health official says”):“Testing for Ebola is done at the CDC. According to a CDC spokesperson testing for Ebola takes 1-2 days after they receive the samples. The primary testing is PCR. This is performed on blood that has been treated to kill and live virus [sic]. So far CDC has tested samples from around 6 people who had symptoms consistent with Ebola and a travel history to the affected region.”

But the PCR test is completely unreliable for a disease diagnosis. Why? Two reasons. First, technicians start with a tiny, tiny sample of genetic material from the patient. This sample is supposed to be part of a virus. It may or may not be. Mistakes can be made. Obviously, the techs want the sample to be viral in nature; otherwise, the diagnostic test will be complete bust.

But more importantly, the whole rationale for PCR is wrongheaded. Doctors and researchers only find a miniscule bit of hopefully relevant material in the patient to begin with. The PCR amplifies that bit many times so it can be observed. That’s the whole rationale behind the PCR.

But to consider the possibility that a virus is causing a disease in a patient, there must be huge numbers of that virus working actively in his body.

The PCR never establishes that.

Finding a tiny, tiny trace of viral material in a patient says absolutely nothing about whether he is ill, has been ill, or will become ill.

The PCR test is an irrelevant bust and a lie.

—Those are just three examples, out of many, where “going deep” gets you a strange stare and glare from medical editors at newspapers and magazines.

They run away. They disappear. They huff and puff and turn red in the face. They do whatever they can to let you know you’re no longer welcome in their presence.

It’s fun. I used to enjoy pitching stories like these to the guardians on the watchtower of truth. Their various reactions were priceless. I used to call it “watching the egg crack.”

And it’s instructive. You find out where the boundaries are. You learn, in your gut, how shallow and fear-ridden the mainstream news business is, behind its pompous front.

You discover what “going independent” really means. That’s very important. Because if you’re going to leave the fold, your commitment to what you’re writing has to become relentless.

Fortunately, I discovered “relentless” was right up my alley.

It makes a cloudy day turn sunny.

Since those days when I made my exit, I’ve watched many reporters I know stop being reporters. Some of them went into real estate. Some started selling cars. Some became teachers at prep schools. Some landed jobs with partisan think-tanks and foundations.

And some are still around, turning out fake news like pancakes at a diner. Their faces are gray. They’re standing over their griddles like robots.

In off-the-cuff conversations, I told them they were making a mistake. They didn’t want to listen. I told them how vastly bored they would become.

They said it wasn’t a problem.

But it is a problem. Especially when the truth is the first casualty.

It always is the first casualty, in the news biz.

Read More 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 NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

What You’ll Never Read About Virus-Research Fraud

QuestionEverything2
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
August 8, 2016

There are very few investigators on the planet who are interested in this subject. I am one of them. There is a reason why.

In many articles, I’ve written about the shocking lack of logic in the curriculum of advanced centers of learning. When I attended college, I was fortunate to have a professor who taught logic, and taught it in a way that appealed to the minds of his students. In other words, for those of us who cared, we could not only absorb the subject matter, we could think with it; for example, we could approach an area of knowledge and track it back to its most basic premises. And then we could check those premises and see whether they were true and correct. If they were incorrect, we could then challenge many accepted notions that followed from those basic untruths.

That is one of the payoffs of being able to deploy logic.

With this introduction, let me bring up the issue of disease-causation. How do researchers decide that a given virus causes a given condition?

There are many twists and turns involved in answering the question, but before being able to engage in such a discussion, a more basic factor has to be considered:

Has the virus in question ever been isolated and identified? More simply, has it ever been found?

Obviously, in order to eventually say virus A causes condition B, you have to know you’ve found, discovered, isolated virus A from some tissue sample removed from a human being.

I’m not talking about tests run on people in 2016, to decide whether they have virus A. I’m talking about the first time, the first time ever a researcher said, “I’ve found a virus we’ve never seen before. I’m calling it virus A.”

So, for example, with all the chatter about people with Ebola in recent years, the question would be: when was the first time a researcher said, “We’ve verified the existence of a virus we’ve never seen before, and we’re calling it Ebola.”

When was that, and by what procedure was this discovery made?

For many people, it’s unthinkable that scientists would say a given virus is causing many people to fall ill—and yet that virus had never really been isolated and identified—but who knows what you find out when you go down the rabbit hole?

Let’s consider HIV, the purported cause of AIDS. Independent reporter Christine Johnson conducted a magnificent and shocking rabbit-hole interview with Dr. Eleni Papadopulos, “a biophysicist and leader of a group of HIV/AIDS scientists from Perth in Western Australia. Over the past decade and more she and her colleagues have published many scientific papers questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis…” The interview was titled: Does HIV Exist?

I’ll highlight part of the exchange, because it’s so telling and instructive. Keep in mind that what Eleni Papadopulos is saying about HIV could apply to any virus — including zika.

The interview takes up a few complex procedures, but if you read through it several times, you should be able to sort out the key points:

Christine Johnson (CJ): Does HIV cause AIDS?

Eleni Papadopulos (EP): There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.

CJ: Why not?

EP: For many reasons, but most importantly, because there is no proof that HIV exists.

CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo [purportedly the co-discoverers of HIV] isolate HIV back in the early eighties?

EP: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients. [HIV is said to be a retrovirus.]

CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.

EP: Our interpretation of the data differs. To prove the existence of a virus you need to do three things. First, culture cells and find a particle you think might be a virus. Obviously, at the very least, that particle should look like a virus. Second, you have to devise a method to get that particle on its own so you can take it to pieces and analyze precisely what makes it up. Then you need to prove the particle can make faithful copies of itself. In other words, that it can replicate.

CJ: Can’t you just look down a microscope and say there’s a virus in the cultures?

EP: No, you can’t. Not all particles that look like viruses are viruses.

CJ: My understanding is that high-speed centrifugation is used to produce samples consisting exclusively of objects having the same density, a so-called “density-purified sample.” Electron microscopy is used to see if these density-purified samples consist of objects which all have the same appearance — in which case the sample is an isolate — and if this appearance matches that of a retrovirus, in terms of size, shape, and so forth. If all this is true, then you are three steps into the procedure for obtaining a retroviral isolate. (1) You have an isolate, and the isolate consists of objects with the same (2) density and (3) appearance of a retrovirus. Then you have to examine this isolate further, to see if the objects in it contain reverse transcriptase [an enzyme] and will replicate when placed in new cultures. Only then can you rightfully declare that you have obtained a retroviral isolate.

EP: Exactly. It was discovered that retroviral particles have a physical property which enables them to be separated from other material in cell cultures. That property is their buoyancy, or density, and this was utilized to purify the particles by a process called density gradient centrifugation.

The technology is complicated, but the concept is extremely simple. You prepare a test tube containing a solution of sucrose, ordinary table sugar, made so the solution is light at the top but gradually becomes heavier, or more dense, towards the bottom. Meanwhile, you grow whatever cells you think may contain your retrovirus. If you’re right, retroviral particles will be released from the cells and pass into the culture fluids. When you think everything is ready, you decant a specimen of culture fluids and gently place a drop on top of the sugar solution. Then you spin the test tube at extremely high speeds. This generates tremendous forces, and particles present in that drop of fluid are forced through the sugar solution until they reach a point where their buoyancy prevents them from penetrating any further. In other words, they drift down the density gradient until they reach a spot where their own density is the same as that region of the sugar solution. When they get there they stop, all together. To use virological jargon, that’s where they band. Retroviruses band at a characteristic point. In sucrose solutions they band at a point where the density is 1.16 gm/ml.

That band can then be selectively extracted and photographed with an electron microscope. The picture is called an electron micrograph, or EM. The electron microscope enables particles the size of retroviruses to be seen, and to be characterized by their appearance.

CJ: So, examination with the electron microscope tells you what fish you’ve caught?

EP: Not only that. It’s the only way to know if you’ve caught a fish. Or anything at all.

CJ: Did Montagnier and Gallo do this?

EP: This is one of the many problems. Montagnier and Gallo did use density gradient banding, but for some unknown reason they did not publish any Ems [electron microscope photos] of the material at 1.16 gm/ml…this is quite puzzling because in 1973 the Pasteur Institute hosted a meeting attended by scientists, some of whom are now amongst the leading HIV experts. At that meeting the method of retroviral isolation was thoroughly discussed, and photographing the 1.16 band of the density gradient was considered absolutely essential.

CJ: But Montagnier and Gallo did publish photographs of virus particles.

EP: No. Montagnier and Gallo published electron micrographs of culture fluids that had not been centrifuged, or even separated from the culture cells, for that matter. These EMs contained, in addition to many other things, including the culture cells and other things that clearly are not retroviruses, a few particles which Montagnier and Gallo claimed are retroviruses, and which all belonged to the same retroviral species, now called HIV. But photographs of unpurified particles don’t prove that those particles are viruses. The existence of HIV was not established by Montagnier and Gallo — or anyone since — using the method presented at the 1973 meeting.

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.

Bill Gates & George Soros Fund Monsanto & A World Depopulation Agenda

Eugenics
Source: NaturalNews.com
S.D. Wells
August 6, 2016

Hitler had a depopulation agenda which he kept under wraps, until so many millions of people disappeared that the world started figuring out what was happening. What if he had come right out and announced his plan to create a master race and eliminate everyone else by shooting them in the head with two bullets, starving them to death, or putting them in gas chambers?

How many people around the world would have supported him and said they liked the idea of getting rid of all the “undesirables” and blaming them for all the world’s problems?

Well, Bill Gates and George Soros are also all about depopulation, but there’s no way they’re going to come right out and say it … or has Bill already done so? What if you found out right now, by video, that Bill Gates, along with his partner in crime, are planning on reducing the world’s population by about 5 billion over the next decade, and that they plan on using vaccines and genetically modified food to do so? Here it is.

United States citizens underestimate the devastating power of consuming pesticides daily. Sure, most Americans say they want labels on GMOs, but they’re not getting them anytime soon, so now what? Also, most Americans believe vaccines are a good idea for combating infectious disease, and two out of every three people get a flu shot yearly, but do they know what the typical ingredients are and what chronic damage they’re really doing to their brains and nervous, immune and reproductive systems?

Bill Gates and George Soros know. These two super rich white dudes are not trying to save poor people in Africa, or India or Brazil. They don’t care at all about the health of underprivileged societies, but what they do care about is making sure these folks can’t reproduce, and that if they do reproduce, they are creating deformed, severely autistic, cancer-ridden beings that won’t reproduce or even lead productive lives, but rather cost their parents all of their earnings and savings just to care for them.

Bill Gates has spoken at a TED conference saying he can reduce the world population by billions using vaccines. How so? If vaccines supposedly prevent infectious disease, how does that equate to killing off people or keeping them from multiplying? Great question.

South African ‘test and treat’ mass HIV experimentation begins with funding from Bill Gates

As of 2016, it’s approximated that 7 million people in South Africa have HIV, with over 300,000 new cases arising every year. Of those, nearly 200,000 die each year from an AIDS related death, usually because their immune systems are next to non-existent, so anything from a head cold to the flu could drive them into their graves. What else could “kill off” these “undesirables?” Vaccines that contain known neurotoxins and heavy metal toxins. It’s called eugenics, and some tall white guys are running the show. “Trials” are underway, and Bill Gates, the ultimate population control promoter and self-declared philanthropist, is pumping money into the pharma labs to concoct an AIDS vaccine.

Zika hoax, Bill Gates’ GM mosquitoes, mass media propaganda scare, followed by mass DNA vaccination agenda

The CDC defines DNA vaccines as “purified plasmid preparations containing one or more DNA sequences capable of inducing and/or promoting an immune response against a pathogen,” yet there is no proof that this really works as stated, and research shows that when these sequences are injected they can cause “insertional mutagenesis,” which means gene and cell mutations can result – and that’s also the definition of carcinogenesis, or “cancer.” Care to turn off your tumor suppressor genes? Bill Gates and George Soros would love it if you did. That could help reduce the world population “problem” they are so righteously battling for us.

Could these novel sounding DNA vaccines actually create human tolerance to pathogens instead of immunity? Why would billionaires who support and promote cancer-causing, pesticide-laden GM food support a vaccine that creates immunity? It wouldn’t make sense. That would be like breeding and releasing millions of poisonous snakes while creating and promoting anti-venom inoculation.

Watch out for hoax vaccines that contain neurotoxins. Ask your naturopathic physician if the highly experimental, untested and dangerous Zika, HIV, Ebola, Anthrax, HPV, Swine Flu, MMR and DNA vaccines are “right for you” and your children.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources for this article include:

Nature.com

TruthWiki.org

NaturalNews.com

TruthWiki.org

TruthWiki.org

TruthWiki.org

Confirmed: Renowned Physician Jeff Bradstreet Who Link Vaccines To Autism Was Murdered

Family of Autism Specialist Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet Says Forensic Evidence Points to Murder, Impossible for Bullet Entry to Be Self-Inflicted

Jeff-Bradstreet-Facebook-AutismOne

Source: GlobalResearch.ca
Julie Wilson
June 15, 2016

Nearly one year has passed since Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet, a renowned physician known for his skepticism of immunizations (particularly the MMR vaccine) and his progressive autism research was found dead, floating in a North Carolina river with a single gunshot wound.

Leading up to his death, Bradstreet was working with a highly controversial molecule that occurs naturally within the human body and is believed to be capable of treating and reversing autism.

Researchers claim that GcMAF (Globulin component Macrophage Activating Factor), which becomes the GC protein after combining with vitamin D in the body, is effective for treating HIV, diabetes and diseases of the liver and kidneys. More importantly, GcMAF experts predict that the natural molecule has the potential to be a universal cure for cancer

Due to the controversial nature of Bradstreet’s research, as well as the fact that his office was raided by officials with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the days leading up his death, the physician’s family hired a private investigator in hopes of finding the truth about Bradstreet’s untimely demise.

‘It is our 100 percent belief that Jeff did not commit suicide’

Finally, new details regarding Bradstreet’s death have been revealed through a recent interview conducted by the producer of the documentary VAXXED. Polly Tommey sat down with Bradstreet’s baby brother Thom and his lovely wife Candice at the AutismOne conference held towards the end of last month at the Loews Chicago O’Hare Hotel in Rosemont, Illinois.

Thom said that while the family knew in their hearts that Bradstreet was murdered, it wasn’t until they had the opportunity to review the case forensically that they realized the evidence supports their theory that his death was in no possible way a suicide, as has been reported by police and the mainstream media.

“People who knew him knew he would never take his own life,” said Thom, adding that information uncovered by a forensic scientist hired by the family validates that conjecture. After meeting with the medical examiner and reviewing case files and photographs, the private forensic scientist ruled that Bradstreet’s death was absolutely not a suicide.

“It is our 100 percent belief that Jeff did not commit suicide. Not only because of who Jeff was as a person, but because we looked at the science of it; we looked at the medical proof and it’s just not possible that Jeff took his own life,” commented Thom.

“Unfortunately, there’s an ongoing investigation so there’s not a lot we can share about the specifics. But the way the bullet entered into the body, it’s almost impossible for an individual to do that and it was far enough away that it left no tattooing, no significant burn marks or anything like that.”

‘Where would the world of autism be without Jeff Bradstreet?’

Bradstreet’s younger brother noted that while it would be easy to say the murder was a conspiracy due to his controversial (and highly effective) work, they can’t yet say for sure, adding that they must know for sure before reaching any conclusions regarding the perpetrator(s)’ identity.

The family said that while they are still overcome with immense sadness, they know that Bradstreet is in heaven because he was a “great man of faith” who loved God.

“The sadness is to know that there’s all these parents out here, existing patients of Jeff or recently diagnosed, where do they go? Where would the world of autism be without Jeff Bradstreet? [Without] his 20 years of knowledge and input and experience, where would we be?” asked Thom.

The Bradstreets asked the public for patience while they attempt to uncover who may have been behind their loved one’s death.

“Have patience. Be in prayer. Stay actively involved in the world of autism,” said Thom, adding that supporting projects like VAXXED is a great way to continue Bradstreet’s legacy.

(Photo credit: AutismOne/Facebook)

Notes:

HealthNutNews.com

NaturalNews.com

Science.NaturalNews.com

[Book Review] AIDS Inc. – Scandal Of The Century by Jon Rappoport

AIJR
TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
June 9, 2016

In his usual top-down, pull no punches fashion, Jon Rappoport dives into the deep end of Big Medica territory and sets enough depth charges to shake the very strata of conventional medicine.

Rappoport’s regular readers already know what kind of investigative reporter he is.

For those that don’t know, Rappoport [NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com] is the type of person that won’t back down when he sees something amyss.  That says A LOT in our era of controlled, cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all, mainstream media manipulation reality that’s been carved for us all.  To that end, Rappoport stands clear above the rest, bringing credibility to countless issues that truly need it.

Another great appeal from this researcher is that he’s not a fear-monger.  Rappoport tells it how it is, which is how it should be – even though some people don’t like to be told the truth – but also relentlessly brings about core issues to the individual level.

As if that were not enough, Rappoport also shows us how important it is for individuals, cognizant of their endless imagination which he speaks about at length, to unleash their creative consciousness to solve any type of issues as well as creating their very reality.

In fact, one could argue all of Rappoport’s work is about showing individuals what reality TRULY is about, and what the individual can unleash to help crack that reality egg, and create a new one from the ground up.

In that sense, AIDS Inc. – Scandal Of The Century by Jon Rappoport is one of those books whose main thesis is so audacious, so phenomenal that it make you question the very fabric of reality.

Why so?

Because it challenges everything we’ve ever known about viruses.

Because it goes places no one would ever dream lies would come from within the mainstream media establishment.

Because the work of Robert Gallo, who was the person that claimed to have found the cause of AIDS, comes into question in an extremely disturbing manner.

Rappoport, in his usual no-holds-barred approach, shows that Gallo’s work regarding viruses wasn’t as ironclad as he would have liked us to believe.  In fact, his work wasn’t ironclad in no way shape or form.

In order to be able to prove that HIV is the cause of AIDS, Gallo should have been able to isolate HIV constantly – EVERY SINGLE TIME.  This was not the case however.

Through his research, Rappoport shows us that not only do many scientists disagree with the mainstream official scenario regarding AIDS, but one in particular was even willing to go on record.

Peter Deusberg.

Duesberg, who is a molecular biologist and is the author of Inventing The AIDS Virus was interviewed at length by Rappoport, and sung like a canary.

Duesberg not only is in thorough disagreement with the official AIDS theory, which is a complete fabrication, but also notes the issues with Gallo’s work, the NIH’s warped view of viruses as well as other issues with virology and such.  That excerpt by Rappoport of the interview with Deusberg alone is worth the price of the book.

Additionally, as Rappoport touches upon a few times, and Deusberg mentions in the interview, the health decline experienced by the individuals who were diagnosed with HIV/AIDS have other causal factors. 

If folks are still having trouble believing what might be possible once the veil of lies is pierced, we’ll quote a small passage from the book to outline the crux of the issue.

To quote the man himself, Rappoport:

“Traditionally, in order to establish that a germ causes a condition, medical researchers invoke what are called Koch’s postulates.

These postulates describe a formula:  From people with a given disease, remove the same germ in every case; then inject this germ into animals and in every case bring about all the symptoms of the disease.

Having accomplished this, one says that germ A causes disease B.

With HIV, this has not been done.  First, depending on which study you read, you find HIV itself has been isolated in roughly 50-80% of those people diagnosed with full-blown AIDS.   Second about a hundred chimps in the US, held in sterile isolation chambers, have been injected with high volumes of HIV.  Two chimps immediately developed infected lymph glands; this condition lasted for thirty weeks and then returned to normal.  In those two chimps, no new symptoms then appeared.  In all the other chimps, no AIDS-like symptoms developed at all.”  [1][Bold Emphasis Added]

As individuals can see, if AIDS/HIV operated as the establishment claims it did, the above should not be possible.

If that’s not bad enough, as Rappoport has noted quite often in his website and has spoken about quite a few times, the Elisa & Western Blot tests that are used to verify HIV have their inherent flaws.  In fact, the tests could end up positive for reasons not connected to HIV whatsoever.  Hear that?  That’s more depth charges going of.

Unfortunately ,the issue doesn’t start and end with HIV/AIDS.  This pervasive dilemma has actually evolved.

Ebola and the Zika virus are now being brought to the forefront for ultra-fearmongering  in the same manner.  Predictably, if one sifts deep through the data with a fine-toothed comb, allegations of people being diagnosed with these viruses are fraught with issues.  And as we’ve learned from the HIV/AIDS smokescreen, the health issues that the individuals are experiencing with Ebola/Zika can be explained by other factors that are not virus-related.

Now you have to ask yourself, if we’ve been lied to about all THAT, what ELSE have we been lied to about?

_________________________________________________________________

Source:

[1] Jon Rappoport, AIDS Inc. – Scandal Of The Century, p. 83

Pennsylvania Becomes 24th State to Legalize Medical Marijuana

image-governor-wolf-signs-medical-marijuana-bill-735-350

Source: NaturalNews.com
Julie Fidler
April 20, 2016

After the state House voted in favor of the medical marijuana bill, marijuana activists were biting their nails for fear the Senate would find a way to slow or stall the bill, but the bill passed last week.

Supporters knew they’d been successful, as Governor Tom Wolf had vowed to sign it into law. And the governor did not disappoint. Wolf signed the bill on Sunday, making Pennsylvania the 24th state in the nation to embrace marijuana as a legitimate form of medical treatment.

Wolf said:

“This is really a great day for Pennsylvania. This is really a great day for all of us.” [1]

Cheers and applause broke out in the capitol rotunda in Harrisburg when the law was passed. Northumberland County resident Maria Belkadi wept with joy. Her 7-year-old son, Marksen, suffers from severe autism and sometimes screams for hours. Belkadi has done a great deal of research into cannabis, and became convinced it might be able to help Marksen’s symptoms and joined advocates in pushing for legalization to become a reality in Pennsylvania.

She told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

“In 30 days time, if we can get it legally somehow from another state that has it, we can start treatment for our son. I can only dream of what it’ll be like to have him go a week without him attacking me physically or screaming uncontrollably, melting down, hurting other people, biting other people and just suffering.”

Pennsylvania is the only state to include autism as a qualifying condition for medical marijuana.

According to the bill’s drafters, it could take 2 years to write regulations and get dispensaries opened. But lawmakers recognized that many children are suffering needlessly, so they included a provision allowing parents to legally administer medical marijuana to their children before the bill takes effect in a month. [2]

The bill sets standards for tracking plants, certifying doctors and licensing growers, dispensaries, and physicians. Marijuana must be used in pill, oil, vapor, ointment, or liquid form, but cannot be smoked. It is also illegal to grow your own plants.

image-marijuana-medical-pa-CgQve4nUYAA1V

 

The road to legalization was a 2-and-a-half year journey, but it will be well worth it for patients who suffer any of the 17 qualifying conditions for medical marijuana, which, in addition to autism, includes:

  • cancer
  • HIV or AIDS
  • ALS
  • Parkinson’s disease
  • multiple sclerosis
  • damage to the nervous tissue of the spinal cord with objective neurological indication of intractable spasticity
  • epilepsy
  • inflammatory bowel disease
  • neuropathies
  • Huntington’s disease
  • Crohn’s disease
  • post-traumatic stress disorder
  • intractable seizures
  • glaucoma
  • sickle cell anemia
  • severe pain of neuropathic origin or severe pain that resists traditional pain management

    Continue Reading at: NaturalSociety.com