Covid-19 Update July 7, 2020
- Created on Wednesday, 08 July 2020 04:44
The Covid situation is reportedly getting worse, not better. My state of Texas, and my city of Austin, is now supposed to be the nation’s hotspot. The theory goes that Texas was one of the first states to reopen its economy, and as a result of that interaction, and despite the continued use of masks and social distancing, that the virus got transmitted. But, if that’s true, then it means that “asymptomatic carriers” have got to be the ones spreading it.
How many visibly sick people have you been around lately? How many visibly sick people have you seen in pubic lately? Even before this, and long before this, it was not a common thing to see acutely ill people in public. And that’s because when people are acutely ill, they tend to stay home. Maybe if they just have a mild cold they’ll go out. But, I’ve been going to the supermarket, post office, Walmart, etc., and I haven’t seen one person with acute symptoms out shopping. So, if they told me that I have Covid it would mean that somebody I passed in the aisle at Walmart or some other store gave it to me- even though I wore a mask. And the masks are required now. They don’t let anyone in without a mask, and many stores have someone out front handing out masks to those that don’t have one.
So, how is this virus spreading person to person? Are the masks ineffective?
The previous enthusiasm for the antibody tests seems to have waned. They’re saying now that the antibodies don’t last. Maybe a couple of months, but that’s about it.
But, there is still a lot of enthusiasm about getting a Covid vaccine. Just yesterday, the government gave a grant of $1.6 billion to some company to develop one. But, why do people think that a Corona virus vaccine would be any more effective than other vaccines? This past flu season, the CDC said that the Influenza-b vaccine was 37% effective. That means that for every 3 unvaccinated people who got the flu, 2 vaccinated people got it. And keep in mind that the CDC is notorious for propagandizing about the flu and the flu vaccine, claiming that 36,000 Americans die every year from the flu. With their track record of propping-up the vaccine industry, chances are great that the real effectiveness of the flu vaccine is much less than 37%. And keep in mind that they REFUSE to do double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of the flu vaccine. They refuse to do double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of any vaccine. They won’t even do unblinded trials. Every single year, there are millions of adults who don’t get the flu shot. I have never had a flu shot in my life, and I never will. So, why not at least compare health outcomes of those who vaccinate and those who don’t? But, I digress.
The point I am really trying to make is that among the newly diagnosed Covid cases, surely the vast, overwhelming majority have had no known exposure to an acutely ill person, sick with Covid. So, what does that mean? It means that they must have gotten it from someone who was infected but not sick, a so-called “asymptomatic carrier.”
But, we need to take a close look at the whole concept of an asymptomatic carrier. Because, presumably we are dealing with an infectious agent that causes disease- except when it doesn't. So, what does it mean when an infectious agent does NOT cause disease? What is going on in the body of someone who is infected with Corona virus but doesn’t get sick? The presumption is that their body is fighting the virus, but it doesn’t provoke symptoms, such as fever, inflammation, coughing, excess mucus, etc. But, those symptoms are how the body fights pathogens. So, if there is no reaction, why assume that the body is fighting a virus at all?
An asymptomatic carrier is defined as someone who tests positive for the virus but isn’t sick. But, what is the difference between not being sick with a positive test result and not being sick with a negative test result? Say, we’ve got two people, and both seem to be fine. We test them, and we find that one is positive and the other is negative. So, we presume that the one who tested positive is technically sick, even though he feels OK. Technically and theoretically, there is a BIG difference between the one who tested positive and the one who tested negative. But, what is the difference other than the opposite test result? For instance, if we tested both their blood, would we find tell-tale signs of infection in the one with the positive test result? As far as I know, they’re not even looking.
Why should we accept that a person is sick if the only indication of the sickness is an arcane test result and nothing else? On the day he was tested and found to be positive, Senator Rand Paul lifted weights at the Senate gym and swam in the Senate pool. Now, why should I believe that he was sick? Just because the test said so? Why should I believe the test?
They just told us that a 17 year old girl in Florida died from Corona virus after going to a Church social in which some people weren’t wearing masks and practicing social distancing. I bet none of them were overtly sick either. So, another asymptomatic carrier, I suppose. But, they also said that the girl had a rare auto-immune disease and that she has had cancer since the age of 2. She also suffered from gross obesity. I know of a 13 year old girl who died from gross obesity, and that was long before Covid.
So, what is going on? Let me rephrase that: So, what is going on for me? For me, Covid is a government and media phenomenon. That’s my entire exposure to it- what they are telling me. And the basis for the things they are telling me is not a comfort. The number of dubious claims and unanswered questions is legion, as are the flip-flops. Is there really a pandemic going on? The only thing I know for sure is that there is a cult-like allegiance to a medical doctrine going on, affecting both doctors and lay people, and that it has spread faster than a virus ever could.
Hidden Danger of the Keto Diet
- Created on Monday, 06 July 2020 19:20
There is a very attractive female doctor on Youtube who goes by Dr. Boz who advocates the keto diet. She is a real true believer in it. She says, for instance, that “fruit is poison.” And I don’t doubt that she is very strict about it. She gives an example of one of her meals being green salad, a small portion of meat, and then most of the calories on the plate from fats, such as avocado and cream cheese. Cream cheese. Now, there’s something that nobody needs to be eating.
But, I have a very strong suspicion that the people who follow that diet, and especially as strictly as Dr. Boz does, develop a severe degree of carbohydrate intolerance. The reason I say that is because I have much experience with people who have been on a keto diet. I am referring to people who have been water fasting.
Do you realize that fasting is like being on a keto diet? It’s just that it is internally generated, rather than provided from the outside. When fasting, you’re in a state of ketosis; your body has switched from burning sugar to burning ketones; and increasingly, your body burns ketones instead of glucose the longer you fast. If you suddenly start putting carbohydrate in, your body will get the message that it doesn’t have to stay in ketosis any longer, and it can start burning sugar again. But, it takes time to make the switch. It isn’t instant. So, if you just start off by pouring sugar into yourself, even wholesome foods such as fruits and melons and sweet vegetables, such as carrot juice, your blood sugar can spike. And I mean spike more than it would under normal conditions when you’re not fasting. Temporarily, you are sugar-sensitive.
And that’s why it’s a good idea not to go overboard eating sugary foods right after a fast- even wholesome ones.
How do I know this? I know it from testing the blood of post-fasters and seeing that they are sugar-sensitive, that they spike from eating an amount of sugar that a normal healthy person would tolerate easily. The effect doesn’t last very long. Within two weeks, it’s gone, and they’re back to tolerating carbohydrate normally. The reason that it happens is because the body has to change gears to get into a fasting state, one in which they are going to efficiently get through it. And it takes time to change back.
But, if these Keto people are really staying in a state of ketosis all the time, then I presume they have those adaptations going all the time, and thus, they develop sugar sensitivity and sugar intolerance. And in their case, it may be going on for months and years. How entrenched is it going to be then?
Now, if they remain as strict at avoiding carbs as Dr. Boz apparently does, then their blood sugar obviously is not going to spike. But, I suspect that in the real world, even among her most devoted followers, who think the world of her, that they sometimes cheat. And when they cheat, they may cheat a lot. They may actually binge on carbs sometimes. And they may think that it doesn’t matter because they avoid them most of the time. But, because they avoid them most of the time, they are probably sugar-sensitive, like a faster, and the result is that their blood sugar spikes, even from a normal amount of wholesome carbohydrate.
So, my advice is: don’t train your body to be insensitive to carbs by eating such an extreme diet as the keto diet. The important thing is to cut out all junk carbs, refined carbs, because you surely don’t need them. And make some of your carbs complex, such as beans, which digest slowly and tend not to cause spikes- even in diabetics. And eat plenty of non-carb foods, such as green and yellow vegetables which are non-starchy, and also raw nuts, seeds, and avocado. In other words, you should find a balance that works that relies very largely on, if not exclusively on: whole, natural, plant foods.
But, if you don’t eat carbohydrates at all, then you are setting yourself up for trouble.
When is the insanity going to stop?
- Created on Saturday, 27 June 2020 17:58
Medicine is such a dogmatic institution, and its dogma permeates all over the world. For decades now, they have preached that the amount of cholesterol in the blood determines whether arterial plaquing takes place. They say that if serum cholesterol is high, it causes atheromatous plaquing, and if serum cholesterol is low, it prevents it. High is now defined as 200 or above. But, if your cholesterol is 150, you’re considered OK.
But, how could a 25% reduction in serum cholesterol have any effect on starting or stopping a pathological process? Cholesterol is a normal constituent, and it is vital. Every cell in your body depends on cholesterol to maintain its intracellular environment. Without cholesterol in your cell membrane, your cells would dissolve! In other words, they couldn’t exist. Cholesterol is also a building block of steroid hormones, including testosterone and estrogen, and it provides vital cholic acid for digestion, which is synthesized from cholesterol.
If the atheromatous process is driven by the amount of cholesterol in the blood, where a level of 200 milligrams per decaliter of blood drives it, then why shouldn’t 150 also drive it? Why should that little difference be the determining factor in whether plaque forms or not? It’s insane.
It’s true that when people are on good health programs, where they are eating well, a diet consisting mostly, if not wholly, of: fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, etc. that they are going to have lower cholesterol. And if they eat bad diets, consisting of burgers, shakes, cookies, etc., they are going to have higher cholesterol. So, the level of cholesterol in the blood may be a marker for the kind of diet they eat. But, it doesn’t mean that the concentration of cholesterol in the blood is the determining factor in whether plaque is formed.
There is one caveat, and that is that oxidized cholesterol, from frying meats and whatnot, has been shown to be irritating, and anything that irritates the endothelium can cause plaquing. Tobacco smoke has no cholesterol, but it is very irritating, i.e. poisonous, and it is a powerful progenitor of arterial plaque.
There are special tests that can determine how much of your blood cholesterol is oxidized, and that has significance. But, that aside, the idea that the amount of cholesterol in the blood is what determines whether your have open or clogged arteries is crazy.
But, what about the fact that when they give people statin drugs, that their cholesterol goes down, and it may go down a lot, and their risk of heart attack and heart disease goes down with it? The truth is that the risk isn’t lowered that much from taking statin drugs. Maybe one heart attack gets prevented when 100 people take statins for a year. It’s something like that. The demonstrable benefit from taking statin drugs is actually very small.
And that tiny risk reduction may be due to other things than cholesterol reduction. We know that statin drugs are anti-inflammatory, and we know that inflammation is directly involved in atherosclerosis. It’s very telling that the slight reduction in heart attack risk has not been shown to be dose-dependent.
Meanwhile, the demonstrable harms from taking statin drugs are much less obscure, including: an increased risk of diabetes, dementia, and even cancer.
Furthermore, statins are often prescribed in the absence of any clinical signs of heart disease; based solely on the cholesterol number. In other words: it’s a knee-jerk reaction to a blood test.
“Mr. Jones, we see that your cholesterol is a little high, so we’ll be starting you on a statin drug. You’ll be taking it indefinitely- for the rest of your life. Have a nice day.”
That is the state of Modern Medicine today. For all the money, and it’s about $20 trillion spent in the U.S. every year, for all the exalted research and science, and regardless of whether you, yourself, are a rich bastard or a dirt-poor pauper, that is what you get. That is what 21st century Medicine delivers and calls health care.
Dr. Andrew Kaufman on Covid-19
- Created on Friday, 19 June 2020 12:46
Dr. Andy Kaufman is a board certified psychiatrist, and I know that doesn’t sound like a specialty that would lend expertise about a viral illness, but he also has a degree in Molecular Biology from MIT, and he has done clinical research in other fields of Medicine, including hematology and oncology. So, he is broadly educated and widely experienced.
And, as I listen to him, he certainly comes across as being very knowledgeable, and intelligent. Yet, what he says is certainly extreme. He challenges medical orthodoxy to the nth degree about Covid.
But, please give him a listen because I think it’s valuable to do so, whether or not you agree with him. That’s because, like it or not, he makes some very important points and asks some very important questions. For instance, the fact is that, to this day, the Corona virus has never been isolated, even though they speak as though it has been. For two, all claims about the death rate from Covid-19 are worthless because, as he puts it, “you don’t know the bottom number.” Since a great many people, reportedly, contract the Corona virus without getting the slightest bit sick from it, it means that anyone could potentially have it. And that means that you would have to test every person on Earth before you could know how many infected people there are. And that obviously has not been done or anything close to it. However, it’s worse than that because that assumes that you have a valid test, but you don’t. The inadequacies and faulty assumptions underlying the RT-PCR Covid-19 test have been detailed by David Crowe, Jon Rappaport, and others, including Dr. Kaufman, but he stresses that the problem in methodology long precedes this. The whole medical field of Virology has been plagued, from the start, with the kind of dogmatism that would make religions blush.
Dr. Karufman goes into vaccines and the refusal in Medicine to do double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of them, presumably because it would be “unethical” to do so, to deny anyone a vaccine. But, that is ridiculous. For instance, what about vaccines for adults, such as the Shingles vaccine? Obviously, a lot of adults don’t get that vaccine and aren’t going to get it. So, why couldn’t they do a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of it? And even with children’s diseases- and that’s the kicker because how could you deny any child the protection of vaccines- they could still do studies because there are parents who willfully do not vaccinate their children. So, those children aren’t going to be vaccinated anyway. So, why not compare those children to vaccinated children, and I mean scientifically? Granted, it would not be a blind study, but that doesn’t mean that it would have no value. You could test for the incidence of the disease that is supposedly being prevented, but just as important, you could test for incidence of other diseases and general health outcomes. There has been some attempt outside Mainstream Medicine to do this. For instance, there is this study, which shows a lower incidence of common maladies and chronic problems in unvaccinated children compared to vaccinated.
But, getting back to Dr. Kaufman, he is a psychiatrist, and he looks at the mental fixations of medical experts who are glued to a paradigm that is a colossal “group-think” of the worst kind, where the dogma starts, and everything that happens afterwards is interpreted according to the dogma- and if they have to pound square pegs into round holes, so be it. For instance, there is the question as to why an infective agent causes little or no illness in the vast majority of people (where, apparently, the number who don’t manifest any illness at all outnumber the ones that get a little bit sick because, as I type this on June 18, they are telling us that the virus is still spreading rapidly, and especially in states that have reopened "too soon," such as my state Texas, but how are these new cases coming about? How are people contracting it? Surely, the vast, overwhelming majority are unaware of having been around anyone with Covid or anyone with respiratory symptoms, which means that, presumably, that they got it from someone without symptoms.
In other words, with all the quarantining, social distancing, sanitizing, etc., it not only means that the “sickless sick” (to coin a phrase) are the motor of spread of this disease, but that the face masks, etc. are not effective.
And remember that all this supposedly started at “A” seafood market in Wuhon, China, and then spread, from there, person to person, to everywhere on Earth. The implausibility of that is staggering.
But, to me, the scariest thing is not Covid-19 but the medical response to it. Dr. Kaufman goes into the ventilating, and clearly they have killed a lot of people with those machines. And, Dr. Kaufman explains that they often they have to persuade conscious people to submit to that treatment- to allow doctors to anesthetize them, then administer drugs to them to paralyze them, so that a machine can forcibly ram oxygen in and out of their lungs. And the really perverse thing is that often these people have not been in that much distress. They have not been that dyspneic. They are being asked to volunteer to go on a respirator, you might say, electively.
Well, I will tell you flat-out that anyone who is able to sit and think and listen and talk (and remember that talking is a modified form of expiration) doesn’t need to be on a ventilator. The risks of ventilating are extremely high. The vast majority of Covid patients put on a ventilator have died: over 90%.
Dr. Kaufman goes into this and more. Again, he strikes me as a very intelligent man and a very courageous one. He explains that there is nothing solid about any of the claims made about Covid-19, and the idea that the whole world needed to shut down over it, is just plain insane.
So please listen to Dr. Kaufman and share this video:
Two surprising articles on Medscape
- Created on Saturday, 13 June 2020 13:32
Medscape is a weekly online journal for medical doctors that I have been reading for years, and the June 9 edition contains two articles that surprised me.
The first concerns the latest guidance from the American Cancer Society about lifestyle measures to prevent cancer. For the first time, besides setting limits on alcohol consumption for men and women, they admit that it’s best not to consume alcohol at all- to avoid it completely.
Thus, the change here is that the previous guideline only recommended limiting alcohol consumption, whereas the update suggests that, optimally, it should be avoided completely.
But, I have to wonder what took them so long because it’s not as though it was ever suggested that a little alcohol is good for you, that it helps to prevent cancer. Ethyl alcohol is a carcinogen, a mutagen, and a teratogen, and that’s been known for a long time.
Of course, there was the longstanding fallacy that a little alcohol helps to prevent heart disease, but that was based entirely on the “sick quitter” effect. In the U.S. and many other countries, most non-drinkers are former drinkers who used to drink a lot and often for decades. They are still suffering from the effects of alcohol even though they don’t currently drink. When researchers compared lifelong abstainers to so-called moderate drinkers, they found no protective effect from alcohol at all. The best thing you can do for your heart- and every other organ in your body- is not to bathe it in alcohol- at all.
The second article was an admission that many Covid patients who seem to recover, whose symptoms clear up completely, continue to test positive for the Corona virus for a long and indefinite period of time. So, the question is: are they still infective? But, what the question should be is: Is the PCR test valid? The medical world, in its religious faith in the Covid PCR test, still refuses to admit the possibility of false positives- even though it is widely recognized that the non-sick often test positive, and that the fully recovered also commonly continue to test positive. Some medical authorities are saying that it’s pointless to rely on the PCR test to determine if someone is cured, that other tests will need to be developed, and it may be best to forego PCR testing of recovered patients completely.
There is supposition about disease that occurs across the whole spectrum of pathology, where this, that, and the other thing are believed to be true. In other words, Medicine is riddled with “commonly held beliefs” that are unproven. But, the amount of supposition that is going on with Covid is off the chart.
I am not saying that there is nothing real underlying the Covid crisis, but I am saying that there is an element of “extraordinary popular delusion and the madness of crowds” that has taken over and is feeding on itself. And I am saying that it is happening at the professional level and fueled by the institutional dogmatism within Medicine, especially when it comes to this kind of disease. And to a large and growing extent, the masses just don’t seem to care any more, as evidenced by people flocking to beaches- and to anti-lockdown rallies. Medicine, as a profession, started based on superstition. Well into the 19th century, they were bloodletting to release the bad humors and the evil spirits. Modern scientific Medicine supposedly started at Johns Hopkins in the early 20th century. But, to a great extent, dogma and authoritarianism, and I mean of the worst and most dangerous order, still dominate the profession. What the world did, which was to shut down on medical orders, where governments of every stripe submitted to worldwide international Medicine shows you what Medicine has become and the extent to which it controls our lives. And it’s a very scary thing. With so many exotic viral outbreaks having happened, don’t you think it’s extremely likely that there are going to be more? What are we going to do if another one breaks out next winter? Is the world going to shut down again? One thing is absolutely certain: medical dogmatism is here to stay, and the sweep of it is going to be even greater going forward because of what happened.
Dr. Grundy’s grunge
- Created on Friday, 05 June 2020 19:37
Dr. Steven Grundy is either very rich, or he has a company backing him with pervasive internet advertising. His schtick is that lectins are bad. Lectins are proteins in plant foods that can potentially have harmful effects, but it’s more theoretical than real. The food highest in lectins are beans, but thorough cooking thoroughly deactivates the lectins. I’m a big fan of beans, and I eat them almost every day. And I’ll confess that it’s almost always out of a can. But, one advantage of that is that you know they have been cooked properly, and you don’t have to worry about the lectins.
Much smaller amounts of lectins occur in almost all plant foods. Dr. Gundry likes to give lectures holding up a tomato and asking if you think it’s good for you. Of course, the answer is that it isn’t. And that’s what got me thinking about Dr. Gundry because my garden tomatoes are pouring in right now, and I am eating them voluminously every day. The quality is so good. And I am not the least bit worried about the lectins.
Here’s a man who ate nothing but canned beans for 40 days. And he was very active physically during that time, so he ate a lot of beans. And on the 40th day, he competed in an ultra-marathon race. The race was so long, the runners had to eat solid food during the race to keep going. And he ate beans. Just beans.
And he looked good too. He slimmed down, as I expected he would (regardless of how many cans of beans he ate). But, he appeared to just lose body fat. His muscles stayed firm.
It's amazing all he could do. What harm did he suffer from the lectins? None.
And if you check the medical databases, you’ll find scant evident of harm from lectins. The most notorious case involves the eating of raw or undercooked red kidney beans. You shouldn’t do that. But, I do eat red kidney beans. Whenever I go to the salad bar, I always take a scoop. The USDA says that they are the highest antioxidant food on the planet. They’re not going to hurt you if they’re cooked properly. And eating them can only drive down your risk of heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. And that’s what you have to worry about, not Dr. Grundy’s leaky gut obsession.
The bottom line is that Dr. Grundy is so deluded, you should pay him no mind. None at all. Run away from him. Just click him off whenever he pops up on the internet. And eat your plant foods, including beans. There are things to worry about in this world, but lectins aren't one of them.
Caloric reduction for life extension
- Created on Saturday, 30 May 2020 20:26
First, it works. It has been demonstrated in animals many time, both large and small. Also, in insects. It’s never been tested with people, for many reasons. But, I know of a surrogate test in which they used telomere shortening as a surrogate for aging, and the test subjects who were calorically restricted for two years experienced less telomere shortening.
So, caloric restriction is the most proven life extension technique. But, what should we do about it? Well, I cant see getting underweight, and by that I mean skinny where you are decidedly less than your ideal weight. Life is about quality not quantity, in my opinion. You want to feel good about yourself, the way you look, about your manliness or womanliness. And if you get too thin, you’ll have no reserves to sustain you in an emergency. So my advice is to restrict calories enough to get down to lean body weight but where you still look good and feel good about yourself.
So, what is the best way to do it? There are several ways. You could just eat less at every meal. Or, you could just eat fewer meals. Say, for instance, instead of having 3 meals a day, you have only 2. Or, you could just have fasting days occasionally. That’s how Dr. Roy Walford went about it. He wrote in his book Maximum Lifespan that he fasts every Monday and Tuesday. He found that easier than having to skimp on his eating all the time. But, that really is radical because it comes to 104 days of fasting every year, and that is a lot. I know I couldn’t do that much fasting. I would waste away. I wouldn’t be able to eat enough the other 5 days to make up for it. But, he did it, and perhaps others can.
But, there is such a thing as being too thin, and we have to be practical. But, here’s a way that everyone should think about caloric restriction and that is to use it to keep you from eating things that you shouldn’t eat at all. Say someone offers you a piece of cake with some ice cream. You know you shouldn’t be eating that, and that those calories are just extra calories you don’t need; calories that will age you. So, you pass. That is the most important way to exploit the fact caloric restriction can lengthen your life. Use it to gain the fortitude to say no to food that you should not eat. Use it to say no to junk food.
One world government? It’s already here
- Created on Tuesday, 26 May 2020 20:44
I see a lot written online about the new world order and the coming one-world government. Whether it is going to happen or not, I don’t know, but in one very important respect, it is already here, and I mean: medically.
You know how powerful the CDC is in the U.S. It got the federal government to shut down the economy over the Corona virus. Your freedom to move about, to work, and to live as you wished was shuttered by the CDC, that is, by the medical establishment. Medicine is a profession; it is an industry; but through the power of government, it is overlord. Why couldn’t they just recommend that people who are vulnerable stay home? Or even if they wanted to recommend that most people stay home except for essential workers, but to make it the law of the land? In what is supposed to be a free country?
So, Medicine is powerful. When it talks, people listen, including our leaders. And it’s partly because Medicine is so highly revered. Doctors are the best and the brightest among us, and they, and they alone, have an understanding of disease and what needs to be done about it. We need to listen to them- at the doctor/patient level, and at the level of medical decrees about health and disease that are fanned far and wide.
Why is Medicine so highly revered? It’s because it is perceived as the pinnacle of science. And surely, there is a tremendous amount of science involved in Medicine; I don’t deny that. However, to a great extent, Medicine is a cult, and a dangerous one at that. And I could say it is a religion. It is definitely a belief system. And as in all cults, it has a strict hierarchy of authority, and it does not tolerate dissent.
Take the guiding principle of Medicine and Biology, which is Darwinian Evolution. Is it scientific? A distinguished group of PhDs in biology and biochemistry say it isn’t, and they have put their names to this statement:
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
It would be tangential for me to go into this at length, but briefly: life obviously underwent changes on Earth, but what drove the changes? Medicine says that random, accidental chance changes (mutations) to DNA from radiation etc. caused changes in organisms that were favorable, that had distinct survival advantages, such that they were “naturally selected” wherein those individuals survived better and lived longer and reproduced more often and more successfully, passing along those traits, and that’s what drove the whole process of evolution.
I debated it once with a Professor of Biology, and I asked her how it worked when it came to lactation, which is the crux of being a mammal. She actually had the nerve to suggest that it probably started with a pre-mammalian mother holding her infant close, and the infant got some sustenance, if only water and salts, from ingesting sweat from her sweat glands. But, that is SO stupid because it is totally imaginative, and it doesn’t even involve a mutation; it’s just an adopted behavior. So, how could it be passed along genetically? But, it’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to explaining the evolution of lactation because it involves not just changes in the glands on a woman’s chest, but changes in her uterus and birth canal, and a complete revamping of her offspring into a milk-consuming creature. And all these diverse changes had to evolve at the same time. And if it was driven by random changes being naturally selected, it meant that every single piecemeal step in the direction towards becoming a milk maker and milk consumer had to be useful and advantageous. It had to contribute something to survival- immediately. How can you explain the supposed evolution of some kind of a reptile into a mammal that way? It’s preposterous. It is absurd. Yet, it is regarded as “medical science.”
But, you better believe it because if you don’t, it’s assumed that you believe that God made the universe in 6 days and rested on the 7th. But, what about just saying that it’s a mystery, that life is a mystery, and we just don’t know how it happened and what drove the unfolding of it?
But, you can’t question Darwinian Evolution. If you do, you are put in the same category as flat-earthers and those darn “9/11 conspiracy theorists”, and be aware that, like the 3000+ architects and engineers, I am one.
But, the point is that Medicine involves beliefs- suppositions that are accepted on faith and in submission to authority.
Look at the whole realm of “vaccination science.” Consider how many doctors spend their days injecting vaccines into children. What do these doctors know about the vaccines, their effects, their effectiveness, or lack thereof, their safety, or lack thereof, their risks, their harms, etc.? I would tell you that they don’t know much more than you do. The only difference is that they have a few more talking points than you do. That’s about it. They’re not “virologists” or “immunologists.” So, not only are the people accepting the vaccines out of faith, but so are the doctors.
There are fields within Medicine that are very straight-forward, such as Anatomy and Physiology. But, when you get to “Virology” it is very autocratic, hierarchical, and dogmatic, and I mean that in the worst sense of the word. This is a paper by David Crowe, a Canadian researcher whom I greatly respect, and it concerns the isolation of the Corona virus. We have been told, repeatedly, that the Corona virus has been isolated, but what they mean by that is not what you think they mean. They are conflating the demonstration of “cytopathic effects” with the isolating of a virus.
David Crowe also has done more than anyone else to expose the flakiness of the RT-PCR test for the Corona virus, while completely ignoring the very possibility of false positives and hushing anyone who tries to raise the issue. David discusses it in this video:
David has also written an excellent critique of the Corona antibody tests.
You should definitely listen to this podcast of David Crowe and Dr. Andrew Kaufman discussing the very nature of viruses and their association with and similarity to exosomes, which are cellular excretions.
The whole paradigm of viral infections is fraught with uncertainty and inconsistency. Why is it that having Corona antibodies is good while having AIDS antibodies is bad? Why is it that children, who get colds easily and frequently, which are reportedly caused by Corona viruses, should be relatively immune from Covid-19? And yes, I’ve heard the explanation that there is an overlap of the antibodies, but it’s just a lip-flapping convenience, and it still comes down to believing that feeble children who get sick often are more resistant and better off. And that just doesn’t make sense.
Then, there is the whole “cytokine storm” theory for the lethality of Covid-19, that that’s what kills you. But, they are also telling us that it’s mostly the old and feeble who are dying, and they can’t generate cytokine storm as well, just as old people can’t generate fever as well. Who do you hear about getting 106 degree fevers? It’s not the old; it’s the young. It works the same for cytokine storm because it takes vitality to do it.
The bottom line for me is that we are in a situation in which a disease is being diagnosed solely on the basis of a test, and a very flaky one at that. And the possibility of error with this test is being systematically and dogmatically shunned, and that’s like not seeing an elephant in a room. Clinical presentation has been completely discarded. Although Covid-19 was initially designated as SARS2, which stands for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, with the cardinal symptoms being fever, coughing, and shortness of breath, now, it no longer has to be respiratory at all. Covid could be digestive. It could be dermatological. It could be anything. If you test positive, it’s Covid- no matter what your symptoms are. If you die of something that you’ve been suffering with for 20 years, you died of Covid, if you test positive- even if it was found out postmortem. If a husband and wife both seem to have colds, and they test for Covid, and she’s positive and he’s negative, then, of course, her positive test is valid, and his negative test is false. But, why not question the validity of the test?
Because of the arbitrary decree that the presence of Corona antibodies means a successful, if asymptomatic, fight against the virus has already been waged and the person is now recovered, they are adding people to the list of contractees in leaps and bounds, such that the lethality of Covid-19 has been reduced to well less than 1%. Because of all the asymptomatic cases, they’re now saying that it’s no more deadly than the flu. But wait. If it’s no more deadly than the flu, what did they shut down the world economy for? And remember that the deadliness of the flu occurs despite the fact that there is a vaccine which is supposedly protective and preventative. So, if Covid-19, without there being a vaccine, is no more deadly than the flu, and if the vast and overwhelming majority of people get no symptoms from it, where they don’t even know they’re sick, or they just get very mild symptoms and don’t even have to stay in bed, then what the heck are we doing shutting down the whole world economy and bringing so much suffering and ruin to so many people? It’s crazy.
The only thing I know for sure about Covid is that it is a dogma; a medical dogma, and the scariest thing about it is that this dogma knows no borders. You know how there is separateness and independence between countries when it comes to international relations, economic policies, and certainly military policies. BUT, THERE IS PRACTICALLY A ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT WHEN IT COMES TO MEDICINE. And that to me is truly the scariest thing of all. Because: all the wacky theories and wacky tests are being heaped on everybody; every person on Earth.
Medical globalism is already a reality. Medicine is a global cartel, and OPEC is like Little League in comparison. China has its own CDC, but methodologically and in their beliefs, they’re the same as ours. Medicine is an international institution and an international mindset. When it comes to this pandemic, they’re practicing the same religion. The institution of Medicine has superseded national sovereignty.
And medical tyranny is on the rise. Of course, in a country like China, it’s easy for it to grow. But even here, opting out of vaccines is getting increasingly more difficult. California recently passed a bill vacating personal exemptions from vaccination, even if doctor-prescribed. Now, If you want to put your kids in public school in California, they have to be vaccinated; no ifs, ands, or buts. It’s been that way in Germany for a very long time. What’s going to happen when they come up with a Corona vaccine? Are they going to lower the hammer even more?
Medical doctrines are like an ether that pervades the whole planet- seeping everywhere. To a great extent, the medical establishment has taken over the planet. It is like a virus that has commandeered the machinery of governments everywhere. Be afraid. Be very afraid.