PRESS RELEASE:

August 4, 2026 Rachel Rodriguez, Esq. Vires Law Group www.vireslaw.group and Rachel Rodriguez for Governor www.rachelforgov.com Phone: (561) 370-7383 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA - The Vires Law Group (VLG) of West Palm Beach, Florida, together with the Rachel Rodriguez for Governor campaign, announces that letters have been sent to the Attorneys General and Governors of all 50 states, thanking officials of Alabama and Louisiana and requesting that the other states also follow Florida's lead in investigating and, where warranted, prosecuting participants of the Covid Criminal Enterprise under VLG’s Federal Accountability Freedom Operation (FAFO).

The letters were sent to officials in Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming, in addition to the VLG teams efforts since 2023 in Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Missouri.

The letters request that each state's Attorney General open or expand a criminal investigation into individuals and institutions alleged to have participated in a coordinated scheme during and after 2020 in which hospital administrators and other actors received financial incentives in connection with the imposition of Covid-19 treatment protocols that VLG and the victims' families allege caused preventable deaths and injuries. Dr. Anthony Fauci and a number of federal officials and hospital administrators previously named in VLG's petition to the Florida Attorney General in 2023, and updated in 2025, remain among the individuals identified as subjects of the requested investigations.

VLG’s FAFO has sent state-specific victim witness information and petitions for investigation to Texas, Louisiana, Arizona, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania, in addition to Florida. “We are enormously grateful to Attorney General James Uthmeier of Florida for the leadership he is showing in pursuing the petition of his constituents,” said Rachel Rodriguez, Esq., founding attorney of Vires Law Group and a Republican candidate for Governor of Florida.

“We are equally grateful to Attorney General Liz Murrill of Louisiana, whose office has been in communication with our team since 2024, and to Attorney General Steve Marshall of Alabama, who has stepped forward to take a lead role in pursuing this necessary justice on behalf of all Americans. Florida leads the nation in preserving liberty. It is time for all states to step up for their citizens.”

VLG's ongoing petition effort identifies violations of state criminal statutes including second- and first-degree murder while committing acts of terrorism, aggravated abuse of the elderly and disabled, human trafficking, “RICO” - racketeering, terrorism, and aggravated manslaughter.

VLG and the campaign emphasize that, as with the original Florida petition, accountability for alleged Covid-era crimes is, under the current legal landscape, most likely to be achieved at the state or county level, since federal pardons have foreclosed certain avenues of federal prosecution. The letters ask each state's Attorney General to treat the matter with the urgency it deserves. VLG and the campaign urge citizens in all states to contact their Attorneys General and Governors to express support for these investigations and to stand with the victims' families who continue to seek truth and accountability.

For more information, or to support this effort, contact Vires Law Group at (561) 370-7383 or visit www.vireslaw.group. © Vires Law Group, 2026

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION REQUEST

Download evidence package

FLORIDA CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION PETITION

Download FL Crim Petition

Art for today: from my sketchbook, watercolor. Available art here.

Recently, there has been a new development in this case. Mr. Sexton has been pursuing the investigation of that fake show by the Met Police in 2021, and he has made some progress. Here is his report on X, please watch his video for the explanation. I have been in touch with Mr. Sexton, and expressed my willingness to come back to this effort, now with more evidence of wrongdoing by the British government that has accumulated since 2021. I also reached out to the Met Police investigator as an interested party. I am posting the previous articles I have written about this case below after Mr. Sexton’s announcement.

Mark Sexton’s post on X:

M. Sexton

@XPCBirmingham

31st of July 2026, important update and developments regarding covid, vaccine and Government related crimes.

Please watch the below video [link to video is above, view on X] it explains it all. We do understand it’s all part of the same system, however, if everyone gets on board that genuinely feels they are a victim, the Police will have no choice but to act and those responsible must be held to account. It’s all being exposed in the US, it needs to be exposed here too.

Share this with everyone you know, millions will have been affected.

It is my summation this will apply worldwide where the Covid 19 vaccines were and continue to be administered.

Be mindful Scotland and Northern Ireland police might have different crime recording procedures to that of England and Wales.

Some forces may re-direct you to the Counter Terrorism Police. All forces do collaborate with this specialist police force.

Documents I refer to attached as follows.

1, Terrorism act 2000/2006.

https://legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1

2, Dr Francis Boyle affidavit confirming Covid 19 vaccinations are a biological weapon of mass destruction. This has also recently been submitted to The Metropolitan Police by South Wales Police on behalf of Dale Vincent

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/francis_boyle_affidavit.pdf

3, The Biological weapons anti terrorism act of 1989. Drafted by Dr Professor Francis Boyle and signed into law in May 1990 by President George H.W. Bush.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Anti-Terrorism_Act_of_1989

4, my complaint submission March 2026 with some of the supporting evidence, this is now being actively investigated by The Metropolitan Police Professional Standards Directorate. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) were consulted and they have directed The Met’s PSD to carry out the investigation into the closure and handling of crime reference number 6029679/21.

A number of the high profile experts, professionals, witnesses and victims involved in the original crime report, at my request, have made contact with The Met PSD.
They have been acknowledged and in some cases identified as complainants.

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/FormSubmission_complaint_formcom_redacted_redacted.pdf

5, the home office crime recording rules 2026/2027. These are specific to England and Wales, for Scotland and Northern Ireland be guided by those forces.

Page 6,
The Standard directs a victim focused approach to crime recording. The intention is that victims are believed and benefit from statutory entitlements under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (CPVC).
This seeks to ensure that those reporting crimes will be treated with empathy and their allegations will be taken seriously. Any investigation which follows is then taken forward with an open mind to establish the
truth.

https://govukdiff.njk.onl/update/2026-04-02T10:35:00+01:00/www.gov.uk/government/publications/counting-rules-for-recorded-crime

THE POLICE CANNOT IGNORE YOUR COMPLAINT BY SAYING THE GOVERNMENT APPROVAL AND ROLL OUT OF THE VACCINE IS LAWFUL.

THE ALLEGATIONS BEING MADE ARE AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.

OPERATION TALLA STYLE DIRECTIVES ARE UNLAWFUL AND CURRENTLY UNDER INVESTIGATION BY THE SCOTTISH POLICE AUTHORITY AND FORMS PART OF THE METROPOLITAN POLICE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS DIRECTORATE REGISTERED COMPLAINT.

THE POLICE HAVE STATUTORY DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS TO INVESTIGATE THE CRIMES REPORTED AND MUST REMAIN IMPARTIAL, INDEPENDENT, DISPLAY PROFESSIONAL CURIOSITY AND TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND.

THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND INVESTIGATIONS ACT 1996 (CPIA 1996) ALL POLICE FORCES MUST ADHERE TO;

An investigation conducted by police officers with a view to it being ascertained whether a person should be charged with an offence, or whether a person charged with an offence is guilty of it.” It outlines the codes of practice for any investigation set out by the Secretary of State.

All investigators have a responsibility for carrying out the duties imposed on them under this code including and in particular recording information and retaining records of information and material.

Watch the video, read the documents and then action if this applies to you.

Below, I am republishing my post from 2025: “Operation Talla - Scotland’s Police Force were used to enforce and track the democide, aka “covid response”, to provide the background and history on this effort to compel the police in the UK to perform their duties and investigate assault, battery, poisoning and many other crimes transpired “during covid”.

This post is a follow on to my previous articles about police enforcement ops during the “covid response” in the UK:

Operation Talla was Police Scotland’s national command/operational structure for responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Police Scotland stood the Op down in mid-2022 and carried out a formal, organization-wide debrief (March–June 2022) that collected staff input and produced a Formal Debrief Report (the “Op Talla Formal Debrief”) containing 15+ recommendations and 6 practice observations and an action plan for implementing learning.

“Operation Talla” was activated in March 2020 as its pandemic response and command architecture; the name was later used by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) for the UK national operation. The operation covered pandemic planning, PPE and testing provision, governance and the policing of COVID regulations.

The CVI recording system and enforcement data (what was recorded)

Police Scotland created a specialized Coronavirus Intervention (CVI) recording system to log every COVID-related police encounter. The CVI dataset records interventions (engage/explain/encourage/enforce) and was the basis for analyses of policing activity during the pandemic. Aggregate enforcement figures across Scotland show over 20,000 COVID-related Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) were issued (March 2020–mid-2021), and enforcement (FPN/arrest) represented a minority of recorded interventions — enforcement accounted for roughly ~11–12% of CVI interventions and arrests about 0.7% of interventions in published breakdowns. (Different public summaries use slightly different date windows but this scale and profile are consistent.)

The Debrief

Method and scale: the Op Talla debrief was led by Police Scotland’s SMARTEU unit; it used a short questionnaire and invited contributions from all staff. It received 294 online responses representing the views of >5,300 people (individual and team submissions were consolidated), which were analyzed into findings, 15 recommendations and 6 practice observations.

Below are the most operationally important themes and sample recommendations:

• Operational planning & governance: create an overarching governance structure early in future major events; keep planning-team size under regular review; define job descriptions/role responsibilities for Silver/Gold roles and planners.
• Mass mobilization & logistics: develop a formal mass mobilization plan, identify logistic support and staging, create a dedicated C3 mass-mobilization cell, and future-proof Police estate for multi-agency operations.
• Communications & ICT: continue to use and harden MS Teams (or an equivalent multi-agency accessible platform), review/upgrade text alert systems, co-locate partner comms functions with Police Scotland comms where possible.
• People & welfare: retain enhanced cleaning regimes and PPE provision as appropriate; review business-continuity for staff welfare and absence management; put workforce agreements / overtime guidance in place for major mobilizations.
• Training & accreditation: build national training pathways so Inspectors/Chief Inspectors gain experience across events; manage “loggist” roles/cohorts centrally to retain competence and CPD.

I listed these just so you can see that none of these debriefings and discussions touched on anything other administrative processes around enforcing nonsensical, deliberately harmful policies that violated human rights, law and resulted in severe harm to communities, children, the elderly, leading to deaths and injury. No one in Police Scotland bat an eye or gave any of this even a brief consideration. All they were concerned with is how to commit the next militarized op better.

There were some external analyses published, such as a report by the Law School of the University of Edinburgh. This report pointed out that there was no impact identifiable from the police wielding extraordinary powers and issuing fines to those who violated the nonsensical pandemic “rules” (not law).

Trends in enforcement during the pandemic demonstrate surges during periods when death rates were particularly high or increasing. Nevertheless, it would be very difficult to tease out the effect, if any, that enforcement had on preventing the spread of the disease or saving lives. As a principal reason for introducing new policing powers during the pandemic[1], this does raise questions about testing the efficacy of an enforcement-based model to reduce the spread and impact of contagion.

Footnote 1: According to the Home Office and The Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (26 March 2020), police enforcement powers were strengthened by the government in order to ‘reduce the spread of coronavirus, protect the NHS and save lives’: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/police-given-new-powers-and-support-to-respond-to-coronavirus.

In other words, it is clear that the “measures” did not slow or prevent the spread of disease, i.e. failed at what they were justified with, but Scotland Police fully intends to continue using their newly obtained extra powers to do the same non-sensical enforcement of another psyop, whenever the PTB announce it. I am quite certain that the same activities have gone on in all police organizations world wide.

Sources of data:

• Police Scotland / SPA — Organisational Learning: Operation Unicorn & Operation Talla (Formal Debrief PDF, presented 21 June 2023). This is the primary source for the debrief, recommendations, practices and next steps. Spa Police

• Public Health Scotland / Journal summary (linked study): “Investigating the association between health vulnerabilities and police enforcement…” — includes discussion of the CVI dataset and notes >20,000 COVID FPNs in Scotland. Public Health Scotland

• University of Edinburgh / Independent data report on Police Use of FPNs (data reports used by the Independent Advisory Group). Edinburgh Law School

• HMICS thematic inspection of organisational culture (Dec 2023) — references Op Talla as an example and discusses organisational learning gaps. HMICS

• NPCC / Operation Talla publication strategy (Mar 2020) — explains national coordination, the “4Es” approach, and guidance to forces on COVID response. NPCC

• Police Scotland disclosure / FOI pages (FPN stats, disclosure logs). Scotland Police

Art for today: Early Harvest, watercolor, 12x16 in.

In my previous articles and interviews I have stated a few times that I don’t believe smoking alone is the cause of lung cancer or other types of cancer. Smoking could be undermining conditions of the body terrain making it more susceptible to the primary causes of chronic illness, of which vaccinations are a major driver, as I have already established. For example, it’s been demonstrated by Thomas Riddick that both smoking and alcohol consumption temporarily lower zeta potential and thus temporarily degrade the blood flow. Thus, it would be a reasonable hypothesis that chain smoking or abuse of alcohol are putting some constant pressure on the circulatory system. Heavy smoking could very well be a contributing factor in chronic diseases of various kinds including cancer, especially in case of heavy cigarette smoking vs moderate pipe tobacco/cigar smoking, as discussed further in this article. The point of my writing about this topic is not to encourage anyone to smoke, but to encourage all of you to think for yourself.

A brief commercial break, brought to you by Bryan Johnson, who seems to be reconsidering his massive drug addiction lately:

Let’s look at what the data shows and doesn’t show about smoking and cancer.

Introduction - no lung cancer prior to 1930 according to Alton Ochsner, head of American Cancer Society

I read a book by Judyth Vary Baker, “Lee and Me” where she details her relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald during the months preceding JFK assassination. In it, she describes an underground operation where she and Oswald worked on what was called “cancer research” but likely was a “dirty” lab for the military-intelligence agencies attempting to make weaponizable cancer-causing viruses. For the record, I believe Judyth, since her late teens, was (and still may be) an intelligence asset. While the book contains a lot of factual material, it is a narrative likely co-produced with the deep state agencies. The same applies to the “Dr. Mary’s Monkey” book. Both are written as a propaganda of gain-of-function (GOF), even though the books have a lot of factually correct material. For the purposes of this article, neither Judy nor her book are important. What caught my attention was this quote:

Dr. Ochsner’s speech that day was impassioned, and it was easy to see why he had been president of the American Cancer Society. Before 1930 lung cancer was so rare, Ochsner explained, that it was not even listed on the International Classification of Disease system in the United States. Ochsner even recalled as a medical student that he was awakened in the middle of the night to witness an autopsy of a man who died of lung cancer, because his professors considered it to be a medical event so rare that he might not see another again in his lifetime. But now, [around 1960] said Ochsner, there was an epidemic of lung cancer and the victims were overwhelmingly cigarette smokers.

This quote became a starting point for my investigation. Ochsner allegedly stated that there was no lung cancer before 1930! Whether or not Ochsner said this, the statement is factually correct - lung cancer was exceedingly rare at that time. This is despite smoking being prevalent for centuries, and despite high rates of tobacco use in the United States:

The only notable change in the above trends is the rapid rise of commercial cigarettes after 1930. That could be a possible explanation for lung cancer. One could hypothesize that it’s perhaps the switch to mass produced commercial cigarettes that has driven the cancer rates upward. Maybe it has something to do with inhalation of the products of burning paper and/or additives rather than tobacco itself? To some extend, that story holds, but strangely, only in men - discussed further below.

Alton Ochsner-initiated campaign, blaming cancer on smoking (while he himself worked on making cancer induced by injections) worked! The rates of cigarette smoking went up through the 50’s-60’s, but declined very substantially since then, especially in younger population:

Below is the data on which the narrative that smoking causes cancer was largely constructed. For the lung cancer incidence I combined CDC Seer data with pre-1975 estimates [Source]. These symmetrical curves of cigarette consumption vs lung cancer rates are separated by 20 years (!) The large time lag is very hard to reconcile with biological realities of any toxic exposure. As you can see, the story of cigarettes causing lung cancer fell apart after the rollout of mRNA shots. However, even before 2021 it is evident that the decline in lung cancer has a different, shallower slope vs the steep decline in cigarette consumption:

The story of lung cancer is even curiouser when the data is assessed by gender. Here is the long term trend of % population, by gender, being cigarette smokers, 1975-2023:

Here are CDC trends of lung cancer by gender, all ages for the same time period. Notice that very similar trends of smoking in men vs women translate to completely different trends in lung cancer! How come?

These 2 sets of charts are showing an extremely odd pattern that does not neatly fold into “smoking cigarettes causes cancer” narrative, because notice that in 1975, when both male and female rates of smoking began to decline, men had approximately 4 times (!!!) higher rate of lung cancer, while the rate of smokers in the population was only 10% higher. The gigantic gap between male and female rates of lung cancer that only began to narrow after 2005 is the best evidence that it wasn’t cigarettes, but something else entirely that was causing or exacerbating lung cancer.

Another significant evidence against the narrative is the growth in the rates of lung cancer diagnosed in younger people and children who are not smokers and not exposed to smoke. These rates have accelerated after the mRNA rollout in 2021, notice the change in slope in all graphs below:

Incidence in <50 yo, and 15-39 yo, post mRNA rollout, the rate increased 3.2%.

Incidence in <15 yo, post mRNA rollout rate of incidence increased by 3.8%.

The British Doctors Study, 1951-1991

In this part of the article, I am going to review one of the foundational studies that was used to drive the legislation, policy and public messaging about smoking being the cause of cancer. The British Doctors Study (1951-1991), was a prospective survey collected from healthcare professionals and assessed over 40 years.

Strangely, data from women were excluded AFTER the surveys were collected and analyzed! The authors state that there were “relatively few women smokers” as an excuse, but even few women over 40 years make a really good sample to study, so this smacks as an effort to prove a preferred narrative, rather than an open-minded scientific research:

The results for various types of cancers in men seem to indicate that yes, indeed, cigarette smoking may have impact on lung cancer, and a few other types:

Three types (cancers of the upper respiratory sites, lung, and oesophagus) were particularly closely related, with the mortality in heavy cigarette smokers at least 15 times that in non-smokers; two other types (cancers of the bladder and pancreas) were about three times more common in heavy cigarette smokers than in nonsmokers.

Non-cigarette smokers show far lower association with cancers vs. cigarette smokers:

Impact of smoking on overall mortality was rather puzzling:

for the 40 year period of the study as a whole, the overall mortality was twice as great in continuing cigarette smokers as in lifelong non-smokers throughout middle and early old age. The proportional excess in cigarette smokers decreased, however, in later life, and the ratio was reduced to 1-6:1 at 75-84 years of age and 1-3:1 at ages 85 years and over.

Effect on survival between cigarette smokers and non/former-smokers was found to be statistically significant, but diminishing later in life. This chart is for all-cause mortality, not specific to cancer:

The most convincing factor in the above data is the “dose-dependency” effect demonstrated in the cigarette smoking. This was not reproduced in the tobacco/cigar cohort. Therefore, it’s quite possible that paper or additives in commercial cigarettes may indeed have some real effect for both, cancer and all-cause mortality. As I mentioned before, cigarette smoking, especially heavy use, may put a significant pressure on the circulatory system, which, in turn, would undermine all other self-healing/clearance mechanisms. Therefore, I believe this chart is a valid finding for a significant association between cigarette smoking and elevated all-cause mortality.
Pulmonary and cardiovascular disease and mortality were as highly related to cigarette smoking. Mechanistically, this relationship makes sense.

Can this study be used to claim causality of cancer by smoking?

No! While this study provided an important long term prospective observation on the rates of cancer and all-cause mortality associated with smoking, it did not establish any causality. The authors of the paper do not claim that it does, and only state that this is a statistical association.

Furthermore, the arbitrary exclusion of women after the dataset was collected is the most troubling aspect of this study. The excuse provided (not enough of the 6100 survey responders were smokers) seems very shaky. A large % of the female population in the UK were smokers: 45% in 1951, which gradually declined to 28% in 1991. Therefore, the dataset could have contained ~2000 female smokers, and 40 years makes it a large sample! As I discussed previously, cancer rates in men and women are astonishingly different and cannot be explained by any natural causes or lifestyle choices. At the peak rates of smoking in the US and UK, both men and women had high rates of cigarette smoking, and women were almost exclusively cigarette smokers. Something really inconvenient must have been shown in the male vs female data and jeopardized the “smoking causes cancer” narrative.

Furthermore, in this study no adjustments for demographic, health status, medication, or any other factors - other than age - were performed. Finally, of course, no adjustment for vaccination status was performed, this is strictly a taboo topic in “science”. Yet, speculatively, I could say that this factor could have been a major one. The authors should have asked that question. They did not.

To smoke or not to smoke? Jean Calment’s story.

If you are a non-smoker, please don’t start, that’s clear. The rest of it is a much harder question to answer. I would like to conclude this article with a story about the longest lived human in recorded history - Jean Calment, a French woman who lived to 122+ years of age. She was born in 1875 and died in 1997!

As a teenager, Jean met Vincent Van Gogh, and found him very unpleasant. She was tiny (4’11). She reportedly had some childhood vaccines, but no records are available. She was from an upper middle class family, and she had a relatively comfortable life in a century of major wars and societal upheavals. From all the information available about her - she was not “health conscious”. She didn’t maintain a particular diet, she didn’t take vitamins or supplements, and didn’t seem to care about her “health metrics”. Worse - she ate chocolate by pounds a week!! What would MAHA-HHS say, sugar kills, that’s worse than being on heroin? Even worse than that - she drank wine (preferred sweet) and she smoked until the age of 117!

The only thing I can reliably conclude from Jean’s story - it’s not the smoking that kills you, it’s quitting that does.

For a one time donation

Buy me a Kofi

Art for today: Abstracted Roses, oil on panel, 12x12 in.

Did you enjoy the narrative build up, the anticipation, that “THIS TIME WE GOT FAUCI, we have his secret diaries!!!” Ooh, the drooling, the moaning, the righteous anger and indignation: finally, in Season 6, Episode 26 of this Hollywood production, our heroes will be victorious. We must trust the plan harder and shut our critical thinking skills even harder-er! Anyone who points to boring stuff like the applicable legal and governance frameworks, or simple things like obvious fakeness of “Fauci diaries” - they are divisive gatekeepers and controlled opposition! They are defending Fauci! They hate Rand Paul because they are just hateful!

It is useless to ask MAHA groupies to name one law that Fauci broke in 2020, in order to test their prosecutorial theories… I tried several times and got screamed at and called names. Their prosecution theory is “he is evil, he pushed for masks, he told Trump XYZ, he is a narcissist, look what he did during AIDS”. I did get some more sane responses, but the best prosecutorial theory they could come up with is - he lied to Congress (not interesting, par for the course in government) and he directed his staff to apply for cash awards for him (also, not relevant to anything covid policy or covid pandemic crimes). Oh well. It is a sad fact that most Americans’ civics classes are delivered by Netflix and Hollywood, who are likely among top corporate contractors of the vast intelligence agency that this post is dedicated to.

But did you enjoy the story arc adapted from the 007 movies? The villainous evil villain whose every word determined the policies of all the kings and queens, the Presidents, the Prime Ministers, the Governors and Congresspeople, Members of Parliaments, the media, the Hollywood actors, the famous athletes, corporations, schools, etc. etc. - because the world was gripped by the terrible horrible completely apocalyptic crisis of a “novel virus”! Or maybe even horrible-er crisis of GOF virus that leaked from Wuhan, because that’ where the villain had cooked it. Whenever words “novel virus” are splattered all over the news, and Johns Hopkins red balls are flashing on screen, that’s it! The world has nowhere to turn but to a wee hemorrhoid NIH bureaucrat, who has no formal authority for any of this whatsoever, but, how dare you to point this out? Of course, every head of state in the world did what a mid-level American government official, Anthony Fauci told him to do! Note that this level of average logical reasoning out there is also why we are not allowed to ask how is it that all space alien ships consistently land in the USA and nowhere else on Earth?

Do you wonder where the narrative of the villainous Dr. Evil Fauci, who singlehandedly controlled all states and countries of the world by his sheer evil genius (and no legal authority at all) came from? My readers who have been with this Substack for a while realize that the Fauci Show is very fake. And we also realize that it is very carefully pre-planned (years ahead of time) and orchestrated with massive “whole of government” participation and, likewise, massive amounts of cash poured into the private sector to achieve the “whole of society” compliance. This is not your average roadside carney attraction.

This post describes the [highly likely] producers, script writers, prop makers, cast and crew behind the Fauci Show - the Agency that Goes Largely Unnoticed, i.e. Signature Reduction. While the true scope of this agency is unknown, it was estimated to employ ~60,000 people around 2015 (the CIA at the time had ~20K employees). The activities include creating fake credentials, identifications, passports, personas, backstories, employment records, social media profiles, documentation like Fauci’s diary, sometimes even casting doppelgangers for important individuals or operations. It is highly likely that many high profile doctors, scientists and other professionals with influential podcasts/social media presence on all sides of freedom are affiliated with these narrative control activities. It is also possible that there are even greater numbers of “soft-controlled” individuals - their public speech is directed via numerous direct and indirect incentives, and “nudges” into preferred narratives of masking the military-intelligence Operation Covid as a public health event. The soft controlled assets may or may not be aware of being handled.

The post below explains the history and evolution of Signature Reduction, and was provided by my correspondent, who prefers to stay anonymous.

First There Was OSS

The history of intelligence agencies in the United States, when examined critically, reveals a complex network of organizations operating within the shadows of the government power. The genesis of modern U.S. intelligence can be traced back to World War II, with the establishment of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the precursor to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). A spade, huh?

The OSS was instrumental in covert operations, intelligence gathering, and espionage during the war. One of the most controversial programs run by the OSS was ‘Operation Paperclip,’ which played a role in recruiting and extracting German scientists, engineers, and technicians, including former Nazis and SS members, to work for the United States. This operation provided immunity and new identities to individuals who had been part of the Nazi regime in return for their assistance in developing the US military-industrial complex.

Kurt H. Debus, a former member of the SS, sitting between President John F. Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon Johnson. Debus served as the first director of NASA’s Launch Operations Center.

The CIA is Born

Post World War II, the National Security Act of 1947 marked a pivotal moment, birthing the CIA and reshaping the intelligence landscape. This Act was a response to the perceived need for a centralized, coordinated approach to intelligence that would transcend the limitations of wartime agencies. The CIA was vested with broad powers, functioning under minimal public scrutiny, often operating in international territories to counter perceived threats to U.S. interests. Their actions during the Cold War, including covert operations to influence foreign governments and gather intelligence on the Soviet Union, were indicative of their expanding role in global affairs.  The CIA has likely run more shady programs than any intelligence agency in the world.  They include everything from MKUltra, which involved abusing children, to the CIA's involvement in the killing of JFK.

Declassified Project MKUltra: Subproject 8 documents detailing illegal experimentation with LSD on non-consenting subjects (mental patients, prisoners, drug addicts, etc.)

Additionally, the CIA ran an active interventionist campaign to achieve regime change to undermine democratically elected governments that did not share the CIA's or US’s political views.  Generally, these programs caused significant long-term harm to the countries involved as well as, ultimately, to US foreign policy.

• Iran (1953): The CIA orchestrated Operation Ajax to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and reinstated the Shah of Iran, largely due to concerns over Mossadegh's nationalization of the oil industry.  This resulted in the subsequent Iranian revolution and took the country on a path to a terrorist-backing theocracy.

• Guatemala (1954): The CIA-backed coup ousted President Jacobo Árbenz, who had enacted land reforms and other policies perceived as socialist.

• Cuba (1961): The Bay of Pigs Invasion, an unsuccessful CIA-backed attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro.

• Chile (1973): The CIA supported the coup led by General Augusto Pinochet against President Salvador Allende, the first democratically elected Marxist leader in Latin America.  Pinochet subsequently ruled Chile with an iron fist.

• Afghanistan (1980s): The CIA provided support to Afghan mujahideen fighters against the Soviet invasion.  This led to the rise of Islamist terrorists from Afghanistan.

• Nicaragua (1980s): The CIA was involved in the Iran-Contra affair, where they secretly financed the Contras against the Sandinista government.

The NSA Gets into the Game

The formation of the National Security Agency (NSA) in 1952 added another layer to the intelligence network, focusing primarily on signal intelligence (SIGINT) and codebreaking. This era also saw the rise of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the expansion of the FBI’s counterintelligence capabilities.

NSA's greatest claim to fame is their ongoing operation to spy on all Americans all the time.  Specifically, the organization was involved in the following operations (as revealed by Edward Snowden).

• PRISM Program: This program involved the NSA collecting internet communications from various U.S. internet companies, including email, chat services, videos, photos, stored data, file transfers, video conferencing, and logins.

• Metadata Collection: The NSA collected call records, known as metadata, from millions of Americans. This data included phone numbers, call durations, and other details, but not the content of the conversations.

• Bulk Data Collection: The NSA had been collecting vast amounts of digital communications globally, including from U.S. citizens, under a program called "Upstream." This included data passing through internet backbone facilities.

• Global Surveillance: The NSA's surveillance extended beyond the U.S., targeting foreign leaders, global organizations, and the general population of various countries.

• Collaboration with Foreign Intelligence: The NSA worked closely with intelligence agencies in other countries, particularly the "Five Eyes" alliance (comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States).  In this fashion, if US law prevented surveillance, they would outsource it to one of the other ‘Five Eyes’.

• Court Orders and Legal Justifications: The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) authorized many of the NSA's activities. However, there were concerns about the lack of transparency and the broad interpretations of laws like the Patriot Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

• Hacking and Encryption Bypassing: The NSA reportedly used various methods to bypass encryption and conduct hacking operations to access data and communications.

Dates when PRISM data collection began for each service provider.

These operations continue to be re-authorized by Congress with only minor cosmetic changes.

Even More Bloating After 9/11

Post-9/11, the intelligence community underwent significant reorganization. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) aimed to enhance coordination among various intelligence agencies. Thanks to the anthrax-mediated extortion of a few Congresspeople, the Patriot Act greatly expanded government surveillance capabilities.

The types of activities authorized by the Patriot Act, in many instances are unconstitutional.

• Roving Wiretaps: The Act allowed for roving wiretaps, enabling intelligence agencies to monitor multiple communication devices of a suspect without needing to obtain a separate court order for each device. This was aimed at individuals who frequently change phones or communication devices to evade surveillance.

• Business Records Provision (Section 215): This section permitted the FBI to request court orders to access business records, including library and financial records, relevant to terrorism investigations. It expanded the type of information that could be sought and made it easier for investigators to obtain such data.

• Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Amendments: The Patriot Act broadened the scope of what could be considered relevant to an investigation, allowing for more expansive surveillance under FISA. It lowered the threshold for obtaining FISA warrants against suspected foreign agents and terrorists.

• Enhanced Surveillance of 'Lone Wolf' Terrorists: The Act authorized the surveillance of individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities who may not be affiliated with a recognized terrorist group or foreign nation ('lone wolf' provision).

• National Security Letters (NSLs): The Act expanded the FBI's authority to issue NSLs, which are administrative subpoenas used to demand communication records, financial records, and other information without prior judicial approval. It also imposed a gag order on recipients, prohibiting them from disclosing that they had received an NSL.

• Sneak and Peek Warrants: The law allowed for delayed notification of search warrants, meaning law enforcement could search a property without immediately notifying the target of the search. These warrants were justified as necessary to prevent suspects from destroying evidence or fleeing.

Of the above, my favorite is National Security Letters, which allows the FBI to demand private records without a warrant or any other judicial oversight.  Essentially, they are self-issued search warrants.  I can’t image how these would ever be misused. 

Redacted National Security Letter demanding cell phone customer records (without a warrant)

Yet another layer of bloat - “Signature Reduction”

You would presume that there is absolutely no need to spin up yet another intelligence agency, given the broad scope and unconstitutional powers that have already been assigned to both domestic and international intelligence offices.  You would presume wrong. After you commit a bunch of crimes, you need a cleaning crew.

The genius of Signature Reduction is to work through shady contracted proxies instead of the government getting directly involved in the dirty business of breaking laws.

The Signature Reduction program is a highly classified initiative operated by the Pentagon, encompassing a range of clandestine activities and techniques aimed at reducing the detectability and traceability of U.S. military and intelligence operations. Additionally, the program is increasingly involved in ‘influence’ operations both on foreign soil as well as domestically. We have all probably been exposed to their operations on the Internet.  The NSA listens to everything we do.  Signature Reduction tries to influence everything that we do and believe.

Some key aspects of the program, as revealed through investigative journalism and public disclosures, include:

• Scope and Scale: The program is reportedly the largest undercover force ever created by the Pentagon, involving approximately 60,000 people. In comparison, the CIA is estimated to have a staff of around 21,000 at the time of the Edward Snowden leaks in 2013. This secret army operates both domestically and internationally, utilizing low-profile approaches and often working under masked identities​​​​.

Operational Groups: Signature Reduction efforts are carried out by three major groups:

• Special Operations Forces: This includes Navy SEALS, Green Berets, and other special forces who operate under varying levels of clandestine cover, often employing false identities and civilian covers​​.

• Human Intelligence Operators: Operatives in this group engage in activities such as close-in surveillance and reconnaissance, often requiring them to work undercover​​.

• Cyber Operators: This rapidly growing group focuses on online intelligence collection, monitoring of terrorist organizations and foreign adversaries, and conducting influence operations​​.

The overall program significantly focuses on cyber operations and is deployed through a set of private contractors that lack oversight.

• Cyber Operations Focus: Ostensibly, a significant part of the Signature Reduction program involves cyber operations targeting terrorist organizations and adversaries like Russia and China. In reality such operations are now being conducted within the United States​​ to influence the domestic population.

• Program Administration: The program is managed by over 130 private companies and is supported by numerous secret government organizations. The budget for administering Signature Reduction is reported to be around one billion dollars, involving a complex network of contractors and government agencies​​​​​​.  Because the work is often contracted to private organizations, they are not limited by the legal constraints that are placed on the US military operating on US soil.

• Lack of Oversight: Despite its vast scale and significant impact, the Signature Reduction program has reportedly received little to no oversight from Congress or public policy entities. The program's clandestine nature has kept it largely hidden from public scrutiny and democratic accountability​​​​.  This allows them tremendous latitude to act outside of the law.

• Discovery and Reporting: The program was first identified by William Arkin, a former US intelligence analyst and journalist, who discovered its existence through job announcements and resumes in the defense industry. His inquiries revealed that while the term "signature reduction" was widely used, it was not officially acknowledged as a program by the government​​.

Getting a Job at Signature Reduction

Unlike the CIA and NSA, which now have websites, you will only find mentions of Signature Reduction in job postings.  If you are interested in pursuing a career where you run domestic ‘influence operations’, you can look through job postings on Indeed.  You may get to do exciting things, such as ensuring that Americans believe that J6 was an insurrection or that the vaccines are safe and effective.

Senior Signature Reduction Specialist Job Posting on Indeed.com

Art for today: Borzoi puppy, pastel on paper

Me - no.

Quick update: Fauci took the Fifth. HA. HA. HA. Who could have predicted this, right?

If you haven’t caught up on all the “Fauci private diary!TM” bruhaha, here’s the post from yesterday.

Later in the day, RFK Jr confirmed what Debbie and I discussed in yesterday’s video - this document is NOT Fauci’s private diary, but a federal record. He should have explained that this is part of “signature reduction”, i.e. masking of the covert military-intelligence operations, but whatever. By the way, do you know that signature reduction is probably the largest department of the deep state? But nobody really knows the scope of it.

I wonder if Rand Paul and all the MAHA accounts who flooded the internet with misinformation will retract their statements?

In any case, I am not going to dignify that clown show. Here is my prediction - nothing will happen, beyond Rand Paul posturing and Fauci saying he can’t recall anything. Even if Fauci says something else, it doesn’t matter. No accountability, no justice for the victims and no change to how HHS is going to continue to lie to all of us while funding more of the same “fast-tracked” poisons, “countermeasures”, “preparedness”, etc. I am not black-pilling you, the truth is never “black” or “pill” - it is always valuable and liberating. I am simply going to use this opportunity to remind how important it is to not compromise it in exchange for a cheap thrill, no matter how much you want to smash Fauci’s smirk off his face.

No matter how vile and despicable Fauci is - and he is truly vile and despicable - “prosecuting” him for crimes that he didn’t commit is designed to fail. That’s exactly why Rand Paul is doing it. He is running a fake (very safe) prosecution show for his own political gain-of-function and with full approval of the real criminals - Trump and the Pandemic Preparedness crime cartel. The goal of this cartel and Paul’s “investigation” is to legitimize and forever enshrine the government’s self-assumed right to remove the civil rights and Constitutionally guaranteed protections under the doctrine of “pandemics”, whether claimed natural or “gain-of-function” derived. They want to keep all the illegal-laws and pseudo-legal powers they have obtained through Operation Covid in place in order to commit the same crimes in perpetuity.

Prosecution under a false theory not only ensures Fauci is safe, it also helps the crime cartel solidify its power and the lies on which they built their power - the “gain-of-function” narratives. It also makes mockery of the victims - those fake-diagnosed with “gain of function lab leaked bioweapon” and then trapped and murdered in the hospitals with remdesivir, narcotics, ventilators and with such utter depraved cruelty that would make Nazis blush. Yet, their voices are forever silenced with the “lab leak” narrative that large “health freedom” MAHA-aligned accounts are now trumpeting all over the internet! The Pandemic crime cartel couldn’t ask for better supporters than those who take the cheap “get Fauci” bait and endorse this lie.

As a reminder, I have written about the fake hero-villain relationship between Rand Paul and Fauci (they are both on the same side, and playing for the same GOF team) back in August 2024 in this post:

Here is a summary of why Fauci will walk free and live happily ever after:

• There was no lab leak and none are possible. Psychological and non-lethal chemical weapons were deployed to drive fear and achieve mass compliance with criminal acts of the US Government, their co-conspirators and foot soldiers, witting or unwitting.

• There is no definition of GOF, there was no “GOF virus” and none are possible to make.

• Bioweapons are indistinguishable from vaccines, and that’s the real reason Trump gave Fauci a Presidential award for Operation Warp Speed.

• Fauci was not in charge of any covid policy decisions, the National Security Council under Trump 1.0 was in charge. Giving bad advice without decision making authority is not a crime. The fake prosecution of Fauci is designed to keep Fauci safe and these real perpetrators even safer.

• Anything that Rand Paul claims as a GOF activity is indistinguishable from routine “infectious disease and vaccine/biologics research” conducted in 1000+ lab facilities in the US and 3000+ facilities world-wide. Thus, no crime or cover up can ever be proven.

• Finally, Rand Paul and Fauci are both acting in a theatrical play as a hero and a villain characters. The hero is fighting against evil villain who is making GOF bioweapons in secret labs far away. The hero will defeat the villain by claiming the government must continue to invest into [totally fake] Pandemic Preparedness racket, and all the illegal laws, such as PREP Act, CARES Act, etc. that have been used to remove our rights, lie to the public, and kill and maim millions of people while deriving huge profits should stay with no changes.

Below is the collection of articles which will refresh your memory on these topics, or, if you are new here - explain my position on this matter.

Art for today: Alpine lake, from my sketchbook, watercolor. Available art here.

Before we proceed, I am reminded of this famous quote, which I edited, because the same propaganda techniques apply to manufacturing both, heroes and villains:

Reading “Fauci’s diary” reminded me of another “historic diary”. Debbie and I were walking around a little tourist town one day not long ago. Among what looked like a million-items of inventory in a thrift/antique shop she found a copy of Life magazine from 1966 with Lee Harvey Oswald’s “My Historic Diary” from his (obviously stage managed) “defection” stay in the USSR. It is a hilarious read… the spelling alone is a gem, and given that he wrote it by hand, makes it much more impressive than 1141 pages produced by agency(ies) staffers who compiled Fauci’s materials. The photo below is of Oswald, his Russian wife Marina and Marina’s uncle, a high ranking KGB official. All of this was part of a joint USSR-USA production in preparation of the JFK’s assassination:

These documents (props, “signature reduction ops”, misdirections into irrelevant events or actors, etc.) are a reminder that everyone knows who killed JFK, and that Oswald was a patsy, but nobody was ever brought to justice. Those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it.

The history lessons aside, here is our discussion of Fauci’s Historic Diary:

Notes on various topics that we discussed:

We spent some time addressing the false advertisement of the document as “Fauci’s personal diary”. Here is Rand Paul himself lying about it. This is designed to elicit angry and immature emotional response from the public and drown-out any critical assessment of the document:

There is no record of a specific subpoena issued by Paul’s committee for Fauci’s personal diary. Instead, the diary appears to be part of the federal records production, i.e. official government documentation.

After becoming chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Paul launched an investigation into “COVID-19 origins” and federally funded virus research. He issued subpoenas to multiple federal agencies—including NIH, HHS, CIA, FBI, and others—for records related to those subjects. (Homeland Security Committee). Paul’s committee has stated that it requested emails, messages, call records, agency files, and other documents relating to Fauci and NIH. The “diary” was released as one category of material among many in the committee’s document archive (Senator Rand Paul). According to Paul, the immediate reason for subpoenaing Fauci’s testimony was that Fauci had initially agreed to appear voluntarily before the committee and later declined. Paul also said he wanted to question Fauci about COVID-19 origins, gain-of-function research, alleged destruction of records, and other matters under investigation. (Semafor)

The committee’s public announcements have not explained the precise chain of custody or legal authority by which the diary entries were obtained. Thus, these 1141 pages are not Fauci’s private thoughts, but likely staff-generated CYA journaling activity and records of at least some of Fauci’s meetings and public appearances, which are part of agency documentation, not Fauci’s personal materials.

The “Covid Dossier” that Debbie and I published, clearly demonstrating that Operation Covid had nothing to do with public health, and that all countries involved in “lockstep” (~180) invoked nearly identical military-security laws and frameworks. In none of the countries we were able to profile any health agencies had any decision making authority.

The dossier is a compilation of the official government documentation and sources. It is disingenuous for any serious covid investigator or commentator to pretend this evidence does not exist and pretend that there is any real prosecutorial theory behind Rand Paul’s theatrics, because Fauci has not violated any applicable laws. Under the military/national security doctrine invoked, lying to the public is 100% legal. The US Government under Trump 2.0 administration continues lying to the public about Operation Covid under the same doctrine. Rand Paul’s production is part of this propaganda and cover-up.

Here is another example: while Fauci is being presented as an evil mastermind, somehow having magical jurisdiction over 50 states and 180+ countries, and being accused of funding “dangerous GOF virus research in Wuhan”, Senator Paul is strangely not interested in a full scale manufacturing of that “dangerous GOF bioweapon virus” right here in the United States by our brave DARPA forces at the time when no such “GOF bioweapon” was circulating in the country (March 5, 2020 press conference at the Pentagon).

Why doesn’t Senator Paul invite Col Wendy Sammonds-Jackson to testify about what she was growing at Ft. Detrick, how she obtained that material and where it went after it was grown? Cases and deaths started skyrocketing right AFTER she made this announcement.

Results of the AI-queries I ran on “the diary”:

Mentions of the PREP Act

The document mentions the PREP Act (Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act) only once, specifically in the entry for March 10, 2020.

According to the journals, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Robert Redfield spoke with Nancy Pelosi at the request of the Vice President to encourage the passage of a bill to indemnify companies that manufacture surgical masks. Dr. Fauci noted that there was a shortage of medical-grade masks and the administration wanted to allow industrial masks to be sold for medical use. He stated that “the PREP act allows indemnification,” which was a requirement for companies to agree to sell industrial masks for medical purposes.

Mentions of the National Security Council

The journals describe the National Security Council (NSC) as a central body in coordinating the government’s response to both COVID-19 and later outbreaks, often through Policy Coordination Committee (PCC) meetings and the involvement of high-ranking advisors.

Early Pandemic Response and Travel Restrictions

In the initial stages of the COVID-19 outbreak, the NSC played a lead role in determining policy, specifically regarding border controls:

• PCC Meetings: Dr. Fauci attended daily Policy Coordination Committee (PCC) meetings, which were chaired by Anthony Ruggiero of the NSC. These meetings were the forum for deciding on initial measures like airport entry screenings for flights from Wuhan.

• Stance on Travel Bans: NSC officials, particularly Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger, were the primary proponents of closing U.S. borders to travelers from China. While Dr. Fauci and Dr. Robert Redfield initially opposed these bans, the NSC continued to push for them throughout January 2020.

• Coordination with Task Force: Key NSC figures, including National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien and Pottinger, were designated members of the President’s Coronavirus Task Force.

• Schengen Area Restrictions: In March 2020, NSC Advisor Robert O’Brien weighed in alongside health officials to support restricting travel from the 26 European countries in the Schengen Area as infections there surged.

• Debbie Birx: In February 2020, Dr. Deborah Birx was announced as the new “coronavirus coordinator” within the NSC.

• Raj Panjabi: He is identified as the NSC lead for pandemic preparedness. Dr. Fauci worked with him during the monkeypox outbreak to engage with LGBTQ+ activists, though Dr. Fauci later privately expressed concern that Panjabi seemed “over his head” in that role.

• Beth Cameron: Serving as the NSC’s Senior Director for Global Health Security and Biodefense, Cameron worked with Dr. Fauci on securing funding for pandemic preparedness and managing the U.S. relationship with the WHO.

The NSC was heavily involved in the Intelligence Community’s (IC) efforts to determine how COVID-19 began:

• Investigative Tasking: Shortly after taking office, President Biden tasked the NSC and the IC to prepare a report on whether the virus emerged from human contact with an infected animal or a laboratory accident.

• Briefings: Dr. Fauci attended high-level NSC briefings on the origins of the virus, noting that the NSC’s analysis leaned toward a natural “species jump,” which contrasted with some other agencies’ views.

Fauci was interacting with members of NSC but did not have decision-making authority:

Fauci attended multiple meetings involving the National Security Council (NSC), often in the context of policy coordination or high-level intelligence briefings. According to the journals, he participated in several different types of NSC-led meetings:

• Policy Coordination Committee (PCC) Meetings: In the very early stages of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci attended daily PCC meetings. On January 16, 2020, he noted being in on a PCC meeting via the NIH SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) with the NSC, chaired by Anthony Ruggiero. He attended additional PCC meetings led by Ruggiero throughout late January to discuss airport screenings and travel restrictions.

• Meetings with NSC Leadership: On January 27, 2020, he attended a White House meeting via SCIF led by Deputy Director of the NSC Matt Pottinger to discuss closing borders to travelers from China. On July 16, 2020, he participated in a teleconference with Pottinger and National Security Advisor Bob O’Brien regarding travel between the U.S. and Europe.

• Interagency Policy Committee (iPC) Meetings: On April 22, 2021, Dr. Fauci participated in an iPC meeting chaired by Beth Cameron of the NSC to discuss funding for pandemic preparedness.

• Intelligence and Origin Briefings: On July 1, 2021, he attended an “official briefing” with the NSC led by Beth Cameron and Maher Bitar (Senior Director for Intelligence Programs at NSC) to discuss the Intelligence Community’s report on the origins of COVID-19.

• Principals Meetings: On September 2, 2021, he attended a “principals meeting” in the SCIF led by National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to discuss the global response to the pandemic.

Use of the Defense Production Act by Trump to commandeer pharmaceutical and other corporations

The journals mention the Defense Production Act (DPA) several times, primarily as a tool for the federal government to compel the manufacturing of critical supplies and as a potential point of leverage in negotiations with pharmaceutical companies.

• Initial Discussions: On March 17, 2020, the Coronavirus Task Force discussed the DPA and a possible Executive Order to implement it.

• By March 27, 2020, President Trump invoked the DPA to require General Motors (GM) to manufacture ventilators to address nationwide shortages.

• Peter Navarro was identified as the staff member tapped by the President to lead efforts in compelling private companies to meet the government’s needs under the Act.

• Dr. Fauci noted in June 2020 that the DPA could serve as a “hammer” during negotiations with companies like Pfizer. He suggested the government could invoke the Act to dictate vaccine prices (proposing ~$25 per dose instead of $100) or even “take over” the company during the emergency.

• In February 2021, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio begged for the invocation of the DPA or similar mechanisms because the city’s vaccine supply was not meeting demand.

• Activists like Peter Staley and James Krellenstein repeatedly urged the Biden administration to use the DPA to:

  • Build new plants to produce unlimited amounts of vaccine, which would allow for rapid responses to new viral strains.

  • Force Moderna to allow the manufacturer Lonza to increase capacity specifically for low- and middle-income countries.

  • Establish “GoCo” (Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated) factories to deliver doses of NIAID-developed vaccines globally

This explains the use of the military/war law and takeover by the government and direct to supply the government for the ongoing war effort, which was falsely represented to the public as a “public health emergency”. This is, in my opinion, the key deception of the Operation Covid - invoking the war doctrine to subvert the Constitution, remove consumer safety protections and the civil rights of citizens by the persons who control both, the high government offices and the large corporate entities. It also justifies Pfizer’s defense invoked in Brook Jackson’s case under False Claims Act, which boils down to “we delivered the fraud the US Government ordered”. Of course, they forgot to say, “we joyfully and enthusiastically delivered the fraud and murder weapons, and we would like to be included into any future fraud solicitations by the US Government, please!” You get my point...

Finally, what should a real investigation of “covid origins” look like?

Someone asked me what would real covid investigation look like. Here is my answer:

1. Trump (or POTUS) removes national security classification from covid. It is currently classified as a national security matter.
2. Kennedy (or HHS Sec) or POTUS revokes PREP Act declaration for covid emergency (it is still ongoing by Biden Admin decision, until Dec 31, 2029).
3. Bring REAL covid decision makers in front of Congress to testify. Fauci wasn't one of them. These can include members of the National Security Council, the decision making authority on covid, and representatives of DHS (the agency in charge of covid). It wasn't HHS. NSC officials incl. Pottinger, Birx, Ruggiero, Panjabi, O'Brien, Cameron, the DARPA and Pentagon leads including Matt Hepburn, Wendy Sammonds-Jackson, many others. Grill them on how they decided there was a pandemic when there was no illness of any kind anywhere. Ask them to produce reasons for why covid was classified as national security threat in January of 2020.
Proceed from there.

Art for today: Fishing Boats, watercolor, 6x8 in.

GSK is launching a 33,600-person study to see whether elderly people who get its shingles vaccine Shingrix are less likely to develop any form of dementia, including Alzheimer’s, compared to those who get a placebo shot. The study, which will take place in Finland, will likely be one of the largest trials ever conducted for the disease.

Here is the study design. It states that the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of the recombinant zoster vaccine on the risk of new diagnosis of dementia among adults aged 76 years or older in Finland. Participants will be enrolled and randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive either recombinant zoster vaccine (Shingrix) or placebo.

Now, let’s do a quick math - Finland is a small country with about 5M total population, including estimated 600,000 people aged 76+ yo. Finland also historically boasts some of the most lavish social security benefits. Albeit, with greater and greater government indebtedness, they have been somewhat curtailed. Nevertheless, the socialist utopia promises that the government has no way of fulfilling are very expensive and continuously compound the indebtedness problem.

Now, GSK is aiming to enroll ~5% (!!!) of the country’s senior citizen population in just one “study” and inject 3/4 of them, or ~4.2% of the Finish elderly with Shingrix. Hey grandma! Want to reduce your risk of dementia? Would you like to step over to this friendly death accelerator clinic?

The plan to cull the useless eaters is even more obvious in another Nordic state - Denmark. GSK is launching a similar friendly senior poisoning operation with Shingrix … ahem, a “clinical trial”, which is aimed at a deeper societal slice - 65+yo, targets enrollment of 162,000 (!) people, and will not have a placebo arm at all. There are an estimated 1.2M of Danes in that age group, representing a 20% of the total population. Just as Finland, Denmark is held up as an example of a “working” socialist paradise. We are about to find out the shocking news that all governments lie and steal, and when lying and stealing runs into the debt wall, they proceed to genocide the claimants of the social benefits. A quick calculation shows that a whopping 13.5% (!!!) of the Danish seniors are being targeted for this poisoning/cull round using GSK’s “clinical trial” as a cover story.

What is the incentive for the governments? Finland spends about 13% GDP on its lavish social benefit system which includes publicly-funded long-term care (where a lot of 76+ yo can be found). The life expectancy is high, 82.6 years, and over 85 years for women. The total net present value of all social benefits per 65yo+ is approximately $1M per person.

Denmark spends less on public benefits (9% of GDP) but has an extensive workplace benefit scheme. The corporations that are fused with the socialist welfare government act as a government extension. The life expectancy is slightly lower - 81.8 years, but the NPV of social benefits is close to Finland ~$950K. Sources of various statistics here.

In case you are wondering, while the US is criticized as “capitalist” and lacking in social welfare, the NPV of social benefits averages to about the same as in the Nordic socialist paradise countries, with the caveat that the life expectancy in the US is much lower, 79 years, and the spread of low-to-high benefits is much wider ($700k - $1.15 million per person).

These “studies” are planned to be completed by end of 2029, just in time for the NWO which is planned to start in 2030.

What is the basis of the claim that a shingles vax may prevent dementia?

You may say: but wait, surely, you are making up a conspiracy! This is science. This is a clinical trial - how can GSK possibly get these studies approved by the institutional review boards otherwise? There must be some rational basis for their hypothesis, i.e. some solid data indicating there is prevention of dementia possible by a shingles vax injection…

Let’s take a look at the study, published in Nature, upon which the dementia-prevention hypothesis was constructed. The study was a retrospective analysis of health records from Wales, where, due to restriction of eligibility for free shingles vaccines was set arbitrarily by the national health bean counters. Due to this arbitrary cut-off, it was possible to compare records of people who were of the same age, but separated by about a week in date of birth. The 1-week older cohort was 42% vaxxed and the earlier cohort was practically unvaxxed for shingles. The datasets are thus reasonably well separated, and “all other things equal” provide a good comparison.

During our follow-up period of 7 years, a total of 14,465 among 296,324 adults in our sample had at least one diagnosis of shingles [5%]. […] When calculating the effect of actually receiving the zoster vaccine, we find a reduction in the probability of having at least one shingles diagnosis of 2.3 (95% CI = 0.5–3.9; P = 0.011) percentage points over the seven-year follow-up period (Fig. 2b); an effect (37.2% (95% CI = 19.7–54.7) in relative terms) that is similar in size to that observed in clinical trials of the live-attenuated zoster vaccine (Zostavax)³⁰.

Even if you still foolishly believe that some vaccines may provide some benefits (as many large “alternative” grifter accounts claim) - looks like shingles vaccine is one of the most useless out there. It provides a 2% “protection” from shingles, i.e. absolutely nothing. The pharma company, health authorities and doctors will all lie to you and tell you “it cuts your risk by up to 55%” (because they will use the upper bound of the confidence interval for the relative risk). My readers are well familiar with absolute vs relative risk statistic. Absolute is what matters to you. Relative is what matters to the government and your doctor’s paycheck, and must be ignored by you when making any decisions about any medical intervention or test.

Did the shingles vax prevent dementia in this dataset?

Given the neuropathological overlap between dementia types and the difficulty in distinguishing dementia types clinically³¹, as well as our reduced statistical power when studying less-common outcomes, we defined dementia as dementia of any type or cause as our outcome. […]

During our seven-year follow-up period, 35,307 among 282,541 adults in our sample were newly diagnosed with dementia. [12.5%]

Scaled to account for the fact that not all those who were eligible received the vaccine, we find that actually receiving the zoster vaccine reduced the probability of a new dementia diagnosis by 3.5 (95% CI = 0.6–7.1; P = 0.019) percentage points, corresponding to a relative reduction of 20.0% (95% CI = 6.5–33.4) (Fig. 3b).

As expected, the result is as meaningless as the “shingles prevention” claim! The number they were able to coax with all the statistical trickery rounds to zero for practical purposes. In addition, no analyses were performed to see if this “prevention of dementia” was associated with any quality-of-life or length-of-survival benefit. No analyses of adverse events in the shingles-vaxxed vs. shingles unvaxxed was done.

I did a quick search for adverse events associated with the shingles vaccination in VAERS database. Currently, there are ~138,000 reports for shingles vaccination, considering that VAERS under-reporting ratio could be 40x-100x. Restricting my search to only “serious” adverse events, these are the top ones ranked by frequency of reporting. As you can see, “death” is ranked #7, with shingles disease as #1 “adverse event” (we should read all these as intentional effects of the poison shots):

Just reading through the SAEs frequently reported, it was evident that symptoms associated with an accelerated decline in seniors are commonly induced by the shingles vax - dizziness, falls (and fractures), pneumonia, paralysis, pain, muscle weakness, decrease in mobility and daily activity, etc. I think this quick search confirms to me that this is what these “dementia prevention clinical trials” are really about - intentional cull of the senior populations.

What if the shingles vaxxed group has a significant increase in deaths or a decrease in life expectancy? That would not be counted as “dementia” and not reported in the Nature paper. After all, if a 70 yo has a heart attack and dies from it, they won’t be diagnosed with dementia, will they? Were their causes of death perhaps different in shingles vaxxed vs in the non-vaxxed group? The paper does not provide this information.

I am willing to bet $1M these types of analyses were performed but not published, and, instead, reserved for the “public hellth” policy making circles.

Please tell your loved ones, and do not comply!

Below are additional resources on shingles vaccination, chicken pox vaccination and adverse events:

[2017 April] Shingles Vaccine Zostavax Is Causing What It’s Designed To Prevent

[2016 Sept] Merck Admits Shingles Vaccine Can Cause Eye Damage… and Shingles

[2013 Feb] Study Shows Chicken Pox Vaccine Responsible for Triggering Nationwide Shingles Epidemic

[2009 Nov] Peer-reviewed studies documenting cases of shingles following varicella vaccination by Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D

[Aug 2005] CHICKEN POX VACCINE ASSOCIATED WITH SHINGLES EPIDEMIC Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D.

Chickenpox Vaccine Cuts Deaths but Raises Questions on Shingles

ATA REVEALS THREAT OF SHINGLES EPIDEMIC FROM VACCINE USE Health Officials Threaten Legal Action Against Researcher

October 2003 STUDY REVEALS IMPORTANT SIDE EFFECT OF MASS VARICELLA VACCINATION OF HEALTHY CHILDREN: Reduction in chickenpox may increase incidence of shingles.

For a one-time donation

Buy me a kofi

Art for today: Port City, watercolor, 11x14in.

I hope that everyone reading my articles is already familiar with the name “SV40”. You have probably witnessed numerous online screaming matches where one side says “simian virus” doesn’t exist, while “genomics experts” on the other side call the former group unhinged lunatics and point at plasmid maps on computer screens. Which one of these groups is correct? What’s the truth about SV40? Does it exist? Does it cause cancer?

The purpose of this lengthy post is to try to clarify this controversy. The short answer - both groups are technically correct. They are screaming at each other over a simple misunderstanding of the utter bullshit that is passed as “synthetic biology” today. [I attempt to describe that horror show in plain terms below]. The no-virus people claim dragons are imaginary (true!); the genomics group is waving an artificial poison-laced dragon claw (technically, it can be designed and manufactured). While I agree there is no cancer-causing simian virus in nature, it doesn’t mean synthetic poisons do not exist or that cancer is not a manufactured (largely vaccine-induced) disease. In a nutshell, this is the answer to the SV40 controversy.

End of TLDR;

Now, let’s dive into the detailed analysis. The history of finding “SV40 monkey virus” in the “contaminated” Salk vaccine, is probably familiar to most of you. Here is a short version from a newspaper article (slightly abridged). Source: a useful collection of evidence for vaccines being the primary cause of all chronic diseases.

“Salk vaccine cover-up resonates today”

Originally printed in: Oak Leaves on Wednesday, July 20, 2005

When he brought home a small, cardboard box that year, containing nine vials of the new Salk vaccine, Herbert Ratner, M.D., director of the Oak Park Health Department, did not know that they were contaminated with cancer-causing Simian Virus 40 (SV40) from the green monkey liver tissue on which the vaccine had been grown. No one, at that time, yet knew of the monkey virus.

His concern in 1955 was rather than from his analysis of epidemiological data he had become aware that the supposedly killed virus Salk vaccine contained dangerous live polio virus which, in various places around the country including Illinois, was causing polio in vaccinated children, and that this information was not reported by the press.

At that time, Dr. Ratner was editor of The Bulletin of the American Association of Public Health Physicians. So, although he had not been able to go through with his experiment to demonstrate that there was live polio virus in the Salk vaccine, he was able to publish a critique in the November and December issues of The Bulletin, setting forth the epidemiological evidence that the Salk vaccine had been causing the disease it was intended to prevent.

The then heads of the government health agencies chose not to respond to Dr. Ratner’s critique; they instead chose to simply ignore it. And soon after his critique appeared, the president of one of the drug companies, which manufactured the vaccine, succeeded in getting Dr. Ratner removed from the editorship by threatening a member of the association’s executive committee with the loss of his job, if the committee did not get rid of Ratner.

In 1960, Dr. Ratner learned that a government researcher, Dr. Bernice Eddy, had discovered evidence of a cancer-causing agent in the Salk vaccine. The agent was soon identified as a monkey virus. Eddy’s superiors ordered her to remain silent about her discovery. When, about that same time, he learned that eight children in Niles had contracted leukemia within several years of having received the 1955 Salk vaccine. Dr. Ratner understood the importance of continuing to hold on to the vials of 1955 vaccine in his refrigerator.

Although they knew by 1960 that there was a cancer-causing monkey virus in the Salk vaccine, the government health agencies allowed the contaminated vaccine to stay on the shelves of pharmacies for another year and a half until a vaccine, believed to be free of the viral contaminant, could be developed. Then they quietly replaced the old stock with the newer version of the Salk vaccine. Neither the nation’s physicians nor the public were told there was a problem with the older vaccine.

In an effort to verify that there was monkey virus in his 1955 Salk vaccine, Dr. Ratner had given vials of his old vaccine to researchers at two separate institutions before finally giving vials to molecular pathologist and soon-to-be-Oak Parker, Dr. Michele Carbone in 1997. Dr. Carbone discovered that there were not one but two strains of SV40 in the 1955 vaccine.

The government cover-ups of problems with the Salk vaccine in 1955 and 1960 make a cautionary tale of what can happen in a democratic society when monetary interests and face-saving win out over standard scientific caution and concern for public safety. “The crass manipulation of the public by establishment professionals in 1955,” Dr. Ratner wrote, “was a turning point in the history of modern medicine.”

What happened at that time is relevant to present day collusion between government health agencies and the pharmaceutical industry and to the laxity of our present laws which allow physicians in the pay of drug companies to serve, despite obvious conflicts of interest, on government committees which evaluate vaccines and other pharmaceuticals.

Helen Ratner Dietz

Helen Ratner Dietz is correct about government-pharma collusion and covering up decades of poisoning of the population with paralysis and cancer-causing junk! Unfortunately, Dr. Ratner was wrong: 1955 was not a turning point of any kind. The machinery cranked out a slightly different version of poison and just kept rolling. The vaccine crime cartel, however, took care to close the “Ratner loophole”. Note that in the year the Dietz article was published (2005) the Congress finally got rid of any future “Dr. Ratner problem” by installing the extra protective wall of the PREP Act around the vaccine crime cartel. No more pesky Dr. Ratners testing vials to worry about! Test away, it won’t matter, since you cannot even sue the pharma companies under PREP Act, it clearly states that the covered persons are immune from both, suit and liability, and this has been repeatedly adjudicated by the courts. Same courts have adjudicated that finding random toxic ingredients in the vials does not constitute willful misconduct, because it is the US Government’s policy to have those random toxic ingredients there. I wish I were kidding, but I am summarizing actual judicial decisions. It is not surprising that finding the SV40 synthetic promoters (among dozens of other undeclared toxic materials) in Pfizer mRNA vaccine vials, resulted in absolutely nothing!

OK, enough ranting.

If there was no “monkey virus SV40”, then WHAT did Ratner find in the 1955 Salk vaccine vials?

In 1999 Drs. Ratner and Carbone published a paper describing finding SV40 “contamination” in vials saved from 1955. Testing a biological material that sat in a fridge for 44 years is a tenuous activity. Whatever is there is likely not what it was 44 years ago. In addition, the PCR sequencing method is a non-scientific game of Tetris, which cannot reproduce any of its own results (and calls these failures “variants”). In the 1999 paper Ratner and Carbone identify inconsistencies with the simian virus origin story, since, inexplicably, there are more versions of “SV40” than originally thought. They note that the versions (genetic sequences) that were not found in the polio vaccines are found in human tumors by other researchers:

SV40 was first identified as a contaminant of poliovaccines used from 1955 until 1963. Recently, SV40 has been detected in several human tumors. The virus detected in human tumors often contained only one 72-bp enhancer in the regulatory region, in contrast to the SV40 originally isolated from poliovaccines, which contained two 72-bp enhancers. The origin of viruses with one 72-bp enhancer in humans was unknown, because it was thought that these viruses were not present in poliovaccines. It was also thought that all poliovaccine vials produced from 1955 until 1963 had been discarded, thus the possibility that one 72-bp virions contaminated those vials could not be tested. We unexpectedly obtained what appear to be the last available vials of poliovaccine produced in 1955. In these vials, we detected and sequenced SV40 containing only one 72-bp enhancer in the regulatory region.

[…] Our data demonstrate that humans were exposed to SV40 viruses with both one 72-bp enhancer and two 72-bp enhancers SV40 through contaminated vaccines.

To sum up, Ratner preserved the 1955 vials, tested them with a new computer modeling technique (PCR) in 1999 and found two types of “SV40 viruses” in them, one “slow” (single 72-bp on PCR) and one “fast” (double 72-bp on PCR).

How were these PCR artifacts identified as carcinogenic before the PCR era?

Behold the original discovery paper that declared the existence of SV40 “simian virus” in 1960 (without telling the public, of course, to prevent vaccine hesitancy!) … by Merck scientists. They called it “vacuolating virus”:

From the intro:

What this means in plain English: the existence of this alleged previously undetectable virus, was presumed. That’s the standard first step in virology. Whatever issue you have - such as polio vaccine killing, paralyzing and injuring people? - must be a new virus! There are no other causes and none will be ever examined. Virus hunters will kill and blenderize as many monkey kidneys as it takes to “isolate it”! The tiresome Merck paper is written in impenetrable abracadabra-gobbledygook language describes the feat of “isolation”, albeit, inconveniently, NOT in the cells of the monkeys that it allegedly infects, but some other random monkey species as …. foam! Yes, bubbles. That’s what “vacuolating” means.

In the Methods section, we find the usual spirit cooking voodoo ritual:

This handy illustration applies to all “virus culturing” methods:

Of course, no controls were used by the Merck team, i.e., running a parallel experiment without Nicolas Sarkozy’s snot in it to see if the French soufflé bubbles up or not. The scientific method is strictly verboten in virology!

I will spare you the rest of the Merck bullshit; it broke my brain a little, and it still hurts. Suffice to say they killed many monkeys, blenderized their organs, mixed them with toxic chemicals, and after many attempts, produced foam in some of the dying cell cultures and called it a “vacuolating virus SV40”:

Next question:

Why did the Merck people decide to fabricate the SV40 monkey foam in the first place?

You might be shocked, but this ingenious “hypothesis” for making more aggressive cancers while covering up vaccine poisoning belongs to … drumroll… Bernice Eddy! The “heroine” of public health who is credited with whistleblowing about “Cutter incident”. In that incident, Salk polio vaccine batches produced by Cutter Labs caused intermittent paralysis in ~30% of children, and permanent paralysis and deaths in some hundreds. Bad, bad, Cutter Labs produced bad batches of otherwise perfect lifesaving vaccine, can you just imagine such a thing? Government good, pharma bad! You can read about that narrative on Wikipedia, but it is a false narrative.

All vaccines are poisons, and injecting ground up organs of animals, human fetuses, calf hearts, bat brains, eye of the neut, leg of a toad, rat’s testicles, hamster ovaries, etc…. results in poisoning, paralysis or cancer! It’s not that complicated.

Using this straightforward approach while working at the U.S. government’s biologics division, Berenice Eddy repeatedly injected mice with ground organs of other mice that were known to contain leukemia, and observed cancerous tumor growth that was unrelated to leukemia. You may ask: but why were these heroic government-funded virologists trying to find ways to induce cancer, make it more aggressive, faster spreading and appearing at a younger age? The answer you are allowed to have - solely to find the cure for it! Don’t EVER think this was an intentional work to … maybe …. weaponize cancer and make more cancer. As in - induce it in unsuspecting people who seek medical care to control the population (with fear and dependency on “healthcare”), and reap massive profits for decades. No, no! That’s evil. Banish that thought! The government-corporate cartel will never do such a thing to millions of people! Right?

To recap so far, Berenice Eddy (a far more sinister character than most people believe) is credited with imagining a brand new cause of cancer - viruses. Technically speaking, she was not incorrect, if one uses the true definition of a “virus” = poison. Yes, specific kind of poisoning - poisoning that reaches the inner compartment of the body, the blood/lymphatic stream and the cells and/or their nuclei - is the sole reason for cancer. This is most readily accomplished with injections of foreign biological matter together with other chemical junk (composition of all vaccines).

This wasn’t her idea alone, nor was it an original idea. As early as 1910 Peyton Rous, a young pathologist at the Rockefeller Institute, was given a Plymouth Rock hen with a spindle-cell sarcoma. He minced the tumor, passed an extract through a Berkefeld filter (which removed all visible cells), and injected the cell-free filtrate into healthy chickens; new sarcomas developed. His resulting paper in the Journal of Experimental Medicine in 1911 was the first demonstration that an acellular agent could transmit a malignant tumor. The work was widely viewed as a curiosity for a long time. However, Rous received the Nobel Prize for it in 1966.

“Cell free filtrate” derived from decomposing tissues of animals, fetuses, cells, describes every vaccine. Rous 1966 Nobel Prize was the award for discovering a perfectly deniable population control weapon that generated a multi-billion dollar industry of cancer lasting for well over a century now.

It was also a prize for the very important idea to the chemical and biological weapons programs conducted by the US government covertly, overtly and clandestinely, both back then and in the modern times. The efforts to fabricate, ahem, “isolate” this presumed cancer causing virus went on in government, military and private labs, culminating in the production of the bubbles that could be labeled as “SV40”.

Now we come to the modern times post “synthetic biology” revolution and the invention of the magic PCR boxes. This begs the question:

WHAT is synthetic “SV40”? Does it have anything to do with “SV40” monkey bubbles?

Did Pfizer catch monkeys, blenderize their kidneys, produce bubbles and put those bubbles in the mRNA covid shots for Kevin McKernan to find by running them through his magic PCR box? No, silly! Just as with many drugs, the industry finds something (often poisonous) in nature, and figures out by many experiments what synthetic analogues will produce similar effects, and then makes a chemical substance that acts on the same pathway, so it was with SV40. Once the functional pieces of monkey bubbles were experimentally established, they could be build artificially via several methods. Today SV40 has almost nothing in common with monkey bubbles, except the name and some of the functional effects. The synthetic SV40 is a group of complicated chemicals (there are several versions of these compounds). In general, they are designed to deliver bio-chemical “cargo” attached to it inside the cytoplasm, and in some configurations, inside the cellular nucleus. It also happens to be so irritating to the cell, that it induces a rapid cell division with abnormal chromosomes - which is one of the main carcinogenic pathways. As I previously discussed in the article about Thomas Seyfried’s metabolic cancer theory, his experiments transplanting cellular material excluding the nucleus from cancerous cells into healthy cells produce cancer in the target cells.

Cells that get transfected with foreign cancerous material in their cytoplasm, become cancerous (trying to expel the material and dividing more rapidly and unevenly). The same phenomenon can happen in some cells after vaccination, if vaccine ingredients get inside the cell. Synthetic SV40 feature increases the probability of this happening.

I found this little animation video describing how oligonucleotides (think generic Lego blocks for synthetic DNA constructs) are being made. Behold the process of making building blocks of life…

Does this have anything to do with actual life or biology or your body’s own building blocks? Not. A. Thing.

The process amounts to washing toxic chemicals in rapid sequence and creating chemical residue on top of little ceramic buttons. During biomanufacturing process, the synthetic DNA is built by sequential exposure of the starting bead to multiple chemical washes that increase the length of the molecule. All of this is performed in fully automated chemical reactors, not dissimilar to semiconductor manufacturing equipment. Some of it is directly using semiconductor manufacturing parts and chemicals. Of note, I was puzzled a few years ago by findings of antimony (a rare substance used in semiconductor manufacturing in Moderna and Pfizer vials. This explains it.

The process starts with a button which has one of the nucleotides (phosphoramidites), claimed as the core “letters” of DNA:

• dA(Bz) phosphoramidite (adenine with benzoyl protection)

• dC(Ac) phosphoramidite (cytosine with acetyl protection)

• dG(iBu) phosphoramidite (guanine with isobutyryl protection)

• dT phosphoramidite (thymine, usually simpler protection)

The chemical washes include (with links to safety datasheets):

Deprotection (detritylation) reagents between each cycle:

• Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) in dichloromethane - TCA is strongly corrosive acid causing severe skin and eye burns; dichloromethane is volatile toxic solvent, suspected carcinogen, inhalation hazard, can cause CNS depression.

• Sometimes dichloroacetic acid (DCA) is used instead. DCA is a corrosive, toxic, carcinogenic and teratogenic.

Coupling activators that activate the incoming nucleotide so it can attach:

• Tetrazole - explosive, oxidizer, irritant

• 5-ethylthio-1H-tetrazole (ETT)- flammable; skin, eye and respiratory irritant

• BTT (benzylthiotetrazole) - flammable; skin, eye and respiratory irritant

Capping reagents, used to block unreacted chains:

• Acetic anhydride - flammable, causes severe skin burns, eye and respiratory toxicity

• N-methylimidazole (NMI) - corrosive / causes severe skin burns and eye damage, harmful if swallowed, inhaled, or absorbed through skin; Rrspiratory irritant

Oxidation reagents, convert the unstable linkage into a stable phosphate backbone:

• Iodine (I₂)

• Water + pyridine + tetrahydrofuran (THF) (as solvent system) - both harmful, flammable, irritants and carcinogens

Final deprotection & cleavage, after synthesis is complete:

• Ammonium hydroxide (NH₄OH) - severe skin burns and eye damage, extremely toxic to aquatic life, corrosive

• Sometimes methylamine (AMA) (ammonium hydroxide + methylamine mix) - extremely flammable, corrosive / causes severe burns, toxic by inhalation, strong respiratory irritant

The sequential chemical washes are performed fully automatically, by computerized systems that pump the chemicals in and out. The steps have never been validated for pharmaceutical products, and most oligonucleotides are sold as non-cGMP for lab use (not for medicinal purposes or human use in general). Even when claimed cGMP, the compliance is only guaranteed up to ~60-70% of the product shipped. The main problem besides corrosive-explosive-toxic junk, is impossibility of making anything to specification. With each cycle, each chemical wash adds errors. Manufacturers claim efficiency of ~99–99.5% per step, which sounds excellent. Until you consider the number of steps needed to synthesize any sizeable “DNA block”.

Let’s say each step is 99% successful:

• After 10 bases → ~90% correct

• After 50 bases → ~60% correct

• After 100 bases → ~37% correct

The longer the sequence, the fewer full-length molecules are correct. At ~200 bases, the fraction of perfect molecules becomes quite low, and that’s the typical length of these blocks that are sold to the pharma suppliers that stich them into hairbrained “gene therapy” or “lifesaving vaccine” disasters.

Because of this problem, instead of synthesizing a 500 bp SV40-based promoter directly, longer DNA sequences (like promoters) are made by synthesizing multiple ~60–150 nt fragments, and then assembling them using PCR (yeah, lol) or other similar methods.

To conclude, I hope this makes it clear that there is no such thing as “synthetic biology”. The only thing that exists is very toxic chemistry. This also explains why it is not possible to make GOF viruses, or modify them functionally (even if they existed!) or that it is not possible to “weaponize” bacteria, or any other micro- or macro-organisms.

Finally! If the vaccinology clown show is not sufficiently funny, here is another twist: you can now have a vaccine against SV40! You can’t make this up. This study argues that because the population was “infected” by SV40 (really? monkeys are running amok all over US and EU countries somehow?) there is a need for an SV40 vaccine to prevent cancer:

The prevalence of SV40 in human specimens ranges from 1.3 % to 25.6 %, with detection in urine, blood, and tissue specimens [7]. SV40 was first transmitted to humans through contaminated vaccines; however, modern studies suggest that it can also spread through feces, respiration, and maternal-child interaction [8]. The transmission of SV40 from Human to Human has yet to be studied. However, its DNA has been found in urine, blood, and tissue samples, with some studies suggesting the possibility of low-level persistence or reactivation [9]. There is currently no licensed vaccine or specific antiviral treatment available for SV40 infection, and the long-term effects of historical exposure in individuals remained undetermined [10]. Considering the oncogenic potential of SV40, along with the lack of preventive measures, there is a need to design a vaccine that would serve both immunotherapeutic and prophylactic purposes for elderly cancer patients and other immunosuppressed individuals who were historically exposed to radiation.

In reality this paper is an admission that large % of the population has been injected with biologic and synthetic carcinogens, and further damaged by chemical cocktails and radiation. Obviously, it is a stupid idea to “vaccinate” against deliberately injected carcinogens and deliberately delivered chemo and radiation!

For a one time donation

Buy me a Kofi

Art for today: Flower Arrangement with Orchids, oil on panel, 12x16 in

“Animal Farm” got the most important point correctly - as time passes, the “revolutionary” pigs become increasingly corrupt, changing the farm's original rules to benefit themselves. They become indistinguishable from the humans they ones opposed. However, Orwell’s classic didn’t go far enough into the land of truly dystopian totalitarian nightmares, i.e., how would the Animal Farm look if the pigs were equipped with technology and AI and were running a hospital system instead of agriculture. I am thankful that we have just the right type of intellectually mediocre but highly ambitious Commissar Prasad to pig-splain the glorious Hellthcare future for us. If only we abandoned the silly notions of informed consent and independent decisions, and instead, learned to love being caged, surveilled 24/7, tracked, traced and “treated” by robots “for technological progress”!

For my international readers or those unfamiliar with Vinay Prasad - he is a developmentally stunted fool with a medical diploma who hates humans. Really, who goes into medical training because the want to care for people? What a silly notion; that’s not why Indian parents sacrifice all and pay for their sons’ prestigious education to become Oncologists! After publicly mocking mRNA vaccine victims on social media with another stunted fool ZDogg, got awarded by Bobby and his paymasters with a brief stint at the FDA as head of the Biologics division (CBER). His main accomplishment while there was endorsing the 200+ year old Eugenics policy of the US Government, namely - “poison the population with injections of “Hellth” to keep them dumb and poor and under control. When they are sick from the poisoning, poison them to death, while maximizing profitability!” The most recent version of mRNA vaccine policy, prescribing new versions without testing for safety, to the “most vulnerable” 75% of the population was drafted by the Biden admin officials, and, Vinay Prasad and Marty Makary, being the useful idiots that they are, gleefully slapped their names on it.

Earlier this year both Makary and Prasad were fired from the FDA. Prasad is clearly searching for relevance and gainful employment now, and this piece of writing is probably his auditioning for future government and corporate posts in the techno-utopia-Hellth. However, I sincerely think he should consider a career as a dystopian novelist. That may be his true gift.

Enter the Brave New World of Vinay (BN-WoV!)

Here is the bizarre article by Prasad that precipitated this “WoV! WTF??” moment:

Vinay Prasad's Observations and Thoughts

The Future of Medicine

When we imagine how medical technology will change our work and lives, we are constrained by our reality. Patients report symptoms to doctors who schedule scans and then give treatments… this is our paradigm. The wall inside our mind. Our imaginations aren’t creative enough to truly envision how disruptive new technology may end up being…

Read more

24 days ago · 71 likes · 3 comments · Vinay Prasad

The article itself is likely an AI-production, including the idiotic illustration with random space-suited humanoids hovering in the sky, while all else below are safely enclosed in glass cages. I had to re-read it several times, just to make sure it wasn’t meant as a parody of the Pharma-Tech-Industrial complex. Nope. He meant it earnestly.

Ok, I digress. Doesn’t matter if the article is AI-generated. Here are Vinay’s dreams for your future when the people who incentivize him to write this insufferable nonsense finally win:

You sign up for a new health care service. When you launch it, you do an virtual interview intake and the service deduces that you are the kind the person to blow of your health. You aren’t a complainer. AI asks you (in front of your wife) if you would consent to allow it to optimize your health in any non-invasive way it see fit without bothering or notifying you— as long as the interventions were non-invasive. After all, if you are involved you would only procrastinate. And after all, it is just collecting information. You agree. AI asks one follow up. In order to improve health for all people, do you consent to AI running some tests or interventions on you— this is only for societal good— without your explicit consent each time. Your wife looks at you… Ok, you consent again.

Besides strangely mentioning the wife apropos of nothing, did you recognize what the above paragraph is talking about? But of course! The wet dream of the HHS/pharma crime cartel - at least one of many - is a complete removal of informed consent. They already partially accomplished this, via numerous mechanisms (including the PREP Act emergency declarations), but that’s obviously not enough! More needs to be done to enable the fully digitizable and monetizable human harvesting that the New World Disorder envisions.

I would like to remind you that back in 2024, the FDA has removed parental informed consent, making it easier to experiment on children without informing the parents.

According to the 2024 FDA final rule “Under 45 CFR 46.116(c), an IRB [Institutional Review Board] may waive the requirement for obtaining informed consent or parental permission or approve a consent or parental permission procedure that leaves out or alters some or all of the elements of informed consent, provided that the IRB finds and documents that the following criteria are satisfied:

What this means is that if your child is receiving some sort of public benefit or is part of some state/local assistance program, they are fair game for the government to experiment on them without informing you. Let’s say your child receives a free lunch in school, or your child has a disability and has a special learning program or transportation assistance. Well, now they are in a pool of the experimental subjects, and you don’t need to know!

Even after the children are no longer part of any government assistance program, their data is deemed fair game:

If you thought that was bad, just wait! Prasad’s febrile Hellth-AI delusions get even denser in the following passages:

One day, you notice your car drives itself home via a different route. When you get home you wonder about the detour. Turns out the car drove you through a CT scanner because it noticed your movement and behavior was different, and it wanted to work things up. Awaiting you, next to your meal, is a prescription tablet to take. The active ingredient was discovered by AI, and the confirmatory trial was run by AI.

I think actually wrote a real dystopian novel about this called Zone 23. Is Prasad plagiarizing CJ’s ideas, I wonder? Suffice to say, any drug “discovered by AI” and automatically prescribed by AI is guaranteed to be 100% poison. Prasad probably forgot to mention that in between the “automatic CT scan” and “AI-generated suicide pill” sits Palantir’s military targeting software, deciding which citizens are ripe for extermination that day.

Next comes a truly bizarre, nonsensical sentences about imaging modalities and midjourney (an AI software tool that generates those idiotic cartoons and other cookie-cutter marketing slop materials):

“That’s not possible,” you shout, “imaging modalities can’t see through the automobile’s frame.” Of course, AI laughs, it solved that years before—during the boom of midjourney.

Huh? the only possible explanation of the above nonsense I can find is this piece of news from June:

M-kay, that’s pretty laughable. It is as stupid as all the previous attempts by tech bros to “crack” medical devices and technologies. I have personally interacted with some of the Google and Meta billion-dollar funded teams of morons who think that living things are “hardware” that can be fixed or updated with some “code”. They achieved exactly zero while pouring those billions down the drain. Midjourney will go the same way.

If you thought the above was some crazy ravings, hold on to your seats - it gets truly raving mad. Prasad continues explaining how having you tracked and surveilled 24/7 by the Big Brother AI (or should we say Big Mommy Hellth?) is akshually good for you! Because the technology needs the “full impact on health care”, you see, nobody gives a flying banana about your wishes or concerns, that’s so last century! In the new millennium, the technology must be satisfied and fed and cared for, not the people, silly:

Technology’s full impact on health care would mean that every aspect of how we seek and provide care is changed.

• You don’t track your health, your health is tracked.

• You are given care, you don’t decide to seek care.

• Data is collected about your health in ways you are oblivious to (with your upfront consent, just once of course)

• Treatments are studied on you and others around you— because you are a good person and consent to that, and this happens if and only if, AI can’t figure it out using observational methods (strangely AI admits that this is often the case).

• You consent to receive treatments in quiet moments, and you may waive your right to know you are receiving these treatments

• For medical interventions that require trade-offs, you can describe your philosophy and values/preferences or you can ask AI to deduce that about you in the course of it’s monitoring, and then you can waive your individual decision making.

Practically what does this mean for technology makers and investors?

Instead of developing clinician decision support, develop methods to monitor people in their homes/ in the course of their day to day lives. Surely, AI will soon be able to predict when someone may be headed towards illness before they think to ask about symptoms— if you can track their steps, gait, patterns of wakefulness, heart rate, blood pressure (someone needs to make a reliable tracker of this— that doesn’t go around the arm), sweat patterns, skin conductivity, skin temperature, armpit temperature, stomach sounds, bowel patterns, bladder patterns, food consumption, weight, height, visceral fat estimate, body fat estimate, etc.

Instead of investing in imaging that requires a participant to walk into a center, what sort of biological data can be generated from monitoring our trail around the house? Invest in collecting data unobtrusively.

In the Human Stain, Roth wrote,

“We leave a stain, we leave a trail, we leave our imprint. Impurity, cruelty, abuse, error, excrement, semen - there’s no other way to be here.*”

The “Human Stain” refers to a vapid social justice novel by Roth about racially-fluid victimhood Olympics, the main theme of which is “how dare you judge wealthy Jewish professors, who are secretly very light skinned black orphans”. That aside:

Prasad really believes technology must be worshipped and people must be eliminated from healthcare… in his opinion, the disembodied “technology” is responsible for all advances in human health, while humans play no part at all, other than nuisance and hinderance of the technological progress..

I am searching for a charitable explanation for what possessed Prasad to write these AI loony-tunes:

• Was he on drugs?

• Severely sleep deprived?

• Clinically depressed?

• Hasn’t been laid for at least 50 years???

Who in their right mind thinks this article describes any form of “progress”, or even something remotely OK? He is telling you what the AI-obsessed Bio-Tech Bros want:

• You = meat

• Meat = poked, prodded, monitored 24/7, data extracted, sold, resold, tokenized, levered up, poisoned, dissected, organs harvested, sold, resold, futures hedged, re-insured, derivative EFT constructed => profits collected at every step!

End of my rant about this. Please provide your take in comments.

Art for today: Mendocino Cliffs, oil on panel, 12x12 in.

The above quote and commentary provided by a reader.

This post is a continuation of my “mind-control” series, looking into a specific area of it - mental health (or lack thereof). By this I mean that ALL health depends on mental health, i.e. your state of mind and perception of reality. I will also discuss the methods and organizations involved in brainwashing the public into obedience to the cult of Hellth. As it happens quite often, the universe (and my readers) supplied some good illustrations of the topic, just as I was seeking clarity for myself.

Exhibit 1, Bryan Johnson, the “Hellthiest man”:

Yup, the pasty drug-addicted fembot “biohacker” who spends $2 million/year on 30 doctors, transfuses his son’s blood, being Epstein’s close friend (thousands of mentions in the files), and chasing [a highly unoriginal] idea fixe about living forever … has given himself a serious “autoimmune” disease. According to Bryan Johnson, his stomach is eating itself… If I were his stomach, I would have considered a stomach-cide, too. Imagine the horror of facing an eternity of militant plant-based diet, starvation and chemical assault! More importantly, imagine the pit of fear and hubris that fills the hole where Bryan’s God-given mind used to be…

Please note that I believe Bryan Johnson is a fake - he is an actor, playing a reality show with placed commercials in it. Kind of like you are Truman in the Truman Show, and Bryan is your friend, lying to you while reading commercials on screen. Except Bryan Show version is much cheaper than a feature movie! I will address this in future posts. For now, let’s just use Bryan as an illustration, a Hellth mascot.

If I had to guess what’s responsible for his stomach suddenly deciding to off itself now - my money is on the Moderna shots and other vaxxes he’d recently taken in exchange for pharma sponsorships and high profile engagements in MAHA propaganda events. “Autoimmunity” is a classic anaphylactic reaction induced by all vaccines and other injections that contain non-self proteins, chemicals, metals and other toxic materials. However, arguing about the precise physical causes of Johnson’s clearly self-inflicted bodily destruction is not the point of my article. He serves as a mascot for the Cult of Hellth.

You may have heard a Latin quote “Mens sana in corpore sano” (healthy mind in healthy body). It is actually a misquote of the Roman poet Juvenal (Satire X):

All conditions of the body - be it destruction or restoration - begin not in the body, but in the mind.

The cult of Hellth is not new. In general, it falls into the category of idolatry - fabrication of false gods - invariably practiced by the majority of humans throughout history. Idolatry is highly persistent because it is mutually reinforced by shared delusions, which are seeded, fed, encouraged, propagated and harvested by the ruling classes for purposes of the population and resource control.

The modern “scientific” version of the cult of Hellth is not different from other historical forms of idolatry. The false gods of Hellth rise from the following false beliefs:

• Denial of the fact that all people are created perfect, and the design is, ultimately, beyond human comprehension.

• This denial precipitates a false belief that what was created perfect is somehow vulnerable.

• This further induces insane beliefs that what was created perfect requires fixing, and that it can be modified, hacked, improved, reversed, etc.

These beliefs are insane because they are the opposite of health, which is sane.

I do not insist that you believe in your creation by any specific God of a specific religious doctrine. You may call it nature or evolution, whichever way you prefer. I only insist that you realize one thing - the creation of you was perfection incarnate and its precise blueprint is safely locked out of human comprehension.

The Hellth cult worships the gods of sickness, using very strange and demanding rituals, such as the ones practiced by Bryan Johnson. He is by far not the only “Hellth influencer” out there. The internet is filled with the nutrition gurus, health coaches, “protocols”, advertisements for healing retreats, etc. etc. They threaten you with eternal damnation for eating carbs, proclaim that sugar is worse than heroin, and that the seed oils are surely worse than that, and regardless of what food you buy in the grocery store, it is ALL poison! You are continuously poisoned from chemtrails, GMOs, nanotechnology, 5G cellphones, etc. and you must have their advice on detox protocols and supplements. You must buy the detox kits NOW!

Let me remind you that the starting point of the Hellth mode is the delusion that your body is imperfect, vulnerable to invisible threats, and that it requires fixing, and that some idiot with a diploma and a lab coat, or alternatively, with a podcast and a subscription-grift knows how to fix it.

However, before you drive yourself fully insane (and sick) trying all the “protocols”, let me remind you one indisputable fact: a sane mind can lead even a badly damaged body to health. The other way around is impossible. A healthy body cannot fix an unhealthy mind, the disease of the mind will soon overtake and damage the body - refer back to Exhibit 1, Bryan Johnson. The mind is simply that much more powerful than the body!

The false gods of sickness demand denial of true Health, because the true Health is in direct opposition to their own survival. Which brings me to Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2: Operation Matryoshka Doll, or finding Monsignor Richard Dawkins.

A reader pointed me to Science Based Medicine blog mentioning me in several articles. I never heard of them before. This blog advertises itself as entirely free of any sponsorship and in pursuit of “best science”. It is part of another webpage, called the “New England Skeptical Society” (NESS). This society is advertised as an organization dedicated to promoting science and reason. Their main activities seem to be focused on investigations of claims of paranormal events and attempts to test those scientifically. I personally think that is a very silly pursuit. It was founded in January 1996 by Steven Novella, Perry DeAngelis and Bob Novella. NESS reiterates claims of total independence, no sponsorships. This got me quite interested, indeed. The lady doth protest too much… Publications by highly credentialed academics, professors, doctors, operating for 30+ years, affiliated with many other similar groups, all affirming the mainstream science dogmas and pretending to be “skeptical”. All claim to be driven solely by the enthusiasm of the writers. Hm… A bit of digging revealed a Matryoshka Doll operation…

…Checking the profiles of these “totally independent!!!TM” big professors writing little blogs (including David Gorski discussed below) revealed that the professors just happen to be Fellows of The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. This is a much more high profile group with an extensive Wikipedia page, advertised as a nonprofit organization founded in 1976 to promote scientific inquiry, critical thinking, and the examination of extraordinary claims using evidence. It publishes the magazine Skeptical Inquirer. The Politburo membership Fellowship of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry is awarded by invitation or election to individuals who “have made distinguished contributions to scientific skepticism, science communication, critical inquiry, or related fields”. There is no public application process. It’s a secret of the Society! However, the names of the prominent Fellows are no secret, and wow, check out some examples!

• Carl Sagan - mainstream astronomy storyteller, the affirmer of “random rocks flying around vacuum for no reason” narratives;

• Richard Dawkins - the affirmer of “you are just a random bag of reagents that made itself into a cheap Seiko watch for no reason” narratives;

• James Randi - (now deceased) stage magician, escape artist, illusionist - i.e., expert on how to make people see things that didn’t happen, or make them blind to the things that did happen;

• Elizabeth Loftus - a psychologist, expert in misinformation effects, i.e. how to make people believe they remember something that didn’t happen, or remember it in a different way;

• Steven Novella - the big professor that writes little NESS blog;

• David Gorski - the big professor that writes little Science Based Medicine blog.

From this already dazzling Matryoshka layer we proceed to the next, even more spectacular one - the parent org, the mothership, the very near the top of the pyramid of Science and Reason (we shall never see the tippy top) - the Center for Inquiry! The name alone gives me creeps, it’s too close to the “Inquisition” for comfort:

… and the mission of the Center for Inquiry is to do just that! They are the Narrative Commissars, enforcers of “the authoritative Science”. They are the guardians of the Hellth profit extraction layer where a sickly creepaziod Bryan Johnson is beatified as “St. Hellthiest”. The Inquisition is not only hunting the thought heretics like myself to “debunk with science”, i.e. via feeble-minded strawman arguments constructed from the Inquisition-approved manuals by mediocrities like David Gorski. It’s doing much more than that! They have numerous publications, projects and programs for schools, colleges, summer camps, online courses, a Richard Dawkins award, annual meetings, research and numerous international affiliates/chapters. One affiliate organization is called the Institute for the Secularisation of Islamic Society, and abbreviated, without bat of an eyelid, to ISIS. M-kay… nice touch.

In 2006 the Inquisition opened its political lobbying arm, the Office of Public Policy in Washington, DC, and issued a declaration "In Defense of Science and Secularism". The next day (!) The Washington Post ran an article about it entitled "Think Tank Will Promote Thinking". WaPo is a PR agent, at the Inquisition’s beck and call, just like that.

Lawfare against homeopathic medicine and alternative health practices in general is another important activity of the Inquisition: they have filed lawsuits against CVS, Walgreens and Walmart for selling homeopathic products. In 2020 both cases were dismissed.^[91] In September 2022 the District of Columbia's Court of Appeals revived the lawsuits.^[92]

Is Health a Virtue?

Getting back to the little Science Based Medicine blog written by a big professor, one David Gorski MD, a breast cancer surgeon, a professor of Oncology at Wayne State, Fellow of the Center for Inquisition. Below are several lengthy posts where he mentioned yours truly:

1. Antivaxxers easily see through the misdirection of RFK Jr.’s MAHA (David Gorski, October 14, 2024)
   This article discusses reactions within the antivaccine movement to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) campaign. He quotes my “Everything But Vaccines” article. I hope he curled into a fetal position and cried himself to sleep after reading it. Indeed, I called out the bullshit of MAHA policy from the start.

2. Trouble in (MAHA) paradise?

   (David Gorski, January 20, 2025)
   Published around the time of the presidential inauguration and confirmation hearings for RFK Jr.’s as HHS Secretary, it references me among commentators critical of RFK Jr.’s messaging and policy strategy. Gorski is upset at both me and seeing through MAHA bullshit and for writing about the Means duo mission to divert policy into stupid and inane stuff like the “eat real food” (which is exactly what happened). However, a bit further in his blog, Gorski seems to forget that he called us conspiracists and agrees that Casey Means is running a rather fake company (Levels). My article quoted in this piece.

3. “MAHA has fallen? Antivaxxers are getting very impatient with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”

   (David Gorski, November 17, 2025)

   Again cites me and conveniently forgets that I was never part of MAHA, and pretends that this is a new devastating split from Kennedy. This is a standard tactic in propaganda craft - make people believe things that never happened, or not in the way they happened, but in the controller-preferred way.

4. “MAHA: Echoes of The Secret”

   David Gorski, February 3, 2025)

   This is the article Gorski quotes me again, this time - based on my article about the real drivers of the chronic disease epidemic. Among other professed Hellth insanities, he denies that health is a virtue. This warrants a bit of a discussion.

Specifically, Gorski quotes this exchange from RFK Jr’s confirmation hearing:

SANDERS: Do you agree healthcare is a human right?
RFK Jr: I can’t give you a yes or no answer pic.twitter.com/z10JyGeM16

Gorski proceeds with the typical propaganda narrative which you may have heard a zillion times before:

If I were to sum up the idea succinctly, it is the concept that virtue equals health and that, if you are not healthy, you must not be virtuous. In this context, “virtue” means leading a “virtuous” lifestyle with respect to health; i.e., eating a healthy diet, exercising, not indulging in habits that contribute to chronic disease, etc. Consequently, if you develop lung cancer or heart disease as a result of your having smoked cigarettes for 20 or 30 years, somehow you are less deserving of healthcare.

Right. The ability to think and reason is not a requirement for the Fellowship of the Committee of the Grand Inquisition. First he states, reasonably, that leading a healthy lifestyle is virtuous. That’s quite true. Then he says that the same person that leads a healthy lifestyle somehow also smokes for 30 years… and develops cancer… huh? Wait… I thought smoking was explicitly determined by the Big Science as being NOT part of a healthy lifestyle, but quite the opposite of it? What did I miss, professor Gorski?

The rest of his article is about the same level of room temperature IQ, whining about the same garbage ideas that “health is a human right”, by which, of course, he means the government giving you cancer by forcing vaccines on you and then forcing you into the most profitable protocols for Gorski’s paycheck is the human right, not YOUR health, duh! Your health is not part of the Gorski’s calculus at all.

He is having a fit over the radical idea that people can just live a healthy life, avoid vaccines and doctors and don’t get cancer:

I’ve seen so many times on so many alt-med websites, that you – yes, you! – are completely responsible for your own health by your own lifestyle choices. All it takes is living the right way, doing the right things, and you can be not just healthy, but virtually immune to serious diseases up to and including cancer. This sort of concept is inherent in the antivaccine world in which RFK Jr. has been a highly influential voice for two decades, in which it is frequently stated that vaccines are unnecessary because healthy people don’t get sick.

Gorski’s abject horror of people taking responsibility for their health is palpable! Just imagine where would that leave Gorski and the rest of the Cult of Hellth? It is no wonder this big professor is working so hard writing his little propaganda blog - he’d be unemployed and broke if people figured out how to easily avoid cancer and Gorski, which are practically synonymous!

Readers, you know by now that propaganda is not designed to fool the people who can think and reason. They know they can’t get you, and they count on you being in a small minority and thus, inconsequential. Propaganda is designed for the insane as a defensive set of talking points to maintain the walled mental state of protected insanity. This is masterfully illustrated by the recent post of about the Truman show that Hellth builds around the devastation of vaccine injuries, like autism:

Lies are Unbekoming

The Guards Who Love You

Read more

a month ago · 360 likes · 103 comments · Unbekoming

Another really good discussion about the Truman Show is in this video:

Returning to the question of health and human rights. The natural human rights are only those that everyone can exercise freely, simultaneously, without hindering anyone else and without coercion. Thus, medical procedures, drugs, Gorski’s paycheck or medical mandates of any kind, i.e., any part of Hellth, cannot fulfill a single condition of a natural, real human right.

However, true Health is both, a natural right and a true virtue - we are created perfect and healthy and we can all exercise Health - both, right and virtue, simultaneously and freely, as God intended.

PS. Let us offer a prayer of thanks to Him for throwing away the keys to the design, so that the commissars of Hellth cannot get their stupid grubby hands on it. Absolutely ingenious strategy.

Amen.

Art for today: Sketches of warriors, charcoal and conte on paper. Available art here.

In a recent discussion with Steve Kirsch of VSRF, I said that MAHA is not health freedom. Steve argued with my views, and that’s ok. MAHA is, indeed, not health freedom, it is something entirely different from that. In this post we are going to examine the MAHA Alliance financials, which provide some answers to the question that I get very often - “but WHY doesn’t Bobby revoke the PREP Act declarations? Why didn’t he help any victims of the covid crimes? Who owns Bobby?”

We are going to answer these questions by performing a mini-audit of the MAHA Alliance financials from 2024 and 2025.

Thanks to for pointing this out (post on X):

Here is Form 990, with the principal officer named - Del Bigtree.

Total donations in 2024, when Kennedy was running for POTUS were a cool $7.8M!

Who are the Major Financial Donors to MAHA Alliance?

Per Federal Election Commission filings, $6M out of ~$8M total raised came from one person - Elon Musk!

Other notable donors include:

• Patricia (Trish) Duggan, an “artist” (LOL, yeah) donated $1M. She is technically a glass artist, yes, but that’s not where the money comes from. Trish and her ex-husband Robert Duggan were shareholders in several companies, including Pharmacyclics and Intuitive Surgical. Pharmacyclics developed the cancer drug Imbruvica and was acquired by AbbVie for approximately $21 billion in 2015. Public interviews indicate that the Duggans’ stake generated about $3.5 billion before taxes and other adjustments.

• Timothy Mellon (heir to the banking/railroad empire) donated roughly $197 million across federal committees, including $25 million to American Values 2024. In turn, American Values donated $2.1M to MAHA Alliance. Remember this strange largesse from Timothy Mellon in 2025? He “donated” $130M to “cover US servicemembers paychecks”, because, clearly, the US Government is too broke to pay the military salaries. Maybe the money printing machine was out of ink that day? Haha, yeah, right! A much better explanation for this fit of mega-charity was the fact that at the time Thomas Massie had enough votes in Congress to release the Epstein files… and it just so happens that Mellon’s dad is on the Epstein flight logs, with Mellon bank involved in the sex trafficking litigation, and paying the victims while not admitting anything! But paying them quite a lot nonetheless…

• The Rockefellers contributed rather modestly: $400K

Where is the money going?

Contractors:

• Aaron Siri was paid $289K…

• Gosh, what a lot of flowers MAHA Alliance bought from the “Amaryllis” flower shop in Maryland - a whopping $200K worth of flowers? How many flowers do you need to buy to achieve health freedom?

• Bridget Rasmussen took about 270K for “fundraising management”. Who is she?

Rasmussen is the founder and managing partner of Whisper & Roar, a consulting firm that advises organizations on government affairs, communications, coalition building, and strategy. The firm says it works with CEOs, nonprofit leaders, and mission-driven organizations. According to her biography, she served as Chief of Staff to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential campaign, where she led operations, communications, fundraising, and ballot access efforts. The same biography states that she later co-founded MAHA Alliance and MAHA Action and served as Chief Operating Officer. It says she helped build the organizations’ legislative strategy and “raised over $15 million” while developing partnerships and advocacy campaigns.

What is “Big Truth Inc.”?

Another entity that’s listed as a recipient of MAHA cash is “Big Truth Inc”. While I couldn’t find a public Texas business listing for “Big Truth Inc.”, I did find federal records confirming that Big Truth Inc. exists and uses that exact address. This business makes filings with the Federal Election Commission (FEC):

• The amount received by Big Truth in 2024 was $310,000

• Purpose of payments: Media production, digital media production, travel, and food & beverage

Based on publicly available information, Big Truth Inc. appears to operate from the same address as Del Bigtree’s residence. It receives substantial payments for media production. Those payments came from MAHA Alliance, the political action committee supporting the Make America Healthy Again movement during the 2024 election cycle. (FEC.gov) Many more payments to Big Truth appear in the expense line items.

Itemized expenses and notable disbursements

The review of detailed expenses indicate that NOTHING was spent on any actual MAHA causes:

• $2.5M spent on conferences and conventions, i.e. self promotion, capture of the media and attention space with “authorized” messaging.

• ~$2M “other” - appeared to have been distributed to other PACs, such as Turning Point PAC (~$500M), to political consultants, media consultants, legal consultants and so forth.

• ~$1M for travel

• ~$600K for legal expenses (note: these were not for any covid lawsuits, the legal firms are all political consultants).

You can read the rest yourself. Items that are not there - anything to do with helping the victims of the covid crimes, achieving any accountability or any actual health freedom causes.

2025 Financials (9 months, through Sep 2025)

In 2025, the financial picture of MAHA Alliance was much bleaker, and no surprise, since the campaign largesse and feeding frenzy was over. Financial information available through September 2025 shows that MAHA Alliance drained its accounts to zero, and largely transferred money to MAHA Action.

According to the FEC summary for the 2025 reporting period (coverage through September 25, 2025):

• Total receipts: $73,211.15

• Total disbursements: $839,390.33

• Beginning cash on hand: $766,179.18

• Ending cash on hand: $0.00

Of the $800K disbursed, approximately $260K was for operating expenses, distributed to the same group of political, media and legal consultants, and to MAHA Action. In addition, approximately $500M was “donated” to MAHA Action.

Therefore, none of the money went to help the victims or do anything at all that could be called “health freedom”.

Who owns Bobby?

Let’s go back to Elon Musk, who has underwritten the vast majority of the MAHA clowns’ feeding frenzy in 2024-2025, and therefore technically owned that stupid charade. Musk was one of the largest political donor in the US history in 2024, having contributed $43.6 million to Trump and Kennedy campaigns. Timothy Mellon was THE largest political donor that season. Musk is deeply entrenched in all the latest hubris of transhumanism, technocracy and the Epstein’s network. Here are some in-depth investigative articles on this topic from :

To be sure, MAHA Alliance’s funding was a relative nothingburger on the scale of the greater political swamp funding. The $8M they pissed away on Del’s show, influencers, flowers, parties, conferences, hotels, consultants, Bridget Rasmussen’s crooked nose job - who cares! It’s cheap. And small.

However, let’s use this to illustrate a greater point. I do not believe for a nanosecond that Musk is his own master, nor that all the wealth and companies attributed to him are his own endeavors. Nobody runs a dozen high tech companies simultaneously and has as many (or more?) children - most of whom Musk won’t be able to pick out of a line up, I can bet on that. Musk is obviously a front man for political, deep state, corporate and foreign interests. The front man is there to cover the real investors and agendas. Most of the time these are not visible at all. However, some glimpse can be obtained by looking at who were those interests when “Musk” purchased X. As it happens, due to employee lawsuit, the company had to disclose that list at least partially.

As reported by Fortune at the time, key investors in Musk’s acquisition vehicle were Bill Ackman (Pershing Square Capital), Larry Ellison (Oracle), another convicted human trafficker, music mogul P. Diddy (Sean Combs Capital), HRH Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Alsaud (Saudi royalty), 8VC, Andreesen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital, among many others. Same venture capital funds also poured $100M+ into Casey Means’ little “metabolic” scam Levels, with thousands of fake users and not much else. I am glad that fraud was never installed as Surgeon General. Buying Casey bought exactly zero for those Silicon Valley a-holes, and I am glad. I take it as a health freedom win.

As previously reported by , Musk (and his backers) have a raging interest in mRNA, gene hacking “biodigital” poison. Bobby was financed and installed to make his owners’ delusional dreams come true. Yes, they are all in on it, they are all in the same club, and you are not in that club.

Finally, did you catch the mailing address for Elon Musk’s trust on the FEC forms? The office building is located on E. Mockingbird Lane in Dallas! Do you think this was a random business address? Not a chance.

I will reiterate the point of why I am writing about this: MAHA is not health freedom. All related MAHA orgs - Action, Institute, Values, PAC, etc. - are simply a money syphoning grift and capture network, a political fundraiser that pays for dominance in the “alternative messaging” space. None of the donations they take from you go to any purposes that you think they do. Health freedom is meaningless to them, it’s just a bunch of slogans being used to grab attention of the gullible to cheer and elect “our boys” to political offices. But remember - they are the Epstein class boys and not “yours”. MAHA is at best a show, just like any show on Netflix. Those are profitable for the production companies, the cast and crew members and for their investors, but for you, the people, they are a distraction and a cost. You can watch a million shows about space travel, but they do not make Elon’s Mars colony any less fake.

We now know Kennedy couldn’t care less about his political campaign promises, and the MAHA Alliance financials explain why - he is owned by the same deep state/foreign interest owners as any other DC swamp dweller. It’s cheap and easy for the corporate owners to capture the “alternative space” because the group they need to corral is small and money hungry. However, they vacuum your small cash contributions, your volunteering time, your energy and goodwill, and most importantly - they capture your attention and your compliance. They bully you into fake “unity” (i.e. shut up, hero-worship Bobby and repeat our talking points). They craft the narratives that you hear from every “alternative” large account on social media. If you know about the mainstream Operation Mockingbird, you should recognize the “Resistance Mockingbird”. They are controlled by the same elite controllers!

One thing is guaranteed - you will never be exposed to a mockingbird operation telling you the truth. Therefore, please think for yourself. Please do not support the ops like MAHA, or whatever else they will call themselves in 2028.

Art for today: Old Farm in Mendocino, CA. Oil on panel, 11x14 in.

You may recall that in December 2025, Children’s Health Defense colleagues and I have co-authored a Citizen Petition to the FDA asking to find Pfizer’s and Moderna’s mRNA shots misbranded and revoke their Biologics Licensing Approvals. The Petition describes applicable law, and the conflict between “normal” biologics regulatory law and the PREP Act, where the PREP Act trumps any federal or state law in all situations, including ultimately, the US Constitution for purposes of citizen’s remedies for harm. Any law that violates the US Constitution is nullified in theory, however, in practice - this violation is now the law of the land as practiced by Trump/Kennedy administration. Therefore, for the duration of the PREP Act declaration of covid and other relevant emergencies (now extended to 12/31/2029), these “platforms” and products derived therefrom should be labeled as “EUA Countermeasures”, regardless of any other claims or labels attached to them.

This Citizen Petition made history in terms of the largest number of individual comments, without use of any signature aggregation tools (which is now prohibited for FDA Citizen Petition process). The Petition received 104,000+ comments, of which ~4800 comments were processed and posted on the petition docket page. All of the comments are positive and in support of this petition. For reference, a typical Citizen Petition to the FDA receives 0-50 comments.

On June 8, 2026, CHD receieved a non-response response letter from the FDA:

The FDA made it clear they are not planning to do anything about this issue, because while stating that they need more time, no deadline is provided. They are shoving this into a circular filing system.

In May I briefly spoke to RFK Jr about this petition, and he had informed me that we won’t get any real response (correct) and that we should sue the HHS. I will update my readers if and when there is any action on this matter.

Art for today: Figurative study, charcoal on paper. Available art here.

For the majority of people (like me) who have received childhood and other vaccines - should you obsess about risks of chronic diseases, including cancer? NO! It is my personal heuristic view (although I can’t provide data for this) - those adults that had stopped all vaccinations over ~10 years prior, and have no serious chronic illness, lead healthy lifestyle, and maintain healthy mind (the most important part) - should not be concerned with cancer risk. This applies even to the mRNA shots, although of course, we are not yet at the 10 year mark. Still, those people who currently do not have chronic symptoms of anything, should not obsess over whether they got something from these shots or not. Don’t fall for another round of fear mongering, now from the “health freedom”. Time (and God) is on your side. Health, like everything else, begins in the mind. To protect your mind from professional fear mongering/entrapment techniques, I recommend to stay out of the conventional “Hellthcare” system as much as possible. Avoid unnecessary screenings of any kind. Only seek diagnosis if some serious symptoms are present.

The materials in this collection do not propose cures for cancer (because I am not a doctor, and I don’t offer treatments or protocols). However, accurate understanding of the true causes of a problem are the first 50% -75% of solving it. I am including my own articles, and several comprehensive essays by I highly recommend this publication.

First is a video discussion with Dr. Andrew Kaufman: “Questioning the Cause of Cancer” (please follow Dr. Kaufman on his YouTube channel):

The interview was largely based on my article on the 175 years of cancer data in the Prudential Life Insurance 1915 report (Hoffman):

The cancer rates “bump” was due to prostate cancer and long-standing Eugenics policies of the US government:

More on zeta potential and colloidal stability of blood flow (review of Thomas Riddick’s work).

The Synthesis:

To get a comprehensive picture (and even a version of it for a 6 year old) I highly recommend that you read the following essay on cancer, that provides the best synthesis and clear communication of all the material discussed above, and more - combining the theories of Gerald Pollak on water being the underlying medium of life due to it’s properties of separating and transforming electrical charges, including Charles Richet’s anaphylaxis effect from injections of proteins, and research of several other key authors on the true mechanisms of cancer. While we do not have all the answers today, I can confidently recommend this comprehensive view on cancer as currently THE most productive direction for cancer research:

Lies are Unbekoming

What Is Cancer?

Author’s Note: This essay uses establishment terminology strategically. Words like cancer, tumor, and metastasis appear because they name real physical phenomena that the essay examines. These are the walled region, the fermenting cell, the containment vault the body builds when a region of tissue can no longer sustain itself. When these terms operate i…

Read more

a month ago · 238 likes · 53 comments · Unbekoming

Art for today: Warrior sketches, pastel on paper. Available art here.

Video recording from the interview, if you missed the live stream:

Show notes from VSRF:

This Tuesday, Steve Kirsch welcomes back Sasha Latypova, a former pharmaceutical executive with more than 25 years of experience managing clinical research and regulatory programs for dozens of pharmaceutical companies worldwide.

Since 2021, Sasha has dedicated her work to examining the legal, regulatory, and military frameworks surrounding the COVID-19 response. Together, Steve and Sasha will explore the latest developments in mRNA technology, biodefense, pandemic preparedness, manufacturer liability, government oversight, and whether recent changes in Washington represent meaningful reform—or simply a new chapter in the same system. As always, their conversation promises to be candid, thought-provoking, and unafraid to tackle difficult questions from different perspectives.

Later in the program, we'll be joined by Angelia Desselle and Shawn Vidiella for a special tribute to Kristi Simmonds, whose passing last week deeply affected the vaccine-injured community. Together, they'll honor Kristi's life, reflect on her legacy, and share memories of a woman whose courage and compassion touched so many.

Enjoy your weekend!

Art for today: Sketches of Mongolian horse riders, charcoal and pastel on paper, 22x30 in.

As written by Vera Schreibner:

[2009 Aug] LITTLE KNOWN FACTS ABOUT POLIOMYELITIS VACCINATIONS by These days, when a vaccinee develops poliomyelitis, it may not be called poliomyelitis; instead, it may be called viral or aseptic meningitis, ascending paralysis (Guillain-Barre syndrome), cerebral palsy (over 75 per cent of cases are not diagnosed at birth but after six months) or other such names. According to MMWR (1997; 32[29]:384-385), there are 30,000 to 50,000 cases of aseptic meningitis every year in the United States. Considering that the vast majority (99 per cent) of the reported cases in the pre-vaccine era were non-paralytic and would have corresponded to aseptic or aviral meningitis, then vaccination has actually increased the incidence of poliomyelitis. In the pre-vaccine era, such high numbers only occurred in some epidemics. Now, such numbers occur every year, year by year.

Polio now hides behind these names: acute flaccid paralysis (AFP), Transverse Myelitis, Viral or aseptic Meningitis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, Chinese Paralytic syndrome, CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME, epidemic cholera, cholera morbus, spinal meningitis, spinal apoplexy, inhibitory palsy, intermittent fever, famine fever, worm fever, bilious remittent fever, ergotism, ME, post-polio syndrome, Synonyms for GBS

Below is an excerpt from Chapter 10 of Eleanor McBean’s book “The Poisoned Needle” (1957):

“Mrs. Helen B. Covington, of Kensington, Pa. filed a $150,000 suit in the United States District Court, against Wyeth Inc. Philadelphia drug manufacturer, charging that an anti-rabies vaccine had produced paralysis” (The Truth Teller p 26, Aug 1947).

Dr William F Koch (MD, PhD) stated that “THE INJECTION OF ANY SERUM, VACCINE, OR EVEN PENICILLIN, HAS SHOWN A VERY MARKED INCREASE IN THE INCIDENCE OF POLIO, AT LEAST 400%. STATISTICS ON THIS ARE SO CONCLUSIVE, NO ONE CAN DENY IT.”

The United States Public Health Bureau is extremely reticent about reporting diseases caused by vaccination but the report from 1922 to 1931 admitted that there had been 85 cases of post-vaccinal encephalitis, which DeKruif states “is the twin of infantile paralysis.”

In St. Louis (1933) after a typhoid vaccination campaign there was an outbreak of encephalitis (a form of polio) in which over 100 died. It was reported that the disease developed about 10 days after vaccination and in each case vaccinia was indicated in the brain upon postmortem.

In 1926 two prominent English Professors of Pathology, Doctors Turnbull and McIntosh reported a number of cases of encephalitis lethargica (sleeping sickness—a form of polio) following vaccination. This led to the appointment of two — commissions of the British Ministry of Health, to investigate the situation. Their reports published in 1928 revealed that there had been 231 cases and 91 deaths from this cause (post vaccinal encephalitis) in England and Wales.

According to a report in the Hobart (Tasmania) “Mercury,” (April 111950), “Combined injections for diphtheria and whooping cough may cause severe cases of infantile paralysis.” It stated that a St. Pancras, London medical officer found 40 cases and that a British Health Ministry doctor reported 65 cases where paralysis occurred two weeks after vaccine injections, and in 49 of these, the paralysis was confined to the limb in which the injection had been given. Two of the cases followed the injection of penicillin. Dr. J. K. Marlin, from the Guy Hospital reported 80 cases where children developed infantile paralysis soon after having been vaccinated. “Mercury” stated that “the doctors realizing the danger of their findings to the government’s diphtheria immunization campaign, withheld publications until some of the cases could be followed up over a period of many months. Some of the children recovered after a year or more. Others are still paralyzed . .”

After the many months of observation of these disasters of vaccination the London County Council finally banned the use of the combined diphtheria and whooping cough injections in the clinics during the months when infantile paralysis was most prevalent.

Isn’t it appalling that the governments and the serum promoters see and know that vaccination causes paralysis yet they curtail it only during the months when polio is most prevalent. They still insist on having the revenue from the deadly practice the rest of the time regardless of the consequences. If they would care to observe the “polio season” they would see that it is only at the times when it is created by the doctors with their poisoned needles and the people with their excessive eating of sugar products and other devitalizing and semi-poisoned foods.

Dr. L. C. Appel writes: “The fact that vaccination is either the (a) adding of a disease to a body already weighted with disease, or else, (b) the giving of a disease to a perfectly healthy body, is the medical reason why some of us (medical doctors) oppose vaccination and urge its abolition. A perfectly healthy body is proof against natural disease; a diseased or unhealthy body is handicapped by being given another (inoculated) disease. A diseased or unhealthy body can never be rendered healthy by inoculation or vaccination.”

Dr. Harry R. Baybee said:

“My honest opinion is that vaccination is the cause of more disease and suffering than anything I could name.”

Dr. F. H. Haines voiced his views on vaccination as follows:

“It is impossible to say what remote after-effects may be caused by the introduction of alien substances into the blood stream. Many nervous and other disorders of unknown origin are too often met with. Products which alter metabolism, change the nature of fundamental secretions, cause profound change in the fluids of the body, allergy and anaphylaxis, are the negation of nature’s own methods, and must be viewed with grave misgivings and cautious suspicion.” (”The Truth About Vaccination,” by Lily Loat)

In an article in Archives of Disease in Childhood, (March, 1950) Dr. 3. K. Martin, of England, gives details of “17 cases of poliomyelitis which followed 28 days or less after inoculation.” Analysis of the cases showed that 8 of them had been inoculated with A.P.T. Two had other injections against diphtheria, 2 had penicillin injections, 5 had combined diphtheria and whooping cough inoculations and 1 had whooping cough inoculations alone.

Not long after these cases had been published it encouraged other doctors to bring their findings out in the open and several other medical journals in Australia and England published articles which reported numerous cases of paralysis following vaccination. Two investigators, Dr. McCloskey, in Australia and Dr. Geffen in London both observed that “the point that struck them was that the paralysis started in the limb in which the injection had been made.”

(Details of these findings are reported in the Lancet (London) for April 8, 1950 and The Medical Officer, for April 8, 1950.)

Two British statisticians were asked to investigate whether or not there appeared to have been any “Appreciable risk of poliomyelitis following within a month of inoculation during the 1948 outbreak of polio.” The investigators, Dr. A. Bradford Hill and Dr. I. Knowelden, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, reported:

“The statistics collected in this inquiry reveal clearly an association between recent injections and paralysis . . . We must conclude that in the 1949 epidemic of poliomyelitis in this country, cases of paralysis were occurring which were associated with inoculation procedures carried out within the month preceding the record date of onset of the illness . . .” (Reported in the British Medical Journal, July 1, 1950)

Although the British government, under the pressure of Socialism has been forced to make many concessions in favor of the common people such as abolishing compulsory vaccination, making investigations that revealed the fallacy of many medical practices etc. Mr. Bevin, speaking in behalf of the medical fraternity in the House of Commons on November 24, 1947 still tried to protect the medical rackets when he stated:

“As I am advised, there are no medical grounds for attributing to vaccination or diphtheria immunization any connection with polio” (infantile paralysis).

The investigations of the Ministry of Health were not in agreement with this stand as is seen in its statement that “in the last few years there is evidence that occasionally followed vaccination.”

A report in the Lancet (April 8, 1950) stated that Dr. McClosky of Melbourne had inquired into 340 cases of poliomyelitis which occurred in Victoria (from January to August, 1949) and found that 31 of them had occurred in children who had received diphtheria or whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine, or both, within three months of the onset of the disease. Of the 31 cases, 30 of them suffered severe paralysis which was most pronounced in the limb in which the injection was given.

The Medical Officer (April 8, 1950) reported the findings of Dr. D. H. Geffen who stated that in the first four months of that year, in St. Pancras, London, 30 children under five developed infantile paralysis within four weeks of being immunized against diphtheria or whooping cough (or both) “the paralysis affecting, in particular, the limb of injection. In 7 other recently vaccinated cases, paralysis occurred but not in the limb that had received the injection.

Dr. Arthur Gale of the Health Ministry reported (in the Daily Express for April 10, 1950) that he had observed 65 cases mainly from the Midlands’ in which paralysis developed about two weeks after an injection; and in 49 of these, paralysis was confined to the limb in which the injection had been given.

The report of the Government investigation (British Medical Journal, July 1, 1950) conducted by Dr. A Bradford Hill and 3. Knowelden revealed that there were 410 cases of infantile paralysis among children under five years. Of these 249 had been inoculated at the same time. Of 41 cases it was not known if they had been vaccinated or not. Of 35 cases in which poliomyelitis developed within a month of inoculation, the limb that had received the vaccine was paralyzed. This was usually the left arm.

The British Medical Journal (July 29, 1950) reported 112 cases of paralysis admitted to the Park Hospital, London during 1947-1949 in which 14 were paralyzed in the limb “which had received one or more of a course of immunizing injections within the previous two months. The interval between the last injection and the onset of paralysis in the majority of cases was between 9 and 14 days. The paralysis followed (A.P.T.) combined pertussis (whooping cough) and diphtheria prophylactic in nine cases, pertussis vaccine alone in one case, and diphtheria prophylactic alone in four cases. The paralysis, whether of arm or leg, conformed in general to a uniform pattern. It was not associated in time or place with any particular clinic or technique.”

In all 14 cases, paralysis occurred in the injected limb; in 12 cases it was the arm and in 2 cases, the leg. This outbreak of polio followed an intensive immunization campaign during that time (1947-1949).

The serum makers probably had a surplus of vaccine to sell, as is the case in this country (United States) when the scare campaigns are engineered and the gullible people are stampeded into the vaccination centers to be “shot.”

In Los Angeles (1946) after the largest smallpox vaccination campaign in the history of the city, an epidemic of polio broke out within two weeks after the “shots” and by the end of the summer there were 26 deaths from this cause and 1,900 reported cases. The County Epidemiologist estimated that there were —about 15 times as many unreported cases which would bring the count up to 28,000 cases. The report for the entire United States for 1951 was only 28,395. An average vaccination campaign nets the doctors about $2,000,000 so this one must have been tremendous in profits. The amount of the “take” has never been revealed. This Polio epidemic triggered off a “bigger than ever” March of Dimes campaign and the people were ‘bled” again for money to support the medical racket that creates more disease in order to scare the people into more donations and so the vicious circle continues.

POLIO FROM VACCINATION IN OTHER COUNTRIES

England, Australia and United States are not the only countries that have found that vaccination causes polio and its variations such as encephalitis, meningitis, and certain other diseases.

In The New York State Journal of Medicine, (May 15, 1926) reports were given of post-vaccinal encephalitis in several other countries. In a brief of an article by Dr. W. F. Winkler, of the University Clinic of Rostock, Germany it says: “Quite recently isolated cases of cerebral symptoms, suggesting encephalitis, following vaccination have been reported from Holland, Czechoslovakia, and Germany and from Switzerland there have been reported two cases of serious meningitis.”

The (Aug. 27, 1928) Report of the League of Nations tells of 139 cases and 41 deaths. “This resulted in Holland stopping compulsory vaccination during 1928-1929. The total number of vaccinations in Holland in the first half of 1928 was less than one-third of those for the first half of 1927 and the deaths from encephalitis were reduced to less than one-third.” (Vaccine and Serum Evils— Shelton—p. 15)

Germany modified her compulsory vaccination law, as a result of the increased number of polio cases that developed from vaccination. The International News Service, (Feb. 27, 1930) states: “The change of attitude of some medical experts towards vaccination in favor of a less rigid enforcement of the law has been brought about mainly through a considerable number of post-vaccinal diseases observed in Holland and England and in sporadic cases in Germany.”

Dr. Carl Leiner, of Vienna reported cases of encephalitis and meningitis developing 9 to 15 days after vaccination. He admitted “that in a generalized infection, like generalized vaccinia, there may be intracranial complications.” In autopsies, Dr. Lucksch was able to show beyond doubt that “death had been due to encephalitis.” Dr. Bastianse, of the Hague, reported 34 similar cases which occurred in Holland during 18 months (1924-25) with a death rate of 40%. The Netherlands, France and other countries have also reported cases of this kind.

In an article in The Journal of the American Medical Association, (July 3, 1926, p. 45.) on “NERVOUS DISTURBANCES AND SMALLPOX VACCINATION,” is stated, “In regions in which there is no organized vaccination of the population, general paralysis is rare. In patients with general paralysis, he (Dr. Daraskwiewiez) has never seen smallpox scars, but smallpox vaccination scars were always present.” Various physicians agreed that, “It is impossible to deny a connection between vaccination and the encephalitis which follows it.” (emphasis supplied)

In England (1923-1925) an intensive vaccination campaign was carried out which caused a steady increase in the cases of Encephalitis-Lethargica and similar diseases until in 1924 there were 6,296 reported cases with unestimated thousands of unreported cases. Liverpool was at least 50% better vaccinated than the rest of England and had about 100% more encephalitis. The physicians tried to direct blame away from vaccination by claiming that the diseases were due to “latent infection,” “inherited weakness,” or “special susceptibility.”

For a one time donation:

Buy me a Kofi

Art for today: His Goatness, watercolor from my sketchbook. Available art here.

Big government funding of research, or anything really, is a central planning model, similar to those employed by the Soviet Union. These central planning (resource control and allocation to political/corporate interests) designed to over-fund the narratives preferred by the power elites, manipulate public opinion, and divert the capital and resources from the true scientific or other forms of societal progress. If the government suddenly pours lavish amounts of money into “Virus Cancer Program” - no money is ever made available, and thus no scientific hypotheses can ever be studied which aims at ANY OTHER CAUSE of cancer. Nobody can ask - what if cancer is not caused by a virus? There is no money and no academic career to be had asking that question. “VCP” hit a total dead end but still managed to spawn the poisoning, life destroying HPV “vaccine”. While other causes of cancer have been proposed and studied since then, none of them really deviated from the pre-determined dogma, enshrined into that original “cancer war”. Today’s mainstream, NIH-funded cancer research is based on the same false foundations of virology and genetics and, with addition of “computational biology” and AI, the apparatus has devolved into meaningless computer modeling and mass poisoning cartel.

After reading these paragraphs, you will, hopefully, be liberated from the notion that ANYTHING in the mainstream, NIH-funded “Hellth science” is remotely sane or should be relied on for personal health decision making. It should be a relief to know that you can fire your idiot doctor, who is likely a 2nd or 3rd generation indoctrinated into the system that 60+ years ago locked into a lucrative dead-end narrative. It should also be liberating for you to know that the related disciplines of virology and genetics are completely false for the same reason the cancer “science” today is completely false - they stem from the government’s over-funding preferred resource- and population control narratives and have nothing to do with natural science.

And all of this should finally convince you that 3 blind mice will never be able to build a spaceship and fly to the Moon, no matter how many trillions of dollars they are given. Nobody can make viruses in a lab, nobody can “modify your genes”, nobody can link you to the Internet via nanobots and remote control you with chemtrails.

This essay is a vignette from the long history of overfunding bad ideas:

The Special Virus Cancer Program, later simply the Virus Cancer Program (VCP), was launched in 1964. It was part of the NCI [National Cancer Institute], which in turn had been founded in 1937 to research causes of and treatments for cancer and promote cancer research. The NCI had supported research into the relationship between viruses and cancer since the early 1960s, and the SVCP was part of that general effort.²

The SVCP did have some peculiarities, however. “From the start [it] relied heavily on the planning techniques used in space and military programs, and, for a biological undertaking, it has made similarly lavish use of resources.”³ The problem with all this was that by the early 1970s, the program had not produced the breakthroughs in treatment, or even the advances in basic knowledge, that its founders and funders had expected. More than this, the way the program was run and how its funds were awarded frustrated large numbers of scientists. This was the background for the appointment of the Zinder Committee to review the Special Virus Cancer Program in March of 1973.

…the Nixon administration wanted to change how scientific research was managed. Nixon neither liked nor understood the idea of basic, open-ended research and was all for taking control of research planning away from people he termed “nuts” and giving it to, as Mukherjee put it, “a new cadre of scientific bureaucrats” who would “bring a new discipline and accountability to science.”⁵ Robin Scheffler has argued that the controversy over the SVCP and the activities of the Zinder Committee [1973] show scientists in revolt against the centrally managed, contract-focused research program of the NCI, because they feared it would undermine what they saw as more autonomous, independent grant-based research. They were affected by changes in federal research strategy, but they were also the experts whose opinions and cooperation were necessary to the enterprise, and they were able to use the value of their own scientific expertise and their access to the machinery of federal bureaucracy to fend off what they saw as government intrusion into scientific independence.⁶

…The virus model suggested an easy-to-target model for the cause of cancer — viruses — and a relatively simple fix: vaccines.

This is not addressed by the authors of the essay, however, big part of Nixon’s “War on Cancer” had nothing to do with finding cure for cancer. Nixon was transferring the official Bioweapons program from covert military/intelligence funding, into the open - to academia and corporate pharma contractors. Of course, the development of weaponized viruses is hubris scientifically, however, Nixon or his advisors would not know this. They believed it is possible to make flying viruses that cause cancer and unleash them on enemies, or at least use such weapons as a threat. They also believed that they can make vaccines for protecting themselves. Many of the participants of the pandemic preparedness cartel still believe these narratives, too! At the time of Nixon’s plan, the only way to accomplish this transition from covert military programs to academia/pharma without eliciting public backlash was to pretend that all of it was for a benevolent objective of curing cancer.

Biomedical researches found themselves caught in a situation where a lot had been promised politically — the SVCP was compared to the moon landing, and many lay people and members of congress had the impression that a cure for cancer could be as simple as finding the right talent and putting enough money into the effort. The basic research that would have allowed this was lacking, however, and the enterprise as a whole was poorly managed. It ended up becoming a “big science” nightmare for biologists.

…The SVCP was launched in the mid-1960s, during the post-war period of federal largesse in terms of basic research funding. Within a few years after the program’s founding, however, during the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was a move on the federal government’s part toward demanding more immediate returns on investment in scientific research. This was a sharp contrast to the immediate post-war period, when molecular biology research had been supported with the assumption that there would be significant practical gains at some point in the future, even if those gains were not easy to predict or direct at the moment. The social movements of the 1960s also played a role in this shift, as activists and progressive organizations called for more socially useful research, with immediate benefits for ordinary people.⁸ Americans’ expectations of what the federal government could, and should, do in terms of safeguarding public health and preventing disease had expanded. The 1960s and 1970s were, for example, the era of the first pieces of modern environmental protection legislation, such as the Clean Air Act, first passed in 1963 and amended at various points in the later 1960s and 1970s. Less pure motives were also at work. As noted above, President Nixon had no great respect for scientists, but he was interested in “outflank[ing] Senator Ted Kennedy, a potential presidential candidate who was then leading the Lasker forces,” i.e. the alliance of activists and organizations spearheaded by cancer research activist Mary Lasker. Their goal was increased funding for targeted research into cancer treatments.⁹ Changes in management practices within the federal government also played a role. In the late 1960s, “systems analysis” expanded from defense into other areas of the federal government.¹⁰ This included the federal government’s cancer program.¹¹ Systems analysis is a goal-directed management method that involves setting specific targets and mapping out in extensive detail what steps must be taken to achieve these targets with maximum efficiency and how to carry out these steps. It presupposes large organizations, large budgets and large staffs.

Related to the federal government’s interest in systems analysis – but nevertheless distinct – was the rise of “big science.” The term “big science” was coined by Alvin Weinberg, a nuclear physicist, in 1961. Weinberg applied the term to the massive projects in physics and engineering that typified the Cold War-era scientific competition with the Soviet Union. He argued that big science had caused a series of problems for the practice of science itself. The first of these was that the flip side of massive public funding was a need to appeal to the public. As a result, “Big Science…thrives on publicity. The inevitable result is the injection of a journalistic flavor into Big Science which is fundamentally in conflict with the scientific method.” This blurred the line between science writing and journalism, and “issues of technical merit tend to get argued in the popular, not the scientific press,” or in congress rather than in universities. In Weinberg’s view, this led to prominence for the showy rather than the thoughtful.

The second big problem was that the abundance of funding led scientists to throw money at problems rather than thinking up a way to reframe the problem so that it might be solved with the resources at hand — “spending money instead of thought.” Big science also created a problem of too many administrators, or a too-large ratio of administrators to working scientists. “Unfortunately, science dominated by administrators is science understood by administrators, and such science quickly becomes attenuated, if not meaningless.” He also noted the prospect of “pet projects” getting special treatment as far as funding was concerned and “the dangers of creating a political ‘in’ group of scientists who will keep worthy outsiders from the till.”¹²

Many of Weinberg’s criticisms of big science would prove to be prescient as far as the NCI in the early 1970s was concerned. However, it is important to emphasize that Weinberg was not categorically against big science. Ironically, in his more extended treatment of the subject, published in the late 1960s, he argued that given their relevance for human health, molecular biology and biomedical research were good candidates for large, complex research endeavors. He thought that “the biomedical sciences can be force-fed, even more than they are now being force-fed.” More money would attract the best scientific talent and support the best research.¹³

All of this together – cultural, political and administrative developments – formed the context for the review of the SVCP that took place in 1973-1974. The review committee consisted of about a dozen scientists, headed by Norton Zinder. Zinder and his colleagues dug into the progress and results of the program, made site visits, and interviewed people who were involved in awarding the program’s outside grants and contracts. They also spoke on the phone with and received letters from researchers who had had to do with the program in some capacity and whose reactions were, on the whole, negative.

Although it might seem counterintuitive to non-specialists, scientists argued that throwing a lot of money and effort on solving a very particular narrowly-defined problem was not necessarily the best way to gain the knowledge needed to solve it. As biochemist Arthur Kornberg wrote to Nixon’s cancer program advisor Benno Schmidt in 1974, “narrowing the focus of research so sharply limits the serendipitous discoveries which have dominated the modern history of medical research.”¹⁹

The “War on Cancer,” including the SVCP, was sometimes compared to the moon landing — that is, an all-out effort at enormous expense in which American ingenuity and know-how were expected to win the day and deliver spectacular results. Virologists and other experts were skeptical, however.²⁰ Jim Watson, for example, had little patience with the moon landing metaphor for the federal government’s “War on Cancer” in the 1970s. A more realistic ‘moonshot’ comparison, he told the Boston Globe in 1978, would be an attempt to land a man on the moon in the 1920s before the invention of modern rocket technology, by giving contracts to cannon-makers and ladder experts and a lot of administrators — but with no support for basic rocket science.²¹ Jim Watson’s quip to the Boston Globe was not the only such statement. The Wall Street Journal described unnamed scientists as saying that “this ‘targeted research’…smacks of a false analogy to the moon shot program, where the goal was clear and the technology was available. Yet not only do scientists not know the best way to ‘conquer cancer,’ they are not even sure what cancer itself might be. (Some say that the name covers dozens, and maybe hundreds, of diseases.) Furthermore, the programmed approach leaves little room for the chance that new and more productive lines of research might develop….[scientists] say the contract worker simply won’t have the flexibility to follow up chance discoveries, and these are the heart of scientific breakthroughs.”²²

The problems that the Zinder Committee and their contacts and correspondents in the biological and biomedical sciences wrote about look a lot like those of a discipline plunging – or being plunged – into Weinberg’s “big science.” The textbook example of big science in the 1960s and early 70s was the space program and the moon landing, and as noted above, this metaphor was used repeatedly to talk about the SVCP, by both its supporters and its critics. “Big biology” had arrived. But unlike physicists and engineers, biologists were not working on massive projects centered around a large piece of technology, like the atom bomb, a particle accelerator or a moon rocket. The aspects of big science that affected life scientists the most were administrative. There was an increase in the use of contracts to fund science by national funding agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the NIH, as well as an uptick in the number of administrators at these agencies.³⁴

Biologists discussing the SVCP in the early 1970s expressed many of the same concerns as Weinberg had ten years earlier about “big science” in general – top heavy administration, “pet projects,” in-groups, throwing money at problems rather than thinking them through.

An important aspect of big science that lay outside the scope of the Zinder Committee’s activities was the relationship between scientists and the media. The War on Cancer was in part the result of public agitation by people like Mary Lasker and the American Cancer Society. The Nixon administration had a stake in promoting it. And given the seriousness of the disease, the American public was always eager to read about groundbreaking advances in cancer research. The SVCP was implicated in all of this because it was a targeted research initiative that was supposed to produce tangible results fairly quickly. More than this, the virus model of cancer causation that was the intellectual basis for the SVCP raised hopes that the research might produce a cancer vaccine.

The problem was that there was a significant mismatch between how the SVCP and the Cancer Program in general were sold to the public, on the one hand, and on the other, what the people in charge of running it knew that they could deliver. Scientists and administrators working at the NCI or the NIH or otherwise affiliated with the War on Cancer were naturally well aware that given the state of basic cancer research, the prospects of a cure within the next few years were vanishingly small. This led to significant tension between how the program was presented to the public and what those running it knew they could realistically provide, even under the best of circumstances. Occasionally representatives of the program had to backpedal and argue repeatedly that they had never implied that there would soon be a vaccine against cancer — even though, essentially, they had. In his correspondence with Arthur Kornberg, Benno Schmidt said that “no one responsible for the cancer program believes that this is a research effort that can be managed, predicted or targeted, or that a timetable can be fixed or a price tag set. All[underlined] we offer is an accelerated effort.” ³⁹ “Nobody,” he said, “is under the illusion that the cancer problem is one of implementation of known science or that the research needed to advance cancer knowledge can be targeted or planned.”⁴⁰

The problem was that President Nixon himself had publicly made this very comparison to the moon landing in his second State of the Union Address.⁴³ The idea of a war on cancer in which quick and spectacular results were expected was occasionally echoed even by scientists and medical professionals. In 1974, molecular biologist Sol Spiegelman predicted the isolation of a human cancer virus within the next few years, which would be a big step toward a cancer vaccine.

Ultimately, the best way to understand the controversy over the SVCP is as a collision between big science, the politics of the late 1960s and early 1970s and – crucially – a specific model of the causes of cancer that was soon to disappear. In the 1960s and early 1970s, it seemed that viruses might be part of the cause of cancer in humans. Over the course of the 1970s, research based on this idea developed into a different model, which would not have been possible without the virus-cancer hypothesis, but which no longer assumed that viruses were a significant cause of cancers in people.⁴⁷

…Where does this leave us? Despite the high drama that the SVCP and the Zinder Committee’s review provoked, the practical effects on the SVCP and the NCI were limited. Initially, Zinder expressed hope that “a beginning has been made.” He and the committee had “unsettled the system a bit, if nothing else.”⁵² He was less optimistic a few years later. The NCI had had time by this point to put the committee’s recommendations into practice, but little had changed. “For some time now,” Zinder noted,

“I have been approached by scientists both in and out of the program saying that the abuses of power that we found four years ago are as bad as ever…In addition, there were some simple changes that we requested which, although mentioned in the text of our report, were not even listed in the recommendations that have not been put into effect, although we were assured that they would be”. ⁵³

References:

1 Norton Zinder Collection (NZC), Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, handwritten note on SVCP dated Sept. 12, 1973.

2 “National Cancer Institute (NCI),” via the National Institutes of Health, https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/nih-almanac/national-cancer-institute-nci, accessed October 6, 2021.

3 Nicholas Wade, “Special Virus Cancer Program: Travails of a Biological Moonshot,” Science 174, 4016 (24 December, 1971): 1306-1311.

4 Stephen Strickland, Politics, Science and Dread Disease: A Short History of United States Medical Research Policy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972; Richard A. Rettig, Cancer Crusade: The Story of the National Cancer Act of 1971 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977); James T. Patterson, The Dread Disease: Cancer and Modern American Culture (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.

5 Siddhartha Mukherjee, The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer (New York: Scribner, 2010), 182-183.

6 Robin Wolfe Scheffler, A Contagious Cause: The American Hunt for Cancer Viruses and the Rise of Molecular Medicine (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2019), Chapter Eight.

7 Michel Morange, “From the Regulatory Vision of Cancer to the Oncogene Paradigm, 1975-1985,” Journal of the History of Biology 30, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 1–29; Michel Morange, The Black Box of Biology: A History of the Molecular Revolution, trans. Matthew Cobb (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2020), Chapter Eighteen.

8 Doogab Yi, The Recombinant University: Genetic Engineering and the Emergence of Stanford Biotechnology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015), pp. 6-8.

9 Patterson, Dread Disease, 248-249.

10 Guy Black, “Systems Analysis in Government Operations,” Management Science 14, no. 2 (October 1967): B41–58; Alain Enthoven, “How Systems Analysis, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis, or Benefit-Cost Analysis First Became Influential in Federal Government Program Decision Making,” Journal of Benefit Cost Analysis 10, no. 2 (2019): 146–55.

11 Barbara J. Culliton, “Biomedical Research (II): Will the ‘Wars’ Ever Get Started?,” Science 181, no. 4103 (September 7, 1973): 921.

12 Alvin M. Weinberg, “Impact of Large-Scale Science on the United States,” Science 134, no. 3473 (July 21, 1961): 161–64.

13 Alvin M. Weinberg, Reflections on Big Science (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1967), 106.

14 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, xerox of Colin Norman, “Cancer research runs into trouble,” Nature 248, April 5, 1974, pp. 465-466.

15 Barbara J. Culliton, “Virus Cancer Program: Review Panel Stands By Criticism,” Science 184, 4133 (April 12, 1974): 145.

16 NZC, Series: Rockefeller University, Box 1, Folder: 1974, Harold Amos, draft report of review of Zinder report, June 10, 1974.

17 Daniel S. Greenberg, “NSF Boosts Use of Contracts for Research / Cancer program is attacked by study,” Change 6, 4 (May 1974): 54.

18 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 157, Folder: [unlabeled, “Chemistry search” written on front cover], Report of the Ad Hoc Review Committee (Zinder Committee) for the Special Virus Cancer Program. Hereafter cited as “Zinder Committee Report.” Quote on page 3.

19 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Kornberg to Schmidt, June 24, 1974.

20 Nicholas Wade, “Special Virus Cancer Program: Travails of a Biological Moonshot,” Science 174, 4016 (24 December, 1971): 1306-1311.

21 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 173, Folder: unlabeled, “War on cancer: frustration splits ranks,” Boston Globe, April 24, 1978.

22 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, “Fighting the Cancer War,” The Wall Street Journal, August 1974.

23 Zinder Committee Report, 6.

24 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Kornberg to Schmidt, June 24, 1974.

25 Zinder Committee Report, 11.

26 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder: Rev. Cancer, Jerry Schneider, Assoc. Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego Medical School, to Zinder, 13 August 1973.

27 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder: Rev. Cancer, Dr. W. K. Joklik, Duke University Medical Center, to Zinder, August 8, 1973.

28 Zinder Committee Report, 10.

29 Zinder Committee Report, 10.

30 Wade, “Travails of a Biological Moonshot,” 1307.

31 Zinder Committee Report, 11.

32 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder [unlabeled, with “Dr. Zinder” written on the cover], Zinder to Dr. Arthur Upton, September 12, 1977.

33 Zinder Committee Report, 16.

34 Greenberg, “Science Policy: NSF Boosts Use of Contracts for Research / Cancer Program Is Attacked by Study.”

35 NZC, Series: Rockefeller University, Box 1, Folder: 1974, James Whitman to Zinder, April 2, 1974.

36 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box: 149, Folder: Rev. Cancer, Joklik to Zinder, August 8, 1973. Emphasis in original.

37 Zinder Committee Report, 13.

38 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box: 149, Folder: Rev. Cancer, Joklik to Zinder, August 8, 1973.

39 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Schmidt to Kornberg, July 11, 1974. Emphasis in original.

40 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Schmidt to Kornberg, June 18, 1974. Entire sentence underlined in original.

41 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, President’s Cancer Panel, assessment of the National Cancer Program January 25, 1973, page 14.

42 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Report of Ad Hoc Review Committee of the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, Assessment of National Cancer Program Plan, pages 12-13. Emphasis in original.

43 Daryl E. Chubin and Kenneth E. Studer, “The Politics of Cancer,” Theory and Society 6, 1 (July, 1978): 57.

44 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: [unlabeled], Clipping “Cancer Viruses” from The Nation Tuesday, March 26, 1974.

45 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder: [no label, “Dr. Zinder” written on the front cover], NCP special communication, August 17, 1977, copy of testimony of Guy R. Newell, M.D., Deputy Director of the NCI, before the Intergovernmental Relations and Human Resources Subcommittee of the House of Representatives, page 1.

46 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder: Rev. Cancer, Comments on the report of the ad hoc review committee of the Virus Cancer Program, January, 1974.

47 Daniel T. Kevles, “Pursuing the unpopular: a history of courage, viruses and cancer,” in Robert B. Silvers, ed., Hidden Histories of Science (New York: New York Review of Books, 1995), 69-109; Morange, “Oncogene Paradigm”; Morange, Black Box of Biology, Chapter Eighteen.

48 NZC, Series: Rockefeller, Box 1, Folder: 1974, Mathilde Krim to John Maloney, July 11, 1974, page 2.

49 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 135, Folder: Ad Hoc Advisory Committee for Special Virus Cancer Program, 1973, Kornberg to Schmidt, July 16, 1974.

50 Horace Judson, The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology. Commemorative Edition. (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2013), 925-7.

51 NZC, Series: Rockefeller, Box 1, Folder: 1974, Zinder to S. R. Wagle, May 29, 1974.

52 NZC, Series: Rockefeller University, Box 3, Folder: unlabeled, Zinder to J. M. Price, May 16, 1974.

53 NZC, Series: Government Activities, Box 149, Folder: [no label, “Dr. Zinder” on front cover], Zinder to Arthur Upton, September 12, 1977.

Art for today: Summer is Here, oil on panel, 11x14 in.

MAHA Victory!

HHS press release. OMG, did our hero deliver or what?

By now you should have multiple holes in your head where my graphinated-5G nano-voice-to-skull transmissions about the PREP Act have hit you over these years. Do you have persistent tinnitus? ZHHZzhzhzzHHHissss… Bueller… Bueller… test… test. Here is a multiple-choice surprise quiz for you. I shall determine if the nanochip I fabricated in your brain with my secret transhuman remote control alien technology is live and operational:

Ok, I see that everyone responded correctly - great job, class!

PREP Act declaration for the fake covid emergency remains extended until at least December 31, 2029, and continues to deliver an ironclad liability shield for the mRNA vaccine “platforms” of Pfizer, Moderna, Novavax (yes, the flu shots, and RSV shots, and whatever else they spew off those “platforms”, too). It doesn’t mater what their labels say, what the FDA says, what death and suffering the regulators “ignore”, or how illegal are the mandates issued by the Trump Admin for the military servicemembers, or how unconstitutional the NY healthcare mandates which SCOTUS won’t discuss! PREP Act preempts any federal and state law that may be in conflict, and thus, these Countermeasures (mass murder weapons) remain fully deployed and shielded by the US Government. Thanks Bobby! Imagine if it weren’t Bobby running HHS, what would that other bad guy do - give Pfizer $1.2 billion and Moderna $314 million, probably … oh wait. Nevermind. Let’s move on to even better news.

Operation Warp Death 2.0 in the works:

As reported by Katy Talento, Pfizer (and presumably other Big Pharmas) are wining and dining high profile policy makers while drafting an Executive Order for Trump for Operation Warp Death 2.0. Did you think Trump wrote his EOs with his staff taking into account the priorities of the American people? LOL. The only priorities that matter are those of the corporations that he serves. Didn’t they explain this to you in the civics class in school? Among other insanities, Pfizer wants RFK Jr to lead this exciting Apollo mission. According to Talento:

Right now - as in, at the very moment of publication - a group of economists and pharma-friendly policy types are sitting down to lunch, bankrolled by Pfizer (I was told privately), in Washington, D.C. to discuss a draft Executive Order (EO) that would hand the pharmaceutical industry everything it has ever wanted and then some.

The draft EO was attached to the invitation to this lunch as the actual subject matter to be discussed. It has a name: Advancing Cost-Cutting Treatments and Diagnostics for Old-Age Populations through “Operation Warp Speed 2.0.”

She provided this screenshot and made the draft document available for paid subs only:

I don’t doubt that Pfizer and other Pharma Bros are desperate for the mass murder 2.0, because their bio-bullshit gene therapies and other poisons are falling like a Humpty Dumpty after a heroin binge (examples below). All the Trump’s HHS and all the MAHA-IMA-Ryan Cole cannot put Humpty back together at all. And it is not shocking at all, either - what do you think happens when you bet it all on red in the futile, deadly and guaranteed to fail “gene therapy” casino (discussed further below)? Unless! The bet is for a “pandemic emergency!!!” and covered by the PREP Act. Then it is a guaranteed success! Of course, they are “inspired” by OWS 1.0 - who wouldn’t be? Trump infused Pharma and Hellthcare with $4T+ and which government juice junkie would say “no” to this much heroin? Will Kennedy say yes or refuse? We shall find out soon enough. My prediction - if he says yes, he stays as the HHS head and gets Big Pharma’s financial backing for his POTUS run in 2028; if he says no - he is out. As I said many times before, if he had any integrity, he would have resigned long ago. It doesn’t matter what he choses at this point.

The Futile, Deadly and Guaranteed-to-Fail Casino: Update

Let’s look at some high rollers, shall we?

Abivax is highly optimistic that the FDA will approve its cancer-causing micro-RNA disruptor drug. If recent history is a predictor of the future, their optimism is well-founded. There is no cancer-causing therapy that the FDA does not like. Abivax press release.

Obefazimod (formerly ABX464) is an investigational, orally administered, small molecule for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). It is a first-in-class miR-124 enhancer that stabilizes the inflammatory response by upregulating microRNA-124. Yikes! Didn’t I publish about micro-RNA pathway a couple of years ago? Yes, I did, many times, in articles and presentations! Specifically, micro-RNA disruptor mechanism is a well-known bioweapons pathway, extensively described in the 2018 NIH textbook on weaponization of “synthetic biology” (ignore the “gene transfer” nonsense they talk about, it’s all chemical weapons):

Even small amounts of a targeted RNA would not modify the genome per se, but might allow or encourage cells to begin the process of self-transformation to tumors, as evidenced by the fact that a large number of pro-oncogenic miRNAs have already been discovered (O'Bryan et al., 2017).

Right! In 2018 NIH wrote a textbook saying micro-RNAs can cause cancer. Abvivax’s micro-RNA drug causes cancer, just like the NIH said it would:

the rate of malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer — this category includes tumors like prostate and breast cancers, which partly sparked alarm in early June — was 0.48 IR/100 PY in patients who received obefazimod. …the rates of non-melanoma skin cancer — conditions like basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. This was 0.95 IR/100 PY in obefazimod subjects in Part 2 of the trial.

They are using a contrived statistic “per 100 patient-years” for purposes of obfuscation, but the cancer effect is real and dose-dependent, which confirms this drug, indeed, causes cancer. Abvivax is confident their drug will be approved by the FDA, and I believe it will be.

Novo Nordisk $3.3B gene therapy hole:

As I previously reported in Notes, their GLP-1 manufacturing process data is stolen and being auctioned. And their purchase of a gene therapy portfolio for $3.3B turned out to be vaporware - data cannot be replicated:

Pfizer’s $43B Seagen oncology gene therapy hole:

Also previously reported in Notes, in even better news - remember when everyone was upset that Pfizer is going to make mega profits in cancer when they bought Seagen for $43B? Be upset no longer. Be happy. They won’t make any money on it, and therefore that acquisition blew a crater in their financial forecasts. Why do you think they are feverishly writing Trump’s EO for mass murder 2.0? Makes total sense now, doesn’t it?

Let’s wrap up on this optimistic note. I am going to sign off for a long holiday weekend.

I have been extremely busy assisting some legal cases, and I am running low on new art. Here is a photo from the time of innocence which feels like a different universe now. I took this photo at the 4th of July celebration in St. Helena, CA, 2015. Like many of you, I do miss the carefree days, but I do not wish to go back in time. Even the harshest learned lessons about reality are infinitely more valuable than unawareness of it. Happy 250th birthday, America, and many more to come!

This article was originally published on January 1, 2024.

I am republishing it now, because yesterday I have received AI-written death threats from some low IQ incel(s) going by name “Skytoshi” on Substack. I have had numerous very aggressive, mentally ill trolls in this category, over the years. These days, I just block whoever posts this garbage, because it is clearly a targeted operation. I am posting this missive for you because of its comedy value, and further confirmation (as if it’s needed) that the “nanobots, bio-digital convergence, MAC addresses, graphene antennas”, and related genres are a giant pile-of-shit psyop. Hope you find this as hilarious as I do. I replied to this moron with a dck sticker, and reported him to Substack. Not that it matters, the account subscribes only to me, so it’s a “burner”:

Original article:

I have a lot of subscribers and I get many good questions that I am happy to respond to, but also many bad ones. I am briefly going to explain the difference, and hope that there are enough adults here that will understand. The topic of this article is about one of the areas where I get a lot of bad questions: transhumanism (implying bio-digital convergence, uploading brains to the internet, and other techno-hubris), nanotechnology, synthetic biology, internet-of-bodies (IOB) and related concepts. A bad question is not a question, it is an attempt to impose false vocabulary. Typically this starts with “you are so intelligent and we desperately need your help figuring this out! Please help!!” I spend time and patiently explain there is no possibility of “transumans” (except someone sexually mutilated), and nobody is getting plugged into the internet (topic of this article), and instead of “thanks, that’s a relief from my anxiety”, or just “thanks”, I get: “you are stupid, uneducated, and a controlled opposition!” from these people. Then further hounding with endless attempts to make me read mind-numbing techno-word-salad from their favorite bloggers, who appear just as mentally ill, and attempts to pick fights and cheap cries for attention. Yesterday, of course, these hissy fits escalated to the idiotic death threats, referenced above. These people immediately accuse me being all sorts of evil, and “downfall of humanity” (really? you guys are drama queens!) simply because I patiently read and answered their non-question. That’s how I know the question was not asked in good faith.

Attempts to make me look at yet another thousand microscopy pictures of various materials claiming that these are artificial organisms such as “synthetic bacteria”, or nano-robots and other absurdities will result in nothing enjoyable for those feeling entitled to waste my time. So please don’t. If you think that I am stupid, uneducated, and a controlled opposition, feel free to think that. If you want to unsubscribe from my stack, please do so. Do whatever helps you cope! I am not interfering with whatever line of research, reading or fantasy you want to pursue, and all I ask in return is a bit of common curtesy.

Now that we got this out of the way, for those of you still here…

A reader asked a good question about mine and Katherine Watt’s opinion on the concept of the “internet of bodies” and “transhumanism”:

https://www.ftwproject.com/orgonite-blog/wireless-body-area-network-the-new-manhattan-project/ref/493/

Katherine’s response:

Based on my own understanding of reality and especially what I’ve come to understand about the globalists’ use of predictive (word- and image-based) psychological manipulation — using news reports, scientific publishing (including patents), table top exercises, television shows, movies, planning reports, laws, and other media to prepare people to inaccurately interpret and behaviorally respond to orchestrated events that are fictional but presented as real, I’m not that concerned about the globalists actual ability to create transhumans by melding electronic technology with biological organisms. 

In general, I think that the globalists are very, very good at deceiving people and breaking things, including human bodies and souls, but they are not good at creating anything, because creation is God’s domain and is inextricably interpenetrated with truth. 

So, I think the globalists are spraying, injecting and otherwise inserting a lot of garbage into cells, plants, animals and human bodies, some of which is metallic or magnetic or other elements of electronic devices. And irradiating living creatures and systems with EMF and RF and the like. But the effect is to injure and prematurely kill the living organisms, not to meld living, healthy biological organisms with electronic devices or networks.

I don’t think their goal is to create transhumans. I think their goals are to sabotage God’s creation, especially human society, and to kill a lot of human beings. Transhumanism is just one of their many cover stories to try to make people think it’s about something else, alongside climate change, deadly global pandemics of communicable disease, the empowerment of women and a few other things. They’re aborting human beings from conception to 100+ years after birth: extending Roe v. Wade and the atheist-materialist principle of non-sacredness of human life, to its logical full geopolitical expression.

It took me longer than expected to write an answer, and I will probably expand on this in future posts. In short, I completely agree with Katherine - creation and maintenance of life is God’s domain. It is not known how life springs into being, nor how it really functions, how it stays alive as opposed to artificial things which do not. Modern science, even the parts of it that have not been totally falsified, made little progress toward understanding the mystery of a living body. Ultimately, the mystery of life might not be knowable by mortal humans and this may be a “safety mechanism” built into the system by God, its creator.

Rest assured, there is absolutely no possibility of artificially making, capturing, “editing” or controlling what you don’t understand.

If you want a 1-sentence summary of this article - it is impossible to integrate (in survival- and reproduction-competitive way) a living organism and a man made object/technology.

Introduction of any non-self, artificial matter, at any scale - macro to nano - into a living body results in either nothing (safe tolerance or elimination), or toxicity (inflammation, adverse reaction, reduced reproductive potential, reduced life span, death).

If you have not read my articles on mind control, I highly recommend that you read them first:

Mind Control Part 1

Mind Control Part 2

Mind Control Part 3

Words are the most powerful mechanism of mind control in existence, obviating the need for any sophisticated tech. What is needed is a weakened, deluded, unaware target, programmed (by words) to respond predictably to trigger language.

Getting back to the question posed by the reader who sent us the report on the concept of Internet of Bodies:

What is the "Internet of Bodies"?

Internet of Bodies (IOB) is a theory that asserts that humans can be subjugated and controlled via “nanobots”, AI, and related concepts and technologies. It starts from a solid technical foundation but then presumes several technological miracles, including several overhyped concepts that have already failed.  The part of the IOB that is based in reality covers internet communication technologies that allow for low-energy wireless data communication over short distances for medical devices.  The mythological part involves the alleged injectable nanobots that will somehow plug the bodies into the working IOB in a similar manner our devices communicate over the internet.

Real Wireless Body Area Network for Real Medical Devices

As the internet has become ubiquitous through smartphones and wireless networks, there have been various industry proposals to develop small medical devices that would reside on or inside the body and communicate back to the Internet.  This set of internet-enabled devices would be connected through a Wireless Body Area Network (WBAN) as defined by the Institute of Electronic Engineers (IEEE) standard 802.15.6 (IEEE, 2012) or 802.15.4 (focused on the Internet of Things).  For those familiar with wireless standards, 802.11 was the original Wireless Local Area Network (WiFi) protocol for wireless communication for computers, and several subsequent standards have continued to make the technology faster and arguably more reliable.   

WBAN (802.15.6) as Envisioned in 2018

These standards allow manufacturers to produce devices that are compatible with each other.  For example, a laptop you purchase will easily connect to the wireless access point in your home.  The 802.11.6 standard specifically envisions small monitors and devices that collect physiological information such as temperature, blood pressure, respiration measurement, heart rate, blood glucose level, and ECGs.  This data can be analyzed in the cloud, and alerts can be provided to healthcare providers.  Additionally, more advanced versions of these devices may administer medications such as insulin if the patient's vitals indicate additional insulin is required.  (Source)

Currently, none of these devices can be made at the nanoscale.  They need to be physically attached or implanted.  They need direct or wireless charging.  They need to be replaced when they break or wear out.  The medication reserves need to be refilled.  As with any medical technology, they have risks that need to be managed.  They must be thoroughly validated to ensure that the data that they provide is correct.  Physiologic data is notoriously noisy, hugely variable and ALWAYS requires manual adjudication to be reliable. Normal ranges are at best approximations, especially if data is examined at individual level (not aggregated from a population), which would be necessary to presumably “control” someone with this approach.

Are Graphene Nanobots Controlling My Body?

As a side note, the terminology in this space is a whole chapter worth examining. Many proponents of transhumanism confuse materials with technology, and this is likely on purpose. I heard things like robotic-bacteria, cross domain bacteria (huh?), quantum dots (existing tech in semiconductors), sometimes graphene oxide by itself considered as a working device (it is a material), graphene nanotubes (material) and many other half-baked or misused terms. Note that use of over-complicated and confusing terminology should be a warning sign that you are dealing with magical thinking or with charlatans.

If you listen to, for example, SGT Report that the reader asked me to comment on, the vaccination has led to a graphinated population that can now be wirelessly controlled.  Wireless body area network is referred to as “Manhattan project”. Maybe it should have been called “Apollo” for the Moon landing mission, as it is just as fake.

We'll review the central claims and discuss the current technological limitations.  The presenters are not incorrect in their expectation that evil people would attempt to do this if it were technologically possible.  However, the current state of the art allows no points of control at this stage. Furthermore, the mainstream biological science has devolved into a giant ball of hubris held together by layers of denial, failing rescue devices, fraud, incompetence, obedience to dogma, rubber bands and duck tape. It’s not going anywhere but manufacturing poison and fraudulent bills. The silver lining of this - they have no clue. No matter how many trillions of dollars given, blind mice cannot build a rocket ship.

Claim 1: Vaccine Graphinated People to Amplify the Signal.

Injecting a simple material or a matrix into the body will lead to one of three outcomes.  The material can be (a) safely eliminated, (b) safely accumulate, or (c) poison the body as it accumulates and can't be eliminated fast enough.  This is true of all injectable materials such as Vitamin B12, arsenic, or graphene.   There is no question injecting soups of toxic materials called 'vaccines' can harm a population through a variety of poisoning mechanisms (either directly or by breaking down regular biological functions). 

Is graphene toxic to the body? Depends on the formulation and structure. In formulations where it was found to be toxic (e.g. carbon nanotubes), the mechanism of injury is similar to that of asbestos (also a nanomaterial).

a systematic review of 54 laboratory animal studies indicated that they could cause adverse pulmonary effects including inflammation, granulomas, and pulmonary fibrosis, which were of similar or greater potency when compared with other known fibrogenic materials such as silica, asbestos, and ultrafine carbon black

A multiwalled carbon nanotube pierces an alveolar epithelial cell.

Notice that we are talking about nano-materials, and not any nanotechnology so far. These materials do exist, and may well be in the vials of toxic soups marketed as mRNA vaccines. As I repeat for the millionth time - everything can be there, and graphene can be there, too. This does not make the mRNA crime any more criminal than it already is. In addition, even if there is graphene in some of the shot, it is present in minute quantities, not enough to make any average size body “graphinated”.

Could inhalation of carbon nanotubes or similar aerosolized or otherwise dispersed nanomaterial have caused the so-called “ground glass opacity” findings in radiological images of early Covid-19 patients? Quite possible!

The nanorobots-to-WBAN theory gets in trouble when proponents start postulating working “technology”, as complex systems of predictable and controllable inputs and outputs. For example, for collecting and amplifying an external signal, you need an antenna or an optical sensor and an amplifier.  Once you have collected the amplified signal, you need to translate it into some form of action.  This action can be mechanical, electromagnetic, or optical.  I have had exposure to many projects, from large companies such as Google to small start-ups attempting to do this in medical devices.  All of them failed, and Google’s unlimited money didn’t solve anything. Even with larger-scale systems (i.e., quarter-sized objects physically implanted under the skin or in the body), many challenges exist even in 'amplifying the signal.'  To date, best-in-class systems can hope to achieve size in the 1/3 of the AAA battery scale, as seen in the insertable cardiac monitor made by Medtronic.  This device has a width of 8mm.  This is about 10x larger than what larger medical needles for blood collection could handle.  It is 20 times larger than what would be needed from a traditional injection needle.  As to the wireless standard, the Medtronic device communicates between the home monitoring station and the device through Bluetooth Low Energy Protocol.

Insertable Cardiac Monitor from Medtronic (Item 2 is Inserted – 1/3 Size of AAA Battery) - this is a screenshot, not a video

Detailed Composition of Insertable Cardiac Monitoring Device

If the signal is electronic, you need a sufficiently sized antenna to capture the signal and transmit it to the amplifier.  For example, traditional RF communication links are impossible for devices that could be injected because the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave is too large relative to the device's size.  The amplification process also needs energy that must come from an energy source.  This is usually done with some form of onboard batteries.  These batteries need to be either replaced or charged.  As noted, at this point, this package is too large to fit into any needle.  You are talking about squeezing a quarter or a penny through the needle.  As a result, it is doubtful that this package will get into your body without you realizing it.  There have been proposed approaches where ultrasound could be used to communicate and power small injectable devices.  While this may work in the context of having a carriable ultrasound battery and communication pack for a medical device, it would not allow for secret control or access to a person not actively wearing the energy and communication module on their belt or in their pockets.

Claim 2: The Amplified Signal Can Control You.

Our first challenge was getting the technology to 'capture and amplify the signal' to be small enough to fit inside our bodies.  This gets much more complicated when we move down the path of using the signal to control us.  Let's presume that by some miracle, we have an amplified signal that tells us to turn our head to the right by 60 degrees.   

Neck motion is believed to be controlled by the lower part of the motor cortex. Is this actually true? Nobody knows, but sounds plausible enough. Never mind that for example, the heart is believed to be a pump, but it is not a pump, or at least, if it is one, then it is governed by a different set of physical laws than are currently known. Nobody knows how people think and how thoughts drive muscle movements. Not to mention that central and autonomic nervous systems act differently, and their interaction in any given movement is anyone’s guess. The signals from the motor cortex are believed to be relayed via the brain stem and cranial nerves (specifically cranial nerve XI) to activate the sternocleidomastoid and trapezius muscles.  When the right sternocleidomastoid muscle contracts, it turns the head to the left, and vice versa.  Therefore, to turn your head to the right, the left sternocleidomastoid muscle is activated. 

Neck motion is believed to be controlled by the lower part of the motor cortex. Again, no certainty, but heck, that’s the best current guess. Additionally, the signals from the motor cortex are believed to be relayed via the brain stem and cranial nerves (specifically cranial nerve XI) to activate the sternocleidomastoid and trapezius muscles.  When the right sternocleidomastoid muscle contracts, it turns the head to the left, and vice versa.  Therefore, to turn your head to the right, the left sternocleidomastoid muscle is activated. 

Theoretical Process for Making The Head Turn to the Right

Thus, there appear to be three places where we could insert our signal (i.e., the motor cortex, the brain stem or cranial nerves, and the muscles themselves).  The approach would require us to connect our device to one of these three sets of input points and transmit the necessary activation signal.  As a result, we are looking at brain surgery here or at least neck surgery with careful placement of electrodes.

Ultimately, we may have only succeeded in turning the head to the right or left after sophisticated surgical intervention and careful placement of electronics.  The most advanced optogenetic research at Stanford seems to be at this stage.  Specifically, a mouse with a physical implant can be made to turn right or left based on a light activation scheme in its brain. 

Mouse Made to Run in Right Turns Making Circles by Implanting Wires into Its Head.

As you can see from the cruel and stupid experiment with that poor mouse above, if you are worried that someone is going to control you via the Internet of Bodies by sprinkling you with graphene and nanobots, you don’t have to be as long as you stay away from anyone trying to implant wires into your head.

Another variant of the transhumanism narrative is postulating some sort of novel synthetically made but “alive” species based on graphene and other nanomaterials. The proponents of this idea point at microscopy images (typically optical microscopy, which is micro - not nano-) and make wild generalizations to the entire world population. Something about “they poisoned all of humanity!!!” etc. Another frequent narrative is pointing at images of toxic effects (cancer, various severe skin conditions) and declare that this is a result of new synthetic nano-bacteria. There are many versions of this story, and I am not interested enough in this to address all existing scenarios.

I hope this article provided a bit of a relief for anxieties induced by the proponents of transhumanism cult.  You should be more concerned about the scaremongering which is ubiquitous on all sides. The WEF crowd seems sincere in believing that they can “hack the software of life” (whatever that means) and will soon create transhumans and grow babies artificially and much other nonsense. Unfortunately, they have oodles of money and power so they can cause real damage by acting on their beliefs. The “resistance” side (loosely defined and IMO greatly infiltrated both by intel agents and by some garden variety opportunists) spins endless sci-fi blog genre based on the same nonsense concepts that the WEFers peddle. Neither side has been caught in objectively demonstrating any such technology. What I have seen declared as “proof” so far is examination of different materials under microscope + patents and science papers (a sci-fi genre in itself) + a bunch of “imagine if” boxes on the hypothetical flowchart, decorated liberally with technical-sounding nonsense.

The theories of transhumanism, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, internet of bodies and related topics all suffer from common fatal hubris - they assume that living beings are akin characters in Minecraft. Made of Lego blocks. If one can make the “right” blocks, one can mix and match, replace and edit, plug the missing pieces and operate the entire game. Here is, for example, Stephen Hodge of Moderna (quote from 2018):

“Why are we so passionate about messenger RNA?” Moderna President Stephen Hoge asked the attentive audience. “It starts with the question of life,” he explained. “And in fact, all life that we know flows through messenger RNA. ... In our language, mRNA is the software of life.”

The narratives used by both the “nanotechnology” crowd and the mRNA mafia are very similar. They are designed to make you fear and submit to the wannabe technocratic overlords by doubting your own divine origin, to make you believe that there is an equally powerful, or even superior source of creation of living organisms such as “synthetic biology” (science marketing term coined in 1980’s) or, newer more exciting “nanotechnology”. Let’s recall that very recently most of us thought virology and vaccinology were real scientific disciplines, but they turned out to be a hoax and a systematic poisoning exercise.

Please realize that the crowd pushing transhumanism as either a desirable future or a real threat have nothing to back up those words, except things that are or may be poisonous to humans. It is common sense to avoid those things. Once you fall for their words, however, there is no need for any technology, as you will act in predictable manner on their command (trigger words like “nanotechnology” or “cross-domain bacteria”, etc). Notice the people who call me “evil, downfall of humanity” because I didn’t answer their question the way they wanted have already been programmed for this reaction! There is no space between the trigger word and response. No nuanced dialogue is possible.

If you still have not read the Mind Control articles linked at the beginning of this post, please read them now. The most important skill of personal freedom I can advise you to develop - guard your language, your own words and your own thoughts. Do not accept someone else’s vocabulary until you examined and tested it yourself. Be very selective.

Don’t take my word for it either.

Thanks to a reader who reminded me recently:

Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists.

Art for today: I have a bridge to sell you - Ponte Vecchio, oil on panel, 6x12in.

Independent Medical Alliance

Reversing Aging: Gene Therapy Enters Human Trials for Age-Related Eye Disease

IMA Head of Medical and Scientific Affairs Dr. Ryan Cole joined The National News Desk to break down a new experimental gene therapy entering human trials for age-related eye conditions like glaucoma. Built on Nobel Prize-winning research by Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, the therapy uses a targeted injection that instructs cells to produce three proteins designe…

Listen now

a month ago · 19 likes · 9 comments · Independent Medical Alliance

This is a republish of my post about the gene therapy that Ryan Cole promoted on this podcast.

Yes, cancer cells are technically immortal. Also, for this elixir to “work”, a continuous regimen of antibiotics and steroids needs to be taken indefinitely!

On January 27, the press brought this great news for the immortality seekers: “In major test for longevity field, FDA greenlights study on a ‘near total reset’ of cells”.

Life Biosciences, a biotech startup co-founded by Harvard biologist David Sinclair, got the FDA’s permission to begin a clinical study of its gene therapy designed to rewind the clock on dying cells.

Life Bio calls its approach partial epigenetic reprogramming, and its clinical trial will be the first to test the concept in humans. It falls under the broader umbrella of experimental therapies known as cellular rejuvenation, which is a major focus of several well-funded startups backed by tech executives.

Ok, right away, we see the usual made-up meaningless jargon: epigenetics (a narrative rescue device for failure of 97% of genome to “code” for anything) and calling the toxic gene therapy class “cellular rejuvenation”. Of course it is…

Life Bio is a late comer to the burgeoning filed of “cellular rejuvenation”. Altos Labs, the secretive startup that launched four years ago with a record-breaking $3 billion and whose investors reportedly include Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, is working on its own version of partial epigenetic reprogramming. Altos Labs has raised billions of dollars and hunted university departments for star researchers, claiming to develop therapies that delay or rewind aging. However, they disclose very little about what they are using all of that money or talent for.

At a medical conference in Spain last year, the startup’s founding scientist, Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, provided a glimpse into how the company thinks about aging, and how it plans to stall it. Apparently, Altos is working on “partial reprogramming” therapies and testing those experimental reprogramming therapies in organs that have been removed from the body and kept alive on a machine that perfuses life-sustaining fluids through the organs.

Readers, this creeps me out. Make sure you opt out of any organ donor lists, and, if possible any medical electronic records sharing. The psychopath-”elites” have been very pushy lately about “organ donations”. Illegal organ trafficking is also rampant.

Another runner-up in immortality scams is Retro Biosciences, a startup backed by OpenAI’s Sam Altman, and NewLimit, backed by Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, are also working on cell reprogramming therapies.

Back to the main story - Life Bio, a Boston-based startup of fewer than 20 people, has pulled ahead of the pack, securing the [#MAHA!]-FDA nod to begin clinical program in live human subjects. Since, in a surprising flash of momentary sanity, the FDA doesn’t recognize aging itself as a disease, the company’s Phase 1 trial will test its gene therapy in two forms of vision loss: glaucoma and a rarer condition called non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). Quoting from the company press releases and news articles:

In a laser-induced model of NAION in monkeys, the therapy, dubbed ER-100, restored a broken epigenome and improved the electrical signals in the optic nerve. Life Bio chief scientific officer Sharon Rosenzweig-Lipson said the results show that the approach can improve the health of damaged cells, but she said it doesn’t replace those that have already died.

Strangely, this absolute smash hit of science is not published in peer review! According to ChatGPT, at present, there is no peer-reviewed scientific journal publication available for the specific nonhuman primate (monkey) NAION study involving the ER-100 therapy. In other words, Sharon Rosenzweig-Lipson and her employers may be manufacturing their statements, but nobody can check them.

What are Life Bio claims for the mechanism of turning back the clock?

Years earlier, Japanese scientist Shinya Yamanaka discovered that four proteins could turn an adult cell into a stem cell — a Nobel Prize-winning experiment that proved an epigenetic reset was possible. Right, of course, it’s Nobel Prize winning! But directly putting those four proteins, called “Yamanaka factors”, into an animal or a human had long been considered a bad idea, in part because one of them is the cancer-promoting protein c-Myc.

Oops. Yeah, there is a thing about cellular immortality. It’s called cancer:

“Other labs had put in all four and found that it kills mice and causes tumors,” Sinclair said.

Not to be deterred, Lu and Sinclair came up with a simple, albeit overlooked, experiment: Use the other three Yamanaka factors! Now, isn’t this genius. Who would’ve thunk… don’t use cancer thingy, use the three other thingies! Those proteins — Oct4, SOX2 and KLF4, or OSK for short — were able to “restore a youthful epigenetic code and reverse vision loss in a mouse model of glaucoma”.

Wow. Let’s investigate this apparent miracle a bit further. The study landed on the cover of Nature in 2020, ignited interest in epigenetic reprogramming, and formed the basis for Life Bio’s gene therapy. The paper is only available for purchase. I bought it. One has to scroll past the main article full of abracadabra and noxious fumes, past the references to find the “Methods” section on p.7. Readers, I am old enough to remember when “Methods” was a required section at the front of a peer reviewed paper, typically right after the intro. In the latter days of the science fraud we live in, it is customarily hidden away in the back or in an appendix in hopes nobody has any time to get that far. This is the first section of any paper I look for and read. And, lo and behold, it delivered! The Life Bio magik juice is… drum roll… adenovirus stuffed with chemical garbage and a well-known cancer-causing SV40 “promoter”:

Yup. SV40, the well known carcinogenic chemical, associated with numerous forms of cancer in variety of animal models, and occasionally admitted as associated with cancers in humans. It is reliably located in the Pfizer mRNA juice and many other “genetic editing” cocktails. Just to preclude fighting and trolling - SV40 in gene therapy applications is a synthetic chemical. While it was implicated in causing a wave of cancer after the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines and was claimed to be derived from a monkey virus “contamination”, today no monkeys are hunted for it. In fact, the monkey kidney cells typically used in the Satanic rituals of vaccine manufacture today are screened for SV40 (but, every search engine will assure it, it’s not because it causes cancer, but because…because… we just screen it for no reason… we like to spend the money randomly… shut up!) However, deliberate synthesis of SV40 or its components and inclusion as a key ingredient in a gene therapy is totally ok! The geniuses of Life Bio replaced one cancer agent of the 4 “Yamanaka factors” (whatever these chemicals are), c-Myc, with another - SV40.

The rest of the Nature paper is claiming that they cured glaucoma in mice and improved their visual acuity. Right. The glaucoma mouse model was to inject micro beads into mice’s eyes to increase the intraocular pressure and call it “glaucoma”. In other news - it’s trauma to the eye, and not really representative of glaucoma. Some mice recovered from it. As to improving visual acuity, it beats me how this was determined - asking the mice to read an eye chart? I am familiar with animal models in vision science, because I am a co-founder and a board member in ophthalmology medical device company (that does not work in glaucoma, in case you are wondering about bias) - and mice are not suitable for reliable visual acuity testing.

In conclusion, maybe this immortality elixir will cure your glaucoma due to the head trauma, but it will serve you a side dish of cancer with very high probability as we have seen throughout the covid vax disaster.

The MAHA-FDA, despite having full knowledge what might happen to people injected with gene cocktail containing SV40, greenlit the human study for LifeBio. The advertised design of the study states that clinical trial will use one viral vector (adenovirus, same platform as was used in AstraZeneca covid shot) to deliver the three Yamanaka proteins to the retinal ganglion cells (forgetting to mention the 4th - SV40). But wait! This set up includes a “safety switch”:

A second viral vector encodes a protein that acts as a safety switch activated by the antibiotic doxycycline. When patients take the pill, the gene therapy will be turned on. When patients stop taking the pill, the gene therapy is turned off.

In the company’s upcoming study, patients will take doxycycline for eight weeks along with a steroid to reduce the risk of inflammation seen with some gene therapies. The company will likely test two different doses of therapy in up to six glaucoma patients before settling on a dose to test in up to six NAION patients.

Thankfully, this study only aims to experiment on 12 unfortunate people. However, I am at a loss to say how this miracle of eternal youth is supposed to function - 8 weeks of antibiotics and steroids just to turn it on? What about long term “rejuvenation”, will one be required to take doxycycline and steroids for life to stay youthful? Only the time will tell.

For a one-time donation

Buy me a Kofi

Art for today: Hydrangea, watercolor. Available art here.

In Part 1, I have compiled the very long term trend of the “real” increase in cancer rates in the US:

In the article above I mentioned that the peak in ca…

Read more