Connect with us

Alternative News

15 Years Later, Here’s What We Know About 9/11 & Cancer Cases

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

After the World Trade Centre events that occurred on September 11, 2001, a massive cloud of smoke, dust, and debris permeated New York City with asbestos fibers and other toxic substances. It is estimated by the World Trader Center Health Registry that about 410,000 people were exposed to these toxins following the attacks.

advertisement - learn more

The people most exposed by asbestos at Ground Zero were those assigned to rescue survivors, while search and rescue workers and others who helped clean up the debris for months also suffered asbestos exposure, raising questions over the use of asbestos in building the towers in the first place.  

-->Free e-book - Eat to Defeat Cancer : Are you eating any of the foods that fuel cancer... or the foods that help PREVENT it? Get the TRUTH, and discover the top 10 Cancer-Fighting Superfoods Click here to get the free ebook.

Controversy Over The Use Of Asbestos To Build Twin Towers

During the construction of the towers in 1966, this toxic substance was already raising concerns, and by the time the construction of the North Tower was well underway in 1971, the builders had been forced to stop their work because a ban on the material was expected to come into play in the near future. It proved to be a sensitive subject nonetheless, as many asbestos-containing products had already made their way into both towers. But these products were never discussed in relation to health concerns until after the 9/11 attacks.

It was then that these products finally raised health concerns, as fireproofing materials from 20 stories of the towers fell upon the city. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported that the implosions of the towers “pulverized asbestos to ultra-fine particles” that covered Lower Manhattan.

Asbestos Health Concerns Following The 9/11 Attacks

Exposure to asbestos can result in life-threatening illnesses like mesothelioma and asbestosis, symptoms for both of which can take between 20 to 50 years to emerge. However, in 2006, only five years after exposure to the toxic debris from Ground Zero, an emergency responder from 9/11 died of mesothelioma, while another worker developed a serious cough only two years after the attacks that led to her death in 2004 of the same illness.

One can only imagine that these two cases are, unfortunately, not the last, as experts predict that a larger number of 9/11 responders will be diagnosed with these illnesses in the coming years. The severity of the situation becomes more clear when we consider that many of these first responders were not given proper equipment to protect themselves from the airborne contaminants. In fact, almost 70 percent of recovery personnel have since suffered from lung problems.

advertisement - learn more

9-11-effects-infographic1

How The First Responders Were Compensated

As a result of the many health conditions which arose following the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government passed the “James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act” to give people medical care and monitoring. The original terms of the act only offered compensation from 2011 to 2016, but in 2015, Congress voted to reauthorize the program, which extends the coverage for another 75 years.

The Lawsuits That Followed

Many of the tens of thousands of people affected by the 9/11 attacks have filed lawsuits to seek monetary compensation in relation to developing serious respiratory illnesses and several types of cancer as a result of breathing in the toxic dust and smoke. In 2010, for instance, 10,000 rescue and recovery workers who claimed they were injured by the dust opted to benefit from a $713 million court settlement from WTC Captive Insurance Co. Inc.

One of the issues that arose during these lawsuits was the inability to find scientific evidence that linked the dust from 9/11 to the development of cancer, but fortunately for the many victims, a 2011 study changed that. The study, which involved firefighters exposed to World Trade Center dust, discovered that this group was 19 percent more likely to develop cancer as a result of their exposure compared to anyone else in the general population who was not affected. Prior to these findings, under the Zadroga Act, compensation was not provided to those who claimed to have developed cancer as a result of the attacks, but now people with cancer can file a 9/11 lawsuit for their cancers, many of which include melanoma, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, and blood cell cancers like leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and multiple myeloma.

Asbestos-related cancers, however, are still slow to develop, but because symptoms of mesothelioma and lung cancer may come years later, more lawsuits are expected in the years to come. Dr. Craig Stevens, a former staff member at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, predicts that the number of cases related to these specific cancers will peak by 2041.

Responses From First Responders And NYC Residents

A thread of comments from NYC residents and first responders continues to grow, revealing how they were affected by the airborne toxins from the 9/11 attacks.

“That awful smell was so pervasive and lasted several months, until January at least. I kept my windows locked shut and burned incense because air freshener and candles did nothing. I live 15 blocks north of Chambers, and I had a constant headache too,” one Reddit user wrote. “Even with the windows shut, my apartment had so much more dust than ever before. I remember when my parents asked me what I wanted for Christmas, I asked for a vacuum cleaner because I couldn’t stay on top of the dust situation any longer.”

“About a year after the attacks i was first screened by WTC screening at Mt Sinai they brought a bunch of us (first responders/ union workers – who were exposed) into a room and told us that we were exposed to heavy metals and it was highly likely that we would develop cancer,” another Reddit user wrote. “My lungs were shot for two years with bad asthma – im lucky to have it under control for now.. Big thank you to Jon Stewart for getting our backs- i owe him.”

“I work in a pharmacy and we have a customer who was a volunteer fireman during 9/11. The amount of medications he needs to take every day is unbelievable,” another user wrote on the thread. “He has the most horrid cough, and says in the morning it’s all black mucous. He was just diagnosed with a form of lung cancer a couple months ago and it’s really heartbreaking. Good news being the WTC has a medical and prescription aid program for people who helped during the attacks and the prescriptions are completely covered. Almost 3,000 dollars a month worth…”

Given the nature of what occurred on 9/11, the unanswered questions, the evidence that states the official story is not what we have been told, one has to face the uncomfortable truth about how much damage was done to people for something that involved so much conspiracy and potential hidden agendas.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Denmark Introduces “Coronapass” To Enter Certain Buildings & Businesses

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 6 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    On Tuesday, Denmark began requiring people to use a new COVID certificate to enter certain businesses or face fines, one of the first European countries to do so.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is there such a large group of people, who see issue with governmental measures, taking action to stop them? Does it show we don't agree on our collective approach? Does it show we don't agree on the threat level of COVID-19?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: Denmark recently began requiring people to obtain a “CoronaPass.” It’s one of the first countries in Europe to do so. This pass certifies whether or not someone has been fully vaccinated. It also certifies whether someone has tested negative in the previous 72 hours, or has tested positive between two to twelve weeks prior to that, which would suggest that they’ve gained immunity to the virus from previous infection.

Either vaccine or antibody proof now seems to be a required prerequisite to enter into certain buildings and businesses in Denmark. If someone is not fully vaccinated, their negative tests are only valid for a short period of time. People will be required to get tested every single week or multiple times a week to obtain a pass if they are not vaccinated.

The businesses that require a pass are ‘non-essential’ businesses like hairdressers, beauty salons, driving schools, restaurants, museums, theaters, and movie cinemas.

The pass is available in digital form via a smartphone app, but it will also be available in paper format as well. Apparently, the pass is just a temporary measure, but how many temporary measures, which some consider to be “authoritarian” will remain temporary?

According to Danish authorities, the pass will be required until the entire population has been offered a vaccination, but my question is, what if there is a large minority, or even a majority, that refuses to take the vaccine? I guess we will have to wait and see how this all plays out.

It’s no secret that vaccine hesitancy is at an all time high. Iv’e covered what might be the top four reasons many scientists, doctors and journalists are refusing to take the vaccine, as there are legitimate evidence based concerns and it appears the mainstream still fails to have open and complete conversations about this topic. Instead of addressing concerns they are commonly labelled as “anti-vaccine conspiracy theories.”

If businesses do not comply with the pass or fail to verify whether or not patrons are carrying one, they risk a fine of at least 400 euros and up to 6,000 euros for repeated offences.  Individuals who try to slip by without the pass risk a fine of about 330 euros. How authorities are going to enforce these rules remains to be seen.

Yahoo News points out:

The programme has stoked controversy however, as some Danes feel it will divide society. The anti-restriction movement “Men In Black” has organised a protest next Saturday in Copenhagen against it. Some shopkeepers also feel the screening requirement is a needless burden.

“It is an unreasonable responsibility to impose on a small business. It would have been much better if, for example, the police made inspection visits, like train ticket inspectors,” Jakob Brandt, head of a federation of small- and medium-sized businesses, told the Politiken newspaper.

Why This Is Important: The rollout of certain measures that governments around the world are starting to implement has many people concerned, especially many scientists, doctors and experts in the field who have condemned the idea.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a Harvard medical professor, epidemiologist and vaccine expert alongside Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, (two founding members of The Great Barrington Declaration) a physician and professor at Stanford Medical school recently published a piece in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) condemning the idea of vaccine passports, a measure that seems to be gaining traction in multiple countries.

That’s one of many examples, and if you can’t access their article in the WSJ you can read more about in an article I wrote summarizing it, here.

There has been wide scale disagreement amongst global citizens about the measures being taken with regards to COVID-19. On one hand, greater control, health surveillance, and centralized power is being pushed in accordance with keeping people ‘safe’ from a virus with a very high survival rate. On the other hand, people are feeling as though their personal experience and everyday view of this virus and what health effects it is really causing, don’t line up with the extreme measures. We have a split in our global community whereby many citizens’ desires and will are not being represented by the government and their decisions, and they feel as though by not participating in extreme measures, they will lose access to living life to the fullest. Furthermore, there is legitimate concern that lockdowns may be responsible for more deaths than COVID.

Can we truly accept that controlling everyone’s lives and what they can and can’t do is the best thing to do in this situation? Does this indicate the level of fear we have towards life? When things are not as black and white as they are presented to us, and when measures go against the will of so many people, should government be making recommendations instead? Why are certain viewpoints and evidence based science being suppressed and unacknowledged?

The Takeaway: Greater surveillance and measures are coming in ways we likely could have only imagined in sci-fi movies. When it comes to much of the COVID measures we’ve seen, I’m not sure people want to get comfortable with what’s being presented. While the promises of a return to normal are there, the goalpost seems to always be pushed, while other ‘experts’ claim normal will never be seen again.

The obvious response to this might be, “yes but we don’t know enough about how dangerous COVID is and that’s why these measures keep evolving.” But is this really true? This is where the frustration begins between differing perspectives as not all of us have heard the same information about COVID and thus see it as something different. We don’t have an agreed upon set of facts about things PCR testing, asymptomatic spread of COVID, treatments for COVID-19, lockdowns, masks and so on.  This is the case not just with everyday citizens but with experts also.

How are those two sets of people supposed to communicate when the foundation for their discussion is completely different? Are we even recognizing how each other feels and where our ideas came from when we have these debates?

The events playing out at an everyday level invite a deeper inquiry into how our decisions are made and how our world functions. Inevitably there is complexity in all of this and judging people’s position on COVID measures is not a simple “these people are all sheep” or “these people are all conspiracy theorists”, it goes much deeper than these judgements.

We recently had a conversation in conjunction with our recently released course on overcoming bias and improving critical thinking. The talk focused on what we do when experts don’t agree. I feel this is a useful video for diving deeper on the issues we face right now in relation to this piece, you can watch it here.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Researchers Outline Reality of Psychic Ability & Explore Whether It May ‘Run In The Family’

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 8 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    It is commonly believed that psychic ability, like many mental and physical traits, runs in families. This suggests the presence of a genetic component. Researchers recently decided to search for one among people with psychic abilities.

  • Reflect On:

    Can special abilities, or psychic abilities be passed down? Are these abilities innate and lying dormant within all of us?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

‘Psychic ability’ comes in many different forms, from telepathy to clairvoyance or remote viewing, there are a number of phenomena that have been demonstrated under strict scientific controls that have yielded statistically significant and repeatable results. There are also multiple declassified documents that have been archived by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) via their electronic reading room, for example, pertaining to individuals with “special abilities” who are able to perform feats like telekinesis, or healing at a distance. You can access a few examples of that here, and here where I go more into depth.

The literature in this area, from peer-reviewed research all the way to examples from the within the defense departments of  multiple countries, is quite robust. It’s another subject seen as fringe and in-credible yet has more than enough evidence to for a reasonable person to deem these abilities as possible.

The researchers of a recent study published in EXPLORE titled “Genetics of psychic ability – A pilot case-control exome sequencing study” decided to search for some sort of genetic link among people with psychic abilities. They explain:

Many cognitive and perceptual abilities are associated with genetic factors. An open question is whether or not extraordinary “psychic” abilities such as mind-to-mind communication (in the vernacular, telepathy), knowledge of future events before they occur (precognition), and perception of hidden or remote events (clairvoyance), might also be associated with genetic factors. Evidence of the reality of such extraordinary abilities has been offered by multiple meta-analysis of experiments conducted over the past century, which demonstrate independent repeatability and robust statistical significance.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that extraordinary manifestations of these abilities run in families.. Few formal studies have evaluated the genetics of psychic abilities. Telepathy studies with identical and non-identical twins have found mixed evidence for greater concordance among identical versus nonidentical twins on telepathy task performanceOther case studies of families with data on up to four generations have been conducted. The pattern of familial transmission in second sighthas also been examined. This capacity is defined as “a special psychic ability believed to be a natural faculty of mind, regarded as an inborn gift by some andan affliction by others…Second sight implies that there are two forms of sight. One is normal sight and the other is the ability to have prophetic visions which occur spontaneously and arrarely directed at will.” Second sight is considered hereditary within the Scottish tradition. A formal pedigree analysis of second sight found an autosomal dominant pattern f inheritance. Other studies have evaluated the relationships between psychic abilities and the temporal lobe. However, to our knowledge, no similar investigations have been conducted using modern genetics techniques.

Interesting stuff, isn’t it? For the study, more than 3,000 candidates from around the world were selected and screened through two online surveys. This was done to locate people who claimed that they, as well as other family members, had some form of psychic ability. Eligible candidates were then selected as the final “psychic cases,” and then age, sex, and ethnicity-matched individuals, with no claims of psychic ability, were selected as the controls.

DNA from the saliva of the 23 participants were subjected to “whole-exome sequencing.” This is a test that looks at most of the genes within an individual. After this, two independent bioinformatics analyses were blindly applied to the sequenced data. This means the ones doing the analyses had no idea about the results the other lab was getting. They were completely separate.The analyses focused on protein-coding sequences and another one included some adjacent noncoding sequences.

According to the researchers:

Sequencing data were obtained for all samples, except for one in the control group that did not pass the quality controls and was not included in further analyses. After unblinding the datasets, none of the protein-coding sequences (i.e., exons) showed any variation that discriminated between cases and controls. However, a difference was observed in the intron (i.e., non-protein-coding region) adjacent to an exon in the TNRC18 gene (Trinucleotide Repeat-Containing Gene 18 Protein) on chromosome 7. This variation, an alteration of GG to GA, was found in 7 of 9 controls and was absent from all psychic cases.

You can access the full study here.

This means the study did not find any significant markers suggesting that these abilities may be genetic, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t. We already know through epigenetic studies that various traits are passed down to offspring, be it physical or even emotional. It is interesting that the study did however identify a noncoding variant that was largely restricted to non-psychic controls.

The most conservative interpretation of these results is that they result from random population sampling. However, when the results are considered in relation to other lines of evidence, the results are more provocative. Further research is justified to replicate and extend these findings.

Keep in mind, the researchers did test those who claimed to have psychic ability and overall they scored better on the tests than those who did not. There were many limitations to this study, and a big one was the size of the number of people used for the study.

Given the fact that, in the researchers experience and based on my research and examples that I’ve written about, these abilities are undoubtedly real, so looking for some sort of genetic component is quite reasonable and would have tremendous implications.

The researchers explain:

The identification of genes involved in psychic abilities has the potential to yield clues about their distribution within the general population and also their evolutionary origins. Such a finding may also have clinical value because it may help inform the development of pharmacological or environmental interventions to enhance or suppress such abilities, and clinical performance applications could be used. Enhancing these abilities could augment decision-making in many contexts, stimulate creativity in art and science, and improve diagnosis of disease, insofar as these faculties and activities may be partly dependent on, or enhanced by, psychic ability.

For example, perhaps telepathic communications could be developed for individuals living with communication disabilities, such as aphasia or cerebral palsy. On the other hand, suppressing these abilities might alleviate psychotic symptoms in some individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, insofar as “disordered” psychic manifestations may be at risk factor in these individuals.

The Takeaway: Studies within the realm of parapsychology, which encompasses the study of various psychic abilities mentioned in this article, are abundant. Many show eye-opening repeatable results. Remote viewing is one of many great examples, showing “successful replication” by yielding “significant scientific evidence.” (source)

The methodology and the controls on these experiments are tighter than any other area of science where I’ve worked. Dr. Dr. Jessica Utts, former Chair of the Department of Statistics at the University of California, Irvine (source)

Again, there are also documented real world examples that defy belief linked earlier within this article, which brings me to my next point. Much of the science produced today, in my opinion, isn’t really following the scientific method. By that I mean discoveries that challenge what we once thought we knew, and ones that have paradigm shifting implications for humanity, are often ignored and unacknowledged. We see this all the time in the field of parapsychology.

“There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field will be tarnished by studying a phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seems more important than encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing.”
 Cassandra Vieten, PhD and President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (source)

Why do we fail to properly confront new concepts and ideas that don’t fit within the frame? Studies and results from these realms truly call into question what we think we know about the nature of reality and human potential. They will force humanity to open up to a broader view of reality that currently may not fit within the accepted framework of knowledge in the minds of many. But if there’s one thing that’s constant, it’s change.

Discoveries in this field, I believe, will lead to the realization that love, compassion, thoughts, emotions and service to others are key for humanity to move forward. It’s more than likely that this is the true nature of human beings, not competition and separation.

These must be our priority, we have to change the way we think here on planet Earth. If we continue to operate from a place of greed, ego, and have a lust for power, control and material wealth, which are cultural learnings, not necessarily our nature, we will not move forward to a thriving world. Non-material science has the potential to change the way we perceive the world, and ask the deeper questions like, why do we live the way we do when we can create a human experience where everybody can thrive? How can a race that is so intelligent and technologically advanced be so politically and morally corrupt?

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

WHO Data Shows Ivermectin Reduces COVID Mortality By 81%, But They Won’t Recommend It?

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read
(Salvatore Di Nolfi/Keystone via AP, file)

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The World Health Organization's own data shows use of safe and inexpensive drug called ivermectin could have reduced COVID mortality by 81%, but they still won't endorse it and are instead recommending vaccinations.

  • Reflect On:

    If global health officials truly cared about saving lives, would they be holding back on information about these drugs? Is it even possible to accept such an idea that they may not be acting in people's best interests?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again, there is ample evidence to support a completely different approach to treating COVID-19, yet it’s being ignored. We would likely not need any potentially harmful lockdowns, expensive drugs or vaccines if we used these treatments – and this might be exactly why they are not being talked about.

What Happened: Last week the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its guidelines on COVID-19 and the drugs that go with treating it. A drug we’ve reported on in Dec 2020 called Ivermectin, shows, via meta-analysis, that an 81% drop in mortality was seen in those treated with Ivermectin as opposed to standard care. This also came with a 64% decrease in hospitalizations. These are powerful numbers given what’s happening in our world with COVID, yet the WHO still refuses to endorse ivermectin as it feels confidence is low in how effective Ivermectin might be.

“The issue with the Ivermectin is that based on initial study and the currently available data, it is not strong enough for us to advocate the use of Ivermectin for treatment of COVID or prevention of COVID,” said WHO representative to the Philippines Rabindra Abeyasinghe.

He further goes on to state that without strong evidence they might be providing false confidence to the public. While this is understandable, it seems given how much is known about how safe and effective Ivermectin is, it’s likely not going to provide unreasonable hopefulness. Interestingly, the WHO hasn’t had a problem recommending highly experimental and not fully proven vaccines to the public, with no fear of giving them overconfidence. Why is this the case?

Ivermectin is useful in guarding against COVID-19 infection as well.

Why It Matters: Ivermectin is not a new drug that we know little about. To date, there have been 49 studies looking at the drug, and 26 of them were randomized controlled trials, showing that ivermectin works to treat COVID-19.

Back in December of 2020, multiple physician specialists were urging the CDC to look at Ivermectin as they had clinically seen it was  a powerful treatment for COVID-19, yet this fell on deaf ears.

The pooled results of Ivermectin/COVID studies show an 80% improvement when used early, 89% when used as prophylaxis, and even a 50% improvement at late stages of contraction. You might be wondering why such a safe, long used and well understood drug is not being used while experimental vaccines are – you are right to wonder this. In the US, the FDA has not yet approved the vaccines and no vaccine company will be held liable for damages caused to citizens. Unlike ivermectin, the vaccines also have zero long term safety studies associated with them.

William C. Campbell and Satoshi Ōmura discovered ivermectin as a cure to river blindness and received a Nobel Prize for their work in 2015. Here is an excerpt from the press release of the Nobel Assembly:

“Today the Avermectin-derivative Ivermectin is used in all parts of the world that are plagued by parasitic diseases. Ivermectin is highly effective against a range of parasites, has limited side effects and is freely available across the globe. The importance of Ivermectin for improving the health and wellbeing of millions of individuals with River Blindness and Lymphatic Filariasis, primarily in the poorest regions of the world, is immeasurable. Treatment is so successful that these diseases are on the verge of eradication, which would be a major feat in the medical history of humankind.”

Disease nearly eradicated without vaccines? Interesting. Perhaps COVID’s story could be the same if there was greater coverage of this potential use case. What’s a bit concerning is there has been virtually no legitimate investigation by mainstream media to bring forth the controversy around how ivermectin is being ignored. This is important to mention as with such a huge percentage of the population relying on mainstream media for their news, not covering this story is changing the overall public perception and one could argue MSM is not doing their job.

The Takeaway: There are a number of treatments that are promising in treating COVID-19, and quickly, supplements like vitamin D or effective doses of IV Vitamin C, but instead mainstream consensus is to ignore these treatments, cast doubt on them, throw a mask on everyone and urge people to take experimental vaccines. When people question why this is the case and why other treatments are being ignored, they are gaslit and called conspiracy theorists.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting this is a miracle cure, I’m suggesting that in a culture that is deeply fearing a disease, it seems hypocritical to ignore a safe a potentially highly effective drug while promoting an experimental vaccine.

Hypocrisy is apparent in our current situation, and while not everything is certain and clear when it comes to COVID-19, what is clear is that there is a lack of honesty and transparency around why certain decisions are made, and people are noticing.

As we’ve said before, lack of trust in governing institutions is not the result of crazy online conspiracies, it’s the result of people becoming more aware of actions being taken by these institutions that don’t make sense.

The WHO lists ivermectin as one of its Model List of Essential Medicines for 2019 as it is so effective against parasitic infections and has a long standing track record of safety, yet all of a sudden we can’t use it against COVID. To not ask why this is happening might be irresponsible.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!