Connect with us

Alternative News

Here’s Why More Than 35 Countries Have Banned Genetically Modified Crops From Their Country

Published

on

The global resistance against Genetically Modified Crops is growing at an exponential rate. A few years ago, you were almost ridiculed for suggesting that GM foods could be a problem, and now scientists and researchers are presenting information that has 19 new countries joining an already long list of nations to completely ban, or have severe restrictions on, GMOs — as well as the pesticides that go with them.

advertisement - learn more

These countries will not allow genetically modified crops to be grown in their country. The opt-out countries are requesting that biotechnology companies exclude their territories from GMO seed sales, and some countries, according to RT news, are simply putting things to a halt until more research is conducted.

For those of you who do not know, GMO crops have had their DNA artificially altered, which is a process that would not happen in nature. This is done by introducing genes from a completely different species in order to boost the plant’s resistance to pests or herbicides, or create some other desired effect.

“By slipping it into our food without our knowledge, without any indication that there are genetically modified organisms in our food, we are now unwittingly part of a massive experiment. The FDA has said that genetically modified organisms are not much different from regular food, so they’ll be treated in the same way. The problem is this, geneticists follow the inheritance of genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to take this organism, and move it horizontally into a totally unrelated species. Now David Suzuki doesn’t normally mate with a carrot and exchange genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to the other without regard to the biological constraints. It’s very very bad science, we assume that the principals governing the inheritance of genes vertically, applies when you move genes laterally or horizontally. There’s absolutely no reason to make that conclusion.” 

– Geneticist David Suzuki (source)

Again, we are talking about more than three dozen countries. That’s more than half of the countries within the European Union, some of which include: Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Greece, Poland, and Belgium. The magnitude of this resistance cannot be ignored.

advertisement - learn more

Here is a current list of countries  that have banned the growth of these crops. Other countries not on the list have restrictions on them, and some still allow the import of these crops. But the trend seems to be a complete ban as the years move on. It’s a complicated issue, especially when you ponder the fact that science has now been heavily politicized. More on that later in the article.

Health/Environmental Concerns Mixed With Scientific Fraud

So why are these countries doing this? Two of the main reasons have to do with environmental and health-related concerns. Alongside all of these troubles (according to Reuters), some countries simply want to take time to do proper research — flying in the face of the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) decree that GMOs are completely safe. There are many who disagree with this assertion.

“As part of the process, they portrayed the various concerns as merely the ignorant opinions of misinformed individuals – and derided them as not only unscientific, but anti-science. They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that GMOs were safe.”

– Jane Goodall (source)

The quote above from Goodall comes from Steven M. Druker who, in 1996, did something very few Americans were doing then — learn the facts about the massive venture to restructure the genetic core of the world’s food supply. The problem of unawareness still exists today, but it’s getting much better thanks to activists like Druker.

Druker, being a public interest attorney and the Executive Director of the Alliance For Bio-Integrity, initiated a lawsuit in 1998 that forced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods. In 2015 he published a book on the lawsuit. In the book, Druker provides details of his experience, and he’s also released the documents on his website showing the significant hazards of genetically engineering foods and the flaws present in the FDA’s policy.

It’s called Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public.

The book has some very impressive reviews. For example, David Schubert, Ph.D., molecular biologist and Head of Cellular Neurobiology at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, said that this “incisive and insightful book is truly outstanding. Not only is it well-reasoned and scientifically solid, it’s a pleasure to read – and a must-read.”

Stephen Naylor, Ph.D., CEO and Chariman of Mai Health Inc., an individual who spent 10 years as a professor of biochemistry and molecular biology and pharmacology, stated that Druker’s “meticulously documented, well crafted, and spell binding narrative should serve as a clarion call to all of us.” 

Joseph Cummins, Ph.D. and professor emeritus of genetics at Western University in London, Ontario, believes that Druker’s book is a “landmark” and that “it should be required reading in every university biology course.” 

In publishing his book and filing this lawsuit, Druker exposed how the agency covered up the warnings of its own scientists about the risks, lied about the facts, and then ushered these foods onto the market in violation of federal law.

It’s also noteworthy to mention that Druker has actually served on the food safety panels at conferences held by the National Research council and the FDA, presented lectures at numerous universities, met with government officials throughout the world, and conferred at the White House Executive Offices with a task force of President Clinton’s Council on Environmental Quality.

You can also check out his website, where he has published key FDA documents revealing hazards of genetically engineered foods and the flaws with how the agency made its policy. 

Let’s not forget all of the science cited by these other countries.

A great example is a study that was published in the journal Evironmental Sciences Europe. The WHO has never cited any long term studies that prove the safety of GMOs. When a study was finally conducted, it found severe liver and kidney damage, as well as hormonal disturbances, in rats fed GM maize in conjunction with low levels of Roundup — levels that were below those permitted in most drinking water across Europe. The rats also developed large cancer tumours.(source)

Other studies have found instances of adverse microscopic and molecular effects of some GM foods in different organs or tissues. They also determined that no standardized methods to evaluate the safety of GM foods have been established. Many studies have emphasized that more scientific effort is needed in order to build confidence in the evaluation and acceptance of GM foods. (source)(source)

Studies have also linked GMO animal feed to severe stomach inflammation and enlarged uteri in pigs. (source)

Here’s what Irina Ermakova, VP of Russia’s National Association for Genetic Safety, said last year when Russia was mulling over the decision to ban GMOs:

It is necessary to ban GMOs, to impose moratorium (on) it for 10 years. While GMOs will be prohibited, we can plan experiments, tests, or maybe even new methods of research could be developed. It has been proven that not only in Russia, but also in many other countries in the world, GMOs are dangerous. Methods of obtaining the GMOs are not perfect, therefore, at this stage, all GMOs are dangerous. Consumption and use of GMOs obtained in such way can lead to tumors, cancers and obesity among animals. Bio-technologies certainly should be developed, but GMOs should be stopped…. [We] should stop it from spreading.  (source)

Keep in mind that we are talking about GM crops, which are sprayed with billions of pounds of toxic chemicals every year. These chemicals have been linked to a number of diseases, ranging from autism, to cancer, to Alzheimer’s disease and more.

“Children today are sicker than they were a generation ago. From childhood cancers to autism, birth defects and asthma, a wide range of childhood diseases and disorders are on the rise. Our assessment of the latest science leaves little room for doubt; pesticides are one key driver of this sobering trend.” 

– October 2012 report by Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) (source)(source)

A new study published in the Journal of Organic Systems last September examined US government databases, and researchers searched for GE (Genetically Engineered) crop data, glyphosate application data, and disease epidemiological data while performing a “correlation analysis” on a total of 22 different diseases.

Researchers reached an alarming conclusion:

These data show very strong and highly significant correlations between the increasing use of glyphosate, GE crop growth and the increase in a multitude of diseases. Many of the graphs show sudden increases in the rates of diseases in the mid-1990s that coincide with the commercial production of GE crops. The probabilities in the graphs and tables show that it is highly unlikely that the correlations are a coincidence. The strength of the correlations shows that there is a very strong probability that they are linked somehow.” (source)

Correlation doesn’t mean causation, but using the Bradford Hill criteria, it’s easy to see why so many scientists/countries are opposing GMOs.

The shift toward organic food is strong and growing; it’s what consumers are demanding. After all, who wants pesticides accumulating in their body, especially ones that have been incontrovertibly linked to several diseases?

For example, a recent study conducted by researchers from RMIT university, published in the journal Environmental Research, found that an organic diet for just one week significantly reduced pesticide exposure in adults by 90%.  (source)

Another study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, indicated that among individuals eating similar amounts of vegetables and fruits, the ones who reported eating organic produce had significantly lower OP pesticide exposure than those who normally consume conventionally grown produce. You can read more about that here.

These chemicals are manufactured by big bio-tech corporations like Monsanto, and the fact that they’ve been caught lying doesn’t help their credibility one bit. For example, a new study published in the journal Biomedical Research International shows that Roundup herbicide is 125 times more toxic than its active ingredient glyphosate studied in isolation. (source)  Roundup was also (finally) linked to cancer recently by the WHO, although a number of scientists had already provided tremendous amounts of proof for this:

“There is convincing evidence that glyphosate also can cause cancer in laboratory animals. On the basis of tumours in mice, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans. A US EPA report and several more recent positive results conclude that there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. Glyphosate also caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells, although it gave negative results in tests using bacteria. One study in community residents reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) after glyphosate formulations were sprayed nearby.” (source)

Political Agendas?

Studies that link Genetically Modified (GM) food to multiple human health ailments are not the only thing that has millions of people questioning the production of GM food. There is fact that previously classified secret government documents exist which show how the Bush administration developed ways to retaliate against countries that were refusing to use GM seeds. If information about our food needs to be concealed from the public domain, then something has gone seriously wrong with the food industry. It’s great to have an organization like WikiLeaks shed some light into a world that’s been hidden from us for so many years.

The cables reveal that the State Department was lobbying all over the world for Monsanto and other major biotech corporations., and that American diplomats requested funding to send lobbyists for the biotech industry to meet with politicians and agricultural officials in “target countries.” These included countries in Africa, Latin America, and Europe.

A non-profit consumer protection group called Food & Water Watch published a report showing the details of the partnership between the federal government and a number of biotech companies who have pushed their GMO products on multiple countries for a number of years:

In the past decade, the United States has aggressively pursued foreign policies in food and agriculture that benefit the largest seed companies. The U.S. State Department has launched a concerted strategy to promote agricultural biotechnology, often over the opposition of the public and governments, to the near exclusion of other more sustainable, more appropriate agricultural policy alternatives.

Agricultural development is essential for the developing world to foster sustainable economies, enhance food security to combat global hunger and increase resiliency to climate change. Addressing these challenges will require diverse strategies that emphasize sustainable, productive approaches that are directed by countries in the developing world.

The U.S. State Department has also lobbied foreign governments to adopt pro-agricultural biotechnology policies and laws, operated a rigorous public relations campaign to improve the image of biotechnology and challenged commonsense biotechnology safeguards and rules — even including opposing laws requiring the labeling of genetically engineered (GE) foods.

Here is one cable (out of many) from Morocco.

Here is a 2008 cable that summarizes a French documentary called “The World According to Monsanto,” which attacks the U.S. biotech industry and the fact that Monsanto and the U.S. Government constantly swap employees and positions.

This is just one example that clearly shows how giant corporations essentially dictate government policy. These food corporations are responsible for pushing independent agriculturists out of business. They control the world’s seed supply, forcing farmers to become dependent on their seed. Monsanto and corporations like it have created patented GMO seeds and are preventing farmers from seed saving and sharing, resulting in a dependence on their genetically modified product.

Between 2007 and 2009, the State Department sent annual cables to ‘encourage the use of agricultural biotechnology,’ directing every diplomatic post worldwide to “pursue an active biotech agenda” that promotes agricultural biotechnology, encourages the export of biotech crops and foods and advocates for pro-biotech policies and laws.” (source)

“The US Department of State is selling seeds instead of democracy. This report provides a chilling snapshot of how a handful of giant biotechnology companies are unduly influencing US foreign policy and undermining our diplomatic efforts to promote security, international development and transparency worldwide. This report is a call to action for Americans because public policy should not be for sale to the highest bidder.”

– Wenonah Hauter, Food & Water Watch Executive (source)

One of the most revealing cables is from 2007, and it looks at French efforts to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety. Here is a cable that shows Craig Stapleton, former ambassador to France under the Bush administration, asking Washington to punish the EU countries that did not support the use of GM crops: “Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices.”

The U.S. government was not only working for the biotech industry. They were also threatening other governments who did not comply. Think about that for a moment. Over the years, the United States government and Monsanto have collectively pushed their GMO agenda upon the rest of the world. Why? Do you really think it is to help feed the world? This could easily be achieved if we came together and pooled our resources. The entire planet could have access to organic food and it could be done for free.

A Shift in Consciousness Encompasses Everything

It’s quite amazing to see what has happened over the past ten years alone. The birth of social media networks has brought forth a wealth of new information in the form of alternative media. While there may be many “fake news” sites out there, there are also many valid information sources that have created awareness and sourced their work properly. They shared information that mainstream media would not share. After all, mainstream media is owned by a handful of corporations, and also heavily influenced by government and corporate agendas.

Our world has been drenched in secrecy, and more people are having a hard time trusting mainstream media networks. It’s simply best to let people decide for themselves and examine the sources for themselves, rather than having somebody on television telling the world “what is.”

The fact that billions of people every year were accessing information about corporate and government fraud, and information that is not always presented to the world, just goes to show how big this shift in consciousness is. New ideas are being presented that challenge old beliefs, and more people are starting to question the world around them and the entire human experience.

What are we really doing here? A lot of people see a clear need for change, and recognize that if we continue to follow our ways with regards to politics, finance, health, environment, education, and more, we’re not really going forward.

Our souls are craving a new human experience, and creating awareness about several aspects of that human experience, like GMOs, for example, plays a key role in changing it. So when it comes to GMOs, vote with your dollar!

Don’t let “fake news” labels determine your truth. Don’t let someone else make your decisions for you. Examine the sources for yourself, think critically, and make your own decisions. We do not need another entity, like Snopes, telling us what is and what isn’t. It’s time to think for ourselves, and stop letting the government, corporations, and politicians do it for us.

We can’t continue to put change in their hands; we have to put it in our own.

 

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

The Medical Journals’ Sell-Out—Getting Paid to Play

Published

on

[Note: This is Part IX in a series of articles adapted from the second Children’s Health Defense eBook: Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health. The first eBook, The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, described how children’s health began to worsen dramatically in the late 1980s following fateful changes in the childhood vaccine schedule.]

The vaccine industry and its government and scientific partners routinely block meaningful science and fabricate misleading studies about vaccines. They could not do so, however, without having enticed medical journals into a mutually beneficial bargain. Pharmaceutical companies supply journals with needed income, and in return, journals play a key role in suppressing studies that raise critical questions about vaccine risks—which would endanger profits.

Journals are willing to accept even the most highly misleading advertisements. The FDA has flagged numerous instances of advertising violations, including ads that overstated a drug’s effectiveness or minimized its risks.

An exclusive and dependent relationship

Advertising is one of the most obviously beneficial ways that medical journals’ “exclusive and dependent relationship” with the pharmaceutical industry plays out. According to a 2006 analysis in PLOS Medicinedrugs and medical devices are the only products for which medical journals accept advertisements. Studies show that journal advertising generates “the highest return on investment of all promotional strategies employed by pharmaceutical companies.” The pharmaceutical industry puts a particularly “high value on advertising its products in print journals” because journals reach doctors—the “gatekeeper between drug companies and patients.” Almost nine in ten drug advertising dollars are directed at physicians.

In the U.S. in 2012, drug companies spent $24 billion marketing to physicians, with only $3 billion spent on direct-to-consumer advertising. By 2015, however, consumer-targeted advertising had jumped to $5.2 billion, a 60% increase that has reaped bountiful rewards. In 2015, Pfizer’s Prevnar-13 vaccine was the nation’s eighth most heavily advertised drug; after the launch of the intensive advertising campaign, Prevnar “awareness” increased by over 1,500% in eight months, and “44% of targeted consumers were talking to their physicians about getting vaccinated specifically with Prevnar.” Slick ad campaigns have also helped boost uptake of “unpopular” vaccines like Gardasil.

Advertising is such an established part of journals’ modus operandi that high-end journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) boldly invite medical marketers to “make NEJM the cornerstone of their advertising programs,” promising “no greater assurance that your ad will be seen, read, and acted upon.” In addition, medical journals benefit from pharmaceutical companies’ bulk purchases of thousands of journal reprints and industry’s sponsorship of journal subscriptions and journal supplements.

advertisement - learn more

In 2003, an editor at The BMJ wrote about the numerous ways in which drug company advertising can bias medical journals (and the practice of medicine)—all of which still hold true today. For example:

  • Advertising monies enable prestigious journals to get thousands of copies into doctors’ hands for free, which “almost certainly” goes on to affect prescribing.
  • Journals are willing to accept even the most highly misleading advertisements. The FDA has flagged numerous instances of advertising violations, including ads that overstated a drug’s effectiveness or minimized its risks.
  • Journals will guarantee favorable editorial mentions of a product in order to earn a company’s advertising dollars.
  • Journals can earn substantial fees for publishing supplements even when they are written by “paid industry hacks”—and the more favorable the supplement content is to the company that is funding it, the bigger the profit for the journal.

Discussing clinical trials, the BMJ editor added: “Major trials are very good for journals in that doctors around the world want to see them and so are more likely to subscribe to journals that publish them. Such trials also create lots of publicity, and journals like publicity. Finally, companies purchase large numbers of reprints of these trials…and the profit margin to the publisher is huge. These reprints are then used to market the drugs to doctors, and the journal’s name on the reprint is a vital part of that sell.”

… however, even these poor-quality studies—when funded by the pharmaceutical industry—got far more attention than equivalent studies not funded by industry.

Industry-funded bias

According to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), nearly three-fourths of all funding for clinical trials in the U.S.—presumably including vaccine trials—came from corporate sponsors as of the early 2000s. The pharmaceutical industry’s funding of studies (and investigators) is a factor that helps determine which studies get published, and where. As a Johns Hopkins University researcher has acknowledged, funding can lead to bias—and while the potential exists for governmental or departmental funding to produce bias, “the worst source of bias is industry-funded.”

In 2009, researchers published a systematic review of several hundred influenza vaccine trials. Noting “growing doubts about the validity of the scientific evidence underpinning [influenza vaccine] policy recommendations,” the authors showed that the vaccine-favorable studies were “of significantly lower methodological quality”; however, even these poor-quality studies—when funded by the pharmaceutical industry—got far more attention than equivalent studies not funded by industry. The authors commented:

[Studies] sponsored by industry had greater visibility as they were more likely to be published by high impact factor journals and were likely to be given higher prominence by the international scientific and lay media, despite their apparent equivalent methodological quality and size compared with studies with other funders.

In their discussion, the authors also described how the industry’s vast resources enable lavish and strategic dissemination of favorable results. For example, companies often distribute “expensively bound” abstracts and reprints (translated into various languages) to “decision makers, their advisors, and local researchers,” while also systematically plugging their studies at symposia and conferences.

The World Health Organization’s standards describe reporting of clinical trial results as a “scientific, ethical, and moral responsibility.” However, it appears that as many as half of all clinical trial results go unreported—particularly when their results are negative. A European official involved in drug assessment has described the problem as “widespread,” citing as an example GSK’s suppression of results from four clinical trials for an anti-anxiety drug when those results showed a possible increased risk of suicide in children and adolescents. Experts warn that “unreported studies leave an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the risks and benefits of treatments.”

Many vaccine studies flagrantly illustrate biases and selective reporting that produce skewed write-ups that are more marketing than science.

Debased and biased results

The “significant association between funding sources and pro-industry conclusions” can play out in many different ways, notably through methodological bias and debasement of study designs and analytic strategies. Bias may be present in the form of inadequate sample sizes, short follow-up periods, inappropriate placebos or comparisons, use of improper surrogate endpoints, unsuitable statistical analyses or “misleading presentation of data.”

Occasionally, high-level journal insiders blow the whistle on the corruption of published science. In a widely circulated quote, Dr. Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of NEJM, acknowledged that “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” Dr. Angell added that she “[took] no pleasure in this conclusion, which [she] reached slowly and reluctantly” over two decades at the prestigious journal.

Many vaccine studies flagrantly illustrate biases and selective reporting that produce skewed write-ups that are more marketing than science. In formulaic articles that medical journals are only too happy to publish, the conclusion is almost always the same, no matter the vaccine: “We did not identify any new or unexpected safety concerns.” As an example of the use of inappropriate statistical techniques to exaggerate vaccine benefits, an influenza vaccine study reported a “69% efficacy rate” even though the vaccine failed “nearly all who [took] it.” As explained by Dr. David Brownstein, the study’s authors used a technique called relative risk analysis to derive their 69% statistic because it can make “a poorly performing drug or therapy look better than it actually is.” However, the absolute risk difference between the vaccine and the placebo group was 2.27%, meaning that the vaccine “was nearly 98% ineffective in preventing the flu.”

… the reviewers had done an incomplete job and had ignored important evidence of bias.

Trusted evidence?

In 2018, the Cochrane Collaboration—which bills its systematic reviews as the international gold standard for high-quality, “trusted” evidence—furnished conclusions about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine that clearly signaled industry bias. In May of that year, Cochrane’s highly favorable review improbably declared the vaccine to have no increased risk of serious adverse effects and judged deaths observed in HPV studies “not to be related to the vaccine.” Cochrane claims to be free of conflicts of interest, but its roster of funders includes national governmental bodies and international organizations pushing for HPV vaccine mandates as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation—both of which are staunch funders and supporters of HPV vaccination. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s president is a former top CDC official who served as acting CDC director during the H1N1 “false pandemic” in 2009 that ensured millions in windfall profits for vaccine manufacturers.

Two months after publication of Cochrane’s HPV review, researchers affiliated with the Nordic Cochrane Centre (one of Cochrane’s member centers) published an exhaustive critique, declaring that the reviewers had done an incomplete job and had “ignored important evidence of bias.” The critics itemized numerous methodological and ethical missteps on the part of the Cochrane reviewers, including failure to count nearly half of the eligible HPV vaccine trials, incomplete assessment of serious and systemic adverse events and failure to note that many of the reviewed studies were industry-funded. They also upbraided the Cochrane reviewers for not paying attention to key design flaws in the original clinical trials, including the failure to use true placebos and the use of surrogate outcomes for cervical cancer.

In response to the criticisms, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library initially stated that a team of editors would investigate the claims “as a matter of urgency.” Instead, however, Cochrane’s Governing Board quickly expelled one of the critique’s authors, Danish physician-researcher Peter Gøtzsche, who helped found Cochrane and was the head of the Nordic Cochrane Centre. Gøtzsche has been a vocal critic of Cochrane’s “increasingly commercial business model,” which he suggests is resulting in “stronger and stronger resistance to say anything that could bother pharmaceutical industry interests.” Adding insult to injury, Gøtzsche’s direct employer, the Rigshospitalet hospital in Denmark, then fired Gøtzsche. In response, Dr. Gøtzsche stated, “Firing me sends the unfortunate signal that if your research results are inconvenient and cause public turmoil, or threaten the pharmaceutical industry’s earnings, …you will be sacked.” In March 2019, Gøtzsche launched an independent Institute for Scientific Freedom.

In 2019, the editor-in-chief and research editor of BMJ Evidence Based Medicine—the journal that published the critique of Cochrane’s biased review—jointly defended the critique as having “provoke[d] healthy debate and pose[d] important questions,” affirming the value of publishing articles that “hold organisations to account.” They added that “Academic freedom means communicating ideas, facts and criticism without being censored, targeted or reprimanded” and urged publishers not to “shrink from offering criticisms that may be considered inconvenient.”

In recent years, a number of journals have invented bogus excuses to withdraw or retract articles critical of risky vaccine ingredients, even when written by top international scientists.

The censorship tsunami

Another favored tactic is to keep vaccine-critical studies out of medical journals altogether, either by refusing to publish them (even if peer reviewers recommend their publication) or by concocting excuses to pull articles after publication. In recent years, a number of journals have invented bogus excuses to withdraw or retract articles critical of risky vaccine ingredients, even when written by top international scientists. To cite just three examples:

  • The journal Vaccine withdrew a study that questioned the safety of the aluminum adjuvantused in Gardasil.
  • The journal Science and Engineering Ethics retracted an article that made a case for greater transparency regarding the link between mercury and autism.
  • Pharmacological Research withdrew a published veterinary article that implicated aluminum-containing vaccines in a mystery illness decimating sheep, citing “concerns” from an anonymous reader.

Elsevier, which publishes two of these journals, has a track record of setting up fake journals to market Merck’s drugs, and Springer, which publishes the third journal as well as influential publications like Nature and Scientific American, has been only too willing to accommodate censorship requests. However, even these forms of censorship may soon seem quaint in comparison to the censorship of vaccine-critical information now being implemented across social media and other platforms. This concerted campaign to prevent dissemination of vaccine content that does not toe the party line will make it harder than ever for American families to do their due diligence with regard to vaccine risks and benefits.


Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Jeffrey Epstein’s Case Raises Questions About Royal Family Pedophilia & Elite Ritualistic Abuse of Children

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The recent case against Jeffrey Epstein, who is being charged with child sex trafficking, has opened up the idea that 'higher powers' like the Royal Family might be involved in this type of thing, along with other political "VIPs."

  • Reflect On:

    Is this really a surprise? If we look at our world and our 'leaders,' our actions are truly a reflection of their psychopathic behaviour. The involvement of high ranking people in ritual sex abuse, if you think about it, shouldn't be a surprise.

Child sex abuse among the global elite is extremely rampant. This no doubt makes those who aren’t really aware of it wonder: Why is this not more well-known? Well, the answer to that is simple, it’s the same reason why so many other ‘happenings’ on planet Earth go virtually unknown, and that’s because we have been relying on a small group of very powerful and wealthy people and the corporations they run for information about what is happening on our planet. We are constantly being spoon-fed lies by mainstream media. There are a number of examples to choose from, and multiple award-winning mainstream media journalists have been blowing the whistle with regards to what really goes on behind the scenes for years. All information that comes from mainstream media is given to them in the form of instructions from big corporations, government, and intelligence agencies. This is evident by documents that’ve been released via the Freedom of Information Act as well.

Furthermore, media outlets providing access to alternative information using credible sources that go against the narrative and interests of these big corporations and the government have been completely censored and demonetized.

Information like what’s discussed in this article has been made out to be a ‘conspiracy theory’ by the mainstream, but it’s now becoming so obvious that the mainstream has no choice but to start reporting on it.

The latest example is the case of Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire who has close connections to the Clintons and people like Prince Andrew of the Royal Family. He is a registered sex offender, and apart from that, a number of his victims have come forward over the years claiming that he abused them, many of whom are under age. One example is Virginia Roberts Giuffre, pictured here with Prince Andrew. She claims that she was loaned out by Epstein to people like Prince Andrew as a young teenager.

The latest news regarding Epstein was that he was arrested and taken into federal custody for the sex trafficking of children. Specifically, it deals with the sex trafficking of minors in both New York and Florida between 2002 and 2005. He is expected to appear in court tomorrow. The arrest was made by the FBI-NYPD Crimes Against Children Task Force, and it comes almost 12 years after Epstein didn’t receive any penalty except a slap on the wrist for supposedly molesting and raping children in Florida.

Here is the information coming from a Miami Herald article titled ‘With Jeffrey Epstein locked up, these are nervous times for his friends, enablers’

advertisement - learn more

Jeffrey Epstein, 66, was arrested at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey shortly before 4 p.m. Saturday, July 6th as he arrived on his private jet from Paris.

It should be noted that the Department of Justice has said that it is not rescinding the plea deal Jeffrey Epstein got in his previous conviction even though it has been determined to have been illegal.

Although details of the case remain undisclosedthere are indications that others involved in his crimes could be charged or named as cooperating witnesses.

The fact that others involved in his crimes could be charged is quite significant, since it indicates that law enforcement and the judiciary are not shying away from proving a CONSPIRACY in this case. This is quite different from his earlier conviction in Florida in 2008, which was ‘soliciting an underage girl for prostitution.’

According to the Daily Beast:

Several of the billionaire’s employees and associates allegedly recruited the girls for Epstein’s abuse, and some victims eventually became recruiters themselves, according to law enforcement. The girls were as young as 14, and Epstein knew they were underage, according to details of the arrest and indictment shared by two officials.

Why are these people always connected to and have close relationships with the global elite? What’s even more eye-opening is that this is not the only example that’s leaked into the mainstream. It’s become impossible for the world to ignore as of late. For exmaple,  Smallville actress Allison Mack was ‘outed’ for being a member of a sex cult and working in a management capacity. Apparently, Mack’s job was to lure women into the program under the false pretence of female empowerment and self-help workshops. They were then convinced to sign up for a more “advanced program” called Dominus Obsequious Sororium, which required these women to basically turn their lives over to the leader, Keith Raniere. Dominus Obsequious Sororium is a quasi-Latin phrase that roughly translates to “Master Over The Slave Women.”

You can read more about that here.

Raniere owns a company called NXIVM, which supposedly offers executive success programs, but clearly, that’s not the case. Raniere was also arrested, along with Mack, in March 2018 in Mexico on charges of sex trafficking. He stands accused of raping girls as young as 12 years old, imprisoning a woman for 18 months, child pornography, and more. He has been kept in federal custody in New York, but has now been found guilty on all charges.

This group also has strange connections to the powerful elite, as Billionaire Clare Bronfman was indicted on racketeering charges. These charges were connected to her role as “Operations Director” for NXIVM. Clare Bronfman is the daughter of Charles Bronfman, a Canadian/American businessman and philanthropist. The Bronfman family has been referred to as the “The Rothschilds of the New World” by author Peter C. Newman, a well-known Canadian journalist and writer. The Bronfman family has also been in business with the Rothschild family for quite some time. One of many examples is their wealth management company, Bronfman Rothschild, which began in 1997 as Virchow Krause Wealth Management.

Bronfman’s brother, Stephen, was one of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s biggest funders. Trudeau was also very close to Peter Danglish, a high-ranking UN sex-offender mentioned below. I mention this because I came across more strange ties to the Trudeau family, like the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation symbol, as you can see, is the same symbol used by pedophiles to identify sexual preference.

Just like with the Epstein case, the Clinton’s are mentioned with regards to NXIVM as well.

The Rolling Stone reported:

“There are strange political connections as well. Mark Vicente, a documentary filmmaker and former high-ranking member of the group, testified at the trial of NXIVM head Keith Raniere that Clare Bronfman, the billionaire Seagram’s heiress and alleged benefactor of the organization, approached him and a few other members of the group to help her make a contribution to a Clinton campaign.” (source)

Pretty weird stuff, isn’t it?

Let’s not forget about Sir Jimmy Savile, a BBC children’s television presenter feted by the Royal Family and Downing Street, abused 450 victims, mostly boys and girls as young as eight over 50 years. While Savile had long been seen as odd, the scale of his offenses shocked the country. He was even allowed special access to hospitals, and the authorities laughed at or ignored his victims before he died a national hero. He was very close with the Royal Family.

This kind of thing has been floating around out there for decades. For example, a member of the Royal family was claimed to be part of a suspected pedophile ring under investigation by the police in the late 1980s, a former police officer has said. The former Metropolitan Police officer said he was told by a detective sergeant that the investigation into the ring, which was also claimed to include an MP, was shut down for national security reasons. “I was in a car with two other vice squad officers … The detective sergeant said he had just had a major child abuse investigation shut down by the CPS regarding a royal and an MP,” he told the Sunday Mirror newspaper. “He did not mention names, but he said the CPS had said it was not in the public’s interest because it ‘could destabilise national security’.”

We even have whistleblowers when it comes to this issue, like Steve Pieczenik, a former United States Department of State official and a Harvard trained psychiatrist with a doctorate in international relations from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). He’s been openly talking about this type of thing in elitist circles. You can view an example of him talking about the Clintons here.  Here’s another one of him implicating Bush Sr.

Peter McKelvie, a former child protection chief in the UK, gained attention when he claimed that senior politicians, military figures and even people linked to the Royal Family were among the alleged abusers. While working in Hereford and Worcester, he helped to convict notorious child abuser Peter Righton, who was once one of the country’s most respected authorities on child care.  This highlights a great point, and something that I’ve come across multiple times in my research. Many people who work for national child care protection programs are directly involved in this type of thing. McKelvie  is one of many who told the world that these types of powerful VIP pedophile rings have been running in secrecy for multiple years. (source)

The same types of scandals take place here on our side of the pond as well.

Congress is now looking at a bipartisan bill to stop employees from sharing child porn on Department of Defense computers. Yes, it’s a real problem, which begs the questions: Where are these kids coming from? Who is making these kids ‘perform,’ who is filming them, and where are these high-ranking people getting this from?

“The notion that the Department of Defense’s network and Pentagon-issued computers may be used to view, create, or circulate such horrifying images is a shameful disgrace, and one we must fight head on.” – Abigail Spanberger (D-Virginia), spoken in a  statement as she and co-sponsor Mark Meadows (R-N. Carolina) introduced the End National Defense Network Abuse (END Network Abuse) Act in the House.

As The Hill reports, “The Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service subsequently identified hundreds of DOD-affiliated individuals as suspects involved in accessing child pornography, several of whom used government devices to use and share the images.”

You can read more about that and see some more disturbing connections between high ranking powerful people and this type of activity here.

It doesn’t stop there, and it goes all the way up into the Vatican.

What I’ve Discovered From My Research: This Is Ritualistic In Nature

It was only a few years ago when the information cited above was considered a conspiracy theory, but we here at Collective Evolution were creating awareness about it in a credible way. Based on our research, this doesn’t just involve the rape and trafficking of children. It also involves murder and ritualistic satanic abuse of children who are used for various ceremonies, sacrifices and rituals. In some cases, it even deals with cannibalism.

The term “ritual” hasn’t been mentioned in the mainstream. On November 12, 2012 the former Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, set into motion a Royal Commission to inquire into institutional responses to child abuse. Five years later, in December 2017, the Royal Commission presented its final report to the government, an absolutely damning indictment against institutions that dealt with children, including the Catholic Church. As a result, the current Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, delivered a public apology on October 22, 2018.  You can read more about that story here.

“The crimes of ritual sexual abuse happened in schools, churches, youth groups, scout troops, orphanages, foster homes, sporting clubs, group homes, charities, and in family homes as well.” Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison

Our Interview With A Survivor

Anneke Lucas is an author, speaker, advocate for child sex trafficking victims, founder of the non-profit organization Liberation Prison Yoga, and creator of the Unconditional Model.

Her work is based off her 30-year journey to restore her mental and physical wellbeing after surviving some of the worst atrocities known to humankind before the age of 12. Sold as a young child into a murderous pedophile network by her family, she was rescued after nearly six years of abuse and torture.

We recently conducted an interview with her. Below is a clip from the four part series, as it was a very long and detailed interview. You can access the full interview HERE on CETV, a platform we created to help combat internet censorship and allow us to continue to do our work and get the word out about various issues and topics.

The Takeaway

There is so much evidence showing that the global financial elite (various members of big politics, corporations, hollywood, Royal Families, and people in positions of great power, the Vatican, etc.) are engaged in psychopathic behaviour. But are you really surprised? Look at the world and its systems and all aspects that surround humanity… It’s truly a reflection of psychopathic ‘leaders.’ And it’s a reflection of us being totally oblivious to it as a result of mass brainwashing. Still, in many cases, we support and stand up for these systems, and accept no other way. We refuse to acknowledge things that any fairly intelligent person should be able to see with a bit of investigation.

If you watch the Anneke interview, you will see how there is a very positive and uplifting message that comes out of all of this, despite the disheartening subject matter. Human trafficking and child abuse represent the most untold stories of our generation, as they hurt millions of souls every year, many of them being children. The International Tribunal For Natural Justice (ITFNJ) is one of many organizations to bring awareness to child sex trafficking. You can read more about that here, especially if you are feeling hopeless about this issue.

We are slowly coming to terms with the fact that this happens at elite levels, done by some of the most ‘prominent’ and powerful people. It’s time to talk about it, and it’s time to ask more questions. Let’s keep disclosure coming.

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Why I Haven’t Paid Much Attention To “Q Anon”

Published

on

We are living in some very interesting times. Amidst all of the mass brainwashing we’ve received from establishment mouthpieces (mainstream media), the birth of alternative media brought to light information that simply wasn’t being presented by the mainstream media. Prior to the mass popularity that alternative media garnered, global media was completely owned by a handful of corporations. It still remains a vital tool for this small group of powerful people to completely control the perception of millions of people across the world.

The owners of these outlets did not like how their viewers were wandering off to alternative media, so they’ve used their power to create massive amounts of censorship, but the truth can’t really be stopped. This is why we’ve seen the persecution of Wikileaks, for example, and the demonization of alternative media outlets simply because their beliefs don’t fit the accepted framework of knowledge. Alternative media outlets have been demonetized and censored, and multiple award-winning mainstream media journalists have called out mainstream media and how these networks are slaves to their masters–their masters being big corporations, governments, and intelligence agencies.

Truth doesn’t come from mainstream media, so it’s no mystery why millions have flocked to other sources of information that provide evidence instead of a news anchor simply talking, since these networks do nothing but push propaganda and put out false information.

Our world is and has been experiencing a shift in consciousness for a very long time, and a big reason the global elite started to deem certain information and credible sources as ‘fake news’ and subject them to extreme amounts of censorship was simply due to the fact that this type of information is extremely threatening to several corporate, political and elitists agendas, so much so that freedom of information and speech continues to be censored.

In the midst of all this, along came “Q Anon.” For reasons I am completely unaware of, I never took an interest in Q Anon, and still haven’t. Perhaps it was the predictions being made that didn’t come to light, although many did, or perhaps it’s the fact that it could be anyone speaking. Nevertheless, I simply don’t know why I never took an interest.

The thought crossed my mind that collective consciousness has shifted so much, and so many people have awakened to so many different things, that the only way to capture and deceive this segment of people, who represent the majority in my opinion, would be to develop a character like Q. I don’t really believe this, it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

advertisement - learn more

The thought also crossed my mind that Q could be legit, given the fact that they’ve put out information and predictions that have come to light. Q has a good track record for that and appears to be a team of people who are in or have access to the “inside.” In this sense, Q seems very legit at times.

Furthermore, Q could represent Donald Trump and another faction of the ‘Deep State.’ I believe there are governments within governments, and they are constantly fighting for power, but always remain at the top. This is evident by the fact that all presidents and politicians always followed the will of their masters, they’ve all had ties and close relationships with corporations and the elite and made policies that benefited certain corporate interests and elitist agendas.

What turns me away from Q is its religious-like following. What Q preaches is never questioned by them, and a lot of information and claims are put out there simply based on nothing. Q is not really needed, there are more than enough whistleblowers, documentation, etc. to really seek out the truth and present it in a credible way that will reach the masses.

That being said, Q has no doubt been an awakening trigger forcing and encouraging people to think for themselves, connect the dots, and do their own research.

Trump is also not questioned by many and is seen as a saviour in some cases. People are giving away their own critical thinking, they’re giving away their own brain to another entity without questioning it. Regardless of whether or not Q is legit, or represents another side of the ‘deep state’ or not, this is dangerous.

There have also been some shady claims, just as there have been some legit claims made by Q. One of them was when Q claimed the arrest of Julian Assange was to free him from his poor conditions, and that we should simply just “trust the plan.” This was far from the truth, and this is one of multiple examples that raised red flags about Q in my mind. At the same time, there are many things Q has put out that have been credible and that suggest Q is part of or has deep connections to the inside.

I don’t think that this is a larper… This is way beyond, this is someone who is, I don’t think it’s possible to say the things that Q has been saying without being a true insider. So it’s someone that is real, it’s someone that truly believes that Trump is working against the deep state for the good of the American people, that’s their perspective. The real question is how accurate are they, and I don’t really have an answer to that. – Richard Dolan (source)

When it comes to Trump, it’s quite clear and easy to see, in my opinion, that he represented a disturbance to some very powerful elite that use people like Hillary Clinton to represent them. Trump represented, and still does in many ways, an ‘outsider.’ Looking at politics with no opinion or bias and without a “republican” or “democrat” point of view, it’s easy to see how, during Trump’s campaign, the powerful elite did everything possible to ensure a victory for Clinton. This included not only swaying the Democratic party (which previously played dirty pool against Bernie Sanders), but the entire mainstream media machine, the financial community, the EU, and even the Republican party itself.

Since Trump’s campaign, we have been told that Trump is a racist, sexist, xenophobe, liar, cheat, and narcissist. It’s reminiscent of the concerted media attack against Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff, which culminated earlier in 2016 in her impeachment and removal from power. It’s important to understand why Trump is demonized, and that’s because he is a disruptor, and his disruption falls squarely against the two key pillars of the American ruling elite’s ideology: neoliberalism and neoconservatism.

During Trump’s campaign, he was quite vocal about pharmaceutical corruption, the US government funding terrorist organizations, vaccine safety, and he even called out Bill Clinton and his relationship to Jeffrey Epstein. Now, in some instances, he seems to have changed his views on a few matters, which goes to show that he could have been compromised by the deep state, or the other side of the deep state, if you will.

“So a person is elected, he comes with his ideas. Then people with briefcases come to visit him, well dressed, in dark suits, kind of like mine. Except instead of a red tie it’s black or navy. And then they explain what to do, and the whole rhetoric changes, you see? This happens from one administration to the next.”  – Vladimir Putin, providing one of many examples of politicians around the world and within the US speaking up about this hidden power that controls the presidency. (source)

I’d like to leave you with this thought-provoking quote from Catherine Austin Fitts, former Commissioner of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, who recently said:

“In the Red Button Problem, everybody wants their check and they want to pretend that they are good. So it’s very important that politicians come up with this story of ‘good’. The story of ‘I’m good,’ doesn’t have to make sense, but it has to be good enough so that I can just take my check and feel good and not have to do anything. It’s a way of being free to stay on my couch and do the things that I love instead of being bothered with the responsibility of being a citizen.”

So Q is the new story of, ‘I am good,’ because, ‘I can just trust the plan, and these covert operators are going to get their thing done.’ So I’ve been nice because I know some very intelligent, capable people who buy this whole thing hook, line, and sinker. It has been really frustrating for you and me. I took FASAB 56 to these Q believers, and they said, ‘You need to trust the plan.'”

The Takeaway

It appears that people are becoming too engaged with the Q narrative that it is blinding them from the truth of what Q is actually representing. Instead of viewing Q as right or wrong, what steps does it represent in our awakening process? Is the narrative truly creating a world where humanity thrives? Or is it perhaps only taking us a step forward, if at all?

We can’t let Q do all thinking, we must continue to do what got is here in the first place, that’s think for ourselves. It’s ok to peak and take a look at Q, but to hang on to and live and die by everything Q says, and to constantly push the idea that whatever Q says is correct is a little troublesome to me.

Related CE Article: Is The Q Narrative Providing False Hope? Catherine Austin Fitts Weights In

You Can Help Stop The 5G Infrastructure

We plan to investigate the telecom industry, it’s ties to politics, and expose its efforts to push 5G while ignoring the dangers and without proper safety testing, but we can't do it without your support.

We've launched a funding campaign to fuel our efforts on this matter as we are confident we can make a difference and have a strong plan to get it done.

Check out our plan and join our campaign here.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod