Mercury is a potent neurotoxin. Even the smallest amounts can cause cumulative adverse effects. Two of the most widespread forms of mercury exposure come from the organic compounds methylmercury (found in fish) and ethylmercury, which makes up 50% of the vaccine preservative thimerosal. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) affirms that young children and fetuses are particularly sensitive to harmful mercury-related effects such as “brain damage, mental retardation, incoordination, blindness, seizures and inability to speak.” This calls into question public health authorities’ aggressive peddling of annual flu shots—many of which contain thimerosal. The influenza vaccine guidelines target all children who are at least six months of age, with two closely spaced doses recommended for very young children in their “first season of vaccination.” They also target pregnant women and women who “might” be pregnant.
Organic mercury can cross the blood-brain barrier, and numerous studies have fingered it as a major offender in increasing the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), tic disorders, delayed language and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Shamefully, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) refuses to admit that mercury is an ASD risk factor. Instead, it has been left up to other researchers to continue to focus attention on the compelling relationship between mercury and ASD.
-->Help Support CE: Donate to Collective Evolution to help us move past the challenges censorship has put on independent media. Click here to contribute!
Taking stock across studies
Two 2017 studies perform a valuable service by systematically reviewing the totality of published mercury-ASD evidence that has accumulated over the past dozen or so years, in particular. The two studies both come out of Iran, and both employ a technique called meta-analysis, which is a quantitative systematic review. Meta-analytic studies seek to take a step back and draw rigorous conclusions about comparable studies as a group. A key benefit of this approach is that it can consolidate “a large, and often complex, sometimes apparently conflicting, body of literature.”
The meta-analysis approach is a very appropriate tool for taking stock of published studies that compare mercury levels in ASD individuals and healthy controls without ASD. The first meta-analysis (published in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology by Tina Jafari and other researchers at Iran’s Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences) focuses exclusively on mercury. The second study (published in Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry by Amene Saghazadeh and Nima Rezaei at the Tehran University of Medical Sciences) examines mercury along with other heavy metals such as lead. Both research teams used state-of-the-art statistical techniques to produce unbiased results.
The table below summarizes the key features of study #1 (Jafari et al.) and study #2 (Saghazadeh and Rezaei):
The two meta-analyses examined mercury levels for each type of specimen or tissue. Both studies found significantly higher concentrations of mercury in the red blood cells of ASD patients versus healthy controls, and the first meta-analysis found significantly higher levels in the whole blood of ASD patients. (The second study also found higher levels of lead in both the red blood cells and blood of individuals with ASD, which is suggestive of possible combined or synergistic effects.)
There were no significant differences in urinary mercury levels in ASD and healthy individuals, but there were interesting findings for mercury levels in hair. In study #1, mercury concentrations were significantly lower in ASD patients compared with healthy subjects—but when the investigators analyzed their results by continent, this result held only for America but not for Asia, Africa or Europe. Similarly, study #2’s comparison of developed and developing countries found that mercury levels were significantly lower in the hair of ASD patients in developed but not developing countries—and the preponderance of developed-country studies came from the U.S.
Study #1 also affirmed significantly higher mercury levels in ASD brain tissue. However, the number of brain studies identified for the meta-analysis was very small and also somewhat unclear. The authors report pooling the results of three studies, but their reference list and table include just two studies published by Harvard researchers in 2008 and 2014, respectively. (World Mercury Project has asked the authors to clarify this discrepancy.) The 2008 study found a 68.2% increase in cerebellar mercury in autistic brain tissue (from 3.2 to 80.7 pmol g-1) compared with brain tissue of controls (from 0.9 to 35 pmol g-1), but the increase was not statistically significant. On the other hand, there was a statistically significant elevation in a key marker of oxidative stress in the ASD group that was significantly and positively correlated with elevated mercury. The 2014 study detected no difference in mercury levels but again noted elevated oxidative stress in the ASD group.
Interpreting the findings
Researchers note that a properly conducted systematic review or meta-analysis “allows the reader to take into account a whole range of relevant findings from research on a particular topic” and “establish whether the scientific findings are consistent and generalizable across populations [and] settings…and whether findings vary significantly by particular subgroups.” In addition, “mathematically combining data from a series of well-conducted primary studies may provide a more precise estimate of the underlying ‘true effect’ than any individual study.”
In this instance, the two Iranian teams used a variety of techniques to mitigate the potential weaknesses of meta-analyses. These included using multiple databases, search terms and search strategies to identify relevant studies; following established guidelines to assess the quality of each study; investigating sources of and (where appropriate) adjusting for heterogeneity; analyzing subgroup differences (i.e., the distinction between developed and developing countries); and screening for publication bias. The substantial overlap in the individual studies included in each meta-analysis and the comparability of the two teams’ findings offer a further degree of confidence in the results.
To explain the seemingly counterintuitive finding that hair mercury concentrations are lower (rather than higher) in ASD patients versus healthy individuals, Jafari et al. point to the evidence that those with ASD have impaired detoxification pathways and mechanisms.
As a result, ASD individuals retain mercury inside the cells rather than being able to effectively excrete it through the hair, stool or urine. The Iranian authors do not delve into the question of why ASD patients in developed (primarily U.S.) versus developing countries are less likely to excrete mercury and more likely to retain a heavy body burden. However, one conspicuous factor that differentiates the U.S. from other developed countries (as well as the rest of the world) may help explain this result: the U.S. promotes a far more burdensome vaccine schedule, laden with heavy metals such as thimerosal and aluminum, and annually insists that moms accept thimerosal-containing flu vaccines for themselves and their young children.
Research by Burbacher and colleagues compared blood and brain mercury levels in monkeys exposed to methylmercury and ethylmercury. That work showed that ethylmercury, in particular, goes to the brain, gets metabolized into even more toxic inorganic mercury and remains in the brain for years. Moreover, some common flu vaccines contain the emulsifier polysorbate 80, which disrupts the blood-brain barrierand helps create an extremely effective delivery system for escorting neurotoxic ethylmercury and other heavy metals straight to the brain.
Unfortunately, the majority of published studies only measure total mercury, and very few have examined brain tissue. This makes it challenging to zero in on the specific effects and mechanisms associated with exposure to ethylmercury. Given young children’s widespread exposure to ethylmercury in vaccines, there is no excuse for failing to address this research gap—and even less excuse for failing to remove thimerosal from all vaccines.
Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the World Mercury Project. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
World Doctors Alliance: “We Do Not Have A Medical Pandemic.” Fake News?
- The Facts:
Formed under the “Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee,” an alliance of hundreds of doctors and scientists, the "World Doctors Alliance recently held a press conference sharing their views about the coronavirus.
- Reflect On:
Why are tens of thousands of doctors and scientists all over the world being ridiculed and in many cases censored for sharing their research and opinions?
What Happened: Once again, doctors and scientists are and have been sharing the opinion that COVID-19 should not be classified as a pandemic virus due to the fact that it’s, in their opinion, nowhere near as dangerous as big media is making it out to be.
An organization made up of well over 500 German doctors and scientists called “Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee” who share the same perception discussed in this article have also created the “World Doctors Alliance.” Not long ago they held a press sharing their perspective.
Below is a clip of one of the members, Dr. Elke De Klerk, founder of Doctors for Truth from the Netherlands sharing her thoughts. Below that you will find the press conference recently held by the alliance.
Many expert have been emphasizing that we are dealing with something no more dangerous than the flu. For example, approximately 40,000 scientists, doctors and more than half a million concerned citizens have now signed The Great Barrington Declaration. The declaration explains that “Covid-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.”
The CDC also released new infection/fatality estimates that show numbers on par with seasonal flu. This recent release also has many people and experts calling into question the severity of the virus, this was well after John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford University said that the infection fatality rate is close to 0 percent for people under the age of 45 years old.
The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) recently published a report titled “Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) Compares COVID-19 to Previous Seasonal and Pandemic Flu Periods.” According to them, the infection/fatality rate of COVID-19 is 0.26%. You can read more about that and access their resources and reasoning here.
Then there is the controversy surrounding the PCR tests and the idea that a large majority of cases may actually be false positives. You can read more about that here and here. This as been coupled with the fact that many COVID deaths may not have actually been the result of COVID. You can read more about that here and here.
These groups are made up of veteran experts in the field, Nobel Laureates, Professors of Medicine, Doctors and more, yet all it takes is for an Anthony Fauci like figure to oppose their opinion, and this is the perspective that gets beamed across mainstream media outlets, radio and television while the opposing view is nothing but ridiculed and “debunked.” This is very bizarre to say the least, mainstream media alone has the power to make the majority seem like the minority, and the minority seem like the majority. They have a huge reach when it comes to regulating the perception of the masses.
The exampels listed above are a few of many.
Right now, the Great Barrington Declaration mentioned above and the idea of “heard immunity” is being heavily ridiculed in the mainstream, without any of the renowned scientists who support the declaration having an opportunity to share their opinion via mainstream media.
Below is a recent full press conference held by the alliance.
Is This Fake News? Nothing in this article is fake, these opinions are actually being shared by doctors and scientists around the world, and a lot of them. As far as what they are saying and the opinions expressed above, this is what’s come under the scrutiny of Facebook Fact-Checkers. It’s been emphasized during this pandemic that any type of information that does not come straight from federal health regulatory agencies and the World Health Organization is not to be trusted.
Here’s an article from Health Feedback, for example, explaining why low infection fatality numbers do not mean that the virus is not dangerous.
The organizations above have been speaking up regarding the censorship they’ve experienced from social media giants, and this has also been a common theme throughout this pandemic. Michael Levitt, a Biophysicist and a professor of structural biology at Stanford University, criticized the WHO as well as Facebook for censoring different information and informed perspectives regarding the Coronavirus. According to him, “the level of stupidity” going on here is amazing.
The Takeaway: It’s been quite intriguing to see so many scientists and doctors completely oppose the recommendations and claims made by the World Health Organization (WHO) since the beginning of this pandemic. What’s even more shocking for lots of people is the fact that many scientists and doctors have been completely censored for sharing their research and opinion regarding anything to do with COVID if it opposes the information and recommendations set out by the WHO.
It’s not hard to see why so many people are confused and so many of us have beliefs that completely differ from one another.
Should people not have the right to examine information and opinions and decide for themselves what is and what isn’t Should there be a digital fact checker patrolling the internet limiting peoples ability to see certain information? Do organizations like the WHO and our governments really make decisions that are in and for our best interests, or are there other interests being served here?
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
Trump Says COVID-19 Vaccine Won’t Be Mandatory, Biden Says It Should Be
- The Facts:
It doesn't seem likely that a COVID vaccine will be mandatory under the Trump administration, but Joe Biden recently shared that he believes it should be.
- Reflect On:
If the vaccine did become mandatory, would you take it? Will there be too much of a backlash if the vaccine is made mandatory, or mandatory to travel for example?
What Happened: US President Donald Trump told Stuart Varney on Fox Business Network’s ‘Varney &Co’ that he doesn’t plan to make the coronavirus vaccine mandatory for American citizens, because “there are some people who feel strongly about the whole situation,’ alluding to the idea that people should still have freedom of choice when it comes to what they choose to do with their own body.
On the other hand, presidential candidate Joe Biden said he would urge all state representatives, governors, mayors and council members to make the vaccine mandatory, just like some have done with masks. He acknowledged that such a mandate would be difficult to enforce, but stated that “we should be thinking about making it mandatory.”
Trump has long been promoting alternative therapies for COVID, many have come under scrutiny by mainstream media. The scientific and medical community have both promoted these therapies as well as criticized them, the only difference seems to be that those who support them don’t seem to receive much media attention, while simultaneously become subjected to a censorship campaign by media and social media outlets.
Scientists who share opinions that contradict the World Health Organization (WHO) have also been heavily censored. Michael Levitt, a Biophysicist and a professor of structural biology at Stanford University is one of many who have criticized the WHO as well as Facebook for censoring different information and informed perspectives regarding the Coronavirus.
The Great Barrington Declaration is experiencing the same thing for questioning lockdown measures, it’s now been signed by nearly 40,000 doctors and scientists.
A paper recently published in Global Advances in Health and Medicine titled Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions points out:
A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.
The paper also promotes the use of alternate therapies like intravenous vitamin C and provides evidence showing its success in COVID patients. It’s one of multiple studies to do so, but vitamin C has been heavily ridiculed and censored by mainstream media and social media for being able to provide any help when it comes to healing from COVID, or to help prevent it.
We are being made to believe that a vaccine is the only answer. No other suggestions seem to be acceptable. Why?
Why This Is Important
Why is there an authoritarian ‘fact-checker’ patrolling the internet and censoring information? Sure, a lot of stories may be completely false and irresponsibly written, especially ones that don’t provide any sources for their claims, but a lot of legitimate information is also being censored. Should people not have the right to examine information and opinions that go against the grain and decide for themselves what is, and what isn’t? Are we not capable of this? Can the mainstream media make the minority feel like the majority and the majority feel like the minority?
I’ve emphasized in many of my articles how vaccine hesitancy continues to grow. That’s no big secret. This is occurring not only with much of the general population, but doctors and scientists as well.
Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference that:
The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider…
Many people are asking why doesn’t mainstream media or Bill Gates actually addresses the concerns that are being raised by scientists and doctors? Why is ridicule and terms like “conspiracy theory” always used instead?
What are the concerns? Vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.
There are several concers.
If you’d like to access more of articles that are properly sourced regarding vaccine concerns, there is a link to a few at the bottom of this article I recently published.
Big Politics: Every single year big politics, in my opinion, continues to be exposed as a system that’s no longer capable of dealing with and appropriately handling big issues our planet faces today. I often ask myself, does voting simply uphold a system that’s no longer capable of creating any meaningful change? Big politics is filled with an enormous amount of corruption, and many would say that corporations now dictate policy, not government.
When it comes to health policy, there are many conflicts of interests to be concerned about, scientists from within federal health regulatory agencies have been bringing awareness to this fact for many years. For example, few years ago more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out public statement detailing the influence corporations have within the CDC, how corrupt things are, how it happens in all departments how many high ranking people within the CDC condone this behaviour. They were referred to as the Spider Papers.
Award winning medical investigator Jeanne Lenzer also made this quite clear in a 2015 paper published in the British Medical Journal.
The CDC’s image as an independent watchdog over the public health has given it enormous prestige, and its recommendations are occasionally enforced by law. Despite the agency’s disclaimer, the CDC does receive millions of dollars in industry gifts and funding, both directly and indirectly, and several recent CDC actions and recommendations have raised questions about the science it cites, the clinical guidelines it promotes, and the money it is taking.
This is a huge problem, and it’s one that seems to plague all industries, not just the medical industry.
We are pitted against each other like never before these days, and it doesn’t seem that politics helps us find common ground. It’s about belittling and ridiculing every move an opponent makes, and does not in any way shape or for represent a system of people who are willing to pool their resources and work together for meaningful change. So why do we continue to be captured by it? Why do we even pay attention? How can we change things and take matters into our own hands? Why do we live the way we do?
Power has corrupted our political process, and decisions today are made for politicians, corporations and those who seem to control these entities in order to gain more power from and profit off of.
Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of today – Theodore Roosevelt
Honesty, morality, empathy, and an overall unawareness regarding the interconnectedness of life is severely lacking, and I do believe human beings are capable of creating a human experience where all life can thrive. We have the solutions, but many of them never see the light of day or receive any attention, so ask yourself, if we have the solutions, what’s preventing them from being implemented?
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
Trump Scorned For Saying “I Don’t Know” If A Satanic Pedohphile Ring Exists
- The Facts:
Donald Trump was recently featured on Thursday night NBC News in a discussion where he was asked a number of questions, including one about a "satanic pedophile ring."
- Reflect On:
Why are controversial topics that are hard to belief never really investigated or properly looked into? Why are they simply ridiculed and deemed a "conspiracy?"
Mainstream media has been used as a political weapon for quite some time now. With Operation Mockingbird becoming public, a decades old CIA campaign to infiltrate media in order to shape the perception of the masses, the idea that mainstream media was and is largely a brainwashing tool has become valid. Today, in my opinion, it’s become even more evident thanks to multiple award winning mainstream media journalists blowing the whistle, as well as documents that have been released via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) showing just how much influence not only big corporations have, but also the intelligence community has with mainstream media and shaping perception.
This is exactly what big politics is about, shaping people’s perception. Voting seems to uphold a system that’s no longer capable of making the best decisions for the people and our planet, but that’s just my opinion. Instead of seriously discussing and investigating important issues, big politics has become a disaster.
As we move through another presidential election, we see the same thing. The latest example comes from President Donald Trump’ recent interview on NBC news. The ‘questioner’ Savannah Guthrie brought up “Q Anon” and ridiculed Trump for simply stating that he knows nothing about it. He was also ridiculed when refusing to denounce a Democratic “satanic pedophile ring.” He didn’t say he believes it’s real, he simply stated that he knows nothing on the subject, that he is obviously against pedophilia and again, that he just doesn’t know about the subject.
Here we have mainstream media, again, completely ridiculing the idea of some sort of elite level pedophile cult, deeming it a “conspiracy theory” over and over again, using nothing but ridicule and also ridiculing anybody who may think that it’s actually a possibility.
We don’t need “Q anon” to see this, there is actually legitimate evidence behind this activity and credible sources can be used to relay that to the public. By using “Q anon” as a source one is almost doing a disservice to the movement of transparency, because it makes it very easy for another to simply label this claim as a conspiracy theory when no evidence is provided.
Let me ask you this, what if it were true that there was an elite level pedophile cult, or multiple similar type of cults that are in operation throughout the world? Imagine how the children being used would feel to learn that what they go through, or are possibly going through is perceived as completely fake by the masses? How can mainstream media ridicule and denounce something without really doing any proper investigation into the topic? How can they label something a conspiracy theory so easily simply based on the idea that it sounds ridiculous?
It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not true, but “condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.” Big media today is lacking big time, in my opinion, in their ability to explore subjects and conduct investigations as well as ask the right questions.
Is There Any Evidence? Obviously, there is plenty of evidence for pedophilia and child trafficking, nobody can really deny that and I doubt anybody ever would. There are countless examples to choose from, for example, the Pentagon. Not long ago, it was disclosed that 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.
Recently, Retired Army Maj. Gen. James Grazioplene has been given 20 years for continually sexually abusing his daughter from a young age. Grazioplene retired in 2005 after a career that included stints as a commander within the 82nd Airborne Division and senior staff positions at the Pentagon. He also became a vice president at the contractor DynCorp International but is no longer with the company.
DynCorp has also been implicated in trafficking children abroad. DynCorp receives nearly all of its income from doing work for the U.S. military and has been implicated in multiple sex trafficking scandals.
Another great example comes Cardinal George Pell, who a couple of years ago became the highest-ranking Vatican official to ever be convicted of child sexual abuse. Of course, he has now been freed from jail after Australia’s highest court overturned his conviction, but did you know that he himself established The Diocesan Commission Into Sexual Abuse? This is a common theme. The ones who we go to combat these problems may themselves involved.
A paper published in European Psychiatry titled “The cremation of care ritual: Burning of effigies or human sacrifice murder? The importance of differentiating complex trauma from schizophrenia in extreme abuse settings” by Dr. Rainer Kurz, explains, a chartered occupational psychologist (Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) at The University of Manchester. Master of Science (MSc) Industrial Psychology at The University of Hull) explains:
In the wake of institutional abuse enquiries and the ‘unbelievable’ child abuse perpetrated by celebrities like Jimmy Saville and Ian Watkins, a ‘new reality’ is setting in that child abuse is pervasive and knows no limits. Reports of elaborate rituals with ‘mock’ human sacrifices at the highly secretive annual ‘Bohemian Grove’ summer festival point towards a pervasive interest in the occult in high society. Mental health professionals have a ‘duty of care’ towards their service users. Unless clear and irrefutable counter-evidence is available it is inappropriate to claim that disclosures of extreme abuse and/or human sacrifice rituals are ‘delusions’ and indicative of Schizophrenia.
It goes on to provide another example of this type of activity, this time among high ranking “establishment” members:
Research eventually led to the Franklin scandal that broke in 1989 when hundreds of children were apparently flown around the US to be abused by high ranking ‘Establishment’ members. Former state senator John W DeCamp, cited as one of the most effective legislators in Nebraska history, is today attorney for two of the abuse victims. A 15 year old girl disclosed that she had been abused since the age of 9 and was exposed since the age of 9 and was exposed to ‘ritual murder’ of a new born girl, a small boy (who was subsequently fried and eaten) and three others.
The point I am making is that the examples above are not even the tip of the iceberg when it comes to this type of activity within places of high power. There was more awareness created about this and about the sex trafficking and abuse of children for those who were inspired to dig deep into the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell saga.
Multiple sources claim Maxwell and Epstein had a blackmail operation, and they they had/have evidence of politicians sexually abusing children.
To read more examples, you can refer to THIS article I wrote that dives in a bit deeper and provides more examples.
Then there are multiple examples, as the paper above indicates, of potential victims who have come forth. We’ve interviewed one. Her name is Anneke Lucas, who is now 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.
You can access the full interview and start your free trial 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.
All systems on our planet seem to be plagued with corruption. The consciousness of our whole system seems to be based on greed, ego, fear, and competition instead of cooperation. Is it possible, and are human beings capable of creating an experience where everybody can thrive?
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
These 15 Drawings Are An Incredible Reflection Of What’s ‘Wrong’ With Society
For centuries art has been used as a tool for telling the human story. What we look like, what we...
16000 Doctors & Scientists Sign Declaration Strongly Opposing a 2nd COVID Lockdown
What Happened: Approximately 16,000 doctors have come together opposing lockdown measures in various countries, as well as the possibility of a...