Connect with us


Groundbreaking Study Shows Shielding EMF Improves Autoimmune Disease




This article was written By Sayer Ji, Founder of, along with Ali Le Vere. For more news from them, you can sign up for their newsletter here

advertisement - learn more

Concerns about electromagnetic fields (EMF) are branded pseudoscientific conspiracy theories and relegated to the realm of tin-hat wearing quackery. However, a recent publication in the peer-reviewed journal Immunologic Research entitled “Electrosmog and Autoimmune Disease,” sheds new light on the validity of concerns about this so-called electrosmog with which we are constantly inundated.

--> Practice Is Everything: Want to become an effective changemaker? Join CETV and get access to exclusive conversations, courses, and original shows that empower you to embody the changemaker this world needs. Click here to learn more!

Although we encounter natural microwave electromagnetic radiation in the form of cosmic radiation from outer space, the aurora borealis, and thunderstorms, the vast majority of electrosmog that we encounter is largely manmade (1). These atmospheric phenomena, however, emit electromagnetic radiation at lower radio frequencies and are negligibly weak in comparison to manmade sources, which have increased exponentially due to the emergence of television, cellular phone technologies, and WiFI, all of which utilize microwave frequency bands (1).

According to researchers Marshall and Heil (2017), for instance, “The recent release of WiGig and anti-collision vehicle radars in the 60 GHz region embody a 1000-fold increase in frequency, and photon energy, over the exposures mankind experienced up until the 1950s” (1).

How Electrosmog Interfaces with the Bioelectromagnetic Body

It is intuitive that electrosmog would interact with human biology, since human physiology operates in part via electromagnetic fields. Apart from physical information superhighways such as the blood, nervous, and lymphatic systems, the body uses electromagnetic forms of energy transmission and communication which are several orders of magnitude faster than chemical diffusion (2).

advertisement - learn more

Called biophotonic emission (BPE), these quanta of electromagnetic energy have a visibility one thousand times lower than the sensitivity of our naked eye and are quintessential to cellular metabolism and to the powering of our energy-intensive nervous and immune systems (3). Harbored within our genetic material, biophotonsserve as a mode of instantaneous communication from one body part to another and to the extraneous world (4) and their emission is influenced by our global state of health (5). Research even suggests that mental intention and the fabric of our consciousnessis mediated by these quantum of light, which operate as highly coherent frequencies and generate an ordered flux of photons (4).

Thus, both the stuff of consciousness and the functioning of our cellular energetics is premised upon electromagnetism, which may be susceptible to distortion by electrosmog. Curtis and Hurtak describe the electromagnetic body as both “an entire body distinct from the chemical body that interpenetrates it” and “a light circulatory system operating on an energetic level in a markedly different manner from that of its molecular counterparts” (2). That there is “an incredible amount of activity at levels of magnification or scale that span more than two-thirds of the 73 known octaves of the electromagnetic spectrum” (6) in the human body is emblematic of our vulnerability to electromagnetic disturbances.

Potential Immune Disturbances due to Electrosmog Exposure

Although current public health laws are predicated on effects of short-term exposure, research suggests that dosage and repetitive exposures likely influence health risk of electrosmog (7). Two thirds of studies examined report ecological effects of electromagnetic radiation, and researchers state that, “current evidence indicates that chronic exposure to electromagnetic radiation, at levels that are found in the environment, may particularly affect the immune, nervous, cardiovascular and reproductive systems” (7).

Although the conventional mantra is that no harm is incurred from low-energy radio waves, low-level exposures to ionizing radiation are known to manifest profound effects upon human physiology (1). Ionizing radiation exposure, which occurs secondary to nuclear energy accidents, for example, produces immunosuppression, so much so that some scientists have even suggested radon exposure as a therapeutic treatment for rheumatoid arthritis due to its inhibition of inflammatory immune messengers such as the adipokine visfatin (8).

There is, however, often a substantial lag time between exposure and the materialization of symptomatology (1). The detriment to immune defense “often does not become apparent until the body catastrophically fails to overcome an acute challenge” (1). In addition, new science is overturning the previous assumption that immunosuppressive effects are exclusive to ionizing radiation exposure.

A research group headed by Lushinov, for example, found that repeated exposures to low-level non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation impaired the immune response in mice, negatively influencing immunogenesis, or the ability of the immune response to respond to an immune-provocating antigenic substance (9). The exposure to low-intensity electromagnetic radiation negatively influenced thymic and splenic cellularity, causing a statistically significant decrease in the immune cells generated by these lymphoid organs (9). The immunocompetence of the Aegean wall lizard was also significantly reduced upon daily exposure to radiofrequency resembling the amount of electrosmog emitted from cordless phones (10).

Moreover, Gapeev and colleagues (2006) elucidated that exposure to low-intensity non-ionizing electromagnetic waves exerted equivalent immunosuppressive effects to a single dose of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac (11). In another experiment, exposure to low-intensity electromagnetic radiation reduce the footpad edema and local hyperthermia, also known as swelling and heat, that accompanied injection of zymosan, an agent that induces acute inflammation (12). This constitutes evidence that electrosmog exposure may impair the normal immune response to potential threats.

Human Proteins are Responsive to Electromagnetic Waves

Biomolecules, which are constantly undergoing molecular collisions and interacting on the scale of picoseconds, are subject to forces exerted by incident electromagnetic fields (1). According to researchers Marshall and Heil, “It seems likely that signals a million times lower than those currently being used in research may be sufficient to elicit a tangible change in human biology” (1).

Induction of Stress Proteins

Electrosmog at both an extremely low-frequency (ELF) or in the radio frequency (RF) range has been found to stimulate a cellular stress response, leading to expression of stress response genes including heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) (13). As a consequence, there is increased production of highly conserved stress proteins, which serve as chaperones by refolding and repairing damaged proteins (13). Heat shock proteins have likewise been observed to up-regulate an immune response, “transferring antigenic peptides to the class I and class II molecules of the major histocompatibility complexes” as well as increasing activity of a class of immune cells which perpetuate an immune reaction, such as macrophages and dendritic cells (14).

Aberrant Anti-Microbial Response

In addition, the function of another human protein, lysozyme, has been shown to be disrupted by electromagnetic radiation (15). Also called muramidase, lysozyme is an antimicrobial enzyme liberated from cytoplasmic granules of immune cells such as granulocytes and macrophages (16). Contained in human secretions such as mucus, tears, saliva, and breast milk, this bacteriolytic element degrades glycosidic bonds in peptidoglycan, a molecule prominent in the cell walls of gram-positive bacteria (17).

Lysozyme is a major contributor to bactericidal activity, facilitating elimination of inhaled airborne microorganisms to prevent their colonization in the respiratory passages, which would interfere with sterile gas exchange (17). Studies have indicated that depletion of lysozyme reduces bacteria-killing ability of human airway sections by approximately fifty percent (18). Animal studies also highlight how lysozyme is especially important in host pulmonary defense, since, “Increased concentration of lysozyme in the airspaces of transgenic mice enhanced bacterial killing whereas lysozyme deficiency resulted in increased bacterial burden and morbidity” (17).

Turton and colleagues (2014) published a study in Nature Communications showing that non-ionizing terahertz electromagnetic radiation altered the binding of lysolyme to its ligand, triacetylchitotriose, which in turn would affect the biological function of lysozyme (15). Although this represents a much higher frequency than normal background electrosmog, the implications are that human immune defenses against pathogen invasion and virulence may be adversely affected due to repeated and cumulative exposures to electrosmog (15).

Derangements in Vitamin D Pathways

Research shows that Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) pathways are susceptible to interference by electrosmog (1). Functionality of the vitamin D receptor, a transcription factor that translocates to the nucleus and influences gene expression when bound to vitamin D, is fundamental for immunomodulation. The cascade of effects that occur upon vitamin D binding to its receptor reinforce gut barrier integrity, establish oral tolerance, and suppress autoimmune responses by enabling the immune system to differentiate self from non-self.

According to researchers, the shape of the VDR molecule transforms with electrosmog exposure within the frequency range of WiFi routers: “Groups of hundreds of atoms which form the helical “backbone” of the VDR…shift together at the lower frequencies present in electrosmog” (1). Sophisticated molecular dynamics software, which illustrates the lock-and-key interaction between the vitamin D receptor and its native ligand, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin-D (1,25-D), have shown that so-called Lorentz forces act upon charged oxygen atoms in carboxyl groups of the vitamin D receptor (1). These Lorentz forces may either promote or hinder activation of the vitamin D receptor, depending on both the frequency of the “molecular interactions, and that of the impinging electromagnetic waves” (1).

Electrosmog Affects Human Brain Activity and Behavior

As far back as 1987, Bise published a pilot study wherein electrosmog exposure at levels dramatically lower than that observed in urban areas elicited transient changes in human brain waves and behavior (19). He reports, “Constructive and destructive interference patterns from standing waves within the skull possibly interact with the bioelectric generators in the brain, since electroencephalogram wave amplitudes and frequencies increased or decreased respectively at different radio wavelengths” (19).

What’s more, the literature reveals that neuroimaging and electroencephalography studies demonstrate enhanced cortical excitability with EMF exposure, particularly in the front-temporal regions, which is paradoxically correlated with faster reaction times, but may also interfere with sleep (20).

Alarmingly, the patterns observed in human electroencephalograms (EEG) was altered by wave amplitudes as low as -100 dBm (19). Bise was able to induce an immediate frontal headache at a level of -60 dBm (19). Unfortunately, barring use of a Faraday cage, these experiments are impossible to replicate since electrosmog background levels in cities are now 100,000 times stronger at -50 dBm (19).

Silver-Threaded EMF-Blocking Caps Improve Autoimmune Disease

In a recent case series, patients wore shielding clothing and tenting consisting of silver-coated polyester threads interspersed with bamboo fibers that were partially capable of blocking penetration of microwave electrosmog (1). Due to anecdotal testimonies of improvement, researchers decided to distribute standardized garments that would shield the brain and brain stem in order to systematically analyze the results (1).

In this study, 64 patients with assorted autoimmune diagnoses such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)rheumatoid arthritis (RA)multiple sclerosis (MS)Sjogren’s syndrome, and celiac disease, many of whom were disabled and house-bound, were recruited (1). Subjects wore the silver-threaded cap for four hours at night and for four hours during the day, and patient-reported outcomes were collected (1). Impressively, 90% of patients indicated a “definite” or “strong” change in their symptomatology, which is at variance with the 3% of the population that is estimated to be sensitive to electrosmog (1).

Some researchers have attributed this so-called electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) or idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI) to the nocebo effect. However, Dieudonné explores the possibility of a psychosomatic mechanism in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, and concludes, “Overall, symptoms appear before subjects start questioning effects of EMF on their health, which is not consistent with the hypothesis that IEI-EMF originates from nocebo responses to perceived EMF” (21).

In this groundbreaking study, it is also telling that the researchers found the therapeutic efficacy of the silver-coated caps to be so theoretically plausible that they decided the idea of using a control group was unethical. These authors concluded that autoimmune patients exhibit a pronounced susceptibility to electrosmog at levels normally encountered in home and occupational environments, and hypothesized that the exposure may be contributing to their disease etiology (1).

Electrosmog and Mitochondrial Dysfunction

Because electric fields result from voltage differences, whereas magnetic fields from the flow of electric current, EMFs may be capable of disrupting the finely orchestrated proton gradient and flow of electrons within the inner mitochondrial membrane upon which the process of oxidative phosphorylation is contingent (13). Oxygen-dependent aerobic respiration, which relies upon oxidative phosphorylation, is the process that drives production of the cellular energy currency adenosine triphosphate (ATP) in our cellular energy factories, the mitochondria.

These organelles are fundamental to every energy-dependent process in the body but especially quintessential for the energy-demanding nervous system. Thus, EMF-mediated changes in mitochondrial function may affect cognition and even perpetuate development of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s in which mitochondrial dysfunction has been demonstrated. In fact, EMF-induced disruption of mitochondria may play a role in many diseases in which mitochondrial collapse is implicated, including psychiatric disordersautoimmune diseasesmigraine headachesataxiastrokediabetes, heart disease, neuropathic pain, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and liver disease (22, 23).

It has also been proposed that EMFs can interact directly with electrons in DNA, so it is not a stretch that EMFs could interact with the electron transport chain (ETC) in mitochondria (24). This concept is supported by a study where pulsed electromagnetic radiation (EMR) resulted in alterations in the ETC, leading to adverse metabolic changes, cellular hypoxia, and increased generation of oxidative stress inducing free radicals such as the superoxide anion (25).

Electrosmog and Cancer

Although the undoubtedly industry-influenced mainstream consensus is that EMFs do not play a role in the development of childhood cancers, “Kheifets and Shimkhada [2005] stated that epidemiologic studies of ELF-EMFs and childhood leukemia are difficult to design, conduct, and interpret due to the fact that EMFs are imperceptible, ubiquitous, have multiple sources, and can vary greatly over time and short distances” (13). Also, in an animal study, a correlation between ELF-EMF radiation and development of malignant tumors, specifically gliomas and schwannomas of the heart, was discovered (26).

These findings led the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to revise their criteria for EMF exposure in children, and include recommendations such as using hands-free and wired headsets, holding the phone away from the head, limiting television watching, and texting when possible (13). Currently, a 14-country study called MOBI-Kids is being conducted to examine the carcinogenic effects of RF-EMFs from mobile telephones on the central nervous system in children and adolescents (27).

Further upstream, electrosmog has also been shown to induce DNA strand breakages, such that “Any extensive damage or changes to DNA that need repair may increase the risk of developing cancerous cells” (13). Studies also suggest that electrosmog causes genome-wide alterations in methylation (28), or the attachment of one-carbon tags to DNA sequences which modulate gene expression, affecting everything from neurotransmitter production to detoxification.

Mitigating Electrosmog Exposure

Although more data is needed, the science warrants exercising the precautionary principle and taking simple steps to minimize EMF exposure. To remediate electrosmog, renowned doctor Dietrich Klinghardt recommends removing cordless phones from the house, turning off WiFi, switching off fuses at night, considering an EMF-reducing sleep sanctuary or canopy, and grounding.

Moreover, fundamental to neutralizing the toxic effects of electrosmog is spending time in nature and grounding in order to scavenge free radicals and engender antioxidant effects. Direct contact with the surface of the earth precipitates an influx of electrons, which are absorbed and distributed throughout the ground substance of extracellular tissue as well as intracellular biopolymers, neutralizing oxidative stress in the body (29).

Studies have elucidated that grounding decreases the voltage imposed on the body by a factor of seventy upon exposure to alternating current (AC) electric potential (30). This transfer of electrons that occurs as a result of grounding, therefore, can minimize electrosmog-induced derangements in the electrical activities of our bodies, which is meaningful since researchers state that, “There is no question that the body reacts to the presence of environmental electric fields” (30).


1. Marshall, T.G., & Heil, T.J.R. (2017). Electrosmog and autoimmune disease. Immunology Research.

2. Curtis, B.D., & Hurtak, J.J. (2004). Consciousness and quantum information processing: Uncovering the foundation for a medicine of light. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 10(1), 27-39.

3. Schwabl, Herbert, and Herbert Klima. “Spontaneous Ultraweak Photon Emission from Biological Systems and the Endogenous Light Field.” Forschende Komplementärmedizin / Research in Complementary Medicine 12, no. 2 (2005): 84-89. doi:10.1159/000083960.

4. Bonilla, E. (2008). [Evidence about the power of intention] [Article in Spanish]. Investigación Clínica 49, 4, 595-615.

5. Hossu, M., & Rupert, R. (2006). Quantum Events of Biophoton Emission Associated with Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies: A Descriptive Pilot Study. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 12(2),119-124. doi:10.1089/acm.2006.12.119.

6. Rosch, P.J. (2014). Bioelectromagnetic and Subtle Energy Medicine. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

7. Balmori, A. (2014). Electrosmog and species conservation. Science of the Total Environment, 496, 314-316.

8. Shreder, K. et al. (2016). Low-dose ionising radiation inhibits adipokine induced inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Annals of Rheumatological Disease, 75, A64. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209124.151.

9. Lushnikov, K.V. et al. (2001). Effect of extremely high frequency electromagnetic radiation of low intensity on parameters of humoral immunity in healthy mice. Biofizika, 46, 753–760.

10. Mina, D. et al. (2016). Immune responses of a wall lizard to whole-body exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 92,162–168. doi: 10.3109/09553002.2016.1135262.

11. Gapeev, A.B. et al. (2006). Pharmacological analysis of anti-inflammatory effects of low-intensity extremely high-frequency electromagnetic radiation. Biofizika, 51, 1055–1068.

12. Gapeyev, A.B., Mikhailik, E.N., & Chemeris, N.K. (2008). Anti-inflammatory effects of low-intensity extremely high-frequency electromagnetic radiation: frequency and power dependence. Bioelectromagnetics, 29(3), 197-206.

13. Miah, T., & Kamat, D. (2017). Current understanding of the health effects of electromagnetic fields. Pediatric Annals, 46(4), e172-e174. doi: 10.3928/19382359-20170316-01.

14. Li, Z., & Srivastava, P. (2004). Heat-shock proteins. Current Protocols in Immunology, Appendix 1, Appendix 1 T.

15. Turton, D.A. et al. (2014). Terahertz underdamped vibrational motion governs protein-ligand binding in solution. Nature Communications, 5, 3999. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4999

16. Afzal Mir, M. (1977). Lysozyme: a brief review. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 53, 257-259.

17. Nash, J.A. et al. (2006). The peptidoglycan-degrading property of lysozyme is not required for bactericidal activity in vivo. Journal of Immunology, 177(1), 519-526.

18. Dajani, R. et al. (2005). Lysozyme secretion by submucosal glands protects the airway from bacterial infection. American Journal of Respiratory and Cellular Molecular Biology, 32, 548-552.

19. Bise, W. (1978). Low power radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram and behavior. Physiological Chemistry and Physics, 10(5), 387-398.

20. Zhang, J., Sumich, A., & Wang, G.Y., (2017). Acute effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field emitted by mobile phone on brain function. Bioelectromagnetics, 38(5), 329-338. doi: 10.1002/bem.22052.

21. Dieudonné, M. (2016). Does electromagnetic hypersensitivity originate from nocebo responses? Indications from a qualitative study. Bioelectromagnetics, 37(1), 14-24.

22. Neustadt, J., & Pieczenik, S.R. (2008). Medication-induced mitochondrial damage and disease. Molecular Nutrition and Food Research, 52, 780-788.

23. Pieczenik, S.R., & Neustadt, J. (2007). Mitochondrial dysfunction and molecular pathways of disease. Experimental and Molecular Pathology, 83, 84-92.

24. Blank, M.M., & Goodman, R. (2009). Electromagnetic fields stress living cells. Pathophysiology, 16(2–3), 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.006

25. Burlaka, A., Selyuk, M., Gafurov, M., Lukin, S., Potaskalova, V., & Sidorik, E. (2014). Changes in mitochondrial functioning with electromagnetic radiation of ultra high frequency as revealed by electron paramagnetic resonance methods. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 90(5), 357-362.

26. National Toxicology Program, Public Health Services, National Institutes of Health, & US Department of Health and Human Services. (2004). NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of Elmiron (Cas No. 37319–17-8) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (Gavage Studies). National Toxicology Program Technical Report Series, 512, 7–289.

27. Sadetzki, S.S., Langer, C.E., & Bruchim, R. (2014). The MOBI-Kids study protocol: challenges in assessing childhood and adolescent exposure to electromagnetic fields from wireless telecommunication technologies and possible association with brain tumor risk. Frontiers in Public Health, 2, 124. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2014.00124

28. Liu, Y. et al. (2015). Effect of 50 Hz Extremely Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields on the DNA Methylation and DNA Methyltransferases in Mouse Spermatocyte-Derived Cell Line GC-2. BioMed Research International.

29. Oschman, J.L. (2009). Charge transfer in the living matrix. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapy, 13(3), 215-218.

30. Chevalier, G. et al. (2012). Review article: Earthing: Health Implications of Reconnecting the Human Body to the Earth’s Surface Electrons. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 1-8.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

advertisement - learn more


COVID-19 Has A 99.95% Survival Rate For People Under 70 – Stanford Professor of Medicine




In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine recently shared that the survival rate for people under 70 years of age is about 99.95 percent. He also said that COVID is less dangerous than the flu for children.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is there such a large divide between so many doctors and scientists with regards to the response to the pandemic? Why is one side constantly ridiculed and censored by Big Tech companies? Should governments have the authority to mandate lockdowns?

What Happened: Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine in California recently appeared on a JAMA (The Journal of the American Medical Association) Network conversation alongside Mark Lipsitch, DPhil and Dr. Howard Bauchner, who interviews leading researchers and thinkers in health care about their JAMA articles.

During the conversation, Dr. Bhattacharya said that the survival rate from COVID-19, based on approximately 50 studies that’ve been published providing seroprevalence data, for people over 70 years of age is 95 percent. For people under the age of 70, the survival rate of COVID-19 is 99.95 percent. He went on to state that the flu is more dangerous than COVID-19 for children, and that we’ve (America) had more flu deaths in children this year than COVID deaths.

Obviously, his comments are open to interpretation and similar comments floating around the internet have been refuted by Facebook ‘fact-checkers.’

Bhattacharya has cited this study, published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization to come to his conclusion, along with, as mentioned above, many more.

These facts and many others are what inspired Bhattacharya, along with Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, and Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology to create The Great Barrington Declaration.

The declaration strongly opposes lockdown measures that are being and have been put in place by various governments around the globe. The declaration has an impressive list of co-signers from renowned doctors and professors in the field from around the world, and now has nearly 50,000 signatures from doctors and scientists. The declaration also has approximately 660,000 signatures from concerned citizens.

The Declaration states,

The Declaration was written from a global public health and humanitarian perspective, with special concerns about how the current COVID-19 strategies are forcing our children, the working class and the poor to carry the heaviest burden.  The response to the pandemic in many countries around the world, focused on lockdowns, contact tracing and isolation, imposes enormous unnecessary health costs on people. In the long run, it will lead to higher COVID and non-COVID mortality than the focused protection plan we call for in the Declaration.

The declaration also states that as herd immunity builds, the risk of infection to all, including the most vulnerable, falls. Bhattacharya has explained that he and his colleagues don’t see herd immunity as a strategy but as a simple “biological fact,” adding, “It will eventually happen. That’s how epidemics end. So, the only question is how you get there with the least amount of human misery, death, and harm.” The best way, he said, is to “acknowledge who actually is in danger and devote enormous creativity, resources, and energy to protect them.”

The Declaration recommends implementing measures that protect the vulnerable without locking down the entire population, shutting down businesses and limiting people’s access to health-care.

Stefan Baral, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, said he supported adaptive interventions to protect at-risk people rather than broad lockdowns of entire populations. He said his mother lives in Sweden and “there’s nowhere else I would have wanted my mom to be. I love my mom and I feel she’s safe there.”

A report published in the British Medical Journal  titled Covid-19: “Staggering number” of extra deaths in community is not explained by covid-19″  has suggested that quarantine measures in the United Kingdom as a result of the new coronavirus may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the months of April and May . According to the data, Covid-19 only accounts for 10,000 of the 30,000 excess deaths that have been recorded in senior care facilities during the height of the pandemic. The article suggests and also quotes British Health officials stating that these unexplained deaths may have occurred because Quarantine measures have prevented seniors from accessing the health care that they need.

Bhattacharya has also cited an estimate from the United Nations World Food Program indicating that pandemic lockdowns causing breaks in the food chain are expected to push 135 million people into severe hunger and starvation by the end of this year.

These are just a few  many examples and concerns the declaration is referring to.

Another perspective on these survival rates? According to  Professor Robyn Lucas, head of the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health at the Australian National University,

Survival rates and the percentage of the population who have not died are two very different numbers, “They are using the whole population, rather than the number who have diagnosed infection. So this is not really ‘survival’ – to survive a disease you have to have the disease in the first place,” Prof Lucas told AAP FactCheck in an email. (source)

Why This Is Important: Never before have we seen so many renowned doctors, scientists, and experts in the field oppose the recommendations and actions taken by the World Health Organization and multiple governments to combat a health crises. The fact that there is a great divide among the scientific and medical community makes one ponder how governments can have the mandatory authority to lockdown our planet when there isn’t really a scientific consensus to do so.

What’s also quite concerning is the fact that big tech companies, like Facebook, have been actively censoring and flagging information and opinions that oppose those of the WHO and government health authorities. Unpopular opinions and recommendations aren’t really given any attention by mainstream media either, and they’re often ridiculed by them. The Great Barrington Declaration is a great example.

Because of all the discrepancy, it wouldn’t be a bad idea for governments to simply present the science and make strong recommendations and leave the citizenry to do what they’d like to do. To each is own, that’s just my opinion. I believe we are more than capable enough, and intelligent enough to determine the right course of action for ourselves. A lot of people have lost trust in their government and this is because actions taken by them have simply called into question whether or not they make decisions with humanities best interests at heart.

Are they really executing the will of the people?

When it comes to COVID-19, we’ve seen that this may not be the case. Kamran Abbas is a doctor, executive editor of the British Medical Journal, and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. He has published an article about COVID-19, the suppression of science and the politicization of medicine in the British Medical Journal.

It it, he states the following:

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.

When we allow governments and give them the power to use force when so many people disagree with their recommendations, it makes one question just how much power do thee entities have? And why? Why do we choose to be governed in such a way? Why aren’t we free to make our own decisions?

More important than facts is our ability to get along with one another and see from the perspective of another. We must understand why those who disagree with us feel the way they do, and they must try to understand us. Constantly arguing and disagreeing with each other and always being in a state of constant separation doesn’t solve anything. Now more than ever we need to respect one another and try see from a perspective that’s not our own. Can’t we find some middle ground and all get along? It’s ok to ask questions and challenge our governments, in fact, it should be encouraged.

Many of us are feeling the loss of freedoms, and even with new measures like that which is presented in this article, we are now seeing how our reality may become limited should we choose not to participate in certain measures we don’t agree with. The trouble we seem to be having is determining how to communicate about COVID, the fears we have around it, and how to come together as a community to ‘draw a line’ as to where we may be taking things too far.

Can we truly accept that controlling everyone’s lives and what they can and can’t do is the best thing to do with an extremely low mortality virus? Does this indicate the level of fear we have towards life? The issues with our general health? If the worry is straining health care systems, are we seeing the limitations of how our rigid social infrastructures can’t be flexible and maybe it’s time to look at a new way of living within society? Perhaps a new way built on a completely different worldview?

No, I’m not talking about no Great Reset here, I’m talking about something much deeper. I’m talking about re-examining the deep questions of who we are, why we are here and what type of future we truly want to create. Questions that we may have forgotten about as we have gone on chasing what our current worldview and system dangles in front of us. Perhaps it’s time to take a breath and see the crisis’ in front of us as a call to ask some much deeper questions than common conversation invites us to ask.

A great place to start with these questions, and something I deeply urge people to consider doing, is doing something like a media/news fast that includes important questions and reflections designed to re-imagine and examine your worldview. I have just released a new short course on CETV called How To Do An Effective Media Detox. Check out CETV and this course as a great place to start. – Joe Martino

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading


New Research Adds Evidence That Weed Killer Glyphosate Disrupts Hormones




New research is adding worrisome evidence to concerns that the widely used weed killing chemical glyphosate may have the potential to interfere with human hormones.

In a paper published in the journal Chemosphere titled Glyphosate and the key characteristics of an endocrine disruptor: A review, a trio of scientists concluded that glyphosate appears to have eight out of ten key characteristics associated with endocrine disrupting chemicals . The authors cautioned, however, that prospective cohort studies are still needed to more clearly understand the impacts of glyphosate on the human endocrine system.

The authors, Juan Munoz, Tammy Bleak and Gloria Calaf, each affiliated with the University of Tarapacá in Chile, said their paper is the first review to consolidate the mechanistic evidence on glyphosate as an endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC).

Some of the evidence suggests that Roundup, Monsanto’s well-known glyphosate-based herbicide, can alter the biosynthesis of the sexual hormones, according to the researchers.

EDCs may mimic or interfere with the body’s hormones and are linked with developmental and reproductive problems as well as brain and immune system dysfunction.

The new paper follows publication earlier this year of an assortment of animal studies that indicated glyphosate exposures impact reproductive organs and threaten fertility.

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide, sold in 140 countries. Introduced commercially in 1974 by Monsanto Co, the chemical is the active ingredient in popular products such as Roundup and hundreds of other weed killers used by consumers, municipalities, utilities, farmers, golf course operators, and others around the world.

Dana Barr, a professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health, said the evidence “tends to overwhelmingly indicate that glyphosate has endocrine disrupting properties.”

“It’s not necessarily unexpected since glyphosate has some structural similarities with many other endocrine disrupting pesticides; however, it is more concerning because glyphosate use far surpasses other pesticides,” said Barr, who directs a program within a National Institutes of Health-funded human exposure research center housed at Emory. “Glyphosate is used on so many crops and in so many residential applications such that aggregate and cumulative exposures can be considerable.”

Phil Landrigan, director of the Global Observatory on Pollution and Health, and a professor of biology
at Boston College, said the review pulled together “strong evidence” that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor.

“The report is consistent with a larger body of literature indicating that glyphosate has a wide range of adverse health effects – findings that overturn Monsanto’s long-standing portrayal of glyphosate as a benign chemical with no negative impacts on human health,” said Landrigan.

EDCs have been a subject of concern since the 1990s after a series of publications suggested that some chemicals commonly used in pesticides, industrial solvents, plastics, detergents, and other substances could have the capacity to disrupt connections between hormones and their receptors.

Scientists generally recognized ten functional properties of agents that alter hormone action, referring to these as ten “key characteristics” of endocrine-disruptors. The ten characteristics are as follows:

EDC’s can:

  • Alter hormone distribution of circulating levels of hormones
  • Induce alterations in hormone metabolism or clearance
  • Alter the fate of hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone receptor expression
  • Antagonize hormone receptors
  • Interact with or activate hormone receptors
  • Alter signal transduction in hormone-responsive cells
  • Induce epigenetic modifications in hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone synthesis
  • Alter hormone transport across cell membranes

The authors of the new paper said a review of the mechanistic data showed that glyphosate met all of the key characteristics with the exception of two:  “Regarding glyphosate, there is no evidence associated with the antagonistic capacity of hormonal receptors,” they said. As well, “there is no evidence of its impact on hormonal metabolism or clearance,” according to the authors.

Research over the last few decades has largely focused on links found between glyphosate and cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL.) In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

More than 100,000 people have sued Monsanto in the United States alleging exposure to the company’s glyphosate-based herbicides caused them or their loved ones to develop NHL.

The plaintiffs in the nationwide litigation also claim Monsanto has long sought to hide the risks of its herbicides. Monsanto lost three out of three trials and its German owner Bayer AG has spent the last year and a half trying to settle the litigation out of court.

The authors of the new paper took note of the ubiquitous nature of glyphosate, saying “massive use” of the chemical has “led to a wide environmental diffusion,” including rising exposures tied to human consumption of the weed killer through food.

The researchers said that though regulators say the levels of glyphosate residue commonly found in foods are low enough to be safe, they “cannot rule out” a “potential risk” to people consuming foods containing contaminated with the chemical,  particularly grains and other plant-based foods, which often have higher levels than milk, meat or fish products.

U.S. government documents show glyphosate residues have been detected in a range of foods, including organic honey, and granola and crackers.

Canadian government researchers have also reported glyphosate residues in foods. One report issued in 2019 by scientists from Canada’s Agri-Food Laboratories at the Alberta Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry found glyphosate in 197 of 200 samples of honey they examined.

Despite the concerns about glyphosate impacts on human health, including through dietary exposure, U.S. regulators have steadfastly defended the safety of the chemical. The Environmental Protection Agency maintains that it has not found any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate.”

Written by Carey Gillam, research director of U.S. Right to Know, where it was originally posted. 

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Positive Association Found Amongst COVID Deaths & Flu Shot Rates Worldwide In Elderly




In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A recently published paper has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

  • Reflect On:

    Why does vaccine hesitancy continue to grow worldwide? What's going on? What information/factors are contributing to this hesitancy?

What Happened: A recently published study in PeerJ  by Christian Wehenkel, a Professor at Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango in Mexico, has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

According to the study, “The results showed a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and IVR (influenza vaccination rate) of people ≥65 years-old. There is a significant increase in COVID-19 deaths from eastern to western regions in the world. Further exploration is needed to explain these findings, and additional work on this line of research may lead to prevention of deaths associated with COVID-19.”

To determine this association, data sets from 39 countries with more than half a million people were analyzed.

The study was published on October 1st, and two weeks later a note from the publisher appeared atop the paper emphasizing that correlation does not equal causation, and that this paper “should not be taken to suggest that receiving the influenza vaccination results in an increased risk of death for an individual with COVID-19 as there may be confounding factors at play.”

The paper provides evidence from others which have recently been published that ponder if the flu shot could increase ones chance of contracting and dying from COVID-19.

For example, this study published in April of 2020, reported a negative correlation between influenza vaccination rates (IVRs) and COVID-19 related mortality and morbidity. Marín-Hernández, Schwartz & Nixon (2020) also showed epidemiological evidence of an association between higher influenza vaccine uptake by elderly people and lower percentage of COVID-19 deaths in Italy, which directly contradicts the author’s own findings and suggests that the flu shot may help prevent COVID-19 related deaths.

He goes on to mention another study:

In a study analyzing 92,664 clinically and molecularly confirmed COVID-19 cases in Brazil, Fink et al. (2020) reported that patients who received a recent flu vaccine experienced on average 17% lower odds of death. Moreover, Pawlowski et al. (2020) analyzed the immunization records of 137,037 individuals who tested positive in a SARS-CoV-2 PCR. They found that polio, Hemophilus influenzae type-B, measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13), geriatric flu, and hepatitis A/hepatitis B (HepA-HepB) vaccines, which had been administered in the past 1, 2, and 5 years, were associated with decreased SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.

So, its important to mention that correlations between the flu vaccine have also found that it may decrease ones chance of deaths from COVID-19.

But are there studies that have shown an increased chance of death or contracting other respiratory viruses as a result of getting the flu shot? Yes.

That’s also discussed in the paper. For example, he mentions a paper published in 2018:

In a study with 6,120 subjects, Wolff (2020) reported that influenza vaccination was significantly associated with a higher risk of some other respiratory diseases, due to virus interference. In a specific examination of non-influenza viruses, the odds of coronavirus infection (but not the COVID-19 virus) in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher, when compared to unvaccinated individuals (odds ratio = 1.36).

The study above found the flu shot to increase the risk of other coronaviruses among those who had been vaccinated for influenza by 36 percent. The study was conducted prior to COVID-19, so it’s not included and only applies to pre-existing coronaviruses. The study also found an even higher chance of contracting human metapneumovirus amongst those who had received the flu shot.

Below are some more studies regarding the flu shot and viral infections that hint to the same idea.

  • 2018 CDC study (Rikin et al 2018) found that flu shots increase the risk of non-flu acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs), including coronavirus, in children.
  • A 2011 Australian study (Kelly et al 2011) found that flu shots doubled the risk for non-flu viral lung infections.
  • 2012 Hong Kong study (Cowling et al 2012) found that flu shots increase the risk for non-flu respiratory infections by 4.4 times.
  • 2017 study (Mawson et al 2017) found vaccinated children were 5.9 times more likely to suffer pneumonia than their unvaccinated peers.

Why This Is Important: We live in an age where vaccinations are heavily marketed. We’ve seen this with the flu shot time and time again and we are also living in an age where a push for more mandated vaccines seems to be growing.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal) and also an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. He published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

This is a touchy subject that dives into medical ethics and the connections that big pharmaceutical companies have with our federal health regulatory agencies and health associations. Vaccines are a multi billion dollar industry.

At a recent World Health Organization conference on vaccine safety, it was expressed that vaccine hesitancy is growing at quite a fast pace, especially among doctors who are now becoming hesitant to recommend certain vaccines on the schedule. You can read more about that and find links to the conference here.

We have to ask ourselves, why is this happening? Is it because people and professionals are becoming aware of certain information that warrants the freedom of choice? Should freedom of choice with regards to what we put in our body always remain? Are we really protecting the “herd” by taking these actions?

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors show that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” It is time, they suggest, to cast aside coercion in favor of voluntary choice.

When it comes to the flu shot, I put more information and science as to why so many people seem to refuse it, in this article if interested.

The University of California is currently being sued for mandating the flu shot for all staff, faculty and students. A judge has prevented them from doing so as a result until a decision has been made. You can read more about that here.

In South Korea, 48 people have now died after receiving the flu shot this season causing a lot of controversy. You can read more about that here.

The Takeaway: There are many concerns with vaccines, and 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.

Should these statistics alone warrant the freedom of choice? Should the government have the ability to force us into measures, or would it simply be better for them to present the science, make recommendations and urge people to follow them? When the citizenry is forced and coerced into certain actions, sometimes under the guise of good-will, there always seems to be a tremendous amount of uproar and people who disagree. Why are these people silenced? Why are they censored? Why are they ridiculed? Why don’t independent health organizations receive the same voice and reach that government and state “owned” or organizations do? What’s going on here? Do we really live in a free, open and transparent world or are we simply subjected to massive amounts of perception manipulation?

When it come to the flu shot there is plenty of information on both sides of the coin that point to its effectiveness, and on the other hand there is information that points to the complete opposite. When something is not 100 percent clear, freedom of choice in all places should always remain, in my opinion.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more


Due to censorship, please join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!