Connect with us

Awareness

5 Ways Animal Protein Is Damaging Your Health

Published

on

According to Dr. Deepak Bhatt, a Harvard Medical School professor and Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Heart Letter:

advertisement - learn more

“When it comes to getting protein in your diet, meat isn’t the only option. Mounting evidence shows that reducing meat and increasing plant-based protein is a healthier way to go. A diet with any type of meat raises the risk of heart disease and cancer, when compared with a vegetarian diet.” (source)

--> High Quality CBD Our friends at PuraThrive worked with industry experts to create one of the most bioavailable CBD extracts possible. Get yours today before it runs out. Click here to learn more.

There’s a big trend happening on our planet right now, and it has to do with our diet. On a mass scale, a lot of people are starting to change the way they eat for multiple reasons. Every single year, it seems that more and more people switch from a meat-eating to a vegetarian or vegan diet. Be it for ethical reasons (animal rights), environmental reasons, or health reasons, it’s a trend that continues to grow.

As a result, more awareness has been created, especially within the past few years, regarding multiple misconceptions when it comes to the vegetarian/vegan diet, and one of them is protein. It’s not uncommon for  someone who doesn’t eat meat to be asked, “where do you get your protein?”

There are a lot of misconceptions about not eating meat, and the main one was is probably that it’s necessary to be healthy and to survive. The science actually shows otherwise, “Studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.” – Harvard Medical School (source)

It’s not only nutrition science, but anthropology. Many of our supposed ancestors who roamed the planet before us have long been thought to be heavy meat eaters, but this isn’t true. Although analysis has shown that many were indeed heavy meat eaters, it has also shown that many weren’t meat eaters, that some were completely vegetarian, and some were predominately vegetarian. This suggests, according to some, that the human gut is not designed to digest meat, or, that it’s not necessary to do so.

advertisement - learn more

This theory has also been emphasized due to the fact that modern day meat eating has been linked to a variety of diseases. For example, a recent study published by a team of archaeologists in Europe found that Neanderthals from Spain actually ate no meat at all. So, basing our current behaviour on the notion that “things have always been this way”  could actually be completely misguided, despite the fact that this is the general accepted consensus from the masses. But things are changing. You can read more about that in the article linked below, it goes into greater depth about that conversation:

Were Those Who Roamed The Earth Before Us Nearly All Vegetarian? 

“It’s difficult to comment on ‘the best diet’ for modern humans because there have been and are so many different yet successful diets in our species. Because some hunter-gatherer society obtained most of their dietary energy from wild animal fat and protein does not imply that this is the ideal diet for modern humans, nor does it imply that modern humans have genetic adaptations to such diets.”  – Katherine Milton, anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley (source)

Below is information gathered by Sofia Pineda Ochoa, MD. She’s a practicing physician in Houston, Texas who is certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. She was a biochemistry professor at the University of Guadalajara’s School of Medicine in Mexico, and is also the co-founder of Meat Your Future, an educational non-profit that provides fact-based information about the health, environmental, and ethical implications of consuming animal products.

You can view her article “7 Ways Animal Protein is Damaging Your Health,” here.

Animal Protein 

Animal Protein & IGF-1 (Increased Cancer Risk)

The IGF-1 levels (the hormone insulin-like growth factor) increases when animal protein intake increases. These levels drop when we are fasting, and that’s one of the reason fasting has been shown to destroy cancer cells, reverse age related diseases, re-generate the immune system and more.

When we take in proteins from animal sources, they have a much higher proportion of the essential amino aids, which in turn produces higher levels of IGF-1.

“This hormone stimulates cell division and growth in both healthy and cancer cells and, for this reason, having higher circulating levels of IGF-1 has been consistently associated with increased cancer risk, proliferation, and malignancy.” 

 Animal Protein, Heme Iron, and Free Radicals

Iron, for a human, can be consumed in two forms. One is heme iron, found in animal foods like fish, meat and poultry, and the other is non-heme iron which is found predominantly in plant-based foods.

“One of the problems with heme iron is that it can convert less reactive oxidants into highly reactive free radicals. And free radicals can damage different cell structures like proteins, membranes, and DNA….Heme iron can also catalyze the formation of N-Nitroso compounds in our bodies, which are potent carcinogens. So, not surprisingly, high intake of heme iron has been associated with many kinds of gastrointestinal cancers as well as other pathologies.”

The absorption and bioavailability of iron from a well-rounded plant-based diet is adequate for our needs, “and we can avoid the problems associated with heme iron and other negative health attributes of animal foods.”

Higher Sulfur-Containing Amino Acids and Bone Health Problems

Higher concentrations of amino acids that contain sulfur are also found within animal proteins, and this can create a state of acidosis when metabolized.

Metabolic acidosis happens when the body produces too much acid and becomes very acidic. This isn’t good, especially when you think about the fact that many experts warn against an acidic body, and believe that an alkaline diet can actually successfully treat cancer.

Metabolic acidosis forces the body to compensate by leaching calcium from the bones to help neutralize the increased acidity. Over time, all of this can have severe and detrimental effects on bone health, and studies have shown this. Science tells us that nations with high instances of hip fracture and osteoporosis also have a very high calcium intake. Given this correlation, and the fact that animal protein causes metabolic acidosis, sucking the calcium out of the bones — in direct contrast to what the dairy industry would have us believe — it’s easy to see that we have been misled.

This is thought to be one of the reasons why some studies have found that populations with higher dairy consumption, as well as higher consumption of animal protein in general, also have a higher incidence of bone fractures.

Animal Protein & Phosphorus

“Animal protein contains high levels of phosphorus. And when we consume high amounts of phosphorus, one of the ways our bodies normalize the level of phosphorus is with a hormone called fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23).

FGF23 has been found to be harmful to our blood vessels. It can also lead to hypertrophy of the cardiac ventricle (abnormal enlargement of our cardiac muscle) and is associated with heart attacks, sudden death, and heart failure. So eating animal protein with its high concentration of phosphorus can result in increased levels of this hormone in our bodies, which in turn is highly problematic for our health.”

Animal Protein & TMAO

Animal protein has higher levels of  trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO). TMAO wreaks havoc on our body by creating inflammation, injuring the lining of our vessels, and facilitating “the formation of cholesterol plaques in our blood vessels. And that, of course, is highly problematic for cadiovascuar health.”

“So, consuming animal foods result in higher TMAO levels, which is damaging to our vessels. Even without all of the other problematic aspects of animal foods, this one issue involving TMAO, according to the recent president of the American College of Cardiology Dr. Kim A. Williams, sufficient by itself for people to vigorously avoid animal foods.”

One of the most comprehensive studies ever performed on this subject is “The China Study” conducted by Drs. T. Colin Campbell and Thomas Campbell. Their findings showed direct correlations between nutrition and heart-disease, diabetes, and cancer, proving that cultures that eat primarily plant-based diets have lower to no instances of these diseases and that switching to a plant-based diet can successfully reverse diseases already established in the body. The China Studyis recognized as the most comprehensive nutritional study ever conducted on the relationship between diet and disease. I highly recommend watching the documentary Forks Over Knives (available on Netflix), which delves into this in more detail.

More On Animal Protein Compared To Plant-Based Protein

While underconsumption of protein is harmful to the body, overconsumption comes with risks as well. In the United States, the average omnivore gets more than 1.5 times the optimal amount of protein, and most of that protein is from animal sources. This is bad news, because excess protein is turned into waste or turned into fat. This stored animal protein contributes to weight gainheart diseasediabetesinflammation and cancer.

On the other hand, the protein contained in whole plant foods is connected to disease prevention. According to Michelle McMacken, MD, a board-certified internal medicine physician and an assistant professor of medicine at NYU School of Medicine:

“[T]he protein found in whole plant foods protects us from many chronic diseases. There is no need to track protein intake or use protein supplements with plant-based diets; if you are meeting your daily calorie needs, you will get plenty of protein. The longest-lived people on Earth, those living in the “Blue Zones,” get about 10% of their calories from protein, compared with the U.S. average of 15-20%.”

There are many comparisons between plant-based protein compared to protein from meat. You can read more about that in the article linked below which goes into more detail.

Plant-Based Protein VS Protein From Meat – Which One Is Better For Your Body? 

Sources:

1.Young VR , Pellett PL. Plant proteins in relation to human protein and amino acid nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr. 1994;59(5 Suppl):1203S-1212S.
2. Dunaif GE, Campbell TC. Relative contribution of dietary protein level and aflatoxin B1 dose in generation of presumptive preneoplastic foci in rat liver. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1987;78(2):365-369.
3. Youngman LD, Campbell TC. Inhibition of aflatoxin B1-induced gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase positive (GGT+) hepatic preneoplastic foci and tumors by low protein diets: evidence that altered GGT+ foci indicate neoplastic potential. Carcinogenesis. 1992;13(9):1607-1613.
4. Campbell TC. Dietary protein, growth factors, and cancer. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007;85(6):1667.
5. Ornish D, Weidner G, Fair WR, et al. Intensive lifestyle changes may affect the progression of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005;174(3):1065-1069.
6. Kleinberg DL, Wood TL, Furth PA, Lee AV. Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-I in the transition from normal mammary development to preneoplastic mammary lesions. Endocr Rev. 2009;30(1):51-74.
7. Allen NE, Appleby PN, Davey GK, Kaaks R, Rinaldi S, Key TJ. The associations of diet with serum insulin-like growth factor I and its main binding proteins in 292 women meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002; 1(11):1441-1448.
8. McCarty MF. Vegan proteins may reduce risk of cancer, obesity, and cardiovascular disease by promoting increased glucagon activity. Med Hypotheses. 1999;53(6):459-485.
9. Tang WH, Wang Z, Levison BS, et al. Intestinal microbial metabolism of phosphatidylcholine and cardiovascular risk. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(17):1575-1584.
10. Koeth RA, Wang Z, Levison BS, et al. Intestinal microbiota metabolism of L-carnitine, a nutrient in red meat, promotes atherosclerosis. Nat Med. 2013;19(5):576-585.
11. Interview with Kim A. Williams Sr., MD, President of the American College of Cardiology (August 25, 2015; Chicago). http://meatyourfuture.com/2015/09/interview-with-kim-a-williams-sr-md-president-of-the-american-college-of-cardiology-extended-version. Accessed December 18, 2016).
12. Xiao Y, Peng C, Huang W, et al. Circulating fibroblast growth factor 23 is associated with angiographic severity and extent of coronary artery disease. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e72545.
13. Ozkok A, Kekik C, Karahan GE, et al. FGF-23 associated with the progression of coronary artery calcification in hemodialysis patients. BMC Nephrol. 2013;14:241.
14. Atamna H. Heme, iron, and the mitochondrial decay of ageing. Ageing Res Rev. 2004;3(3):303-318.
15. Ward MH, Cross AJ, Abnet CC, Sinha R, Markin RS, Weisenburger DD. Heme iron from meat and risk of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and stomach. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2012;21(2):134-138. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22044848 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
16. PJ Tuso, MH Ismail, BP Ha and C Bartolotto. Nutritional Update for Physicians: Plant-Based Diets. Perm J. 2013 Spring; 17(2): 61-66. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662288 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016)
17. WJ Craig and AR Mangels; American Dietetic Association. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Vegetarian Diets. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 Jul; 109(7): 1266–82. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
18. E Giovannucci. Dietary Influences of 1,25(OH)2 Vitamin D in Relation to Prostate Cancer: A hypothesis. Cancer Causes Control. 1998 Dec; 9(6):567-82. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10189042 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
19. Harvard T.H. Chan, School of Public Health: The Nutrition Source – Calcium and Milk: What’s Best for Your Bones and Health? Available here: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/calcium-full-story (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
20. HC Sherman and AO Gettler. The Balance of Acid-Forming and Base-Forming Elements in Foods, and its Relation to Ammonia Metabolism. J. Biol. Chem. 1912 11: 323-338. Available here: http://www.jbc.org/content/11/4/323.citation (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
21. D Feskanich, WC Willett, MJ Stampfer, GA Colditz. Protein Consumption and Bone Fractures in Women. Am J Epidemiol. 1996 Mar 1; 143(5):472-9. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8610662 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
22. LA Frassetto, RC Morris Jr., DE Sellmeyer, A Sebastian. Adverse Effects of Sodium Chloride on Bone in the Aging Human Population Resulting from Habitual Consumption of Typical American Diets. J Nutr. 2008 Feb; 138(2):419S-422S. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18203914 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
23. MM Adeva, G Souto. Diet-induced Metabolic Acidosis. Clin Nutr. 2011 Aug; 30(4):416-21. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21481501 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
24. US Barzel, LK Massey. Excess Dietary Protein can Adversely Affect Bone. J Nutr. 1998 Jun; 128(6):1051-3. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9614169 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
25. DM Hegsted. Calcium and Osteoporosis. J Nutr. 1986 Nov; 116(11): 2316-9. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3794834 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
26. K Michaëlsson, A Wolk, S Langenskiöld, S Basu, EW Lemming, H Melhus and L Byberg. Milk Intake and Risk of Mortality and Fractures in Women and Men: Cohort Studies. BMJ. 2014; 349: g6015. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25352269 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
27. D Feskanich, HA Bischoff-Ferrari, L Frazier and WC Willett. Milk Consumption During Teenage Years and Risk of Hip Fractures in Older Adults. JAMA Pediatr. 2014 Jan; 168(1): 54–60. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3983667/ (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
28. HC Sherman, AR Rose and MS Rose. Calcium Requirement of Maintenance in Man. J. Biol. Chem. 1920 44: 21-27. Available here: http://www.jbc.org/content/44/1/21.citation (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
29. BJ Abelow, TR Holford and KL Insogna. Cross-cultural Association between Dietary Animal Protein and Hip Fracture: A hypothesis. Calcif Tissue Int. 1992 Jan; 50(1):14-8. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1739864 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
30. LM Ausman, LM Oliver, BR Goldin, MN Woods, SL Gorbach and JT Dwyer. Estimated Net Acid Excretion Inversely Correlates with Urine pH in Vegans, Lacto-ovo Vegetarians, and Omnivores. J Ren Nutr. 2008 Sep; 18(5):456-65. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18721741 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
31. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website: Life Stages and Populations – Deaths – Leading Causes of Death. Available here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
32. CB Esselstyn Jr. Updating a 12-year Experience with Arrest and Reversal Therapy for Coronary Heart Disease (An Overdue Requiem for Palliative Cardiology). Am J Cardiol. 1999 Aug 1;84(3): 339-41, A8. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10496449 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
33. CB Esselstyn Jr, G Gendy, J Doyle, M Golubic and MF Roizen. A Way to Reverse CAD? J Fam Pract. 2014 Jul; 63(7):356-364b. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25198208 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
34. D Ornish, SE Brown, LW Scherwitz, JH Billings, WT Armstrong, TA Ports, SM McLanahan, RL Kirkeeide, RJ Brand and KL Gould. Can Lifestyle Changes Reverse Coronary Heart Disease? The Lifestyle Heart Trial. Lancet. 1990 Jul 21; 336(8708):129-33. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1973470 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
35. CB Esselstyn Jr, SG Ellis, SV Medendorp and TD Crowe. A Strategy to Arrest and Reverse Coronary Artery Disease: A 5-year Longitudinal Study of a Single Physician’s Practice. J Fam Pract. 1995 Dec; 41(6):560-8. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7500065 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
36. TC Campbell, B Parpia and J Chen. Diet, Lifestyle, and the Etiology of Coronary Artery Disease: the Cornell China Study. Am J Cardiol. 1998 Nov 26; 82(10B):18T-21T. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9860369 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
37] CB Esselstyn Jr. Resolving the Coronary Artery Disease Epidemic Through Plant-Based Nutrition. Prev Cardiol. 2001 Autumn; 4(4):171-177. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11832674 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
38. Usual Intake from Food and Beverages 2007-2010 Compared To Dietary Reference Intakes; Part E. Section 2: Supplementary Documentation to the 2015 DGAC Report. Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Available here: http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015-binder/meeting2/docs/refMaterials/Usual_Intake_072013.pdf (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
39. NS Rizzo, K Jaceldo-Siegl, J Sabate and GE Fraser. Nutrient Profiles of Vegetarian and Nonvegetarian Dietary Patterns. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013 Dec; 113(12):1610-9. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23988511 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
40. JY Wick. Diverticular disease: Eat your fiber! Consult Pharm. 2012 Sep; 27(9): 613-8. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22982746 (accessed Jul. 4 2016).
41. A Dilzer, JM Jones and ME Latulippe. The Family of Dietary Fibers: Dietary Variety for Maximum Health Benefit. Nutrition Today. 2013 May/June; 48(3):108-118. Available here: http://journals.lww.com/nutritiontodayonline/Abstract/2013/05000/The_Family_of_Dietary_Fibers__Dietary_Variety_for.5.aspx (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).
42. PJ Skerrett and WC Willett. Essentials of healthy eating: a guide. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010 Nov-Dec; 55(6): 492-501. Available here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20974411 (accessed Jul. 4, 2016).

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

COVID-19 Survival Rates Have Many Scientists/Doctors Questioning Masks & Lockdown

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    All restrictions on restaurants and other business in Florida have been lifted, and so have local fines against people who refuse to wear masks after the CDC released new survival rates.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are opinions and narratives that oppose the WHO being censored, ridiculed, and largely ignored? Why aren't they discussed openly and transparently?

What Happened: Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently lifted all restrictions on restaurants and other business in Florida and banned local fines against people who refuse to wear masks. He did so after showing new statistics just released by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) showing very high survival rates, as you can see from the picture picture above. The CDC has a page on their website titled “Covid-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios.” According to them, “Each scenario is based on a set of numerical values for biological and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 illness, which is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These values—called parameter values—can be used in models to estimate the possible effects of COVID-19 in U.S. states and localities. That’s where the numbers come from.

Questioning Lockdown & Masks, A Theme From The Very Beginning: The world’s leading scientists in the field and from other fields have been questioning lockdown measures from the very beginning of this pandemic, due to the fact that many of them believe and have believed that we are dealing with a virus similar, and even less severe than viruses that have been circling the globe for decades, infecting hundreds of millions and killings tens of millions of people every single year.

For example, did you know that metapneumovirus has been shown to have worldwide circulation with nearly universal infection by age 5? Did you know that outbreaks of metapneumovirus have been well documented every single year, especially in long term care facilities with mortality rates of up to 50%? () Did you know that human metapneumovirus infection results in a large number of hospitalizations of children every single year? Did you know it has a substantial morbidity rate, again in the elderly, but also among children as well? Did you know nearly 1-2 million children every single year die of these types of respiratory illnesses because they lead to acute respiratory illness? (source)

At the beginning of the pandemic, multiple professors from Stanford criticized the World Health Organization for creating unnecessary fear and hysteria.

They make it quite clear that if the projections being given by the World Health Organization are correct, then “the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified.” But they also make the point that “there’s little evidence to confirm that premise – and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.” It turns out that they were right.

John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology, recently published an article entitled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. In the article, he also argues that there is simply not enough data to make claims about reported case fatality rate.

He stated that rates, “like the official 3.4% rate from the World Health Organization, cause horror — and are meaningless. He was right. Prior to the recent CDC update, he emphasized that the infection fatality rate is close to 0 percent for people under the age of 45 years old.

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. This is another strong point, why are/were social media outlets censoring information and opinions that did not match that which was given by the WHO? These actions have only raised more eyebrows, as we now have a digital authoritarian Orwellian “fact-checker”
patrolling the internet.

Almost all of the science we were hearing, for example like organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) was wrong…This has been a disgraceful situation for science..Reports were released openly, shared by email, and all I got back was abuse. And you got to see that everything I said in that first six weeks was actually true and for political reasons, we as scientists let our views be corrupted. The data had very clear things to say. Nobody said to be “let me check your numbers” they all just said “stop talking like that.” – Levitt

When Dr. Ron Paul shared his opinion a few months ago that “People should ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic” he was censored and marked as false news, having his social media distribution limited.

More than 500 German doctors & scientists have signed on as representatives of an organization called the “Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee” to investigate what’s happening on our planet with regards to COVID-19, expressing the same sentiment. They came together to investigate the severity of the virus, and whether or not the actions taken by governments around the world, and in this case the German government, are  justified and not causing more harm than good.

You can access the full english transcripts on the organizations website if interested.

This group has been giving multiple conferences in Germany, in one of the most recent, Dr. Heiko Schöning, one of the organizations leaders, stated that “We have a lot of evidence that it (the new coronavirus) is a fake story all over the world.”  To put it in context, he wasn’t referring to the virus being fake, but simply that it’s no more dangerous than the seasonal flu (or just as dangerous) and that there is no justification for the measures being taken to combat it.  You can read more about the story here

Another example would be a recent report published in the British Medical Journal  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 peak of the virus.

Are masks even effective? Many studies claim yes, but many also claim no.

Many scientists and doctors in North America are also expressing the same sentiments. For example, 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.

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a specialist in microbiology and one of the most cited research scientists in German history is also part of Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee mentioned above and has also expressed the same thing, multiple times early on in the pandemic all the way up to today.

Implementation of the current draconian measures that are so extremely restrict fundamental rights can only be justified if there is reason to fear that a truly, exceptionally dangerous virus is threatening us. Do any scientifically sound data exist to support this contention for COVID-19? I assert that the answer is simply, no. – Bhakdi. You can read more about him here.

And there is the issue of exaggerated death counts. For example, Toronto Public Health tweeted in late June that “Individuals who have died with COVID-19, but not as a result of COVID-19, are included in the case counts for COVID-19 deaths in Toronto.” There are multiple examples from different countries. You can read more about that here.

Vittorio Sgarbi, Italian politician Mayor of Sutri, gave an emotional speech at a hearing on the 24th of April where he emphasized that the number of deaths in Italy due to COVID-19 are completely false and that the people are being lied to. You can watch that and read more about it here.

A chemistry professor at the University of Waterloo has distributed a course outline to students, saying his in-class exams aren’t mandatory “because of the COVID fake emergency.”  Ronald B. Brown, Ph.D., from the School of Public Health and Health Systems at the University of Waterloo recently stated that the COVID-19 fatality rate is the “worst miscalculation in the history of humanity.” Brown is currently completing his second doctorate degree, this time in epidemiology at the University of Waterloo. Not long ago, Brown published a paper in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, titled “Public health lessons learned from biases in coronavirus mortality overestimation.”

Below is a statement Brown recently gave to John C. A. Manley, a journalist who was the first to cover the story:

The subject of this article is disruptive, to say the least, although it is not as obvious from the title. The manuscript cites the smoking-gun, documented evidence showing that the public’s overreaction to the coronavirus pandemic was based on the worst miscalculation in the history of humanity, in my opinion. My manuscript underwent an intensive peer-review process. You are the first media guy who has responded to my invitation.

The examples above aren’t even the tip of the ice-berg, but they are ones I’ve used many times in previous articles. I am posting them above just to hammer home the point.

Why This Is Important: This information is important because it highlights that the measures we are being mandated & forced to take are being done using flawed data to justify it. What also has more people concerned is that the opinions and research of many doctors and scientists around the world, some of them quite renowned, are being banned and censored from social media platforms for simply contradicting the information given to us by the World Health Organization (WHO). Why are people like Julian Assange really in jail? Why are people exposing war crimes and other misdoings within the WHO, as Assange has, punished, and the ones committing the actual crimes are the ones we identify with? Should we not have the right to examine information openly and freely, and determine for ourselves what is and what isn’t? A common theme with regards to this pandemic seems to be using fear and hysteria to make the threat seem much greater than it actually is, and then to propose the solution. Perhaps Edward Snowden was right when he said that governments are using the coronavirus to take away more of our rights and freedoms, and they won’t come back, just as they didn’t come back after 9/11. Is there anybody politically and financially gaining from this pandemic? What’s going on here?

The Takeaway: 

At the end of the day, we have to keep asking ourselves if our designated government and global health authorities actually have our best interests at hand. If not, why do we continue to support it?

There are many examples that show these institutions do not work to make humanity thrive, but instead oppress humanity. When it comes to the World Health Organization (WHO) for example, Wikileaks exposed how much they are influenced by pharmaceutical companies. Vimeo also recently completely banned a documentary that exposed the same thing. That particular documentary featured many scientists, doctors and even officials from within the WHO.

It’s quite clear to many that government doesn’t really put the citizens it claims to represent first, but instead corporations and big money. So why do we constantly listen to their advice? Why do we constantly rely on them for truth and information? Why do we rely on them for guidance? Would we not be better off determining for ourselves what is appropriate, especially in the face of such controversial times when so much is being exposed?

Is it time humanity becomes self-governed? Is it time we steep away from the need for such parental figures like government? It seems like we are currently in the process of doing this, with many of us beginning to awaken. Collectively, we will be creating a new world, that matches a consciousness of self-governance, and the key is to operate from a place of oneness and peace within, which is a journey of awakening to who we truly are, as opposed to what we have been taught to think. We are in a time of a consciousness renaissance.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

CDC Director: ‘Masks May Offer More Protection From COVID-19 Than The Vaccine’

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    CDC director Robert Redfield said on Wednesday that wearing a mask might be "more guaranteed" to protect an individual from the coronavirus than a vaccine.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is there so much conflicting information out there? Why is it so difficult to arrive at any concrete truth? How does the politicization of science play a role?

What Happened: Centers For Disease Control (CDC) Director Robert Redfield recently stated that wearing a mask may be “more guaranteed” to protect an individual from the coronavirus than a vaccine. This calls into question the efficacy of the vaccine, which is set to make its way into the public domain at the end of this year, or shortly after that. We thought we’d cover this story to bring up the efficacy of vaccines in general, and the growing vaccine hesitancy that now exists within a number of people, scientists and physicians across the world.

“I’m not gonna comment directly about the president, but I am going to comment as the CDC director that face masks, these face masks, are the most important powerful public health tool we have.” – Redfield

Not long ago, many scientists presented facts about vaccines and vaccine safety at the recent Global Health Vaccine Safety summit hosted by the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland. At the conference, Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project emphasized the issue of growing vaccine hesitancy.

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…”

Redfield’s comments came after President Trump downplayed the effectiveness of wearing mask, and Trump also stated that Covid would probably go away without a vaccine, referring to the concept of ‘herd immunity’ as practiced in Sweden, but has also been quite outspoken about the fact that a vaccine may arrive by November.

When it comes to the COVID vaccine, multiple clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccines have shown severe reactions within 10 days after taking the vaccine. You can read more about that here.  The US government and Yale University also recently collaborated in a clinical trial to determine the best messaging to persuade Americans to take the COVID-19 vaccine. You can read more about that here.

Are Masks Effective?

Multiple studies have claimed to show definitively  that mask-wearing effectively prevents transmission of the coronavirus, especially recent ones. This seems to be the general consensus and the information that’s come from our federal health regulatory agencies. There are also multiple studies calling the efficacy of masks into question. For example, a fairly recent study published in the New England Medical Journal  by a group of Harvard doctors outlines how it’s already known that masks provide little to zero benefit when it comes to protection a public setting. According to them,

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

You can read more about that story here and find other complimenting studies.

When it comes to masks, there are multiple studies on both sides of the coin.

Then we have many experts around the world calling into question everything from masks to lockdown. For example, 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%.

They are one of many who have emphasized this point.

More than 500 German doctors & scientists have signed on as representatives of an organization called the “Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee” to investigate what’s happening on our planet with regards to COVID-19, and also make similar points. You can read more about that story here.

Again, there are many examples from all over the world from various academics, doctors and scientists in the field.

This is why there is so much confusion surrounding this pandemic, because there is so much conflicting information that opposes what we are hearing from our health authorities. Furthermore, a lot of information that opposes the official narrative has been censored from social media platforms, also raising suspicion among the general public.

How Effective Are Vaccines?

Vaccines have been long claimed to be a miracle, and the most important health intervention for the sake of disease prevention of our time. But as mentioned above, vaccine hesitancy is growing, and it’s growing fast.

According to a study published in the journal EbioMedicine,

Over the past two decades several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts, and science. These two dimensions are at the core of the vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. These two dimensions are at the core of the vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. VH is defined as delay in acceptance of vaccination, or refusal, or even acceptance with doubts about its safety and benefits, with all these behaviors and attitudes varying according to context, vaccine, and personal profile, despite the availability of vaccine services. VH presents a challenge to physicians who must address their patients’ concerns about vaccines..

In the United States, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) shows what vaccines have resulted in deaths, injury, permanent disabilities and hospitalizations. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury act has also paid out nearly $4 billion dollars to families of vaccine injured children.

According to a MedAlerts, the cumulative raw count of adverse events from measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines alone was: 93,929 adverse events, 1,810 disabilities, 6,902 hospitalizations, and 463 deaths. What is even more disturbing about these numbers is that VAERS is a voluntary and passive reporting system that has been found to only capture 1% of adverse events.

The measles vaccine has also been plagued with a lack of effectiveness, with constant measles outbreaks in heavily vaccinated population pointing towards a failing vaccine. You can read more about that in-depth and access more science on it here. In 2015, nearly 40 percent of measles cases analyzed in the US were a result of the vaccine.

It’s not just the MMR vaccine that shows a lack of effectiveness. For example, a new study published in The Royal Society of Medicine is one of multiple studies over the years that has emerged questioning the efficacy of the HPV vaccine. The researchers conducted an appraisal of published phase 2 and 3 efficacy trials in relation to the prevention of cervical cancer and their analysis showed “the trials themselves generated significant uncertainties undermining claims of efficacy” in the data they used. The researchers emphasized that “it is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome, which takes decades to develop.”  The researchers point out that the trials used to test the vaccine may have “overestimated” the efficacy of the vaccine.

It’s one of multiple studies to call into question the efficacy and safety of the HPV vaccine. It’s also been responsible for multiple deaths and permanent disabilities.

Another point to make regarding vaccine injury is that data was collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals. Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions (2.6 percent of vaccinations) were identified. This is an average of 890 possible events, an average of 1.3 events per clinician, per month. This data was presented at the 2009 AMIA conference. This data comes 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) that found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million. You can access that report and read more about it here.

The Takeaway: 

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

1 Million + People Download Study Showing Heavy Aluminum Deposits In Autistic Brains

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A landmark paper published in 2018 showing high amounts of aluminum in autistic brains has not been dowloaded more than 1 million times.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are federal health regulatory agencies ignoring the emerging science showing concerns with regards to injected aluminum? Why don't they address the concerns and conduct safety studies?

What Happened: In 2018, Professor of Bioinorganic Chemistry at Keele University, who is considered one of the world’s leading experts in aluminum toxicology, published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine & Biology showing very high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism. Exley has examined more than 100 brains, and the aluminum content in these people is some of the highest he has ever seen and raises new questions about the role of aluminum in the etiology of autism. Five people were used in the study, comprising of four males and one female, all between the ages of 14-50. Each of their brains contained what the authors considered unsafe and high amounts of aluminum compared to brain tissues of patients with other diseases where high brain aluminum content is common, like Alzheimer’s disease, for example.

It’s now been downloaded by more than 1 million people. The photo below was posted recently via his Instagram account.

Here is a summary of the study’s main findings:

-All five individuals had at least one brain tissue with a “pathologically significant” level of aluminum, defined as greater than or equal to 3.00 micrograms per gram of dry brain weight (μg/g dry wt). (Dr. Exley and colleagues developed categories to classify aluminum-related pathology after conducting other brain studies, wherein older adults who died healthy had less than 1 μg/g dry wt of brain aluminum.)

-Roughly two-thirds (67%) of all the tissue samples displayed a pathologically significant aluminum content.

-Aluminum levels were particularly high in the male brains, including in a 15-year-old boy with ASD who had the study’s single highest brain aluminum measurement (22.11 μg/g dry wt)—many times higher than the pathologically significant threshold and far greater than levels that might be considered as acceptable even for an aged adult.

-Some of the elevated aluminum levels rivaled the very high levels historically reported in victims of dialysis encephalopathy syndrome (a serious iatrogenic disorder resulting from aluminum-containing dialysis solutions).

-In males, most aluminum deposits were inside cells (80/129), whereas aluminum deposits in females were primarily extracellular (15/21). The majority of intracellular aluminum was inside non-neuronal cells (microglia and astrocytes).

-Aluminum was present in both grey matter (88 deposits) and white matter (62 deposits). (The brain’s grey matter serves to process information, while the white matter provides connectivity.)

-The researchers also identified aluminum-loaded lymphocytes in the meninges (the layers of protective tissue that surround the brain and spinal cord) and in similar inflammatory cells in the vasculature, furnishing evidence of aluminum’s entry into the brain “via immune cells circulating in the blood and lymph” and perhaps explaining how youth with ASD came to acquire such shockingly high levels of brain aluminum.

Following up this paper, Exely recently published recently published a paper titled “The role of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines raises issues that deserve independent, rigorous and honest science.” In their publication, they provide evidence for their position that “the safety of aluminium-based vaccine adjuvants, like that of any environmental factor presenting a risk of neurotoxicity and to which the young child is exposed, must be seriously evaluated without further delay, particularly at a time when the CDC is announcing a still increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, of 1 child in 54 in the USA.”

In the interview below, Exley answers a lot of questions, but the part that caught my attention was:

We have looked at what happens to the aluminum adjuvant when it’s injected and we have shown that certain types of cells come to the injection site and take up the aluminum inside them. You know, these same cells we also see in the brain tissue in autism. So, for the first time we have a link that honestly I had never expected to find between aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines and that same aluminum potentially could be carried by those same cells across the blood brain barrier into the brain tissue where it could deposit the aluminum and produce a disease, Encephalopathy (brain damage), it could produce the more severe and disabling form of autism. This is a really shocking finding for us.

The interview is quite informative with regards to aluminum toxicology in general, but if you’re interested in the quote above, you can fast forward to the twelve minutes and thirty seconds mark.

Why This Is Important: There are many concerns being raised about aluminum in vaccines, and where that aluminum goes when it’s injected into the body. Multiple animal studies have now shown that when you inject aluminum, it doesn’t exit the body but travels to distant organs and eventually ends up in the brain where it’s detectable 1-10 years after injection. When we take in aluminum from our food or whatever however, the body does a great job of getting rid of it.

When you inject aluminum, it goes into a different compartment of your body. It doesn’t come into that same mechanism of excretion. So, and of course it can’t because that’s the whole idea of aluminum adjuvants, aluminum adjuvants are meant to stick around and allow that antigen to be presented over and over and over again persistently, otherwise you wouldn’t put an adjuvant in in the first place. It can’t be inert, because if it were inert it couldn’t do the things it does. It can’t be excreted because again it couldn’t provide that prolonged exposure of the antigen to your immune system. – Dr Christopher Shaw, University of British Columbia. (source)

Furthermore, federal health regulatory agencies have not appropriately studied the aluminum adjuvants mechanisms of action after injection, it’s simply been presumed safe after more than 90 years of use in various vaccines.

It’s also important to note that A group of scientists and physicians known as The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) have discovered a crucial math error in a FDA paper regarding the safety of aluminum in vaccines.

If you want to access the science and studies about injected aluminum not exiting the body, and more information about aluminum in vaccines in general, you can refer to THIS article, and THIS article I recently published on the subject that goes into more detail and provides more sources, science and exampels. 

The Takeaway: When it comes to vaccine safety, why does mainstream media constantly point fingers and call those who have concerns “anti-vax conspiracy theorists?” Why don’t they ever address the science and concerns being raised that paint vaccines in a light that they’ve never been painted in? What’s going on here? Would more rigorous safety testing of our vaccines not be in the best interests of everybody? Who would ever oppose that and why?

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

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

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!