illness

August 19, 2021

CDC “Delta” Science Contradicts Their Cited References

The CDC published an article about “science” and the Delta variant. It is found here: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html.

While the CDC’s strong language suggests that:

The Delta variant is more contagious.
Vaccinations cause lesser illness.
Unvaccinated exhibit greater transmission.
Fully vaccinated have shorter infectious periods,

Their cited references DO NOT SUPPORT these declarations.

When read beyond the headlines, many of their cited references disagree with the allegations made on the CDC website. Please evaluate them for yourself as only brief highlights are given below.

**And, as an aside, I use the term “vaccine” under duress. I personally consider all the mRNA technology gene therapy/genetic engineering and NOT vaccine technology. The evaluated sources call them “vaccines,” so to avoid confusion I kept the terminology uniform. It’s basically prion disease if you want to get technical.**

Let’s get started.

Reference #1 (https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891)

These authors state that vaccines are efficacious at preventing symptomatic disease. This does not mean that it prevents asymptomatic infection or stops transmission. It goes on to state, “…it appears that strains with mutations at that site [one of which is the Delta variant] may have increased replication, which leads to higher viral loads and increased transmission.” While vaccinated people are not always symptomatic, they can still transmit virions. Further, while the CDC claims that vaccines are effective, this study explicitly states, “Data on the effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines against clinical outcomes with this variant have been limited.” The CDC asserts that vaccines prevent death or severe disease, and this study also claims, “The numbers of cases and follow-up periods are currently insufficient for the estimation of vaccine effectiveness against severe disease, including hospitalization and death.”

Reference #2 (https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891)

This source is fascinating as it is a direct contradiction to the pro-investigational vaccine paradigm. This MMWR was from Barnstable County, Massachusetts, where 74% of the outbreak population was fully vaccinated at least two weeks prior to this gathering. A total of 5 people were hospitalized with symptomatic disease, for which 4 were vaccinated, leaving 1 unvaccinated hospitalization of that remaining 26%, nobody died. Does this not cause concerns for immune escape, vaccine failure, or potentially increased susceptibility in the vaccinated due to non-lethal antigenic pressures?

Reference #3 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261295)

The author has glaring conflicts of interest in Sanofi and Roche that both provide covid-19 testing or vaccine manufacturing. They cite using up to the 45-cycle threshold for testing when we know that accuracy is diminished after approximately 22-25 cycles. How did they account for false positives? Those that developed symptoms within 14 days of vaccination were excluded from the study. While vaccinated were collected from 5 study sites, the unvaccinated were from a single site uncovering systemic bias as testing methods differed. The study also states that “Vaccine-breakthrough patients were significantly more likely to be asymptomatic… Notably, in contrast to existing studies that showed lower viral load in vaccinated patients, initial viral load indicated by PCR Ct values was similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with B.1.617.2.” This statement solidifies the fact that vaccinated cohorts can still transmit covid-19 without outward symptoms, which should be concerning when considering mass vaccination to “protect the vulnerable.” The CDC ignores this fact and publishes that “fully vaccinated people with symptomatic breakthrough infections, can transmit it to others” when this clearly states that vaccine breakthrough patients were asymptomatic. Logically, the asymptomatic person with a high viral load is more of a risk to vulnerable populations than those with symptoms that would typically avoid their daily routines. Illness can prevent people from going to work and infecting others, but asymptomatic illness encourages this.

Reference #4 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.05.21260050)

This author has a direct competing interest as he sits on advisory boards for covid vaccines with AstraZeneca and Pfizer. Table One excludes the unvaccinated cohort from the dataset. While rates of infection are higher in the unvaccinated, deaths and hospitalizations are unclear. What is deciphered is that Delta is contagious, for which the CDC agrees. However, the CDC further asserts that “Vaccines are playing a crucial role in limiting spread of the virus and minimizing severe disease.” Interesting to note: “The emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern has slowed progress against the pandemic in three distinct ways: (i) by increasing transmissibility and the disease’s reproduction number; (ii) by increasing immune escape and diminishing vaccine effectiveness; and (iii) by increasing the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 infection.” This is a direct contraindication of the CDC’s statement of vaccine efficacy.

Reference #5 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.07.21260122)

This study concludes that the antigenic changes with the Delta variant display “higher viral replication… increased transmissibility or could exhibit an increased propensity for escape from host immunity, and therefore pose an increased risk to global public health.” This agrees with the fact that Delta is more contagious in all populations, including those vaccinated.

Reference #6 (https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-637724/v1)

This source relays concerns about transmission between healthcare workers in populations of highly vaccinated. It further explicitly states, “the Delta variant shows 8 fold approximately reduced sensitivity to vaccine-elicited antibodies compared to wild type.” The CDC completely ignores this information yet cites it as a reference? This does not support the push for vaccination programs.

Reference #7 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.19.21260808)

This article states, “data are consistent with the potential ability of fully vaccinated individuals to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.” Though this source claims less lethality for vaccinated cohorts, the article does not separate the data from vaccinated versus vaccinated. Further, it shows the death rate and hospitalizations are lower as compared to the variants otherwise specified. The CDC reverses this by publishing, “patients infected with the Delta variant were more likely to be hospitalized than patients infected with Alpha or the original virus strains.” This is false.

Reference #8 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.28.21259420)

This study does not have transparent data to review. Further, it considers only symptomatic cases for which the large control group has symptoms but covid negative status. Are these vaccinated more susceptible to other viral illnesses due to immune system modulation by the current vaccines? Why are hospitalization and death in the same category? Where is the information on those with prior illness or unvaccinated? Furthermore, these groups are only monitored for 14 days post-vaccine #1 and 7 days post-vaccine #2. This is a menial period to make sweeping judgments for “highly effective” per the CDC. Is the theoretical 14-day window an advantageous endpoint?

Reference #9 (https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3861566)

This study has a very small sample. Its data reflects a positive association with comorbidities; increased delta cases in vaccinated compared to other variants (due to the retrospective design); increased supplemental oxygen demands; and lower ICU admission/death rate compared to different variants. It also raises concerns of “mutations particularly in key areas of the immunodominant spike protein… that [has] been associated with increased transmissibility, evasion of immunity from infection and vaccination.” This is contrary to the push for vaccinations at the conclusion of the paper. It is no surprise that they declare conflicts of interest due to personal fees from Sanofi and Roche.

Reference #10 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387)

This paper starts by saying, “The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant and its sublineages (B.1.617.2, AY.1, AY.2, AY.3; [1]) can cause high viral loads, are highly transmissible, and contain mutations that confer partial immune escape.” This statement is unfavorable for current vaccination strategies. The authors further outline “similar viral loads in nasal swabs, irrespective of vaccine status, during a time of high and increasing prevalence of the Delta variant. Infectious SARS-CoV-2 was isolated from 51 of 55 specimens (93%) with Ct <25 from both vaccinated and unvaccinated persons, indicating that most individuals with Ct values in this range (Wilson 95% CI 83%-97%) shed infectious virus regardless of vaccine status.” Ironically, this study closes with, “it is essential for public health policy to encourage vaccination while also planning for contingencies, including diminished long-term protection.” This statement is contradictory to the entire study and an utterly unjustified declaration.

Reference #11 (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1005517/Technical_Briefing_19.pdf)

This is the most interesting citation as it shows data that concludes increased cases in unvaccinated populations but more deaths in the fully vaccinated population overall. This UK data is alarming as the case-fatality rates make Delta more lethal in the vaccinated population. Vaccinated Delta cases (28,773) with vaccinated deaths within 28 days (224) is a case fatality of 0.78%; however, unvaccinated Delta cases (121,402) with unvaccinated deaths within 28 days (165) is a case fatality rate of 0.14%. This is a five-fold increased risk of death for the vaccinated population. While supportive in claims of contagion, it is contrary to assertions that “Unvaccinated people remain the greatest concern,” as stated by the CDC. Looks like the vaccinated should be priority as they fare worse…?

Reference #12 (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01358-1)

This study asserts, “the effect of vaccination (at least 28 days after first or second dose) was to reduce the risk of hospital admission” and further evaluates “that there was no evidence of a differential vaccine effect on hospital admissions among those first testing positive.” With a disclaimer at the end: “Given the observational nature of these data, estimates of vaccine effectiveness need to be interpreted with caution.”

Reference #13 (https://khub.net/web/phe-national/public-library/-/document_library/v2WsRK3ZlEig/view_file/479607329)

This limited study does not provide raw data to compare the severity of disease and death in different groups based on vaccination status. It also poses a disclaimer stating that it was “not possible to estimate vaccine effectiveness against severe disease.” This is, again, a contradiction to the CDC’s claim that “the vaccine still provides strong protection against serious illness and death.”

Reference #14 (https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2107058)

This study evaluates healthcare workers, PPE, and viral load with symptoms. It does not consider hospitalizations, deaths, oxygen demands, or “severity” outcomes but illustrates vaccinated populations have less RNA viral load and marginally fewer self-reported sick days. The authors further guess, “The mechanisms by which vaccination attenuates Covid-19 are largely unknown, but the effect is probably due to recall of immunologic memory responses that reduce viral replication and accelerate the elimination of virally infected cells. The biologic plausibility of these benefits is supported by the observation of similar phenomena in studies of other vaccines.” These assumptions seek to compare novel mRNA technology to the traditional vaccine strategies, which are entirely different. How can we draw conclusions of investigational-phase technology from the studies of unrelated products?

Reference #15 (https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.03.21258293)

These authors state a shift in the dominant variant and increase in the positive cases but do not determine hospitalizations or deaths. An increase in positive cases is consistent with CDC’s statement that Delta is more contagious.

Again, you are the only person that can make the decision to consent to an investigational product that is heavily promoted by entities indebted to pharmaceutical giants. Beware of the conflicts of interest. The gatekeeper to informed consent is your own ability to draw conclusions from the data. This is easier said than done in the environment of today when “the data” is concealed, buried, and wrongfully interpreted by those in power positions.

I will leave you with some questions to consider:
How are government agencies allowed to make statements that are not grounded in research?
Why aren’t our investigational journalists critically reviewing these agencies?
If EUA products were such a good intervention, why do we need to mandate them?
Who is making the decision to mandate? What are their credentials?
If EUA products were so safe, why is liability from harms completely removed?
If health entities really cared about health, wouldn’t they have already mandated clean drinking water for the entire planet?
Science demands criticism and discourse, why are questions/thoughts labeled “misinformation” if they do not clearly promote “vaccine” uptake?

Do not be coerced and please keep a questioning mind. The only way to grow is through discussion. If something was truly lifesaving do you really think that Big pHARMa would “mandate” every person on the planet access “for free?” Because that’s what they do, right? What’s not to love about violating someone’s bodily autonomy and creating barriers to employment, goods, and services. Totally normal. Nothing to see here, right? I’ve said this since April 2020: the next currency is compliance. We all need to stand up against that. Once your ability to make independent decisions about your body is gone, so is your life. That is not a future I wish upon my children.

Shalom, light, and love…

August 9, 2021August 8, 2021

Delta Variant Derangement

Prepare to be triggered.

Could we please do some actual RESEARCH? Let’s step back and review. We have been gaslighting the people injured by Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J products for the better part of the last year while NOT COLLECTING DATA APPROPRIATELY. It is mind boggling that nurses and doctors still do not know VAERS or its use. VAERS is written all over the EUA disclosures for Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J. How have these professions become willfully ignorant to this whole process? How has the medical community allowed such propaganda to permeate their systems?

Since the U.S. cannot collect data and share it openly with the public, let’s look across the pond for those “variant” trends… Though I’d really like to see overall hospital and emergency care admitting diagnoses broken down like this so we can compare severity of illness; however, the death category will do.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1005517/Technical_Briefing_19.pdf

You’re fully capable of making up your own mind.
Cases = contagion. Death = lethality.

By now, most people recognize that Israel is the most vaccinated population due to their early deal with Pfizer. So, how does that data stack up against South Korea with their early treatment strategy and our U.S. floundering? Is there a trend? Or maybe its multifaceted, since contact tracing and isolation were heavily used. We do not quite know what the long-term outcome will be of their early success stories… Some virologists believe that isolated countries painted themselves into a corner and will now be subject to the most lethal variant instead of the first one that did not have a chance to mutate, yet confers broad immunity.

Now let’s review the cases, shall we?

Perhaps, the biologics are not as glamorous as the media touts? The U.S. had a downward trend before the mass campaigns with a little upswing commencing just as the nation’s biggest corporations and health systems are mulling around the idea of mandated medicine. Not so great when you consider man-made antigenic shift.

And, Israel and South Korea’s death data is almost identical regardless of population uptake of these biologics with that little bump right around the time of their jab campaigns. So where is the efficacy? Must all be a coincidence. I am curious to see if we will ever get passed ignoring VAERS data? You can clearly see red flags from the size of the files. Can we please fast-forward to the part when we admit pharmaceutical failure? No, it is not “breakthrough” cases. IT IS FAILURE. Call it like it is and stop with the doublespeak.

Scientists did not know whether these biologics would stop transmission but they concluded that your symptoms would be “less severe” when they deployed it back in November 2020. Wait. Think about that. Making someone’s symptoms LESS SEVERE just breached a huge defense mechanism in humans. When your symptoms are “severe,” you tend to stay home and take extra care of yourself without exposing others to whatever you have… most times. If, now, you don’t feel so bad then you are more likely to go about your day exposing everyone else (plus, not taking extra measures to boost your own health). This biologic, at the very least, just made YOU the oh-so-silent spreader of that virus. Think it through. Do not shift blame to those with a normally functioning immune system in response to this particular illness, if it really is “more severe” for them. Further, most people do not see temporary illness as worst case. You cannot be free of illness as a member of this ecosystem.

If you want your symptoms to be less, be our guest. Let’s just make crystal clear that you are not some virtuous human saver as compared to other humans who chose the precautionary principle. You are not allowed to force your emotions on others or treat them differently because they did not want to subject themselves to these products. That’s called DISCRIMINATION and it has no place in a free society. Health-related passports are a slippery slope, just like mandated medicine. We should ALL be alarmed that any human being has lesser rights based on what governments/institutions say, eh?

If we learned at least one thing from Nazi Medical Experiments (and others!), I hope it was that informed consent is the cornerstone of medicine. You cannot take someone’s free will and bodily autonomy from them and force them into experimentation. Period. There are also consent bounds when it comes to routine procedures and medical care. Where there are risks there must always be freedom of choice.

Shalom, light, and love…

June 7, 2019

Separating Education from Indoctrination

I don’t know about you, but I did not want this.

I did not devote years of my life to health, science, healing, and wellness to be attacked, ridiculed, judged, and labeled.

I did not spend thousands of hours studying health sciences to graduate at the top of my class THREE TIMES to be discredited for my experiences and knowledge about these topics.

I did not dedicate countless hours of my time reading government websites, pharmaceutical documents, peer-reviewed studies, and systematic reviews to be ignored, silenced, rejected, and censored.

I did not want this, but my conscience will not let me ignore my experiences.

I was once indoctrinated. I was taught the vaccine schedule and what infections were covered in those vaccines. I was briefly shown herd immunity. I was informed that “vaccines [were] safe and effective.” I had no reason to question otherwise, and if others did so, they lacked the capacity to understand “the science.” That is what I was, and many others are, indoctrinated to believe.

I was not taught about vaccine efficacy rates or failure. Vaccines were not a focus in immunology, though some processes signaled theories of their supposed actions. Vaccine-targeted bacteria and viruses were not thoroughly explored in microbiology alike other microbes. Vaccines were not covered in pharmacology, where adverse events were always attached to studied drugs. Vaccines did not come with adverse events. There was no mention of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and I was not familiar with this passive avenue of compiling population data through post-marketing surveillance as clinical trials are of short duration (some only FOUR days… e.g., Hep B vaccine).

As a foundation, colleges require you to learn concepts without challenging the information. As you dive deeper into the sciences, you find that challenging theory is vital to the fluid nature of science. We still discover new things about the evolving biome/virome and what humans have done to help or hinder the health of populations (e.g., the implications of antibiotic overuse, tobacco science, and the low-fat/high sugar “heart health” diet in light of the obesity crisis… just to name a few). We see changes in human health and must consider contributing factors to find solutions. Current research in epigenetics, the gut-brain connection, and functional medicine are challenging long-held theories surrounding health and wellness.

I have made up for gaps in school. I have explored the evidence-based practice, how to read scientific studies, how to check for bias, and have challenged mainstream ideas in the classroom with success. I have pulled the studies from databases and notice a trend. Glowing reports of vaccine efficacy always contain a bias as they are usually funded by vaccine manufacturers and government agencies that promote them. Those researchers that challenge the data and ask the hard questions rarely have a government funding source, are never tied to the pharmaceutical companies that produce vaccines, and declare no conflicts of interest. Funny how that works, eh?

That being said, we all have biases that need worked through. Our experiences, including formal education, can create these biases. We can be taught to hold certain entities in high regard, but we must be careful not to be blinded to their failures or misrepresentation of data. We must hold them accountable.

I do not think that there is a conspiracy surrounding the childhood vaccination program. I do not believe vaccine manufacturers intended to injure children. At the same time, we have got to recognize that vaccine manufacturers are the same companies that create other pharmaceuticals. If you know anything about FDA regulation and drug testing, you know that there is a price, harm still occurs after the screening of new drugs, and there are regular recalls. You know that medical journals are filled with shady science promoting new medications that are funded by the companies producing those drugs. The clinical trials involved in the manufacturing of vaccines are lesser than those demanded of the FDA for prescribed medications. Fact-Check this; clinical trials are included in manufacturing inserts for vaccines that are required by law.

My take on these issues is that an unintentional loophole was created with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that freed manufacturers from liability and guaranteed a market for vaccines that are recommended for the U. S. Vaccine Schedule. When your vaccine is approved for the schedule, you have secured revenue. The fiscal incentive for more vaccines is high in a developed country.

In 1983, there were seven total vaccine doses. In 2019, there are over 70 throughout childhood, with 22 doses concentrated in the first 12-15 months of life in the U.S. We also have an embarrassing infant (0-12 month) mortality rate as compared to other developed AND developing nations (we rank in the 50s)!

InfantMortalityCountries — List of countries that have LOWER infant death rates than the U. S.

According to the most recent data, the 4th leading cause of death in the first year is Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). SIDS is unexplained death that is not the result of congenital anomalies, maternal/pregnancy complications, or gestation-related causes. If we remove congenital, maternal, pregnancy, gestation from the death table, SIDS will rank #1! Sadly, we spend next to nothing on SIDS research as compared to vaccine spending. On top of that, spending on SIDS research was slashed by almost half from 2017 to 2018! Governments are the largest funding source for R&D, and the largest investment category worldwide is Vaccine Research and Development. The CDC claims vaccines aren’t the cause of SIDS; however, SIDS has no explained cause so that statement is a fallacy. Why would the CDC go against their own vaccine recommendations? They wouldn’t. That is why all their supporting SIDS studies contain glaring conflicts of interest (as they are generated internally), not to mention: outdated.

Where your money goes, there lie your interests. Infant mortality in the U.S. is not the result of infectious diseases, yet that is where the money is spent. We have “no idea” why infants suddenly die, yet we aren’t interested in finding out why? Every year, roughly 2,500 babies born in the U.S. die before age one for unknown causes when you remove strangulation/suffocation from the data. Scientific processes allow people to find out the cause of death for a mummy buried over 4,000 years ago, but we cannot do the same for a baby that dies today. Let that sink in.

I do not think there is a conspiracy, but I do believe that these health agencies feel they have gone too far to turn back. They have sold us to their dogma of “vaccines are safe and effective” that is slathered all over government websites. If the childhood vaccine program fails, several people lose trust in government programs that seek to do some good. The challenge is identifying when data is misrepresented due to strong biases. It takes a level of commitment and discomfort (cognitive dissonance) when you seek education and put your biases aside. There is a lot on the line when you challenge the science of vaccines, but without conflict there cannot be progress. We have conflict because we demand progress. Never stop demanding progress.

Shalom, light, and love.

Sites to Consider:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/99th-congress/house-bill/5546
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
https://report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx
https://www.who.int/research-observatory/monitoring/inputs/neglected_diseases_source/en/
https://www.cdc.gov/sids/data.htm

February 12, 2019March 7, 2019

Measles Epidemic: This is what the numbers say

With the recent media-driven hysteria over measles, I’ve been asked by friends, co-workers, and family if I was concerned since I am an ex-vaxxer and have likely not vaccinated my littles with MMRV.

Concerned about the measles that lurks in our population? No.
Concerned about my children getting measles? No.
Concerned about how people lack the capacity to research the actual incidence of measles as related to the population density of children? Yes.
Concerned about people regurgitating the propaganda and bashing parental choice? Yes.

Why am I not concerned about the first two? You will have to see my former post here: Your Herd Immunity is a Myth

As for the rest… we have given mainstream media too much credit in our country. Let us look at the numbers. According to the U. S. Census Bureau in 2017, we estimated the total population at 325,719,178. Of this population, 23% were under the age of 18 years; this gives us roughly 39,086,301 children in the U. S. under age 18.

If I take a gross overview of the incidence of measles in the United States over the last ten years (Because that data is readily available to me. Thank you, CDC! See table.) That gives us 2,059 cases of measles across EVERY age group for ten years.

If I were to apply this number to our current population of children alone, that is an incidence of 0.0000527% of those aged <18. A minuscule percentage, even when I apply the total number over the course of a decade to the population of today. Of course, this is an innacurrate calculation as population fluctuates.

If I were to apply the recent numbers (2018 to currently) for a rate of 473 cases… that is 0.0000121% of the entire population of children alone. The incidence of measles is 1.2 in every 100,000 children! That is also known as a 12 IN A MILLION chance that your child got measles last year. What?! Why is this mainstream news?!

UPDATE: number exaggerated by CDC on actual incidence of measles-related deaths, [see image below].

https://www.facebook.com/PICphysicians/photos/pb.669725606516932.-2207520000.1551953075./1246091035547050/?type=3&theater — PIC Measles Memorandum to Senate

Do you want to know what is more critical than measles? The rate of disease in our youth that is 100% preventable by diet and lifestyle choices. The World Health Organization reports that 71% of deaths are caused by NON-COMMUNICABLE DISEASES worldwide! Measles is communicable. The top two killers are coronary artery disease (heart disease) and stroke; the top two in the U. S. are heart disease and cancer. (I am not going to touch cancer or autoimmune diseases right now, because that could be a blog series of its own.)

The U. S. has a population that touts 1 in 3 obese children. This incidence is tangible. This risk factor leads to early-onset diabetes and hypertension which contribute to coronary artery disease, the leading cause of death! So why aren’t we talking about the unhealthy foods marketed to our children, given to them in school, and promoted by mainstream media and big business? Because: MONEY. These things are lucrative.

There is no profit in growing your GMO-free, water and sunshine fed produce in your backyard and certainly no money in a healthy child. However, there is a lot of money in autoimmune disorders, chronic disease, and frequenting the pediatrician and the plethora of specialists we have created in the medical community for all of your sickcare needs.

Let us look at the numbers again. According to the Diabetes Report Card of 2017, in 2015 there were 193,000 new diagnoses of diabetes in those <20 years old. In one year, 0.005% of children were newly diagnosed with diabetes, not including those already diagnosed; 5 in 1,000 children were diagnosed with diabetes. They also report a 6.6% annual increase of diabetes among those <20 years of age. Diabetes is a risk factor for chronic conditions including… You guessed it! CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE.

According to the CDC, there are 1.3 million children aged 12-19 diagnosed with hypertension. For every 100 children, 3 will be diagnosed with hypertension using the CDC data. Read that again. Hypertension is also a major risk factor for that leading killer!

The U.S. spends almost $10,000 per capita in “health” care. This is double the second-highest spender, Canada. Compared to Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom we rank DEAD LAST in health outcomes. How embarrassing.

While the mainstream media is attacking parental choice and pushing government mandates, we must remind ourselves that our government does not have a track record for success in health matters, but sure spends a lot of money in the meantime. With poor health trends mimicked in our children, it is time that parents take responsibility for the health of their littles… It is time that we question mainstream practices and consult the evidence. It is time we stand up, recognize what matters most, and identify the histerics.

Informed parents are not concerned about measles. Informed parents are not mainstream. Informed parents are often ridiculed by powerful entities. Do not be mistaken. We are educated, vigilant, and fiercly protective of our own. Ball is in your court.

Shalom, light, and love.

Sites to Consider:
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/measles-scare-tactics-hurt-us-all
https://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html
https://www.cdc.gov/bloodpressure/youth.htm
https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
https://censusreporter.org/profiles/01000us-united-states/
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db328.htm
https://interactives.commonwealthfund.org/2017/july/mirror-mirror/

November 23, 2018November 23, 2018

Holiday Health

It is the time of year for gathering with friends and family with some full meals, heavy soups, and high sugar treats. These things can be detrimental to your health when they are not supported by useful sources of nutrition. Good news! You get to be creative in the kitchen. As I say: Most things in moderation, some restricted.

While you’re preparing those leftovers from Thanksgiving, throw in some fresh vegetables! It is the season for broccoli, cauliflower, carrots, garlic, onions, spinach, kale, cabbage, and lettuce! All these things work well as garnishes, on sandwiches, in casseroles, and soups. Well, I wouldn’t put lettuce in soup, but cabbage soup is pretty tasty!

As it cools down, think soup! Soup is nice and warming, has the potential to provide you with several nutrients (it is all about what you toss in), and supplies your body with HYDRATION. We tend to remember to drink water in the summer while we are hot; yet, forget in the winter while we are hermits. You need hydration all year long. Soup to the rescue!

[https://therecipecritic.com/vegetable-detox-soup/]

Which brings us to the stars of the show… these winter vegetables.

Garlic and Onions: Antimicrobial (bacteria, fungi, and viruses); High in sulfur which replenishes glutathione essential for detoxification; High in Manganese, Vitamin B6, and Vitamin C

Broccoli and Cauliflower: High in Vitamin C; good source of fiber and potassium; contains isothiocyanates that reduce oxidative stress

Carrots: Excellent source of beta-carotene; good source of threonine which is an amino acid used to treat neurological disorders and helps thymus growth and immune cell functions

Spinach: High in vitamin K; high in beta-carotene; high in Vitamin C; good source of Manganese

Kale: Same as spinach with additional anti-cancer, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory properties. I add kale to all my recipes!

Cabbage: Great source of vitamin C

These vegetables (plus, many more and fruits) are sources of metabolites and biologically active components that are found to be beneficial to overall health and several immune functions.

Phytochemicals: aid in detoxification, stimulate the immune system, prevent DNA damage, repair DNA damage, regulates hormones, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, anti-carcinogenic

Flavonoids: antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-carcinogenic, anti-mutagenic, inhibits neurodegeneration, regulates the immune system, antimicrobial

[https://www.growbetterveggies.com/growbetterveggies/2017/11/tending-a-winte.html]

While cooking some vegetables, be careful not to boil your soup. Why?

Vitamin C.

– Vitamin C is a powerful antioxidant. It cleans up waste within your body by capturing free radicals. Free radicals are unstable, highly-reactive particles that cause cell damage. You want to limit these!

– Because Vitamin C is water-soluble, it is excreted in your urine. This means that you must constantly replenish this vitamin for use. It also means that Vitamin C escapes foods when exposed to heat and water. Boiling as preparation for vegetables high in vitamin C breaks down this vitamin, and it can get lost in the liquid. That is obviously okay in soups! If you are worried about the heat, just add your vitamin C rich vegetables LAST and be careful when reheating leftovers. Or, you can do what I do and just save some vegetables and add them in each time you reheat your soup.

Vitamin C is also tolerable in high doses with no upper limit toxicity. The only documented side effect is abdominal discomfort and bowel flushing in frequent mega-doses.

Yet, some vegetables love the heat!

A gentle sauté before tossing them in soup can bring out the flavors and do wonders for carotenoids found in carrots and deeply colored root vegetables! These are excellent vegetables in soups.

Beta-carotene: This is a mineral that is converted to Vitamin A. Beta-carotene has anti-cancer properties specific to the gut, lungs, and leukemia. Dietary beta-carotene is safe in high doses as the body will not convert more beta-carotene than needed. Retinol (another form of vitamin A) is already converted and can be absorbed in toxic amounts as it is readily stored in fats. Vitamin A protects your skin and mucous membranes (your first line of defense!). Vitamin A fortifies the immune system and is essential for eye health and vision.

Most of all, have fun combining flavors and find what works for you and your family. Some vegetables are a pain to prep; some are easier. Some people cannot tolerate certain flavors; some put garlic in EVERYTHING (guilty!). I capitalize on naptime for veggie prep. Hours in the kitchen may save you hundreds in the stores seeking out illness remedies. A fortified immune system is well-equipped to fight off those “seasonal” invaders!

Shalom, light, and love.

Sites to Consider:
https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminC-HealthProfessional/
https://www.livestrong.com/article/17387-nutritional-value-carrots/
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/252758.php
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/L-threonine#section=Top
http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=38
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5465813/
http://www.aicr.org/reduce-your-cancer-risk/diet/elements_phytochemicals.html
http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=60
https://www.livescience.com/45293-onion-nutrition.html
https://www.livescience.com/45408-broccoli-nutrition.html
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/benefits-of-cauliflower#section