OVERDIAGNOSIS

It's was refreshing to read something this morning from the Medical Mafia, reported in the Brisbane Times, that makes some sense. It came from Australia's Chief Medical Officer Professor Brendan Murphy who said about overdiagnosis in the medical profession:

(it is) "a significant issue in all countries with advanced health systems. We know harm can come from overdiagnosis,” Professor Murphy said, from causing undue anxiety and labelling people with stigmatising disorders, to serious adverse effects from unnecessary aggressive or invasive treatments. There is no doubt we need some sort of approach to address it.

The Brisbane Times article goes on to say that:

Overdiagnosis is exposing healthy people to tests and treatments that are at best useless, and at worst trigger aggressive procedures with devastating side effects, a formidable alliance of peak doctors colleges, researchers, advocates and public health experts warned. 

The alliance - forged by the Wiser Healthcare research collaboration - is developing a world-first national action plan to curb overdiagnosis across the medical spectrum, from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) to cancer. Reversing the harms of too much medicine was becoming a healthcare priority, members of the emerging alliance wrote in the Medical Journal of Australia on Monday.

The Wiser Healthcare collaboration states that:

Wiser Healthcare is a research collaboration involving The University of Sydney, Bond University, Monash University and international colleagues. We investigate the cause and size of the problem and test new solutions, in the areas of cancer, cardiovascular disease and musculoskeletal disorders, with a particular focus on overdiagnosis caused by imaging (like CT scans and MRI scans), testing biomarkers (for example, blood tests like the Prostate Specific Antigen test), and genetic tests. Here you can find out about our plans, read our work, see the evidence about overdiagnosis, and get help to make decisions, whether you are a clinician, policymaker, or citizen considering your own healthcare.

There's clearly no plans to address the scourge of vaccinations but at least it's a start. What it will achieve actually however, remains to be seen. At least the issue is being discussed and advice given to prospective victims of overdiagnosis. Here is some advice that is offered:

Keeping it short 

Short questions that have been shown to improve the quality of information that doctors provide about treatment options: 

What are my options?
What are the possible benefits and harms of those options?
How likely are each of those benefits and harms to happen to me?
What will happen if I do nothing? 

Choosing Wisely 

Questions recommended by the Choosing Wisely organisation in Australia, to help avoid unnecessary tests and treatments: 

Do I really need this test, treatment or procedure?
What are the risks?
Are there simpler, safer options?
What happens if I don’t do anything?
What are the costs?

The Choosing Wisely organisation professes to be helping healthcare providers and consumers start important conversations about improving the quality of healthcare by eliminating unnecessary and sometimes harmful tests, treatments, and procedures. It is facilitated by NPS MEDICINEWISE that purports to be making Australia more medicinewise, through digital health and data insights, health professional education and reliable health information for consumers.

The authors of the MJA Perspective wrote:

Cultural beliefs that more tests and treatments were always better, financial incentives to diagnose and treat in the health system and increasingly sensitive diagnostic technologies detecting minor abnormalities were likely major drivers of overdiagnosis. 

Doctors’ cognitive biases and the fears that they might miss something, coupled with the public’s expectation that the clinicians should “do something” also fed overdiagnosis.

Of course, there will be immediate reactions from those medical areas that feel threatened:

Chief executive of Cancer Council Australia Sanchia Aranda said any moves to curb overdiagnosis must not undermine national screening programs and the benefits of early detection. 

 Here is the link to the MJA article and also a link to some information about Alan Cassels (his website at www.alancassels.com doesn't seem to be working). This is some information taken from the footnotes to a YouTube video which I just watched and which I've embedded below:

Alan Cassels has been immersed in pharmaceutical policy research and healthcare journalism for the past 23 years, mostly studying and writing about how prescription drugs are regulated, marketed, prescribed and used. His niche is in exposing the large gap between the marketing and the science around prescription drugs, medical screening and other forms of disease creation. His books include Selling Sickness: How the World’s Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies are Turning us All into Patients (co-written with Ray Moynihan), The ABCs of Disease Mongering: An Epidemic in 26 Letters, and Seeking Sickness: Medical Screening and the Misguided Hunt for Disease.

OXFAM

A report from Oxfam notes that:

Pharmaceutical companies behind some of Australia’s best-known brands avoided an estimated $215 million a year in tax in Australia over a three year period - almost four times the $63 million actually paid - Oxfam says. 

The report, ‘Prescription for Poverty’ looks at four of the world’s largest global pharmaceutical companies - Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Merck, Sharpe & Dome (MSD Australia), and Abbott – which in Australia are estimated to have unfairly avoided paying $215 million in taxes a year between 2013 and 2015.

No surprises there but Oxfam's CEO Helen Szoke went on to say, clearly ignorant of the irony:

“To put it in perspective, if this amount were invested in healthcare in these countries, this could pay for 10 million girls to be vaccinated against the HPV virus that causes cervical cancer and kills one woman every two minutes around the world,” Dr Szoke said. 

OXFAM IS A SCAM

Pay who? Oh, Merck, the pharmaceutical company that produces the vaccine Gardasil! Of course she also implies that Gardasil would reduce this alleged death rate from cervical cancer. Ah well, she's a doctor so she's bought into the whole vaccination mythology but the irony is that while she criticises the tax avoidance schemes of the pharmaceutical companies, she does not have the slightest hesitation is suggesting that money be given right back to them via one of the most notorious vaccine on the market.

Oxfam of course is one of those sham organisations that purport to be working toward alleviating poverty and improving health in developing countries. This quote from Oxfam's own website gives an insight into what it's really on about:

Vaccines have contributed to some of the greatest public health successes of the past century, averting 2.5 million child deaths every year and millions more bouts of illness and disability. Yet even as the demand for existing, new and planned vaccines grows in developing countries, financing for immunization in poor countries has reached a crisis point, and major problems in the vaccines market mean that access to existing vaccines and development of new vaccines will be impeded and delayed. 

That's what Oxfam sees as a way of improving the health of children in developing countries: undermine the already weakened immune systems of malnourished children by subjecting them to a barrage of vaccinations.

Let's not forget Oxfam is a Scam.

An Acne Vaccine?

There are seemingly no limits to the vaccine madness that has taken hold of the world. This article in today's online edition of The Jakarta Post reports on a study in the United States that looked into the possibility of vaccination to prevent acne.

"Current treatment options are often not effective or tolerable for many of the 85 percent of adolescents and more than 40 million adults in the United States who suffer from this condition," Huang said. "New, safe and efficient therapies are sorely needed."

Despite the damage caused to adolescents by Gardasil, the pharmaceutical companies would of course love to be able to promote an anti-acne vaccine to such a huge market. As with the production of all vaccines, clinical trials of potential candidates would be limited if not overtly fraudulent. The safety of vaccines will always be secondary to the need to maximise profits.

There's further information about a potential vaccine here. Having suffered from acne myself as a youth, I would have welcomed a cure and would have opted for a vaccine had one been available. Of course back in those days, I thought vaccines were safe and beneficial. I didn't much the safety of vaccines or the need for them until much later in life. My parents never questioned the vaccine propaganda of the times and told me how the polio vaccine had stopped the terrifying spread of poliomyelitis. This vaccine that I received was later found to be contaminated with a cancer-causing virus of simian origin.

I often wonder whether my youngest brother's acoustic neuroma wasn't caused by the additional vaccines that he received because he was born in 1960, eleven years after me. He was around four years of age when he suddenly developed strabismus.

I remember my mother being quite shocked at the discovery because this was certainly not something that he had from birth. This sudden onset of strabismus in toddlers and children is a classic sign of brain damage caused by the aluminium in vaccines as outlined in Forest Maready's book Crooked B (see my post about this). When my brother was diagnosed with his brain tumour (acoustic neuroma) at age 19, the doctors were of the opinion that, because of its size, it had been growing since he was two years of age. Of course, no one will ever know if his tumour was caused by vaccine damage but I am highly suspicious that this was the reason.

Link

Even after reading Maready's book, it was only now when writing this blog post that I remembered my own brother's sudden onset strabismus. That's how conditioned I was to not connect his condition to vaccine damage. Certainly at the time, there was never any question that his condition had been precipitated by a recent vaccination. It was just accepted and he suddenly had to wear spectacles with a patch over one of the lenses so that his misaligned eye would be encouraged to straighten up. While Tony's strabismus was the result of damage to the muscles controlling eye movement, his tumour may have been the result of impairment to the nerves related to hearing and balance.

It's too late now to know what his vaccination schedule was back then. The clinic where he would have received his shots is still there, I suspect, but my brother would have to request access to his records if they are available. He's not likely to do that and in fact he dutifully receives his flu shots every year and seems to have complete faith in the medical "profession". Almost certainly however, my brother was a victim of a war on his well-being. It is a war that was only ramping up when he was at his most vulnerable but it is now in full swing and gaining momentum.

Original Antigenic Sin

This book can be viewed or downloaded from the Internet Archive

I've just finished reading Suzanne Humphries book about the history of vaccination. The book really conveyed the awful living and working conditions that working people endured in the nineteenth century that allowed diseases like measles, diphtheria and whooping cough to take such a heavy toll of the population. Here is the Amazon review:

Not too long ago, lethal infections were feared in the Western world. Since that time, many countries have undergone a transformation from disease cesspools to much safer, healthier habitats. Starting in the mid-1800s, there was a steady drop in deaths from all infectious diseases, decreasing to relatively minor levels by the early 1900s. The history of that transformation involves famine, poverty, filth, lost cures, eugenicist doctrine, individual freedoms versus state might, protests and arrests over vaccine refusal, and much more. Today, we are told that medical interventions increased our lifespan and single-handedly prevented masses of deaths. But is this really true? Dissolving Illusions details facts and figures from long-overlooked medical journals, books, newspapers, and other sources. Using myth-shattering graphs, this book shows that vaccines, antibiotics, and other medical interventions are not responsible for the increase in lifespan and the decline in mortality from infectious diseases. If the medical profession could systematically misinterpret and ignore key historical information, the question must be asked, “What else is ignored and misinterpreted today?” Perhaps the best reason to know our history is so that the worst parts are never repeated.

Of course I'd heard before that vaccines, antibiotics, and other medical interventions are not responsible for the increase in lifespan and the decline in mortality from infectious diseases but this book confirms the reality of that in meticulous detail. The author also introduced me to the term original antigenic sin explained by Wikipedia as follows:

Original antigenic sin, also known as the Hoskins effect, refers to the propensity of the body's immune system to preferentially utilise immunological memory based on a previous infection when a second slightly different version of that foreign entity (e.g. a virus or bacterium) is encountered. This leaves the immune system "trapped" by the first response it has made to each antigen, and unable to mount potentially more effective responses during subsequent infections. The phenomenon of original antigenic sin has been described in relation to influenza virus, dengue fever, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and to several other viruses.

The vaccination process is so unnatural that the body's immune response to later exposure to viruses in the wild is impaired, thus accounting for the increased vulnerability of the vaccinated population. This idea was quite new to me whereas previously I'd thought that the vaccination process itself was valid and that any problems were the result of adjuvants and other foreign material.

The response of vaccine developers to the problems caused by original antigenic sin is to modify and enhance the vaccines, not to question the efficacy of the vaccination process itself. Big Medicine and Big Pharma have too much invested in the vaccination industry to abandon it now. It's encouraging that Suzanne Humphries is a qualified medical doctor so the criticism is coming from within the profession. Here is an excerpt from her website:

Dr Humphries is a conventionally educated medical doctor who was a participant in conventional hospital systems from 1989 until 2011 as an internist and nephrologist.  She left her conventional hospital position in good standing, of her own volition in 2011. Since then, she’s been furthering her research into the medical literature on vaccines, immunity, history, and functional medicine.

I've discovered that she has a YouTube channel with 40 videos uploaded so far. Interestingly, the view count for her videos seems ridiculously low. For example, her most recent video from two weeks ago has 40 views according to the thumbnails but 130 views once you actually click on the video. Here's the video: NOW TAKEN DOWN BY YOUTUBE

Suzanne Humphries has written an autobiography titled Rising From The Dead and I've read the Amazon preview but not yet the entire book. It's a very interesting read. Here is an excerpt from it:

A Lot of Hot Air

UK weather: Blistering heatwaves and tropical storms to last four years with 'abnormally hot' air until 2022

So touted the Mirror headline of an article from the 15th August 2018 edition. The news article was based on new research by a team led by Dr Florian Sevellec, of the University of Southampton. Brazenly she said: “Warming caused by greenhouse gas is not linear. It appears to have lapsed in the early 21st century". So wait a minute, she concedes that global warming has "lapsed" since the new century began eighteen years ago.

One might hope that this would have prompted the good doctor to review her assumption that the world is in fact warming. No way! She confidently asserts:

"A new method for predicting mean temperatures, however, suggests the next few years will be hotter than expected.” The system, developed with French and Dutch researchers, uses a statistical method to search 20th and 21st century climate simulations, find similarities to current conditions and then make forecasts.

Apparently, the "lapse" is now over and this new statistical technique ensures that from now on the world will be warming again. At least until 2022! No doubt her research was well funded by the usual interested parties and her academic career will benefit because the results obtained using this new technique support the current climate orthodoxy of relentless global warming.

This is "climate science" in the early 21st century and Dr Florian Sevellec would be regarded as an expert climate scientist. Where is the science in all of this? She admits that the globe has not warmed during the opening years of the new century and then she uses a new and clearly as yet unproven statistical technique to predict what will happen over the coming few years, based on "climate simulations"!

All that most readers will remember is that the next four years are going to be "abnormally hot". Even if they're not, I'm sure climate experts like Dr Sevellec won't be phased. They'll explain it away as a "protracted and atypical lapse" before the warming begins in earnest. They'll go off and tweak their statistical tools to take account of unforeseen variables and then reassure us that the next eight years are going to feel like a "furnace".

It's sad to see presumably intelligent scientists like Dr Sevellec abandoning the scientific method and making unfounded claims about the coming "blistering heat waves and tropical storms". It seems that all climate scientists must worship at the anthropogenic global warming branch of the Church of Climatology.

The Khazars

The following comment to a video I watched caught my attention:

Satanism is based on Rabbinical Talmudism, a Babylonian Magick of biblical Pharisees, worship of Baal, Baphomet etc., the basis for Judaism, doctrine Jesus Christ railed against. Jews are not the biblical Hebrews they claim to be. They are impostors who inverted reality and inserted themselves into biblical stories. They are Khazars.

The comment came with a link attached to a blog post in The Times of Israel, dated March 18th 2014. The post has this header:

Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine 

It then goes to say that:

It is well known that, sometime in the eighth to ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people, converted to Judaism and ruled over a vast domain in what became southern Russia and Ukraine. What happened to them after the Russians destroyed that empire around the eleventh century has been a mystery. Many have speculated that the Khazars became the ancestors of Ashkenazi Jews. 

Arabs have long cited the Khazar hypothesis in attempts to deny a Jewish historical claim to the land of Israel. During the UN debate over Palestine Partition, Chaim Weizmann responded, sarcastically: “lt is very strange. All my life I have been a Jew, felt like a Jew, and I now learn that I am a Khazar.” In a more folksy vein, Prime Minister Golda Meir famously said:  “Khazar, Schmazar. There is no Khazar people. I knew no Khazars In Kiev. Or Milwaukee. Show me these Khazars of whom you speak.” 

Contrarian Hungarian ex-communist and scientist Arthur Koestler brought the Khazar hypothesis to a wider audience with The Thirteenth Tribe (1976), in the hope that disproving a common Jewish “racial” identity would end antisemitism. Clearly, that hope has not been fulfilled. Most recently, left-wing Israeli historian Shlomo Sand’s The Invention of the Jewish People took Koestler’s thesis in a direction he had not intended, arguing that because Jews were a religious community descended from converts they do not constitute a nation or need a state of their own. 

Scientists, however, dismissed the Khazar hypothesis because the genetic evidence did not add up. Until now. In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study claiming to prove that Khazar ancestry is the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Sand declared himself vindicated, and progressive organs such as Haaretz and The Forward trumpeted the results. 

Israel seems finally to have thrown in the towel. A blue-ribbon team of scholars from leading research institutions and museums has just issued a secret report to the government, acknowledging that European Jews are in fact Khazars.

So it would seem that the Khazar hypothesis has been accepted even by the Israelis. The references at the beginning of my post to the Talmud and Babylon reminded me of two videos (Meet the Rothschilds' Bosses 1 and 2) that I watched recently that were posted by an Israeli woman named Doreen Dotan. This is the link to her YouTube channel. She claims that it was the Jews who stayed behind in Babylon, after their exile to that region, who are responsible for the Talmud and the worship of Babylonian deities. She claims this group and their descendants have perverted Judaism.

All this is confusing of course to someone with little knowledge of the history of Judaism. There is an article in Wikipedia about the Babylonian Talmud. Here is an excerpt:

The Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) consists of documents compiled over the period of Late Antiquity (3rd to 5th centuries). During this time the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, a region called "Babylonia" in Jewish sources and later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis (modern Nusaybin), Mahoza (al-Mada'in, just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbedita (near present-day al Anbar Governorate), and the Sura Academy, probably located about 60 km south of Baghdad.  

Of course there is the Jerusalem Talmud and lots more to make sense of. It's best that I read the following book that I have on my Kindle:

After doing that, I should have a better overview of Jews and Judaism. I'm sure that there won't be much mention of Satanism and its connection to Radical Talmudism but at least I'll have a foundation from which to explore further. The takeaway from all this is that terms like Jew and Judaism are not straightforward. When combined with Zionism and Israel, things become more complex still. I realise I know very little.

Flat Earth

A May 22nd 2018 post by Harry T Dyer, a lecturer in Education at the University of East Anglia, on the website The Conversation was titled I watched an entire Flat Earth Convention for my research – here’s what I learnt. It was a refreshingly thoughtful article as evinced by this declaration early on in the post:

Let me begin by stating quickly that I’m not really interested in discussing if the earth if flat or not (for the record, I’m happily a “globe earther”) – and I’m not seeking to mock or denigrate this community. What’s important here is not necessarily whether they believe the earth is flat or not, but instead what their resurgence and public conventions tell us about science and knowledge in the 21st century.

Importantly, he makes the critical observation that:

While flat earthers seem to trust and support scientific methods, what they don’t trust is scientists, and the established relationships between “power” and “knowledge”. This relationship between power and knowledge has long been theorised by sociologists. By exploring this relationship, we can begin to understand why there is a swelling resurgence of flat earthers. 

He concludes by saying:

In many ways, a public meeting of flat earthers is a product and sign of our time; a reflection of our increasing distrust in scientific institutions, and the moves by power-holding institutions towards populism and emotions. In much the same way that Foucault reflected on what social outcasts could reveal about our social systems, there is a lot flat earthers can reveal to us about the current changing relationship between power and knowledge. And judging by the success of this UK event – and the large conventions planned in Canada and America this year – it seems the flat earth is going to be around for a while yet. 

The post is well worth a full read. The author notes that, while the Internet has led to an unprecedented sharing of ideas and information, it is by no means conducive to consensus. On the contrary, it is promoting polarisation as various, competing interest groups strive to make themselves heard and garner support for their causes. What I'd like to add in this post is that such interest groups are highly susceptible to infiltration and manipulation by parties that are not "true believers" and have their own agenda.

The flat earthers are perfect in a way because they outrage of the scientific community and amuse most of the rest of us who choose to believe that the Earth is a globe. By first aligning with the flat earth community and then broadening their scope to include other issues such as questioning manmade global warming, certain parties can "contaminate" these other issues. It can then be said that those who question the reality of manmade global warming also believe in a flat Earth. Many would assume that, since the latter is absurd in their opinion, so too is the former. It's just one of the ways in which the power elite can undermine and derail legitimate concerns about all sort of issues including climate change, fluoridation, vaccination, banking and significant historical events.

I'm certainly sympathetic to the flat earthers and agree with their deep suspicions about the scientific establishment. If NASA says the Earth is a globe, why should this organisation be believed? This is the organisation that claims to have landed men on the Moon almost fifty years ago! Scientists in general have been forced to compromise their commitment to the scientific method in order to get ahead in their chosen fields. They have to adhere to the prevailing orthodoxy or risk professional stagnation, ostracism and even expulsion. Climatologists who don't support "the truth" of anthropogenic global warming will soon find themselves "out in the cold" if I can be allowed a pun. There is no funding for studies that challenge this orthodoxy.

The flatearthers are going back to the basics and questioning everything they have ever been told. This of course is always a good idea. They choose not to accept that the earth is a globe simply because NASA and other scientific institutions say that it is. Photographs and videos showing the curvature of the Earth can be easily faked in the same way that the Moon landings were. However, the polarisation around the question of whether the Earth is flat is essentially a distraction, diverting attention away from the key issue of how power is shaping knowledge. The ruling elite choose to remain largely in the background but its members control global finance and wield enormous power through the banking system, mainstream media, political structures, multinational organisations and scientific institutions. This tiny percentage of the world's population, controlling most of the world's wealth, is cleverly shaping what it thinks we should know.

The elite has an agenda that it intends to implement and we, by taking sides over this or that issue (flat Earth, vaccinations, global warming or whatever), are unwittingly abetting it by diverting our energy and attention from THE BIG ISSUE. This issue is the need to become aware of how our knowledge of the world is being shaped by powerful people who don't have our best interests at heart. These people could have promoted peace over war, economic equality over disparity, health over an illness industry but they chose not to do so. It is important to focus on who "they" are, discovering what agenda they are pursuing and what agencies they are using to implement it.

As I said earlier, the flatearthers are going right back to basics and questioning the nature of the very ground on which they are standing. They believe they are standing on a flat Earth. They may be right. Right or not however, they are reclaiming power for themselves and reevaluating what they've been told is true. They are redefining their knowledge using this new power. For too long, humans have willingly relinquished their power to others: religious leaders, politicians, demagogues, false prophets, scientists, charlatans, doctors or whoever. There are a very few who manage to reclaim all their power, attaining when they do access to infinite power and infinite knowledge while experiencing infinite bliss. The knowledge attained is true gnosis and not knowledge of the phenomenal world. For the rest of us, we must try to reclaim what power we can and thus add to our store of what we know to be true: our gnosis or knowledge of spiritual mysteries.

Humanity is increasing its knowledge of the Earth and its place in the universe but this does not come for the most part with any commensurate understanding. To say the stars and planets are shards of a shattered unity that eludes our understanding sounds nonsensical to most scientists and yet it is closer to the truth than our current cosmological conceptions. With increasing personal power comes increasing gnosis, knowledge of what is and what we know to be true. It is not knowledge that has been given to us or that we have acquired from someone or somewhere. It is endogenous. Our intellect cannot help us to attain it and is in fact the biggest impediment to gnosis. For flatearthers, belief in a flat earth may be a rite of passage, replacing a sense of disempowerment with one of empowerment. It may be a first step in disengaging from a reliance on outside parties to define what is to be believed.

I choose to believe in an Earth that is a sphere, albeit not a perfect one. My long time practice of Astrology, a subject virulently attacked by scientists who often have no idea what they're even attacking, inclines me to accept that we are indeed on a large ball spinning on its axis as it revolves around a much larger, luminous ball called the Sun. It's not that I'm right and the flatearthers are wrong. Ultimately, all such knowledge about the workings of the Universe is illusory and has nothing to do with gnosis. We all need to reclaim our personal power in our own way. The Flat Earth is a way for some but not for others.