The case against fluoride

At the AB 2098 event in Sacramento today, Jay Sanders of walked up to me and asked me, “Can I give you a book?”

This is the sort of life changing question that got Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to realize that vaccines aren’t safe.

So after a 10 second hesitation to overcome my cognitive dissonance (since as we all know fluoridation must be safe since it is mandated everywhere ), I said yes, and I ended up with a copy of “The Case against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep It There.

Nobody likes to admit they made a mistake.

Sound familiar? 🙂

In a nutshell, here is what you need to know.

  1. Trials began in 1945.

  2. It was approved in 1950, before any trials were completed and any comprehensive studies were published.

  3. There is a tiny net benefit to fluoride if it is kept in your mouth and not swallowed. It can slightly reduce your risk of a cavity.

  4. Once you swallow it, the risks strongly outweigh the benefits. IQ drops significantly and other negative health outcomes accrue. It’s not a close call.

  5. In hindsight, it was a stupid intervention.

  6. It would have been better to have limited fluoride to small doses in toothpaste, mouth rinse, etc, that are then spat out, provide the benefits of strengthening tooth enamel, without the detriments of deteriorating bones by drinking an unknown dosage. 

  7. But nobody likes to admit they made a mistake! Does this sound familiar?

  8. All large towns are required by law to fluoridate water. It’s mandated.

  9. Short term ways to avoid fluoride:

    1. Drink distilled water or mountain spring water

    2. Use a reverse osmosis filter

    3. Use a 3 stage Clearly Filtered system

    4. Use a Berkey filter (you have to get the special fluoride filter)

  10. Long term ways to avoid fluoride in your water:

    1. Get your town to stop fluoridating the water. It’s poison. You will have to overcome the same disbelief you get when you tell people the COVID vaccines aren’t safe.

    2. Change the law in your state to outlaw fluoridation. Like vaccines, the science is crystal clear when you look at it; but nobody wants to look at it. After we take down the COVID vaccines, people will hopefully be more receptive to looking at the risk-benefit here.

    3. Donate to

  11. For more information:

    1. Watch the movie “The fluoride deception” (just 28 minutes)

    2. See

    3. Read the book

    4. Read the amazing comment by AMD

Shocking extent of government collusion with Big Tech to censor Americans revealed in lawsuit

Image: Shocking extent of government collusion with Big Tech to censor Americans revealed in lawsuit

(Natural News) A lawsuit filed against President Biden has shed some light on the shocking extent of collusion between federal agencies and Big Tech in illegal censorship activities online.

The lawsuit was brought about by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, Eric Schmidt and Jeff Landry, along with the New Civil Liberties Alliance, against Biden. The suit was filed in May, and as part of the discovery process, the plaintiffs identified meetings with social media platforms related to “misinformation” or content modulation.

Their findings revealed that a Unified Strategies group meeting was held every month between a range of government agencies and Big Tech companies. At these meetings, topics that would be suppressed or censored were discussed.

Among the topics that they deemed worthy of censorship were, not surprisingly, stories about people refusing to get COVID vaccines and the repercussions that they faced for exercising their health freedom, particularly those that involved punishments given to members of the Armed Services for refusing to get jabbed.

They also censored posts in which people discussed testing positive for the virus after getting the vaccine as well as criticism against COVID restrictions and the way that they were affecting people’s mental health. Personal stories of the side effects people experienced after getting the vaccine, such as menstrual irregularities, and concerns about vaccine passports becoming mandatory were also targeted by censors.

New Civil Liberties Alliance notes: “Under the First Amendment, the federal government may not police private speech nor pick winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas. But that is precisely what the government has done — and is still doing — on a massive scale not previously divulged.


“Multiple agencies’ communications demonstrate that the federal government has exerted tremendous pressure on social-media companies — pressure to which companies have repeatedly bowed.”

More than 50 federal employees from 15 federal agencies involved

The group goes on to explain that official communications have shown the head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency discussing the need to overcome hesitation among some social media companies to work with the government in censoring certain views. They added that this type of governmental interference is unlawful and violates Americans’ fundamental right of free speech. They called for more discovery to uncover just how extensive this activity has been.

Some of the documents that have been obtained as part of the lawsuit identify more than 50 federal employees in 15 federal agencies who have taken part in these censorship meetings or engaged in illegal censorship in some other way.

The list of those involved in this appalling behavior is lengthy and includes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of the Surgeon General, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis, the Justice Department’s National Security Division, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s Election Security and Resilience team, and the U.S. Census Bureau.

Members of White House staff have also been implicated, such as the former White House senior COVID advisor Andy Slavitt, White House lawyer Dana Remus, and the president’s deputy assistant, Rob Flaherty.

Other emails show that outside consultants were brought in to manage the collusion between the government and social media in censoring Americans. For example, strategic marketing and communications firm Reingold was enlisted to set up a portal that CDC officials could use to flag content that it wanted social media platforms to censor.

Some of the Big Tech names who participated in these censorship meetings include Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Wikimedia Foundation, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Pinterest and Reddit.

Some social media companies may have been initially hesitant, but others showed an eagerness to cooperate with the censorship. For example, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was in regular contact with the State Department as far back as February 2020 offering to help “control information and misinformation related to Corona virus.”

Meanwhile, three Republican representatives on the House Oversight and Reform, Judiciary and Commerce committees have introduced legislation that would ban federal employees from using their roles to influence decisions on censorship made by tech platforms.

Sources for this article include:

CHAOS all over the world: UN food chief describes “destabilization of nations” resulting from FAMINE

Image: CHAOS all over the world: UN food chief describes “destabilization of nations” resulting from FAMINE

(Natural News) Several years back, Donald Trump warned it was coming. Now, United Nations World Food Program Executive Director David Beasley is saying it has arrived.

“A perfect storm on top of a perfect storm,” Beasley recently said, has reached our doorstep. Both Nord Stream gas pipelines (1 and 2) from Russia to Europe have ruptured and become non-operational. Energy prices are through the roof. Fertilizer is too expensive for farmers to obtain – if they can even find any.

The global economy as we currently know it is on its last legs. And Beasley wants the billionaire class, along with certain wealthy Gulf nations, to contribute anything they can to prevent widespread food shortages next year.

“Otherwise, there’s going to be chaos all over the world,” Beasley warned during an interview with The Associated Press (AP). (Related: Other UN officials are begging Russia to export more fertilizer to Western nations.)

Five-and-a-half years ago when Beasley was installed to his current position, only 80 million people around the world were headed towards starvation. Then that number ballooned to 135 million. Then it doubled from there to around 276 million as a result of the Covid-19 scamdemic.

Today, as many as 345 million people – more than the total population of the United States – face starvation following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“Within that are 50 million people in 45 countries knocking on famine’s door,” Beasley says.

“If we don’t reach these people, you will have famine, starvation, destabilization of nations unlike anything we saw in 2007-2008 and 2011, and you will have mass migration. We’ve got to respond now.”


UN says the world now lives in “a permanent state of humanitarian emergency”

According to UN General Assembly President Csaba Korosi, the world now lives, “it seems, in a permanent state of humanitarian emergency.”

Conflicts and humanitarian crises, added UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, are now so great that the funding gap for humanitarian appeals is the highest it has ever been at $32 billion.

The war in Ukraine amplified the crisis by shutting down grain shipments from Ukraine, a nation that is said to produce enough food to feed 400 million people.

Russia is also the world’s second-largest exporter of fertilizer, and is also a major food producer much like Ukraine. If these two nations are not exporting as normal, then millions of people will starve.

Then we have the inflation situation, which is pricing out many formerly middle-class families that can no longer make ends meet. Poorer folks were especially hard hit by the Fauci Flu lockdowns, which “just economically devastated them,” according to Beasley.

“With the fertilizer crisis we’re facing right now, with droughts, we’re facing a food pricing problem in 2022,” Beasley added. “This created havoc around the world.”

“If we don’t get on top of this quickly – and I don’t mean next year, I mean this year – you will have a food availability problem in 2023. And that’s going to be hell.”

In other words, hell on earth is what awaits us in 2023 apart from a miracle. Even if the interventions called for by Beasley materialize, it will not be enough to contain what is shaping up to be the Four Horses of the Apocalypse riding with abandon.

“We’ve got to get those fertilizers moving, and we’ve got to move it quickly,” Beasley added in an impassioned plea for assistance. “Asian rice production is at a critical state right now. Seeds are in the ground.”

More than 70 percent of the population in Africa is fed by 33 million small family farms that desperately need fertilizer to reach harvest. The UN says “we’re several billion dollars short of what we need for fertilizers.”

More related news coverage can be found at

Sources for this article include:

Carbon dioxide levels have nothing to do with global temperatures, top scientist says

Image: Carbon dioxide levels have nothing to do with global temperatures, top scientist says

(Natural News) Meteorologist William Kininmonth with the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) authored a new paper on so-called “greenhouse gases,” revealing that carbon dioxide (CO2) does not impact global temperatures as many falsely claim.

At worst, CO2 has a “minimal effect” on temperature and climate, which is constantly in a state of flux due to factors far outside the bounds of anything mankind can control.

A former consultant at the World Meteorological Organization’s Commission for Climatology, as well as the former head of the Australian government’s National Climate Centre, Kininmonth knows what he is talking about when it comes to the climate. And he is not convinced that CO2 is anything about which to worry.

He says oceans are the “vital inertial and thermal flywheels” of the climate system. And the oceans, as we can clearly see, are not something that any person or government can control. (Related: Remember when Pete Buttigieg declared that carbon dioxide is a “sin” in the eyes of God?)

“Efforts to decarbonize in the hope of affecting global temperatures will be in vain,” Kininmonth is quoted as saying, adding that recent warming trends are “probably simply the result of fluctuations in the ever-changing ocean circulation.”

Ocean movement is largely responsible for planetary warming, not cow farts

Kininmonth says it “must be recognized” that CO2 is a non-issue when it comes to warming trends. Humans will always exhale CO2 and plants will always inhale it – and no amount of climate tampering will ever change that.


He further shared a chart showing that even as CO2 concentration increases from 0 to 600 parts per million (ppm), the total strength of the greenhouse effect barely changes, indicated by a nearly perfect horizontal line across all concentrations.

In essence, whether there is no CO2 in the air or tons of it, the greenhouse effect remains the same regardless. This basically deconstructs the entire global warming narrative with one simple data point.

No longer is it necessary to cull all cattle, destroy all gas-powered cars, and exterminate billions of people. Whether life continues on as normal or gets forced into a “green” transition, warming (and cooling) patterns will do what they are going to do regardless.

Good luck trying to convince the climate crazies about any of this, but it is the truth just the same. And it is helpful to have someone like Kininmonth, a renowned climate expert, saying it along with the independent media.

Kininmonth says that heat is continually exchanged with the tropical atmosphere and transported by winds to enhance warming at the North Pole. The oceans are doing this, he says, despite it getting blamed on human activity.

Temperatures at the South Pole, meanwhile, have barely moved at all over the past 50 years, which further supports Kininmonth’s hypothesis – which makes a whole lot more sense, by the way, than the cow farts narrative coming from the left.

“Models fail to reproduce accurate energy flows, and this is the guts of how the climate system works,” added Dr. John Christie, a professor of atmospheric and earth sciences at The University of Alabama, supporting Kininmonth’s claims about ocean energy driving climate change.

Despite all this, the prevailing climate claims still point to human use of fossil fuels as the driving factor in global warming. That is because those pushing these claims have a whole lot to gain from a forced global conversion to “green” energy.

“Climate change is a natural process primarily controlled by the cycles of the sun,” added a commenter, pointing to yet another source of global warming that is outside of human control.

The climate insanity is only getting more and more insane. You can keep up with the latest at

Sources for this article include:

USDA launches $500 million grant program for domestic fertilizer production

Image: USDA launches $500 million grant program for domestic fertilizer production

(Natural News) The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is offering $500 million in grants to bolster domestic fertilizer production to spur competition and combat the massive price increases of the past few months.

Farmers have been dealing with skyrocketing fertilizer prices for most of the year. Worse yet, even though prices declined somewhat during the summer, forecasts predict that costs will surge once again in the fall. This is compounding the already dire concerns and anxieties American farmers have about potential farm income for 2023. (Related: Nitrogen fertilizer prices are expected to rise – and the cost of natural gas is no longer the only factor.)

The USDA’s $500 million grant program is known as the Fertilizer Production Expansion Program. This is the continuation of a program the department established back in March when it made available $250 million to finance more domestic fertilizer production.

At the time, the USDA said it would also use funds drawn from the Commodity Credit Corporation, a government-owned corporation designed to help stabilize agricultural prices and support farmers’ incomes, to develop a grant program that would provide “gap financing” to help bring new domestic fertilizer production in the market.

America is currently one of the top three importers of fertilizer. Most of the fertilizer or components of fertilizer come from countries like Russia, Morocco, China and Canada. Supply chain issues from last year made fertilizer prices start growing. These prices crept even higher earlier this year and are expected to soar to record highs by the end of the fall planting season.


While price is one main problem for American farmers, fertilizer availability is another dire concern. Issues stemming from freak weather incidents, including the impact of Hurricane Ida, to political issues like the sanctions against massive fertilizer producer Russia, have created a cobweb of concerns that have slowed down global fertilizer production and have prevented what fertilizer there is in the market to reach the United States.

Program unlikely to help farmers deal with fertilizer costs at present

According to the White House and the USDA, the grant money from the Fertilizer Production Expansion Program will support independent, innovative, sustainable and farmer-focused domestic fertilizer production meant to supply American farmers with cheap fertilizer.

USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack himself said that the department’s bigger goal is to help create “a resilient, secure and sustainable economy, and this support to provide domestic, independent choices for fertilizer supplies is part of that effort.”

“Recent supply chain disruptions have shown just how critical it is to invest in the agricultural supply chain here at home,” he added.

The maximum grant amount that can be doled out is $100 million. The minimum is $1 million. Each grant has a term of five years.

The Fertilizer Institute President and CEO Corey Rosenbusch praised the program, saying that “anything that helps strengthen domestic fertilizer production is a win for the industry, growers and consumers.”

Unfortunately, this program comes far too late to help farmers deal with prices at the moment. In Missouri, farmers are currently paying an average of $1,325 for a ton of nitrogen fertilizer. In Iowa, farmers are paying more than $1,400 per ton.

Rosenbusch himself noted that if the administration of President Joe Biden really wanted to help boost domestic fertilizer production, it would require billions of dollars. One nitrogen fertilizer plant, he noted, can cost between $2 to $4 billion to construct.

Learn more news about fertilizer production and prices at

Watch this episode of the “Health Ranger Report” as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, talks about how Hurricane Ian has devastated North America’s fertilizer production.

This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on

More related stories:

Major Florida fertilizer hub took DIRECT HIT by Hurricane Ian, produces HALF the phosphate fertilizer for America.

Green energy GENOCIDE: Without fossil fuel, there’ll be no more fertilizer to grow food.

United Nations BEGGING Russia to export fertilizer so Western nations don’t suffer a worsening food collapse.

FAMINE AHEAD: High fertilizer prices could cause global grain production to PLUMMET by 40%.

Prepare for dire food shortages as most fertilizer production in Europe goes offline.

Sources include:

Fifth COVID Shot Recommended Without Safety or Efficacy Data

fifth covid shot

  • The emergency authorizations of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s bivalent COVID boosters are based on preliminary test results from a grand total of eight mice, and that data hasn’t even been made public

  • Based on the antibody response in eight mice, the Biden administration has ordered 171 million doses of the two boosters

  • A reanalysis of data from the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccine trials found that, combined, the jabs were associated with a risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest at a rate of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated. Meanwhile, the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization was only 2.3 per 10,000 participants for Pfizer and 6.4 per 10,000 for Moderna

  • According to a recent risk-benefit analysis of a third booster for university students, for each COVID hospitalization prevented, the booster will cause 18 to 98 serious adverse events

  • A number of top officials with the FDA, CDC and the NIH reportedly have serious concerns about the direction we’re going in, yet are too afraid to speak out or push back

Visit Mercola Market


August 31, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the reformulated COVID bivalent booster shots by Moderna and Pfizer1 — all without the required convening of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), which would typically discuss or vote on the authorization or approval of a new vaccine.

Instead, the FDA pushed the matter before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). ACIP met for eight hours September 1, 2022, and authorized the untested boosters 13-to-1.2 3 CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky endorsed the recommendation later that evening.

Pfizer’s new booster, authorized for people age 12 and older, is a bivalent injection targeting Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, which are the two currently in circulation.

Moderna’s shot, authorized for adults only, aged 18 and older, targets the already extinct Wuhan strain and Omicron subvariant BA.1.4 The two bivalent boosters is only be available to those who have already received the primary two-dose series and/or a monovalent booster at least two months ago.5

As explained in “What They’re Not Telling You About the New mRNA Boosters,” the emergency authorization of these reformulated boosters is based on nothing more than preliminary test results from a grand total of eight mice,6 and that data hasn’t even been released to the public.

In an August 30, 2022, article, Science explained the makeup of the reformulated boosters:7

“Both the Pfizer-BioNTech collaboration and Moderna make their vaccines from messenger RNA (mRNA) coding for the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2. The new vaccines are bivalent.

Half of the mRNA codes for the spike protein of the ancestral virus strain that emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, which is also in the original shots; the other half codes for the spike protein in BA.1 or the one in BA.4 and BA.5, which have identical spikes …

For the BA.4/BA.5 boosters, the companies have submitted animal data. They have not released those data publicly, although at the June FDA meeting, Pfizer presented preliminary findings in eight mice given BA.4/BA.5 vaccines as their third dose.

Compared with the mice that received the original vaccine as a booster, the animals showed an increased response to all Omicron variants tested: BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5.

The companies say clinical trials for the BA.4/BA.5 vaccines will begin next month [i.e. September 2022]; they need clinical data both for full approval of the vaccines — their recent submissions are only for emergency use authorization — and to help develop future updates.

Presumably they will measure recipients’ antibody levels, but not the vaccine’s efficacy against infection or severe disease. Such trials are very expensive and were not done for the BA.1 shot either.”

A key take-home here is that efficacy against infection and severe disease has NEVER been ascertained. Those trials were not done for the original shot, and won’t be done for the reformulated boosters. Yet the efficacy of these boosters is assumed and declared as having been “proven” based on the original trials.

Talk about a circular argument! It’s just assumptions piled upon assumptions. Yet, based on the antibody response in eight mice alone, the Biden administration has now ordered 171 million doses of the two boosters.

Let’s not forget that the mice actually did get infected with Omicron,8 although we don’t know to what degree, since they haven’t released the data. For all we know, the mice may have had a good antibody response, got sick and then dropped dead.

What’s more, the monovalent Pfizer booster authorized for children aged 5 to 11, back in May 2022, was based on the antibody levels of just 67 children.9 So, when the FDA claims the original human trials were exhaustive and have conclusively proven the shots are both safe and effective, they’re flat out lying.

In addition to apparent fraud being committed, and the fact that they eliminated the placebo groups midway, those human trials won’t even be finalized for another two years or so, as all clinical trials require follow-up.

All we have are preliminary analyses, and FOIA released documents clearly show Pfizer has been less than transparent about adverse effects, as they mislabeled and dismissed almost all of them.

A reanalysis10 of data from the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccine trials found that, combined, Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 jabs were actually associated with a risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated. Meanwhile, the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization was only 2.3 per 10,000 participants for Pfizer and 6.4 per 10,000 for Moderna. So, again, the risk-benefit is crazy lopsided AGAINST the shots.

Aside from the risk of immediate adverse effects of these experimental gene transfer injections, there’s also the issue of immune destruction through repeat exposure. A number of scientists have warned that repeated injections appear to be breaking down people’s immune systems. As noted by independent journalist Rav Avora:11

“The European Medicines Agency has warned12 against the potential adverse immunological effects of repeated boosting every four months.

As Dr. Marty Makary from Johns Hopkins has noted,13 recent research shows a ‘reduced immune response against the Omicron strain among people previously infected who then received three COVID vaccine doses compared to a control group that previously had COVID and did not have multiple shots.’

It is just impossible to overstate the unconditional absurdity of the FDA and CDC decision. Not only is the booster merely available to the public … but it is recommended by the state for everyone, including children and teenagers — those with least to gain and most to lose.”

Indeed, the population most likely to be mandated to take a bivalent booster are students, and according to a recent risk-benefit analysis,14 which assessed the impact of booster mandates for university students, between 22,000 and 30,000 previously uninfected students (aged 18 to 29) must be boosted to prevent a single COVID-19 hospitalization.

“For each COVID-related hospitalization prevented, a third booster will cause 18 to 98 serious adverse events.”

And, for each COVID-related hospitalization prevented, the booster will cause 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3 “booster-associated myocarditis cases in males,” plus another 1,373 to 3,234 cases of “grade ≥3 reactogenicity which interferes with daily activities.”

In short, mandating a third COVID shot for university students will result in a net expected harm of massive proportions, which is completely unethical. Anyone who cannot compute that 18 to 98 serious injuries plus another 3,000+ injuries that are bad enough to interfere with daily living is WORSE than one COVID hospitalization really should not be in a public health position. They belong in a remedial first-grade math class.

Sadly, a number of top officials within the FDA, CDC and the National Institutes of Health reportedly have serious concerns about the direction we’re going in, yet are too afraid to speak out or push back, so the death toll keeps mounting. In a July 15, 2022, Substack article, Makary and Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg shared the following:15

“The calls and text messages are relentless. On the other end are doctors and scientists at the top levels of the NIH, FDA and CDC. They are variously frustrated, exasperated and alarmed about the direction of the agencies to which they have devoted their careers.

‘It’s like a horror movie I’m being forced to watch and I can’t close my eyes,’ one senior FDA official lamented. ‘People are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything.’

That particular FDA doctor was referring to two recent developments inside the agency. First, how, with no solid clinical data, the agency authorized COVID vaccines for infants and toddlers, including those who already had COVID. And second, the fact that just months before, the FDA bypassed their external experts to authorize booster shots for young children …

At the NIH, doctors and scientists complain to us about low morale and lower staffing: The NIH’s Vaccine Research Center has had many of its senior scientists leave over the last year, including the director, deputy director and chief medical officer. ‘They have no leadership right now …’ one NIH scientist told us …

Another CDC scientist told us: ‘I used to be proud to tell people I work at the CDC. Now I’m embarrassed.’ Why are they embarrassed? In short, bad science. The longer answer: that the heads of their agencies are using weak or flawed data to make critically important public health decisions … And that they have a myopic focus on one virus instead of overall health …

An official at the FDA put it this way: ‘I can’t tell you how many people at the FDA have told me, ‘I don’t like any of this, but I just need to make it to my retirement.’”

Even Dr. Paul Offit, one of the most prominent pro-vaccine propagandists in U.S. history and a member of the FDA’s VRBPAC, has the common sense to question the sanity of rolling out untested shots to millions of people. In late August 2022, just two days before the FDA authorized the two bivalent boosters, he told the Wall Street Journal:16

“I’m uncomfortable that we would move forward — that we would give millions or tens of millions of doses to people — based on mouse data.”

The FDA is also advertising the COVID shots — and making bizarre unscientific claims in those ads. Here are two recent COVID booster campaign messages tweeted out by the FDA:

“It’s time to install that update! #UpdateYourAntibodies with a new #COVID19 booster.”17 “Don’t be shocked! You can now #RechargeYourImmunity with an updated #COVID19 booster.”18

Recharge your immunity

By law, the FDA should not engage in the advertising of drugs — historically, they’ve never even worked with drug companies to create ads19 — and the agency certainly should not put out false and misleading claims about drugs, as this is illegal. So, why are they doing both? As reported by Tablet magazine:20

“The continuation of unchecked conflicts of interest, and several recent authorizations for uses of new medical products that are in many ways unproven, demonstrate that the FDA is essentially unresponsive to public outrage, culminating in the bizarre spectacle of … promoting bivalent boosters on social media through unsubstantiated claims …

[A]cting not as a neutral regulator but actively advertising on behalf of pharmaceutical companies with government purchase contracts. The FDA’s disregard for its congressional mandate is not unique to this moment — it is a symptom of its decadeslong transformation into an agency captured by the corporations it is tasked with regulating.”

Tablet magazine also highlights the FDA’s now-consistent disregard for safety issues, even when data clearly point to problems. This includes data showing frequent boosters can weaken immune function, and the fact that Pfizer, in its pediatric trial, actually observed a higher rate of severe COVID in the vaccine group than the placebo group.

The FDA also allowed Pfizer to discount 365 symptomatic cases in the pediatric trial and only count 10 cases that occurred after the third dose. This is how they got to 80% efficacy. In reality, however, the efficacy was negative after doses 1 and 2. As noted by Tablet magazine:21

“In a vaccine meant to prevent illness for an age group that is already at extremely low risk, this data should have been a red flag for the FDA. Why, then, has the body charged with protecting Americans from inadequately tested products been so eager not just to authorize these products for emergency use, but to enthusiastically recommend them?”

Clearly, the fact that 75% of the FDA’s funding comes from the drug industry is one factor that contributes to this corruption. Another is the revolving door between the agency and industry, with officials passing back and forth between the two.

A third factor is the financial conflicts of interest of individual officials. Tablet magazine reviews several examples of VRBPAC members receiving hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars from drug companies, be it in the form of research grants, speakers’ fees or consulting fees.

In closing, at least three new studies demonstrate the insanity of continuing down the path of boosters:

  1. Japanese researchers have found in vitro evidence of antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) following Moderna’s mRNA injection.22 23

  2. A preprint study24 posted on bioRxiv in mid-September 2022 found Omicron sublineage BA.2.75.2 is exceptionally good at escaping neutralizing antibodies.

    On average, this sublineage was neutralized fivefold less potently than BA.5, making it the most resistant variant to date. According to the authors, “These data raise concerns that BA.2.75.2 may effectively evade humoral immunity in the population.”

  3. Another September preprint25 26 27 by Chinese researchers detail how and why SARS-CoV-2 variants are outracing vaccination efforts, and the role played by original antigenic sin.

    In addition to BA.2.75.2, other variants with impressive immune evading capabilities include BR.1, BJ.1, and BQ.1.1. According to the authors,28 many of the variants now emerging have mutations converging in particular “hotspots” on the receptor binding domain (RBD).

    They suspect this convergent evolution is linked to humoral immune imprinting, in other words, the phenomenon of original antigenic sin,29 the end result of which is reduced immunity and an increased risk of symptomatic infection.

    If you’re up for some, at times, complex scientific jargon, check out coauthor Yunlong Richard Cao’s Twitter thread in which he does his best to lay out the findings. Cao explains the convergent RBD evolution as follows:

    “Due to immune imprinting, BA.5 breakthrough infection caused significant reductions of nAb [neutralizing antibody] epitope diversity and increased proportion of non-neutralizing mAbs [monoclonal antibodies], which in turn concentrated immune pressure and promoted the convergent RBD evolution.”

    The take-home message here is that this convergent RBD evolution — which is making new variants increasingly capable of evading neutralizing antibodies — is the result of a narrow antibody response.

    It’s a byproduct of “vaccinating” the world during an active outbreak. The end result is that both natural immunity and the COVID jabs are rendered more or less null and void. If that’s not reason enough to quit this booster madness, I don’t know what is.

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.