The Best Foods for Your Skin

best foods for your skin

  • According to recent research, eating 2.25 cups of grape powder per day for two weeks, equal to 60 grapes a day, can help protect your skin against sunburn. After two weeks, one-third of study participants showed increased resistance to UV-induced skin erythema (reddening of the skin)

  • Grape skins are rich in polyphenols, which are one of the primary components responsible for improving the resilience of your skin against UV damage

  • Other polyphenol-rich foods include herbs like cloves, Mexican oregano, rosemary, spearmint and peppermint, elderberry, black olives, dark chocolate and cocoa powder

  • Another powerful skin protector is astaxanthin, a carotenoid antioxidant derived from Haematococcus microalgae. Research has shown 16 weeks of astaxanthin supplementation can improve wrinkles, skin moisture and elasticity. Astaxanthin-rich foods include wild-caught Alaskan salmon, trout, krill (or krill oil), shrimp and crayfish

  • Omega-3 fat is also important for skin health, while high omega-6 linoleic acid (LA) intake is a significant contributor to sunburn. To improve your skin and reduce your sunburn risk, strictly limit seed oils in your diet and eat more omega-3-rich fatty fish such as wild-caught Alaskan salmon, verified wild-caught sockeye salmon, sardines, anchovies, mackerel and herring. A krill oil supplement will provide you with both astaxanthin and omega-3

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

According to recent research,1 2 eating what amounts to a little over 60 grapes a day for two weeks can help protect your skin against sunburn. In the study, 29 volunteers were fed 70 grams of grape powder a day for two weeks, or the equivalent of three,126-gram servings of fresh grapes a day, with a three-fourth cup, or about 24 grapes, considered as one serving.3

After the two-week study period, one-third of study subjects (9 of 29) showed increased resistance to ultraviolet (UV)-induced skin erythema (reddening of the skin).

One in 10 retained this benefit for four weeks after they stopped eating the grape powder. Grape skins are rich in polyphenols, which are one of the primary components in grapes responsible for improving the resilience of your skin against UV damage.4 Polyphenols are also anti-inflammatory with antioxidant effects, and play a role in DNA repair mechanisms.5 As noted in a 2010 paper:6

“Chemoprevention refers to the use of agents that can inhibit, reverse, or retard the process of these harmful events in the UV-exposed skin. A wide variety of polyphenols or phytochemicals … have been reported to possess substantial skin photoprotective effects.

This review article summarizes the photoprotective effects of some selected polyphenols, such as green tea polyphenols, grape seed proanthocyanidins, resveratrol, silymarin and genistein, on UV-induced skin inflammation, oxidative stress, and DNA damage …

It is suggested that polyphenols may favorably supplement sunscreens protection, and may be useful for skin diseases associated with solar UV radiation-induced inflammation, oxidative stress and DNA damage.”

Polyphenols are phytochemicals found in natural plant foods. More than 8,000 polyphenols have been identified in foods such as tea, wine, chocolate, fruits and vegetables. Antioxidants such as polyphenols help protect the cells in your body from free radical damage, thereby controlling the rate at which you age, and that includes your skin, where aging becomes quite visible.

If your body does not get adequate protection, free radicals can become rampant, causing impaired cell function that not only can lead to tissue degradation, but also put you at risk of chronic diseases.

Polyphenols are what give fruits, berries and vegetables their vibrant colors, and contribute to the bitterness, astringency, flavor, aroma and oxidative stability of the food. In the plant, they protect against ultraviolet radiation, pathogens, oxidative damage and harsh climatic conditions. In the human body, polyphenols have been shown to have a diverse array of biological properties,7 8 including the following:

  • Protecting your skin against ultraviolet radiation, as demonstrated in the featured study9 10

  • Fighting cancer cells and inhibiting angiogenesis11 (the growth of blood vessels that feed a tumor) — Several studies have demonstrated the usefulness of polyphenols in the prevention of cancer.12 13 14 15 Researchers believe the antioxidant effects of polyphenols help protect DNA from free radical damage, which can trigger cancer development. Polyphenols also reverse epigenetic markers in the DNA believed to reduce tumor growth

  • Promoting brain health and protecting against dementia16 17 18

  • Fighting free radicals and reducing the appearance of aging

  • Reducing inflammation

  • Protecting your cardiovascular system,19 in part by inhibiting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which can cause complications with atherosclerotic plaques20

  • Supporting normal blood sugar levels21

  • Promoting normal blood pressure

  • Reducing your risk of osteoporosis, thanks to its positive effect on bone metabolism22 23

  • Improving your gut health — Polyphenols appear to have a prebiotic effect, improving the beneficial bacteria living in your gut. Much of the research has been done on green tea, which plays an important role on balancing your gut flora by increasing good bacteria and reducing the number of bad bacteria.24 25 26 27 Researchers have also found improvements in gut flora with moderate consumption of red wine and chocolate28 29

Aside from grapes — where the polyphenols are found in the skin — many other foods also contain high amounts. In 2010, the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition published a list30 of the 100 richest dietary sources of polyphenols based on milligrams (mg) per 100 grams. Foods topping that list include:

  • Cloves

  • Peppermint

  • Star anise

  • Cocoa powder

  • Mexican oregano

  • Celery seed

  • Dark chocolate

  • Flaxseed meal

  • Black elderberry

  • Chestnut seeds

  • Dried sage

  • Rosemary

  • Spearmint

  • Thyme

  • Blueberries

  • Blackcurrant

  • Capers

  • Black olives

  • Hazel nuts

  • Pecans

You can further optimize the health benefits of these foods by eating them with a little bit of fat, as polyphenols are fat soluble.31 How the plant is grown can also influence its healing potential. As noted in 2004 paper,32 agricultural practices and industrial processes can reduce the health effects of the polyphenols in the food.

Research33 has shown organically grown foods contain statistically higher levels of polyphenols compared to conventionally grown varieties. Also, freeze-drying preserves higher phenol content than air-drying does.

Another powerful skin protector is astaxanthin, a carotenoid antioxidant derived from Haematococcus microalgae. The alga produces astaxanthin as a protective mechanism to shield itself from harsh UVs and other environmental stressors, and research has shown astaxanthin provides similar benefits in humans when consumed.34 35 36

As reported by Liver Doctor,37 research38 published in the Journal of Clinical Biochemistry and Nutrition in 2017 showed 16 weeks of astaxanthin supplementation protected against wrinkles and loss of skin moisture, and improved skin elasticity. It also helps lighten age spots by preventing the accumulation of too much melanin.39

“Additional studies have shown that astaxanthin inhibits the production of inflammatory chemicals by skin cells when they are exposed to UV radiation,” LiverDoctor.com writes.40

“The inflammatory chemicals break down collagen and elastin fibers, and increase the risk of pigmentation changes to the skin. The lead author of the study has stated that ‘Long term astaxanthin supplementation may prophylactically inhibit skin deterioration induced over time by environmental damage and consequently retard the skin aging process via its anti-inflammatory effect.'”

When it comes to UV radiation protection, astaxanthin specifically helps protect against UV-induced cell death. Unlike topical sun block, astaxanthin does not actually block UV rays, so it doesn’t prevent UVB from converting into vitamin D in your skin; it simply protects your skin against damage.

This protective effect is so potent studies even show it helps protect against total body irradiation,41 primarily by scavenging intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reducing cell apoptosis (programmed cell death), and burn-wound progression, by reducing oxidative stress-induced inflammation and mitochondrial-related apoptosis.42 You can learn more about astaxanthin’s skin benefits in “7 Nutrients to Boost Your Skin’s Natural SPF.”

Foods that contain generous amounts of astaxanthin are restricted to seafoods that consume the microalgae, such as:

  • Wild-caught Alaskan salmon

  • Trout

  • Krill (or krill oil)

  • Shrimp

  • Crayfish

If you rarely eat these foods, an astaxanthin supplement can be used. Just make sure it’s made from the Haematococcus pluvialis microalgae and not petrochemicals. While taking too many antioxidant supplements can be problematic, astaxanthin is far safer in this regard — in fact, it’s safe even in extremely high dosages — thanks to several unique features.

Astaxanthin is related to beta-carotene and lutein, but its unique molecular structure makes it both more potent and more widely usable than other carotenoids.

Importantly, while it donates electrons to neutralize free radicals, astaxanthin is not depleted by this electron donation. It has a massive surplus that allows it to remain active far longer — at least one order of magnitude longer than most other antioxidants.

The astaxanthin also remains intact, meaning there are no chemical reactions to break it down, which is what occurs in most other antioxidants. Another major difference is in the number of free radicals it can handle. Most antioxidants, such as vitamins C, E can typically handle only one free radical at a time.

Astaxanthin can address multiple free radicals simultaneously by forming an electron cloud around the molecule. This is known as the electron dislocation resonance. When free radicals try to steal electrons from the astaxanthin molecule, they’re simply absorbed into and neutralized by this electron cloud, all at once.

Astaxanthin also has the unique ability to protect both water- and fat-soluble parts of the cell. Carotenoids are typically divided into water-soluble or fat-soluble, but astaxanthin belongs to an in-between group that can interface between both water and fat.

This means the astaxanthin molecule can affect and expand the biolipid membrane of all cells. It’s not simply floating around in your bloodstream; it actually integrates into the cellular membrane. It also has the ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, which is part of its neuroprotective effects.

Another key feature is that it cannot function as a pro-oxidant. Many antioxidants will act as pro-oxidants (meaning they cause rather than combat oxidation) when present in sufficient concentrations. Astaxanthin, on the other hand, does not function as a pro-oxidant, even when present in high amounts, which makes it both safer and more beneficial. Lastly, it acts on at least five different inflammation pathways, making it a very potent anti-inflammatory.

In addition to its skin benefits, astaxanthin can also benefit your eye, brain, lung43 and heart health, and help prevent conditions such as cancer, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes, diabetic nephropathy, gastrointestinal disease, liver diseases, male infertility and HgCl₂-induced acute renal failure.44

Its potent anti-inflammatory effects also make it useful for inflammatory conditions and joint problems such as rheumatoid arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome and tennis elbow. It’s also been shown to improve athletic performance, in part by ameliorating exercise-induced fatigue.

The third dietary factor for optimal skin health that I’ll cover in this article involves fat. Omega-3 fat is important for healthy skin. If your skin is rough, dry and wrinkly, you probably need more omega-3, as it helps regulate oil production in your skin, balance hydration, reduce inflammation and minimize the effects of sun damage and aging in general.45

“High omega-3 intake will help protect your skin against UV damage, whereas high LA intake will INCREASE your risk of sunburn, as LA is highly perishable and readily oxidizes.”

On the other side of this coin is omega-6 linoleic acid (LA). Like omega-3, LA gets integrated into your cell membranes, but unlike omega-3, LA impairs rather than optimizes cellular function. With regard to sun exposure, high omega-3 intake will help protect your skin against UV damage, whereas high LA intake will INCREASE your risk of sunburn, as LA is highly perishable and readily oxidizes.

So, to protect and improve your skin, you’ll want to eliminate as much LA from your diet as possible, and increase your omega-3 intake. This means you’ll need to:

  • Avoid all seed oils, found in most processed foods, restaurant foods, condiments, pastries, conventional chicken and pork. Do not cook your food with seed oils; use butter, ghee, beef tallow or coconut oil instead.

  • Eat more omega-3-rich fatty fish such as wild-caught Alaskan salmon, verified wild-caught sockeye salmon, sardines, anchovies, mackerel and herring. All of these are high in omega-3 while being low in contaminants. Canned Alaskan salmon is a less expensive than salmon steaks. As a general recommendation, try to get two servings of fatty fish per week.46

    Avoid farm-raised salmon. Not only is farmed salmon one of the most contaminated foods on the market, but most are also loaded with harmful LA thanks to being fed genetically engineered (GE) corn and soy. Others are fed fishmeal, which is known to accumulate industrial chemicals like PCBs and dioxins.

    Farmed salmon contain only half the omega-3 of wild salmon47 48 49 and one-fourth the vitamin D,50 while having more than 5.5 times the amount of omega-6.51 52 Farmed salmon are also routinely exposed to antibiotics and pesticides.

    Alaska does not permit aquaculture, so all Alaskan fish are wild-caught. They also have some of the cleanest water and some of the best maintained and most sustainable fisheries. To verify authenticity, look for the state of Alaska’s “Wild Alaska Pure” logo. Sockeye salmon is now being farmed in certain areas of North America,53 so if you opt for sockeye, make sure it’s wild-caught.

Beyond taking care of your skin, other health benefits of omega-3s include but are not limited to:

  • Reducing inflammation, which can be helpful for those suffering with rheumatoid arthritis by reducing stiffness and pain.54 Women who suffer from menstrual pain may also experience milder pain55 56

  • Optimizing muscle building and bone strength — Omega-3 fats help your body build healthy muscle mass, including people suffering from cancer who may experience cachexia.57 Omega-3 fats can also help improve your bone strength by improving the utilization of calcium in your body. This may lead to a reduction in the development of osteoporosis58

  • Improving metabolic syndrome59 and insulin resistance60

  • Improving mental health and behavior — Demonstrated benefits have been shown for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), including reduced aggression, hyperactivity,61 impulsivity,62 oppositional behavior63 and restlessness.64

    Omega-3 is associated with lowered risk for other neurological/cognitive dysfunction as well, including: memory loss, brain aging, learning disorders and ADHD,65 autism and dyslexia66

  • Protecting your vision — DHA is a major structural element in your eye and brain.67 Low levels of DHA may increase your risk for age related macular degeneration68

So, to summarize what we’ve reviewed here, foods that will nourish your skin and provide natural protection against sunburn include polyphenol-rich foods such as grapes, dark chocolate, cocoa, olives, green tea and certain herbs; astaxanthin from wild-caught Alaskan salmon, trout, shrimp and crayfish; and omega-3 fat from fatty fish.

A krill oil supplement will give you both astaxanthin and omega-3. At the same time, you also want to limit omega-6 LA as much as possible, which is done by avoiding the foodstuffs listed above.

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.

Glutathione to Improve Health and Age-Related Degeneration

glynac supplementation

  • Glutathione is a powerful antioxidant composed of three amino acids — cysteine, glycine and glutamic acid

  • The lack of glutathione in older adults may be a key element driving the oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction that lead to age-related degeneration

  • Researchers looked into supplementation with a combination of glycine and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), two glutathione precursors known as GlyNAC when taken together

  • In older adults, GlyNAC supplementation for 24 weeks corrected glutathione deficiency and improved multiple measures of health

  • By boosting glutathione, supplementation with GlyNAC led to improvements in oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, insulin resistance, strength, cognition and more

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

Glutathione is a powerful antioxidant composed of three amino acids — cysteine, glycine and glutamic acid. In older adults, limited availability of glycine and cysteine may lead to decreased synthesis of glutathione, such that glutathione deficiency is widespread in this population.1

The lack of glutathione in older adults may be a key element driving the oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction that lead to age-related degeneration. Meanwhile, a “practical and effective approach” to lowering oxidative stress as you age may simply involve boosting your glutathione levels.2

Researchers at Baylor College of Medicine looked into supplementation with a combination of glycine and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), two glutathione precursors known as GlyNAC when taken together. They had previously shown that young mice deficient in glutathione had mitochondrial dysfunction, and supplementing with GlyNAC in older mice not only improved glutathione deficiency but also mitochondrial impairment, oxidative stress and insulin resistance.3

Additional previous research they conducted in HIV patients4 also found that GlyNAC supplementation improved “deficits associated with premature aging” in this population.5 This included improvements to oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, insulin resistance, genotoxicity, strength and cognition.6

A subsequent pilot trial in older humans found similar results, with GlyNAC supplementation for 24 weeks correcting glutathione deficiency and improving multiple measures of health, including:7

  • Mitochondrial dysfunction

  • Oxidative stress

  • Inflammation

  • Endothelial dysfunction

  • Insulin resistance

  • Genomic damage

  • Cognition

  • Strength

  • Gait speed

  • Exercise capacity

  • Body fat levels

  • Waist circumference

While the benefits declined after GlyNAC supplementation was discontinued for 12 weeks, the researchers concluded, “Supplementing GlyNAC in aging humans could be a simple and viable method to promote health and warrants additional investigation.”8 In scientific circles, there are nine hallmarks of aging that lead to most age-related disorders. These include:9

  • Genomic instability

  • Telomere attrition

  • Epigenetic alterations

  • Loss of proteostasis

  • Deregulated nutrient-sensing (including insulin resistance)

  • Mitochondrial dysfunction

  • Cellular senescence

  • Stem cell exhaustion

  • Altered intercellular communication (including inflammation)

It’s interesting to note that GlyNAC supplementation improved four of these nine defects — mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, insulin resistance and genomic damage.10

The study authors believe GlyNAC works by the “power of 3,” acting together to bring about beneficial changes, as follows:11

  1. Correction of glutathione deficiency, which results in correctio of oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction.

  2. Glycine, an important methyl-group donor. “Methyl groups are abundant in DNA and are important components of multiple cellular reactions,” they noted. “Glycine is also important for normal brain function. Hence providing glycine could improve multiple defects as seen in this trial.”

  3. NAC, which acts as a cysteine donor. “Cysteine is critically important in energy metabolism by contributing the sulfhydryl (SH) group needed for energy generation … Cysteine and its donated SH groups also play key roles in multiple additional cellular reactions and function.”

“We call this the ‘Power of 3,’” study author and endocrinologist Dr. Rajagopal Sekhar, associate professor of medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, explained, “because we believe that it takes the combined benefits of glycine, NAC and glutathione to reach this far reaching and widespread improvement.” He believes this also the potential to protect brain and muscle health in aging:12

“I am particularly encouraged by the improvements in cognition and muscle strength. Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are serious medical conditions affecting memory in older people and leading to dementia, and there are no effective solutions for these disorders.

We are exploring the possibility that GlyNAC could help with these conditions by conducting two pilot randomized clinical trials to test whether GlyNAC supplementation could improve defects linked to cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease and in MCI, and possibly improve cognitive function.”

Due to the significant oxidative stress it causes, a glutathione deficiency may be at the root of severe illness, including from COVID-19. Dr. Alexey Polonikov, from Kursk State Medical University, explained further:13

“Based on an exhaustive literature analysis and own observations, I proposed a hypothesis that glutathione deficiency is exactly the most plausible explanation for serious manifestation and death in COVID-19 infected patients.

The major risk factors established for severe COVID-19 infection and relative glutathione deficiency found in COVID-19 infected patients with moderate-to-severe illness have converged me to two very important conclusions:

  1. oxidative stress contributes to hyper-inflammation of the lung leading to adverse disease outcomes such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, multiorgan failure and death;

  2. poor antioxidant defense due to endogenous glutathione deficiency as a result of decreased biosynthesis and/or increased depletion of GSH [glutathione] is the most probable cause of increased oxidative damage of the lung, regardless which of the factors aging, chronic disease comorbidity, smoking or some others were responsible for this deficit.”

Many of the comorbid risk factors that predict severe COVID-19 disease are also tied to glutathione deficiency. In one evaluation of COVID-19 patients from six hospitals in Atlanta, researchers found independent factors that raised the risk of hospitalization. These included smoking, having Type 2 diabetes, being male, being Black, being of advanced age and being obese.14 Polonikov found evidence that a glutathione deficiency may be implicated in these comorbidities.

In his paper he identified the progressive reduction in endogenous glutathione with aging. This, he believes, makes “the elderly more susceptible to oxidative damage caused by different environmental factors compared to younger individuals.”15 He pointed out that deficiencies in endogenous glutathione are also found in people who have other comorbid conditions.

He proposed these decreased levels with chronic disease could begin a shift toward oxidative stress and exacerbate lung inflammation, ultimately leading “to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiorgan failure and death.”

NAC, a form of the amino acid cysteine, also plays a crucial role in COVID-19. NAC has a long history of use as a remedy for acetaminophen poisoning. It neutralizes the toxic effects of the drug by recharging glutathione, thereby preventing liver damage. But the idea that NAC can also be helpful against viral infections is not new. Previous research16 has found it reduces viral replication of certain viruses, including the influenza virus.

In a study published October 2020 in Clinical Immunology, researchers focused on a specific group of patients, namely those with glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency, which has been shown to facilitate human coronavirus infection due to the fact that G6PD depletes glutathione.17

Importantly, NAC may also protect against other problems associated with COVID-19, including the hypercoagulation that can result in stroke and/or blood clots18 that impair the ability to exchange oxygen in the lungs. Considering many COVID-19 cases involve blood clots in addition to excessive oxidative stress, and NAC effectively addresses both, I believe NAC should be included in standard of care for COVID-19. As noted in the FASEB Journal:19

“Based on a broad range of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms … the oral administration of NAC is likely to attenuate the risk of developing COVID-19, as it was previously demonstrated for influenza and influenza-like illnesses.

Moreover, high-dose intravenous NAC may be expected to play an adjuvant role in the treatment of severe COVID-19 cases and in the control of its lethal complications … including pulmonary and cardiovascular adverse events.”

NAC is most well-known to help increase glutathione and reduce the acetaldehyde toxicity20 that causes many hangover symptoms. However, it may also prevent strokes in people with hereditary cystatin C amyloid angiopathy (HCCAA), a rare genetic disorder.21

People with HCCAA have an average life expectancy of just 30 years, and most die within five years of their first stroke,22 so reducing their incidence could prove to be essential to increasing survival.

The finding is even more significant because it was conducted by researchers from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), which is notoriously against supplements. NAC appears to work by preventing the formation of amyloid-producing proteins, which promote amyloid deposits linked to strokes.23 NAC is also sometimes prescribed to break up mucus in the lungs.24

NAC is also showing increasing promise as a neuroprotectant. Scientists are investigating NAC as a treatment for Parkinson’s disease, which has been linked to glutathione deficiency in the substantia nigra, a region that houses dopamine neurons.25

However, because glutathione is poorly absorbed, in many cases it’s easier to raise your glutathione by taking NAC instead. It could also have potential for Alzheimer’s as, according to the CHOP researchers, the process of protein deposition that occurs in HCCAA is similar to what occurs in Alzheimer’s, although at an accelerated pace in HCCAA compared to Alzheimer’s, which is why dementia occurs later in life with the latter.

“If the underlying mechanisms of protein deposition and pathogenesis are sufficiently similar, similar or identical treatments may be effective,” they said.26 Another area where NAC shows particular promise is in the treatment of mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder,27 depression28 and substance use disorders.29

Food, supplements and exercise can be used to help optimize your glutathione levels. In addition to NAC and GlyNAC, supplementation with cysteine and glycine has been found to improve glutathione deficiency.30

Foods that have a positive impact on glutathione production include cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli, green tea, curcumin, rosemary and milk thistle.31 Whey protein, which is a rich source of cysteine, may also be beneficial,32 along with getting quality sleep.33 34

Different types of exercise can also influence your levels. In one study researchers enrolled 80 healthy but sedentary volunteers to measure the type of exercise that may have the greatest effect.35 They found aerobic training in combination with circuit weight training showed the greatest benefit.

You can also use molecular hydrogen to increase your glutathione levels naturally as it will cause your ARE (antioxidant response elements) to go directly to your DNA and have it transcribe the genes that not only produce glutathione and dozens of other important antioxidants, like catalase and superoxide dismutase. But it will only cause your body to make them, if and only if, your body has excess oxidative stress, which is precisely what you want.

Finally, a commonly overlooked strategy is to increase your melatonin levels by exposing your skin to near infrared. This is because one of the side effects of melatonin is that it causes your body to produce glutathione. The optimal way to get this near infrared exposure is by sun exposure but that is a challenge during the winter months, so near, not far, infrared saunas will work as will photobiomodulation near IR panels.

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.

What You Need to Know About ‘the Great Reset’

your guide to the great reset

  • “The Great Reset” is a new “social contract” that ties you to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, and a “social credit” ID that will dictate every facet of your life

  • While the COVID-19 pandemic is being used as a justification for The Great Reset movement, the agenda has nothing to do with health and everything to do with a long-term plan to monitor and control the world through digital surveillance and artificial intelligence

  • The Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution are rebranded terms for technocracy and the old “New World Order” melded with the transhumanist movement

  • Technocracy is an economic system of resource allocation that revolves around technology — in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection — and the digitization of industry and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule, thereby doing away with the need for democratically elected leadership

  • While the real plan is to usher in a tech-driven dystopia free of democratic controls, they speak of this plan as a way to bring us back into harmony with nature

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

By now, you’ve probably heard world leaders speak of “The Great Reset,”1 “the Fourth Industrial Revolution”2 and the call to “Build Back Better”3 — which also is U.S. President Joe Biden’s plan to rebuild the middle class slogan.4 It was a concept that former President Bill Clinton talked about in 2005 as special envoy to a United Nations Special Convoy.5

Another example among many is this speech by Matt Hancock, British Minister for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, given during an All-Party Parliamentary Group meeting on the Fourth Industrial Revolution in 2017:6

“One of the roles of Parliament is to cast ahead … and tackle the great challenges of our time … The nature of the technologies is materially different to what has come before. In the past, we’ve thought of consumption as a one-off, and capital investment as additive.

Yet put resources into the networks that now connect half the world, or into AI, and the effects are exponential … I’m delighted to speak alongside so many impressive colleagues who really understand this, and alongside Professor Klaus Schwab who literally ‘wrote the book’ on the 4th Industrial Revolution.

Your work, bringing together as you do all the best minds on the planet, has informed what we are doing … Our Digital Strategy, embedded within the wider Industrial Strategy, sets out the seven pillars on which we can build our success.

And inside that fits our 5G strategy, like a set of Russian Dolls. Our Strategy covers infrastructure, skills, rules and ethics of big data use, cyber security, supporting the tech sector, the digitization of industry, and digitization of government.”

But what do the terms “Great Reset,” “Fourth Industrial Revolution” and “Build Back Better” actually mean? What do they refer to? In the October 16, 2020, Corbett Report7 above, journalist James Corbett breaks down the new social contract planned for the world, otherwise known as “the great reset.”

“The Great Reset not only ties you to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, but even gives you a “social credit” ID that can run every facet of your life.”

While the current pandemic is being used as a justification for the movement, the agenda has nothing to do with health and everything to do with a long-term plan to monitor and control the world through technical surveillance. In other words, the world will be reset to depend on digital technocracy run by self-appointed elitists.

It’s a power grab of unprecedented magnitude, and involves the restructuring of social classes to dismantle democracy, erase national borders and allow for the governing of communities from a distance by a group of unelected leaders. What was in the past referred to as the “New World Order” is now known as “The Great Reset.”

This Great Reset not only ties you to it through an electronic ID linked to your bank account and health records, but even gives you a “social credit” ID that can run every facet of your life. This isn’t a lofty conspiracy theory — it’s real. It’s happening now. And you need to know how to fight it before it’s too late.

Ultimately, it’s a technocratic agenda that seeks to integrate mankind into a technological surveillance apparatus overseen by powerful artificial intelligence. Ironically, while the real plan is to usher in a tech-driven dystopia free of democratic controls, they speak of this plan as a way to bring us back into harmony with Nature.

If you’re unfamiliar with the term “technocracy,” be sure to go back and listen to my interview with Patrick Wood, author of “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.” You can also learn more on Wood’s website, Technocracy.news.

In a nutshell, technocracy is an economic system of resource allocation that revolves around technology — in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection — and the digitization of industry (which includes banking) and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule, thereby doing away with the need for elected government leaders.

According to the World Economic Forum,8 The Great Reset “will address the need for a more fair, sustainable and resilient future, and a new social contract centered on human dignity, social justice and where societal progress does not fall behind economic development.”

And what is the World Economic Forum? It’s an international organization for public-private cooperation that “engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.”9

The founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum is professor Klaus Schwab, who, as mentioned by Hancock in his 2017 speech, wrote the book on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Schwab announced the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset Initiative in June 2020. In his report, Corbett summarizes the Great Reset thus:

“At base, the Great Reset is nothing more, and nothing less, than a great propaganda, marketing rollout campaign for a new brand that the would-be global elite are trying to shove down the public’s throats … It’s just a fresh coat of lipstick on a very old pig. This is The New World Order, just redefined. It’s just a new label for it.”

And, as explained by Corbett, for those who forgot about what the New World Order was/is all about, it was all about “centralization of control into fewer hands, globalization [and] transformation of society through Orwellian surveillance technologies.”

In other words, it’s technocracy, where we the people know nothing about the ruling elite while every aspect of our lives is surveilled, tracked and manipulated for their gain. Four key take-aways from Corbett’s research into the Great Reset are:

  1. The Great Reset has NOTHING to do with a virus, the COVID-19 pandemic or anything else related to public health.

  2. The Great Reset is a coordinated agenda that has been years in the making — The pandemic is simply being used as a convenient “cover” for an elitist, globalist agenda that has been planned for decades.

  3. The Great Reset is NOT the end of globalization — On the contrary, it is globalization turbocharged. As noted by Schwab in the policy book, “COVID-19: The Great Reset,” co-written with Thierry Malleret and cited in Corbett’s report:

    “If no one power can enforce order, our world will suffer from a ‘global order deficit.’ Unless individual nations and international organizations succeed in finding solutions to better collaborate at the global level, we risk entering an ‘age of entropy’ in which retrenchment, fragmentation, anger and parochialism will increasingly define our global landscape, making it less intelligible and more disorderly.”

    In other words, there’s no room for the spontaneously arising social order that occurs when people are allowed to freely interact. Instead, there must be “one power” to enforce whatever the desired social-environmental-economic-geopolitical order is.

  4. This process is not meant to end — The end of the pandemic will not be the end of this totalitarian, digital enslavement agenda. The plan is not to “reset” the world back to some earlier state that will allow us all to start over with a cleaner environment and more equitable social structures. The plan is to circumvent democracy and shift global governance into the hands of the few. As noted by Schwab in “COVID-19: The Great Reset”:

    “When confronted with it, some industry leaders and senior executives may be tempted to equate reset with restart, hoping to go back to the old normal and restore what worked in the past: traditions, tested procedures and familiar ways of doing things — in short, a return to business as usual.

    This won’t happen because it can’t happen. For the most part, ‘business as usual’ died from (or at the very least was infected by) COVID-19.”

What might The Great Reset transformation look like? As noted by Corbett, the following illustration, created and released by the World Economic Forum, shows the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on various aspects of life, and how pandemic responses are transforming these areas.

If you go to the original site for the illustration,10 you’ll also find listings of publications, videos and data relating to all of these facets. Around the 25-minute mark, Corbett explains how you can use this map to get a feel for the scope of the transformation being prepared — everything from finance, business and education to health care, human rights and global governance.

Importantly, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and “rescue” debt-ridden countries.

However, the price for this salvation is your personal freedom and liberty. The World Economic Forum and the central banks will, through their facilitated financial bailouts, be able to effectively control most countries in the world. And, again, one of the aspects of the technocratic plan is to eliminate nation borders and nationalism in general.

widespread impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

A related term to the Great Reset is “the Fourth Industrial Revolution.” This refers to the merging of digital, physical and biological systems. As noted by Schwab, “It will be like a tsunami and actually it’s not just a digital revolution. It’s digital; of course, physical. It is nanotechnology. But it’s also biological.11

What they’re talking about is the creation of a new economic system built around the merger of the human body and mind with machines and artificial intelligence. In other words, technocracy — a resource-based economic system with centralized control by a technocratic elite who have the know-how to program the computer systems will ultimately dictate the lives of everyone.

Of course, it’s sold to us as a means to harness and elevate human potential, when in fact it will do the complete opposite. Ultimately, they’re not just trying to change the definition of what it means to be human — they’re openly conspiring to alter humanity through technological means.

In addition to the sources cited earlier, Corbett also fleshed out the history of technocracy in his December 28, 2015, report,12 “How Big Oil Conquered the World.” In short, the Fourth Industrial Revolution is nothing but a rebranding of technocracy, melded with the transhumanist movement.

You can also learn more about Schwab, the figurehead of modern technocracy, by reading the June 29, 2020, Technocracy.news article13 “The Elite Technocrats Behind the Global ‘Great Reset,'” and the October 12, 2020, Off-Guardian article,14 “Klaus Schwab & His Great Fascist Reset.”

According to Off-Guardian,15 Schwab ensures us that “smart” Big Data technologies will “‘deliver new and innovative ways to service citizens and customers’ and we will have to stop objecting to businesses profiting from harnessing and selling information about every aspect of our personal lives.”

In that article, Schwab is also quoted as saying, “Establishing trust in the data and algorithms used to make decisions will be vital” — which about sums up the technocratic view of “government.”

By October 2020 in some parts of the world, a second wave of COVID-19 was16 emerging, and according to some researchers, the best way to combat it was to implement another round of more stringent lockdown measures — a so-called “circuit breaker” strategy to bring the infection rate under control.

Meanwhile, other reports17 warned that while COVID-19 can be deadly for a small minority of people, so are lockdowns, thanks to the poverty, famine and mental health challenges they bring about.

According to an October 13, 2020, article18 in The Sun, COVID-19 restrictions “could hurl 90 million into ‘extreme poverty,'” with the poorest nations bearing the brunt of the economic collapse. The New York Post also recently reported19 that “COVID-19 lockdowns were a risky experiment” that failed, and have proven deadlier than the virus itself.

“No ethical scientist would conduct such a risky experiment without carefully considering the dangers and monitoring the results, which have turned out to be dismal,” the New York Post writes.20

“While the economic and social harms have been enormous, it isn’t clear that the lockdowns have brought significant health benefits beyond what was achieved by people’s voluntary social distancing and other actions.

In a comparison of 50 countries, a team led by Rabail Chaudhry of the University of ­Toronto found that COVID-19 was deadlier in places with older populations and higher rates of obesity (like the United States), but the mortality rate was no lower in countries that closed their borders or enforced full lockdowns.

After analyzing 23 countries and 25 U.S. states with widely varying policies, Andrew Atkeson of UCLA and fellow economists found that the mortality trend was similar everywhere once the disease took hold: The number of daily deaths rose rapidly for 20 to 30 days, then fell rapidly …

The cost-benefit rationale becomes even bleaker if you use the standard metric for determining whether a drug or other intervention is worthwhile: How much money will society spend for each year of life being saved?

By that metric, the lockdowns must be the most cost-ineffective intervention in the history of public health, because so many of the intended beneficiaries are near the end of life. In America, nearly 80 percent of COVID-19 victims have been over 65, and more than 40 percent were living in nursing homes, where the median life expectancy after admission is just five months …

No one wants to hasten the demise of the elderly, but they and other vulnerable people can be shielded without shutting down the rest of the society, as Sweden and other countries have demonstrated …

Early in the pandemic, Scott Atlas at the Hoover Institution and researchers at Swansea University independently calculated that the lockdowns would ultimately cost more years of life than COVID-19 in the United States and Britain, and the toll seems certain to be worse in poor countries.

The World Bank estimates that the coronavirus recession could push 60 million people into extreme poverty, which inevitably means more disease and death.”

Also by October 2020, we were seeing reports21 that “unexplained excess deaths at home” were outpacing COVID-19 deaths by nearly 900%, likely due to people with chronic illnesses avoiding medical care. Unfortunately, physicians and scientists continued to butt heads when it came to the sanest path forward.

As noted in an October 6, 2020, article22 in The Conversation, whether or not the coronavirus cure is worse than the disease has become “the most divisive question of 2020,” with dozens of doctors signing on to one side or the other.

A Kaiser Health News story23 also highlighted the impact of “pandemic stress” on public health, as more and more people are reporting problems ranging from insomnia and excruciating headaches to hair loss and cracked teeth:

“Throughout the pandemic, people who never had the coronavirus have been reporting a host of seemingly unrelated symptoms: excruciating headaches, episodes of hair loss, upset stomach for weeks on end, sudden outbreaks of shingles and flare-ups of autoimmune disorders.

The disparate symptoms, often in otherwise healthy individuals, have puzzled doctors and patients alike, sometimes resulting in a series of visits to specialists with few answers. But it turns out there’s a common thread among many of these conditions, one that has been months in the making: chronic stress.

Although people often underestimate the influence of the mind on the body, a growing catalog of research shows that high levels of stress over an extended time can drastically alter physical function and affect nearly every organ system.

Now, at least eight months into the pandemic, alongside a divisive election cycle and racial unrest, those effects are showing up in a variety of symptoms. ‘The mental health component of COVID is starting to come like a tsunami,’ said Dr. Jennifer Love, a California-based psychiatrist.”

As detailed in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun,” an international network of legal experts and health professionals are preparing to launch the largest class-action lawsuit in history, against all those responsible for the global lockdowns, from local policy makers to the World Health Organization and everyone in between.

According to the four attorneys who founded the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee, which is leading the tort case, the COVID-19 pandemic is “probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed.” Pandemic measures were intended to sow panic in order to allow for a massive transfer of wealth, and fraudulent testing has been used to keep the ruse going.

In reality, mortality statistics reveal COVID-19 has not led to an excess of deaths above the annual norm, the proposed action says, and there’s no evidence lockdowns and economic shutdowns have produced favorable results.

While the Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee hasn’t specifically addressed the pandemic as a vehicle for a technocratic revolution, it highlights that it has been fraudulently used as a means for wealth transfer and elimination of basic human rights.

As noted in the June 29, 2020, Technocracy.news article,24 “The Elite Technocrats Behind the Global ‘Great Reset”:25

“The UN Agenda 2030 with its Sustainable Development Goals is claimed to ‘ensure peace and prosperity for people and the planet.’ The actions are said to tackle poverty and hunger, bring better health and education, reduce inequalities, and save the oceans, forests and the climate. Who can argue against such benevolent goals?

But the promised Utopia comes with a price — it sets shackles on our personal freedom … The leading partners of the United Nations Global Goals project reveal the real technocratic agenda that lies behind the polished feel-good façade — it involves a plan to fully integrate mankind into a technological surveillance apparatus overseen by a powerful AI.

The current pandemic scare has been a perfect trigger to kickstart this nefarious agenda … The current COVID-19 crisis is seen by the World Economic Forum and its chairman Klaus Schwab as the perfect trigger to implement their grandiose technocratic plan. Big Tech will come to ‘rescue’ the world …

This techno-fascist recipe will then, in an utmost non-democratic fashion without any public debate or skeptic inquiry, soon be integrated into the agenda of G20 and the European Union — relabeled as the Great Green Deal …

Unsurprisingly, Klaus Schwab fails to mention his own and his cronies’ role in creating this global economic mess in the first place — as it was ‘foreseen’ with stunning accuracy in World Economic Forum’s and Bill Gate’s Event 201 (October 2019) and in the Rockefeller Foundation report26 Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development (2010).”

As I discuss in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,”technocracy is inherently a technological society run through social engineering, and Big Tech censorship is part and parcel of this. In other words, the medical tyranny and censorship of anti-groupthink that has emerged during this pandemic are an unavoidable element of The Great Reset, and if you think it’s bad now, just wait until the whole system is brought fully online.

The mere idea of dissent will become a thought of the past, because your life — your health, educational and work opportunities, your finances and your very identity — will be so meshed with the automated technological infrastructure that any attempt to break free will result in you being locked out or erased from the system, leaving you with no ability to learn, work, travel or purchase anything.

It sounds far-fetched, I know, but when you follow the technocratic plan to its inevitable end, that’s basically what you end up with. The warning signs are all around us, if we’re willing to see them for what they actually are. The only question now is whether enough people are willing to resist it to make a difference.

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.

Message of Medical Freedom Ringing Out

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

I have noticed throughout the COVID-19 crisis, there has been a distinct absence of town halls, university public presentations, and health department open briefings on the pandemic. Stonewalling for three years has resulted in pent up anxiety over many aspects of public health particularly mass vaccination. After two years of flooding the zone with “safe and effective” our public health agencies are out of ammunition. Questions are pouring in about heart damage, blood clots, and neurologic syndromes. Many people want to hear confirmation of their suspicions from doctors in positions of medical authority. A rare public event was organized and hosted by Dr. Sally Priester at Centro De Bellas Artes San Sebastian, San Sebastian, Puerto Rico. As I spoke on stage in front of the pensive crowd, most of whom had been vaccinated, I could imagine the concerns they have developed seeing friends and family developing side effects and some some cases losing their lives.

Dr. McCullough on stage at Centro De Bellas Artes San Sebastian, San Sebastian, Puerto Rico, December 10, 2022

I was followed by an impromptu exhortation from Javier Jiménez Pérez, a Puerto Rican politician and the current mayor of San Sebastián, Puerto Rico. Jiménez is affiliated with the New Progressive Party and asserted in Spanish that his city has always promoted freedom of choice and respect for bodily autonomy.

Javier Jiménez Pérez current mayor of San Sebastián, Puerto Rico, December, 10, 2022

It was clear afterword that what Jimenez did not have over the past few years was medical backup from doctors in his town who put patient safety and bioethics above the heavily funded government mission to get “a needle in every arm.”

Dr. McCullough and Javier Jiménez Pérez, San Sebastián, Puerto Rico, December 10, 2022

Most people left that day understanding that if they felt well now after the shot, they are fortunate and under no conditions should they step up to the Russian Roulette wheel for another injection and spinning of fate.

If you find “Courageous Discourse” enjoyable and useful to your endeavors, please subscribe as a paying or founder member to support our efforts in helping you engage in these discussions with family, friends, and your extended circles.

I got on “The Platform” with Sean Plunket in New Zealand!

Sean Plunket has left Magic Talk | Stuff.co.nz

The Platform host Sean Plunket is more interested in ad hominem attacks than talking about the data. He didn’t offer a single statement that I made that is demonstrably false, where I was easily able to show his statements are not backed up by data.

That’s exactly what Sean did when I appeared on his show on the Platform at noon PT today, Dec 11, 2022. This is a popular online talk show based in New Zealand which I recently visited. I tried to get on the Michael Laws show, but Michael didn’t want to speak to anyone capable of challenging him. Sean was more “open minded” but Sean had prepared to blast me with ad hominem attacks based on the MIT article about me instead of any real data or science. So it was a trap rather than an opportunity to really listen. Sean’s sole agenda was to discredit me and not listen to anything I had to say.

You can watch the 36 minute episode on Rumble here to see what happens when pro-vaxxer meets anti-vaxxer…. this is a statistically rare event, i.e., it happens only once every few years:

You can watch the discussion about the show tonight at 11pm PT:

Here is the Zoom registration link so you can join in the fun.

Sean started the show with the ridiculous claim that “more people die from myocarditis from COVID than the vaccine.” He cited no source.

After I asked “Where’s the data on that one?” he changed the topic!

In fact, here’s the data in a HUGE study showing the unvaccinated had no increase in myocarditis cases following COVID infection (here’s the full paper which looked at 196,992 unvaccinated adults after Covid infection). And the Thailand study showed that 1 in 29 previously healthy teenage boys developed myocarditis/pericarditis after getting the vaccine. So his statement is a whopper. And he has the gall to accuse me of spreading misinformation?!?!

Also, I don’t think there is a cardiologist in the entire world who saw her rates of myocarditis plummet after the vaccines rolled out.

Chris Martenson points out (at 42:42) that myocarditis post-vaccine is elevated by 133X. Sean should watch Episode 48 and see if he can find a mistake. It would be fun to see Sean try to show Chris he got it wrong. I’d pay money to see that.

Since Sean values credibility, I can assure him that Martenson is very well respected; his video on this topic had 84,000 views which is a lot more than what Sean gets on his videos on COVID. So if we are talking technical expertise or professional respect, Chris is miles above Sean. So by Sean’s own rules, we should believe Chris over Sean.

Here’s one of the listener comments that got over 500 thumbs up on the Martenson video:

Definitely not a mystery. Dozens and dozens of studies, tons of data and tons of stories are out there. All of these sudden deaths and numerous health issues that are more prevalent than ever in history all started as soon as the cl0t sh0t came out, and the death rate spiked 40%! So far I know four people that got myocarditis, three women that miscarried and another woman whose child was born with birth defects, a friend of mine had two deaths in his family within 2 weeks of getting the cl0t sh0t, a mother and daughter that were both perfectly healthy before they got it, I know a 30-year-old woman that had a stroke 2 days after getting it, my friend’s mom had a stroke 2 weeks after getting it, a good friend of mine lost his leg because he broke out in terrible rashes from the first and second dose but the rashes didn’t go away after the second dose and his leg became infected and had to be amputated, I have two relatives that now have blood clotting issues and I know a woman that reluctantly got them so that she could keep her job but she got myocarditis and neurological symptoms so she was unable to work and lost her job anyways. Millions and millions of people worldwide will never be the same from this poison. All over something with a 99.997% survival rate and a so-called treatment that doesn’t stop you from getting or spreading it. Recent data released shows that they need to administer over 1,000 doses to prevent even one hospitalization or death, and for every one hospitalization or death prevented, an average of 4.5 serious AEs occur in adults and between 19 and 98 serious AEs occur in children and teens! Informed consent has been taken from the masses because of greed, corruption and Power and the globalist agenda.

See my Why can’t we talk about it? article for all the references backing up my statements.

I have no idea where Sean is getting his data on myocarditis. He wouldn’t tell me. He would just change the topic.

If Sean can find a more definitive study than that Israeli study or the Thailand study or can point to an error in both studies that would invalidate the result, I’m all ears. Or produce a cardiologist who saw her myocarditis cases plummet post-vax. I have yet to find one. Sean?

I couldn’t get him to look at the data at all.

I tried. I offered to fly an expert of his choosing to the US to look at the odd clots, all expenses paid. Sean declined my offer. This was a GOLDEN opportunity to PROVE I was wrong at NO EXPENSE and he turned it down. What does that tell you? It tells you he has zero confidence that he believes what he says.

I told him about a neurologist in California with 0 vaccine injured in 11 years and this year has 1,000 vaccine injuries that should be reported to VAERS. I offered to fly Sean to California so he could look at the medical records himself and talk directly to each of 1,000 patients (assuming we obtained the proper patient consents which I would have arranged for before the flight). That’s real data. You cannot have 0 injuries in 11 years and suddenly have 1,000 injuries if the vaccine is perfectly safe. You don’t need a clinical trial on that one.

I asked Sean how he explained the VAERS data where all of a sudden, and for the COVID vaccines only, the death and adverse event reports went off the charts. This wasn’t just in the US; it was worldwide. No explanation offered. No evidence offered. He changed the topic.

I asked him about the nearly 8% of people who had to seek medical attention after getting the vaccine (per the V-safe data obtained by ICAN). Sean offered that they were exaggerating. And what motivation would they have for doing that Sean? The V-safe data was kept from public view for almost 2 years. And only people who took the vax could file a V-safe report, so all of these people are PRO-VAXXERS. Explain that one, Sean. I can’t wait to hear it. Why would pro-vaxxers tell the CDC they were hospitalized?

We talked about the excess deaths in New Zealand that Peter Williams brought to my attention. Sean asked where Peter got the data. I said from official New Zealand government reports. Sean switched topics. I offered to send Sean’s producer the New Zealand government data on the excess deaths, but Sean didn’t want to see it. See no evil, speak no evil.

Sean claimed I misinterpreted the fluvoxamine studies citing hearsay opinion from the MIT article. I asked him for evidence of that: what statements did I make that were wrong? He provided no evidence that I said something wrong. No statement that I made that was false. What is true is that I said the results of multiple studies (Lenz/JAMA and Seftel/OFID studies) were statistically impossible if fluvoxamine didn’t work. Since the side effects were low, the likely benefit outweighed the risk and the precautionary principle of medicine directs that it should be used since the benefit is life saving and the downside is near zero.

One of the authors of one of the studies agreed with me, but others wanted to wait for Phase 3 trials because that’s the way they are told to practice medicine (which doesn’t take into account the low risk of harm vs. a probable benefit). There is a brilliant essay on this written by Norman Doidge about this referring to using “all available evidence” as the correct approach. I fully agree with this. But that’s not how we train physicians unfortunately. It’s a brilliant essay that I wish every clinician should read.

He said I was a snake oil salesman, but I told him I left millions of dollars of stock options on the table to become a misinformation spreader and that my Substack is free to subscribe. Some people voluntarily subscribe for a whole $5 per month which helps pay the bills. I can tell you: this is a money losing venture.

Why would I take a huge pay cut to do something like this? I’m 65 years old and have no history of spreading misinformation. What is my motivation? What is Peter McCullough’s motivation? Why did Bret Weinstein run the interview with me and Malone? Nobody can explain that.

Sean said the blood clots from the movie Died Suddenly are formed post-mortem. I explained how Dr. Chris Martenson did a 49 minute video explaining how this is impossible. Sean wasn’t interested in watching the video or debunking what Chris said (which the embalmers confirm was exactly right). See Could These Mysterious Clots be the Cause of Death? Watch the video at 43:48. Here’s the screenshot:

Also, I’ve watched many of Chris’s videos. I’ve never seen him use “without a doubt” before. So he really means, “without a doubt.” He says that because the laws of physics back up what he said.

People who are pro-narrative typically share one or more of these characteristics:

  1. No interest in seeing the data

  2. Blind trust in authority and experts (that they agree with)

  3. Change the topic when pressed to look at or show the data

  4. Engage in ad hominem attacks and/or gaslighting when challenged to produce facts

  5. Lack of intellectual curiosity

  6. More concerned about defending their belief than being open to data that might challenge their beliefs

  7. Unwilling to have your beliefs challenged

  8. Run for hills or change topic when challenged to produce data on something you just claimed

I give credit to Sean for overcoming #7 somewhat. He was willing to have me on his show, but he clearly had an attack list he was referencing throughout the call. He didn’t go into this with an open mind. His goal was to destroy me.

For more on this, see this excellent comment.

I also have no problem if Sean cites authorities who are making arguments based on real data. For example, I cited Martenson because all his stuff is solidly referenced. The “experts” that Sean cited in that MIT article have absolutely no evidence to back up their ad hominem attacks. The scientific evidence is there in plain sight that I was right, but Sean didn’t want to explore what the numbers said. He had no interest in knowing what the p-value was for the long-COVID stats of the people on fluvoxamine in the Seftel study (which was 1e-14. Here’s the Julia calculation:

This is why I believed that the drug worked and I challenge anyone to debate on this; note that the treatment group got stuck with the short end of the stick as far as patients go so arguing bias and confounders is not credible.

In plain English, suppose you were told you had a treatment and on the last 77 patients, the treatment worked on every single patient and there were no side effects. You just got the disease and you know you can die from it. Would you take the treatment? Any sane person would. Academic scientists would not.

Would we have the potential to save more lives with fluvoxamine with no death downside. Absolutely! But scientists don’t like to make mistakes. They are trained in NON-EMERGENCY situations to wait for Phase 3 data.

Dr. Seftel agreed with me. He ran the study. He’s the trusted doctor at the racetrack and was featured on 60 Minutes.

So yeah, I side with experts who are right, not experts who are wrong. Seftel saved lives. No doubt about it.

Sean, if you are so sure you are right about those clots like you said, would you like to bet me $1M? This is a quick way to double your money without risk.

Of course Sean will never bet me because he knows that what he said was misinformation.

Here’s another way Sean could debunk me: Simply respond to the 84 points I made in Why can’t we talk about it?

But Sean can’t respond to the 84 points. In fact, it’s highly likely that he can’t even provide credible evidence that even ONE of my points is wrong. Sean is just interested in defending his beliefs. He has no intellectual curiosity to look at the data or the evidence himself. In his mind, because he hasn’t seen vaccine injury himself, he doesn’t believe it exists.

When I pointed out that his heart attack that happened post-vaccine MIGHT have been a vaccine injury, he said he KNEW it wasn’t. Really? Did he ever run any tests to rule out the vaccine as causal? Of course not!!!!!!!!!!!! So how could he know?

Dr. Ryan Cole has often said, “The cells don’t lie.” They sure don’t as the Schwab paper that just came out points out; the paper tied death with the COVID shots in a way that nobody can dispute. But we never even got into discussing the evidence in that paper because Sean isn’t a data guy.

I pointed out that the VAERS database triggered the DEATH safety signal. Three independent statisticians duplicated my calculation. The CDC ignored it, even after it was brought to their attention. Conspiracy? Nope. The people who work at the CDC are sheep and Biden wants to drive vaccination so people at the CDC basically find a way to avoid looking at the data. It’s that simple. No conspiracy.

I’ve written over 1,000 articles on my substack and there are no allegations of people actively conspiring to hide the data… they are just doing what they are told to do which is support the government narrative.

He asked for evidence of a cover up. I provided that: I said doctors are afraid to speak out for fear of retribution, e.g., Charles Hoff in Canada, Ira Bernstein in Canada, Meryl Nass in the US, Matt Shelton in New Zealand. If you speak the truth, bad things happen to you. This is why many physicians have told me they agree with me but have to shut up about it or they will lose their license.

Finally, he asked what I thought about ivermectin. He was unimpressed that there are MULTIPLE systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in peer-reviewed journals that ivermectin works; this is the GOLD-STANDARD of evidence-based medicine. Didn’t matter to Sean. It’s misinformation even though the medical literature says it isn’t.

He kept interrupting me, so I did the same to him, but in retrospect it would have been better to have let him finish and insist that I didn’t interrupt him, he should give me the same respect. But I didn’t think that would work.

Bottom line: when you talk to someone who keeps avoiding looking at the evidence and data, even when I offer to pay all expenses to have them look at the evidence first hand, it’s pretty hard to convince them that you are right.

See Why can’t we talk about it? for all the detailed references backing up what I wrote in this article.

Sean kept saying that I wanted people to believe me, but I kept saying that I wanted people to look at the data themselves and decide for themselves who is telling them the truth. This is something Sean never asks his listeners to do. It’s a new concept for him.

A key example is the VAERS DEATH signal where the authorities will not look at their own data or that nobody wanted to see the Israeli safety data showing the vaccines were harming people.

Sean didn’t like that so quickly switched off of that even though it is OBJECTIVE PROOF IN PLAIN SIGHT THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS IGNORING THEIR OWN SAFETY DATA. And ANYONE can verify it from the comfort of their home because the government publishes all the data you need.

Jeez, I’ve written over 1,000 articles and can’t recall one espousing a conspiracy theory other than Fauci having a big ego and telling people the vaccine is the way to go and everyone following his directions because they think the guy knows his shit.

Fauci tells Biden: the vax is the way out. Biden makes it a national priority to develop the vax and get everyone vaccinated. The CDC does what the White House wants because that’s the way they roll. This means looking the other way when safety signals happen. The people at the CDC are like sheep: they follow orders. I have insiders at the CDC that tell me that. Their orders are to get everyone vaccinated, not “protect the public” because there is an inherent belief that if the vaccine passes the FDA it must be safe and the best way to protect people is through mass vaccination. This isn’t a conspiracy.

This is a government relying on people who aren’t very smart for advice. That is the fundamental problem. Masks don’t work, the 6 foot rule is made up science, and lockdowns caused more harm than good by a long shot. Don’t get me started on the lunacy here. The only thing we needed to do was promote early treatment protocols and the government and media made sure that was all quashed.

So everyone is apparently acting to do their jobs and protect the public.

The problem is any whistleblowers or naysayers are ignored or quit. This happened with at least two top FDA officials.

I have never believed the theories of a master manipulator who wants to kill people. There is no credible evidence of this. There is also no credible evidence that you have an IP address when you are vaccinated. I’ve only promoted arguments that I believe are backed by solid evidence. That’s the way I roll.

If Sean thinks I’m wrong, I invite him to read all my posts and show me where I got it wrong.

Sean, how about we go through as many of the 84 points in Why can’t we talk about it? as we can in 2 hours and have a discussion based on data and evidence, rather than Sean’s beliefs. This means government data, data in peer-reviewed scientific literature, and independent third party polling data.

We’ll have a panel of judges randomly chosen from both camps: Sean’s and mine, e.g., 40 people per side.

Then we take a vote at the end to see whether the audience shifted their position.

And I’m perfectly happy to draw questions evenly from Sean’s list of questions to make the debate topics totally fair. Each party submits 10 topics, each person gets 3 minutes of total talk time per issue. A total of 2 hours.

Each party gets the questions in advance so there are no surprises. A fair fight.

How about it Sean? Do you think you can win a fair debate where you supply half the questions and I supply half the questions?

Note that I have a much bigger follower base than Sean so he can’t weasel out of this challenge arguing that he doesn’t want to give me a platform to spread misinformation. Instead, it’s me giving him an opportunity to reduce vaccine hesitancy among my followers.

Furthermore, Sean doesn’t have to promote it to his listeners at all, therefore, he will not be able to argue that he is “giving me a platform.”

So we’ve eliminated all the potential excuses for saying No.

So how about it Sean?

If Sean wants to prove he’s got it right, it’s easy: he just needs to answer the 84 points I raised in my Why can’t we talk about it? article.

But I doubt he can even successfully argue even one of these points.

I’ve offered him a fair debate where he can prove I’m wrong. I’m happy to negotiate any changes just so at the end, the rules are the same for both sides. We can get Peter Williams to be the moderator. It would be epic.

I predict Sean will decline my most reasonable offer because he knows he has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning and he doesn’t want to be embarrassed.

And that my friends tells you everything you need to know about my good friend Mr. Plunket.

I got on “The Platform” with Sean Plunket

Sean Plunket has left Magic Talk | Stuff.co.nz

The Platform host Sean Plunket is more interested in ad hominem attacks than talking about the data. He didn’t offer a single statement that I made that is demonstrably false, where I was easily able to show his statements are not backed up by data.

That’s exactly what Sean did when I appeared on his show on the Platform just now.

For example, he started the show with the ridiculous claim that “more people die from myocarditis from COVID than the vaccine.”

I said “where’s the data on that one?” He changed the topic!

In fact, here’s the data in a HUGE study showing the unvaccinated had no increase in myocarditis cases following COVID infection (here’s the full paper which looked at 196,992 unvaccinated adults after Covid infection). And the Thailand study showed that 1 in 29 previously healthy teenage boys developed myocarditis/pericarditis after getting the vaccine. So his statement is a whopper. And he has the gall to accuse me of spreading misinformation?!?!

Also, I don’t think there is a cardiologist in the entire world who saw their rates of myocarditis plummet after the vaccines rolled out.

Chris Martenson points out (at 42:42) that myocarditis post-vaccine is elevated by 133X. Sean should watch Episode 48 and see if he can find a mistake.

Since Sean values credibility, I can assure him that Martenson is very well respected: his video on this topic had 84,000 views which is a lot more than what Sean gets on his videos on COVID. So if we are talking technical expertise or professional respect, Chris is miles above Sean. So by Sean’s own rules, we should believe Chris over Sean.

Here’s one of the listener comments that got over 500 thumbs up:

Definitely not a mystery. Dozens and dozens of studies, tons of data and tons of stories are out there. All of these sudden deaths and numerous health issues that are more prevalent than ever in history all started as soon as the cl0t sh0t came out, and the death rate spiked 40%! So far I know four people that got myocarditis, three women that miscarried and another woman whose child was born with birth defects, a friend of mine had two deaths in his family within 2 weeks of getting the cl0t sh0t, a mother and daughter that were both perfectly healthy before they got it, I know a 30-year-old woman that had a stroke 2 days after getting it, my friend’s mom had a stroke 2 weeks after getting it, a good friend of mine lost his leg because he broke out in terrible rashes from the first and second dose but the rashes didn’t go away after the second dose and his leg became infected and had to be amputated, I have two relatives that now have blood clotting issues and I know a woman that reluctantly got them so that she could keep her job but she got myocarditis and neurological symptoms so she was unable to work and lost her job anyways. Millions and millions of people worldwide will never be the same from this poison. All over something with a 99.997% survival rate and a so-called treatment that doesn’t stop you from getting or spreading it. Recent data released shows that they need to administer over 1,000 doses to prevent even one hospitalization or death, and for every one hospitalization or death prevented, and average of 4.5 serious ae occur in adults and between 19 and 98 serious ae occur in children and teens! Informed consent has been taken from the masses because of greed, corruption and Power and the globalist agenda.

Show less

And then it went downhill from there.

See my Why can’t we talk about it? article for all the references backing up my statements.

Sean is just making up the data on myocarditis. This is why I kept asking him for where he is getting his data and he kept changing the topic. If he can find a more definitive study than that Israeli study or can point to an error in the Israeli study, I’m all ears. Or produce that non-existent cardiologist who saw their myocarditis cases plummet post-vax. I have yet to find one.

I couldn’t get him to look at the data at all. I offered to fly an expert of his choosing to the US to look at the embalmer clots. All expenses paid. Sean declined my offer. Here it was a GOLDEN opportunity to PROVE I was wrong at NO EXPENSE and he turns it down. What does that tell you?

I told him about a neurologist in California with 0 vaccine injured in 11 years and this year has 1,000 vaccine injuries that should be reported to VAERS. I offered to fly Sean to California so he could look at the medical records himself (assuming we obtained the proper patient consents which I would have arranged for before the flight). That’s real data. Nope, Sean didn’t want to look at the data. I guess he doesn’t want to make me look bad after all.

I asked Sean how he explained the VAERS data where all of a sudden, and for the COVID vaccines only, the reports were off the charts. No explanation offered. No evidence offered.

I asked him about the nearly 8% of people who had to seek medical attention after getting the vaccine (per the V-safe data obtained by ICAN). Sean offered that they were exaggerating. And what motivation would they have for doing that Sean? The V-safe data was kept from public view for almost 2 years. And it was only people who took the vax who could file a V-safe report, so all of these people are PRO-VAXXERS. Explain that one, Sean. I can’t wait to hear it.

We talked about the excess deaths in New Zealand that Peter Williams brought to my attention. Sean asked where Peter got the data. I said from official New Zealand government reports. Sean switched topics. I offered to send Sean’s producer the New Zealand government data on the excess deaths, but he didn’t want to see it. See no evil, speak no evil.

He also said I misinterpreted the fluvoxamine studies citing hearsay opinion. I asked him for evidence of that: what statements did I make that were wrong? He provided no evidence that I said something wrong. No statement that I made that was false. What is true is that I said the results of multiple studies (Lenz/JAMA and Seftel/OFID studies) were statistically impossible if fluvoxamine didn’t work. Since the side effects were low, the likely benefit outweighed the risk and the precautionary principle of medicine directs that it should be used since the benefit is life saving and the downside is near zero.

One of the authors of one of the studies agreed with me, but others wanted to wait for Phase 3 trails because that’s the way they are told to practice medicine (which doesn’t take into account the low risk of harm vs. a probable benefit). There is a brilliant essay on this written by Norman Doidge about this referring to using “all available evidence” as the correct approach. I fully agree with this. But that’s not how we train physicians unfortunately. It’s a brilliant essay that every clinician should read.

He said I was a snake oil salesman, but I told him I left millions of dollars of stock options on the table to become a misinformation spreader and where I charge $0 for my substack subscriptions. Anyone can subscribe free of charge. Some people voluntarily subscribe for a whole $5 per month.

Why would I take a huge pay cut to do something like this? I’m 65 years old and have no history of spreading misinformation. What is my motivation? What is Peter McCullough’s motivation?

He said the blood clots from the movie Died Suddenly are formed post-mortem. I explained how Dr. Chris Martenson did a 49 minute video explaining how this is impossible. Sean wasn’t interested in watching the video or debunking what Chris said (which the embalmers confirm was exactly right). See Could These Mysterious Clots be the Cause of Death? Watch the video at 43:48. Here’s the screenshot:

Also, I’ve watched many of Chris’s videos. I’ve never seen him use “without a doubt” before. So he really means, “without a doubt.”

People who are pro-narrative typically share these characteristics:

  1. No interest in seeing the data

  2. Blind trust in authority and experts in what they CLAIM if the experts are espousing a point of view shared by the recipient

  3. Change the topic when pressed to look at or show the data

  4. Engage in ad hominem attacks and/or gaslighting when challenged to produce facts

  5. Lack of intellectual curiosity

  6. More concerned about defending their belief than being open to data that might challenge their beliefs

  7. Unwilling to debate

  8. Run for hills or change topic when challenged to produce data

I give credit to Sean for overcoming #7 somewhat. He was willing to have me on his show, but he clearly had an attack list he was referencing throughout the call. He didn’t go into this with an open mind. His goal was to destroy me.

For more on this, see this excellent comment.

Sean, if you are so sure you are right about those clots like you said, would you like to bet me $1M? This is a quick way to double your money without risk.

Of course Sean will never bet me because he knows that what he said was misinformation.

Here’s another way Sean could debunk me: Simply respond to the 84 points I made in Why can’t we talk about it?

But Sean can’t respond to the 84 points. In fact, it’s highly likely that he can’t even provide credible evidence that even ONE of my points is wrong. Sean is just interested in defending his beliefs. He has no intellectual curiosity to look at the data or the evidence himself. In his mind, because he hasn’t seen vaccine injury himself, he doesn’t believe it exists.

When I pointed out that his heart attack that happened post-vaccine MIGHT have been a vaccine injury, he said he KNEW it wasn’t. Really? Did he ever run any tests to rule out the vaccine as causal? Of course not!!!!!!!!!!!! So how could he know?

Dr. Ryan Cole has often said, “The cells don’t lie.” They sure don’t as the Schwab paper that just came out points out; the paper tied death with the COVID shots in a way that nobody can dispute. But we never even got into discussing the evidence in that paper because Sean isn’t a data guy.

I pointed out that the VAERS database triggered the DEATH safety signal. Three independent statisticians duplicated my calculation. The CDC ignored it, even after it was brought to their attention. Conspiracy? Nope. The people who work at the CDC are sheep and Biden wants to drive vaccination so people at the CDC basically find a way to avoid looking at the data. It’s that simple. No conspiracy.

I’ve written over 1,000 articles on my substack and there are no allegations of people actively conspiring to hide the data… they are just doing what they are told to do which is support the government narrative.

He asked for evidence of a cover up. I provided that: I said doctors are afraid to speak out for fear of retribution, e.g., Charles Hoff in Canada, Ira Bernstein in Canada, Meryl Nass in the US, Matt Shelton in New Zealand. If you speak the truth, bad things happen to you. This is why many physicians have told me they agree with me but have to shut up about it or they will lose their license.

Finally, he asked what I thought about ivermectin. He was unimpressed that there are MULTIPLE systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in peer-reviewed journals that ivermectin works; this is the GOLD-STANDARD of evidence-based medicine. Didn’t matter to Sean. It’s misinformation even though the medical literature says it isn’t.

He kept interrupting me, so I did the same to him, but in retrospect it would have been better to have let him finish and insist that I didn’t interrupt him, he should give me the same respect. But I didn’t think that would work.

Bottom line: when you talk to someone who keeps avoiding looking at the evidence and data, even when I offer to pay all expenses to have them look at the evidence first hand, it’s pretty hard to convince them that you are right.

See Why can’t we talk about it? for all the detailed references backing up what I wrote in this article.

Sean kept saying that I wanted people to believe me, but I kept saying that I wanted people to look at the data themselves and decide for themselves who is telling them the truth. This is something Sean never asks his listeners to do. It’s a new concept for him.

A key example is the VAERS DEATH signal where the authorities will not look at their own data or that nobody wanted to see the Israeli safety data showing the vaccines were harming people.

Sean didn’t like that so quickly switched off of that even though it is OBJECTIVE PROOF IN PLAIN SIGHT THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS IGNORING THEIR OWN SAFETY DATA. And ANYONE can verify it from the comfort of their home because the government publishes all the data you need.

Sean, how about we go through as many of the 84 points in Why can’t we talk about it? as we can in 2 hours and have a discussion based on data and evidence, rather than Sean’s beliefs. This means government data, data in peer-reviewed scientific literature, and independent third party polling data.

We’ll have a panel of judges randomly chosen from both camps: Sean’s and mine, e.g., 40 people per side.

Then we take a vote at the end to see whether the audience shifted their position.

And I’m perfectly happy to draw questions evenly from Sean’s list of questions to make the debate topics totally fair. Each party submits 10 topics, each person gets 3 minutes of total talk time per issue. A total of 2 hours.

Each party gets the questions in advance so there are no surprises. A fair fight.

How about it Sean? Do you think you can win a fair debate where you supply half the questions and I supply half the questions?

Note that I have a much bigger follower base than Sean so he can’t weasel out of this challenge arguing that the doesn’t want to give me a platform to spread misinformation. Instead, it’s me giving him an opportunity to reduce vaccine hesitancy among my followers.

Furthermore, Sean doesn’t have to promote it to his listeners at all, therefore, he will not be able to argue that he is “giving me a platform.”

So we’ve eliminated all the potential excuses for saying No.

So how about it Sean?

If Sean wants to prove he’s got it right, it’s easy: he just needs to answer the 84 points I raised in my Why can’t we talk about it? article.

But I doubt he can even successfully argue even one of these points.

I’ve offered him a fair debate where he can prove I’m wrong. I’m happy to negotiate any changes just so at the end, the rules are the same for both sides. We can get Peter Williams to be the moderator. It would be epic.

I predict Sean will decline my most reasonable offer because he knows he has a snowball’s chance in hell of winning and he doesn’t want to be embarrassed.

And that my friends tells you everything you need to know about my good friend Mr. Plunket.