Urgent Explanation — Money and Executive Order #14067

 By Anna Von Reitz

All roads lead to the month of March and to the American Civil War. 
Read that again — we just bypassed Rome for the moment. 
Why March?  Because that is when the Northern Allies calling themselves “the Union” so as to confuse their “Union” with the actual Union of States — defaulted on their debt owed to their foreign investors. 
They were already organized as British Crown Corporations, so they had access to and sought public bankruptcy protection.  That’s how they “hooked” their own citizens to absorb and pay for their debt — but who were their “citizens”?   
(1) Those born in the Territories of the United States — Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., and (2) those who “voluntarily” adopted Territorial U.S. Citizenship by “enlisting” to serve as Territorial Mercenaries — all unaware.  
The men who fought in the Civil War on the Northern side of it, were all enrolled under the auspices of State-of-State organizations, not the actual States.  Whether they grasped the implications or not, when they signed up to fight for “the Union”, they actually signed up to fight for The State of New York,  The State of Vermont,  The State of Maine — and so on.  They weren’t fighting for New York, Vermont, or Maine.  
They were agreeing to be employed as mercenaries by British Crown Corporations. They were agreeing to adopt British Territorial U.S. Citizenship by doing so.  
They were not told this in so many words and I am sure that our Great-Great Grandfathers would turn over in their graves if they knew this, but it is nonetheless true.
On March 6th, 1863, Lincoln’s British Crown Corporation doing business as “the” United States of American, Incorporated, defaulted on its debts.  Three days later, on March 9, 1863, this default became official.  
More due process required by debt collection procedures followed, but finally, by April 1863, Lincoln had to pull the plug and seek bankruptcy protection.  
On the day before he declared bankruptcy of “the” United States of America, (Incorporated, that is) Lincoln issued the very first “Executive Order”.  It was called “General Order 100” even though it was the first of its kind. 
General Order 100 is also known as the Lieber Code and it has since been transformed into the Hague Conventions.  It directs the Union Army to take possession of and hold the assets of the nation (which “nation”?) and sets forth how they are supposed to do this and the rules they have to observe during this ersatz occupation of our country by the U.S. Army acting as a foreign mercenary force. 
The only nation that Lincoln or his British Crown Corporation had, were the natural Territorials born in U.S. Territories, and whoever “adopted” U.S. Citizenship by enlisting in the corporation’s private military service.  
Lincoln issued General Order 100 as the Commander-in-Chief of the United States, Inc. on April 24th, 1863, and one April 25th, 1863, he bankrupted the first British Crown Corporation doing business as “the United States of America, Incorporated”.  The assets of the first incorporated version of “the United States of America, Incorporated” were seized in receivership by foreign banks, who sent their Trustees in to act as “the US Trustees”.  
Clearly, this was all fraudulent, first to last, but they got away with it by deceit and Breach of Trust.  The Perpetrators impersonated the actual Union of States and the actual Federation of States using similar names, stole our identity just like a modern day Credit Card Hacker, and accessed our assets and credit under conditions of misrepresentation and color of law. 
Just as clearly, Lincoln needed to boot up a new corporation and find some new investors to keep his “war” effort going.  Enter his own Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase—yes, the one that Chase Bank is named after.  
Chase suggested basically two things — getting a loan from the Federal Reserve, a consortium of old family banks that had been in operation for some years prior to the so-called Civil War, and issuing Greenbacks based on that loan, and, then, to pay back the initial loan, issue “10/40 Bonds” as investment instruments backing the Greenbacks, which would eventually pay back the debt to the Federal Reserve and resolve the bankruptcy.
1040 Bonds were called that because they could be redeemed after ten years or after forty years, depending on how long the investor wanted to wait and how much interest they wanted to make.  
There was just one small (and very crooked) part of the whole scheme that appeared up front.  If you wanted to invest in the 1040 Bonds, and reap those very favorable rates of interest return, you had to pay for the 1040 Bonds in Greenbacks — and to get Greenbacks, you had to pay for them in gold or silver.  
It’s not a mistake that “Taxpayers” still fill out “1040” Forms and “invest” in these “bonds” to pay back this generation’s form of “Federal Reserve”.  
Lincoln issued the Greenbacks and the 1040 Investment Bonds as Chase suggested, and they were very popular products.  Investors acting as “the Federal Reserve” extended gold to back the Greenbacks, then other smaller investors from America and all around the globe piled on and paid with gold or silver to buy Greenbacks (giving the currency more support) and Lincoln’s problem was solved — or at least, put off for a decade or four.  
When it came time to pay off the 1040 Bonds, General William Tecumseh Sherman was in charge and when the 1040 Bond Investors came looking to redeem their bonds in gold plus interest, he told them — infamously, “Why, you paid for those bonds in Greenbacks. Why should you ask for anything different in return?” 
So, the Swindlers successfully exchanged paper for gold, and not even “gold certificates” — for bonds.  And what were those bonds actually issued against?  A loan from the Federal Reserve banks and the families running those banks.  And what was the collateral offered to those banks to guarantee the loan?  The assets and labor of the “citizenry” attached to the bankrupted British Crown Corporation.  
Right. Fast forward 140 years. 
Things didn’t improve with age.  The criminality with which all this started continued and worsened and gradually seeped into every corner of the the government structure including the military, which has continued to follow “Executive Orders” issued by a foreign corporation’s “President” ever since. 
So, all and any “Executive Orders” issued by any such “President” are just internal “orders” that apply only to actual Officers and Employees and their Dependents and do not apply to the General Public at all.  

Read that — Joe can surveil and lockdown and do whatever he wants to do to himself and his employees and fellow officers of the good ship HMS Blarney Buckets, but he can’t enforce any “Executive Orders” on the rest of us, and furthermore, because all the “employment contracts” —for the military, especially– were not properly disclosed, nobody who works for him has to continue working for him.  Just like any other corporate job, the members of our military can quit and they can sue for any abuses of their human, civil, or natural rights by the offenders responsible, no matter what the contract for their induction may say.  
The Scoundrels have gone to some lengths to make it appear that Americans have “voluntarily” conscripted themselves as British Crown Property by instituting a system of birth registration in this country and operating it under conditions of non-disclosure.  This has created a situation in which Medical Doctors (physicians licensed to provide services to British Crown Corporation employees and officials) have been secretively employed as Undeclared Foreign Agents and Uniformed Officers (Title 37) have been fraudulently registering Americans as British Territorial Citizens and/or Dependents since the 1920s. 
What does this all add up to?  Fraudulent confiscation of private property assets and intellectual property assets  belonging to this country and the people of this country, and the accumulation of vast amounts of Odious Debt being held against the victims of this scheme and their “future generations”. 
Odious Debt is debt established by means of some kind of fraud of which the victims are unaware and from which the victims don’t benefit.  
The trillions-worth of FRNs have to be destroyed in order to destroy this Odious Debt, quite apart from the illegal counterfeiting and fraudulent debt collecting and all the helicopter money bribes that have paid in FRNs. 
This is complicated by the fact that the military and all other components of the corporate governmental services operations have to be paid using credit, as mandated by the Constitutions.  Lincoln’s protegees had to find a way of accessing our credit and issue either credit notes or debt notes to pay for their operations.  
That’s why the proposed replacement for the Federal Reserve Notes is also a “Note” —the so-called “US Notes” or “USN” currency,  albeit, a “Note” like the Greenbacks, that is once again being backed by gold from some unstated private investor group.  
If we left the situation at that we would be back at Square One, where Lincoln was when he declared bankruptcy and needed new investors.  Whether it was the Federal Reserve extending the gold to back the new “USN” currency or the Bank of China, the same exact situation would merely repeat itself.  
For the sake of ourselves and our country and the entire world, we cannot let this fraud and illegal occupation of our country by foreign “service” corporations go on like this.  Even if we hire these same corporations and allow them to continue as Successors to our original Constitutions, we have to step up and take control of the helm, so that these corporations and their foreign investors are no longer able to spend our assets and credit “for” us. 
What does all this have to do with the actual country here and with us, the living people populating our States of the Union?   Nothing. 
This was all a big fraud game promoted by foreign interests, having nothing to do with us at all.  
To straighten this mess up, we have to restore the natural order of things, where the Employers tell the Employees what to do, and not the other way around.  
Fortunately for all concerned, we “woke up” in 1998 and began the Notification and Due Process needed to do exactly this, and we completed all the various steps by 2015 and finished all the commercial claims processes by 2019.  
Go to: www.TheAmericanStatesAssembly.net and get involved in restoring the actual American Government you are owed.  
Everyone else worldwide is invited to do the same.  Reclaim your identity as a livng man or living woman and reclaim your homelands and your national governments.  
Vast amounts of pre-paid credit are owed to the living people of this world, along with land assets, precious metals and so much more.  Nobody anywhere on this planet is “poor”.  
It was just fraud and selfishness and lust for power that ever made it seem otherwise.  There is no reason for anyone to fight or to invest in war anymore. 
Don’t be afraid.  Dedicated people from all over the world have been working hard to reclaim and recoup the assets and develop a system by which everyone everywhere can be restored.  Our International Land Recording System is totally independent, block-chained, and ready to record people who come back to the land and soil of their countries on a worldwide basis.  Whether you are from Kansas or Sri Lanka, you can find your feet again and stand up as men and women in control of your own countries and your own destinies. 
Americans, go to: www.TheAmericanStatesAssembly.net and get moving. 
Everyone else, the new International Recording System will launch very soon and enable you to do what we have done.  
Immediately upon recording your correct political status and peaceful intent, you will become Inheritors of your natural and native assets, and war and crying and crime and disease will be no more. 
Because of all the acrimony and false-front corporate wrong-doing, there are still people employed by these corporations resisting change, thinking that they are in a commercial “war” and have something to win or lose.  The Municipal city-states that were illegally established here in our country are refusing to accept the new USN currency of the District of Columbia, and vice-versa, obviously, the District of Columbia is refusing to honor Federal Reserve Notes.  
It’s all foreign nonsense that has no place on our shores, being promoted by commercial corporations and foreign governments that have been acting in Breach of Trust as governmental service providers acting under color of law and in violation of the public service contracts.  We have moved to have these offending corporations involuntarily liquidated as a result of the injuries to life that they have caused and their many other lawless acts in pursuit of profit.  
The primary responsibility for such liquidation rests upon those who are by custom, Law, and tradition responsible for the administration of the Air Jurisdiction — the Roman Curia, the Roman Catholic Church, especially the Pope, and other church leaders and organizations throughout the Ecumenical Community of the Earth.  This includes the leaders of the Eastern and Russian Orthodox Churches, the Coptic Churches, the leaders of Synagogues, the Imans of Islam, the priests of Buddha, the priests of Shinto, the Brahmas of Hindu tradition, and all others of reasonable and peaceful belief, are called to support and initiate action against the Nazi-controlled UN CORP, WHO, Inc., the World Bank, Inc,, WEF, Inc.,  and all the corporations responsible for crimes against humanity including but not limited to the governmental services corporations and their franchises operating as, for example, OTTAWA, INC., or the Province of Alberta, Inc., or the “State of Ohio, Inc.”,  NIH, INC., CDC, INC., Government of the United States, Inc., FBI, INC., Pfizer, Inc., Moderna, Inc., Astrazeneca, Inc., Alphabet, Inc., CBS, Inc., NBC, Inc, and other broadcast media “news” organizations that have violated guaranteed freed speech and filled the airwaves with subliminal messaging and health-destroying dischordant music and propaganda facilitating crime, and the many foundations that have contributed to and profited from these heinous profit-making activities, including The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The Clinton Foundation, and others. 
There are also abundant statutory and code provisions for the liquidation of offending corporations and business enterprises involved in criminal activities that result in injury to living people and their actual physical and intellectual assets.  
We are recommending that these corporations and others that have profited from the misery, enslavement, and illness of Mankind be involuntarily dissolved by whatever means is more expedient and that such action should include the following additional measures: (1) removing the privilege of incorporation and prohibiting the officers, board members, and senior executives of these dissolved corporations from ever forming or directing any corporation again; (2) removal of the corporate veil to allow direct prosecution of the officers, board members and senior executives responsible for the criminal misdirection of these corporations, including, if appropriate, criminal prosecution, confiscation of personal assets, and jail time; (3) removal of public bankruptcy protection for these organizations and individuals, who have betrayed the public interest and attacked their Benefactors.  
Anna Maria Riezinger, Fiduciary

The United States of America 

See this article and over 4000 others on Anna’s website here: www.annavonreitz.com

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here. 

WHO Puts Mad Scientist in Charge of Global Health

  • December 13, 2022, the World Health Organization named Dr. Jeremy Farrar as its new chief scientist for global health

  • Farrar, while director for the Wellcome Trust, was complicit in the coverup of SARS-CoV-2’s origin

  • The Wellcome Trust, which Farrar led from 2013 until February 2023, is part of the technocratic globalist network and the modern eugenics movement

  • Farrar has been on the forefront pushing the envelope on vaccine development, such that experimental gene therapy is now used as a preventive for viral infection. When COVID broke out, Farrar founded Wellcome Leap, which is basically the DARPA of global public health. Its focus is wholly on transhumanist research to usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution

  • Farrar and WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus are part of a small and tight-knit but global network that is working behind the scenes to influence global health, finance and governance

Visit Mercola Market


December 13, 2022, the World Health Organization named Dr. Jeremy Farrar as its new chief scientist for global health.

As chief scientist, Farrar will oversee the WHO’s science division “to develop and deliver high quality health services” worldwide.

As detailed in “The Dam of Lies Surrounding COVID Lab Leak Is Breaking,” February 1, 2020, Farrar convened a conference call with Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins and several scientists to discuss tell-tale signs that SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered, which meant the pandemic was the result of a lab leak.

At the time, Farrar wrote that “On a spectrum if zero is nature and 100 is release — I am honestly at 50!”

But rather than being transparent, Farrar became complicit in Fauci’s and Collins’ coverup of SARS-CoV-2’s origin. But that’s far from the only reason to be concerned about Farrar’s new role.

Farrar was the director of the Wellcome Trust from 2013 until February 2023, and as explained by investigative journalist Whitney Webb in the video above, the Wellcome Trust is part of the technocratic globalist network and the modern eugenics movement.

Not only is the Wellcome Trust the archivist for the Eugenics Society, now known as the Galton Institute, but it also has a eugenics-directed center of its own. The Wellcome Trust’s Centre for Human Genetics investigates race genetics and susceptibility to diseases and infertility, and co-funds research and development of vaccines and birth control methods with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Wellcome’s board consists of present or former bankers, insurance executives and investment board members. The founder, Sir Henry Wellcome, while still alive, also founded the company that went on to become GlaxoSmithKline, so the Wellcome Trust is essentially the “philanthropic arm” of GSK. The Wellcome Trust is also one of the investors behind Vaccitech, a private company that holds the patents and royalties for the AstraZeneca COVID jab.

Considering the WHO’s plan to seize control over health care decisions worldwide, starting with pandemic responses — a move that will essentially turn the WHO into an incubator for a One World Government or New World Order (NWO) — its selection of Farrar makes sense. He’s part of the technocracy and is a eugenics insider already.

If the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty gets signed this year (and there’s every reason to suspect it will be), then Farrar will wield unprecedented power and influence, as member nations will have no choice but to adhere to his medical recommendations. What’s so concerning about that is his willingness to embrace reckless science and transhumanist pie-in-the-sky ideals.

As noted by Webb, Farrar has been on the forefront pushing the envelope on vaccine development, such that experimental gene therapy is now used as a preventive for viral infection. When COVID broke out, Farrar founded Wellcome Leap, an organization that “builds bold, unconventional programs” that “aim to deliver … seemingly impossible results on seemingly impossible timelines.”

The CEO of Wellcome Leap, Regina Dugan,

worked at the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) from 1996 until 2012. Between 2009 and 2012, she served as its first female director. In 2012, Dugan left DARPA to create a DARPA equivalent for Google called Advanced Technology and Projects (ATAP). She later took on a similar project at Facebook, called Building 8.

DARPA, of course, is heavily invested in transhumanist technologies for the use in soldiers, including brain-machine interfaces and other even more extreme ideas. Wellcome Leap is basically the DARPA of global public health, with all the transhumanist connotations that brings, and this is the kind of mindset Farrar brings to his position as chief scientist at the WHO. What could go wrong?

“I would argue Farrar is a recipe for disaster when it comes to imposing experimental medical technologies on the population during public health crises,” Webb says. “This is a guy who was very much invested in this stuff …

In terms of the kinds of pandemic response policies he supports, it’s lockdowns, masks — essentially all of that stuff. And he was the architect of a lot of that, specifically for the WHO during COVID-19. He has consistently supported policies that really, ultimately, have little to do with public health.”

As explained in greater depth by Webb in her interview with Kim Iversen, what we’re seeing is the merger of the medical industry with Big Tech and the military-intelligence complex. There are longstanding plans to introduce biosurveillance, and this is being done primarily through the health care sector.

Surveillance technologies are basically being introduced and sold as technologies to help you manage your health better but, ultimately, it’s not about promoting health, it’s about implementing increasingly more invasive surveillance mechanisms without setting off alarm bells.

According to historian and WEF transhumanist “guru” Yuval Harari, wearable and/or implanted surveillance technologies will ultimately be used “to wipe out dissent, because even if you outwardly act like you agree with leadership and are supportive of certain agendas and policies, but you’re internally not, the government will know.”

As noted by Webb, “That’s his interpretation of that stuff and it’s just totally insane.” As for Farrar’s Wellcome Leap, there’s no doubt its focus, like DARPA’s, is on transhumanist research. For example, one project involves mapping infants’ brain development to create a “perfect child brain model” that they then intend to use as the basis for AI-based interventions in infants and toddlers, with the goal of making them “cognitively homogenous.”

As noted by Webb:

“It just sounds like mad scientist stuff and per Wellcome Leap, which again is an organization with a lot of influence, they’re hoping to have 80% of kids subjected to that by 2030. So if Jeremy Farrar as chief scientist of the WHO is willing to sign off on a program like that, with those kinds of insane ambitions … I mean it’s just like something out of Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World.'”

Other investigators have also identified Farrar as being part of a small but global network that is working behind the scenes to influence global health, finance and governance. In September 2021, German journalist and filmmaker Markus Langemann posted the video above, in which he presents some of the highlights from a 170-page document that details more than 7,200 links between 6,500 entities and objects, including payment flows and investments related to the COVID scam.

The audio is in German but there is a captioned translation at the bottom of the video. You can review and download the document here.

This document was created using software that investigators and detectives use to help them identify hidden connections between potential suspects based on publicly available data.

Red arrows are used throughout the document to indicate money flows, such as grants, donations and other payments. As one example, as shown on page 3, at least 21 U.S. universities are financed by and through just three key organizations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Open Philanthropy project (a research and grantmaking foundation linked to the World Economic Forum) and the Wellcome Trust.

“Farrar and WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus are part of a small and tight-knit but global network that is working behind the scenes to influence global health, finance and governance.”

According to the anonymous IT specialist who created the document, the core of this “COVID criminal network,” around whom most everything revolves, is no larger than 20 or 30 people. Several of them appear on page 36, and among them we find not only Farrar, but also WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.

This close-knit group of people got together May 8, 2019, at a CDU/CSU event where they discussed how to strengthen global health and implement the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The CDU/CSU is a political alliance of two German political parties, the Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU) and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria (CSU).

From that May 2019 meeting onward, these individuals are found again and again, in overlapping working groups. You also find them rubbing elbows in the past.

One event Farrar attended that seems relevant was the February 14, 2019, tabletop exercise on International Response to Deliberate Biological Events, as shown on page 124. Individuals from the Chinese CDC and the Gates Foundation were also present.

In 2018, Farrar became a member of the International Advisory Board on Global Health. He also joined the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, a joint arm of the WHO and the World Bank, formally launched in May 2018. Dr. Anthony Fauci is also a member of this board.

Due to the complexity of the network connections, there’s really no easy way to summarize them here. You simply have to go through the document, page by page. That said, key organizations, whose networking connections are detailed, include:

  • The Wellcome Trust

  • The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

  • The World Health Organization

  • The Rockefeller Foundation

  • The World Bank Group

  • The World Economic Forum (WEF)

  • GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, founded by the Gates Foundation

  • Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), founded by the governments of Norway and India, the Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust and WEF

  • The Global Fund

  • Forum of Young Global Leaders, founded by WEF in 2004

  • FIND, the global alliance for diagnostics, seeks to ensure equitable access to reliable diagnosis around the world

  • Big Pharma

  • Johns Hopkins University

  • Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin

  • The Robert Koch Institute

  • The European Commission

  • The European Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

  • The Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products

  • The German Global Health Hub

Of these, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be near the top, or the center, of this criminal network, depending on how you visualize it. Gates is also a major funder of the WHO, and, as noted by Webb, it’s likely billionaires like Gates and his Big Pharma and Big Tech allies who are the puppeteers pulling the WHO’s strings.

Ultimately, they’re the ones trying to seize control of global health, as medicine is the vehicle they’ll use to usher in their technocratic, transhumanist dystopia.

To give us an idea of how the WHO might end up misusing the powers it would gain through its Pandemic Treaty, we can look at the International Health Regulations (IHR),

which the U.S. signed on to in 2005.

The IHR is what empowered the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).

This is a special legal category that allows the WHO to initiate certain contracts and procedures, including drug and vaccine contracts.

The IHR allows the unelected director-general of the WHO to declare a PHEIC and, suddenly, all member states have to dance to his tune. It basically grants the WHO dictatorial powers over health policy.

PHEICs have included the phony H1N1 swine flu pandemic in 2009, the inconsequential Zika outbreak in 2016, the overhyped Ebola outbreak in 2019, and, of course, the massively exaggerated COVID pandemic in 2020. All of these PHEICs were poorly handled and the WHO was criticized as inept and corrupt

in their wake.

So, through the IHR, the WHO has already been significantly empowered to dictate global health policy with regard to pandemics, and they used that power to bamboozle the nations of the world into spending billions of dollars on countermeasures, especially drugs and vaccines, that didn’t work very well.

In that sense, the WHO is really just another wealth-transfer instrument. The WHO’s Big Pharma collaborators make billions on the taxpayers’ dime, while the people of the world are left to suffer the consequences of fast-tracked vaccines.

Its handling of the COVID pandemic in particular has been unprecedentedly bad, as they were behind the withholding of early treatment with safe medicines worldwide. So, why would anyone expect the WHO to become less corrupt if given even more power and control, which is what the Pandemic Treaty will give them?

Additional evidence that the WHO is corrupt and inept can be seen in the fact that they, at the end of January 2023, extended the public health emergency over COVID for another three months.

So, even though government officials around the world have publicly stated that the pandemic is over, the WHO is not willing to relinquish emergency powers.

Even if the WHO eventually drops the PHEIC, they have a plan to still keep everyone’s feet to the proverbial fire. As reported by STAT News:

“In order to prepare for the eventual termination of the PHEIC, the emergency committee recommended that the WHO develop other ways to maintain attention on COVID, including accelerating the integration of surveillance for COVID into the long-standing program that monitors influenza transmission and viral evolution around the globe.”

In other words, they will continue fearmongering and pushing for the implementation of biosurveillance and vaccine passports/digital IDs. Similarly, during the January 2023 WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland, former prime minister of the U.K., Tony Blair, called for a “digital infrastructure” to monitor everyone’s vaccine status, not only for COVID but also for all the other “vaccines that will come down the line.”

Everywhere you look, pawns of the globalist cabal are singing the same tune. They want more surveillance and control over the population, which translates into less personal freedom and bodily autonomy. 

President Biden is also holding on to his emergency powers even though no emergency exists. In September 2022, he said the pandemic was over.

Then, January 11, 2023, he extended the public health emergency until April,

ostensibly due to the emergence of XBB.1.5.

While this variant is rapidly spreading, it’s causing only mild cold symptoms. So, essentially, the government is hogging emergency powers because of cold symptoms now. What’s next? All the signs point to the idea that COVID is intended to be a “permanent emergency,” and, of course, the longer it drags out, the more people resign themselves to that fact.

Aside from facilitating unconstitutional overreaches, there are other reasons for keeping the public health emergency status as well. Importantly, it allows for the allocation of medical resources and funding that benefit Big Pharma and the medical industry. For example, lifting the emergency would limit who can administer the COVID jabs — such as pharmacists — at a time when Big Pharma is pushing to get more people to get boosted.

While preventing the WHO Pandemic Treaty from being enacted will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, as “regular people” have no say in the matter, there are still things you can do to protect your freedom. Importantly, do not sign up for a vaccine passport, digital ID or central bank digital currency (CBDC).

These will be sold as marvels of convenience but do not be fooled. They are the gateway to a prison state you will not be able to extricate from. Our best hope of thwarting the plan for a One World Government is to refuse to adopt these core surveillance technologies en masse. Once a nation goes completely cashless, the entire population is trapped.

Instead, we need to build and expand parallel economies and industries that do not rely on these technologies. Start small and local, and develop strong communities for mutual support and exchange. This way, you become more resilient against coercion.

Beyond that, you need to evaluate your own situation and determine how you can become more independent and resilient against threats like financial crashes and food shortages. The answers will be different for each person. For starting tips, see “How to Secure Your Water Supply for Emergencies,” “How Bad Will the Food Shortage Get?” and “How to Turn the Tables on Tyrants Waging Economic War.”

>”,”action”:null,”class”:null}”>NEXT ARTICLE >>

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.

Scientists Warn That UV Nail Drying Devices Damage DNA

uv nail polish dryers dna damage

  • Ultraviolet (UV) light nail polish dryers used by nail salons to set nail gel commonly emit UVA light. Researchers have found consistent exposure can increase the risk of developing skin cancer on your fingers

  • One 20-minute session under UVA light damages 20% to 30% of DNA, much of which does not repair, and causes mitochondrial dysfunction. Three consecutive 20-minute exposures resulted in 65% to 70% of cell death

  • Personal care products are poorly regulated, and laws have remained unchanged since 1938. Popular hair straightening product is linked to an increased risk of uterine cancers

  • Sunscreens are another product with ingredients that can accumulate in your body at unhealthy levels. The FDA confirms there is an additive effect to the exposure to benzene, avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene and octinoxate, to name a few

  • Very few chemicals are safety tested and even then may not be safe as they are tested individually under lab conditions and you use them in combination in real-world scenarios

Visit Mercola Market


In 2021, the global beauty and personal care market was valued at $482.8 billion

and is expected to grow at a rate of 7.7% through 2030. Personal care products include skin care, hair care, color cosmetics and daily grooming tools, which have become the primary driving factor in market expansion.

A 2023 study

published in Nature Communications has found that the ultraviolet (UV) light devices used to cure gel nail polish lead to DNA damage and permanent mutations. As the Environmental Working Group (EWG) reports,

federal laws that regulate personal care product safety have remained unchanged since 1938.

On average, men use six personal care products every day, which exposes them to 85 different chemicals. However, women have greater exposure, using 12 personal care products on average each day, which exposes them to 168 chemical ingredients.

Researchers were interested in whether long-term exposure to ultraviolet A (UVA) light from nail polish dryers that are a common fixture in nail salons could increase the risk of developing skin cancer.

The light is used to cure chemicals in gel manicures in the spectrum of 340 to 395 nanometers.

Ludmil Alexandrov, corresponding author of the study and professor of bioengineering and cellular molecular medicine at UC San Diego, said that these devices are often marketed as being safe for the consumer, yet the researchers could not find a study on how they affect human cells at the molecular level.

The scientists used three different cell lines, including adult human skin keratinocytes, human foreskin fibroblasts and mouse embryonic fibroblasts. In just one 20-minute session, between 20% and 30% of the exposed cells had died. After three consecutive 20-minute exposures, the researchers noted from 65% to 70% of the cells exposed to the UVA light had died.

Alexandrov was waiting at his dentist’s office when he read an article about a beauty pageant contestant diagnosed with a rare form of skin cancer on her finger. This sparked his curiosity about the type of exposure that may have caused that damage. From there, Alexandrov noted case reports of people who got gel manicures frequently with rare cases of cancer on their fingers.

This suggested to him that the manicures may have something to do with cancer. “And what we saw was that there was zero molecular understanding of what these devices were doing to human cells,” he said. The study does not answer the question of whether a once-yearly manicure is a cause for concern or if those getting gel manicures on a regular basis should stop.

They acknowledge that further studies are needed to understand the frequency of use and increased risk associated with these devices. However, after seeing the results firsthand, Maria Zhivagui, a postdoctoral scholar in the Alexandrov Lab and first author of the study, has sworn off gel manicures, explaining:

“When I was doing my Ph.D., I started hearing about gel manicures, which last longer than normal polish. I was interested in trying out gel nail polish, particularly in the setting of working in an experimental lab where I frequently put gloves on and off, to maintain a presentable appearance. So I started using gel manicures periodically for several years.

Once I saw the effect of radiation emitted by the gel polish drying device on cell death and that it actually mutates cells even after just one 20-minute session, I was surprised. I found this to be very alarming and decided to stop using it.”

The researchers wrote that while data strongly suggest that UV light emitted from nail polish dryers may trigger skin cancer, “Nevertheless, future large-scale epidemiological studies are warranted to accurately quantify the risk for skin cancer of the hand in people regularly using UV-nail polish dryers. It is likely that such studies will take at least a decade to complete and to subsequently inform the general public.”

The researchers noted that the first thing damaged was DNA and some of it was not repaired over time. They also saw that exposure could “cause mitochondrial dysfunction, which may also result in additional mutations. We looked at patients with skin cancers, and we see the exact same patterns of mutations in these patients that were seen in the irradiated cells,” said Alexandrov.

Your mitochondria are tiny organelles inside your cells that generate a vast majority of the energy in your body. As you age, mitochondrial function declines. This is a hallmark of aging and chronic disease. Mitochondrial dysfunction in the featured study was noted in the area localized to UVA light exposure.

However, it is worth noting that several environmental stressors can have an impact on mitochondrial function, so paying attention to strategies that protect your mitochondria is important to your overall health. Dr. Frank Shallenberger has been a natural medicine physician for nearly five decades.

In my interview with Shallenberger,

we talked about the system he developed in 2004 that gives a quantitative measure of how well your mitochondria are working. What he found was that even asymptomatic people in their 30s can have a significant decline in mitochondrial function and early onset is indicative of premature aging.

After years of testing and experimenting, Shallenberger found only two substances that really move the needle to optimize mitochondrial function — B vitamins and ozone treatment:

“B vitamins are absolutely critical for mitochondrial function — especially niacin, riboflavin and folate. Orally speaking, with niacin, I typically start them at 100 to 200 milligrams a day [but] you can go up to 2,000 mg easy on some patients. I use a B complex because I like to balance it out, but I’m focusing primarily on niacin, folate and riboflavin.

I have literally seen patients have great mitochondrial function, be under stress for two months, and have their mitochondria wiped out just from emotional stress.”

Another popular cosmetic treatment is hair straightening products. These contain toxic chemicals that can increase the risk of uterine disease. A study led by the National Institutes of Health

found women who use hair straighteners may have double the risk of uterine cancer.

The study engaged 33,497 women from the ages of 35 to 74 years who were part of the Sister Study cohort.

This was a separate research initiative to identify risk factors for breast cancer and other health conditions. After 10.9 years, data showed those who used hair straightening products in the last 12 months had a higher rate than those who had never used the products.

This was also a dose-dependent response. In other words, the women who used hair straightening products more frequently had a greater risk. This factor was quantified and revealed that those who used hair straighteners more than four times in 12 months had more than twice the risk of developing uterine cancer as those who didn’t use any hair straightening products.

The study’s lead author, Alexandra White, Ph.D., head of the NIEHS Environment and Cancer Epidemiology group, said in a news release:

“We estimated that 1.64% of women who never used hair straighteners would go on to develop uterine cancer by the age of 70; but for frequent users, that risk goes up to 4.05%. This doubling rate is concerning. However, it is important to put this information into context — uterine cancer is a relatively rare type of cancer.”

Incidence rates for uterine cancer have risen in recent years, particularly for aggressive subtypes and particularly among black women.

According to a 2019 study,

these trends of nonendometrial uterine cancers in black women exceed those of white women and black women have a lower survival rate for all uterine cancers.

The use of hair straightening products could be one precipitating factor. The 2022 study found that among participants who had ever used hair straighteners, 59.9% were Black.

While the study didn’t find racial differences in the association between straightener use and uterine cancer incidence, it’s possible that risks are higher for Black women due to more frequent, and younger, use.

According to study author Che-Jung Chang, Ph.D., “Because Black women use hair straightening or relaxer products more frequently and tend to initiate use at earlier ages than other races and ethnicities, these findings may be even more relevant for them.”

Unfortunately, people have been made to fear the sun so much that vitamin D deficiencies have become a serious health concern,

as was demonstrated during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Evidence suggests that inadequate sun exposure can also be correlated with “specific cancers, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, autism, Alzheimer’s disease and age-related macular degeneration.”

Many people turn to sunscreens to reduce their exposure. Yet, these may be more dangerous. In mid-2022,

one company voluntarily recalled two brands after benzene was found in the products. Benzene is a colorless, flammable liquid that is a known carcinogen in animals and people.

Although it’s known that benzene is a carcinogen, it is also among the top 20 most widely used chemicals in the U.S. In other words, despite the FDA and EPA knowing that benzene causes cancer, the government continues to allow it to be used in products. In fact, in March 2020, the FDA issued temporary guidance that allowed hand sanitizers to contain benzene at levels up to two parts per million.

Two FDA studies have confirmed there is an additive effect from exposure to benzene. The studies were published in 2019

and 2020,

showing other ingredients in sunscreen could also build up in the body at unhealthy levels. The FDA studies included avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, homosalate, octisalate and octinoxate.

Since the FDA’s own data

revealed that some of these chemicals accumulated at levels higher than would be considered safe, it begs the question of why the FDA considers these products safe. The study found chemicals accumulated above safety levels after just seven days of using sunscreen.

It’s important to read ingredient labels and watch for product recalls.

As the featured study demonstrates, it’s not always chemicals that can damage your health, DNA and mitochondria. However, a global inventory taken in 2020 listed more than 350,000 chemicals and mixtures found in commercial products, which was up to three times more than is commonly estimated.

Some of these chemicals are endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which are similar in structure to natural hormones including thyroid hormones, the female sex hormone estrogen and the male sex hormone androgen. EDCs interfere with development, reproduction, neurological functioning, metabolism, satiety, immune system functioning and more.

There is no safe level of exposure for many EDCs. While the list is extensive, and the list of possible EDCs even longer, the EWG identified 12 of the worst and most widely used ones. These include:

  • Bisphenol-A (BPA)

  • Dioxin

  • Atrazine

  • Phthalates

  • Perchlorate

  • Fire retardants (polybrominated diethyl ethers or PBDEs)

  • Lead

  • Mercury

  • Arsenic

  • Perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs)

  • Organophosphate pesticides

  • Glycol ethers

According to the Endocrine Society,

there is an estimated 1,000 man-made EDCs on the market. Some common routes of exposure include personal care products, drinking water, conventionally grown produce and CAFO meat, kitchenware, cleaning products and cash register receipts.

Personal care products often contain phthalates, parabens and the neurotoxin toluene. As the EWG pointed out, very few chemicals are tested for safety, and even then, they aren’t necessarily safe. One of the reasons is that safety testing is typically done on one chemical at a time and under laboratory conditions.

Yet you are exposed to chemicals in combination and under countless different real-world scenarios. This could increase their toxicity exponentially. To avoid exposure, simplify your personal care routine and make your own products using safe ingredients like coconut oil, essential oils, and mild soap.

You can also consult EWG’s Skin Deep Cosmetics Database

where you can enter the name of your product or product type and get a safety report. For more ways to lower your exposure to toxins, see my article, “10 Things That You Can Eliminate for Better Health.”

>”,”action”:null,”class”:null}”>NEXT ARTICLE >>

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.

Will Wearing a Mask Protect You Against Coronavirus?

coronavirus mask

  • Fear of coronavirus infection has led to a massive increase in sales of surgical face masks and respirators. Many health care facilities are now struggling to obtain the supplies needed to protect health care workers and patients

  • Health experts are issuing public statements saying the masks won’t protect healthy people against infection and, according to the FDA, the “immediate health risk from COVID-19 is considered low,” so face masks are unwarranted for public use

  • While the evidence is conflicting, some studies suggest healthy people do limit their chances of infection if wearing a face mask, especially properly fitted N95 or N100 respirators

  • A 2009 study found use of face masks in households was ineffective due to low adherence, not because they don’t prevent the transmission of illness. In fact, were more people to wear masks, influenza-like infection rates would probably be lower

  • A 2015 meta-analysis found that in 8 of 9 trials, use of face masks in community settings prevented infection in healthy people when used in isolation or in combination with hand hygiene, when used early and consistently

Visit Mercola Market

ℹ️ From Dr. Joseph Mercola

Since COVID-19 first entered the scene, exchange of ideas has basically been outlawed. By sharing my views and those from various experts throughout the pandemic on COVID treatments and the experimental COVID jabs, I became a main target of the White House, the political establishment and the global cabal.

Propaganda and pervasive censorship have been deployed to seize control over every part of your life, including your health, finances and food supply. The major media are key players and have been instrumental in creating and fueling fear.

I am republishing this article in its original form so that you can see how the progression unfolded.

Originally published: March 17, 2020

With 101,606 reported COVID-19 cases across 96 countries and territories as of March 6, 2020,

and no known cure, people are seeking ways to protect themselves against infection. Logically, many are resorting to wearing face masks when venturing out in public.

However, as face masks are becoming harder to come by, health experts are issuing public statements saying the masks won’t protect healthy people against infection. Is that true? Or is it a ploy to ensure an adequate supply for health care workers? As reported in a March 4, 2020, Time article:

“‘It seems kind of intuitively obvious that if you put something — whether it’s a scarf or a mask — in front of your nose and mouth, that will filter out some of these viruses that are floating around out there,’ says Dr. William Schaffner, professor of medicine in the division of infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University.

The only problem: that’s not effective against respiratory illnesses like the flu and COVID-19. If it were, ‘the CDC would have recommended it years ago,’ he says. ‘It doesn’t, because it makes science-based recommendations.'”

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, surgical masks are not designed to provide protection against airborne pathogens and are not considered respiratory protection. They’re only designed to prevent large-particle droplets (which may contain pathogens) from reaching your mouth and nose.

Part of the problem is that these kinds of masks won’t form a seal around your face. Most people also have a tendency to touch their face a lot, thus depositing pathogens from their hands to their face anyway.

According to U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams, wearing a mask may actually increase your risk of infection, as most people will touch their face even more frequently when wearing one.

The CDC only recommends surgical masks for:

  • People who are symptomatic, as the mask will inhibit the spread of the virus if you cough or sneeze into the mask

  • Caregivers for infected patients

Mayo Clinic infectious diseases specialist Dr. Nipunie Rajapakse explains:

“The current recommendations regarding masks are that if you yourself are sick with fever and cough, you can wear a surgical mask to prevent transmission to other people.

If you are healthy, there is not thought to be any additional benefit to wearing a mask yourself because the mask is not airtight and does not necessarily prevent breathing in of these viral particles, which are very tiny.”

The CDC also does not recommend that the general public wear N95 respirators, which are designed to be tight-fitting and capable of filtering out at least 95% of much smaller (0.3 micron in size) airborne particles. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration:

“For the general American public, there is no added health benefit to wear a respiratory protective device (such as an N95 respirator), and the immediate health risk from COVID-19 is considered low.”

You wouldn’t think the health risk from COVID-19 was “considered low” by looking at or listening to the news though. Perhaps journalists didn’t get the memo?

Either way, it strikes many as odd that facemasks and N95 respirators are universally considered key instruments for infection control in health care settings, yet the general public is now told they won’t protect against respiratory diseases such as COVID-19.

One reason cited for why the public should not use N95 respirator masks either, even though they protect against airborne pathogens, is because they require fit testing to ensure a tight seal around the face.

However, according to the CDC’s fit test Q & A document,

this is a relatively simple affair. The qualitative pass/fail test that an individual would conduct to assess whether the mask is properly fitted is a smell test. If you can smell an odorous substance through the mask, it’s not tight-fitting enough.

What’s more, this test only needs to be done once, when selecting the best-fitting brand, make, model and size of the respirator. Once you know which model fits your face best, you don’t need to do the fit test again until or unless your facial structure changes due to dental or cosmetic surgery, for example, or “an obvious change in body weight.” Health care workers, however, must do the fit test once a year regardless, in order to maintain NIOSH compliance.

So, what’s the real deal on the use of face masks? Do they only protect health care workers from getting sick, and sick patients from spreading it to others, or might they prevent healthy lay people from being infected as well? A 2009 study

in Emerging Infectious Diseases sought to answer this question in the wake of the bird flu (H5N1) outbreak. According to the authors:

“Many countries are stockpiling face masks … to reduce viral transmission during an influenza pandemic. We conducted a prospective cluster-randomized trial comparing surgical masks, non–fit-tested P2 masks, and no masks in prevention of influenza-like illness (ILI) in households.

During the 2006 and 2007 winter seasons, 286 exposed adults from 143 households who had been exposed to a child with clinical respiratory illness were recruited … Adherence to mask use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of ILI-associated infection.

We concluded that household use of masks is associated with low adherence and is ineffective in controlling seasonal ILI. If adherence were greater, mask use might reduce transmission during a severe influenza pandemic.”

In other words, mask use was ineffective due to low adherence, not because they don’t prevent the transmission of illness. In fact, were more people to wear masks, infection rates would probably be lower.

Then there’s the article

“Disrupting the Transmission of Influenza A: Face Masks and Ultraviolet Light as Control Measures,” published in Health Policy and Ethics in 2007, which states:

“In the event of an influenza pandemic, where effective vaccine and antiviral drugs may be lacking, disrupting environmental transmission of the influenza virus will be the only viable strategy to protect the public. We discuss two such modalities, respirators (face masks) and ultraviolet (UV) light.

Largely overlooked, the potential utility of each is underappreciated. The effectiveness of disposable face masks may be increased by sealing the edges of the mask to the face. Reusable masks should be stockpiled, because the supply of disposable masks will likely prove inadequate …

Respirators (N–95 and N–100; both commercially available) are masks designed to shield the wearer from inhalational hazards, as opposed to surgical masks, which are designed to protect others from contaminants generated by the wearer. In the discussion that follows, use of the word mask refers only to the former …

Current respirator filters are typically made of polypropylene wool felt, or fiberglass paper. Particles collide with and become enmeshed within these nonwoven fibers. Another mechanism for the filtering media may be the electrostatic charge that these fibers have, which attract and hold oppositely charged particles. The influenza virus has charges at its hemagglutinin spikes …

N95 respirators … have been reported to be protective in preventing transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus … but use of these masks failed to prevent a cluster of cases in one hospital.

If one assumes that influenza is transmitted by respiratory droplets (… which immediately fall to the ground) rather than by aerosols (… which remain suspended in air for long periods of time), the supposition may be that keeping a safe distance may obviate the need for a face mask.

It is stated that the range of such droplets is generally no more than 3 ft. We are unable to locate the basic science behind that assertion … Laschtschenko found that talking sprayed viable bacteria 6 m (approximately 20ft).

Koeniger … found that even whispering sprayed bacteria … 7.4 m (approximately 24 ft) and a mixture of coughing, speaking, and sneezing carried bacteria 12.4 m (40 ft) … From these very old reports, the distinction between respiratory droplets and aerosols may be more apparent than real.

As a respiratory droplet falls to the ground, the aqueous portion quickly evaporates, but the bacterial or viral portion remains. Theoretically, a viral particle, if it remains viable, could be carried by wind or reaerosolized by ground disturbances.”

The paper does highlight several factors that can render respirator masks unreliable and ineffective. There’s the issue of fit and seal against the face, the fact that they cannot be repeatedly reused, the risk of contact contamination when touching or removing the mask, and the fact that your eyes are also a portal for viral infection.

Still, N95 and N100 respirators “offer the potential of mitigating a potentially uncontrollable pandemic,” the authors note, adding “It is our hope that this brief review … draws the attention of policymakers to allow for wider implementation of their use as public health measures.”

All of that said, studies

looking at disease transmission rates among people who use either face masks or N95 respirators have shown conflicting results. Some conclude they lower the risk of infection while others find they’re no more effective than handwashing. The following excerpt from a systematic review published in 2012 is a case in point:

“There are limited data on the use of masks and respirators to reduce transmission of influenza … Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials and quasi‐experimental and observational studies of humans … with an outcome of laboratory‐confirmed or clinically‐diagnosed influenza and other viral respiratory infections.

There were 17 eligible studies. Six of eight randomized controlled trials found no significant differences between control and intervention groups (masks with or without hand hygiene; N95/P2 respirators).

One household trial found that mask wearing coupled with hand sanitizer use reduced secondary transmission of upper respiratory infection/influenza‐like illness/laboratory‐confirmed influenza …

One hospital‐based trial found a lower rate of clinical respiratory illness associated with non‐fit‐tested N95 respirator use compared with medical masks.

Eight of nine retrospective observational studies found that mask and/or respirator use was independently associated with a reduced risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) …

None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection. Some evidence suggests that mask use is best undertaken as part of a package of personal protection especially hand hygiene. The effectiveness of masks and respirators is likely linked to early, consistent and correct usage.”

A 2015 systematic review came to similar conclusions, stating:

“The concepts of droplet and airborne transmission that are entrenched in clinical practice have recently been shown to be more complex than previously thought.

Several randomized clinical trials of facemasks have been conducted in community and healthcare settings, using widely varying interventions, including mixed interventions (such as masks and handwashing), and diverse outcomes.

Of the nine trials of facemasks identified in community settings, in all but one, facemasks were used for respiratory protection of well people. They found that facemasks and facemasks plus hand hygiene may prevent infection in community settings, subject to early use and compliance.”

At present, health authorities recommend using the following strategies to minimize the spread of infection:

  • Frequently wash your hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds

  • Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth

  • If you need to cough, cough into your flexed elbow or disposable tissue. Discard the tissue in a trash can and wash your hands

  • If feeling unwell, stay home and avoid public spaces

If you have symptoms of illness such as coughing or sneezing, be sure to wear a surgical mask to contain the spread whenever you’re around others. As for whether or not you should wear a mask to prevent contracting COVID-19 (or some other infectious disease), the answer is a bit more elusive.

Based on the published evidence, however, it appears it can be at least moderately helpful provided you’re:

  • Consistent in its use

  • Using an N95 or N100 respirator mask and putting it on correctly to ensure a proper seal

  • Not touching the mask while wearing it (if droplets have landed on the mask, the viruses in the droplets are still infectious and can transfer to your hands. So, if you touch the mask, you need to wash your hands)

  • Removing it correctly (for the same reason as above)

  • Using it concomitant with frequent handwashing and other basic hygiene recommendations

As reported by The Washington Post,

face masks of all kinds are now in such short supply, even hospitals are having a hard time getting enough. Mike Bowen, executive vice president of Prestige Ameritech, the largest U.S.-based manufacturer of surgical masks, claims he’s been warning governments about the coming of this day.

“This is the precise scenario he began warning about almost 15 years ago, when he pleaded with federal agencies and lawmakers to boost U.S. production of medical masks,” The Washington Post writes.

“He had predicted an eventual health scare and not enough manufacturers. He was right … ‘What I’ve been saying since 2007 is, ‘guys, I’m warning you, here’s what is going to happen, let’s prepare,’ Bowen said … ‘Because if you call me after it starts, I can’t help everybody.’

The coronavirus outbreak has … exposed major vulnerabilities in the medical supply chain. Many U.S. companies, especially hospitals and pharmaceutical firms, rely on Chinese manufacturers for products … like masks and gloves. Now, much appears upended.

There is no global, centralized plan for fast-tracking production of what’s known as personal protective equipment … ‘Prestige Ameritech is presently the lone voice warning of the insecure U.S. mask supply,’ Bowen wrote to President Barack Obama in June 2010 …

‘The U.S. protective mask supply could — and mostly likely would — be disrupted, confiscated or diverted in the event of a pandemic,’ Bowen wrote to President Trump three years ago … ‘A lack of planning on their part is not an emergency on my part,’ Bowen said. ‘They had their chance. I told them over and over.'”

There’s still an awful lot we don’t know about COVID-19, its origin, infection mechanisms, incubation and transmission rates, and its treatment. At present, the incubation period appears to be somewhere between two and 14 days, which isn’t exactly a precise measurement.

Complicating matters is the finding that you can spread the virus during that incubation period, and may remain contagious for an undetermined time even after you’ve recovered. January 30, 2020, German doctors reported

a case of transmission from an asymptomatic carrier, saying:

“… it is notable that the infection appears to have been transmitted during the incubation period of the index patient, in whom the illness was brief and nonspecific. The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-nCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak.

In this context, the detection of 2019-nCoV and a high sputum viral load in a convalescent patient (Patient 1) arouse concern about prolonged shedding of 2019-nCoV after recovery.”

As for how it spreads, the virus can pass from one person to another through respiratory droplets emitted when talking, coughing or sneezing. Aside from breathing the virus in, you may be infected by touching a contaminated surface, or when shaking hands or sharing a drink or utensils with an infected person

— whether asymptomatic or symptomatic, and possibly for some days after they’ve recovered.

Now, if COVID-19 can spread during the incubation period and for some time after recovery, wearing a face mask as a precautionary strategy may be rather sensible. After all, surgical masks are meant to limit the spread of the virus.

If you don’t know whether you’ve been exposed, you won’t know if you’re contagious. So, limiting the wearing of face masks to people who are already symptomatic means people will be walking around spreading the disease for up to two weeks. If they’re wearing a mask, they limit the spread of the contagion.

While not a short-term solution for the current shortage of protective masks, perhaps it would be wise to increase global production in preparation for these kinds of outbreaks, just like Bowen has suggested for the past 15 years.

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.

Pete Santili: Mark Houck case a clear example of government overreach against Christian conservatives

Image: Pete Santili: Mark Houck case a clear example of government overreach against Christian conservatives

(Natural News) Pete Santili of “The Pete Santili Show” pointed out that the case against now-acquitted pro-life activist Mark Houck was a perfect example of the federal government’s overreach against Christian conservatives.

During the podcast’s Feb. 2 episode, which had Houck himself as a guest, Santili mentioned the recent exoneration of the activist after being accused of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act. Houck allegedly “assaulted” and “forcefully shoved” 72-year-old volunteer Bruce Love at a Planned Parenthood in the city of Philadelphia back in October 2021.

The 48-year-old father was subsequently arrested by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) during a raid on his home in September of last year. However, Fox News reported that a jury acquitted him of charges relating to the violation of the FACE Act.

According to Santili, the Department of Justice under President Joe Biden has literally tried to destroy Houck’s life – but he stood firm.

Houck recounted to Santili what happened during the Sept. 23, 2022 raid on their home and his subsequent arrest. At around 6:45 a.m. on that day, no less than 20 federal agents and Pennsylvania State Troopers surrounded the pro-life activist’s home. (Related: Journalist calls FBI raid on pro-life activist ‘act of terrorism’ as politicized Justice Dept. unleashed to target conservatives.)

Houck mentioned that on the Friday morning of September 23, 2022, at 6:45 a.m. around 20 plus federal agents and Pennsylvania State Troopers came to his home to arrest him.


“What I saw was a complete circus. I saw 15 marked and unmarked units with five federal agents, long guns pointing at me; heavily armored vests; ballistic shields and helmets; and a battering ram ready to come into my home if I didn’t open the door.”

According to Houck, the government intended to humiliate him and instill fear in him, his family and the entirety of pro-life America.

Houck subjected to a warrantless arrest

The pro-life activist also shared to Santili that his wife came down and asked the agents if they had a warrant for his arrest, to which the agents replied that they will take Houck into custody with or without a warrant.

Houck was charged with two counts of violating the FACE Act – both felonies. If found guilty, Houck would have faced up to three years of supervised probation and a $350,000 fine. A conviction would yield 11 years’ jail time, he said.

The pro-life activist also mentioned an interesting detail about his jury trial, with its jury selection happening last Jan. 24. Many of the potential jurors were supporters of Planned Parenthood and had used its services. Even though the selection process was tough, he and his legal team picked the best 12 for the trial that began on Jan. 25.

Santili ultimately commented that the federal government’s overreach needs to stop.

“”It needs to stop this kidnapping of people from their 10 square mile jurisdiction in D.C.,” he said. “These federal agents – we’re talking about government overreach coming into jurisdictions – this stuff that is happening is yet another example where they come in from a foreign jurisdiction and it is foreign to the sovereign state of Pennsylvania. That’s not a radical concept. This stuff needs to stop because it’s done for political and ideological reasons.”

Watch Pete Santili and Mark Houck talk about the latter’s acquittal on “The Pete Santili Show” below.

This video is from The Resistance 1776 channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

Sheriff Mack wants law enforcement officers to lead the way in helping America wake up and resist government overreach – Brighteon.TV.

Corrupt Biden Justice Department, FBI raid homes of Project Veritas journalists for the “crime” of doing their jobs and exposing malfeasance.

The Zelenko Report: DOJ and FBI don’t have any credibility, argues Kevin Jenkins – Brighteon.TV.

FDA, FBI raid natural cancer treatment clinic in Tulsa without due cause; force patients to leave without medicine needed for survival.

Connecticut police arrest parents for letting their kids walk freely.

Sources include: