3 Things You Need to Know About Treating Spike & Post-COVID Syndrome

Long after mask mandates, lockdowns, and vaccine requirements are little more than a distant memory, the legacy of COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines will continue to haunt us in the form of spike protein.

Low energy, fatigue, brain fog, loss of taste – It’s been three years, and millions of Americans are still needlessly suffering from the long-term effects of COVID-19. What’s worse, these symptoms may be magnified if you were vaccinated

Dr. McCullough was one of the most outspoken and bravest leaders during the pandemic, and today he is continuing his work to keep Americans healthy and safe in this new post-pandemic era of spike protein.

COVID-19 expert Dr. Peter McCullough emphasizes the problem: 

Over three years into the pandemic with nearly the entire country having become sick with SARS-CoV-2, a virus engineered to invade the body, there are millions suffering with long-hauler syndrome. Approximately half of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 will have post-COVID syndrome which is now understood to be due to persistence of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein within cells, tissues, and organs. Those vaccinated have been additionally loaded with Spike, so may have even a worse course with prolonged symptoms including fatigue, lethargy, brain fog, muscle loss, skin and hair changes, sleeplessness, and effort intolerance. The magnitude of the problem has driven an all-encompassing search for management strategies to resolve the syndrome(s).

Despite censorship and continued denial by the mainstream medical community, solutions exist. Dr. Peter McCullough notes the following potential remedies: 

  • Prescription Ivermectin 
  • Prescription Low-Dose Naltrexone 
  • Over-the-counter Nattokinase 

In particular, Nattokinase shows great promise. From Dr. McCullough:  

I have found nattokinase, the Japanese product derived from natto (a traditional Japanese food made from whole soybeans that have been fermented with Bacillus subtilis var. natto.) to be the most compelling and scientifically supported approach to clear Spike protein out of the body via proteolytic degradation.

Dr. Peter McCullough and his team at The Wellness Company designed an optimized Nattokinase-based supplement, Spike Support, to help you feel your best. That supplement includes:

  • Nattokinase to aid with circulation and dissolve spike protein 
  • Dandelion for a detoxifying agent and prevent spike protein cellular binding 
  • Black sativa to help facilitate cellular repair 
  • Green tea for added defenses at the cellular level through scavenging for free radicals 
  • Irish sea moss to help rebuild damaged tissue and muscle 

 

Here is one of Dr. McCullough’s colleagues, Dr. Jen VanDeWater, talking about all the elements of The Wellness Company’s Spike Support Formula:

According to The Wellness Company, purchasing all the separate ingredients of the Spike Support Formula would be over $100 – you can save 36% with the unique formulation in The Wellness Company’s Spike Support Formula.

Click here to order the Spike Support Formula today!

References:

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/prescription-and-over-the-counter

The post 3 Things You Need to Know About Treating Spike & Post-COVID Syndrome appeared first on DailyClout.

Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revival – An Excerpt From Upcoming Book “Small Farm Republic”

The following is an excerpt from John Klar’s upcoming book,
Small Farm Republic: Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revival


SmallFarmRepublic_frontcover (1)

Covid has revealed numerous food distribution vulnerabilities unaddressed by the 2016 [Republican] platform, which also does not present a plan for the steady spikes in inflation in food prices that will be the new normal. Layers of price-inflated fossil fuels and (fossil-fuel-based) fertilizers, and other inflating agriculture inputs, will compound inflationary impacts in foods. Americans could be suffering severe economic hardship, malnutrition, and even starvation if and when food costs comprise 20% percent or 30% percent of their monthly budgets instead of the 10% percent to which they are accustomed. There is a very real risk of a jump to 50% percent or more of household budgets for basic groceries, and even widespread food shortages—aggravated by hoarding and theft.

 

The Republican Party must steer its policies with foresight toward responding to these very real problems, rather than wait until 2024 to dabble with another quixotic, disconnected, faux environmental policy prescription. America’s conservatives must stake their political futures with working-class rural Americans, not corporate elites and billionaires. Regenerative agricultural policies, reduced regulation, and support for rural farming communities and family farms offer an agricultural policy pathway to economic, human, and environmental health, but also political success for conservatives. These proposals affirm traditional conservative values that include supporting small businesses and their economic importance for America. The widely dispersed smallholdings favored by Jefferson and the distributists remain the strongest bulwark against industrial domination and government totalitarianism. This foundation resists the vagaries of both capitalism and communism. But more, it rests on traditionally espoused conservative values. Republicans must return to that legacy from which they have strayed.

 

The past century witnessed a relentless tightening of government regulatory control of nearly every morsel of food grown locally, while rapidly and recklessly expanding access to dubiously labeled foreign-sourced foods that often lack thorough regulatory oversight. Family farms have all but vanished and local landscapes have grown back in scrub brush and woods, or worse—“development.” And the citizenry is being made ill by it all.

 

Republicans must get food and sustainable agriculture right. Prices of basic foods have already risen much faster than base inflation rates, and this will worsen as the Biden post-CovidOVID spending infusions dilute the money supply. It is likely the government will issue more debt-fueled “relief,” but this will instead fuel yet more inflation. There may well be food riots in American streets such as have not been seen since revolutionary times, when more than thirty local food riots occurred from 1775 to 1779, fueling the American Revolution.

 

Restoring rural communities begins with subsidies for small-scale and regenerative farming practices instead of for monocultures and Chinese solar panels. When small families can afford to live in rural areas—and wish to—businesses that serve farmers and also these rural consumers will also return to rural towns,; schools will grow in enrollment, and rural communities will thrive. The family farm is the foundation of soil stewardship as well as community, and that merits saving.

 

A local food supply is also the best defense against tyranny. That was as true for the American colonists against the British Crown as it is for today’s patriots. And once again, it’s a win-win. Trustworthy governments should encourage self-reliance and food security for their populace, not compel servitude to corporate hegemony.

 

Eliminating subsidies over time for large-scale, soil-wrecking monoculture production is a necessity, along with paring back overly burdensome agriculture regulations. Targeted credits and subsidies will profoundly motivate Americans to consider economically viable, healthy living in the diverse and beautiful landscapes that crave human nurturing and regeneration.

 

Humans rebel against being converted to a CAFO life. Just like cows, they are happier, healthier, and more balanced with the ecosystem only when they are out on the land. The policies proposed will do more than just restore fair opportunities for small-scale farmers: they will help all Americans weather future storms of inflation or food scarcity, as growing one’s own food is the strongest possible hedge fund against a weak currency.

 

There are a number of potential food supply crises that face America, linked to soil erosion and water supplies, but also to currency strength, fossil fuel market volatility, world war, and other potential threats. A land-based (agrarian) rural population is more resilient to such blows and serves as a resource for urban as well as rural Americans.

Conservatives and liberals must unite to support small farms and local food production. 

 

There is no need to embrace global warming or even carbon dioxide as the culprit for conservatives to see the many benefits that follow. Democrats can fight the climate change battle separately while concurring in the many benefits proffered by a Republican policy initiative favoring regenerative practices and local agriculture. Should the nation quickly achieve consensus on chemical reduction and regenerative agriculture, the benefits would soon prove themselves: rural economic growth; healthier food supplies, and thus healthier people and less-costly care; improved soil retention and healthier soils; cleaner water and reduced stress on aquifers; reduced overall government spending on agriculture subsidies; reduced fossil fuel, and fertilizer, and other chemical inputs; and reduced dependency on foreign food, fuels, fertilizers, and other agricultural inputs. Additionally, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could be measurably reduced (offsetting the surge of its production via solar panel and EV manufacturing!).

 

The political import of these proposals is to unite Americans strongly along policy priorities, on the eve of a growing crisis of sustained food-price inflation and in the midst of a highly -polarized political climate. This makes local agriculture urgent, but no less political. More people could die in a month in America from an abrupt interruption in commerce than have succumbed to Covid through the entire pandemic.

 

The post Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revival – An Excerpt From Upcoming Book “Small Farm Republic” appeared first on DailyClout.

St. Michael’s College Segregated Me From My Peers for Refusing COVID Vaccines

For declining to take the COVID-19 vaccines, Lauren Palmer was treated like a pariah in her once beloved community at St. Michael’s College. As a result, she was forced to withdraw and while she is thriving at her new university, she is compelled to remind St Michael’s of the damage they caused in refusing to seek the truth, in coercing their community to take vaccines not supported by science and in their complete failure to live up to the mission they so boldly claim to uphold.


To the St. Michael’s College Administration,

My name is Lauren Palmer. I am a previous St. Michael’s College student. I transferred to St. Mike’s in the fall of 2020. I withdrew in August 2021 after St. Mike’s announced its Covid-19 vaccine mandate and continued mask mandate for unvaccinated students. I did not believe in the safety of these vaccines and did not feel comfortable taking one, and—even with an exemption—special regulations for unvaccinated students meant I had no autonomy on campus. Because of my “vaccine status,” I was both segregated from my peers and denied opportunities I would otherwise have enjoyed taking part in. I withdrew only after long consideration and considerable grief. Before I left, I wrote several letters asking the administration and Covid policy group on campus to reconsider its mandates, providing a number of the most recent studies, including the CDC’s and WHO’s own statistics. Each of these correspondences received only generic dismissals.

I am no longer a current student at St. Mike’s, but the college and the decisions of the administration around Covid-19 have had a continued impact on my life. I have spent much of the last two years coming to terms with this impact, and I write today to express what I can through this letter. I speak here only from my personal experience, not as an expert in anything beyond my own story, and as someone who once loved St. Mike’s. This letter is addressed equally to the college’s administration, to several of my former professors whose classes I had the pleasure of attending, and to a handful of others whom I came to know at St. Mike’s (should there be any not included in this email who ought to be, I welcome you to pass my words on)—I hope there may be some among you that take the time to fully read the following and that it may provoke a reconsideration of the events of the past three years. No student, faculty, or staff member should have had to face the decision between compromising their beliefs and leaving a place which had become like home; I hope my experiences as described below may begin to shed light on the long-term effects of these Covid-19 policies that especially students, both at St. Mike’s and across the country, were forced to confront.

I transferred to St. Mike’s in the fall of 2021, having already completed a year of credits at the Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts. I chose St. Mike’s for its emphasis on the humanities and its commitment to a more classical education, as well as its small size which I felt would allow me to get to know my peers and professors better. I took a year off after withdrawing from St. Mike’s before deciding to reapply to new schools. I am now in my second semester at the University of Vermont, studying Classics and Asian Studies. I have about a year of courses left which I still need to complete to fulfil UVM’s core requirements as well as my major and minor programs.

I was, at St. Mike’s, not only an Honors student but also a coach-in-training at the Writing Center, a student employee at Durick Library, and an upcoming Residential Assistant. I organized several meetings for fellow transfer students to get acquainted with each other, and I was an active participant in every course I took, both inside and outside of class time. Had I stayed at St. Mike’s, I might have pursued involvement in the theatre as well. I willingly gave up these positions and opportunities with my withdrawal, and I stand by this decision. But I think it is important to understand that, while this decision was my own, I would never have had to make it if vaccine and masking mandates had not made this decision necessary. I left behind three jobs, I left behind friends and professors, and I left behind a learning environment which I felt, at least at that time, encouraged and nourished my love of learning. I am 25 this month—I would have been graduating this spring in just under two months. I will now no longer be a graduate at the place that I had once thought would become my alma-mater.

These were only logistical changes, however. The administration’s decisions around Covid-19 went far beyond this.

The decisions of the college shook my faith in humanity. They challenged my convictions about the human ability to overcome selfishness and fear in favor of love. And they devastated my belief in institutions like St. Mike’s which had professed to seek truth but only proved their ability to uphold blind injustice.

I have seen the worst of human viciousness and unkindness in the past three years, the frightening ease with which good people become tyrants. I used to wonder how terrible things happen—events like the Holocaust or the Chinese Cultural Revolution. I realize now it is the ordinary people possessed by a great fear who propagate such terrors. The worst events of history have happened because of the complacency and willingness of the majority: the reason that the practice of slavery in America was able to survive for so many decades was due to the arrogant belief of the majority that it was okay to own people and treat them as nothing more than animals. The Holocaust began with propaganda saying the Jews needed to be segregated because of the threat of disease, and the majority did not question this. The Cultural Revolution, aided by a decade long climate of fear, began with a series of articles published by Mao Zedong asking student activists to call out intellectual traitors in their society—photos from the time show professors, crowned with paper hats spelling their “wrongdoings,” bowed amidst crowds of cheering youths, madness in their eyes. That same madness reflected in their eyes is what shows today in ours. Only a society which is possessed by such a madness can have convinced itself that dividing and hurting any part of its community is a righteous cause.

Because of the decisions of our society today, I, like many other students who refused the Covid vaccine, was segregated from my peers. I was denied opportunities or told that I had to follow a list of restrictions in order to be eligible to participate. I could not live on campus over the summer. I could not participate in a student photoshoot for school publications. In order to work at the library, I was told to remain masked despite the rest of the employees and patrons having the freedom to choose. I faced walking onto campus each day not knowing what someone else might say to me about my vaccine status—wondering what names I might be called or what looks of disapproval I might meet. Because of these decisions of the college and society, I have watched close friends and classmates, faced with the choice the mandates forced them to make, crushed by betrayal and fear. I have watched some turn on their own friends or family with an unkindness I would never have believed possible. I have watched the souls of others die as they agreed to a mandate they knew went against their own conscience—feeling they had no other way. They should never have had to make that decision. None of us should have had to.

As a private college, I understand that you had and have more freedom to make these decisions than public schools. I also understand that, whether or not you had that freedom, it ought to have been your prerogative—as an institution which teaches its students about the right to autonomy and critical thought—to defend the rights of every student, faculty member, and staff to choose, a right owed to us as human beings which the Declaration of Independence, and even if not the Declaration of Independence at least our humanity, once guaranteed. You chose not to defend this right. And even if you had not agreed, as you proved, and even if every other person on the planet were saying that you were right and students like me were wrong, you ought to have given us the chance to speak. You ought to have given every student like me with concerns an open platform and listened not with a pre-determined answer, but with an honest ear. The silent condemnation you chose to serve to students like me is one of the worst acts you could have committed.

In future, therefore, I hope you will reconsider what it is that St. Mike’s stands for and whether you are indeed brave enough to uphold those ideals. I believed St. Mike’s to be a place of true integrity and learning, but you have betrayed, at least for me, the promise you swore to uphold as a place of true learning and, in doing so, you have betrayed in yourselves your own humanity. St. Mike’s professes to celebrate civil rights and liberty, but, from what I have seen of the college’s actions, you can be said to be little better than those who stood on the side-lines and watched while the police brutally attacked Martin Luther King’s march outside of Selma, Alabama on Bloody Sunday.

I believe it is at the beginning of the year that every student is required to take a Sexual Assault Prevention training. In that training, one of the central messages: “Don’t be a bystander.” Being a bystander is as much a choice as being a perpetrator. Yet the only feedback I received from St. Mike’s administration previously was that they were following guidelines, despite conflicts in the emerging scientific findings and perhaps too despite personal conscience. I can only say that your being a bystander to this situation was a choice too, and one not without consequences. I hope you may, therefore, find it in your hearts to recognize, in order that the future may be proven better than the past, the freedoms you have squashed, the dreams of your students which you have asked us to change, and the fear which you have empowered to run rampant. I hope you come to realize the enormous effect you have on every students’ life who steps onto your campus and walks through your halls. And I hope you understand fear, not health, not love, not kindness, has been at the center of these last three years. Love does not discriminate. Kindness does not turn a blind eye to the pleas of others, friend or enemy. Compassion does not encourage its community to shun and openly criticize certain of its members. If you truly wanted to protect our health, you would have educated your students with good food, encouraged time outside, allowed an open platform for discussion and the presentation of research, and protected our mental well-beings by allowing us a voice, not masking and shutting us down.

Given the responses I received two years ago, I do not hold much hope that many who read this will truly understand what I am asking, but perhaps enough time has passed now; I believe there must be some out there who have not forgotten their humanity and their compassion altogether. I must have faith that there are some left in whom the spirit of those like Gandhi and Thich Nat Han still lives.

I assume that the Covid-19 vaccine and booster is still mandated at St. Mike’s as it is today at UVM. I was able to get an exemption, though I know many students who either were not aware of this option or felt they would be denied—both at St. Mike’s and at UVM. I hope that, if this is still the case, you may take my letter and explore for yourself the new research being published about the vaccines as evidence that the Covid-19 vaccine should not be on the list of vaccines mandatory to attend St. Michael’s. I hope that, for those of you in the administration, you may take it upon yourselves to make an official apology to students affected by your mandates and that you take a hard look at the principles you purport to be built on and ask yourselves whether or not you have, indeed, upheld them. I hope that others who read this may take my experiences into consideration and may find the courage to support students of all voices by speaking up beside us in the future. We should never have needed to mask. We should never have been asked to vaccinate upon punishment of discrimination or withdrawal. Now, two years later, Covid is still around us yet the masks are off, never mind the continued questionability of vaccine efficacy and safety. Little to nothing has changed between today and two years ago about Covid itself besides your mandates, so I hope that alone may make you think twice about what you choose to do next time. It was not Covid but these mandates that empowered fear and unkindness to run unchecked in our community.

You do not know how many good students you have lost because of those mandates, nor do you probably realize how many others you have and are losing now by upholding these requirements even into today. My generation begins to look much like that World War I generation of young people who lost their souls, if not their bodies, to a terrible war. I can only say that, for my part, I do not intend to let my generation be another lost generation. There are students like me all across the world, affected by these mandates, who are now taking back the dreams and hopes for the future which colleges tried to steal when asking us to mask ourselves everyday and to stay inside, to stay away and to be silent.

There is a bench across the road from the college’s main entrance, overlooking the mountains. There is a quote inscribed on that bench by the poet Hafiz: “I wish I could show you when you are lonely or in darkness the astonishing light of your own being.” I hope you get a chance to go sit on that bench someday soon, if it is still there—I believe it must be. I would not want any other young man or woman to face the decisions and the trials I have faced in the past three years, but I must also thank these experiences for the strength they have given me. I must thank St. Mike’s in the end for teaching me the true meaning of Hafiz’ quote too, for it, if nothing else, has taught me, to paraphrase the words of an anonymous author, how to witness great darkness but not to let it consume my light—how, indeed, to recognize my own great light even in the midst of this great darkness.

I hope that someday you may come to understand the experiences I have expressed above—the experiences which are not only mine but all of my generations’—and that the horrible acts of the past three years need not to repeat themselves again.

Thank you sincerely for your time,

Lauren Elise Palmer

The post St. Michael’s College Segregated Me From My Peers for Refusing COVID Vaccines appeared first on DailyClout.

Nearly 80 Percent of American Voters Support Boycotting Chinese Made Products in Response to Aggressive Behavior of Chinese Communist Party

Strong Bipartisan Majority Supports Limiting U.S. Dependence on Chinese Manufacturing

 

(Austin, TX—March 30, 2023) Convention of States Action, in partnership with The Trafalgar Group—one of America’s most accurate pollsters—is releasing the results of a new national survey. Results were from surveys conducted March 20th through March 22nd of over 1,000 likely general election voters.

“Previous polling we conducted have repeatedly shown that Americans are taking the threat from the Chinese Communist Government seriously and want President Biden and the U.S. government to take decisive action in containing the threat from China,” said Mark Meckler, President of Convention of States. “What is notable in this poll though is that Americans are so concerned about the threat posed by the Chinese government that they are willing to take action themselves to restrict China’s manufacturing monopoly that feeds the CCP beast. We have reached a national moment of awareness and understanding.”

For complete details on the poll, including graphics, please visit:

https://www.thetrafalgargroup.org/news/nat-issues-chinese-products-0323/

KEY INSIGHT: Overwhelming Majority of American Voters Say They Would Be Willing to Stop Buying Chinese Manufactured Products in Response to CCP’s Aggressive Behavior and to Lessen America’s Dependence on Chinese Products:

  • 78.7 percent of voters say they would be willing to stop purchasing Chinese products as a means to help counter the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, and lessen America’s dependence on Chinese manufacturing.

  • 10 percent of voters say they would not be willing to stop purchasing Chinese products as a means to help counter the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, and lessen America’s dependence on Chinese manufacturing.

  •  11.4 percent are not sure.

KEY INSIGHT: Bipartisan Majority Supports Boycotting Chinese Products in Response to CCP’s Aggressive Behavior and to Lessen America’s Dependence on Chinese Products:

  • 74.2 percent of Democratic voters say they would be willing to stop purchasing Chinese products as a means to help counter the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, and lessen America’s dependence on Chinese manufacturing. 10.5 percent are not willing and 15.4 percent are not sure.

  • 92.1 percent of Republican voters say they would be willing to stop purchasing Chinese products as a means to help counter the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, and lessen America’s dependence on Chinese manufacturing. 1.9 percent are not willing and 6 percent are not sure.

  • 67.1 percent of Independent voters say they would be willing to stop purchasing Chinese products as a means to help counter the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, and lessen America’s dependence on Chinese manufacturing. 19 percent are not willing and 13.9 percent are not sure.

The post Nearly 80 Percent of American Voters Support Boycotting Chinese Made Products in Response to Aggressive Behavior of Chinese Communist Party appeared first on DailyClout.

No Farmers, No Food, No Life

The world is now facing a man-made food catastrophe. It is reaching crisis levels.

Current policies in many parts of the world place a priority on climate change for realizing a green new deal. Meanwhile, such policies will contribute to children dying from severe malnutrition due to broken food systems, with shortages of food and water, stress, anxiety, fear, and dangerous chemical exposure.

More negative pressure on farmers and the food system is asking for a catastrophe. The immune system of many people, especially children, has lost its resilience and has weakened too far with high risks for intoxication, infections, non-communicable and infectious diseases, deaths and infertility.

Dutch farmers, of whom many will face a cost of living crisis after 2030, have drawn the line. They are supported by an increasing number of farmers and citizens worldwide.

It’s not the farmers who are the most heavy polluters of the environment, but industries who make the products needed for a technocracy revolution to green energy, data mining, and Artificial Intelligence. As more of the WEF plans are rolled out by politicians, inequalities grow, and conflicts are rising all over the world.

The strong farmers’ revolt in the Netherlands is a call for an urgent transition to a people-oriented, free and healthy world with nutritious food cultivated and harvested in respect to natural processes. The cooperation of ordinary people worldwide is on the rise to prevent a mass famine catastrophe caused by the plan of scientism and technocracy to rule and control the world by unelected scientists and elites.

Enough food, access to food is the problem

Farmers around the world normally grow enough calories (2,800) per person (while 2,100 calories/day would be sufficient) to support a population of nine to ten billion people worldwide. But still over 828 million people have too little to eat each day. The problem is not always food; it is access. The UN which wrote in 2015 in the Sustainable Development Goals goal 2: No hunger and malnutrition for all in 2030 will not be reached.

Throughout history many times natural or manmade disasters led to food insecurities for longer periods of time, resulting in hunger, malnutrition (undernourishment) and mortality. The Covid-19 pandemic has worsened the situation. Since the global pandemic began, access to food estimates show that food insecurity has likely doubled, if not tripled  in some places around the world.

Moreover, during the pandemic, global hunger rose to 150 million and is now affecting 828 million people, with 46 million at the brink of starvation facing emergency levels of hunger or worse. In the hardest hit places, this means famine or famine-like conditions. At least 45 million children are suffering from wasting, which is the most visible and severe form of malnutrition, and potentially life-threatening.

With global prices of food and fertilizers already reaching worrying highs, the continuing impacts of the pandemic, the political forces to realize climate change goals and the Russia-Ukraine war raise serious concerns for food security both in the short and the long term.

The world is facing a further spike in food shortages, pushing more families worldwide at risk for severe malnutrition. Those communities which survived former crises are left more vulnerable to a new shock than before and will accumulate the effects, diving into famine (acute starvation and a sharp increase in mortality).

Furthermore, growth of economies and development of nations are currently slowing down due to a lack of workforce due to a sharp decrease in well-being and higher mortality rates.

In the wake of new nitrogen limits that require farmers to radically curb their nitrogen emissions by up to 70 percent in the next eight years, tens of thousands of Dutch farmers have risen in protest against the government.

Farmers will be forced to use less fertilizer and even to reduce the number of their livestock, in some cases up to 95%. For smaller family-owned farms it will be impossible to reach these goals. Many will be forced to shutter, including people whose families have been farming for up to eight generations.

Moreover, a significant decrease and limitations of Dutch farmers will have huge repercussions for the global food supply chain. The Netherlands is the world’s second largest agricultural exporter after the United States. Still, the Dutch government pursues their agenda on Climate Change while there is currently no law to support the implementation, while they will not change much in the planet’s major air pollution. Models used to arrive at the decision of the Dutch government are debated by acknowledged scientists.

In no communication have Dutch politicians considered the effects of their decision on breaking a most important goal in the UN agreement: ending hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all in 2030.

Unfortunately, Sri Lanka, a country whose political leader introduced zero Nitrogen and CO2 emissions policy, is now facing economic problems, severe hunger, and difficulties to access food upon a political decision that farmers were not allowed to use fertilizers and pesticides. Still, politicians responsible for Nitrogen emissions/climate change in other countries pursue the same green policy.

Furthermore, experts are warning that heat, flooding, drought, wildfires, and other disasters have been wreaking economic havoc, with worse to come. Food and water shortages have been in the media.

On top of that, Australian experts announce a risk for an outbreak of a viral disease in cattle. This could cause an A$80 billion hit to the Australian economy and even more real supply chain issues. Countless businesses and producers go bankrupt. The emotional toll they are facing to euthanize their healthy herds is immense and hardly bearable. It is pushing more farmers to end their life.

Hopefully, the need for the Danish government to apologize, as an investigative report on the cull of more than 15 million minks in November 2020 criticized the action that led to the misleading of mink breeders and the public and the clearly illegal instructions to authorities, will help politicians to reconsider such drastic measures on farmers.

Worldwide, farmers’ protests are rising, supported by more and more citizens who stand up against the expensive mandates for changes to “green policies” that already brought massive miseries and instability.

At a ministerial conference for food security on June 29 2022, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that worsening food shortages could lead to a global “catastrophe”.

Malnutrition responsible for more ill health than any other cause

The increased risk of food and water shortages the world is facing now will bring humanity to the edge. Hunger is a many-headed monster. For decades conquering world hunger has become a political issue in a way that it could not have been in the past. The use of authoritarian political power led to disastrous government policies, making it impossible for millions of people to earn a living. Chronic hunger and the recurrence of virulent famines must be seen as being morally outrageous and politically unacceptable, says Dreze and Sen in Hunger and Public Action, published in 1991.

“For those at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger in the world would be a disaster. For those who need availability of cheap labor, hunger is the foundation of their wealth, it is an asset,” wrote Dr. George Kent in 2008 in the essay “The Benefits of World Hunger.”

Malnutrition is not only influenced by food and water shortage, but also to exposures of extreme stress, fear, insecurity of safety and food, social factors, chemicals, microplastics, toxins, and over-medicalization. No country in the world can afford to overlook this disaster in all its forms, which affects mostly children and women in reproductive age. Globally more than 3 billion people cannot afford healthy diets. And this is in contradiction to what many people think is just a low-income country problem.

Even before the Covid-19 pandemic began, about 8% of the population in North America and Europe lacked regular access to nutritious and sufficient food. A third of reproductive-age women are anemic, while 39% of the world’s adults are overweight or obese. Each year around 20 million babies are born underweight. In 2016 9.6% of the women were underweight. Globally in 2017, 22.2% of the children under the age of five were stunting, while undernutrition explains around 45% of deaths among children under five.

As stated by Lawrence Haddad, the co-chair of the Global Nutrition Report independent Expert Group, “We now live in a world where being malnourished is the new normal. It is a world we must all claim as totally unacceptable.” While malnutrition is the leading driver of disease with nearly 50% of deaths caused by nutrition related non-communicable diseases in 2014, only $50 million of donor funding was given.

Malnutrition in all its forms imposes unacceptably high costs – direct and indirect – on individuals, families and nations. The estimated impact on the global economy of the chronic undernourishment of 800 million people could be as high as $3,5 trillion per year, as was stated in a Global Nutrition Report in 2018. While child deaths, premature adult mortality and malnutrition-related infectious and non-communicable diseases are preventable with the right nutrition.

This will be much more at this precious moment, as the population sharply increases in excess mortality and non-communicable diseases among the working age people as recently shown by insurance companies.

Famines cause transgenerational effects

Famine is a widespread condition in which a large percentage of people in a country or region have little or no access to adequate food supplies. Europe and other developed parts of the world have mostly eliminated famine, though widespread famines that killed thousands and millions of people are known from history, like the Dutch Potato famine from 1846-1847, The Dutch Hunger winter 1944-1945 and a Chinese famine of 1959-1961.

The latter was the most severe famine both in terms of duration and number of people affected (600 million and around 30 million deaths) and led to a widespread undernutrition of the Chinese population in the period from 1959-1961. Currently, Sub-Saharan Africa and Yemen are countries with recognized famine.

Unfortunately, global destabilization, starvation and mass migration are increasing fast with more famines to be expected if we do not act today.

Epidemiological studies of Barker and later of Hales showed a relation between the availability of nutrition in various stages of pregnancy and the first years of life and diseases later in life. Their studies demonstrated that people with metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular diseases were often small at birth. More and more research proves the role of nutrition-related mechanisms influencing gene expression. Even the period prior to pregnancy might influence a later risk for insulin resistance or other complications of the fetus.

As demonstrated in a study with 3,000 participants in Northern China, prenatal exposure to famine significantly increased hyperglycemia in adulthood in two consecutive generations. Severity of famine during prenatal development is related to the risk for Type 2 diabetes. These findings are consistent with animal models that have shown the impact of prenatal nutritional status on neuro-endocrine changes that affect metabolism and can be programmed to transmit physiologically across multiple generations through both male and female generations. Early life Health shock conditions can cause epigenetic changes in humans that persist throughout life, affect old age mortality and have multigenerational effects. Depending on which trimester the fetus is exposed to food deprivation or even stress alone a related disease later in life may vary from schizophrenia, ADHD to renal failure and hypertension among others. Other studies of famine exposure in people have produced evidence of changes in the endocrine system and to prenatal gene expression in reproductive systems.

The effects of periods of famine or undernutrition have predominantly been seen in people with low social economic income. However, 1 in 3 persons in the world suffered from some form of malnutrition in 2016. Women and children are 70% of the hungry. There is no doubt that undernutrition increased further during the past six years. Stunting and wasting increased in the most vulnerable. Two out of three children are not fed the minimum diverse diet they need to grow and develop to their full potential.

The hungry people in countries like Sri Lanka, Haiti, Armenia ,and Panama are the tip of the iceberg, opening the eyes of many citizens worldwide to a fast-growing problem as a result of the lockdowns, mandates and coercive policies in climate change, drought and the Ukraine war.

Citizens of the world have been facing for years: excess mortality, a fast decline in infertility and childbirth with a threat to human rights for women and more diseases.

Shocking reports of the UN and WHO acknowledged the health of people and environment is declining. The world is moving backwards on eliminating hunger and malnutrition. The real danger is that these numbers will climb even higher in the months ahead.

The truth is that food innovation hubsfood flats (vertical farming), artificial meats and gene and mind manipulations will not be able to tackle the depressing state humanity is facing.

Zero-Covid policy has brought humanity at risk in its existence. Covid-19 vaccines with a risk for harm have been rolled out even for children under five years, hardly at risk for a severe disease, but undernourishment that greatly increases susceptibility to major human infectious diseases has not been taken care of.

Conflicts are growing worldwide, increasing instability. Citizens will no longer accept policies without a clear harm-cost benefit analysis.

We need to act now to decrease food and fuel prices immediately by supporting farmers and effective food systems for nutritious food to heal the most malnourished (children and females at childbearing age) in the population.

Let us hope for a return of Hippocrates’ principle: “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.”

This article was originally published by Brownstone Institute

The post No Farmers, No Food, No Life appeared first on DailyClout.

Dershowitz: A Communist front group ran the Stanford Law protest (updated)

Get ready for a lot of screeching over Alan Dershowitz’ blast at the Stanford Law School and its recent disgrace as a sort of neo-McCarthyism. That would have more resonance, however, if the media and Democrats hadn’t turned themselves into industrial-level purveyors of McCarthyism themselves in their Russia-collusion and “mis/disinformation” crusades. For the past seven years, all we’ve read and heard from both is that there’s a Russian under every bed, and every dissenting voice is either a traitor or a shill.

 

Besides, Dershowitz’ accusation has a more rational basis. The main organizers of the Stanford shout-down were associated with the National Lawyers Guild, which has sponsored and organized similar campus disruptions against conservative speech. And what exactly is the National Lawyers Guild? Dershowitz explains:

It turns out that the disruption by several dozen Stanford University law school students of a speech to be given by federal judge Kyle Duncan was not a spontaneous exercise of freedom to protest.

It was a well-planned and carefully orchestrated effort to prevent other Stanford students from hearing the judge’s conservative views. The disruption was organized by the local chapter of National Lawyers Guild as part of a nationwide effort to suppress conservative speech. Although not all the participants were associated with the NLG, the main organizers were. The Guild praised “every single person” who participated in the disruption, and called it “Stanford Law School at its best,” suggesting it would confront “judicial architects of systems of oppression” with “social consequences for their actions.” Here the consequences went beyond “social” to censorial.

Let us understand what the National Lawyers Guild is. Begun in the 1930s as an alternative to the American Bar Association, its original membership consisted of traditional left-wing liberals and communists. After Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union made the notorious Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939, most of the liberals resigned. Adolf Berle, a prominent “New Dealer,” quit because it had become obvious that the Guild “is not prepared to take any stand which conflicts with the Communist Party line.”

 

That was decades ago, however. What have they done for us — er, to us — lately? Dershowitz has some receipts on that, too:

The Guild has never abandoned its Marxist-Leninist provenance. It supports Antifa, (see hereherehere and here) which also employs violence to disrupt speakers. …

The National Lawyers Guild seemingly despises America, and in 2020 passed a resolution declaring:

“The United States government is based on and dedicated to preserving white supremacy, hetero-patriarchy and imperialism… US uses its various government agencies to implement its policies and crush political resistance.”

It sounds like the legal arm of International ANSWER.

 

Continue Reading

The post Dershowitz: A Communist front group ran the Stanford Law protest (updated) appeared first on DailyClout.