Category: Dr. Mercola’s Censored Library

Download Interview Transcript | Download my FREE Podcast

• Silicon Valley is essentially fused with the national security state. Silicon Valley is now also entering into joint ventures with medical companies, and many of these ventures are financed by groups like In-Q-Tel, which is the CIA’s venture capital arm

• There’s a concerted effort to frame transhumanism — which is really the new eugenics — as health care. Joint ventures involving Big Tech, Big Pharma and the security state typically focus on products and services that normalize and further the transhumanist agenda

• Food and agriculture are also being tossed into the mix. The U.S. government has launched a “Food is Medicine” program, which is yet another way for the government to seize control of the population. Food as medicine will be used to get you into their control system, and keep you there

• In 2023 and 2024, watch for the rollout of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). It’s crucial that as many people as possible refuse the system during the initial voluntary phase. Once it becomes mandatory, it cannot be stopped and all freedoms will be lost

• If the singularity cannot be achieved, technocrats may end up faking it, because if they can blame eugenics, depopulation and other unethical decisions on artificial intelligence running the government, they can do whatever they want, with no repercussions

I recently interviewed investigative journalist Whitney Webb about her two-volume book series, “One Nation Under Blackmail.” She’s been on tour, promoting the books in dozens of interviews.

Here, we discuss some of her experiences since the release of her books, and delve deeper into the disturbing merger of the intelligence state, Silicon Valley and medicine, and how transhumanism — eugenics rebranded — is being rolled out under the guise of health care.

We also talk about censorship and other tactics used to mold public perception, and how artificial intelligence may be overhyped to give technocrats and eugenicists carte blanche to do whatever they want without having any accountability.

Her book tour brought her back to the U.S. for the first time in eight years. When asked about her first impressions after being gone for such a long time, she expresses surprise at how willing Americans have become to embrace spy tools like Ring cameras on their front doors.

“This is actually troubling,” she says, “because a lot of those tech companies, Google included, are contractors for the military and for intelligence. I think it would be naive to assume they don’t have backdoor access to those devices, knowing when you’re home and when you’re not and all of that.

I think it’s interesting, the willingness of so many people, so many households, to invite that type of technology into their homes. I didn’t see inside people’s homes much, but a lot of people, as I understand it, have things like Amazon’s Alexa. Numerous stories have come out that they’re recording you without your consent, even though they say they’re not.

But people still continue to use the product, and I really wish people would wise up about inviting that type of technology into your house. So much of what we’re being sold today is being marketed as convenience, but really a lot of it is really just the building blocks for the infrastructure of a very dangerous and Orwellian system of control.”

As a former contributor to Mint Print Press News, which provides a lot of great coverage on the encroaching surveillance state, Webb knows a thing or two about Orwellian systems of control. Much of her work there focused on the intersection of intelligence agencies and Silicon Valley.

“Even after I left and started to do my own thing, I maintained a lot of that focus,” she says. “I guess a theme of my work would be the structure of power and how it really works. If you’re looking at Silicon Valley today, it’s very clear that it’s essentially fused with the national security state …

One thing we’ve seen happen, specifically during the COVID era, is that Big Pharma is now getting in this mix. There’s a lot of merging happening between Big Pharma and Silicon Valley. You’re seeing this with a lot of joint ventures into the health care space of Silicon Valley companies. A lot of it’s through wearables and these efforts to normalize technology like CRISPR or nanotechnology injectables.

You’re seeing them all come together, and a lot of these joint ventures or companies in this particular space that’s spanning big pharma in Silicon Valley tend to have a lot of funding from groups like In-Q-Tel, which is the CIA’s venture capital arm.

I think we’re seeing, in the effort to push through this technocratic transhumanist system, a lot more overlap between the power structure of the national security state in Silicon Valley with Big Pharma. And that’s very, very bad. I don’t know how else to put that.

It’s awful. I think more people should be paying a lot more attention to that specifically … [There’s] an effort to frame transhumanism — which is really the new eugenics — as health care, and that’s what a lot of this is about.”

Food and agriculture are also being tossed into the mix. In early December 2022, I wrote about how John Rockefeller eliminated food from medicine 112 years ago and how, now, The Rockefeller Foundation is working with the White House to bring nutrition back in. While it sounds like a great idea, the real purpose is the same now as it was a century ago. It’s all about controlling the population. As noted by Webb:

“If these people take over the food supply, they’ll be framing it as a return to ‘food is medicine,’ but it’s not. Well, it’s not exactly food as medicine as people would think of it when someone like you talks about that concept …

This idea, for example, of putting vaccines in your food, like in tomatoes. Eating one of these GMO tomatoes is the equivalent of taking a vaccine and stuff like that … It’s taking this age-old adage and twisting it to fit their purposes. Food as medicine is only convenient to them when it’s not something that actually heals you, but [rather] something that keeps you in this new system they’re creating.”

As we record this in late November 2022, we seem to be in a bit of a lull, in terms of tyrannical overreaches. It’s a bit like being in the eye of a hurricane. You know the storm will be upon you yet, again, it’s only a matter of time. The question is, what comes next?

“I think there’s a couple things to watch really closely in the next year,” Webb says. “One is how this World Health Organization Pandemic Treaty, which tries to [supersede] the Constitution, not just of the U.S. but pretty much every country that signs it.

That’s definitely something to pay close attention to, because if that does get passed, I think it’s likely we’ll see an effort to repeat a lot of what we saw during COVID 19 from these particular groups. And if it’s not signed, I think they’re going to wait …

They’re waiting to get that type of new authority so they don’t have to deal with so much dissent, whether it’s from nation states or from particular domestic populations that have had enough and are unlikely to believe all of this a second time.

I think they’re really counting on having that WHO super-national authority in order to go forward with the biosecurity agenda, in terms of a repeat of what we saw in recent years.

The other thing I think is really important is the central bank digital currency (CBDC) agenda. Almost every country in the world at this point — there are exceptions, but I think it’s a majority — have some sort of CBDC pilot program going on right now. In the U.S., they’ve even announced they’re doing pilots of [CBDCs] with commercial banks like JP Morgan and some of the big financial giants of Wall Street.

I would say that either 2023 or 2024 is likely to be the year of the CBDC. In countries where they’ve already launched a CBDC, or have a very advanced pilot program, it’s framed first as voluntary, and then of course, once enough people start using it, it becomes the only form of legal tender in use. At least that’s the end game for CBDCs in any particular country.”

As explained by Webb, CBDCs are programmable money. The Central Bank will decide when, where and on what you’re allowed to spend your money. You also cannot save when and however much you want, because some of the CBDCs have expiration dates. Use it or lose it. You don’t get to decide when you spend your money, the state does.

CBDCs can also be programmed to only work for certain types of items, including certain types of food. If your health records indicate you have a health problem, your CBDCs can be programmed such that you cannot buy foods deemed unhealthy for you. Purchases can also be blocked based on your carbon footprint score, and they can be blocked based on geofencing parameters.

“If they declare a lockdown, for example, and you’re not allowed to go five miles beyond your home, your money won’t work five miles beyond your home. That’s basically why CBDCs are attractive to the powers that be. But they’re going to frame it as voluntary first, before it moves into involuntary.

We’re going to see it pop up in a lot more countries over the next two years. And obviously, that is the phase to mass reject CBDCs in any way you can … I’ll go back to COVID for a second to explain where I’m trying to go here.

I understand and have empathy for people that didn’t want to lose their jobs and were worried about being thrown into a position of poverty, so they took the vaccine because of the mandates. But the more steps you take down that path of, ‘It’s convenient,’ the harder it will be to go on the alternative path later on.

For people that were in that situation with COVID 19, that should have been a huge wake up call to start doing something different and think about how to get off that path …

… if you went down that path, and then go down the CBDC path just because it’s more convenient for now, there’s going to come a point where, if you make enough compromises, it’s going to be almost impossible, if not entirely impossible, to redirect and go towards a different outcome.

These are things that are very important for people to pay attention to right now, in terms of developments, and plan how to keep your family independent of these types of systems and resilient in the face of all the shocks to the system that we already see coming.”

As noted by Webb, those who will feel the squeeze of tyranny first are the poor and lower-middle class. We’re already seeing how they’re planning to encourage mass adoption of CBDCs through various assistance programs such as food stamps.

As food and energy prices continue to soar, more and more people will qualify for government assistance and be forced into those systems. Webb also suspects that any future stimulus checks, if there are additional long-term lockdowns, may be paid out only in CBDCs.

“It’s a very insidious plan,” Webb says. “They’re trying to reduce the standard of living of people, and then in order for them to maintain their standard of living, they’re forcing them to adopt a control system disguised as a monetary system …

They’re going to frame it as voluntary before it becomes involuntary. That stage where it’s voluntary is when it’s critical for people to act [and reject it] … I don’t think we can prevent them from implementing it, but you can prevent yourself, your family and your community from adopting that system, and use a parallel economic system [instead].”

While some have speculated that decentralized digital currencies such as Bitcoin might work as a parallel economic system, the problem with that idea is that government could easily make it illegal. They’ve already promised to implement new regulations of that space.

The safest alternatives are those that government cannot regulate or make illegal (at least not easily). This includes trading and bartering of goods and services, without any type of currency, with the exception perhaps of physical gold and silver.

“So, so we have to think about these sorts of things when countering the CBDC agenda,” Webb says. “That voluntary stage is the time to make those plans so you don’t get swept up when it moves from voluntary to involuntary, which they are definitely going to do, or attempt to do.

But it will only be successful if there’s mass adoption. The more people who opt out and do some sort of parallel system for their economic activity at the neighborhood or community level, the less successful that agenda will be.”

While it seems we’re headed into a dystopian future that cannot be avoided, and with no clear means of escape, Webb feels there is still reason to be optimistic. Importantly, more people than ever before are now getting wise to the globalists’ agenda, and are hungry for explanations about what’s really going on.

People who want the truth are more likely to search for it, and are ready to take it in. They’re less likely to stick their head in the sand and write everything off as a baseless conspiracy theory.

“I think a lot of people on a visceral level know something is really wrong. And I think that’s why there are so many efforts to censor that type of information. I also think there is a major investment by the state in efforts to make us think we are a minority when we are not.

More than anything else, what social media is used for by the powers that be is to make us think certain ideas are more popular than they really are. [Take] the bot situation on Twitter … a lot of those bots serve to promote ideas that many people don’t necessarily have, or make certain figures or ideas look more popular than they are …

When you combine that with the censorship, removing ideas that otherwise would be popular with real authentic accounts … you’re manipulating people’s perception of how the rest of the country feels … A lot of what’s going on right now on social media is to completely change how we perceive a particular situation or agenda, in the hopes that change in perception will cause a change in behavior.

If you’re censoring an idea, you’re trying to take it out of the public mind and have it just not be part of the discourse anymore. That obviously causes a change in perception, because you’re only having one idea, or a very small spectrum of opinion about a particular idea, out there.

That’s all people are going to engage with if you censor all the other takes. The idea is to completely wipe out dissent so that everyone has a rather homogenous perception of events, people, ideas and agendas, and then from there, behavior will be molded to the benefit of these particular powers.”

When it comes to Twitter, with Elon Musk now at the helm many are hoping it will become a bastion of free-speech. Webb, however, is skeptical. She suspects Musk is promoting free speech and reinstating banned accounts because he wants to turn Twitter into a U.S. version of WeChat, an “everything app” that’s connected to digital ID, CBDCs and the social credit system. The more users he has, the more people will be lured into the digital prison system.

“We’re in this paradigm shift, where we’re going from an oil-based economy to a data-based economy. Data is the new oil, and whoever owns the ‘everything app’ in this new system is going to be the king of the castle of the new economy. They’re going to be the Rockefellers of the data age,” she says.

“There’s nothing good about that. I think what we’re seeing right now is an effort to coax people back Twitter, and there might be some benefits to that. But ultimately, what Elon Musk is interested in is the data and getting more people on Twitter than before, with the goal of turning it into WeChat, which is a segue to this ‘everything app.’

And it’s worth pointing out that the company behind WeChat, Tencent, is one of the most active advisors to Tesla and a major shareholder in Tesla. There is a relationship there.”

Webb and I also discuss the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI), and the role of social media in feeding AI with data for programs relating to pandemic outbreak detection and pre-crime. But while AI and its successor, artificial general intelligence (AGI), has impressive capabilities, Webb believes there’s a lot of false hype, and that this hype will be used to shield human powerbrokers from accountability.

“A lot has been said about the role of AI in our lives once it reaches a particular point referred to as the singularity, which is where AI intelligence allegedly outpaces human intelligence so extensively and so rapidly that it’ll basically take over. If you ask me, based on everything I’ve seen, I don’t think the singularity is actually possible. Or if it is possible, I think it’s very far away.

But if you are the people behind … this agenda — people like Eric Schmidt and Henry Kissinger who just put out their ‘New Age of AI’ book, which has a lot about AI and its role in government, basically having AI become the government — all you really need to do is convince people … that the singularity is here and … that it’s so far superior to human intelligence that we should outsource all our decision-making to it.

Then, there’s a Wizard of Oz type guy … behind the curtain who makes the decisions. If you look at what Schmidt and Kissinger and these guys say about AI and government, they say it’s going to be so far above our intelligence that there’s no way for the AI to explain its decision-making. It’ll just be ‘The computer says this.’

And if you’re basically organized crime, running the government, which I would argue is the situation today, and you don’t want to have to explain the reasons for your policy because it’s a horrible reason that no one would agree with, what a great curtain, what a great facade to have for your smart dictatorship.

They just have to say that it was the AI’s decision. They have plausible deniability about everything, don’t they? And a lot of the stuff they say in that context is very unsettling. Stuff like, AI may decide to sacrifice hundreds of thousands, if not millions of their own population to win.

If the goal given is winning, then AI is willing to make all sorts of sacrifices that humans wouldn’t make. But if you look at people like Kissinger and Eric Schmidt, they’d be very happy to kill a bunch of people and then blame it on AI for the decision.

They don’t care about killing millions of people. They care about expanding their money and power infinitely. How do you have plausible deniability about that and get away with mass murder, eugenics programs and population control? You say ‘There’s this new super intelligence thing that’s going to take over government because it’s so superior. It’s going to churn out policies and we’re just going to follow them.’

It’s the new god basically. It’s superior to us and it can’t explain how it got to this conclusion because it thinks so differently from us. So, we just have to follow what it says, but we’re not responsible for what it says at the same time …

People like Ray Kurzweil said the singularity was going to happen a long time ago and it didn’t happen. And if you look at programs like Welcome Leap … where they’re trying to map baby brains and child brains by forcing kids to use very invasive, biometric technology … because they think that will create the singularity — that, to me, says they are grasping at straws.

They have no way of producing something equivalent to the human brain. They can mimic stuff very successfully with AI and they have done so, but in terms of creating consciousness? These are the most unconscious people on the entire planet trying to recreate consciousness in their image. Good luck … I think they’re going to try and fake it.

And, here’s the other thing. This whole inevitability of AI narrative is a major marketing narrative necessary to get transhumanist technologies widely adopted … The super intelligent singularity stuff is most likely a PSYOP to get you into the transhumanist box that you’re not going to get out of. Once you get a brain chip, there’s no going back.”

Clearly, we all face enormous challenges in the years ahead, regardless of where we live, as this is a global takeover. So, what can you do to prepare? Here are some of Webb’s recommendations:

• Build community and local parallel economies.

• Build your knowledgebase on how to grow and raise food, even if you’re not in a position to grow food right now. There are many free videos online that you can peruse. Ideally, download them so you can watch them offline, even if the internet goes down.

  Books on homesteading and basic survival skills are also a valuable investment. “Back to Basics: A Complete Guide to Traditional Skills” is one option.

  As a general rule going forward, you’ll want hard copies or copies on external hard drives of any information that you want to have access to in the future, as the internet is becoming increasingly scrubbed of important information. If using an external hard drive, make sure you store it in a faraday bag to protect the information from electromagnetic weapons.

• Stock up on backup supplies such as food and energy generators. Also have a plan for how to secure potable water. Since the economy is collapsing and inflation skyrocketing, your money is not doing you much good in the bank. You’re losing purchasing power with each passing month, and a bank bail-in could wipe you out completely. So, if you need survival items, buying them now might be one of the better investment strategies out there.

• Do everything you can to avoid entering the CBDC system when it rolls out.

• Go back to using more cash if you don’t do that already. Also, consider cutting back on your online usage, social media in particular. “If things get really bad and the war on domestic terror gets underway and there’s all this profiling going on, I would stay as far away from the online world as you can,” Webb says.

In closing, Webb is now investigating the FTX scandal. Could we end up seeing a Volume 3 in her “One Nation Under Blackmail” series? Perhaps, but she’s not making any promises. She’s also working on an investigative series with Ian Davis about the United Nations sustainable development goals, showing point by point “the agenda under the hood.”

To stay abreast of Webb’s work, sign up for her newsletter at Unlimited Hangout. There you will also get the best price for her two-volume series “One Nation Under Blackmail.” I couldn’t recommend her site more strongly. She’s a world-class investigator, and is willing to take deep dives into crucial topics few others dare to touch.

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.

Download Interview Transcript | Download my FREE Podcast

• Your teeth are organs that are connected to your nervous system via the trigeminal nerve, one of the 12 cranial nerves

• In his book, “It’s All in Your Mouth: Biological Dentistry and the Surprising Impact of Oral Health on Whole Body Wellness,” biological dentist Dr. Dominik Nischwitz presents a holistic treatment program for whole-body health and well-being

• Nischwitz has developed a Bone Healing Protocol that includes micronutrients such as vitamins D, C and K2, magnesium and B vitamins. Your vitamin D3 level should ideally be above 60 ng/mL for proper bone formation

• His holistic treatment plan includes removing or addressing oral interferences such as metal fillings, root canals and cavitations

• Cavities and resulting problems can be avoided altogether by following an optimized lifestyle program where you’re getting ideal levels of sun exposure and nutrition, and avoid toxins and certain dietary culprits such as gluten and dairy

In this interview, Dr. Dominik Nischwitz, author of “It’s All in Your Mouth: Biological Dentistry and the Surprising Impact of Oral Health on Whole Body Wellness,” discusses his “all-in-one” holistic treatment program, and why addressing your oral health can have far-reaching whole body benefits.

Nischwitz is a biological dentist, like his father before him, and has served as president of the International Society of Metal Free Implantology (ISMI) since 2019.

As a child, Nischwitz “was always a little bit sick” and was frequently treated with antibiotics for recurrent throat infections. At the age of 14, his wisdom teeth were extracted. Age 15 brought on appendicitis and severe acne, which were also treated with antibiotics for months at a time.

“I thought it was normal to be just a little sick and then a little healthy … Then they wanted to take out my tonsils when I was 16. My mom said, ‘Ah, let’s get a second opinion. Go to this naturopathic doctor’ … He tested me with kinesiology and … told me, ‘You’re just allergic to milk … This is an allergy.’

[Removing milk] helped. My tonsils are still in there and it took me a few more years to actually look into dentistry. I was [doing] civil service at a Red Cross as a paramedic … and you have to do an internship in the clinic.

Maybe it’s coincidence. They put me in dental clinic … I applied to university, made the cut, and started without knowing anything. Finally, I got interested [in health] … because at the same time, I was starting to work out. I just wanted to perform better.”

Following the advice given in a bodybuilding magazine, Nischwitz started eating 3,000 calories a day to gain mass. Little did he know all calories are not equal, and after a year of eating noodles and tuna, he’d gained 20 kilos (about 44 pounds), although it wasn’t all muscle.

“I didn’t know it was health that I was missing. I was just focusing on performance and of course muscle gain. Maybe it was just an aesthetic thing, but I learned everything I could about nutrition …

I tried every possible diet. I used every supplement. I was the guy in university who had his box of food always with him, not even knowing that it maybe was also too much carbs … But I learned a lot from this.”

Eventually, Nischwitz learned about the effects dental amalgam has on health, which “totally clicked with everything nutrition-wise” he was learning. “Every minute in my residency when I wasn’t drilling out amalgam fillings, I was searching the internet for stuff to remove, to detox, how the liver phases work, basically, everything possible,” he says. “I was really curious to find real solutions.”

Nischwitz now focuses on what he calls an “all-in-one concept” of health, starting with the mouth.

“Your teeth are organs that are connected to your whole nervous system and basically are part of your brain, kind of like your eyes,” he says. “You have this massive brain nerve there called the trigeminal nerve. It’s one of the 12 cranial nerves and takes up 50% of the space of all the other ones, so it’s quite important.”

To get started, patients will send him their current panoramic X-rays, a medical questionnaire, and their vitamin D3 and LDL blood work to provide some basic knowledge of their health.

Next, the patient must be properly prepared through nutrition and other lifestyle changes. “It’s basically the same stuff you would do for a patient of every other functional medicine doctor. Go as natural as possible,” Nischwitz says.

His book contains two charts, one red and one green. The red chart describes common food intolerances and food toxins, and their alternatives. All patients are asked to go grain- and dairy-free. The green chart lists healthy carbohydrates, healthy fats and proteins to add to your diet.

Nischwitz has also developed a Bone Healing Protocol that includes certain micronutrients and focuses on high doses of vitamin D3. Vitamin D levels, for example, should ideally be above 60 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL), and if your levels are low to begin with, you may need to take a supplement for several months before your treatments begin. The protocol also stresses magnesium, vitamin K2, vitamin C and B vitamins.

“So, they come into this health optimization week already immunologically boosted,” Nischwitz. “The nervous system is already very good. What we’re trying to achieve then is bring the patient from chronic sympathetic nervous system mode into parasympathetic [mode] …”

Nischwitz’s all-in-one treatment plan includes removing or addressing oral interference such as:

• Metal fillings — Mercury (amalgam) fillings (and all other metal restorations) are removed safely using specialized rubber dams and cleanup suction, as well as other parameters to ensure mercury vapors are not recirculated into the system, as this can lead to acute toxic overload. Patients will also receive a nasal probe and intravenous nutrients to assist with detoxification and healing.

• Root canals (replacing them with ceramic implants) — Root canaled teeth are extracted and the socket cleaned with ozone. Neural therapy is also used, along with platelet-rich fibrin (APRF) treatment.

  “We draw blood before the surgery and spin it in the centrifuge to make APRF,” he explains. APRF contains stem cells and growth factors that are then placed into the empty socket or beside the zirconium dioxide implant, which has no metal oxides in it and is completely biocompatible.

  On a side note, while few dentists are educated about this, there are ways to rescue an infected tooth, thus avoiding the need for a root canal in the first place. One method that appears to be very effective is sterilizing the infected root with a high-powered YAG laser, which combines both light therapy and acoustic sound therapy, along with ozone.

  This has been shown to eliminate the need for a root canal in many cases. What Nischwitz is describing is the necessary rescue effort after a root canal has been performed.

• Cavitations — Cavitations is the layman’s term for fatty degenerative osteonecrotic jawbone (FDOJ) or chronic ischemic bone disease (CIBD). It’s also known as neuralgia-inducing-cavitational-osteonecrosis (NICO cavitations).

  Cavitations at the back of your jaw left over from wisdom tooth extractions (or every other extraction site) can cause pain to radiate through your other teeth via the trigeminal nerve. Sometimes, patients end up getting a root canal in a painful tooth that really didn’t need it, as the pain actually was caused by a cavitation.

  Aside from cavitations, Nischwitz points out that pain in a tooth could also be due to high blood sugar, low blood sugar, an overall change of pH level in your mouth, or a mineral deficiency.

After surgery, Nischwitz prepares a “food design” or “lifestyle concept” plan for each patient, based on body composition, metabolism and so on.

Nischwitz firmly believes cavities and resulting problems can be avoided altogether by following an optimized lifestyle program where you’re getting ideal levels of sun exposure, nutrition, and avoid toxins and certain dietary culprits such as gluten and dairy.

“This is why it’s so important that all this information comes out,” he says. “And that’s why I devoted a whole chapter to the nutritional part. Basically, biological dentistry, I would say, is an overlap of functional medicine, biohacking and high tech dentistry with the goal of optimal health. I’m a big fan of the basics, and the goal is [changing] the lifestyle …

Everybody talks about leaky gut, but nobody talks about leaky gum. The gum tissue, the gingiva, is the same tissue, it’s squamous tissue. And if you have a chronic gingivitis, for example, just from a lack of nutrients or maybe from the wrong [dental] restorations, you will have an opening into your system because the gingiva is outside.

Your bacteria cannot go really inside [the tooth], but if there’s an opening in the gum or if you have a titanium implant where the tissue doesn’t grow on top, you will always have a huge gap … and all these bacteria, mainly anaerobic bacteria, will travel into your system. This is basically leaky gum. [The problem] starts there, because the gut basically starts in your mouth.”

Nischwitz also stresses the importance of a natural birth (whenever possible) and breastfeeding, as this is really important for proper jaw formation. Breastfeeding requires far greater strength than sucking formula from a bottle, so sucking on the breast develops the lower jaw and muscles, and ensures the proper development of the baby’s palate.

“This is the fulfilling part for me — that I can help you optimize your health. And this is also the challenge that I put onto all my patients; they have to change their lifestyle. Otherwise, we don’t even accept them because then they won’t have good results.”

To learn more, be sure to pick up a copy of “It’s All in Your Mouth: Biological Dentistry and the Surprising Impact of Oral Health on Whole Body Wellness.” You can also find more information about Nischwitz’ practice on his website, DNA Health & Aesthetics. Other resources include his YouTube channel and Instagram.

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.

• Bret Weinstein, an evolutionary theorist, discussed some of the most heavily censored topics today on “The Joe Rogan Experience”

• From the initial allowance of gain-of-function research to the botched pandemic response, Weinstein believes the COVID-19 pandemic is the largest blunder in human history

• Research published in Science Immunology reveals a “mind blowing” finding that after three doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots, your immune system may be triggered not to fight

• As SARS-CoV-2 spread through the population, fear was used to make the population compliant

• Weinstein explores the possibility that a select group may have had advance notice of the impending pandemic and used that knowledge to position themselves for a financial windfall

Bret Weinstein, an evolutionary theorist, author of “A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” and host of “The DarkHorse Podcast” was interviewed on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” discussing some of the most heavily censored topics today.

From discussing why he believes COVID-19 is the “biggest blunder in human history” to how COVID-19 shots may make the human immune system unable to fight off pathogens, the interview is as riveting as it is pertinent to public health.

At the root of the problem is censorship, which has buried information that could have turned the tide of the COVID-19 pandemic early on, and the intentional act of keeping people in the dark, which may have paved the way for massive wealth transfer ahead of the pandemic.

Weinstein begins by discussing how the narrative has been able to get so out of control, with free speech openly dampened by those in control. He calls the concept “zero is a special number”:

“The idea of zero as a special number is that this narrative control would not work if there was even one newspaper that was dedicated to the job of reporting the news. It wouldn’t work if there was even one university that was dedicated to finding what the truth might be. Right?

It doesn’t work if there’s one social media platform in a primary position in which free speech reigns, because in any of these cases, if you had the university that was still interested in truth seeking in an era where everybody else was doing their diversity, equity and inclusion thing, every reasonable person would wanna send their kid there, right?

So it would win in competition almost immediately, and the result would be every other institution would have to change their policy to compete. So if you get even one exception, that’s enough to break this pattern.”

What we face is a corporate stronghold over media combined with a state-run propaganda machine. Countless private-public partnerships between government and corporations bind the two camps together in a pact to dictate “truth” to the public. Weinstein believes Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter is an attempt to become that single exception, which is why you’re seeing so many people publicly announcing that they’re leaving the platform:

“The structure that is controlling the narrative understands that it cannot endure that [Twitter becoming a platform for free speech]. And so far it has failed to shut down Elon.

So their next move is actually to get people on one side of this debate to leave so that they can’t prevent Twitter from being a space where people can speak freely, but they can take it out of the position of being a primary social media environment. And in so doing, they will take the number of meaningful exceptions to the free speech control back to zero. That’s what they’re up to.”

Initially, Weinstein didn’t think the issue of labeling mRNA COVID-19 shots “vaccines” was a big issue, but he’s since changed his mind. “Lots of people were upset by the redefinition of the term vaccine,” he says. “I wasn’t convinced it was an important issue. I have switched sides on this. I now think the definition is vitally important and we’re beginning to see why.”

The No. 1 reason why Weinstein believes COVID-19 shots are not vaccines is because they do not create immunity to the pathogen. They also use a very different technology than that used by typical vaccines. But if the government began touting a new gene therapy, people would have questioned it. Weinstein explains:

“What they’ve done is they’ve smuggled in a really, truly radically new technology. And they caused us all not to worry about it very much by using the term vaccine, right? If they had said, alright, we’ve got this pandemic and in order to prevent it from spreading, we’re gonna have everybody take gene therapy.

Everybody would’ve said, what? Gene therapy is that safe? So the point is we had a category and it was called vaccine. And we all thought, you know, there are some crazy folks who are worried about vaccines, but in general, it’s safe. So if something carries that label, it’s probably safe too.”

As Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, an evolutionary biologist and cohost of “The DarkHorse Podcast,” dug deeper, they realized there was no way anyone could know whether COVID-19 shots were safe. “We looked at these technologies and thought, wow, you are intervening in a nested series of complex systems in a way that you can’t possibly predict the outcome.”

This brought them to the work of Geert Vanden Bossche, Ph.D., a vaccinology expert and former global director of vaccine programs, including work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He’s been heavily censored because he’s among those who have warned about immune escape due to the pressure being placed upon the virus during the mass COVID-19 shot campaign.

Bossche describes a general principle in biology, vaccinology and microbiology that if you put living organisms like bacteria or viruses under pressure, via antibiotics, antibodies or chemotherapeutics, for example, but don’t kill them off completely, you can inadvertently encourage their mutation into more virulent strains. Those that escape your immune system end up surviving and selecting mutations to ensure their further survival.

SARS-CoV-2 has a high capacity for mutation but, according to Bossche, if the virus isn’t under pressure, it won’t necessarily see a need to select mutations to, for instance, become more infectious. But if you put it under pressure, as occurred during the mass vaccination campaign — or as Bossche calls it the “one big experiment” — this changes. Weinstein says:

“What he said is, look, if you vaccinate into a pandemic and you do so broadly across the population, you’re going to drive the evolution of variants … You are going to create an evolutionary arms race, and you were going to cause the number of variants to proliferate.

And, you know, at the time, I couldn’t say for sure that he was right, but what I could say was that he was making evolutionary sense. There was nothing terribly complex about his argument, and it was robust. And I think now we are seeing … that proliferation of variants.”

Research published in Science Immunology

reveals a “mind blowing” finding that after three doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots, your immune system may be triggered not to fight. “It’s a very dangerous discovery,” Weinstein says, that has to do with an elevation in the percentage of IgG4 antibodies:

“IgG4 is actually part of a system in which the body attenuates its own response to an antigen. So the mind blowing, and you know, it’s an early result, maybe it doesn’t get replicated, but … the implication is that the evolutionary path we have traveled is causing the pathogen now to be able to trigger a response that will cause the immune system not to fight. Nobody knows what happens next …

So the idea that a pathogen, and mind you, not a normal pathogen, a pathogen that we can now be pretty darn certain was engineered by humans, at least in part, that pathogen is now triggering that signal that causes the immune system not to react anymore, means we’re in a whole new landscape.”

Another potential mechanism of harm involves Marc Girardot’s Bolus Theory

and what happens if a COVID-19 shot, or any shot which is intended to be injected into the muscle, accidentally gets injected into a blood vessel, a demonstrated regular occurrence in hospitals. According to Girardot:

“Say the direct IV injection of a dose of Pfizer [COVID-19 shot] is diluted by 30 by the time it gets to the aorta, you’d have around 10,000 lipid nanoparticles hitting each square millimeter of endothelium during the very brief passage of the bolus.

Let’s imagine 10% of these vaccine particles penetrate a cell when they hit it. That means that up to 1,000 cells will end up destroyed by the immune system. That’s more than 100% of the cells in that area! Likely irreparable, similar to a third-degree burn.

In the case of a proper intramuscular injection, the maximum concentration would be 25 lipid nanoparticles presenting themselves to the same 1 sq.mm. of endothelial surface. Only three would be uptaken, or less 0.4% of the surface would end up destroyed. Those three cell gaps would be fixed within minutes of the immune attack. And life would go on.

This brief physical phenomenon, similar to an avalanche crashing through your vascular system, is in my opinion the cause of all the adverse effects we have witnessed these past two years, and that have occurred for decades.”

Weinstein says he knew very early on in the pandemic that SARS-CoV-2 did not appear to be of natural origin. Further, it didn’t appear to be due to a simple laboratory escape either, but rather was a highly unusual pathogen with “unprecedented genetic alteration” — one that was likely enhanced in a laboratory before it escaped. Even the way it behaves in the human body, harming everything from toes to circulation to the brain is unusual:

“There’s a reason that a normal pathogen doesn’t do the widescale damage that COVID seems to, and that reason is that, in general, pathogens don’t have an interest in harming you … In fact, they do best when you are healthy enough to walk around and spread them.

And so they tend to spare tissues that do not help them to be transmitted. Well, that’s not the case with this pathogen. This pathogen seems to invade all kinds of tissues that don’t help it to spread.”

The presence of a furin cleavage site on SARS-CoV-2, which is what makes it so transmissible and able to invade tissue so effectively, is another smoking gun. “That’s something that we knew would take a coronavirus and cause it to be highly effective in humans. We knew that before SARS-CoV-2 ever emerged. So, to find it on this virus, even though no other member of the subfamily has it, is conspicuous,” he says.

The lengths that the mainstream narrative has gone to discredit the lab-origin theory also hint at its relevance:

“Why are they continually trying to reanimate the explanation that this is a natural spillover event? Because if it isn’t, then we know who did it, right? Anthony Fauci was key to circumventing the ban on gain-of-function research that resulted in the Wuhan lab being funded by us [the U.S.] to do this work. So if this was a natural spillover event from a wet market, then Anthony Fauci is in the clear, right?

If this is the result of ill-conceived gain-of-function research taking place in Wuhan, partially at our direction, that’s a whole different ballgame … those who are responsible cannot allow a full investigation.

I don’t know what will happen if the truth were to fully emerge about, not only what was the explanation for how this virus came into the world when it came into the world … but also what we failed to do, … we failed to deploy …

Because we didn’t deal with the pathogen properly at the beginning, because we didn’t deploy the drugs that we had at our disposal that did work, we ran out the clock on the brief period of time when we might have driven it extinct or at least controlled it.”

From the initial allowance of gain-of-function research to the botched pandemic response, Weinstein believes the COVID-19 pandemic is the largest blunder in human history. He asks poignant questions, like what would have happened if we had treated COVID-19 the way we treat other emerging pathogens — with trial and error and open discussion until the best course of treatment is identified.

“[If] we just let doctors figure out how to treat it … they would’ve gotten rapidly better at treating this disease, and they would’ve discovered all of the compounds that work. And they would’ve talked to each other about in what way to deploy those compounds, at what dosage. They would’ve discovered all of that stuff,” Weinstein says.

Instead, as SARS-CoV-2 spread through the population, fear was used to make the population compliant. Data was manipulated, with COVID-19 deaths including people who died “with” COVID, not from it.

“Those numbers caused us to think the pathogen was something other than it was. And it is obvious to anyone seriously analyzing this that COVID isn’t a dangerous pathogen. SARS-CoV-2 is a dangerous pathogen. I’m very worried about where it goes. But the case fatality rate is not one that should have caused us to vaccinate literally billions of people,” Weinstein explains.

A tweet featured in the interview claimed to be from a doctor who defended her choice to get a COVID-19 shot, saying she did it out of love while antivaxxers were acting out of hate. The tweet turned out to be fake,

but its sentiment was not a far stretch from reality, as friends, families and colleagues have been torn apart over differing viewpoints during the pandemic.

This divisiveness is not happenstance; it’s very much intentional. “One of the best ways to not look at people as being human is to categorize them as an enemy in some way,” Weinstein says, mentioning mass formation, which involves the formation of a hypnotic state around a shared consensus.

“The mass formation appears to be downstream of an industrial strength propaganda campaign,” Weinstein says. “A very expensive one designed to create these unsolvable puzzles for people so that they would end up in this mindset.”

The solution begins with continuing to share and spread the truth, and coming together toward this end. “If we don’t do that, then we head into further and further polarization.”

Meanwhile, Weinstein explores the possibility that a select group may have had advance notice of the impending pandemic and used that knowledge to position themselves for a financial windfall — and a “cryptic, massive transfer of wealth:”

“There’s been lots of talk in various publications at this point about the possibility that COVID was circulating earlier than we knew … If you know that a pandemic is coming and that it is going to spread around the globe, and it is going to cause all kinds of alterations, you can, you know, short stocks for cruise ships or airplanes, hotels, right? You can invest in pharmaceutical companies that have useful technologies …

And so the question is, how much of the story here involves something having understood what was coming and having revealed it at a point that it was positioned rather than it having emerged naturally? … I’m as much an outsider to this as anybody, but I will say there’s a version of the story in which our being kept in the dark is a perpetual source of wealth.”

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.

• Mainstream media has held Dr. Anthony Fauci’s word as indisputable since the start of the pandemic, despite his outright lies and condescending attitude toward scientists who dare to question his “science”

• During his interview with a reporter from the Los Angeles Times, he said the public failed to appreciate that science can’t provide quick solutions despite making an experimental jab available in a mere nine months, clinical trials included

• Fauci appears to have trouble with the science as he nears retirement. For example, he continues to say that up to 60% of COVID cases are from asymptomatic spread, despite a study with nearly 10 million people in 2020 that disputes that claim; during a deposition, he answered “I don’t recall” 174 times and “I don’t know” another 84 times

• Fauci’s recommendations have flip-flopped consistently throughout the pandemic; this inconsistency likely contributed to the chaos and fear he used to push people into a state of panic that ultimately resulted in them making decisions they would not have otherwise considered

The mainstream media have held Dr. Anthony Fauci’s word as indisputable “science” since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This continued in the interviews he held with newspaper and television reporters as he prepared to leave office.

Fauci recently turned 82, and after 54 years working in the government, has left the National Institutes of Health at the end of 2022.

His nearly 40-year reign at the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) began in 1984,

during which he walked America through HIV virus, Ebola, Zika and gain-of-function research. He is called the nation’s top infectious disease doctor and throughout the pandemic referred to himself as the personification of science, claiming his statements should not be challenged or questioned.

In the first 18 months of the pandemic, Fauci was given ample opportunity to be truthful but instead engaged in what the online magazine Slate called “noble lies.”

These fall under the category of paternalistic lies that are inaccurate representations of the situation. He may have chosen to do it to protect his decisions or to promote chaos and fear with the intent of manipulating the public.

He may have also been functioning under the delusion that he had the right and responsibility of making an assumption about whether the lies he told were in the best interest of those who have the full capacity and capability of understanding the science and making up their own mind. The COVID lies he told were far-reaching and infamously began in the early days of the pandemic about the effectiveness of wearing masks.

However, as I have documented in the last three years, his lies did not end there. During an interview in July 2021 with MSNBC,

Fauci said within the space of four minutes that without a doubt, people can get infected after vaccination and carry enough virus to transmit the infection, but if the overwhelming majority of people were vaccinated the virus would be crushed.

The percentage of an ‘overwhelming majority’ continued to change throughout 2020. A New York Times article

in December 2020 reported Fauci cited an estimate of up to 70% in the early months, later boosted it to 75% during television interviews, then up to 80% in December 2020 to a CNBC reporter.

The next day he admitted to The New York Times he was ‘moving the goal posts’ “partly based on new science and partly based on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.”

It should come as no surprise then that mainstream media reporters are not asking the hard questions and Fauci is not volunteering the information. After all, it must be difficult to remember everything he said in the last three years when the “truth” and “scientific evidence” that he told the public have not been consistent.

In the final days of 2022, Fauci did an interview with the Los Angeles Times,

during which he spoke with the reporter about the public health policies of the HIV and AIDS crisis and compared that to the COVID-19 pandemic. He was asked whether he thought the public failed to appreciate that science does not provide a quick and complete solution.

Yet, the timeline to produce the COVID-19 genetic shot was phenomenally fast.

Where most vaccines have taken 10 to 15 years to be released to the public, Moderna reportedly received the DNA sequence of SARS-CoV-2 by the second week in January 2020 and designed and manufactured a vaccine by early February 2020.

By March 16, 2020, the shot entered the first phase of clinical trials and by December, it was authorized under emergency use for public distribution. The LA Times reporter also asked Fauci what happens “when the progress of science takes an unexpected turn?”

In Fauci’s answer, he talked about how the outbreak was “dynamic and science is self-correcting.” This was his explanation for the changes in recommendations between January and “When we later learned that the virus is readily spread by aerosol, and that 50% to 60% of the spread was by people who didn’t even know they’re infected, we had to change our recommendations and guidelines.”

This statement was made in December 2022, long after the publication of studies that demonstrated asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 does not happen. In one paper,

87.9% of pregnant women admitted for delivery tested positive but had no symptoms. A second study

evaluated data from 9.899 million residents in Wuhan city and found not one person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual tested positive.

When asymptomatic patients were tested for antibodies, 63.3% had a productive infection that resulted in the production of antibodies, but none of their contacts were infected. Information from this large cohort study was published in 2020, yet in 2022, Fauci continued to assert that up to 60% of the spread was through asymptomatic individuals.

In addition to ignoring any responsibility he had in covering up prevention and early treatment, Fauci continues to call the experimental shot “safe and effective,”

despite data from the FDA and CDC,

and blames vaccine hesitancy along purely political lines, completely nullifying the idea that people could potentially be able to think for themselves or may not have bought into the massive fear campaign promoted by public health agencies.

Despite advertising censorship, Robert F Kennedy Jr.’s book “The Real Anthony Fauci” became an immediate bestseller after its release in 2021. The book has since been made into a movie

in which it’s revealed how Fauci turned the NIH into an incubator for pharmaceutical products and essentially sold the country to the drug industry.

In the same year Fauci became director of the NIAID, AIDS was officially discovered by the National Cancer Institute. Fauci quickly realized that by defining AIDS as an infectious disease he could take control over future research and gain more power for the organization, which at the time was floundering since most infectious diseases of concern at that time had already been conquered.

This began an intimate relationship with the drug industry and Fauci’s love affair with toxic drugs. The movie chronicles how he aligned himself with Big Pharma and promoted AZT, a failed cancer drug that was extremely toxic, as the only choice for AIDS treatment. He blocked other treatments, leaving patients no alternative.

In the late 1980s, Fauci arranged for experimental treatment of orphaned children and children in foster homes in seven states. Included in this group were infants who were diagnosed HIV positive using a PCR test and other children who were not. Together they were used as guinea pigs for experimental HIV and AIDS drugs.

Mary Holland, president of Children’s Health Defense, explained that if the children refused to swallow the medication, they were force-fed through a gastric tube. Many of these children died and one grave in New York contains at least 80 children, all children of color. These actions clearly broke laws, yet no punishment was ever met out. Big Pharma and Fauci clearly regarded these children as disposable.

In much the same way he discarded less toxic treatment for AIDS, Fauci rejected preventive efforts and early treatments for COVID. These were vilified and/or banned while he promoted remdesivir as the standard of treatment despite having severe adverse side effects.

This clear disregard for human life was driven by government agencies and drug companies that placed profits at the forefront and mainstream media who went along with it. According to the movie, Fauci played a central role in the cover-up of the origins of the virus that causes COVID-19.

In the early days of the pandemic, Fauci, then-NIH director Dr. Francis Collins and Wellcome Trust head Jeremy Ferrara were so concerned that the origin of the virus could be traced back to the Wuhan lab that they used burner phones to communicate.

Although he promotes the vaccines as safe and effective after decades of research into producing the mRNA vaccines, the film shows there have been devastating effects around the world from these poorly tested experimental shots. And, while scientists have worked on this technology for many years, they have never been able to get it to work. When it’s effective, it’s also toxic.

November 28, 2021, in an interview with “Face the Nation,” Fauci declared that when people are criticizing Tony Fauci, “they’re really criticizing science because I represent science.”

Nearly one year later to the day, Fauci was deposed by the attorney’s general of Missouri and Louisiana in a lawsuit against President Biden for illegally colluding with social media companies to suppress Americans First Amendment rights to free speech.

During the expedited deposition, Fauci answered questions with “I don’t recall” 174 times and “I don’t know” an additional 84 times, in addition to which, he stated that it was “impossible” the research he funded in Wuhan could have sparked a pandemic.

But at the same time, he claimed to be only “vaguely familiar” with the research he funded there. The depositions were released December 5, 2022.

In a press release, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry stated:

“Fauci’s recent deposition only confirmed what we already knew: federal bureaucrats in collusion with social media companies want to control not only what you think, but especially what you say.

During no time in human history was this more obvious than during the COVID-19 crisis where social engineering tactics were used against the American public, not to limit your exposure to a virus, but to limit your exposure to information that did not fit within a government sanctioned narrative.”

One example of the obfuscation that Fauci has exhibited throughout the entire pandemic was in his deposition about the Great Barrington Declaration.

The Declaration called for focused protection of those who are vulnerable and isolation of people who are infected rather than a nationwide lockdown.

During the deposition, Fauci was asked about emails between himself and Collins that demonstrated they colluded behind the scenes to squash the Declaration. Since they could not defend lockdowns based on science, they resorted to PR, propaganda and smear tactics.

October 8, 2020, Collins wrote in an email to Fauci, “The proposal from the three fringe epidemiologists … seems to be getting a lot of attention … There needs to be a quick and devastating published take down of its premises …”

“Don’t worry, I got this,” Fauci replied. Later, Fauci sent Collins links to newly published articles refuting the focused protection solution. Yet, during the deposition, Fauci could not recall how or when he became aware of the Declaration. He claimed the Declaration was of little to no interest to him.

When he was asked if he knew what Collins was referring to about a quick and devastating takedown, Fauci denied any knowledge and said he believed he was “likely talking about writing a scholarly article to contest some of the premises.” While a scholarly article was never published, mainstream media did quickly publish articles critical of the Barrington Declaration just after Fauci told Collins “I got this.”

His latest deposition and interviews with mainstream media make it appear that one of three things is happening. Either Fauci’s memory has been severely affected by the experimental shot in his last days in office, he is in the early stages of dementia or he is continuing to follow a nearly 40-year pattern of deceiving the American public to protect himself and Big Pharma.

Yet another public health failure is the 54% of Americans who have chronic disease today, which is over four times the 11.8% who had chronic disease when Fauci was appointed in 1984.

In a one-hour interview during “The Corbett Report,”

Kennedy noted that Fauci should not have allowed this to happen since he has a $6.1 billion budget he distributes to colleges and universities for drug research, $1.7 billion for bioweapons research and 68% of his personal salary comes from military and bioweapons research.

In other words, Fauci was professionally and personally well-funded throughout his 40-year reign at the NIAID.

While Fauci appears convincing, compassionate and knowledgeable during his interviews, it’s necessary to understand that he has been at the head of an orchestrated use of the pandemic to clamp down totalitarian control on the American people.

Throughout this latest health crisis, Fauci’s recommendations have flip-flopped and altered to such a significant degree that they likely contributed to the chaos and spread of fear throughout the public. And public health agencies have used this fear to push the acceptance of an experimental jab that has had significant and devastating consequences in people’s lives.

In essence, Fauci was a significant contributor to an epidemic of mental health disease in society. Using a flood of fear and anxiety, people have been pushed into a state of panic that ultimately resulted in making decisions they would not have otherwise considered.

In a publicly accepted evil empire, this would have been Fauci’s crowning achievement — creating an environment where people are willing to double mask, wear masks while swimming, take an experimental jab or voluntarily lock themselves in their homes for weeks at a time when they aren’t sick.

And yet, while this was one end game of the chaos, fear and lies, Fauci has conveniently forgotten much of what happened in the last three years. His testimony is disjointed and filled with “I don’t know” and “I don’t recall.” What has happened to the personification of science? And more importantly, how much influence will this man, who is unable — or more likely unwilling — to recall important facts from the last three years, continue to have over public policy?

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.

• According to Dr. Thomas Frieden, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 is the third leading cause of death in the U.S., having killed 170,000 of the 5.4 million Americans who had tested positive as of August 2020

• Research shows anywhere from 250,000 to 440,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors, far more than COVID-19, especially if you exclude those with comorbidities. While unrecognized, medical errors have, for many years, been the third leading cause of death

• Many who died from COVID-19 were victims of medical error. As of May 2020, 42% of all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. had also occurred in nursing homes, primarily in states where governors had forced long-term care facilities to accept infected patients, which is yet another mistake

• According to the CDC, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate

• Medical treatments showing significant promise have also been censored and even barred from use based on falsified and seriously flawed studies, thereby raising the death toll

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 is a key player and has 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.

According to Dr. Thomas Frieden, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 is now the third leading cause of death in the U.S., killing more Americans than “accidents, injuries, lung disease, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and many, many other causes.”

This claim is said to be based on data from Johns Hopkins University which, at the time Frieden made that statement in August 2020, reported that about 170,000 of the 5.4 million Americans who had tested positive had died.

At the time of this writing, Johns Hopkins reports

the U.S. has recorded 7,916,099 positive tests and 216,872 COVID-19-related deaths.

There are many reasons not to panic over Frieden’s claim. I’ll review mortality statistics in just a moment but, first, I want to highlight a leading cause of death that continues to be swept under the proverbial rug, namely medical errors, because medical errors also play a role in the death toll attributed to COVID-19.

In 2016, a Johns Hopkins study

found more than 250,000 Americans die each year from preventable medical errors, effectively making modern medicine the third leading cause of death in the U.S. I reported these findings in “Medical Errors: Still the Third Leading Cause of Death.”

In 2017, medical mistakes were found to affect 1 in 5 people. Common examples of medical mistakes included receiving the wrong medication, having the wrong procedure done, waking up during surgery or acquiring a hospital-related infection.

Other research

has estimated the number of Americans dying from medical mistakes may actually be as high as 440,000. The reason for the discrepancy in the numbers is because medical errors are rarely noted on death certificates, and death certificates are what the CDC relies on to compile its death statistics.

As a result, the severity of the problem goes unnoticed. Either way, whether it’s 250,000 or 440,000, medical errors still claim more lives than COVID-19 has, and it does so on an annual basis.

We also need to remember that a large portion of those who died from COVID-19 were in fact victims of medical errors. As I reported in “Nurse on the Frontlines of COVID-19 Shares Her Experience” and “Frontline Nurse Speaks Out About Lethal Protocols,” Elmhurst Hospital Center in Queens, New York — which was “the epicenter of the epicenter” of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. — grossly mistreated COVID-19 patients, causing their death.

According to Army trained nurse, Erin Olszewski, who worked at Elmhurst during the height of the pandemic, hospital administrators and doctors made a long list of errors, most egregious of which was to place all COVID-19 patients, including those merely suspected of having COVID-19, on mechanical ventilation rather than less invasive oxygen administration.

During her time there, most patients who entered the hospital wound up being treated for COVID-19, whether they tested positive or not, and only one patient survived. The hospital also failed to segregate COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients, thereby ensuring maximum spread of the disease among noninfected patients coming in with other health problems.

By ventilating COVID-19-negative patients, the hospital artificially inflated the case load and death rate. Disturbingly, financial incentives appear to have been at play. According to Olszewski, the hospital received $29,000 extra for a COVID-19 patient receiving ventilation, over and above other treatments. In August 2020, CDC director Robert Redfield admitted that hospital incentives likely elevated hospitalization rates and death toll statistics around the country.

Another major error that drove up the death toll was state leadership’s decision to place infected patients into nursing homes, against federal guidelines.

According to an analysis

by the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, which included data reported by May 22, 2020, an average of 42% of all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. had occurred in nursing homes, assisted living and other long-term care facilities.

This is extraordinary, considering this group accounts for just 0.62% of the population. By and large, nursing homes are ill equipped to care for COVID-19 infected patients.

While they’re set up to care for elderly patients — whether they are generally healthy or have chronic health problems — these facilities are rarely equipped to quarantine and care for people with highly infectious disease.

It’s logical to assume that comingling infected patients with noninfected ones in a nursing home would result in exaggerated death rates, as the elderly are far more prone to die from any infection, including the common cold. We also learned, early on, that the elderly were disproportionately vulnerable to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Yet ordering infected patients into nursing homes with the most vulnerable population of all is exactly what several Democrat governors decided to do, including New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo,

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and California Gov. Gavin Newsom.

ProPublica published an investigation

June 16, 2020, comparing a New York nursing home that followed Cuomo’s misguided order with one that refused, opting to follow the federal guidelines instead. The difference was stark.

By June 18, the Diamond Hill nursing home — which followed Cuomo’s directive — had lost 18 residents to COVID-19, thanks to lack of isolation and inadequate infection control. Half the staff (about 50 people) and 58 patients were infected and fell ill.

In comparison, Van Rensselaer Manor, a 320-bed nursing home located in the same county as Diamond Hill, which refused to follow the state’s directive and did not admit any patient suspected of having COVID-19, did not have a single COVID-19 death. A similar trend has been observed in other areas.

If it weren’t for systematic medical mistreatment at certain hospitals and incomprehensible decision-making by a handful of state governors, the COVID-19 death toll may well have been negligible.

We should also remember that a) the vast majority of people died with SARS-CoV-2 infection, not from it, and b) medical treatments showing significant promise have been savagely censored and even barred from use based on falsified and seriously flawed studies.

According to groundbreaking data

released by the CDC August 26, 2020, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate.

Six percent of 201,141 (the total death toll reported by the CDC as of October 14, 2020) is 12,068. In other words, SARS-CoV-2 infection was directly responsible for just over 12,000 deaths of otherwise healthy individuals. The remaining 94% had an average of 2.6 health conditions that contributed to their deaths.

When you add all of these factors together — the wanton mismanagement of the infection in hotspots such as New York, the decision to send infected patients into nursing homes, the fact that few healthy people died from the infection and that potential medical treatments have been and still are actively suppressed — it kind of starts to look like a manufactured crisis.

While Frieden is now stoking fears by claiming COVID-19 is the third leading cause of death, and Scientific American is calling the claim that its fatality is on par with the flu “fake news,”

I would call your attention to research looking at the fatality ratio for the average person, excluding those residing in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

“The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio [for COVID-19] was 0.26% … Persons younger than 40 years had an infection fatality ratio of 0.01%; those aged 60 or older had an infection fatality ratio of 1.71%.” ~ Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020

The September 2, 2020, article

in Annals of Internal Medicine points out that, because many who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 remain asymptomatic it’s very difficult to estimate the true infection rate, and when calculating mortality rates based on confirmed “cases” (meaning positive tests) you end up overestimating the infection fatality ratio. As explained by the authors:

“To calculate a true infection fatality ratio, population prevalence data are needed from large geographic areas where reliable death data also exist … We combined prevalence estimates from a statewide random sample with Indiana vital statistics data of confirmed COVID-19 deaths.

In brief, our stratified random sample consisted of state residents aged 12 years and older. Known decedents and incarcerated persons were excluded. Because nursing homes were limiting residents’ ability to leave and re-enter the facilities, their participation was unlikely.

Participants were tested from 25 April to 29 April 2020 for active viral infection and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, which would indicate prior infection … We calculated the IFR by age, race, sex, and ethnicity on the basis of the cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths as of 29 April 2020, divided by the number of infections.

Although nursing home residents were not tested, they represented 54.9% of Indiana’s deaths. Thus, we excluded nursing home residents from all calculations (that is, deaths and infections).

To account for all infections, we added the number of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the testing period and noninstitutionalized COVID-19 deaths into the denominator …

Our random-sample study estimated 187,802 cumulative infections, to which 180 hospitalizations were added. The average age among all COVID-19 decedents was 76.9 years.

The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio was 0.26% … Persons younger than 40 years had an infection fatality ratio of 0.01%; those aged 60 or older had an infection fatality ratio of 1.71%.”

The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza listed in this paper is 0.8%. Other sources put it a little higher. In either case, according to this paper the only people for whom SARS-CoV-2 infection is more dangerous than influenza are those over the age of 60.

All others have a lower risk of dying from COVID-19 than they have of dying from the flu. Put another way, if you’re under the age of 60, your chance of dying from the flu is greater than your chance of dying from COVID-19.

White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx also confirmed this far lower than typically reported mortality rate when she, in mid-August 2020, stated that it “becomes more and more difficult” to get people to comply with mask rules “when people start to realize that 99% of us are going to be fine.”

In addition to COVID-19 having a lethality on par with the flu (again for the average person under the age of 60):

• Data

  show the overall all-cause mortality has remained steady during 2020 and doesn’t veer from the norm. In other words, COVID-19 has not killed off more of the population than would have died in any given year anyway

• Several studies

  also suggest immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection is far more widespread than anyone imagined

• The threshold for herd immunity appears to be far lower than previously estimated

As reported by British Sky News,

October 7, 2020, respected scientists are now calling for a herd immunity approach to the pandemic, meaning governments should allow people who are not at significant risk of serious COVID-19 illness to go back to normal life. As of October 18, 2020, The Great Barrington Declaration

had been signed by 10,601 medical and public health scientists and 29,296 medical practitioners.

At this stage in the game, there’s plenty of cause for optimism. In addition to data showing COVID-19 is nowhere near as lethal as initially suspected, we now have a number of safe and effective treatments. Two that I would place toward the top of the list are:

• Nebulized hydrogen peroxide (see video above) — This is a home remedy I recommend everyone familiarize themselves with, as in many cases it can improve symptoms within mere hours. It’s even been shown to be effective in the later stages of the illness.

  Dr. David Brownstein, who has successfully treated over 100 COVID-19 patients with nebulized hydrogen peroxide, published a case paper

  about this treatment in the July 2020 issue of Science, Public Health Policy and The Law. He also discusses its benefits in a recent interview I did with him.

  I review some of the basic science of how hydrogen peroxide works, as well as some of the studies assessing its therapeutic potential, in my April 2020 article “Could Hydrogen Peroxide Treat Coronavirus?“

• The MATH+ Protocol, developed by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group

  (FLCCC) — There are now MATH+ protocols for prophylaxis, mild symptoms that can be treated at home, and a full clinical in-hospital critical care protocol. The group has issued several updates since April 2020, so be sure to download the latest versions from the Eastern Virginia Medical School COVID Care for Clinicians site.

Lastly, there’s overwhelming evidence showing that those with adequate vitamin D levels are far less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2, less likely to develop symptoms if infected, and less likely to suffer complications, serious illness or death.

Overall, optimizing your vitamin D level appears to be a foundational strategy to minimize your risk. To learn more, download my vitamin D report from StopCOVIDCold.com. There, you can also find a quick COVID-19 risk quiz to help you assess your general risk.

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.

• Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., details how the elite 1% intend to “divide and rule” in order to achieve their exploitative goals

• The world’s top 1% — the ultra-wealthy elite — and the modern empires they control — Big Tech, Big Pharma and Big Ag — are responsible for destroying the planet and sending most of humanity into financial and health crises

• We’re at an unprecedented point in history when the “civilizing mission for humanity” is technology — technology owned by the 1%

• It’s an illusion that technology companies are “creating” these systems that will supposedly make our world a better place — they’re largely extracting, using data mining, including mining your mind

• Divide and rule is a necessity for the 1% to continue to hold on to power as protests and unrest increase

• Pay attention to the economic policies being pushed while people are divided — that’s really the agenda

The world’s top 0.001% — the ultra-wealthy elite — and the modern empires they control — Big Tech, Big Pharma and Big Ag — are not only responsible for destroying the planet and sending most of humanity into financial and health crises, they’re intent on attaining ultimate control. If and when that happens, 99% of people will become disposable.

Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., founder of Navdanya Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology in India, details how globalists are exploiting the masses in her book, “Oneness Vs. the 1%: Shattering Illusions, Seeding Freedom.” In the video above by After Skool, she expands on how the 0.001% intend to “divide and rule” in order to achieve their exploitative goals.

Shiva is trained as a physicist and initially planned to study atomic energy. But as she grasped the devastation it had caused worldwide, she gave up her idea of being a nuclear physicist and instead went looking for knowledge as a whole. She studied on her own, finding quantum theory,

which formed the basis of her life’s work:

“The way you design the world in your mind is the way you relate to it. When you design it as dead matter just to be exploited, you will exploit it. When you design it without any understanding of limits, you will violate the planetary limits.

When you design it with deep recognition of interconnectedness, you will nurture those relationships. And this basic recognition is what I drew from my learnings in quantum theory — that nonlocality, nonseparation, interconnectedness … is the nature of reality.”

However, she explains, within the paradigm of mechanistic thought, there’s a design that didn’t evolve. As such, mechanistic thought is based on the following assumptions:

• We are separate from nature

• Nature is constituted of discrete particles separate from each other, which can only relate through violence, force and action by contact

But in the quantum world, Shiva explains, “There is no separability. My thesis was on nonlocality in quantum theory. Everything is interconnected. There are no fixed essentialized qualities that have been built into the way people are looked at, nature is looked at. Potential is the defining quality in the quantum world, and because it’s about potential, it’s also about uncertainty.”

Shiva states that the mechanistic world is based on a false illusion of determinateness, or a quality of being highly predictable. “In the quantum world, we know we cannot get rid of uncertainty,” she says, citing the uncertainty principle created by German physicist Werner Heisenberg in 1927.

Referring to atoms and subatomic particles, the uncertainty principle maintains that the position and velocity of an object cannot be measured at the same time. “The very concepts of exact position and exact velocity together, in fact, have no meaning in nature,” Britannica notes.

Further, while in the mechanistic world things are either/or — “you can either be a wave or a particle,” Shiva says — “in the quantum world, you have potential to be both and they’re complementary.” She continues, “When you realize that the world is one interconnected whole you also realize that what appears different is actually different expressions of an interconnected reality.”

We’re at an unprecedented point in history when the “civilizing mission for humanity” is technology — technology owned by the 1%. It’s an illusion, however, that technology companies are “creating” or inventing these systems that will supposedly make our world a better place.

“They extract,” Shiva says, “They don’t create anything … software programmers create the platforms that they use. Even Bill Gates didn’t really write his basic program. It was two math professors in Dartmouth College.”

She uses Gates’ Ag One

as an example, which is basically the idea to make one type of agriculture for the whole world, which will be owned and controlled by Gates from the top down. It’s headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, where Monsanto, acquired by Bayer in 2018,

Bayer is also headquartered.

This includes digital farming, in which farmers are surveilled and mined for their agricultural data, which is then repackaged and sold back to them. There are parallels throughout society. Shiva explains:

“We watched what’s going on in India and we pieced it together. So basically he’s financing a lot of data mining from farmers, which will then be packaged as Big Data and sold back to farmers. This is exactly what happened in your 2016 elections. Facebook sold data to Cambridge Analytica.

So when you think of, ‘What are the kind of leaders that we have getting created?’ it’s very important to remember that in these 25 years of corporate deregulation of commerce you basically have a lot of money in the hands of very few people.

And they then are the ones investing in all the companies. The companies are not independent companies anymore. They’re basically billionaire money managed by the investment funds like Blackrock and Vanguard.”

Protests and unrest are increasing throughout the world as people grow tired of being controlled and downtrodden by the 1%. Demands for change are surging, so the 1% has rolled out a plan to overcome it — divide and rule.

Shiva believes the East India Company in 1857 set the historic precedence. A revolt occurred that year against oppressive company rule, and the company was taken over by the British state. Up until that point, Hindus and Muslims in India had stood together to defend their land, livelihoods and freedoms.

They identified primarily with their occupations and communities; religion was secondary. But when the crown took over, Shiva says, “They established a policy called divide and rule … it took from about 1857 to about 1920” to essentially divide the population against each other based on their religion. She explains:

“That partition is still being played out. It’s an incomplete project. So, divide and rule becomes a necessity for the 0.001% to continue to hold on to power. What are the economic policies being pushed while people are divided? Because that’s really the agenda.”

The refusal to cooperate with unjust law was termed a duty of truth by Gandhi. Shiva describes apartheid in 1906, when the British attempted to turn Indians in South Africa into second-class citizens. Indians had to register their race and carry identification. Police officers could enter homes and demand papers, and people were restricted from local trade and certain professions based on their race. “The people said we would rather die,” Shiva says.

Others inspired by Gandhi and the duty of truth include Martin Luther King. “But … when King started to take up economic justice and economic equality issues, that’s when he was assassinated,” Shiva says, “because … you can talk in very sweet ways about civil liberties but you don’t touch economic justice and the economy.”

The word economy comes from oeconomia, or the art of living. But when this got changed into the art of money-making, it brought on violence. “When you turn the art of living into the art of money-making, which Aristotle called chrematistics, then you have to practice violence against the Earth and violence against others — destroy their livelihoods, destroy their freedoms, take away their resources.”

With the convergence of Big Tech and artificial intelligence, Shiva fears mechanical work, from radiography to law, will be made redundant, and 99% of people will become disposable. The solution lies in activating our sense of oneness or interconnectedness with all life and sowing the seeds of what Shiva calls Earth democracy:

“You can either share this beautiful planet with love and abundance and sustainability, or say it’s all mine — every bit of land, every seed, every mind. Because what’s being mined is our mind now, and if we don’t defend the freedoms of all species and the freedoms of all human beings we could see, within 20 to 30 years, a level of disposability built into the structures that humanity will not be able to respond to.”

Currently, democracy has shifted to being “of the corporations by the corporations for the corporations.” Earth democracy calls for a restoration of democracy “of the people by the people for the people,” not only for humans but also for nature.

According to the ancient Vedas, the universe is divine, and everything therein — even the smallest grass — is an expression of the divine.

The universe exists for the well-being of all, but her gifts must be enjoyed without greed. Taking more than your share is theft, and will only backfire. The solution to true sustainability doesn’t lie with new technology but in relying on the natural “technology” that is the universe.

Shiva says:

“This is the time to make oneness and interconnectedness, as one humanity on one planet, the political project of our time. We have to remember we are one humanity. We are part of one Earth, and whatever we do we will not let this basic recognition divide us, either from the Earth or from each other … together we are strong.”

>”,”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.