|(Natural News) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers recently intercepted and seized a shipment of disguised weapons parts that originated in communist China and was destined for Melbourne, Florida. The seizure, which occurred on May 22, blew the lid on a communist Chinese plot to arm Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) terrorists with…|
The hope of living longer and healthier lives has been a focus of attention for centuries. In 1513, Juan Ponce de Leon left Puerto Rico and landed in Florida. He was said to be searching for the fabled Fountain of Youth, which people thought would confer everlasting life.1
While history would eventually tell a different story, with some now thinking his trek was more about politics than philanthropy, what hasn’t changed is our fascination with living longer, healthier lives.
Today, researchers and skin experts are in search of products that give the appearance of youth and vitality — qualities which are highly valued in society. In 2019, Forbes reported that the beauty industry, built on helping women look younger and more attractive, was worth $532 billion across the globe.2
Reducing Blood Plasma Reverses Aging in Mice
Fifteen years ago, researchers from the west coast of the U.S. discovered that old mice that shared blood with younger mice performed as if they were younger.3 The University of California-Berkeley team decided to pursue the matter and have recently published details of their new study in the journal Aging.4 They were determined to find the factor involved in the results from their first study, so they designed a follow-up to see if plasma had an influence on aging.
Using a process to exchange blood in small animals, the team removed half of the plasma in mice and replaced it with a saline solution and albumin. They called this intervention neutral aged blood exchange (NBE). The process essentially diluted plasma factors and replenished albumin.
Just one round of this was enough to assist with muscle repair, lower liver adiposity and fibrosis, and help with brain functioning in older mice. An analysis of the blood after transfusion showed elevated levels of proteins that would be present with tissue maintenance and repair.
Researchers did not believe albumin added to the saline solution was the sole reason for the outcomes. They concluded that the process helps to forward understanding of rejuvenation and suggests a new approach for therapeutic plasma exchange in humans that may improve the health of older individuals.
Importantly, the data from this experiment moves the needle away from investigating young blood for antiaging effects and toward the potential for removing harmful factors in blood that could contribute to antiaging.
Young Blood May Not Be the Answer
The researchers on the 2005 study, led by a husband and wife team, found that blood from younger mice could reverse signs of aging in older animals.5 They created conjoined mice using one old and one young animal. The animals shared blood and certain organs.
Their findings sparked interest in the scientific community and generated other research into whether transfusing young blood could reduce the signs of aging and essentially serve as a “fountain of youth.” As told by the lead scientist,6
“There are two main interpretations of our original experiments: The first is that, in the mouse joining experiments, rejuvenation was due to young blood and young proteins or factors that become diminished with aging, but an equally possible alternative is that, with age, you have an elevation of certain proteins in the blood that become detrimental, and these were removed or neutralized by the young partners.
As our science shows, the second interpretation turns out to be correct. Young blood or factors are not needed for the rejuvenating effect; dilution of old blood is sufficient.”
A therapeutic plasma exchange has been approved in the U.S. for the treatment of some autoimmune diseases. The process is also called plasmapheresis. Currently, the research team is finalizing plans for the next step, which is a clinical trial to explore modified plasma exchange in humans to improve the health of older adults.
In a separate study, scientists compared the actions and performance of older animals on tests of spatial memory. Special attention was paid to the hippocampus, an area of the brain crucial for forming memory and recognizing spatial patterns. The researchers concluded:7 “Our data indicate that exposure of aged mice to young blood late in life is capable of rejuvenating synaptic plasticity and improving cognitive function.” This was published in the journal Nature Medicine.
They are also evaluating the potential this intervention may be used to treat muscle wasting, immune deregulation and Type 2 diabetes.8 Another scientist on the team said this study may divert attention away from using plasma and other blood products from young people:9
“I think it will take some time for people to really give up the idea that young plasma contains rejuvenation molecules, or silver bullets, for aging. I hope our results open the door for further research into using plasma exchange — not just for aging, but also for immunomodulation.”
The point is that while positive effects from transfusing blood products from younger animals is possible, the practice is not necessary.
Chronic Disease Is Not Necessarily a Normal Part of Aging
The aging process is associated with changes in physiological, biological and psychological processes. Some changes are innocuous, while others result in declining function or disability.10 The leading causes of death in the U.S. related to disease or illness include:11
Influenza and pneumonia
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases)
Chronic lower respiratory diseases
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis
Many of these conditions are highly influenced by nutrition and lifestyle choices. In other words, while you could possibly develop heart disease or cancer as an older adult, you may delay or entirely prevent the disease through smart life choices.
After a lifetime of smoking, metabolic dysfunction or lack of physical activity you may be discouraged, but it is still possible to make an impact on your health. Even small changes made later in life can change overall health.12
A moderate amount of activity may help older adults retain independence, reduce blood pressure, improve pain from arthritis and improve mental health.13 Addressing potential health issues before they are overwhelming eases the challenges even further.
Intermittent Fasting One Key to Longevity
Geneticist and author David Sinclair, Ph.D., is a thought leader in how to improve health span. One important strategy that helps to slow your biological clock is calorie restriction and intermittent fasting. You’ll find more information in “Revolutionary Science of Aging and Longevity.”
Results from animal studies have suggested that the younger a person is when they start intermittent fasting, the better the results. Of course, it would be foolhardy to put an infant or young child on a fasting regimen. Teens and young adults are also not good candidates, as Sinclair says, “… there’s still a lot going on in their bodies and their brains.”14
However, after the age of 30, regular fasting is likely to lengthen life, based on the research. Time-restricted eating or intermittent fasting generally involves fasting for 12 to 16 hours each day. Typically, you either eliminate breakfast or dinner. If you choose to eat dinner, be sure it’s at least three hours before bedtime.
As Sinclair and I talk about in the video above, this is because late-night eating increases your nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) levels which are important in a variety of bodily functions. It also reduces nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH), an essential energy component for your cells.
If you’re eating too close to bedtime, your body cannot use the NADPH to burn calories and instead they are stored as fat. Additionally, you may try exercising while fasting. This means you’ll workout just before your first meal, after a 16 or 18 hour fast. This raises your growth hormone levels to reach maximum benefit for mitochondrial biogenesis.
Sinclair’s goal is to identify ways to reprogram cells in the body, so they don’t just act younger, but literally are younger on a molecular level. To learn more about Sinclair’s research, the science behind aging and the potential for reversing its effects, be sure to pick up a copy of his book, “Lifespan: Why We Age — and Why We Don’t Have To.”
More Antiaging Strategies You Can Use at Home
The foundations to good health and a long life are good nutrition, exercise, sensible sun exposure, quality sleep and hydration. Of course, there are other factors as well, but these are a good place to start.
Your body needs quality nutrition to deliver optimal health. Practicing intermittent fasting while eating junk food or processed foods will not accomplish your goal. Your body has micro- and macronutrient requirements for health that you must meet in order to thrive at the cellular level.
Since you can’t out-exercise the amount of food you’re eating, you have to make sure you’re eating highly nutritious foods. Shop around the perimeters of the grocery store aisles to find whole foods you can cook at home. You’ll find more information about the sun and vitamin D, the importance of quality sleep to mitochondrial health and how to stay well-hydrated in the articles listed below:
- Your Vitamin D Level Must Reach 60ng/mL Before the Second Wave
- Nutrients and Supplements That Can Improve Your Sleep Quality
- Average Sleep Time Drops, Increasing Health Risk
- This Could Prevent 3 Million Cases of Degenerative Disease
- The Science Behind Molecular Hydrogen Tablets
Early on in the pandemic it became clear that older individuals were at disproportionate risk of severe COVID-19 infection and death.
According to an analysis1 conducted 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 beyond extraordinary, considering this group accounts for just 0.62% of the population.
Avik Roy, president of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, wrote an article2 about their findings in Forbes, pointing out that “42% could be an undercount,” since “states like New York exclude from their nursing home death tallies those who die in a hospital, even if they were originally infected in a long-term care facility.” Roy also testified before Congress June 17, 2020, about racial disparities in COVID-19 and the health care system.3
Why Do Some States Have Exaggerated Nursing Home Death Rates?
Disturbingly, some states have nursing home mortality rates that are significantly higher than the national average of 42%. Minnesota4 tops the list in this regard, with 81.4% of all COVID-19 deaths having occurred in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. Ohio comes in second, with a rate of 70%.
As reported by Roy:5
“Another way to cut the data is to look at nursing home and assisted living facility deaths as a share of the population that lives in those facilities. On that basis, three states stand out in the negative direction: New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.
In Massachusetts and Connecticut, COVID deaths per 10,000 nursing home and assisted living facility residents were 703 and 827, respectively. In New Jersey, nearly 10 percent of all long-term care facility residents — 954 in 10,000 — have died from the novel coronavirus.”
Thousands Have Died Unnecessarily
By and large, nursing homes are ill equipped to care for COVID-19 infected patients.6 They’re set up to care for elderly patients, whether they are generally healthy or have chronic health problems, but they’re not typically 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.
March 17, 2020, Stanford epidemiologist John Ioannidis wrote an op-ed in STAT news,7 stating that “even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses have been known for decades [to] have case fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect people in nursing homes.”
In other words, we should not be surprised that COVID-19 disproportionally affects older people. Most elderly are frail and have underlying health problems that make them more prone to death from any infection whatsoever. Since this is common knowledge, why did some states decide to violate federal guidelines and send COVID-19 patients back into nursing homes?
New York Governor in the Hot Seat
Democratic governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, appears to have been among the most negligent in this regard. March 25, 2020, instructions from the New York Department of Health stated nursing homes were not allowed to deny admission or readmission of a COVID-19-positive patient.
Nursing homes were even “prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission.” As reported by Roy:8
“As recently as April 23, Cuomo declared9 that nursing homes ‘don’t have a right to object’ to accepting elderly patients with active COVID infections. ‘That is the rule and that is the regulation and they have to comply with that.’
Only on May 10 — after the deaths of nearly 3,000 New York residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities — did Cuomo stand down and partially rescind his order.”
Cuomo’s order seems particularly dubious considering the Navy hospital ship USNS Comfort was docked in New York City harbor. The ship, which had a 1,000-bed capacity, was barely used.10 It departed NYC on April 30, having treated just 182 patients.11
A temporary hospital facility at the Javits Convention Center was also erected to deal with predicted hospital overflow. It had a capacity of 2,500, and closed May 1, 2020, having treated just over 1,000 patients.12 With all that available surplus space equipped for infectious disease control, why were COVID-19 patients forced back into nursing homes where they would pose a clear infection risk to other high-risk patients?
Several Governors Violated Federal Guidelines
June 22, 2020, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator Seema Verma condemned the actions of Cuomo and “other Democrat governors” — including Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and California Gov. Gavin Newsom — who contradicted federal guidelines for nursing homes in their own state guidance.
“Our guidance was absolutely crystal clear,” Verma said in an exclusive interview with Breitbart reporter Matthew Boyle, adding:13
“Any insinuation to the contrary is woefully mistaken at best and dishonest at worst. We put out our guidance on March 13 … It says … ‘When should a nursing home accept a resident who is diagnosed with COVID-19? …
A nursing home can accept a resident diagnosed with COVID-19 and still under transmission-based precautions,’ which means if this person is infectious you have to take precautions.
It says ‘as long as the facility can follow CDC guidance for transmission-based precautions.’ It says: ‘If a nursing home cannot, it must wait until these precautions are discontinued,’ meaning if you are not able to care for this patient — somebody is still positive and you’re not equipped to care for the patient, then you shouldn’t accept the patient into your care.
That’s really important because longstanding discharge — when you’re discharging a patient from the hospital, longstanding guidelines require when you transfer them somewhere you transfer them to a place that can take care of their needs whether they’re going home or they’re going to a nursing home or some other facility …
I just don’t think we should ever put a nursing home in a situation or a patient where we force them to take a patient they are not prepared to care for. That not only jeopardizes the patient but it jeopardizes the health and safety of every single resident in that nursing home.”
Stark Differences Between Nursing Homes
While Cuomo has tried to deflect criticism for his devastating nursing home directive, the facts seem to speak for themselves. ProPublica published an investigation14 June 16, 2020, comparing a New York nursing home that followed Cuomo’s order with one that refused, opting to follow the federal guidelines instead. The difference is stark.
According to ProPublica,15 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 of the staff (about 50 people) and 58 patients were also sickened.
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. As reported by ProPublica:16
“New York was the only state in the nation that barred testing of those being placed or returning to nursing homes. In the weeks that followed the March 25 order, COVID-19 tore through New York state’s nursing facilities, killing more than 6,000 people — about 6% of its more than 100,000 nursing home residents …
In Florida, where such transfers were barred, just 1.6% of 73,000 nursing home residents died of the virus. California, after initially moving toward a policy like New York’s, quickly revised it. So far, it has lost 2% of its 103,000 nursing home residents.”
Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis actually took the opposite position with regard to nursing homes. Not only were hospitals not permitted to discharge COVID-19 patients into nursing homes, but all nursing home workers were also required to be screened for symptoms before entering facilities each day, and ensuring availability of personal protective equipment was prioritized.
In California, Los Angeles County nursing homes are such a hotspot, and local leaders describe the situation as a “pandemic within a pandemic.”17 There, the fact that many of the facilities are unusually large appears to be part of the problem.
They also have a higher percentage of people of color — another high-risk group — both working and residing in these facilities. Low pay, poor quality of care and inferior infection control add to the problem.
COVID-19 Primarily Spread in Health Care Settings
Overall, COVID-19 transmission appears to be rampant within our health care system in general, not just in nursing homes. As noted in “20% of COVID Patients Caught Disease at Hospital,” British data suggests 1 in 5 COVID-19 patients actually contracted the disease at the hospital, while being treated for something else.
SARS-CoV-2 is being transmitted not only between patients but also from health care workers to patients. When you add it all together, nursing homes and nosocomial infections (i.e., infections originating in or acquired from a hospital18), plus the spread from workers to family members, likely account for a vast majority of all COVID-19 deaths.
Without doubt, if nursing homes don’t start getting this right, they eventually won’t have enough patients to stay in business. Unfortunately, rather than tackle the problem head-on and implement sensible safety measures across the board, the nursing home industry is instead seeking immunity from COVID-19 related lawsuits. I discussed this in “COVID-19 and Nursing Homes: The No. 1 Place Not to Be.” According to NBC News:19
“So far at least six states have provided explicit immunity from coronavirus lawsuits for nursing homes, and six more have granted some form of immunity to health care providers, which legal experts say could likely be interpreted to include nursing homes …
Of the states that have addressed nursing home liability as a response to the outbreak, two — Massachusetts and New York — have passed laws that explicitly immunize the facilities. Governors in Connecticut, Georgia, Michigan and New Jersey have issued executive orders that immunize facilities.”
In other words, New York not only issued rules requiring COVID-19 infected patients to be admitted into nursing homes, and barred them from testing, it also granted nursing homes immunity against lawsuits.
Talk about triple injury. Clearly, New York nursing home patients have gotten ill and died due to willfully negligent directives. On top of that, families have been deprived of due process and any legal recourse for these beyond-reprehensible criminal actions.
Congressional Members Demand Answers
While several states have failed to protect their most vulnerable, New York’s actions stand out as being particularly egregious and, so far, no sound justifications have been forthcoming.
June 15, 2020, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and four Republican members of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus sent letters20 to the governors of New York, Michigan, California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, demanding answers:21
“Why did they give those orders? Why did they go against the safety guidelines that were issued from CMS? And why won’t they give us all the disclosure of the patient information that they were giving and then all of a sudden when we started discovering this they clammed up and they’re not letting the public see what these numbers really are?” Scalise said.
Curiously, Select Subcommittee Democrats not only declined to join Republicans in the proposed nursing home oversight effort, they also refused Scalise’s call to “get to the bottom of what motivated these decisions” in New York, Michigan, California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and they did not sign the letters to the governors of those states.22
In a press release by Scalise, Select Subcommittee member Jackie Walorski (R-Ind.) is quoted saying:23
“Just about the worst possible thing to do is knowingly introduce coronavirus to the most vulnerable populations, yet that’s exactly what several states did by mandating nursing homes accept infected patients.
These misguided policies deserve close scrutiny, and the leaders who put them in place have a lot of tough questions to answer. Now is not the time to look the other way while placing blame for this crisis on states that are taking a measured, responsible approach to reopening our economy and protecting our communities.”
Take Action NOW!
While the death toll from COVID-19 in the U.S. has sharply declined since its peak in mid-April — declining from 2,666 deaths the week of June 13, 2020, to 906 deaths for the week of June 20, 2020,24 — authorities predict a reemergence this fall.
We can significantly blunt any reemergence by optimizing our vitamin D levels, and making sure this information reaches nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.
For more information, see “Your Vitamin D Level Must Reach 60ng/mL Before the Second Wave.” To facilitate the public information campaign, I’ve created two vitamin D reports — one comprehensive science report and one summary review — both of which can be downloaded below.
I urge everyone to share this information with friends, family and community at large, so that we can minimize a second outbreak. If you have a family member or know anyone that is an assisted living facility, you could meet with the director of the program, share these reports and encourage them to get everyone tested or at least start them on vitamin D.
Additionally, you could speak to pastors in churches with large congregations of people of color — who are also at disproportionate risk — and help them start a program getting people on vitamin D. Doing so could help save many lives, far more than any vaccine program.
By Anna Von Reitz
But the Truth as I know it, is that your beloved government has been functioning on two cylinders instead of eight, for the past 150 years.
The Truth is that at this very moment, the “Federal” Government is nothing more than two gigantic commercial corporations, both of which are bankrupt.
Major Tax Increases Are Coming Because of Covid Fallout
A West Texas doctor says an inhaled steroid, budesonide, a drug commonly used to treat asthma, is the “silver bullet” for COVID-19. “It’s an inhaled steroid that doesn’t have the side effects of total body steroids but it has the benefits,” Dr. Richard Bartlett said in a recent interview with KWES-TV in Odessa. “It’s like putting out a fire at the base of the fire. I’m having patients recover so quick.” Bartlett, an emergency room doctor for 28 years, said he has been treating high-risk COVID-19 patients such as the elderly or those with conditions such as heart disease and cancer, with the inhaled steroid. COVID-19 starts off in the respiratory system but then moves on to cause severe inflammation that leads to organ failure and death, but Bartlett claims the steroid stops that inflammation from happening
A new pro-Israel policy framework proposed by the US Chamber of Commerce is bolstering the ongoing merger between the US and Israeli national security states. By Raul Diego | 7 July 2020 MINT PRESS NEWS […]
What Happened: The COVID-19 death rate across the US has now been confirmed to be so low that it’s on the edge of no longer being qualified as a pandemic, and therefore the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is poised to soon stop calling the virus an “epidemic.” The primary reason why confirmed death rates are so low is due to extreme amounts of testing in the United States. Although most outside the box thinking people and health professionals knew a couple weeks in that the death rate was extremely low, it has taken up until now for the CDC to admit to this position.
“Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19 (PIC) decreased from 9.0% during week 25 to 5.9% during week 26, representing the tenth week of a declining percentage of deaths due to PIC,” the agency wrote on its website.
Media and government continue to report on ‘new cases’ every single day as testing continues. The challenging part is, they are not sharing how many of these cases are symptomatic or result in any form of hospitalization. Therefore, simply reporting on how many new confirmed cases there are is doing nothing but rile the public up into fear for no reason. The vast majority of “confirmed cases” are people who have no symptoms and have no idea they even had antibodies for the virus. Not to mention the likely inaccuracy of COVID testing.
Why it matters: As many outside mainstream consensus spoke about since late February, testing results show that more people have likely contracted COVID-19 than testing data reflects. This means even way back then, the mortality rate for COVID-19 was lower than any of the extreme estimates that came out of government and health agencies. All of which have been proven wrong along the way.
Those who have questioned the narrative, like us here at CE, have had to deal with shadow banning on social media, fact checking fallacies, and demonetization as a result of reporting on the facts instead of the hysteria. The sad part is, everything we have reported on and suggested would soon happen did and yet we have been constantly ‘punished’ for it. Death rates were not as high as thought, testing is not accurate, and this virus is not near as serious as it’s being made out to be – point blank, there was no need for a lockdown.
But given there was a lockdown, we can look to either complete government incompetency or the fact that there is likely much more going on here behind the scenes than many people want to admit to. Further to that, and going deeper, we can ask how this lockdown and entire virus situation was actually serving the collective to see what’s really going on in our world and why it might be time to bring about some BIG change.
Remember, it’s not the people vs. the deep state, they simply play a role in pushing the evolution of consciousness. I cover this in great detail here.
The Takeaway: More statistics and events are coming to the surface showing that we have been misled greatly about the recent ‘pandemic’, and even though many people in alternative media and alternative health said since day 1 that this was fishy and made no sense, mainstream media and government continued on.
How is it that people with so few resources and access knew the truth before massive and ‘trusted’ sources did? Was it another catalyst for humanity to begin questioning why they trust these sources? Was it another catalyst for people to begin listening to well backed and grounded ‘alternative’ or ‘conspiracy’ ideas as they consistently turn out to be true?
Given the fact our infrastructures collapsed so quickly, is it an opportunity for us to re-imagine our world? Re-imagine what’s possible and truly question the type of world we wish to live in? Is it time for us to activate self responsibility and begin setting aside the parent-child relationship we have with government?
It’s all been a catalyst.
By Steve Almasy and Pierre Meilhan | 7 July 2020 CNN — Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp on Monday declared a state of emergency and activated as many as 1,000 National Guard members. Kemp, a Republican, said […]