Usnic Acid Inhibits Viral Respiratory Infection

The influenza virus has a high rate of mutation and can develop drug resistance. Research has found derivatives of usnic acid can effectively inhibit the reproduction of the influenza virus in the lab and animal models.1

The influenza virus causes a contagious respiratory illness better known as flu.2 The virus infects your nose, throat and sometimes lungs triggering disease that can range from mild to severe. Symptoms include fever, cough, muscle or body aches, fatigue and sore throat. Children may experience vomiting and diarrhea with flu infection.

There are four types of influenza virus that are named by letters: A, B, C and D.3 Influenza D is not known to infect people but causes illness in cattle. Influenza A, B and C infect humans. Influenza A is the only type known to cause a pandemic. Influenza A and B can cause epidemics, and influenza C generally causes mild illness.

Influenza A and B cause most human flu illnesses, and each is classified and subclassified based on genetic sequencing.4 Each year experts attempt to match the flu vaccine by estimating the strains of virus expected in the U.S.5

The CDC estimates from 3% to 11% of the population will have symptomatic flu disease each season, although during the 2020-2021 flu season, infections have been almost nonexistent. Typically, however, up to 20% of the population can have asymptomatic or symptomatic illness.6 The estimated number of deaths from flu have ranged from 12,000 to 61,000 annually from 2010 to 2020, depending on the flu season.7

Since the influenza virus can affect millions of people each year, scientists have sought to develop an effective and safe antiviral treatment to reduce the burden of the illness. However, as I discuss below the results have not lived up to the promise.

Usnic Helps Inhibit Flu Virus Without Stimulating Resistance

Usnic acid was first isolated in 1844 and since then has been extensively studied as one of the few commercially available lichen metabolites.8 Lichen has been included in folk medicine from many countries.9 Early studies of lichen biological activity in New Zealand led to the identification of usnic acid “as the main antimicrobial, cytotoxic and antiviral component.”10

Subsequently, this led to a study of usnic acid and its derivatives against the H1N1 pandemic influenza virus.11 Isomers of usnic acid and the derivatives were tested and the results suggested derivatives should be considered for use against the influenza virus.

Usnic acid was also tested against the virulent influenza A virus and researchers found they could boost the activity by modifying the compound with chalcones.12 These are an important class of flavonoids that scientists have used to create derivatives and:13

“… improve pharmacological activity, gain selectivity for a particular receptor or enzyme with simultaneous reduction of certain adverse effects, or even for optimizing the pharmacokinetics of the lead candidate.”

Derivatives of usnic acid modified with chalcones demonstrated biological activity against the influenza virus in the lab and in an animal model.14 The researchers tested a broad range of viral strains and the results demonstrated activity against these strains.

Additionally, one compound modified with valine demonstrated the capacity to reduce the number of deaths in infected animals and did not trigger the development of a resistant strain of influenza. The researchers concluded that this modification increased the antiviral properties and lowered the potential for toxicity to liver tissue.15

Hepatotoxicity is an important consideration when using usnic acid. A patent review from 2000 to 2017 found applications for use were withdrawn secondary to liver toxicity.16 The results of animal studies have suggested the mechanism for injury is oxidative phosphorylation, increased oxidative stress and depletion of glutathione.17

Antimicrobial resistance is a significant challenge to modern medicine, and the influenza virus can also mutate to become resistant to antiviral drugs.18 As research has demonstrated, some usnic acid derivatives address several challenges of fighting flu, namely they are effective against influenza, do not prompt the development of resistant strains and have low hepatotoxicity.19

What Is Usnic Acid?

Usnic acid is a secondary metabolite produced exclusively by a variety of lichen species,20 which researchers have discovered has antiviral, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antifungicidal and antineoplastic activity.21

Secondary metabolites are organic molecules an organism produces that are not crucial for their reproduction, growth or development, but give a selective advantage.22 For example, secondary metabolites may slow the growth of a competing organism and secondary metabolites from fungi have produced antibiotics such as penicillin.

Usnic acid has strong antibacterial properties and for this reason has been incorporated into toothpaste, mouthwash, deodorant and moisturizing creams.23 It is also used as a preservative in cosmetic products. The antibacterial properties include the ability to inhibit staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation on medical devices and potentially inhibit other gram-positive organisms as well.24

Usnic acid has been promoted for weight loss, but the supplements sold are associated with severe liver toxicity. Topical use can also cause an allergic reaction or local irritation.25 Research has demonstrated the compound has environmental effects including antiherbivore and anti-insect properties.26

Studies Cast Doubt on Value, Safety of Flu Drugs Like Tamiflu

Antiviral flu drugs like Tamiflu (oseltamivir) and Relenza (zanamivir) are conventional medicine’s go-to option for treating the flu, despite their risk of serious side effects and unproven benefits. In fact, these drugs were stockpiled in many countries, including the U.S.,27 for treating and preventing seasonal and pandemic influenza.

In 2010, the World Health Organization (WHO) even classified Tamiflu as an “essential” medicine.28 In 2014, Dr. Mark H. Ebell from the college of public health at the University of Georgia published an editorial in The BMJ29 calling the events surrounding Tamiflu a “multisystem failure,” based on decisions by the CDC, WHO and EMA that included the failure to publish and recognize the limitation of the available data.

Subsequently, a Cochrane review was led by Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine professor Tom Jefferson. Jefferson and his team published the only Cochrane review based solely on raw unpublished regulatory data.30,31 Ultimately, the results of the review demonstrated Tamiflu shortened the duration of symptoms from the influenza virus by less than one day.

The struggle to acquire the data was nearly as eye-opening as the results, which I recount in “Remdesivir Is a Scam Like Tamiflu.” In a later editorial published in The BMJ,32 Ebell outlines some of the lessons learned from this multibillion-dollar fiasco.

These lessons included the need for all available data to be made public and available for independent reanalysis. He added the money spent on stockpiling medication is only minimally effective and may be better spent on other public health priorities.33

Flu Vaccine Ineffective and Increases Viral Shedding

During the 2019-2020 flu season, the CDC reported 51.8% of people 6 months old and older had been vaccinated against flu, representing a 3.1% increase from the previous season.34 According to the interim estimates from the CDC, the 2018-2019 flu vaccine overall adjusted effectiveness against infections associated with acute respiratory illness that required medical attention was 47%.35

The same statistics for the 2019-2020 flu vaccine revealed 45% effectiveness.36 However, said another way, the flu vaccine failed to offer any protection more than half the time it was given.

For adults over 50, which is the group most vulnerable to severe flu illness, the 2018-2019 vaccine had a mere 24% effectiveness rate against all influenza and an abysmal 8% effectiveness against influenza A, which is the most virulent type.37

The effectiveness of 2019-2020 flu vaccine was higher for those over 50 years but had dropped to 25% in adults 18 to 49 years.38 The vaccine has three or four type A or B strains. Even if those strains are a perfect match for the circulating viruses during a given flu season, it does not prevent many other respiratory infections. As noted by the Cochrane Collaboration:39

“Over 200 viruses cause ILI (influenza-like illness), which produces the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches, pains, cough and runny nose) as influenza. Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot distinguish between ILI and influenza because both last for days and rarely cause serious illness or death.”

In addition to poor performance, people who are routinely vaccinated shed 6.3 times more of the influenza virus into the air.40 In the study from the University of Maryland, researchers revealed that repeated vaccinations increased the amount of virus released with each breath, noting:41

“Little is known about the amount and infectiousness of influenza virus shed into exhaled breath. This contributes to uncertainty about the importance of airborne influenza transmission. We show that sneezing is rare and not important for — and that coughing is not required for — influenza virus aerosolization.”

This is important, as it means that even someone who’s not actively sneezing or coughing can potentially transmit the influenza virus to others. Further, someone who’s recently received the live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) may also potentially actively shed and transmit the virus.

There is little evidence to suggest that getting an annual flu vaccine is a good way to combat influenza. On the contrary, there is mounting literature questioning the validity of this public health measure, which I discussed in “Is the Flu Vaccine Really ‘Working Well’ This Year?

At-Home Strategies to Reduce Risk of Viral Infections

There are strategies you can use at home to help prevent and treat the influenza virus if you are infected. In addition to protecting against flu, optimizing your vitamin D level also helps protect you against COVID-19.42 Studies have repeatedly demonstrated the track record for vitamin D in preventing respiratory infections, including a 2017 scientific review of 25 randomized controlled trials that concluded:43

“Vitamin D supplementation was safe and it protected against acute respiratory tract infection overall. Patients who were very vitamin D deficient and those not receiving bolus doses experienced the most benefit.”

As I discuss in a short video in “How Nebulized Peroxide Helps Against Respiratory Infections,” there is absolutely no question in my mind that nebulized hydrogen peroxide is the safest and most effective way to treat an acute upper respiratory infection.

I first wrote about this in the newsletter in April 2020 and have since received impressive testimonials from friends and acquaintances who got severely ill and used it. In the link to the article you can watch an interview with Dr. David Brownstein who has a clinic just outside Detroit.

At the time of the interview, he had successfully treated over 100 patients with nebulized hydrogen peroxide, having one patient hospitalized and no deaths. The treatment typically improves symptoms within hours.

In addition to using nebulized hydrogen peroxide at the first sign of a respiratory infection, I would also start taking quercetin and zinc to help fight the virus outside lung tissue. The earlier you start quercetin and zinc the more effective it will be since late in the course of the illness it is ineffective at inhibiting viral replication.

The key is to have everything you need available before flu season. An ounce of prevention is always worth a pound of cure. To read more about the relationship between quercetin and zinc, see “Zinc Is Key for COVID-19 Treatment and Prevention.”

COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines

Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren’t vaccines in the medical and legal definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they prevent its spread. They’re really experimental gene therapies.

I discussed this troubling fact in a recent interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots are labeled as “vaccines,” and news agencies and health policy leaders call them that, the actual patents for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy,” not vaccines.

Definition of ‘Vaccine’

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1 a vaccine is “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Immunity, in turn, is defined as “Protection from an infectious disease,” meaning that “If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.”

Neither Moderna nor Pfizer claim this to be the case for their COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in their clinical trials, they specify that they will not even test for immunity.

Unlike real vaccines, which use an antigen of the disease you’re trying to prevent, the COVID-19 injections contain synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in a nanolipid carrier compound, the sole purpose of which is to lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein, not the actual virus. 

They do not actually impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected.

As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine, and as noted by David Martin, Ph.D., in the video above, “The legal ramifications of this deception are immense.”

15 U.S. Code Section 41

As explained by Martin, 15 U.S. Code Section 41 of the Federal Trade Commission Act2 is the law that governs advertising of medical practices. This law, which dictates what you may and may not do in terms of promotion, has for many years been routinely used to shut down alternative health practitioners and companies.

“If this law can be used to shut down people of good will, who are trying to help others,” Martin says, “it certainly should be equally applied when we know deceptive medical practices are being done in the name of public health.”

Per this law, it is unlawful to advertise:

“… that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.”3

What Constitutes ‘The Greater Good’?

Martin points to the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts,4 which essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit. To put it bluntly, it argued that it’s acceptable for individuals to be harmed by public health directives provided it benefits the collective.

Now, if vaccination is a public health measure that is supposed to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to a) ensure that the individual who is vaccinated is rendered immune from the disease in question; and b) that the vaccine inhibits transmission of the disease.

Only if these two outcomes can be scientifically proven can you say that vaccination protects and benefits the collective — the population as a whole. This is where we run into problems with the mRNA “vaccines.”

Moderna’s SEC filings, which Martin claims to have carefully reviewed, specifies and stresses that its technology is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its technology was set up to be a cancer treatment, so more specifically, it’s a chemotherapy gene therapy technology.

As noted by Martin, who would raise their hand to receive prophylactic chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer you do not have and may never be at risk for? In all likelihood, few would jump at such an offer, and for good reason.

Moreover, states and employers would not be able to mandate individuals to receive chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer they do not have. It simply would not be legal. Yet, they’re proposing that all of humanity be forced to get gene therapy for COVID-19.

COVID-19 Vaccines — A Case of False Advertising

Now, if the COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine, why are they calling it that? While the CDC provides a definition of “vaccine,” the CDC is not the actual law. It’s an agency empowered by the law, but it does not create law itself. Interestingly enough, it’s more difficult to find a legal definition of “vaccine,” but there have been a few cases. Martin provides the following examples:

Iowa code — “Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity.” Again, the COVID-19 vaccines make no claim of providing immunity. They are only designed to lessen symptoms if and when you get infected.

Washington state code — “Vaccine means a preparation of a killed or attenuated living microorganism, or fraction thereof …” Since Moderna and Pfizer are using synthetic RNA, they clearly do not meet this definition.

Being a manmade synthetic, the RNA used is not derived from anything that has at one point been alive, be it a whole microorganism or a fraction thereof. The statute continues to specify that a vaccine “upon immunization stimulates immunity that protects us against disease …”

So, in summary, “vaccine” and “immunity” are well-defined terms that do not match the end points specified in COVID-19 vaccine trials. The primary end point in these trials is: “Prevention of symptomatic COVID-19 disease.” Is that the same as “immunity”? No, it is not.

There Are More Problems Than One

But there’s another problem. Martin points out that “COVID-19 disease” has been defined as a series of clinical symptoms. Moreover, there’s no causal link between SARS-CoV-2, the virus, and the set of symptoms known as COVID-19.

How is that, you might ask? It’s simple, really. Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease.

Here’s yet another problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 vaccine trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those were measured.

What’s more, key secondary end points in Moderna’s trial include “Prevention of severe COVID-19 disease, and prevention of infection by SARS-CoV-2.” However, by its own admission, Moderna did not actually measure infection, stating that it was too “impractical” to do so.

That means there’s no evidence of this gene therapy having an impact on infection, for better or worse. And, if you have no evidence, you cannot fulfill the U.S. Code requirement that states you must have “competent and reliable scientific evidence … substantiating that the claims are true.”

Why Are They Calling Them Vaccines?

As noted by Martin, you cannot have a vaccine that does not meet a single definition of a vaccine. So, again, what would motivate these companies, U.S. health agencies and public health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci to lie and claim that these gene therapies are in fact vaccines when, clearly, they are not?

If they actually called it what it is, namely “gene therapy chemotherapy,” most people would — wisely — refuse to take it. Perhaps that’s one reason for their false categorization as vaccines. But there may be other reasons as well.

Here, Martin strays into conjecture, as we have no proof of their intentions. He speculates that the reason they’re calling this experimental gene therapy technology a “vaccine” is because by doing so, they can circumvent liability for damages.

As long as the U.S. is under a state of emergency, things like PCR tests and COVID-19 “vaccines” are allowed under emergency use authorization. And as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect, the makers of these experimental gene therapies are not financially liable for any harm that comes from their use.

That is, provided they’re “vaccines.” If these injections are NOT vaccines, then the liability shield falls away, because there is no liability shield for a medical emergency countermeasure that is gene therapy.

So, by maintaining the illusion that COVID-19 is a state of emergency, when in reality it is not, government leaders are providing cover for these gene therapy companies so that they can get immunity from liability.

Under the Cover of ‘Emergency’

As noted by Martin, if state governors were to lift the state of emergency, all of a sudden the use of RT PCR testing would be in violation of 15 U.S. Code FTC Act, as PCR tests are not an approved diagnostic test.

“You cannot diagnose a thing [with something] that cannot diagnose a thing,” Martin says. “That a misrepresentation. That is a deceptive practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. And they’re liable for deceptive practices.”

Importantly, there’s no waiver of liability under deceptive practices — even under a state of emergency. This would also apply to experimental gene therapies. The only way for these gene therapies to enjoy liability shielding is if they are vaccines developed in response to a public health emergency. There is no such thing as immunity from liability for gene therapies.

Propaganda and Vaccine Rollout Run by Same Company

Martin brings up yet another curious point. The middleman in Operation Warp Speed is a North Carolina defense contractor called ATI. It controls the rollout of the vaccine. But ATI also has another type of contract with the Department of Defense, namely managing propaganda and combating misinformation.

So, the same company in charge of manipulating the media to propagate government propaganda and censor counterviews is the same company in charge of the rollout of “vaccines” that are being unlawfully promoted.

“Listen,” Martin says. “This is a pretty straight-forward situation. You’re being lied to. Your own government is violating its own laws … They have thrown this book [15 U.S. Code Section 41] on more people than we can count.

They have shut down practitioners around the country, time and time again, for violating what are called ‘deceptive practices in medical claims’ … Guess what? They’re doing exactly that thing.”

Martin urges listeners to forward his video to your state attorney, governor, representatives and anyone else that might be in a position to take affirmative action to address and correct this fraud.

Defense contractors are violating FTC law, and gene therapy companies — not vaccine manufacturers — are conducting experimental trials under deceptive medical practices. They’re making claims of being “vaccines” without clinical proof, and must be held accountable for their deceptive marketing and medical practices.

CDC Owns Coronavirus Patents

On a side note, the CDC appears to be neck-deep in this scam pandemic, and is therefore wholly unsuitable to investigate the side effects of these experimental COVID-19 therapies. As noted by Martin, it’s like having a bank robber investigate its own crime.

Details about this came out in the documentary “Plandemic,” in which Martin explained how the CDC has broken the law — in one way or another — related to its patenting of the 2003 SARS virus. 

Martin is a national intelligence analyst and founder of IQ100 Index, which developed linguistic genomics, a platform capable of determining the intent of communications. In 1999, IBM digitized 1 million U.S. patents, which allowed Martin’s company to conduct a review of all these patents, sending him down a proverbial “rabbit trail” of corruption.

In 2003, Asia experienced an outbreak of SARS. Almost immediately, scientists began racing to patent the virus. Ultimately, the CDC nabbed ownership of SARS-CoV (the virus responsible for SARS) isolated from humans.

So, the CDC actually owns the entire genetic content of that SARS virus. It’s patented under U.S. patent 7776521. They also own patents for detection methods, and for a kit to measure the virus.

U.S. patent 7279327,5 filed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, describes methods for producing recombinant coronaviruses. Ralph Baric, Ph.D., a professor of microbiology and immunology who is famous for his chimeric coronavirus research, is listed as one of the three inventors, along with Kristopher Curtis and Boyd Yount.

According to Martin, Fauci, Baric and the CDC “are at the hub” of the whole COVID-19 story. “In 2002, coronaviruses were recognized as an exploitable mechanism for both good and ill,” Martin says, and “Between 2003 and 2017, they [Fauci, Baric and CDC] controlled 100% of the cash flow to build the empire around the industrial complex of coronavirus.”

How the CDC Broke the Law

The key take-home message Martin delivers in “Plandemic” is that there’s a distinct problem with the CDC’s patent on SARS-CoV isolated from humans, because, by law, naturally occurring DNA segments are prohibited from being patented.

The law clearly states that such segments are “not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated.” So, either SARS-CoV was manmade, which would render the patent legal, or it’s natural, thus rendering the patent on it illegal.

However, if the virus was manufactured, then it was created in violation of biological weapons treaties and laws. This includes the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and signed into law by George Bush Sr., which states:6

“Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both. There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section committed by or against a national of the United States.”

So, as noted by Martin in the documentary, regardless of which scenario turns out to be true, the CDC has broken the law one way or another, either by violating biological weapons laws, or by filing an illegal patent. Even more egregious, May 14, 2007, the CDC filed a petition with the patent office to keep their coronavirus patent confidential.

Now, because the CDC owns the patent on SARS-CoV, it has control over who has the ability to make inquiries into the coronavirus. Unless authorized, you cannot look at the virus, you cannot measure it or make tests for it, since they own the entire genome and all the rest.

“By obtaining the patents that restrained anyone from using it, they had the means, the motive, and most of all, they had the monetary gain from turning coronavirus from a pathogen to a profit,” Martin says.

Dangers of mRNA Gene Therapy


I’ve written many articles detailing the potential and expected side effects of these gene therapy “vaccines.” If all of this is new to you, consider reviewing “How COVID-19 Vaccine Can Destroy Your Immune System,” “Seniors Dying After COVID Vaccine Labeled as Natural Causes” and “Side Effects and Data Gaps Raise Questions on COVID Vaccine.”

In the lecture above, Dr. Simone Gold — founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, which has been trying to counter the false narrative surrounding hydroxychloroquine — reviews the dangers discovered during previous coronavirus vaccine trials, and the hazards of current mRNA gene therapies, including antibody-dependent immune enhancement.

Antibody-dependent immune enhancement results in more severe disease when you’re exposed to the wild virus, and increases your risk of death. The synthetic RNA and the nanolipid its encased in may also have other, more direct side effects. As explained by Mikovits in our recent interview:

“Normally, messenger RNA is not free in your body because it’s a danger signal. The central dogma of molecular biology is that our genetic code, DNA, is transcribed, written, into the messenger RNA. That messenger RNA is translated into protein, or used in a regulatory capacity … to regulate gene expression in cells.

So, taking a synthetic messenger RNA and making it thermostable — making it not break down — [is problematic]. We have lots of enzymes (RNAses and DNAses) that degrade free RNA and DNA because, again, those are danger signals to your immune system. They literally drive inflammatory diseases.

Now you’ve got PEG, PEGylated and polyethylene glycol, and a lipid nanoparticle that will allow it to enter every cell of the body and change the regulation of our own genes with this synthetic RNA, part of which actually is the message for the gene syncytin …

Syncytin is the endogenous gammaretrovirus envelope that’s encoded in the human genome … We know that if syncytin … is expressed aberrantly in the body, for instance in the brain, which these lipid nanoparticles will go into, then you’ve got multiple sclerosis. 

The expression of that gene alone enrages microglia — literally inflames and dysregulates the communication between the brain microglia — which are critical for clearing toxins and pathogens in the brain and the communication with astrocytes.

It dysregulates not only the immune system, but also the endocannabinoid system, which is the dimmer switch on inflammation. We’ve already seen multiple sclerosis as an adverse event in the clinical trials … We also see myalgic encephalomyelitis. Inflammation of the brain and the spinal cord …”

Making matters worse, the synthetic mRNA also has an HIV envelope expressed in it, which can cause immune dysregulation. As we discussed in previous interviews, SARS-CoV-2 has been engineered in the lab with gain-of-function research that included introducing the HIV envelope into the spike protein.

Are You in a High-Risk Group for Side Effects?

Mikovits’ hypothesis is that those who are most susceptible to severe neurological side effects and death from the COVID-19 vaccines are those who have previously been injected with XMRVs, borrelia, babesia or mycoplasma through contaminated vaccines, resulting in chronic disease, as well as anyone with an inflammatory disease like rheumatoid arthritis, Parkinson’s disease or chronic Lyme disease, for example, and anyone with an acquired immune deficiency from any pathogens and environmental toxins.

The chart below lists 35 diseases that are likely to render you more susceptible to severe side effects or death from COVID-19 gene therapy injections.

diseases associated with XMRV infection

Many of the symptoms now being reported are suggestive of neurological damage. They have severe dyskinesia (impairment of voluntary movement), ataxia (lack of muscle control) and intermittent or chronic seizures. Many cases detailed in personal videos on social media are quite shocking. According to Mikovits, these side effects are due to neuroinflammation, a dysregulated innate immune response, and/or a disrupted endocannabinoid system.

Another common side effect from the vaccine we’re seeing is allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock. A likely culprit in this is PEG (polyethylene glycol), which an estimated 70% of Americans are allergic to.

Experimental Gene Therapy Is a Bad Idea

Circling back to where we began, COVID-19 vaccines are not vaccines. They are experimental gene therapies that are falsely marketed as vaccines, likely to circumvent liability. World governments and global and national health organizations are all complicit in this illegal deception and must be held accountable.

Ask yourself the question Martin asked in his video: Would you agree to take an experimental chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer you do not have? If the answer is no, then why would you even consider lining up for an experimental gene therapy for COVID-19 — a set of clinical symptoms that haven’t even been causally linked to SARS-CoV-2?

These injections are not vaccines. They do not prevent infection, they do not render you immune, and they do not prevent transmission of the disease. Instead, they alter your genetic coding, turning you into a viral protein factory that has no off-switch. What’s happening here is a medical fraud of unprecedented magnitude, and it really needs to be stopped before it’s too late for a majority of people.

WATCH: “The New Normal”

 https://off-guardian.org/2021/01/21/watch-the-new-normal/

Happen.network has released a new documentary entitled The New Normal.

Investigating the origin of the titular phrase – never far from the lips of authority figures across the globe since early 2020 – The New Normal, featuring content from Oracle Films, explores the true purposes behind lockdowns and the inflated pandemic hysteria surrounding Sars-coV-2, and uncovers the origins of a very real and darkly foreboding agenda which might be at the heart of it all. The Great Reset.

Situation Update, Feb. 8th – A philosophical framework for human freedom

 https://www.brighteon.com/af24acc5-d58f-4aba-bcce-97eb0f38ad5e

(Natural News) In today’s Situation Update, I’m announcing a shift of focus for the broadcast. Instead of running down each day’s bad news — which is sure to continue for years — we are laying out real-world solutions for how to protect ourselves from tyranny.

To defend human rights and human freedom, however, we must first understand where rights come from.

Rights do not come from government. This is why no government can legitimately take away your rights, as they were not the source in the first place.

All rights are natural extensions of a very small number of gifts from God. These gifts include the gift of life and the gift of consciousness (free will).

From those gifts — which can only be granted by God, as no government, corporation or person can create life or consciousness — spring a series of natural rights. These rights include:

  • The right to freedom of expression (which springs naturally from the gift of consciousness).
  • The right to say no to medical interventions (which springs naturally from the gift of life and body… i.e. you own your body).
  • The right to self-defense.
  • The right to sound money, which springs naturally from your right to benefit from the product of your conscious labor or creative works.
  • The right to travel freely, without restriction.

… and many more such rights.

In today’s Situation Update, I cover why the future of human freedom rests in codifying these divine rights into local law so that our God-given gifts and rights may be protected even in the face of federal government tyranny.

I also discuss we censorship, coercion, vaccine mandates and fiat currency systems are all expressions of Satanism, while freedom, honest money and the respect of free will are divine principles in alignment with the Creator.

Listen to today’s full podcast to gain this key understanding of the foundations of human freedom and where your rights actually come from.

Kp Radio Hawaii 2-8-21… “BE the BEing of Light that you are”

Theme of the show: “We’re each responsible for our own Energy space… BE the BEing of Light that you are”

Show link

Talked about (among other things):

  • Winter Wonderland” music at the beginning.
  • Enjoying the snow, walking and BEing in it.
  • Very Light, fluffy, snow (not heavy). Perhaps Energies are becoming more “Light” as well.
  • Challenges of the day.
  • Walk in the snow, fun, felt like Light.
  • Whatever we do to bring Inner Joy, to “Lighten” the vibration, can be very helpful.
  • At this time, much is happening, but perhaps time to “step back” from “figuring stuff out”.
  • We’re each responsible for our own Energy space.
  • Others’ perceptions are not mine.
  • Be aware of the “shoulds” or “should nots”.
  • BE the Light that you are.
  • BE the BEing of Light that you are.

Audio player

MP3 download link

[Kp music note: the intro and ending music is “Kaulana na Pua” by Makaha Sons. A translation to English may be found here. (“Famous are the children of Hawai?i… Ever loyal to the land”)]
[Kp 2nd music note: link to video with Winter Wonderland music.]

One million COVID-19 vaccines sent to South Africa put on hold as the vaccine fails basic tests for safety, effectiveness

(Natural News) South African health authorities cannot approve the AstraZeneca/Oxford COVID-19 vaccine in good conscience. The trial data was lacking conclusive evidence to justify the vaccine’s necessity. The vaccine offers minimal protection against mild and moderate infection caused by SARS-CoV-2, better known as the Fauci Virus. There is no guarantee that the protection lasts or whether…