Microcephaly = babies born with small heads and brain impairment.
As I’ve demonstrated in numerous articles, the purported cause of microcephaly, the Zika virus, is completely discredited. There is no science to back it up. In fact, the findings of Brazilian researchers constitute evidence that Zika has nothing to do with microcephaly.
Now we have this: Jerusalem Post (2/2/16), “All eyes on Haifa after damning study results leaked”:
…preliminary results of a University of Haifa study indicating that exposure of pregnant women in the Haifa area to pollution from the petrochemical industry [including an ammonia factory] caused their babies to be born with heads 20 to 30 percent smaller than average.
The five-year study is only a quarter of the way done. The preliminary results were leaked, causing an uproar among residents in the city of Haifa, where cancer rates are five times the national average in some neighborhoods.
Early findings of the five-year study, which has been carried out for only one year so far, were revealed on Sunday night by Channel 2. The study, sponsored by the municipality and the Haifa-area Municipal Association, was financed by the petrochemical industries and the Israel Electric Corporation.
More from the Post article:
The Channel 2 report claimed that the researchers working on the study had demanded to take soil samples from the area to test for possibly carcinogenic materials, but that the Haifa-area Municipal Association, which was among those paying for the research, refused.
Rambam Medical Center, Haifa’s largest hospital, said it was not aware of babies being born with smaller-than-average heads.
So on one side, we have the researchers, who were funded by the petrochemical industry itself, stating that microcephaly is prevalent. On the other side, the local hospital says it’s not.
Facts need to be sorted out, but if this report is true, and the ongoing study continues to validate the early findings, we are looking at one obvious cause of microcephaly. The published literature is clear: any insult to the developing fetal brain can cause microcephaly. Heavy industrial pollution would certainly qualify.
I’ve already reported on several sources of this birth defect in Brazil. They include: toxic pesticides; the Tdap vaccine; a larvicide which was dumped in water supplies; and anti-mosquito indoor sprays.
The Zika virus functions, in fact, as a cover story to divert attention from the true causes of a wide range of birth defects and neurological impairment.
Corporate predators and their profits must be protected.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
“NAGALASE”, the latest weapon against humanity, is suspect in the pandemic of Autism. I would not be shocked to find out that it is also a tool used to subject the unborn fetus to Microcephalia.
im pretty sure NAGLASE is a signature and a byproduct not the actual attack
Read the article…petrochemicals like Glyphosate & in combination with their other deadly toxins quadrupaling the deleterious effects…are the real culprit …as Nagalese is an adjuvant added to the deadly chimera of poisons found now in vaccines, to kill our natural macrophages that inhibit cancer…….as a reflection of the multi-faceted Soft Kill being employed by the new generation scoin of the ol nazis of IG Farben,,, as the ‘Cull of Useless Eaters’ wants our pop. down to 500 million world wide as carved in the Georgia Guide Stones by Ted Turner
Is this your final answer? or would you like to call a friend?
I am only just becoming aware of the extent to which Genocidal Practitioners will go, to effect their goals on humanity. POPULATION REDUCTION has been a dream of the “very few”, for some time. Digging around on sites like “Lincoln Watch, and Activist Post is a stumbling process of education that only pays off when people who know more than I, make contributions and corrections as WE LEARN. Thanks for your help,”John Smith, and Eddysach”. I’ll BE BACK…!
Watch out as well, that with this hysteria, they are going to ring vaccinate scores of populations to cause more problems. We are dealing with mass murderers, a proper Nuremberg
This is what’s behind EVERY “pandemic” scare. You have a better chance of being run over by a city bus driven by an enraged armadillo.
There are many causes of disease but the medical/pharma mafia need the single cause of disease theory. How else are they going to vaccinate against the one cause?
There is no such concept in the medical industry. If that were the case I wouldn’t have worked on projects that have been funded to the total of something like $40 million in my relatively short career–all of which were disease therapies and zero of which were thought to be caused by viruses or bacteria.
Only a “thought sloth” could possibly think that Big Pharma is promoting the idea that there is a single cause of disease.
In fact, when it comes to being accurately described as promoting the idea that disease is rooted in a single, simple cause–isn’t that what your “environment determines disease” theory is more accurately described as?
It’s rather amusing since the medical industry considers environment (internal/external), physical activity, genetics, micro-organisms, diet, psychological state, and senescence to be just a few of the major causes of disease, yet you somehow think that’s single cause despite it including your much more myopic theory?
Talking about orthodox “infectious” disease theory – one germ (the theory goes) means one type of vaccine.
As if your even more narrowly-focused environmental-only theory doesn’t involve avoiding innumerable “toxins” and/or unhealthy activities/substances etc–many of which are associated with particular diseases.
You can’t get around it, Veri. Standard theories literally include internal/external environment as related to a number of diseases. Standard theory just isn’t stupid enough to think that’s all there is to it.
The environment MEANS avoiding toxins, etc. It also includes nutrients, make up the “environment” / terrain.
The petri dish experiments with ‘germs’, even those of the distant past, have clearly demonstrated that the environment in which germs are cultured makes them change from benign to pathogenic and vice versa. Same in the body.
Environment IS the prime determinant of health/disease.
“If a particular “infectious” germ is supposedly the cause of a specific disease, then everyone coming into contact with it should develop that disease.”
Not even remotely true, Veri. I’m sorry that you don’t seem to realize I have already explained to you why that isn’t the case. As much as I love repeating myself to people that aren’t even bright enough to realize an issue has already been addressed, I’ll hold off unless you actually bother going back and rebutting the aforementioned explanation.
“Same applies to the genetic cause of disease theory. It used to be “god’s will,” now its our genes – not.”
Are you retarded? Some genetic diseases are so well-characterized that we even know how they exert their effects across generations. Go read about Huntington’s disease if you wish to learn about an obviously genetic disease…
I’m sorry, Veri, but reality isn’t some mystical utopia where everything in nature exists in a perfect state and in perfect harmony with the rest of nature. You’re Disney-fying health, lol!
Genetics Dogma – Another example of bad science (like the flying virus theory):
In “Tangled Strands In The Double Helix”, M. Ridley (Nature 2000, 406:347-348), for example, the genetics dogma is described as ‘bad science,’ as there’s quite obviously an environment-gene interaction.
In “Habitat Seen Playing Larger Role in Shaping Behavior” D Normile (Science, 1998, 279:1454-1455) discussed the major role of environment over genes.
In “Epigenetics: REgulation Through Repression” AP Wolffe & AM Matzke (Science, 1999, 286:481-486) discuss how so-called acquired characteristics passed from parent to child occur without any changes in DNA coding. In other words, environment controls genes through epigentic mechanisms.
In “Epigenetic Reprogramming in Mammalian Development” W Reik et al (Science 2001, 293:1089-1093) describe how environmental programs or epigenetic control mechanisms are erased and reset in embryonic development.
In “What Maintains Memories?” JE Lisman & JR Fallon (Science 11999 283:339-340) discusses holism vs reductionism with respect to cell information pathways.
Time Magazine’s title page of Jan 2010 read: Why Your DNA Isn’t Your Destiny
In the book: Epigenetics – The Death of the Genetic Theory of Disease Transmission by J Wallach, M Lan & G Schrauzer they cite an example of a disease once thought to be caused by ‘faulty genes’ (much like the flying virus fairytale):
Cystic Fibrosis – which in monkeys could be induced just with a selenium deficient diet!
The same applies to Keshan Disease (KSD) – previously thought to be due to genetics. The Chinese conducted large-scale double blind supplementation studies confirming that selenium deficiency was the cause of this disease as well.
Continued long-term studies involving over 500,000 participants confirmed that supplemental selenium was specific for preventing and curing KSD.
A quote by Bruce Lipton:
“The brain of the cell is its skin, the mem-brane, the interface of the interior of the cell and the ever-changing world we live in. It is the functional element that controls life. This is important because understanding its function reveals that we are not victims of our genes.”
“The cell is a chip and that the nucleus was a hard disk with programs. The genes were programs. … a computer is like a cell. It has programs built into it but what was expressed by the computer was not determined by the programs. It was determined by the information that [the keyboard operator], as the environment, was typing onto the keyboard.”
It’s not our genes which determine outcomes but the feedback of information from the envionment – i.e. nutrition, toxins, emotions, etc.
In, “I’m going to copy a bunch of crap I don’t understand,” Veri Tard:
1. Pretends that somebody here and/or scientists thinks genes are the sole determinant of all diseases with any genetic component. It’s like she’s never head a scientist utter the word “genotoxic” before.
2. Ignores that there is an entire spectrum of genetic diseases ranging from ENTIRELY due to genetics to any exogenous entity altering gene expression.
3. Pretends that epigenetics having a role in some heritable diseases somehow changes the fact that it has no role in other heritable diseases.
4. Imagines that cystic fibrosis is caused by selenium deficiency when the only guy who claims to have evidence of this is a supplement pusher (Big Supple, lol!)–and when basically every paper ever published has found evidence that selenium deficiency causes or cures CF.
5. Thinks that bringing up a disease that has no genetics-based theory proves anything other than that there is at least one disease that isn’t caused by genetic (duh).
As for your list of quotes.
1. You do realize that the cellular membrane’s ability to interact with the environment is largely dependent on the synthesis of proteins encoded by genes, correct? You dog’s photoreceptors are not as diverse as those found in humans, due in no small part to genetics, thus his ability to be influenced by the environment differs from a humans. This truth holds for thousands of biological interactions at the cell surface in humans. Nothing short of exposure to a mutagen/teratogen during organism development can change the fact that the environment can’t do anything other than modulate the functions of what already exists.
2. The computer analogy is poorly contrived. The user can control what is displayed, but what is displayed is limited by the software and the hardware. The software determines HOW the computer can react to input, and the environment can only influence it within those constraints.
“It’s not our genes which determine outcomes but the feedback of information from the envionment – i.e. nutrition, toxins, emotions, etc.”
It’s both. Genetics affects how the body reacts to nutrients and nutrients modulate gene function. Genetics largely determine what is toxic, and many varieties of toxins are only toxic if genetics built a system that was disrupted by them. Emotions are also largely influenced by genetics since they are what determine the general form and distributions of neurons and receptors that modulate and interpret emotion.
As I told you once already, Veri. Your concept of genetics is about as infantile as what’s found in anime from the 90s. Your entire argument against it relies on your ridiculous belief that scientists actually believe in your laughably oversimplified version of genetics.
The industry that derives its profits from the genetic cause of disease theory is making the health vs disease issue more complex than it needs to be.
The primacy of DNA in influencing and regulating biological behavior and evolution is based upon an unfounded assumption. A seminal article by H. F. Nijhout (BioEssays 1990, 12 (9):441-446) describes how concepts concerning genetic “controls” and “programs” were originally conceived as metaphors to help define and direct avenues of research. Widespread repetition of this compelling hypothesis over fifty years has resulted in the “metaphor of the model” becoming the “truth of the mechanism,” in spite of the absence of substantiative supporting evidence.
Since the assumption emphasizes the genetic program as the “top rung” on the biological control ladder, genes have acquired the status of causal agents in eliciting biological expression and behavior (e.g., genes causing cancer, alcoholism, even criminality).
The notion that the nucleus and its genes are the “brain” of the cell is an untenable and illogical hypothesis. If the brain is removed from an animal, disruption of physiologic integration would immediately lead to the organism’s death. If the nucleus truly represented the brain of the cell, then removal of the nucleus would result in the cessation of cell functions and immediate cell death. However, experimentally enucleated cells may survive for two or more months with out genes, and yet are capable of effecting complex responses to environmental and cytoplasmic stimuli (Lipton, et al., Differentiation 1991, 46:117-133). Logic reveals that the nucleus can not be the brain of the cell!
Veri predictably copies yet another retarded essay by an idiot that doesn’t understand genetics or the associate research.
As much as I’d love to explain it to you, all you’ll do is ignore it and copy more things you don’t understand in response.
You should be ashamed of how intellectually lazy you are, Veri.
I mean, you literally just copied a guy making a hilarious argument equating the role of an organism’s brain to the role of DNA in order to attack a nice little straw man, lol!
No wonder you think genetic theories are ridiculous–you don’t even understand them at their most basic, lol!!!!!!
You’ve not mentioned the large-scale and long-term studies with so-called “genetic” Keshan disease patients who were cured with a simple supplement (selenium). Here’s proof that your genetic cause of disease theory is wrong!
Also, you arrogantly dismissed Dr J Bland’s research who is the lead author of over 100 peer-reviewed research papers on nutritional biochemistry. He has degrees in biology and chemistry and a PhD in synthetic organic chemistry; he is a nutritional biochemist and registered clinical laboratory director and has held the position of professor of biochemistry at the University of Puget Sound, as well as Director of Nutritional Research at the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine.
Hardly someone to dismiss when it comes to research into how to cure disease with nutrition, you fool.
Nor can you dismiss the vast body of research into epigenetic causes of disease – those causes that override any role genes may play.
The altar at which you worship your erroneous, twisted and poisonous “medicine” is crumbling, along with your fuddy-duddy cronyist methods of interacting in the world.
There are only two causes of disease: Toxaemia and nutritional deficiency.
“You’ve not mentioned the large-scale and long-term studies with so-called “genetic” Keshan disease patients who were cured with a simple supplement (selenium).”
Actually, I did, Veri. Allow me to quote myself referencing that disease, “Thinks that bringing up a disease that has no genetics-based theory proves anything other than that there is at least one disease that isn’t caused by genetics (duh).”
I’m not sure what you’re high on, Veri, but Keshan disease has been thought to have been caused by a combination of selenium deficiency and a particular virus since the 80s–and the preferred intervention has always been selenium supplementation or improved nutrition. (as opposed to your usual claim that the pharmaceutical industry would push a vaccine in such cases).
“Also, you arrogantly dismissed Dr J Bland’s research” Uhhhh, no I didn’t, lol!
YOU DID THOUGH, LOL!!!!
Dr. Bland’s functional medicine literally involves taking genetic predispositions into account for developing personalized therapies….LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Veri, SERIOUSLY, you need to learn what the heck you’re copying.
Just to drive home how self-defeating it was of you to bring up Jeffrey Bland…
HE BELIEVES VIRUSES AND GENETICS CAN CAUSE DISEASE.
The dude wrote all about 23andMe testing for cystic fibrosis and the role of Herpes and genes in Alzheimers.
…but please, kiddo. Invoke the guy who disagrees with you while claiming that I’m dismissing him, lol! It’s great comic value, in a tragic way, I suppose…
Thus, from here on out, since explaining things to you is futile, I will just point out which idol you adore would not agree.
“There are only two causes of disease: Toxaemia and nutritional deficiency.”
Jeffery Bland disagrees, you fool.
“Nor can you dismiss the vast body of research into epigenetic causes of disease – those causes that override any role genes may play.”
Jeffrey Bland disagrees, you fool.
“The altar at which you worship your erroneous, twisted and poisonous ”
And you’re such a ‘tard that you can’t even attack my actual views or understand those of the people you invoke.
Keshan and a variety of diseases were thought to be genetic until research into nutrition was conducted and found nutritional deficiencies to be the cause.
The fact that there are genetic polymorphisms is not denied, however, the reality that environmental factors (toxicity & nutrient depletion) are still the cause of disease, all other factors being equal, is still asserted.
An example might be the MTHFR gene in autistic children – 98% of autistic children are said to have the MTHFR genetic mutation.
HOWEVER, it is toxic exposures via vaccines and other means which induce these genes to be switched on.
Again, it’s the environment, stupid!
Pellagra, a disease caused by a vitamin (niacin) deficiency, is another example: Initially it was thought to have been caused by a “germ.”
Today, we know it’s yet another nutritional deficiency disease.
“Keshan and a variety of diseases were thought to be genetic until research into nutrition was conducted and found nutritional deficiencies to be the cause.”
Lol, Veri. If anyone had actually built a case that Keshan was a genetic disease you should be able to point me to papers identifying the actual genetic mechanism for the disease, correct? I don’t even come across people GUESSING that it might be genetic, much less actually saying it was.
This is in stark contrast to other diseases like CF and Huntington’s where the actual genetic defect is well-known.
“the reality that environmental factors (toxicity & nutrient depletion) are still the cause of disease, all other factors being equal, is still asserted.”
Assert it until you’re blue in the face. Many heritable diseases do not require exposure to toxins or nutrient depletion. Only a freaking moron would fail to see how stupid it is to claim that one disease being linked to a nutrient deficiency means that ALL of them are either related that or toxin exposure. Especially when you’re making a fallacious claim about it initially being genetic, lol!
Some diseases work like that, Veri. Not all of them, lol!
“An example might be the MTHFR gene in autistic children”
You really don’t get it, do you? EVERY SCIENTIST ON EARTH knows that some disorders are only related to genetics in that they predispose people to acquiring a disease. Autism is one of those classes of disease.
Let’s put it this way to show you how stupid your logic is. Vitamin C deficiency causes scurvy, therefore all diseases must be caused by vitamin C deficiency. That is literally the argument you are using. Keshan disease is caused by malnutrition, therefore all diseases must be caused by ONLY things Veri Tas thinks cause diseases.
If you want to prove a point, show me how the diseases I pointed to as being entirely genetic are not.
“HOWEVER, it is toxic exposures via vaccines and other means which induce these genes to be switched on.”
Says the guy who cited a Dr. who believes in gentically-determined diseases and pathological viruses and didn’t even realize it (as usual).
I’m sorry, but you’re freaking hilarious. It takes a special breed of stupid for someone to stand up in front of a person who recognizes that diseases have a host of causes and then assert that it’s only malnutrition and toxin exposure because there are a handful of such diseases, while flat-out ignoring the examples of diseases with well known genetic causes.
For the last time: Environment trumps genes. Got it?
If the expression of our genetic code were fixed then identical twins would remain identical throughout life and develop similar diseases.
However, that’s not the case, as twin studies have shown.
Moreover, as twins age, their DNA actually becomes more dissimilar.
Hence, different phenotypes can be originated from the same genotype.
Human Genes are Turned On and Off by Diet – John McDougall, MD
Genetic Science Learning Center
Epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins
Over and out.
“For the last time: Environment trumps genes. Got it?”
For the last time, no matter how much you repeat yourself and copy things you don’t comprehend, that will NEVER be true for ALL DISEASES.
GOT IT? I keep giving you examples where genes trump environment, and you just IGNORE THEM ALL, LOL!!!!
“If the expression of our genetic code were fixed then identical twins would remain identical throughout life and develop similar diseases.”
And in many diseases, they do. Look up PENETRANCE.
In a disease with less than 100% penetrance, you can see variability in disease phenotype between twins–but alas Veri, some diseases have 100% penetrance.
And in many cases the environmental triggers have nothing to do with diet as it does in your dream world.
Face it, Veri. Humans are imperfect organisms. Sometimes things just break and there’s no magical nutrient that will fix them.
Since you are too obstinate to listen to anything I actually say, how about I make an argument using one of YOUR authorities.
“Cancer is a constellation of diseases that can occur as the result of cellular malfunction and abnormal cellular division—oncogenesis—which reflects a systemic alteration that is the body’s response to genetic triggers, environmental influences, or in many cases a combination of the two.”
Get it? Your idol literally agrees with what I’ve been telling you, lol!
AND HE BELIEVES IN VIRUSES TOO!!!!!