The Gary Null Show

Higher vitamin D levels linked to longer telomeres: Study

Harvard Medical School and University of Tromsoe (Norway), February 10, 2022

Increased levels of vitamin D are associated with longer telomeres, reported to be a marker of biological aging, says a new study.

Every 10-nmol increase in levels of 25- hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), the non-active 'storage' form of the vitamin) was associated with a 0.03-kbp longer telomere in leukocytes in middle-aged adults, according to data extracted from the National Healthand Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2001–2002.

The findings, published in the Journal of Nutrition , show correlation and not causation, but could have implications for our understanding of healthy aging and potential cancer risk reduction.

The scientists analyzed data from 1,542 younger adults aged between 20 and 39, 1,336 middle-aged adults aged between 40 and 59, and 1,382 adults 60 and over.

After adjusting the numbers to account for potentially confounders such as gender, race/ethnicity, BMI, and other factors, the researchers found that 25(OH)D levels of at least 50 nmol/L were associated with 0.13-kbp longer LTL in middle-aged adults with, compared with the same aged adults with 25(OH)D levels less than 50 nmol/L.

The results also presented a potential mechanism of action for the reported anti-cancer effects of vitamin D, which were first proposed in 1941 when Frank Apperly demonstrated a link between latitude and deaths from cancer, and suggested that sunlight gave "a relative cancer immunity".

Seoul National University (South Korea), February 3,2022

We aimed to investigate the link of vitamin C status with vitality and psychological functions in a cross-sectional study, and examine their causal relationship through a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

We first conducted a population-based cross-sectional investigation of healthy young adults (n = 214, 20–39 years), and analyzed the associations of serum vitamin C concentrations with vitality (fatigue and attention) and mood status (stress, depression, and positive and negative affect) using Pearson’s correlation and multiple linear regression analyses. Next, we performed a double-blind RCT in healthy subjects whose serum vitamin C concentrations were inadequate (

Eating prunes may help protect against bone loss in older women

Penn State University, February 9, 2022

It’s already well known that prunes are good for your gut, but new Penn State research suggests they may be good for bone health, too. In a research review, the researchers found that prunes can help prevent or delay bone loss in postmenopausal women, possibly due to their ability to reduce inflammation and oxidative stress, both of which contribute to bone loss. “In postmenopausal women, lower levels of estrogen can trigger a rise of oxidative stress and inflammation, increasing the risk of weakening bones that may lead to fractures,” said Connie Rogers, associate professor of nutritional sciences and physiology. “Incorporating prunes into the diet may help protect bones by slowing or reversing this process.”

(NEXT)

Can correcting micronutrient deficiencies help treat heart failure? 

University Medical Center Groningen (Netherlands), February 9, 2022

A review published in the Journal of Internal Medicine provides convincing evidence that micronutrients—including iron, selenium, zinc, copper, and coenzyme Q10—can impact the function of cardiac cells’ energy-producing mitochondria to contribute to heart failure. The findings suggest that micronutrient supplementation could represent an effective treatment for heart failure. “Micronutrient deficiency has a high impact on mitochondrial energy production and should be considered an additional factor in the heart failure equation, moving our view of the failing heart away from “an engine out of fuel” to “a defective engine on a path to self-destruction,” said co–lead author Nils Bomer, PhD, of the University Medical Center Groningen.

(NEXT)

Could meditation reduce brain aging?

University of California-Los Angeles   February 7, 2022 

It is common knowledge that the brain deteriorates as we age, causing functional impairments. You may be surprised to learn that this process usually begins during mid-to-late-20s. But before you panic, a new study suggests a potential way to reduce such deterioration: meditation. The research team at the Brain Mapping Center at the University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA), found meditation may be associated with better preservation of gray matter in the brain – the neuron-containing tissue responsible for processing information. The researchers recruited 100 subjects to the study aged 24-77. Of these, 50 had meditated for between 4 and 46 years and 50 had never engaged in the practice. Both groups were closely matched for age.

(NEXT)

The Power Of Tea

Washington University, February 6, 2022

A compound found in green tea could have life saving potential for patients with multiple myeloma and amyloidosis, who face often-fatal medical complications associated with bone-marrow disorders, according to a team of engineers at Washington University in St. Louis and their German collaborators. Jan Bieschke, assistant professor of biomedical engineering  says the compound epigallocatechine-3-gallate (EGCG), a polyphenol found in green tea leaves, may be of particular benefit to patients struggling with multiple myeloma and amyloidosis. These patients are susceptible to a frequently fatal condition called light chain amyloidosis, in which parts of the body’s own antibodies become misshapen and can accumulate in various organs, including the heart and kidneys.

(NEXT)

Changing your diet could add up to a decade to life expectancy, study finds

University of Bergen (Norway), February 8, 2022

A young adult in the U.S. could add more than a decade to their life expectancy by changing their diet from a typical Western diet to an optimized diet that includes more legumes, whole grains and nuts, and less red and processed meat, according to a new study published  in PLOS Medicine. For older people, the anticipated gains to life expectancy from such dietary changes would be smaller but still substantial. In the new study, researchers used existing meta-analyses and data from the Global Burden of Diseases study to build a model that enables the instant estimation of the effect on life expectancy (LE) of a range of dietary changes.

(VIDEOS)

Every news media who secretly took Trudeau’s $61M pre-election pay-off – (13 minutes)

Mary Holland – Protect Our Children (3:44 minutes)

Canadian truckers are ‘doing something wonderful for the world’ says Brendan O’Neill

(OTHER NEWS)

How Fact Checking Is Controlled and Faked

Epoch Times, February 09, 2022

Prior to 2015 or 2016, you could still read what you wanted online without much interference. This has since changed, as propagandists have infiltrated the media and, along with other major players, like Big Tech and government, set out to control information. Fact-checking — a once-obscure term that’s since gone mainstream — is one part of the campaign to control what you see online, and therefore what you think and how you perceive reality — but it’s all a ruse. Speaking with Jan Jekielek, The Epoch Times senior editor and host of the show “American Thought Leaders,” investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson explains how virtually everything you see and hear online has been co-opted, or taken over to serve a greater agenda:1 “One has to understand that nearly every mode of information has been co-opted, if it can be co-opted by some group. Fact checks are no different either, they’ve been coopted in many instances or created for the purpose of distributing narratives and propaganda. And your common sense is accurate when it tells you that the way they chose this fact check and how they decided to word it so they could say this thing is not true when at its heart it really is true, but the message they’re trying to send is that you shouldn’t believe it, your common sense is right. That’s been created as part of a propaganda effort by somebody, somewhere, as part of a narrative to distribute to the public so virtually every piece of information that can be co-opted has been.” The Information Landscape Is Being Controlled Attkisson calls out several common online sources that are heavily manipulated — Wikipedia, Snopes and most “fact” checkers to name a few, along with HealthFeedback.org, which is a fake science group used by Facebook and other Big Tech companies to debunk science that is actually true. Fact checkers are often referred to as scientists, but this, too, is “part of a very well-funded, well-organized landscape that dictates and slants the information they want us to have.” While there have always been efforts to shape the information being given out by the media, it used to be that news reporters would push back against organizations to ensure the public had the other side of the story. Beginning in the early 2000s, Attkisson noted a shift from efforts to simply shape information to those that attempt to keep certain information from being reported at all. This was particularly true among the pharmaceutical companies she was covering at that time. Attkisson described “efforts by these large global PR firms that have been hired by the pharmaceutical industry, by government partners that work with the pharmaceutical industry, to keep the story from being reported at all.”2 Now, instead of real journalists and reporters, the media is infiltrated with propagandists who dictate what’s “fake news” and what’s not. Many believe that fake news is a product of Trump, but Big Tech was brought into the campaign early on. A lobby campaign by behind-the-scenes propagandists met with Facebook and said you’ve got to start censoring and “fact” checking information, Attkisson said. Attkisson states that it goes much deeper. A lot of propagandists have become part of the media, and while there used to be a firewall between reporters and the people they reported on, “that’s long gone.” She says:6 “We’ve not just invited them to influence what we report, but we’ve hired them, not just as pundits and analysts but they are reporters. They are editorial presences within our newsrooms. Now we are one and the same. It’s hard to say that there’s a distinctive difference in many instances between the people trying to get out a message and the messengers in the media who should be doing a more independent job of reporting accurately.” Reality Is Being Altered in Real Time As it stands, information is being changed in real time to meet the common agenda. This includes definitions in dictionaries and on official government websites. Examples of definitions that have been changed recently include those for pandemic, herd immunity, vaccines and anti-vaxxer. Attkisson reiterates:17 “Virtually every form of information and sourcing that can be co-opted has been. That includes the dictionary definitions; that includes everything because these are important ways to influence thought. Language is very powerful. People don’t want to be affiliated with certain names and labels. It reminds me of ‘1984,’ the George Orwell story about the futuristic society, under which history was being rewritten in real time to jive with the version that the government wanted or the party wanted it to be. Definitions now are being rewritten and changed in real time to fit with the vision that the establishment wants people to think.” The Truth Finds a Way To Be Told While there are powerful forces at play to control information, all is not lost. Attkisson is aware of three entities that are actively working on a solution, which include: Investors who want to invest in independent news organizations Technical people trying to invent platforms that can’t be controlled and deplatformed by Big Tech Journalists who want to work or contribute to these efforts Outlets like Substack newsletters and the video platforms Rumble, Bitchute and Odysee, which don’t censor videos for ideological reasons, are actively getting around the censorship of Big Tech, and Attkisson believes that these efforts will accelerate in the next couple of years. Further, she says, “The propagandists may have overplayed their hand by being so heavy-handed and obvious about the control of information and the censorship. It’s no longer deniable. Even people who want their information curated, they can’t always be happy with the notion that they’re not going to be able to get the full story, or that they’re only getting one side of something.”24 Ultimately, she adds, “I think the truth finds a way to be told … it may take some time and there may be a lot of people that don’t want the truth out, but we inherently as humans seek it.”25 On a personal level, you can go a long way toward finding the truth by following your own common sense and reason, and Attkisson agrees. “I always say, do your own research, make up your own mind, think for yourself. Trust your cognitive dissonance, use your common sense. You’re going to be right more often than you think, but open up your mind, read a lot, think a lot and don’t buy into the prevailing narrative at face value.”

(NEXT)

Opioid Overdose Deaths Cost U.S. Economy $1 Trillion A Year, Study Finds

Forbes, February 8, 2022

Opioid overdose deaths cost the U.S. economy $1 trillion a year, the U.S. Commission on Combating Synthetic Opioid Trafficking said Tuesday, a “staggering amount” it says underlines the “direct and escalating threat” the opioid epidemic poses to the economy, public health and safety and national security. The panel came up with the estimate based on a White House Council of Economic Advisors’ 2018 report that determined the cost of overdose fatalities amounted to $696 billion a year at a time when the death toll was about two thirds of today’s. Between June 2020 and May 2021, 100,000 Americans died from drug overdoses, 30% higher than the year before and more than double the number of deaths caused by car accidents or gun violence during that period. About two thirds of those deaths involved synthetic opioids like fentanyl and primarily affected victims between the ages of 15 and 45, the report says. The loss of productivity and increases in healthcare and criminal justice costs tied to opioid overdose deaths amounted to a cost of about $700 billion per year in 2016 and 2017, according to the report. More fatal opioid overdoses. More than 1.2 million Canadians and Americans will die from opioid overdoses by 2029 if the epidemic is not tamed, a group of leading health experts wrote in a report published last week. 

Grapes could help protect against cognitive decline

University of California, Los Angeles - February 06 2022.

The January issue of Experimental Gerontology published the finding of researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles of a protective effect for powdered grape against a decline in brain metabolism in older adults. The results of the investigation suggest that eating grapes might contribute to the prevention of Alzheimer's disease. The study included ten men and women with mild cognitive decline. Participants were given freeze-dried grape powder or a placebo similar in flavor and appearance but lacking beneficial grape polyphenols. The grape powders, which provided the equivalent of three servings of grapes per day, were mixed with water and consumed in divided daily doses for six months. Cognitive performance and changes in brain metabolism as assessed by PET scans were evaluated before and after the treatment period.

(NEXT)

Loneliness associated with increased risk of dementia in older adults

New York University, February 7, 2022

As social isolation in the United States has been increasing among older adults, a new study shows a notable link between loneliness and dementia risk, and one that is most striking for Americans who represent a large part of the population. In the study publishing February 7 in Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology,researchers found a three-fold increase in risk of subsequent dementia among lonely Americans younger than 80 years old who would otherwise be expected to have a relatively low risk based on age and genetic risk factors. The study also found that loneliness was associated with poorer executive function (i.e., a group of cognitive processes including decision-making, planning, cognitive flexibility, and control of attention) and changes in the brain that indicate vulnerability to Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD).

(NEXT)

Dietary total antioxidant capacity and mortality outcomes: the Singapore Chinese Health Study

Huazhong University of Science and Technology (China), February 1, 2022

To evaluate the relations of dietary total antioxidant capacity (DTAC) with mortality outcomes in a Chinese population. The study included 62,063 participants from the Singapore Chinese Health Study. The participants were 45–74 years at baseline (1993–1998) when dietary data were collected with a validated 165-item food frequency questionnaire. During 1,212,318 person-years of follow-up, 23,397 deaths [cardiovascular diseases (CVD): 7523; respiratory diseases: 4696; and cancer: 7713] occurred. In multivariable models, the HR (95% CI) comparing participants in the highest vs. lowest quartile of CDAI was 0.85 for all-cause mortality, 0.82 for CVD mortality, 0.76 for respiratory disease mortality  and 0.94 for cancer mortality  Similar associations were found with the VCEAC index. Higher intakes of the DTAC components, i.e., vitamin C, vitamin E, carotenoids, and flavonoids, were all associated with lower mortality risk.

(NEXT)

Healthy lifestyle equals bigger brain

Yale University School of Medicine, February 4 2022.

Research findings scheduled to be reported at the American Stroke Association’s International Stroke Conference 2022  demonstrated that adherence to Life’s Simple 7 lifestyle behaviors is associated with greater brain volume and fewer indicators of damage among middle-aged men and women. The study included 35,914 participants enrolled in the UK Biobank. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain measured brain volume and white matter hyperintensity volume.

(NEXT)

No time to exercise? What about three seconds a day?

Edith Cowan University (Australia) and Niigata University (Japan), February 7, 2022

Lifting weights for as little as three seconds a day can have a positive impact on muscle strength, a new study from Edith Cowan University (ECU) has discovered. A collaboration with researchers from Niigata University of Health and Welfare (NUHW) in Japan had 39 healthy university students perform one muscle contraction at maximum effort for three seconds per day, for five days a week over four weeks. The participants performed either an isometric, concentric or eccentric bicep curl (see definitions below) at maximum effort, while researchers measured the muscles' maximum voluntary contraction strengthbefore and after the four-week period. Another 13 students performed no exercise over the same period and were also measured before and after the four weeks. Muscle strength increased more than 10 percent for the group who performed the eccentric bicep curl after the four weeks, but less increase in muscle strength was found for the other two exercise groups. The no exercise group saw no increase. The study shows all three lifting methods had some benefit to muscle strength, however eccentric contraction easily produced the best results.

(OTHER NEWS)

Dystopia Disguised as Democracy: All the Ways in Which Freedom Is an Illusion

John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead, February 8, 2022

We are no longer free. We are living in a world carefully crafted to resemble a representative democracy, but it’s an illusion. We think we have the freedom to elect our leaders, but we’re only allowed to participate in the reassurance ritual of voting. There can be no true electoral choice or real representation when we’re limited in our options to one of two candidates culled from two parties that both march in lockstep with the Deep State and answer to an oligarchic elite. We think we have freedom of speech, but we’re only as free to speak as the government and its corporate partners allow. We think we have the right to freely exercise our religious beliefs, but those rights are quickly overruled if and when they conflict with the government’s priorities, whether it’s COVID-19 mandates or societal values about gender equality, sex and marriage. We think we have the freedom to go where we want and move about freely, but at every turn, we’re hemmed in by laws, fines and penalties that regulate and restrict our autonomy, and surveillance cameras that monitor our movements. Punitive programs strip citizens of their passports and right to travel over unpaid taxes. We think we have property interests in our homes and our bodies, but there can be no such freedom when the government can seize your property, raid your home, and dictate what you do with your bodies. We think we have the freedom to defend ourselves against outside threats, but there is no right to self-defense against militarized police who are authorized to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, and granted immunity from accountability with the general blessing of the courts. Certainly, there can be no right to gun ownership in the face of red flag gun laws which allow the police to remove guns from people merely suspected of being threats. We think we have the right to an assumption of innocence until we are proven guilty, but that burden of proof has been turned on its head by a surveillance state that renders us all suspects and overcriminalization which renders us all lawbreakers. Police-run facial recognition software that mistakenly labels law-abiding citizens as criminals. A social credit system (similar to China’s) that rewards behavior deemed “acceptable” and punishes behavior the government and its corporate allies find offensive, illegal or inappropriate. We think we have the right to due process, but that assurance of justice has been stripped of its power by a judicial system hardwired to act as judge, jury and jailer, leaving us with little recourse for appeal. A perfect example of this rush to judgment can be found in the proliferation of profit-driven speed and red light cameras that do little for safety while padding the pockets of government agencies. By gradually whittling away at our freedoms—free speech, assembly, due process, privacy, etc.—the government has, in effect, liberated itself from its contractual agreement to respect the constitutional rights of the citizenry while resetting the calendar back to a time when we had no Bill of Rights to protect us from the long arm of the government. We’ve bartered away our right to self-governance, self-defense, privacy, autonomy and that most important right of all: the right to tell the government to “leave me the hell alone.” In exchange for the promise of safe streets, safe schools, blight-free neighborhoods, lower taxes, lower crime rates, and readily accessible technology, health care, water, food and power, we’ve opened the door to militarized police, government surveillance, asset forfeiture, school zero tolerance policies, license plate readers, red light cameras, SWAT team raids, health care mandates, overcriminalization and government corruption. In the end, such bargains always turn sour. We can no longer maintain the illusion of freedom.

(NEXT)

Preventive Use of Ivermectin Reduced COVID Mortality by 90%, Study Found

A peer-reviewed study published last month found the prophylactic use of ivermectin reduced COVID mortality by 90% among more than 223,000 study participants in a town in Southern Brazil.

David Charbonneau, Ph.D., February 7, 2022

A peer-reviewed study published last month found the prophylactic use of ivermectin reduced COVID mortality by 90% among more than 223,000 study participants in a town in Southern Brazil. The study, published in the Cureus Journal of Medical Science, also found a 44% reduction in COVID cases among those who took the re-purposed drug. Between July 7, 2020, and Dec. 2, 2020, all residents of Itajaí were offered ivermectin. Approximately 3.7% of ivermectin users contracted COVID during the trial period, compared with 6.6% of residents who didn’t take the drug. Based on the results, Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, one of the study’s lead authors, said, “Ivermectin must be considered as an option, particularly during outbreaks.” Dr Pierre Kory said: “You would think this would lead to major headlines everywhere. And yet, nothing. And this is not new, this censorship of this highly effective science and evidence around repurposed drugs. The censoring of it, it’s not new, it’s just getting more and more absurd. And it has to stop.” Kory said it’s not even about ivermectin, “it’s about the pharmaceutical industry’s capture of our agencies and how our policies are all directed at suppressing and avoiding use of re-purposed drugs” in favor of high-profit medicines.

Natural mineral may help reverse memory loss

University of Queensland (Australia), February 7, 2022

Selenium—a mineral found in many foods—could reverse the cognitive impact of stroke and boost learning and memory in aging brains, according to University of Queensland research. Queensland Brain Institute (QBI) lead researcher Dr. Tara Walker said studies on the impact of exercise on the aging brain found levels of a protein key to transporting selenium in the blood were elevated by physical activity. The research team investigated whether dietary selenium supplements could replicate the effects of exercise.

(NEXT)

Poor sleep can triple risk for heart disease

University of South Florida, February 7, 2022

Individual aspects of poor sleep can be detrimental to heart health. But if you combine them, the risk of heart disease can increase by as much as 141 percent. That’s the finding of a new study published in the journal Scientific Reports. The University of South Florida-led study reviewed sleep data of 6,820 U.S. adults with an average age of 53 who self-reported their sleep characteristics and heart diseasehistory. Among the participants, 633 also wore a research device (actigraphy) around their wrist that captured sleep activity.

(NEXT)

Curcumin-pepper combination shows antioxidant benefits for diabetics: RCT

Baqiyatallah, Shiraz and Mashhad universities (Iran), February 7, 2022

Curcumin and Piperine may reduce oxidative stress in patients suffering from type 2 diabetes, according to results of a randomized controlled trial. Clinical data published in the PubMed-listed journal Inflammopharmacology shows for the first time that the curcuminoid–piperine combination supplement may impact measures of oxidative stress in type 2 diabetes.Results showed that the curcuminoid-piperine combination resulted in an 21.9% reduction in MDA levels, compared to baseline levels, while no statistically significant changes were observed in the placebo group. In addition, the curcuminoid-piperine combination increased SOD and TAC levels by 11.6% and 21.1%, respectively, compared to baseline. On the other hand, these decreased by 12.6% and 17%, respectively in the placebo group, compared to placebo. 

(VIDEOS)

Here is Glen Greenwald talking with Howard Kurtz

Trudeau’s Brother Kyle Kemper takes Firm Stance against the Vaccine Mandate and “The Great Reset”

(OTHER NEWS)

Colossal Financial Pyramid: BlackRock and The WEF “Great Reset”

F. William Engdahl – Global Research, June 20, 2021

A virtually unregulated investment firm today exercises more political and financial influence than the Federal Reserve and most governments on this planet. The firm, BlackRock Inc., the world’s largest asset manager, invests a staggering $9 trillion in client funds worldwide, a sum more than double the annual GDP of the Federal Republic of Germany. This colossus sits atop the pyramid of world corporate ownership, including in China most recently. Since 1988 the company has put itself in a position to de facto control the Federal Reserve, most Wall Street mega-banks, including Goldman Sachs, the Davos World Economic Forum Great Reset, the Biden Administration and, if left unchecked, the economic future of our world. BlackRock is the epitome of what Mussolini called Corporatism, where an unelected corporate elite dictates top down to the population. How the world’s largest “shadow bank” exercises this enormous power over the world ought to concern us. BlackRock since Larry Fink founded it in 1988 has managed to assemble unique financial software and assets that no other entity has. BlackRock’s Aladdin risk-management system, a software tool that can track and analyze trading, monitors more than $18 trillion in assets for 200 financial firms including the Federal Reserve and European central banks. He who “monitors” also knows, we can imagine. BlackRock has been called a financial “Swiss Army Knife — institutional investor, money manager, private equity firm, and global government partner rolled into one.” Yet mainstream media treats the company as just another Wall Street financial firm. There is a seamless interface that ties the UN Agenda 2030 with the Davos World Economic Forum Great Reset and the nascent economic policies of the Biden Administration. That interface is BlackRock. Team Biden and BlackRock By now it should be clear to anyone who bothers to look, that the person who claims to be US President, 78-year old Joe Biden, is not making any decisions. He even has difficulty reading a teleprompter or answering prepared questions from friendly media without confusing Syria and Libya or even whether he is President. He is being micromanaged by a group of handlers to maintain a scripted “image” of a President while policy is made behind the scenes by others. It eerily reminds of the 1979 Peter Sellers film character, Chauncey Gardiner, in Being There. What is less public are the key policy persons running economic policy for Biden Inc. They are simply said, BlackRock. Much as Goldman Sachs ran economic policy under Obama and also Trump, today BlackRock is filling that key role. The deal apparently was sealed in January, 2019 when Joe Biden, then-candidate and long-shot chance to defeat Trump, went to meet with Larry Fink in New York, who reportedly told “working class Joe,” that, “I’m here to help.” Now as President in one of his first appointees, Biden named Brian Deese to be the Director of the National Economic Council, the President’s main adviser for economic policy. One of the early Presidential Executive Orders dealt with economics and climate policy. That’s not surprising, as Deese came from Fink’s BlackRock where he was Global Head of Sustainable Investing. Before joining BlackRock, Deese held senior economic posts under Obama, including replacing John Podesta as Senior Adviser to the President where he worked alongside Valerie Jarrett. Under Obama, Deese played a key role in negotiating the Global Warming Paris Accords. In the key policy post as Deputy Treasury Secretary under Secretary Janet Yellen, we find Nigerian-born Adewale “Wally” Adeyemo. Adeyemo also comes from BlackRock where from 2017 to 2019 he was a senior adviser and Chief of Staff to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, after leaving the Obama Administration. His personal ties to Obama are strong, as Obama named him the first President of the Obama Foundation in 2019. And a third senior BlackRock person running economic policy in the Administration now is also unusual in several respects. Michael Pyle is the Senior Economic Adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris. He came to Washington from the position as the Global Chief Investment Strategist at BlackRock where he oversaw the strategy for investing some $9 trillion of funds. Before joining BlackRock at the highest level, he had also been in the Obama Administration as a senior adviser to the Undersecretary of the Treasury for International Affairs, and in 2015 became an adviser to the Hillary Clinton presidential bid. The fact that three of the most influential economic appointees of the Biden Administration come from BlackRock, and before that all from the Obama Administration, is noteworthy. There is a definite pattern and suggests that the role of BlackRock in Washington is far larger than we are being told. What is BlackRock? Never before has a financial company with so much influence over world markets been so hidden from public scrutiny. That’s no accident. As it is technically not a bank making bank loans or taking deposits, it evades the regulation oversight from the Federal Reserve even though it does what most mega banks like HSBC or JP MorganChase do—buy, sell securities for profit. When there was a Congressional push to include asset managers such as BlackRock and Vanguard Funds under the post-2008 Dodd-Frank law as “systemically important financial institutions” or SIFIs, a huge lobbying push from BlackRock ended the threat. BlackRock is essentially a law onto itself. And indeed it is “systemically important” as no other, with possible exception of Vanguard, which is said to also be a major shareholder in BlackRock. BlackRock founder and CEO Larry Fink is clearly interested in buying influence globally. He made former German CDU MP Friederich Merz head of BlackRock Germany when it looked as if he might succeed Chancellor Merkel, and former British Chancellor of Exchequer George Osborne as “political consultant.” Fink named former Hillary Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills to the BlackRock board when it seemed certain Hillary would soon be in the White House. He has named former central bankers to his board and gone on to secure lucrative contracts with their former institutions. Stanley Fisher, former head of the Bank of Israel and also later Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve is now Senior Adviser at BlackRock. Philipp Hildebrand, former Swiss National Bank president, is vice chairman at BlackRock, where he oversees the BlackRock Investment Institute. Jean Boivin, the former deputy governor of the Bank of Canada, is the global head of research at BlackRock’s investment institute. BlackRock and the Fed It was this ex-central bank team at BlackRock that developed an “emergency” bailout plan for Fed chairman Powell in March 2019 as financial markets appeared on the brink of another 2008 “Lehman crisis” meltdown. As “thank you,” the Fed chairman Jerome Powell named BlackRock in a no-bid role to manage all of the Fed’s corporate bond purchase programs, including bonds where BlackRock itself invests. Conflict of interest? A group of some 30 NGOs wrote to Fed Chairman Powell, “By giving BlackRock full control of this debt buyout program, the Fed… makes BlackRock even more systemically important to the financial system. Yet BlackRock is not subject to the regulatory scrutiny of even smaller systemically important financial institutions.” In a detailed report in 2019, a Washington non-profit research group, Campaign for Accountability, noted that, “BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, implemented a strategy of lobbying, campaign contributions, and revolving door hires to fight off government regulation and establish itself as one of the most powerful financial companies in the world.” The New York Fed hired BlackRock in March 2019 to manage its commercial mortgage-backed securities program and its $750 billion primary and secondary purchases of corporate bonds and ETFs in no-bid contracts. US financial journalists Pam and Russ Martens in critiquing that murky 2019 Fed bailout of Wall Street remarked, “for the first time in history, the Fed has hired BlackRock to “go direct” and buy up $750 billion in both primary and secondary corporate bonds and bond ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds), a product of which BlackRock is one of the largest purveyors in the world.” They went on, “Adding further outrage, the BlackRock-run program will get $75 billion of the $454 billion in taxpayers’ money to eat the losses on its corporate bond purchases, which will include its own ETFs, which the Fed is allowing it to buy…” Fed head Jerome Powell and Larry Fink know each other well, apparently. Even after Powell gave BlackRock the hugely lucrative no-bid “go direct” deal, Powell continued to have the same BlackRock manage an estimated $25 million of Powell’s private securities investments. Public records show that in this time Powell held direct confidential phone calls with BlackRock CEO Fink. According to required financial disclosure, BlackRock managed to double the value of Powell’s investments from the year before! No conflict of interest, or? A Very BlackRock in Mexico BlackRock’s murky history in Mexico shows that conflicts of interest and influence-building with leading government agencies is not restricted to just the USA. PRI Presidential candidate Peña Nieto went to Wall Street during his campaign in November 2011. There he met Larry Fink. What followed the Nieto victory in 2012 was a tight relationship between Fink and Nieto that was riddled with conflict of interest, cronyism and corruption. Most likely to be certain BlackRock was on the winning side in the corrupt new Nieto regime, Fink named 52-year-old Marcos Antonio Slim Domit, billionaire son of Mexico’s wealthiest and arguably most corrupt man, Carlos Slim, to BlackRock’s Board. Marcos Antonio, along with his brother Carlos Slim Domit, run the father’s huge business empire today. Carlos Slim Domit, the eldest son, was Co-Chair of the World Economic Forum Latin America in 2015, and currently serves as chairman of the board of America Movil where BlackRock is a major investor. Small cozy world. The father, Carlos Slim, at the time named by Forbes as World’s Richest Person, built an empire based around his sweetheart acquisition of Telemex (later America Movil). Then President, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, in effect gifted the telecom empire to Slim in 1989. Salinas later fled Mexico on charges of stealing more than $10 billion from state coffers. As with much in Mexico since the 1980s drug money apparently played a huge role with the elder Carlos Slim, father of BlackRock director Marcos Slim. In 2015 WikiLeaks released company internal emails from the private intelligence corporation, Stratfor. Stratfor writes in an April 2011 email, the time BlackRock is establishing its Mexico plans, that a US DEA Special Agent, William F. Dionne confirmed Carlos Slim’s ties to the Mexican drug cartels. Stratfor asks Dionne, “Billy, is the MX (Mexican) billionaire Carlos Slim linked to the narcos?” Dionne replies, “Regarding your question, the MX telecommunication billionaire is.” In a country where 44% of the population lives in poverty you don’t become the world’s richest man in just two decades selling Girl Scout cookies. Fink and Mexican PPP With Marcos Slim on his BlackRock board and new president Enrique Peña Nieto, Larry Fink’s Mexican partner in Nieto Peña’s $590 billion PublicPrivatePartnership (PPP) alliance, BlackRock, was ready to reap the harvest. To fine-tune his new Mexican operations, Fink named former Mexican Undersecretary of Finance Gerardo Rodriguez Regordosa to direct BlackRock Emerging Market Strategy in 2013. Then in 2016 Peña Nieto appointed Isaac Volin, then head of BlackRock Mexico to be No. 2 at PEMEX where he presided over corruption, scandals and the largest loss in PEMEX history, $38 billion. Peña Nieto had opened the huge oil state monopoly, PEMEX, to private investors for the first time since nationalization in the 1930s. The first to benefit was Fink’s BlackRock. Within seven months, BlackRock had secured $1 billion in PEMEX energy projects, many as the only bidder. During the tenure of Peña Nieto, one of the most controversial and least popular presidents, BlackRock prospered by the cozy ties. It soon was engaged in highly profitable (and corrupt) infrastructure projects under Peña Nieto including not only oil and gas pipelines and wells but also including toll roads, hospitals, gas pipelines and even prisons. Notably, BlackRock’s Mexican “friend” Peña Nieto was also “friends” not only with Carlos Slim but with the head of the notorious Sinaloa Cartel, “El Chapo” Guzman. In court testimony in 2019 in New York Alex Cifuentes, a Colombian drug lord who has described himself as El Chapo’s “right-hand man,” testified that just after his election in 2012, Peña Nieto had requested $250 million from the Sinaloa Cartel before settling on $100 million. We can only guess what for. Larry Fink and WEF Great Reset In 2019 Larry Fink joined the Board of the Davos World Economic Forum, the Swiss-based organization that for some 40 years has advanced economic globalization. Fink, who is close to the WEF’s technocrat head, Klaus Schwab, of Great Reset notoriety, now stands positioned to use the huge weight of BlackRock to create what is potentially, if it doesn’t collapse before, the world’s largest Ponzi scam, ESG corporate investing. Fink with $9 trillion to leverage is pushing the greatest shift of capital in history into a scam known as ESG Investing. The UN “sustainable economy” agenda is being realized quietly by the very same global banks which have created the financial crises in 2008. This time they are preparing the Klaus Schwab WEF Great Reset by steering hundreds of billions and soon trillions in investment to their hand-picked “woke” companies, and away from the “not woke” such as oil and gas companies or coal. BlackRock since 2018 has been in the forefront to create a new investment infrastructure that picks “winners” or “losers” for investment according to how serious that company is about ESG—Environment, Social values and Governance. For example a company gets positive ratings for the seriousness of its hiring gender diverse management and employees, or takes measures to eliminate their carbon “footprint” by making their energy sources green or sustainable to use the UN term. How corporations contribute to a global sustainable governance is the most vague of the ESG, and could include anything from corporate donations to Black Lives Matter to supporting UN agencies such as WHO. Oil companies like ExxonMobil or coal companies no matter how clear are doomed as Fink and friends now promote their financial Great Reset or Green New Deal. This is why he cut a deal with the Biden presidency in 2019. Follow the money. And we can expect that the New York Times will cheer BlackRock on as it destroys the world financial structures. Since 2017 BlackRock has been the paper’s largest shareholder. Carlos Slim was second largest. Even Carl Icahn, a ruthless Wall Street asset stripper, once called BlackRock, “an extremely dangerous company… I used to say, you know, the mafia has a better code of ethics than you guys.”

(NEXT)

Can Joe Rogan Save Free Speech?

Jonathan Turley, February 3, 2022

Below is my column on the campaign to cancel Joe Rogan and his podcast. Various celebrities and artists have joined the movement for censoring Joe Rogan, including Mary Trump. The White House has called for even greater action from Spotify to limit or remove content. We have also heard the same false narrative that, since the First Amendment only covers government action, this is not by definition a free speech issue. The argument is entirely divorced from any understanding of free speech. As we have previously discussed, the First Amendment is not the full or exclusive embodiment of free speech. It addresses just one of the dangers to free speech posed by government regulation. Many of us view free speech as a human right. Corporate censorship of social media clearly impacts free speech, and replacing Big Brother with a cadre of Little Brothers actually allows for far greater control of free expression. When it comes to media, information or social media platforms, corporate censorship can have a devastating impact on free speech. For Spotify, the choice between Rogan’s 11 million listeners or an aging rocker was economically clear, even with other artists threatening to pull their music from the platform. The music side of Spotify is reportedly not making much revenue, but Rogan and podcasts are a cash machine. Spotify now has 365 million subscribers and its advertising revenues have doubled with the help of the podcast market. Revenue from podcasts is up a staggering 627 percent on Spotify. However, even if the company was not motivated by its better angels, that may actually be better news for free speech. The free-fall of free speech has largely been due to greed. Companies see no profit in defending dissenting viewpoints. Now, for the first time, the economics may have actually worked against censorship and for free speech. At least in this instance, to paraphrase “Wall Street’s” Gordon Gekko, “Greed is good” for free speech. The famous economist Arthur Cecil Pigou once explained that corporations are not “social” but market creatures moved by profits, not principles. No matter how “woke” many companies may appear, there is an economic calculation behind corporate action. Most companies yield to demands because it is wealth-maximizing. There was a calculation that woke statements or censorship policies would protect a company from protests while opposing customers would still want its product. That calculation has been a disaster for free speech. The First Amendment only addresses the primary threat that existed in the 18th century against free speech: the government. It does not limit private companies, which have free speech rights like individuals. Activists and politicians used that blind spot to do indirectly what they could not do directly in censoring opposing viewpoints. Democratic leaders, including President Biden, have encouraged companies to expand what they euphemistically call “content modification” to block dissenting views on vaccines, election integrity, global warming, gender identity and a range of other issues. As a result, social media companies and other corporations now regulate speech in the United States to a degree that an actual state media would struggle to replicate. Faced with a growing cancel culture, companies are scrubbing their platforms of dissenting viewpoints and converting forums into echo chambers. Rogan’s popularity is precisely due to the fact that he is uncensored in what he says. As many networks and newspapers have become more of an echo chamber, viewers and readers have fled en masse. Trust in the media has fallen to just 46 percent and as low as 40 percent in recent polling. While Young reportedly relies on Spotify for 60 percent of his royalty income, Spotify does not rely on Young or other rock stars for its primary profits. It is the reverse of market conditions from just a couple years ago. While Rogan has promised to be more careful in how information is presented on his show (and Spotify will add “advisories” on podcasts), his podcast survived the celebrity onslaught. As various investors seek to create free speech alternatives to Twitter and YouTube, there may be an emerging market for free speech products. This does not mean that Joe Rogan is the new Thomas Paine or that this small skirmish is a turning point in the war over free speech. Indeed, the campaign continues against Spotify. However, with the explosion of corporate censorship, free speech advocates have begun to look at figures like Rogan as “super survivors,” people who seem to have natural immunities protecting them from an otherwise lethal threat. If we can replicate those economic antibodies, we just might be able to develop a protection against censorship and the cancel culture.

Manuka honey contains natural antiviral compounds that fight influenza

Nagasaki University (Japan)

New research published in the journal Archives of Medical Researchshows that manuka honey is a powerful natural remedy against influenza and other associated diseases – including the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19). Entitled, “Anti-influenza Viral Effects of Honey In Vitro: Potent High Activity of Manuka Honey,” the study looked at the commonly researched H1N1 influenza strain known as A/WSN/3. Researchers infected MadineDarby canine kidney (MDCK) cells with the virus before exposing them to numerous types of honey.

(NEXT)

Study Suggests Ultrasound Stimulation May Be An Effective Therapy For Alzheimer’s Disease

Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, February 1, 2022

Researchers from the Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology propose ultrasound stimulation as an effective therapy for Alzheimer’s disease in a new study. Synchronizing one’s brainwaves to ultrasound pulses could reduce the accumulation of abnormal proteins characteristic of the onset of Alzheimer’s disease. Now, scientists from the Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology demonstrate reduced protein accumulation in the brain by synchronizing brain waves to external ultrasound pulses at gamma frequency, opening doors to a non-invasive therapy.

(NEXT)

More spice could help seniors avoid salt

Washington State University, February 3, 2022

Add a little spicy seasoning to a low sodium meal, and adults over the age of 60 may have a harder time noticing a lack of salt, according to a new study in the journal Food Quality and Preference. Led by Carolyn Ross, a professor of Food Sciences at Washington State University, the study tested saltiness perception in older adults using white sauce formulations with varying amounts of salt and different spices and seasonings added.

(NEXT)

Saffron a safer treatment for ADHD, just as effective as Ritalin, says study

Tehran University of Medical Sciences (Iran)

Fortunately, recent studies show that there may be a safe, all-natural alternative to Ritalin: saffron. In a study published in the Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, researchers from the Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) in Iran found that saffron is just as effective as Ritalin at treating ADHD. Corresponding author Shahin Akhondzadeh of the Psychiatric Research Center at TUMS’ Roozbeh Hospital said that his team has been studying the psychotropic effects of saffron since the early 2000s and found that the herb has antidepressant effects.

(VIDEOS)

(READING)

1. kristen meghan

Why I’m leaving the cult of wokeness

Africa Brooke

If there’s one thing I’m NOT afraid of, it’s being ‘cancelled’. If being cancelled means me living in integrity as a human being who thinks for themselves, CANCEL ME TODAY! I repeat; I am not afraid.What I’m truly afraid of is existing in a world that forces me to submit to an ideology without question, otherwise I’m to be shamed (or pressured to shame myself) and cast out of the community. A world that tells me that because I inhabit a black body; I will forever be oppressed and at the mercy of some omnipresent monster called ‘whiteness’. That because of the colour of my skin; I am a victim of an inherently racist system by default – and me rejecting the narrative of oppression means that I am in fact, in denial. How empowering! *You know, as someone that comes from Zimbabwe, a country where the general population is truly oppressed, it perplexes me that oppression is now being worn as an identity piece in most parts of the West, especially by those who claim to be ‘progressive’* What I’m truly afraid of is existing in a world that forces me to consider the colour of my skin and my gender (and that of others) at every fucking turn, instead of living by Martin Luther King’s teachings and prioritising the content of mine and other people’s character. I dread the prospect of a world where context, nuance, critical thinking, meritocracy, mathematics, science, and rationality are considered tools of ‘white supremacy’, and the rule is that you’re not allowed to question or argue this senseless statement – especially if you’re white. A world that is conditioning you and I to believe that we will always be trapped in some weird hierarchy because of our race, our genitals, our physical abilities, our neurodiversity, our sexuality, and our politics. And that if we do not agree on every single thing, it’s a sign that we are interacting with an enemy – or at the very least, someone to be wildly suspicious and judgmental of…instead of another complex human being worthy of being seen and heard. I wish this world I’m speaking of was just a figment of my imagination, but we are already inside it. Our suitcases have been unpacked here for quite some time. This absolutist, authoritarian world is being fiercely crafted under the guise of ‘social justice’, and I want no parts in this. I AM OUT. As someone that, politically speaking, leans left on most things (although I’m neither left or right) – the current state of affairs and this push for obedience at all costs is NOT what I signed up for. I never signed up to be hit over the head with disempowering narratives that tell me that I need to refer to myself as a ‘person of colour’ (how is this different being called a ‘coloured’ person?), a minority, a marginalised person, and BAME (UK version of BIPOC). I cannot stand any of these terms. Please, if we ever need to address my racial identity, which we really don’t need to do as often as you might think…BLACK works just fine, it’s not a dirty word. And remember; it’s okay if the language I mentioned before is affirming for you, we are allowed to disagree – but for ME, it does nothing but give me false reminders of my supposed oppression…which rubs me the wrong way entirely because I AM NOT OPPRESSED. I think it’s key that we begin to accept that black people don’t all share a singular experience, nor do we share the same brain. Shocking, I know. ‘We are not a monolith’ has become a common statement within communities that identify as marginalised, and while I wholeheartedly agree, we’re definitely not a monolith… I’ve noticed that despite this being a popular mantra – when someone ‘steps out of line’ or dares to think differently…it’s a different story. You will often have the pleasure of being told that you are in denial and have some kind of internalised disorder; ‘internalised racism’, ‘internalised anti-blackness’, ‘internalised misogyny’, ‘internalised sexism’, ‘internalised homophobia’, ‘internalised transphobia’, ‘internalised white supremacy’… Meaning NOTHING can be questioned. Fun. Culty. Vibes. Honestly, I want better for us because it’s all getting a bit much in these social justice/woke spaces, and it scares me to know that it’s become controversial to address any concerns or express a differing viewpoint. It’s becoming dangerous to address reality. You either agree and comply, or you shut up. I’m so happy that these are conversations that are now happening with many black people in my life, including my family who spend very little time online, are willing to have healthy debates, and couldn’t give a crap about identity politics. These are the people who have really helped me free myself from the dogmatic thinking. It’s necessary for me to mention that I’m having these conversations with black people because some individuals think that it’s only white people who are pushing back against wokeism, and it’s far from the truth. What is worrying though is how many more of us feel afraid to talk to our own friends, our partners, our spouses, our colleagues, our family – of fear of being branded as ‘wrong-thinkers’. How are we supposed to understand each other if we’re living in constant fear of saying the ‘wrong’ thing? It’s even harder if you’re white because there’s usually someone just waiting to call you racist. And according to the woke manual, if you’re white you’re supposed to just accept that label. If you do question it or defend yourself, it’s taken as confirmation that you ARE in fact a white supremacist. If you DARE express any fears or signs of being rightfully upset, you’ll be accused of ‘centering your white feelings’, and of exuding ‘white guilt’ or ‘white fragility’. With all disrespect, I don’t understand the purpose of these cultish, degrading, racist terms. How are they helping us move forward? Is this true social justice? How is this helping the black community? How is this shaping a world where you and I aren’t judged by the colour of our skin? Are we really trying to eradicate racism with racism? The LITERAL definition of racism is “prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group”. And yet some people have suddenly decided that white people cannot experience racism, nor are they permitted to dispute this insane claim. This then leads to most white people choosing to not say anything at all (which creates resentment because that’s the nature of suppression & self-censorship), and some choose to comply and pretend they are on board with anything and everything (whilst also secretly resenting that they can’t truly express their thoughts, ideas, feelings, etc). To me all of this confirms that when it comes to ‘wokeness’, critical social justice, and the beast that is cancel culture, you will never win. You will NEVER get it right. If you choose to stand back, ‘educate yourself’ privately and quietly; you’ll be accused of being violent via your silence… And if you speak out, ask questions, or express valid confusion from the dehumanising generalisations and character assassinations; you’ll be denounced for centering your ‘white feelings’. This sounds like psychological warfare to me. I can’t be the only one that also finds this language eerie. This is cult behaviour! And for saying the above I’m sure someone out there will lovingly label me a ‘white apologist’… This is where we’re at people. And like I said at the beginning, when it comes to this – I am unafraid. This is my open letter detailing some of the things that have led me to this point, because if there’s anything that this past year has taught me; it’s that my wellbeing and that of those around me (including the collective), is infinitely more important than any temporary discomfort that might come from me doing what I know to be right. I also want to let you know that I’m not writing this to convince you of anything, your agreement is welcome but it’s not a requirement. I’m not writing this from a place of animosity or anger. I’m not writing this on behalf of any individual, group, movement, organisation, or community. I am not an activist, a social commentator, a feminist, an academic, or any other label apart from the ones I claim publicly. I am writing this to free myself. I am writing this for myself. And for you if you need it. Just like you; I am entitled to my own opinions, I have every right to question things that don’t feel aligned with my values, morals, ethics, and beliefs. I have every right to push back if I recognise that I’m being forced to comply with ideologies and practices that don’t make sense to me (which is how I’ve felt this past year). I don’t want to live my life in a fearful and paranoid state. I don’t want to spend my life thinking that everything that doesn’t go my way is because of my skin colour, I don’t want to spend the rest of my life unable to have insightful conversations with those that think differently to me…I really don’t. I’m tired of hearing that because I’m black I should feel victimised. That because I’m black I should agree with everything that black people do and say (surely NO ONE should have this expected of them). None of these narrow definitions of human existence or blackness help me. None of it helps my community. It’s keeping us small. It’s keeping us stuck, afraid, and defensive. I reject the idea that I am a victim. I reject the idea that I am oppressed. I reject the idea that white people only exist to oppress and should be reminding me of their privilege every 2 seconds, while simultaneously telling me that they are above me. How is this helpful!? If anything, it’s deeply offensive and condescending. There’s no question about it; being black is a beautiful part of who I am, but it’s not all I am – not even close. My identity (race, gender, sexuality, body parts) will never be more important than my humanity, my spirit, and my wholeness. EVER. Because of this, I fervently reject the idea that all white people are racist and must be shamed into confessing their sins and admitting complicity in all of their ancestors indiscretions…simply because of the colour of their skin. I reject this bullshit idea that every white person walking this planet is ‘inherently racist’. Do we even know what we’re saying? or are we just regurgitating/parroting things, and now it’s gotten out of control. I honestly struggle to see how shaming others (or shaming yourself) for having white skin is an essential part of fuelling true social change. Surely this is regressive? It also sounds a little like the very thing we’ve spent years moving away from… The truth of the matter is that my own ancestors have participated in some FUCKERY and I would not want to live the rest of my life being punished for their actions. A lot of what I’m seeing in the woke/critical social justice spaces is not about creating a better world, it seems to be about punishment and revenge. And it’s doing nothing but trampling on the work true Activists are doing and have been doing for centuries! I do have to take a moment to acknowledge those who are doing fantastic work and making a long-lasting impact in their communities, instead of perpetuating fear and manipulating people’s emotions by convincing them they will always be victims. I’m done with the insidious brainwashing of wokeness. I’m committed to understanding human behaviour (this is also at the core of what I do professionally), I’m committed to compassion and kindness without excusing that which must be acknowledged. I’m well aware of the systems we live under. I know what’s happening in the world. I’ve lived it. I acknowledge reality, but I refuse to be a slave to a disempowering narrative that rarely focuses on actual solutions. I never want to forget that you can still be compassionate with those you don’t agree with. And this way of thinking is what I CHOOSE because it makes my time on planet earth better, you don’t have to take it on if it doesn’t work for you. I want to live a life that isn’t centred around identity politics and all that comes with it, so much more in my life takes priority. I want to remain open to new ideas, perspectives, and thoughts – so that I can grow, course correct where necessary, and make a genuine impact on a local and global level. I want to give people the benefit of the doubt and continue using discernment instead of making sweeping harmful (often lazy) assumptions based on the colour of people’s skin or their gender. I refuse to take on the black or white thinking because I’ve seen and experienced the grave harm that does. As I move into this next season of my life, I’m more interested in the grey area – where we all exist. The nail in the coffin for me was all the events that took place last Summer. Last Summer in the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, I noticed a shadowy part of me emerging and although I didn’t judge it, I wasn’t comfortable with what was coming up. All the critical social justice dogma I’d been consciously and unconsciously imbibing over the past 2 years began taking a HUGE toll on my mental health, and I hadn’t even realised that I wasn’t functioning as a full human being – until it reached it’s peak. The unpleasant internal experience I had is what led me where I am now, which is why I’m a firm believer that welcoming discomfort in is one of the most loving things you can do for yourself. On social media at that time I was DEEP is various social justice echo chambers that shared more than enough infographics, stories, feed posts, IG LIVES, to make my fight or flight response go nuts. I was in constant fight mode, and wasn’t aware. I was being indoctrinated; this means “to teach a person or a group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically”. I found myself subconsciously looking for things that would piss me off, which is a symptom of wokeness that seems to show up in many people – hundreds of you have shared your own experiences with me in the past month alone and the similarities in our stories are alarming. Before reacting to things, I did ZERO in-depth research of my own. It’s almost as if facts were an unwelcome guest. Anything that didn’t align with the beliefs I held about race, sex, gender, politics, etc – I rejected (this was all unconscious). I didn’t question the sources I was getting information from, it was all taken as objective truth. It was ALL reactionary, I was on autopilot. I didn’t realise I had many people on pedestals that they shouldn’t have been on in the first place (no fault of their own, I put them there), I was operating purely based on emotions and feelings that gave my nervous system the signal that I was under threat. And that’s the energy I acted and spoke from. I rashly unfollowed some people on my social media who I’d decided should have ‘spoken up’ in support of Black Lives Matter (an organisationI have now done my own extensive research on, but that’s a whole other story) – simply because (based on my egos time frame) they weren’t responding as and when they ‘should’ have. I’m sure I re-shared something about ‘white silence’ being ‘violence’ (an oversimplified and unfair statement I no longer agree with, and you can watch the lengthy live I did with Rukiat where I go into some of this). I also publicly shamed an unsuspecting man who had messaged me to question me about my conduct (I immediately assumed he was white…he was mixed race). And even though his approach was not a welcome one, he wasn’t unkind to me – which is why I’m not proud of the unkind way in which I reacted…not responded, reacted. What frightened me was the applause I got from over 4,000 people when I called out this man in an Instagram post – I didn’t say anything wild, but I did deconstruct his direct message publicly with the intention to embarrass him, not to resolve anything – to embarrass. I was honestly shocked by how many people used the environment I had created to exercise pack mentality, and to casually shame and scold a stranger – of which I take responsibility for as the person that created that environment. I now know that publicly shaming someone is a common tactic used in most woke spaces and echo chambers on social media, and it’s so normalised. This is the kind of thing that quickly leads to bullying, doxing, stalking, and harassment…and sometimes ends in suicide. After seeing the responses applauding me, I removed the post and started asking myself some questions; who am I doing this for? why did my interaction with this man need to be publicised? what is really the root of the anger I feel? is this a performance on my behalf? what research have I done to support the ideology I’m leading with? are there any alternative sources that can give me more information or provide clarity on the situation I’m reacting to? do I really believe this or am I regurgitating something I read/heard/saw somewhere? I’m of the thinking that there is such a thing as justified anger, and I believe that all emotions and modes of expressions have their place – but I know myself well enough to know that the way I handled that particular situation was not necessary. This incident led me start evaluating my own behaviour and doing more research around the cancel culture phenomenon. And it’s just one recent example of how some of this stuff has showed up in my life over the past 2 years. SO, why am I calling ‘WOKENESS’ a cult? Well, first lets start by defining what the term woke even means. It’s a term that been around for a very long time but has (in my eyes) lost all of it’s credibility and meaning in recent years. Woke: a term embedded in US Black History and social justice which originally meant being aware, well-informed, and up to date with what was happening within the community. “Stay woke became a watch word in parts of the black community for those who considered themselves self-aware, questioning the dominant paradigm, and striving for something better” – and these are the sentiments I will always stand for, however… This is NOT how it’s playing out these days, and you can read this interesting article to get a timeline of how it’s evolved over the years, and I’ll continue sharing with you the specific pockets of ‘wokeness’ and social justice that I have divorced myself from. I can no longer be an active participant in any culture or movement that encourages groupthink, outrage on demand, fear and violence, revamped segregation, fabricating history, cancellations masked as accountability, self-centredness… normalisation of racism towards white people, the disempowerment of black people masked as social justice, the constant redefining of existing language, ignoring self-responsibility, constant pathologizing, oppressed vs oppressor mentality, and the pressure to conform and comply… It’s exhausting. And honestly, I have better things to do with my time. Not to mention, it’s killing us. I also find it very telling that people who are married to these woke spaces will immediately assume that those that are requesting for more compassion, understanding, room for discussion, removal of censorship – only want these things so they can have free reign to be bigots, sexist, ‘fascists’, racists, homophobes, etc. As a free-thinking black woman who most definitely wants more compassion, understanding, healthy discussion, empathy, removal of censorship, more tolerance and acceptance when it matters most…I can guarantee you that my final goal isn’t so I can be a racist sexist fascist alt-righter extremist. LOL. And if you can understand this, what makes someone who happens to be white any less sincere if they want the exact same thing as me? Which many people do! I hope you can sort of see just how oversimplified and flawed this madness is. I often laugh about the ridiculous nature of it all, but what’s concerning is that it’s spreading like wildfire, it’s causing lasting harm, and it’s distracting us from the very real work that needs to be done to tackle injustice and unite us as human beings. I will stick to my guns by saying that the turn we’re taking because of critical social justice and this current strain of branded monetised wokeness – is not going to take us to the promised land (SPOILER: there is no utopia, I’m sorry to break it to you). As someone who will never stop advocating for human rights (fairness, equality, access to resources, respect, independence – for ALL, not just for people who share my skin tone and gender), I have come to realise that I do not need to be part of any groups or wear any labels to make a positive contribution to this planet of ours. This is also why I do not identify as a feminist. Just like everything else I’ve spoken about so far; the current wave of commodified feminism is so far removed from my core values; honesty, respect, interconnection, equality, individuality etc. There’s a lot of self-righteousness, virtue signalling, self-centeredness, and a lack of empathy in most of what I see being presented today as feminism – and again; it seems to be about revenge, superiority, and personal branding. It’s also not uncommon to be made to feel unintelligent, wrong, and inferior in a lot of these supposedly ‘safe spaces’ – simply because you don’t identify with the label or agree with all the view points of the group. IT’S TIRING, and I wish more people knew that you can still believe in and advocate for equality and fairness without wearing a label like a badge of honour. My mission isn’t to be superior to anyone, nor do I want to see the demise of any gender. I believe that we should all have equal rights and opportunities, and I’m also realistic about the differences we have as human beings – I celebrate those differences. In a world obsessed with labels and titles, I would rather let my values and actions speak for themselves. These are the times when I am incredibly grateful for the upbringing I’ve had, both in Zimbabwe and here in the UK. I’m grateful that I was raised to think for myself, and that’s what I’ll continue to do. I was raised to not judge people based on the colour of their skin, gender, class etc – no matter what. And that’s what I’ll continue to do. YES, I could choose to carry animosity in my heart based on the pain my ancestors experienced and the injustice still taking place in many different parts of the world – but what does that do for me, my mental state, my community, and those I interact with in the present day? I’d rather acknowledge reality, and focus on solutions. I wasn’t really raised to ask many questions, but in adulthood asking powerful questions (even when they are simple) is something that has become a non-negotiable – and that’s what I will continue to do. I will continue to trust myself and question things. I will do my own research before responding purely based on emotion. I will keep myself open to having challenging conversations if I have the capacity to do so, and if I don’t have the capacity to engage, I will still not shut anyone down – unless absolutely necessary. My biggest realisation has been that most of these people that pose as Social Justice Warriors, Activists, Agents of Change etc – don’t actually want to improve and repair society. They don’t want a better world. For some the goal is to make things worse. A lot of the people I know in these spaces have brands, careers, and management teams from this. Their livelihood depends on them playing this role, which often means that they will continue to find everything wrong with society instead of making consistent efforts to unite and truly empower. There’s a sinister side many people aren’t comfortable speaking about because of the potential backlash, and it’s unfair to those of us who end up being sucked into these echo chambers and movements through the promise of community and betterment. Most of us just want to help. We want to see change! In our personal lives, and in the world we exist in. This leaves us vulnerable to questionable ‘leaders’, influencers, and organisations who set themselves up so that you cannot question their practices or agenda. The similarities of wokeness/critical social justice to fundamentalist religion (something I’m VERY familiar with) is why I choose to call it a cult, the framework and tactics are eerily similar… It usually goes a little like this; find/attract a vulnerable person, make them feel like they belong so they can trust you, tell them exactly what they want to hear, and once they become loyal – it is easier to sell them outlandish concepts and to make them ‘repent’ for ‘sins’ they have supposedly committed… the person then regresses and begins to rely on their ‘leader’ or the ideology to shape their thoughts and their world view. They are introduced to an enemy and are encouraged to cut themselves off from the outside world and anyone else who doesn’t agree with or follow the ideology (us vs them mentality). Once cut off from everyone, the individual is more dependent on the leader or the group, and then it becomes increasingly difficult to leave. Just like an abusive relationship! This is exactly what I’m seeing in the woke/feminist/critical social justice spaces. Despite it all, the individual is often unaware of what’s really happening and will continue to believe that they are acting on their own accord. The prison walls remain invisible. But it’s possible to break out! It’s why I’ve decided to speak out. And if you don’t agree with what I’m sharing, and this has not been your experience – that’s okay. I will always respect your right to own your experiences and perspectives. I ask that you do the same for me. We live different lives, we have different views. It’s normal. What ISN’T normal, is forcing people to comply and bow down to an ideology, simply because YOU think it’s the right one. If you resonate with what I’ve shared in this letter, please know that you are not alone. You are allowed to change your mind. You are allowed to grow. You are allowed to walk away. You are allowed to put your foot down. There is no one way to ‘do the work’. You don’t have to pray to a single political idea, movement, or group – nor do you have to agree with EVERYTHING presented to you as the absolute truth. You are not morally inferior or superior to anyone else. And remember that we still have to co-exist on this planet, so expecting everyone you encounter to agree with every belief or view that you hold – is fucking wild, LOL. If you have read this far, I appreciate your time and your attention. Any typos you see, represent the sheer passion flowing through me. I’ll stop here because I could go on, there is always more to say. I feel like this letter is just the foundation of the conversations I REALLY want to have so I will likely explore some of the specificities in podcast form and through my newsletter. I’m considering producing and hosting a limited podcast series that specifically talks about these themes. Don’t worry, my existing podcastBeyond the Self won’t be going anywhere! In the meantime; you can find me on Instagram if we’re not already connected. Although my work as a Mindset Coach, Speaker, and Consultant has nothing to do with social justice, cancel culture, wokeness etc – this is something I’ll continue to speak about because it directly speaks to 2 of my biggest areas of focus, which in this case are collective self-sabotage and psychological manipulation. I encourage you to break out of any echo chambers (especially on social media) and explore yourself BEYOND your race, your pronouns, your genitals, your sexuality, your physical capabilities, your politics – those things have their place but there is so much more to you. And in fact, when you do go beyond those neatly prescribed boxes, you become more secure within your identity. I urge you to unsubscribe to anyone and anything that is stripping you of your humanity, your agency, and is proving to be detrimental to your mental wellbeing. You deserve better, let’s never stop speaking up! Love always, Africa

(OTHER NEWS) 

Senators Have Re-Introduced the Highly Unpopular EARN IT Bill That Would Scan All Online Messages

Electronic Frontier Foundation

People don’t want outsiders reading their private messages—not their physical mail, not their texts, not their DMs, nothing. It’s a clear and obvious point, but one place it doesn’t seem to have reached is the U.S. Senate. A group of lawmakers led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have re-introduced the EARN IT Act, an incredibly unpopular bill from 2020 that was dropped in the face of overwhelming opposition. Let’s be clear: the new EARN IT Act would pave the way for a massive new surveillance system, run by private companies, that would roll back some of the most important privacy and security features in technology used by people around the globe. It’s a framework for private actors to scan every message sent online and report violations to law enforcement. And it might not stop there. The EARN IT Act could ensure that anything hosted online—backups, websites, cloud photos, and more—is scanned.The bill empowers every U.S. state or territory to create sweeping new Internet regulations, by stripping away the critical legal protections for websites and apps that currently prevent such a free-for-all—specifically, Section 230. The states will be allowed to pass whatever type of law they want to hold private companies liable, as long as they somehow relate their new rules to online child abuse. The goal is to get states to pass laws that will punish companies when they deploy end-to-end encryption, or offer other encrypted services. This includes messaging services like WhatsApp, Signal, and iMessage, as well as web hosts like Amazon Web Services. We know that EARN IT aims to spread the use of tools to scan against law enforcement databases because the bill’s sponsors have said so. In a “Myths and Facts” document distributed by the bill’s proponents, it even names the government-approved software that they could mandate . Senators supporting the EARN IT Act say they need new tools to prosecute cases over child sexual abuse material, or CSAM. But the methods proposed by EARN IT take aim at the security and privacy of everything hosted on the Internet. Possessing, viewing, or distributing CSAM is already written into law as an extremely serious crime, with a broad framework of existing laws seeking to eradicate it. Online service providers that have actual knowledge of an apparent or imminent violation of current laws around CSAM are required to make a report to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), a government entity which forwards reports to law enforcement agencies. The Senators supporting the bill have said that their mass surveillance plans are somehow magically compatible with end-to-end encryption. That’s completely false, no matter whether it’s called “client side scanning” or another misleading new phrase. The EARN IT Act doesn’t target Big Tech. It targets every individual internet user, treating us all as potential criminals who deserve to have every single message, photograph, and document scanned and checked against a government database. Since direct government surveillance would be blatantly unconstitutional and provoke public outrage, EARN IT uses tech companies—from the largest ones to the very smallest ones—as its tools. The strategy is to get private companies to do the dirty work of mass surveillance. This is the same tactic that the U.S. government used last year, when law enforcement agencies tried to convince Apple to subvert its own encryption and scan users’ photos for them.  It’s the same strategy that U.K. law enforcement is using to convince the British public to give up its privacy, having spent public money on a laughable publicity campaign that demonizes companies that use encryption.

(NEXT)

Why Are Myocarditis Rates Surging in Europe?

New groundbreaking data: Myocarditis rates up 30-75 percent nationally

Epoch Times, February 1, 2022

I’ve been trying to find national rates of myocarditis in Canada or the United States for several weeks but haven’t been able to find a reliable dataset. However, I came across two countries that appear to be closely tracking this issue: Germany and France. The results are damning. First, take a look at Germany: Since vaccines were widely distributed last year, myocarditis rates surged more than 75 percent. Maybe Germany is just an outlier and I’m senselessly speculating. Look at France: In 2021, myocarditis cases rose 31 percent—the highest in several years. They only rose in 2021, the year vaccines were rolled out to the public. It’s impossible to prove with 100 percent certainty, but this data strongly indicates that mass vaccination in these European nations has led to surging rates of myocarditis (cases are almost certainly concentrated in young men under the age of 40). But among young men, the vaccine-induced myocarditis signal is incontrovertible. And by best available evidence, it occurs at a HIGHER frequency than infection-induced myocarditis in that age/gender demographic. As a robust analysis by Oxford researchers found last month, Pfizer doses 2 & 3 and Moderna doses 1 & 2 are associated with post-vaccine myocarditis rates that exceed the rates of infection-induced myocarditis in men under 40. Myocarditis Is a Non-Serious, Minor Condition? For detractors who think myocarditis is no big deal and most cases are “mild,” consider a TYPICAL case of myocarditis (regardless of the cause): 1) 3-6 months of limited physical activity. No sports or athletic competition. Even carrying heavy textbooks and walking up stairs can be prohibited. 2) Being placed on medications such as beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors that can have negative side effects. 3) Scars in heart region visible on an MRI scan. 4) Life-long risk of cardiac complications.

Lower Dietary and Circulating Vitamin C in Middle- and Older-Aged Men and Women Are Associated with Lower Estimated Skeletal Muscle Mass 

University of East Anglia (UK)

Age-related loss of skeletal muscle mass contributes to poor outcomes including sarcopenia, physical disability, frailty, type 2 diabetes, and mortality. Vitamin C has physiological relevance to skeletal muscle and may protect it during aging, but few studies have investigated its importance in older populations. Positive trends were found across quintiles of dietary vitamin C and FFM measures for both sexes, with interquintile differences in FFM% and FFMBMI of 1.0% and 2.3% for men and 1.9% and 2.9% for women, respectively (all P< 0.001). Similarly, FFM% and FFMBMI measures were higher in participants with sufficient than with insufficient plasma vitamin C: by 1.6% and 2.0% in men, and 3.4% and 3.9% in women, respectively (all P < 0.001). Associations were also evident in analyses stratified into

Compound in the herb rosemary may be useful against COVID-19 and other inflammatory diseases

Scripps Research Institute, February 2, 2022

A team co-led by scientists at Scripps Research has found evidence that a compound contained in the medicinal and culinary herb rosemary could be a two-pronged weapon against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus that causes COVID-19. The scientists, in experiments described in a paper published January 6, 2022 in the journal Antioxidants, found that the compound, carnosic acid, can block the interaction between the SARS-CoV-2 outer "spike" protein and the receptor protein, ACE2, which the virus uses to gain entry to cells. The team also presented evidence, and reviewed evidence from prior studies, that carnosic acid has a separate effect in inhibiting a powerful inflammatory pathway—a pathway that is active in severe COVID-19 as well as in other diseases including Alzheimer's.

(NEXT)

Social isolation and loneliness increase heart disease risk in senior women

University of California San Diego, February 2, 2022

During the current pandemic, social distancing has been one tool used to reduce the spread of COVID-19. But data from a new study point to as much as a 27% increase in heart disease risk in postmenopausal women who experience both high levels of social isolation and loneliness. The findings of the prospective study, published in  JAMA Network Open, reveal that social isolation and loneliness independently increased cardiovascular disease risk by 8% and 5% respectively. If women experienced high levels of both, their risk rose 13% to 27% compared to women who reported low levels of social isolation and low levels of loneliness.

(NEXT)

Fasting ramps up human metabolism, study shows

Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology, January 31, 2019

Fasting may help people lose weight, but new research suggests going without food may also boost human metabolic activity, generate antioxidants, and help reverse some effects of aging. Scientists at the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) and Kyoto University identified 30 previously unreported substances whose quantity increases during fasting and indicate a variety of health benefits. The study, published in Scientific Reports, presents an analysis of whole human blood, plasma, and red blood cells drawn from fasting individuals. The results revealed 44 metabolites, including 30 that were previously unrecognized, that increased universally among subjects between 1.5- to 60-fold within just 58 hours of fasting.

(NEXT)

PET Shows Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Improves Alzheimer’s Disease

Louisiana State University & University of North Dakota, January 31, 2022

Louisiana State University (LSU) and the University of North Dakota School of Medicine, report the first PET scan-documented case of improvement in brain metabolism in Alzheimer’s disease in a patient treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). The authors report the case of a 58-year-old female who had experienced five years of cognitive decline, which began accelerating rapidly. SPECT suggested Alzheimer’s disease. The patient underwent a total of 40 HBOT treatments—five days a week over 66 days. Each treatment consisted of 1.15 atmosphere absolute/50 minutes total treatment time. After 21 treatments, the patient reported increased energy and level of activity, better mood and ability to perform daily living activities as well as work crossword puzzles. After 40 treatments, she reported increased memory and concentration, sleep, conversation, appetite, ability to use the computer, more good days than bad days (5/7), resolved anxiety, and decreased disorientation and frustration.

(INTERVIEW)

MICHAEL KANE - About 10 minute

Topic - New York's Governor Hochul wants to arrest and/or imprison any person deemed as a "public health threat"

Michael Kane has worked as a New York City public school teacher for over 13 years and is a steering committee member of NY TEACHERS FOR CHOICE, a grassroots union caucus of educators and parents that is 100% opposed to all medical mandates to maintain employment. He is currently affiliated with Robert Kennedy's Children's Health Defense, Recently TEACHERS FOR CHOICE sued the NYC Department of Education with their attorney Michael Sussman and won a court-ordered stipulation pertaining to in-school COVID testing and privacy rights. Kane has been a proud union member and active supporter of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) for his entire career. He is a former union delegate, served on union consultation committees, lobbied in Albany on behalf of the union on multiple occasions, and protested with rank-&-file union members against the Bloomberg administration. His website is www.nyteachersforchoice.org

After our January protest in Albany that brought 5,000 Anti-Mandate Protesters to NY's Capitol, Governor Hochul can't get any mandate bills through the legislature in Albany. It's an election year and suburban Democrats in purple districts are scared they will lose their jobs to Republicans.

So,  Hochul is going to sign a regulation that goes into effect on February 14 (no vote required) which will do the following:

1. Allow her to arrest and imprison suspected public health threats

1. Give her the power to impose at will mandatory masks with no state of emergency

1. Expand the number of healthcare workers who must get the Covid injections.

The public has until February 14 to make comments Get more information here :https://teachersforchoice.org/2022/01/20/hochul-wants-to-imprison-any-person-who-is-a-public-health-threat/

(VIDEOS)

Sagar and Krystal - We Must Stop Booster Mandates For Kids - 6:30 minutes

Kim Iverson - Johns Hopkins Study SLAMS Lockdowns As A DISASTER

(OTHER NEWS)

How 18th-century Quakers led a boycott of sugar to protest against slavery

The Conversation, February 2, 2022

Buying items that are fair trade, organic, locally made or cruelty-free are some of the ways in which consumers today seek to align their economic habits with their spiritual and ethical views. For 18th-century Quakers, it led them to abstain from sugar and other goods produced by enslaved people. Quaker Benjamin Lay, a former sailor who had settled in Philadelphia in 1731 after living in the British sugar colony of Barbados, is known to have smashed his wife’s china in 1742 during the annual gathering of Quakers in the city. Although Lay’s actions were described by one newspaper as a “publick Testimony against the Vanity of Tea-drinking,” Lay also protested the consumption of slave-grown sugar, which was produced under horrific conditions in sugar colonies like Barbados. In the late 17th and early 18th centuries, only a few Quakers protested African slavery. Indeed, individual Quakers who did protest, like Lay, were often disowned for their actions because their activism disrupted the unity of the Quaker community. Beginning in the 1750s, Quakers’ support for slavery and the products of slave labor started to erode, as reformers like Quaker John Woolman urged their co-religionists in the North American Colonies and England to bring about change. In the 1780s, British and American Quakers launched an extensive and unprecedented propaganda campaign against slavery and slave-labor products. Their goal of creating a broad nondenominational antislavery movement culminated in a boycott of slave-grown sugar in 1791 supported by nearly a half-million Britons. As a scholar of Quakers and the antislavery movement, I argue in my book “Moral Commerce: Quakers and the Transatlantic Boycott of the Slave Labor Economy” that the boycott of slave-grown sugar originated in the actions of ordinary Quakers seeking to draw closer to God by aligning their Christian principles with their economic practices. The golden rule Quakerism originated in the political turmoil of the English civil war and the disruption of monarchical rule in the mid-17th century. In the 1640s, George Fox, the son of a weaver, began an extended period of spiritual wandering, which led him to conclude the answers he sought came not from church teaching or the Scriptures but rather from his direct experience of God. In his travels, Fox encountered others who also sought a more direct experience of God. With the support of Margaret Fell, the wife of a wealthy and prominent judge, Fox organized his followers into the Society of Friends in 1652. Quaker itinerant ministers embarked on an ambitious program of mission work traveling throughout England, the North American Colonies and the Caribbean. The restoration of the British monarchy in 1660 and the passage of the Quaker Act in 1662 brought religious persecution, physical punishment and imprisonment but did not dampen the religious enthusiasm of Quakers like Fox and Fell. This experience of intimacy with Christ led Friends to develop distinct spiritual beliefs and practices, such as an emphasis on the golden rule – “Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” – as a fundamental guiding principle. Quakers were to avoid violence and war-making and to reject social customs that reinforced superficial distinctions of social class. Quakers were to adopt “plain dress, plain speech and plain living” and to tell the truth at all times. These beliefs and practices allow Quakers to emphasize the experience of God and to reject the temptations of worldly pleasures. John Hepburn, a Quaker from Middletown, New Jersey, was one of the first Quakers to protest against slavery. In 1714, he published “The American Defence of the Christian Golden Rule,” which cataloged, as no other Quaker had done, the evils of slavery.

Meta-analysis affirms association between omega-3 fatty acid intake and lowered inflammation

Zhejiang University (China), February 1 2022

A review and meta-analysis published in the journal PLOS One adds evidence to a reduction in pro-inflammatory eicosanoid levels in association with supplementation with marine-derived omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) by adults. Several arachidonic acid-derived eicosanoids exert their significant influence on the inflammatory response. Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) is involved in the classic signs of inflammation and possesses both proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory actions; thromboxane A2 (TXA2) (precursor of TXB2), formed by platelets, macrophages and polymorphonuclear leukocytes, can induce vasoconstriction and promotes aggregation of platelets as well as adhesiveness of polymorphonuclear nutrophils; leukotriene B4 (LTB4) can not only increase vascular permeability and enhance local blood flow by stimulating neutrophil secretion, but also stimulate other inflammatory substances.

(NEXT)

Lifestyle more likely to affect a child's BMI than the weight of their mother

University of Bristol and Imperial College London, February 1, 2022

Researchers from the University of Bristol and Imperial College London have found that a high Body Mass Index (BMI) of a mother before and during pregnancy is not a major cause of high BMI in their offspring—indicating that childhood and teen obesity is more likely to be a result of lifestyle factors. It is known that greater maternal BMI before or during pregnancy is associated with a higher BMI in children, however the extent to which the mother's weight causes obesity in childhood, or whether this is caused by environmental and lifestyle factors post conception and birth is unclear.

(NEXT)

Iron accumulation linked with age-related cognitive decline

Northwestern University, February 1, 2022

Breakdowns in regulatory mechanisms cause iron to build up in the brain as organisms grow older, increasing oxidative stress and causing cellular damage, according to a Northwestern Medicine study published in the journal eLife This mechanism may explain some age-related cognitive decline and contribute to neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease. "There is tight regulation of iron homeostasis in the brain, but it appears that this regulation is disrupted as we age," said Ardehali, who is also director of the Center for Molecular Cardiology at the Feinberg Cardiovascular and Renal Research Institute. "There are studies planning to use iron chelators in coronary artery disease and exploring these in the brain and aging is the next step."

(NEXT)

Modern diet destroys gut health and causes irreversible damage for generations

Stanford University School of Medicine, February 1, 2022

More Americans than ever are struggling with gut health issues. And, it’s no wonder, thanks to the typical American’s diet, loaded with processed, low fiber foods, chemicals and denatured ingredients. Some of the symptoms of compromised gut health include constipation, too much (or too little) intestinal gas, diarrhea, chronic bad breath, hormonal issues, menstrual problems, allergies and vitamin deficiencies, just to name a few. Poor gut health will lead to serious digestive issues, autoimmune conditions and even cancer. A study conducted by the Stanford University School of Medicine showed that the typical American diet consisting of mostly low fiber foods produces a range of internal deficiencies. Even worse, these deficiencies tend to get passed down to future generations. After four generations in this study, the losses were shown to be irreversible.

(OTHER NEWS)

Why I'm leaving the cult of wokeness

Africa Brooke. 07 Jan 2021

If there's one thing I'm NOT afraid of, it's being 'cancelled'. If being cancelled means me living in integrity as a human being who thinks for themselves, CANCEL ME TODAY! I repeat; I am not afraid.What I'm truly afraid of is existing in a world that forces me to submit to an ideology without question, otherwise I'm to be shamed (or pressured to shame myself) and cast out of the community. A world that tells me that because I inhabit a black body; I will forever be oppressed and at the mercy of some omnipresent monster called 'whiteness'. That because of the colour of my skin; I am a victim of an inherently racist system by default - and me rejecting the narrative of oppression means that I am in fact, in denial. How empowering! *You know, as someone that comes from Zimbabwe, a country where the general population is truly oppressed, it perplexes me that oppression is now being worn as an identity piece in most parts of the West, especially by those who claim to be 'progressive'* What I'm truly afraid of is existing in a world that forces me to consider the colour of my skin and my gender (and that of others) at every fucking turn, instead of living by Martin Luther King's teachings and prioritising the content of mine and other people's character. I dread the prospect of a world where context, nuance, critical thinking, meritocracy, mathematics, science, and rationality are considered tools of 'white supremacy', and the rule is that you're not allowed to question or argue this senseless statement - especially if you're white. A world that is conditioning you and I to believe that we will always be trapped in some weird hierarchy because of our race, our genitals, our physical abilities, our neurodiversity, our sexuality, and our politics. And that if we do not agree on every single thing, it's a sign that we are interacting with an enemy - or at the very least, someone to be wildly suspicious and judgmental of...instead of another complex human being worthy of being seen and heard. I wish this world I'm speaking of was just a figment of my imagination, but we are already inside it. Our suitcases have been unpacked here for quite some time. This absolutist, authoritarian world is being fiercely crafted under the guise of 'social justice', and I want no parts in this. I AM OUT. As someone that, politically speaking, leans left on most things (although I'm neither left or right) - the current state of affairs and this push for obedience at all costs is NOT what I signed up for. I never signed up to be hit over the head with disempowering narratives that tell me that I need to refer to myself as a 'person of colour' (how is this different being called a 'coloured' person?), a minority, a marginalised person, and BAME (UK version of BIPOC). I cannot stand any of these terms. Please, if we ever need to address my racial identity, which we really don't need to do as often as you might think...BLACK works just fine, it's not a dirty word. And remember; it's okay if the language I mentioned before is affirming for you, we are allowed to disagree - but for ME, it does nothing but give me false reminders of my supposed oppression...which rubs me the wrong way entirely because I AM NOT OPPRESSED. I think it's key that we begin to accept that black people don't all share a singular experience, nor do we share the same brain. Shocking, I know. 'We are not a monolith' has become a common statement within communities that identify as marginalised, and while I wholeheartedly agree, we're definitely not a monolith... I've noticed that despite this being a popular mantra - when someone 'steps out of line' or dares to think differently...it's a different story. You will often have the pleasure of being told that you are in denial and have some kind of internalised disorder; 'internalised racism', 'internalised anti-blackness', 'internalised misogyny', 'internalised sexism', 'internalised homophobia', 'internalised transphobia', 'internalised white supremacy'... Meaning NOTHING can be questioned. Fun. Culty. Vibes. Honestly, I want better for us because it's all getting a bit much in these social justice/woke spaces, and it scares me to know that it's become controversial to address any concerns or express a differing viewpoint. It's becoming dangerous to address reality. You either agree and comply, or you shut up. I'm so happy that these are conversations that are now happening with many black people in my life, including my family who spend very little time online, are willing to have healthy debates, and couldn't give a crap about identity politics. These are the people who have really helped me free myself from the dogmatic thinking. It's necessary for me to mention that I'm having these conversations with black people because some individuals think that it's only white people who are pushing back against wokeism, and it's far from the truth. What is worrying though is how many more of us feel afraid to talk to our own friends, our partners, our spouses, our colleagues, our family - of fear of being branded as 'wrong-thinkers'. How are we supposed to understand each other if we're living in constant fear of saying the 'wrong' thing? It's even harder if you're white because there's usually someone just waiting to call you racist. And according to the woke manual, if you're white you're supposed to just accept that label. If you do question it or defend yourself, it's taken as confirmation that you ARE in fact a white supremacist. If you DARE express any fears or signs of being rightfully upset, you'll be accused of 'centering your white feelings', and of exuding 'white guilt' or 'white fragility'. With all disrespect, I don't understand the purpose of these cultish, degrading, racist terms. How are they helping us move forward? Is this true social justice? How is this helping the black community? How is this shaping a world where you and I aren't judged by the colour of our skin? Are we really trying to eradicate racism with racism? The LITERAL definition of racism is "prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group". And yet some people have suddenly decided that white people cannot experience racism, nor are they permitted to dispute this insane claim. This then leads to most white people choosing to not say anything at all (which creates resentment because that's the nature of suppression & self-censorship), and some choose to comply and pretend they are on board with anything and everything (whilst also secretly resenting that they can't truly express their thoughts, ideas, feelings, etc). To me all of this confirms that when it comes to 'wokeness', critical social justice, and the beast that is cancel culture, you will never win. You will NEVER get it right. If you choose to stand back, 'educate yourself' privately and quietly; you'll be accused of being violent via your silence... And if you speak out, ask questions, or express valid confusion from the dehumanising generalisations and character assassinations; you'll be denounced for centering your 'white feelings'. This sounds like psychological warfare to me. I can't be the only one that also finds this language eerie. This is cult behaviour! And for saying the above I'm sure someone out there will lovingly label me a 'white apologist'... This is where we're at people. And like I said at the beginning, when it comes to this - I am unafraid. This is my open letter detailing some of the things that have led me to this point, because if there's anything that this past year has taught me; it's that my wellbeing and that of those around me (including the collective), is infinitely more important than any temporary discomfort that might come from me doing what I know to be right. I also want to let you know that I'm not writing this to convince you of anything, your agreement is welcome but it's not a requirement. I'm not writing this from a place of animosity or anger. I'm not writing this on behalf of any individual, group, movement, organisation, or community. I am not an activist, a social commentator, a feminist, an academic, or any other label apart from the ones I claim publicly. I am writing this to free myself. I am writing this for myself. And for you if you need it. Just like you; I am entitled to my own opinions, I have every right to question things that don't feel aligned with my values, morals, ethics, and beliefs. I have every right to push back if I recognise that I'm being forced to comply with ideologies and practices that don't make sense to me (which is how I've felt this past year). I don't want to live my life in a fearful and paranoid state. I don't want to spend my life thinking that everything that doesn't go my way is because of my skin colour, I don't want to spend the rest of my life unable to have insightful conversations with those that think differently to me...I really don't. I'm tired of hearing that because I'm black I should feel victimised. That because I'm black I should agree with everything that black people do and say (surely NO ONE should have this expected of them). None of these narrow definitions of human existence or blackness help me. None of it helps my community. It's keeping us small. It's keeping us stuck, afraid, and defensive. I reject the idea that I am a victim. I reject the idea that I am oppressed. I reject the idea that white people only exist to oppress and should be reminding me of their privilege every 2 seconds, while simultaneously telling me that they are above me. How is this helpful!? If anything, it's deeply offensive and condescending. There's no question about it; being black is a beautiful part of who I am, but it's not all I am - not even close. My identity (race, gender, sexuality, body parts) will never be more important than my humanity, my spirit, and my wholeness. EVER. Because of this, I fervently reject the idea that all white people are racist and must be shamed into confessing their sins and admitting complicity in all of their ancestors indiscretions...simply because of the colour of their skin. I reject this bullshit idea that every white person walking this planet is 'inherently racist'. Do we even know what we're saying? or are we just regurgitating/parroting things, and now it's gotten out of control. I honestly struggle to see how shaming others (or shaming yourself) for having white skin is an essential part of fuelling true social change. Surely this is regressive? It also sounds a little like the very thing we've spent years moving away from... The truth of the matter is that my own ancestors have participated in some FUCKERY and I would not want to live the rest of my life being punished for their actions. A lot of what I'm seeing in the woke/critical social justice spaces is not about creating a better world, it seems to be about punishment and revenge. And it's doing nothing but trampling on the work true Activists are doing and have been doing for centuries! I do have to take a moment to acknowledge those who are doing fantastic work and making a long-lasting impact in their communities, instead of perpetuating fear and manipulating people's emotions by convincing them they will always be victims. I'm done with the insidious brainwashing of wokeness. I'm committed to understanding human behaviour (this is also at the core of what I do professionally), I'm committed to compassion and kindness without excusing that which must be acknowledged. I'm well aware of the systems we live under. I know what's happening in the world. I've lived it. I acknowledge reality, but I refuse to be a slave to a disempowering narrative that rarely focuses on actual solutions. I never want to forget that you can still be compassionate with those you don't agree with. And this way of thinking is what I CHOOSE because it makes my time on planet earth better, you don't have to take it on if it doesn't work for you. I want to live a life that isn't centred around identity politics and all that comes with it, so much more in my life takes priority. I want to remain open to new ideas, perspectives, and thoughts - so that I can grow, course correct where necessary, and make a genuine impact on a local and global level. I want to give people the benefit of the doubt and continue using discernment instead of making sweeping harmful (often lazy) assumptions based on the colour of people's skin or their gender. I refuse to take on the black or white thinking because I've seen and experienced the grave harm that does. As I move into this next season of my life, I'm more interested in the grey area - where we all exist. The nail in the coffin for me was all the events that took place last Summer. Last Summer in the height of the Black Lives Matter movement, I noticed a shadowy part of me emerging and although I didn't judge it, I wasn't comfortable with what was coming up. All the critical social justice dogma I'd been consciously and unconsciously imbibing over the past 2 years began taking a HUGE toll on my mental health, and I hadn't even realised that I wasn't functioning as a full human being - until it reached it's peak. The unpleasant internal experience I had is what led me where I am now, which is why I'm a firm believer that welcoming discomfort in is one of the most loving things you can do for yourself. On social media at that time I was DEEP is various social justice echo chambers that shared more than enough infographics, stories, feed posts, IG LIVES, to make my fight or flight response go nuts. I was in constant fight mode, and wasn't aware. I was being indoctrinated; this means "to teach a person or a group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically". I found myself subconsciously looking for things that would piss me off, which is a symptom of wokeness that seems to show up in many people - hundreds of you have shared your own experiences with me in the past month alone and the similarities in our stories are alarming. Before reacting to things, I did ZERO in-depth research of my own. It's almost as if facts were an unwelcome guest. Anything that didn't align with the beliefs I held about race, sex, gender, politics, etc - I rejected (this was all unconscious). I didn't question the sources I was getting information from, it was all taken as objective truth. It was ALL reactionary, I was on autopilot. I didn't realise I had many people on pedestals that they shouldn't have been on in the first place (no fault of their own, I put them there), I was operating purely based on emotions and feelings that gave my nervous system the signal that I was under threat. And that's the energy I acted and spoke from. I rashly unfollowed some people on my social media who I'd decided should have 'spoken up' in support of Black Lives Matter (an organisationI have now done my own extensive research on, but that's a whole other story) - simply because (based on my egos time frame) they weren't responding as and when they 'should' have. I'm sure I re-shared something about 'white silence' being 'violence' (an oversimplified and unfair statement I no longer agree with, and you can watch the lengthy live I did with Rukiat where I go into some of this). I also publicly shamed an unsuspecting man who had messaged me to question me about my conduct (I immediately assumed he was white...he was mixed race). And even though his approach was not a welcome one, he wasn't unkind to me - which is why I'm not proud of the unkind way in which I reacted...not responded, reacted. What frightened me was the applause I got from over 4,000 people when I called out this man in an Instagram post - I didn't say anything wild, but I did deconstruct his direct message publicly with the intention to embarrass him, not to resolve anything - to embarrass. I was honestly shocked by how many people used the environment I had created to exercise pack mentality, and to casually shame and scold a stranger - of which I take responsibility for as the person that created that environment. I now know that publicly shaming someone is a common tactic used in most woke spaces and echo chambers on social media, and it's so normalised. This is the kind of thing that quickly leads to bullying, doxing, stalking, and harassment...and sometimes ends in suicide. After seeing the responses applauding me, I removed the post and started asking myself some questions; who am I doing this for? why did my interaction with this man need to be publicised? what is really the root of the anger I feel? is this a performance on my behalf? what research have I done to support the ideology I'm leading with? are there any alternative sources that can give me more information or provide clarity on the situation I'm reacting to? do I really believe this or am I regurgitating something I read/heard/saw somewhere? I'm of the thinking that there is such a thing as justified anger, and I believe that all emotions and modes of expressions have their place - but I know myself well enough to know that the way I handled that particular situation was not necessary. This incident led me start evaluating my own behaviour and doing more research around the cancel culture phenomenon. And it's just one recent example of how some of this stuff has showed up in my life over the past 2 years. SO, why am I calling 'WOKENESS' a cult? Well, first lets start by defining what the term woke even means. It's a term that been around for a very long time but has (in my eyes) lost all of it's credibility and meaning in recent years. Woke: a term embedded in US Black History and social justice which originally meant being aware, well-informed, and up to date with what was happening within the community. "Stay woke became a watch word in parts of the black community for those who considered themselves self-aware, questioning the dominant paradigm, and striving for something better" - and these are the sentiments I will always stand for, however... This is NOT how it's playing out these days, and you can read this interesting article to get a timeline of how it's evolved over the years, and I'll continue sharing with you the specific pockets of 'wokeness' and social justice that I have divorced myself from. I can no longer be an active participant in any culture or movement that encourages groupthink, outrage on demand, fear and violence, revamped segregation, fabricating history, cancellations masked as accountability, self-centredness... normalisation of racism towards white people, the disempowerment of black people masked as social justice, the constant redefining of existing language, ignoring self-responsibility, constant pathologizing, oppressed vs oppressor mentality, and the pressure to conform and comply... It's exhausting. And honestly, I have better things to do with my time. Not to mention, it's killing us. I also find it very telling that people who are married to these woke spaces will immediately assume that those that are requesting for more compassion, understanding, room for discussion, removal of censorship - only want these things so they can have free reign to be bigots, sexist, 'fascists', racists, homophobes, etc. As a free-thinking black woman who most definitely wants more compassion, understanding, healthy discussion, empathy, removal of censorship, more tolerance and acceptance when it matters most...I can guarantee you that my final goal isn't so I can be a racist sexist fascist alt-righter extremist. LOL. And if you can understand this, what makes someone who happens to be white any less sincere if they want the exact same thing as me? Which many people do! I hope you can sort of see just how oversimplified and flawed this madness is. I often laugh about the ridiculous nature of it all, but what's concerning is that it's spreading like wildfire, it's causing lasting harm, and it's distracting us from the very real work that needs to be done to tackle injustice and unite us as human beings. I will stick to my guns by saying that the turn we're taking because of critical social justice and this current strain of branded monetised wokeness - is not going to take us to the promised land (SPOILER: there is no utopia, I'm sorry to break it to you). As someone who will never stop advocating for human rights (fairness, equality, access to resources, respect, independence - for ALL, not just for people who share my skin tone and gender), I have come to realise that I do not need to be part of any groups or wear any labels to make a positive contribution to this planet of ours. This is also why I do not identify as a feminist. Just like everything else I've spoken about so far; the current wave of commodified feminism is so far removed from my core values; honesty, respect, interconnection, equality, individuality etc. There's a lot of self-righteousness, virtue signalling, self-centeredness, and a lack of empathy in most of what I see being presented today as feminism - and again; it seems to be about revenge, superiority, and personal branding. It's also not uncommon to be made to feel unintelligent, wrong, and inferior in a lot of these supposedly 'safe spaces' - simply because you don't identify with the label or agree with all the view points of the group. IT'S TIRING, and I wish more people knew that you can still believe in and advocate for equality and fairness without wearing a label like a badge of honour. My mission isn't to be superior to anyone, nor do I want to see the demise of any gender. I believe that we should all have equal rights and opportunities, and I'm also realistic about the differences we have as human beings - I celebrate those differences. In a world obsessed with labels and titles, I would rather let my values and actions speak for themselves. These are the times when I am incredibly grateful for the upbringing I've had, both in Zimbabwe and here in the UK. I'm grateful that I was raised to think for myself, and that's what I'll continue to do. I was raised to not judge people based on the colour of their skin, gender, class etc - no matter what. And that's what I'll continue to do. YES, I could choose to carry animosity in my heart based on the pain my ancestors experienced and the injustice still taking place in many different parts of the world - but what does that do for me, my mental state, my community, and those I interact with in the present day? I'd rather acknowledge reality, and focus on solutions. I wasn't really raised to ask many questions, but in adulthood asking powerful questions (even when they are simple) is something that has become a non-negotiable - and that's what I will continue to do. I will continue to trust myself and question things. I will do my own research before responding purely based on emotion. I will keep myself open to having challenging conversations if I have the capacity to do so, and if I don't have the capacity to engage, I will still not shut anyone down - unless absolutely necessary. My biggest realisation has been that most of these people that pose as Social Justice Warriors, Activists, Agents of Change etc - don't actually want to improve and repair society. They don't want a better world. For some the goal is to make things worse. A lot of the people I know in these spaces have brands, careers, and management teams from this. Their livelihood depends on them playing this role, which often means that they will continue to find everything wrong with society instead of making consistent efforts to unite and truly empower. There's a sinister side many people aren't comfortable speaking about because of the potential backlash, and it's unfair to those of us who end up being sucked into these echo chambers and movements through the promise of community and betterment. Most of us just want to help. We want to see change! In our personal lives, and in the world we exist in. This leaves us vulnerable to questionable 'leaders', influencers, and organisations who set themselves up so that you cannot question their practices or agenda. The similarities of wokeness/critical social justice to fundamentalist religion (something I'm VERY familiar with) is why I choose to call it a cult, the framework and tactics are eerily similar... It usually goes a little like this; find/attract a vulnerable person, make them feel like they belong so they can trust you, tell them exactly what they want to hear, and once they become loyal - it is easier to sell them outlandish concepts and to make them 'repent' for 'sins' they have supposedly committed... the person then regresses and begins to rely on their 'leader' or the ideology to shape their thoughts and their world view. They are introduced to an enemy and are encouraged to cut themselves off from the outside world and anyone else who doesn't agree with or follow the ideology (us vs them mentality). Once cut off from everyone, the individual is more dependent on the leader or the group, and then it becomes increasingly difficult to leave. Just like an abusive relationship! This is exactly what I'm seeing in the woke/feminist/critical social justice spaces. Despite it all, the individual is often unaware of what's really happening and will continue to believe that they are acting on their own accord. The prison walls remain invisible. But it's possible to break out! It's why I've decided to speak out. And if you don't agree with what I'm sharing, and this has not been your experience - that's okay. I will always respect your right to own your experiences and perspectives. I ask that you do the same for me. We live different lives, we have different views. It's normal. What ISN'T normal, is forcing people to comply and bow down to an ideology, simply because YOU think it's the right one. If you resonate with what I've shared in this letter, please know that you are not alone. You are allowed to change your mind. You are allowed to grow. You are allowed to walk away. You are allowed to put your foot down. There is no one way to 'do the work'. You don't have to pray to a single political idea, movement, or group - nor do you have to agree with EVERYTHING presented to you as the absolute truth. You are not morally inferior or superior to anyone else. And remember that we still have to co-exist on this planet, so expecting everyone you encounter to agree with every belief or view that you hold - is fucking wild, LOL. If you have read this far, I appreciate your time and your attention. Any typos you see, represent the sheer passion flowing through me. I'll stop here because I could go on, there is always more to say. I feel like this letter is just the foundation of the conversations I REALLY want to have so I will likely explore some of the specificities in podcast form and through my newsletter. I'm considering producing and hosting a limited podcast series that specifically talks about these themes. Don't worry, my existing podcastBeyond the Self won't be going anywhere! In the meantime; you can find me on Instagram if we're not already connected. Although my work as a Mindset Coach, Speaker, and Consultant has nothing to do with social justice, cancel culture, wokeness etc - this is something I'll continue to speak about because it directly speaks to 2 of my biggest areas of focus, which in this case are collective self-sabotage and psychological manipulation. I encourage you to break out of any echo chambers (especially on social media) and explore yourself BEYOND your race, your pronouns, your genitals, your sexuality, your physical capabilities, your politics - those things have their place but there is so much more to you. And in fact, when you do go beyond those neatly prescribed boxes, you become more secure within your identity. I urge you to unsubscribe to anyone and anything that is stripping you of your humanity, your agency, and is proving to be detrimental to your mental wellbeing. You deserve better, let's never stop speaking up! Love always, Africa

(NEXT)

Lawsuit accuses COVID-19 testing company of faking results

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson has filed a lawsuit against an Illinois-based COVID-19 testing company, accusing it of improperly handling tests and providing fake negative results.

The Associated Press, January 31, 2022

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson has filed a lawsuit against an Illinois-based COVID-19 testing company, accusing it of improperly handling tests and providing fake results. It describes how the company expanded to about 300 locations throughout the United States and collected tens of thousands of tests a day. “Center for COVID Control contributed to the spread of COVID-19 when it provided false negative results,” Ferguson said in a statement. “These sham testing centers threatened the health and safety of our communities. They must be held accountable.” The lawsuit also said the Center for COVID Control stored tests in garbage bags — rather than properly refrigerating them — backdated sample-collection dates so stale samples would still be processed and instructed its employees to lie when Washington residents asked about delayed results. The lawsuit asks the court to order the Center for COVID Control to pay civil penalties of up to $12,500 per violation of the Consumer Protection Act and relinquish any profits the company made from its “unlawful conduct,” in addition to permanently closing all locations, the statement said.

When food alters gene function

Helmholtz Zentrum München, January 30, 2022

As the study shows, a high-fat diet during pregnancy and lactation leads to epigenetic* changes in the offspring. These changes affect metabolic pathways regulated by the gut hormone GIP**, whereby the adult offspring are more susceptible to obesity and insulin resistance, the precursor to type 2 diabetes. Similar mechanisms cannot be ruled out in humans, according to Pfeiffer. As scientists throughout the world observe, children of obese mothers have a higher risk of obesity and metabolic disorders. Recent findings suggest that diet-related epigenetic effects may also play a causal role in this.

(NEXT)

Probiotics Help with Morning Sickness

University of California at Davis, January 28, 2022

A study published by researchers from the University of California, Davis, has found that probiotics are a game changer for moms-to-be who find themselves green at the gills on the daily. After receiving a mix of 10 Lactobacillus probiotic strains and one Bifidobacterium strain over a 16-day period, the low-risk pregnant women in the study, who all had been experiencing nausea and other digestive system complaints, reported a 16% reduction in nausea and a 33% reduction in vomiting episodes.

(NEXT)

Higher dietary fiber intake in young women may reduce breast cancer risk

Harvard School of Public Health, January 31, 2022

Boston, MA – Women who eat more high-fiber foods during adolescence and young adulthood–especially lots of fruits and vegetables–may have significantly lower breast cancer risk than those who eat less dietary fiber when young. The researchers looked at a group of 90,534 women who participated in the Nurses’ Health Study II, a large long-running investigation of factors that influence women’s health. The women–ages 27-44 at the time–filled out questionnaires about their food intake, and did so every four years after that. The researchers analyzed the women’s fiber intake while adjusting for a number of other factors, such as race, family history of breast cancer, body mass index, weight change over time, menstruation history, alcohol use, and other dietary factors.

(NEXT)

Cocoa flavanols may use gut microbiota pathway to ease metabolic syndrome: Review

Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, January 29, 2022

Consuming cocoa flavanols may interact with the gut microbiota as a way of preventing metabolic syndrome or easing the condition’s symptoms, a review has concluded. While flavanols from a variety of dietary sources appear promising, cocoa flavanols represent an emerging approach for intervention in metabolic syndrome. Flavanols are compounds found in a variety of plant-based foods and beverages, including tea, apples, grapes, cocoa and nuts. Cocoa is generally regarded as the most concentrated dietary source of flavanols with the strongest antioxidant potential.

(NEXT)

Cruciferous vegetables help the immune system to fight intestinal pathogens

Francis Crick Institute, January 28, 2022

A study in mice shows that eating cruciferous vegetables—including broccoli, kale and cauliflower – helps the immune system to fight intestinal pathogens. The research might have implications for people with inflammatory bowel diseases. A protein called the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) plays a crucial role in protecting us from external pollutants, toxins and pathogens at barrier sites in our body such as the skin, lungs and gut. Studying the role of AhR in the gut, scientists at the Francis Crick Institute have discovered that another protein, known as Cyp1a1, regulates immunity in the gut by providing feedback on AhR signalling by degrading the molecules that activate AhR—known as AhR ligands However, too much Cyp1a1 can deplete AhR ligands altogether. This could result in susceptibility to bacteria like pathogenic E. Coli and might play a role in conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease.

(VIDEO)

Klaus Schwab referencing the global leaders groomed by WEF- at Harvard’s JFK School of Government, 2017

Quit social media | Dr. Cal Newport | TEDxTysons

Social Media – Why it Sickens the Self and Divides Society

COVID-19: A Second Opinion

(LETTER)

Letter to Joe Rogan

Dear Joe, I am writing in response to your recent clip about the controversy that has arisen over your coverage of the Covid-19 pandemic. I have been a media host dealing primarily with medicine and health for 57 years and have been engaged in many media wars and even censorship for over four decades. One lesson I have learned is to never apologize when you are correct.  Although I have not watched all of your programs addressing pandemic-related topics, your guests who have questioned the official government narrative, notably Drs. McCullough and Malone, were correct and were far better prepared to provide supporting scientific references to their claims than were Drs. Gupta and Hotez. That should be evident to your regular viewers. I would like to offer a suggestion. Have your staff make transcripts of your interviews from your pro- and con- guests and send them respectively with a request to provide supporting scientific evidence to their statements. Follow this up by moderating an open dialogue with an invitation to the press and critics to ask questions specific to the actual science and supporting clinical evidence, including the positions of our federal health agencies and the World Health Organization.  This will enable your audience and the greater public to decide.  I can predict with strong confidence that individuals such as Gupta, Osterholm and Hotez will decline to dialogue with those who they have consistently ridiculed. For those in power and whom the dominant narrative protects, it is never in their best interest to publicly debate their critics. Nevertheless your very gesture to advance open debate will be an enormous boon for yourself and a growing audience. Already, Spotify has aligned with the pro-establishment fact checkers to serve as the final arbiters of the content and conversations you conduct henceforth. This new effort is thoroughly non-objective and biased. Now that you have apologized and have exposed a weakness, unless you remain firm with your integrity to weigh out the facts and evidence objectively, they will be certain to further erode your reputation and they will succeed. In the future, whatever you air that can be ruled as misinformation – rightly or wrongly — will be magnified across the media. And it will not cease until your opponents get you off the air. You are surely aware that the assault against your program and person is highly coordinated; however, it seems certain that Spotify also exerted some kind of pressure to have you acquiesce to some demands. You have a remarkable audience, it is my belief that the size of your audience comes from your honesty and integrity, an unflinching character to shout out truth to power. Now you are at the threshold of power shouting back.  Trust your audience, not your enemies. Because no apologies you make will be fully respected because you now represent a clear and present threat to their agenda. I hope you take my comments in solidarity with your courage to question many of the lingering uncertainties, contradictions and vagrant misleading statements that comprise the official Covid narrative. Gary Null, PhD

(OTHER NEWS)

Tangled Tale of NATO Expansion at the Heart of Ukraine Crisis

Joe Lauria, Consortium News, January 28, 2022

The end of the Cold War with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the end of the Soviet Union two years later presented the United States with a choice: triumphalism or reconciliation. There was hope of a “peace dividend” because the fortune spent on armaments for so long could now be spent on domestic needs. The Warsaw Pact dissolved and there was hope that its counterpart, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, would also pass into history.  Rather its expansion has become a flashpoint in the current standoff over Ukraine. To assent to the reunification of Germany, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev ultimately agreed to a proposal from then U.S. Secretary of State James Baker that a reunited Germany would be part of NATO but the military alliance would not move “one inch” to the east, that is, absorb any of the former Warsaw Pact nations into NATO. On Feb. 9, 1990, Baker said: “We consider that the consultations and discussions in the framework of the 2+4 mechanism should give a guarantee that the reunification of Germany will not lead to the enlargement of NATO’s military organization to the East.” On the next day, then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl said: ““We consider that NATO should not enlarge its sphere of activity.” Gorbachev’s mistake was not to get it in writing as a legally-binding agreement.  For years it was believed there was no written record of the Baker-Gorbachev exchange at all, until the National Security Archive at George Washington University in December 2017 published a series of memos and cables about these assurances against NATO expansion eastward.  ’” One Jan. 31, 1999 cable from the U.S. embassy in Bonn informed Washington that German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher’s speech that day made clear “that the changes in Eastern Europe and the German unification process must not lead to an ‘impairment of Soviet security interests.’ Therefore, NATO should rule out an ‘expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.’” President Bill Clinton’s administration investigated the matter and concluded that Yeltsin was wrong and that no NATO expansion eastward was ever promised. According to a 2014 article in Foreign Affairs: “’You say that NATO is not directed against us, that it is simply a security structure that is adapting to new realities,’ Gorbachev told Baker in May, according to Soviet records. ‘Therefore, we propose to join NATO.’ Baker refused to consider such a notion, replying dismissively, ‘Pan-European security is a dream.’” Since then NATO has held many military exercises Russia has found threatening. TASS reported in December that NATO holds 40 exercises a year near Russian territory. In 2016, a 10-day maneuver was carried out in Poland with 31,000 NATO troops from 24 nations and thousands of  tanks and other vehicles. That year NATO also installed a missile base in Romania that can strike Russia, claiming it was only “defensive” against incoming missiles from Iran, though the weapons can also be used offensively. A similar missile base, previously canceled, is slated to be operational in Poland later this year. Six years after NATO promised Ukraine would one day become a member, the U.S. led a coup in Kiev that overthrew a democratically-elected president who leaned towards Moscow. The U.S. move seemed to come from Brzezinski’s playbook. In his 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, he wrote: “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire. Russia without Ukraine can still strive for imperial status, but it would then become a predominantly Asian imperial state.” Thus U.S. “primacy,” or world dominance, which still drives Washington, is not possible without control of Eurasia, as Brzezinski argued, and that’s not possible without control of Ukraine by pushing Russia out.  What Brzezinski and U.S. leaders still view as Russia’s “imperial ambitions” are in Moscow seen as imperative defensive measures against an aggressive West.

(NEXT)

Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11

Reuters, January 28, 2022

Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks. “With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don’t see any clear benefit with vaccinating them,” Health Agency official Britta Bjorkholm told a news conference.

Black cumin’s anti-inflammatory potential may have airways/asthma benefits: RCT

University College London, January 27, 2022

Supplements containing oil from black cumin (Nigella sativa) may improve asthma control and lung function, says a new study. The new study, published in Phytotherapy Research , found that one gram per day of the oil for four weeks led to significant improvements in scores of asthma control and a “remarkable reduction of peripheral blood eosinophil count,” wrote the authors “Eosinophil cell plays a major role in asthma inflammation, and blood eosinophil count is considered to be a vital biomarker in asthma trials. To our knowledge, this is the first [randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial] that showed a significant reduction of blood eosinophilia by [Nigella sativa oil (NSO)] among asthmatic patients.”

(NEXT)

Meat, multiple sclerosis and the microbiome

University of Connecticut, January 27, 2022

Eating more meat, having less of certain bacteria in the gut, and more of certain immune cells in the blood, all link with multiple sclerosis, reports a team of researchers led by UConn Health and Washington University School of Medicine. The work, published in the 27 January issue of EBioMedicine, teased out subtle connections that could lead to a better understanding of the causes of the disease. But teasing out the exact relationships between diet, immune response and MS has been difficult. MS is most obviously an autoimmune disease in which the body attacks the insulation surrounding its nerves. When the insulation is damaged enough, the nerves begin to misfire and malfunction like wires with frayed insulation. But what triggers the body to attack the insulation in the nervous system in the first place is unknown.

(NEXT)

Flavonoids may reduce mortality risk for people with Parkinson's disease

Pennsylvania State University, January 27, 2022

People with Parkinson's disease who eat more flavonoids—compounds found in richly colored foods like berries, cocoa and red wine—may have a lower mortality risk than those who don't, according to a new study. Specifically, the researchers found that when people who had already been diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (PD) ate more flavonoids, they had a lower chance of dying during the 34-year study period than those who did not consume as many flavonoids. Additionally, they found that eating more flavonoids before being diagnosed with PD was associated with a lower risk of dying in men, but not in women.

(NEXT)

Team Links Social Media Use to Worse Physical Health

University of Buffalo, January 26, 2022

A new study finds a link between social media use and biological and psychological indicators associated with poor physical health among college students The researchers found participants who used social media excessively had higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), a biological marker of chronic inflammation that predicts serious illnesses, such as diabetes, certain cancers, and cardiovascular disease.

(NEXT)

Can A Lack of Sleep Make You Feel Older?

University of Exeter (UK), January 28, 2022

A study from the University of Exeter in the UK suggests that you are more likely to perceive yourself to be older than your biological age if you don't get enough sleep. Researchers looked at the aging and sleep patterns of nearly 4,500 adults aged 50 years and higher, asking them about sleep quality and sleep duration and giving them cognitive performance tests and lifestyle questionnaires. The participants were given the same questionnaire twice—once at baseline and again a year later. The result? Overall, those who reported sleeping poorly also had a higher awareness of negative age-related changes, while those who slept better tended to feel younger. "Our research suggests that poor sleepers feel older and have a more negative perception of aging," noted Serena Sabatini, the lead author of the study. One interesting finding of the study: middle-aged adults with healthy sleep habits tended to feel younger than their biological age, but those who had trouble sleeping felt every year of their actual age…or, more troubling, they felt older than they were. Why does this matter? If you feel like you are older than your actual age, it can have a lasting impact on your physical, mental and cognitive health.

(VIDEO)

Bill Maher Rant Against the Left - about 8 min

Brussels - What Really Happened - 7:30 minutes

Canadian Constitutional Crisis | Brian Peckford | The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast S4: E78

Mainstream Media Melts Down as National ‘Defeat the Mandates DC’ Rally Overcomes Political Divides

(OTHER NEWS)

The Pressure Campaign on Spotify to Remove Joe Rogan Reveals the Religion of Liberals: Censorship

Glenn Greenwald, January 29, 2022

American liberals are obsessed with finding ways to silence and censor their adversaries. Every week, if not every day, they have new targets they want de-platformed, banned, silenced, and otherwise prevented from speaking or being heard (by "liberals,” I mean the term of self-description used by the dominant wing of the Democratic Party). For years, their preferred censorship tactic was to expand and distort the concept of "hate speech” to mean "views that make us uncomfortable,” and then demand that such “hateful” views be prohibited on that basis. For that reason, it is now common to hear Democrats assert, falsely, that the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech does not protect “hate speech." Their political culture has long inculcated them to believe that they can comfortably silence whatever views they arbitrarily place into this category without being guilty of censorship. Constitutional illiteracy to the side, the “hate speech” framework for justifying censorship is now insufficient because liberals are eager to silence a much broader range of voices than those they can credibly accuse of being hateful. That is why the newest, and now most popular, censorship framework is to claim that their targets are guilty of spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.” These terms, by design, have no clear or concise meaning. Like the term “terrorism,” it is their elasticity that makes them so useful. When liberals’ favorite media outlets, from CNN and NBC to The New York Times and The Atlantic, spend four years disseminating one fabricated Russia story after the next — from the Kremlin hacking into Vermont's heating system and Putin's sexual blackmail over Trump to bounties on the heads of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, the Biden email archive being "Russian disinformation,” and a magical mystery weapon that injures American brains with cricket noises — none of that is "disinformation” that requires banishment. Nor are false claims that COVID's origin has proven to be zoonotic rather than a lab leak, the vastly overstated claim that vaccines prevent transmission of COVID, or that Julian Assange stole classified documents and caused people to die. Corporate outlets beloved by liberals are free to spout serious falsehoods without being deemed guilty of disinformation, and, because of that, do so routinely. This "disinformation" term is reserved for those who question liberal pieties, not for those devoted to affirming them. That is the real functional definition of “disinformation” and of its little cousin, “misinformation.” It is not possible to disagree with liberals or see the world differently than they see it. The only two choices are unthinking submission to their dogma or acting as an agent of "disinformation.” Dissent does not exist to them; any deviation from their worldview is inherently dangerous — to the point that it cannot be heard. The data proving a deeply radical authoritarian strain in Trump-era Democratic Party politics is ample and have been extensively reported here. Democrats overwhelmingly trust and love the FBI and CIA. Polls show they overwhelmingly favor censorship of the internet not only by Big Tech oligarchs but also by the state. Leading Democratic Party politicians have repeatedly subpoenaed social media executives and explicitly threatened them with legal and regulatory reprisals if they do not censor more aggressively — a likely violation of the First Amendment given decades of case law ruling that state officials are barred from coercing private actors to censor for them, in ways the Constitution prohibits them from doing directly. Democratic officials have used the pretexts of COVID, “the insurrection," and Russia to justify their censorship demands. Both Joe Biden and his Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, have "urged” Silicon Valley to censor more when asked about Joe Rogan and others who air what they call “disinformation” about COVID. They cheered the use of pro-prosecutor tactics against Michael Flynn and other Russiagate targets; made a hero out of the Capitol Hill Police officer who shot and killed the unarmed Ashli Babbitt; voted for an additional $2 billion to expand the functions of the Capitol Police; have demanded and obtained lengthy prison sentences and solitary confinement even for non-violent 1/6 defendants; and even seek to import the War on Terror onto domestic soil. Given the climate prevailing in the American liberal faction, this authoritarianism is anything but surprising. For those who convince themselves that they are not battling mere political opponents with a different ideology but a fascist movement led by a Hitler-like figure bent on imposing totalitarianism — a core, defining belief of modern-day Democratic Party politics — it is virtually inevitable that they will embrace authoritarianism. When a political movement is subsumed by fear — the Orange Hitler will put you in camps and end democracy if he wins again — then it is not only expected but even rational to embrace authoritarian tactics including censorship to stave off this existential threat. Fear always breeds authoritarianism, which is why manipulating and stimulating that human instinct is the favorite tactic of political demagogues. And when it comes to authoritarian tactics, censorship has become the liberals’ North Star. Every week brings news of a newly banished heretic. Liberals cheered the news last week that Google's YouTube permanently banned the extremely popular video channel of conservative commentator Dan Bongino. His permanent ban was imposed for the crime of announcing that, moving forward, he would post all of his videos exclusively on the free speech video platform Rumble after he received a seven-day suspension from Google's overlords for spreading supposed COVID “disinformation.” What was Bongino's prohibited view that prompted that suspension? He claimed cloth masks do not work to stop the spread of COVID, a view shared by numerous experts and, at least in part, by the CDC. When Bongino disobeyed the seven-day suspension by using an alternative YouTube channel to announce his move to Rumble, liberals cheered Google's permanent ban because the only thing liberals hate more than platforms that allow diverse views are people failing to obey rules imposed by corporate authorities. It is not hyperbole to observe that there is now a concerted war on any platforms devoted to free discourse and which refuse to capitulate to the demands of Democratic politicians and liberal activists to censor. The spear of the attack are corporate media outlets, who demonize and try to render radioactive any platforms that allow free speech to flourish. When Rumble announced that a group of free speech advocates — including myself, former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, comedian Bridget Phetasy, former Sanders campaign videographer Matt Orfalea and journalist Zaid Jilani — would produce video content for Rumble, The Washington Post immediately published a hit piece, relying exclusively on a Google-and-Facebook-aligned so-called "disinformation expert” to malign Rumble as "one of the main platforms for conspiracy communities and far-right communities in the U.S. and around the world” and a place “where conspiracies thrive," all caused by Rumble's "allowing such videos to remain on the site unmoderated.” (The narrative about Rumble is particularly bizarre since its Canadian founder and still-CEO, Chris Pavlovski created Rumble in 2013 with apolitical goals — to allow small content creators abandoned by YouTube to monetize their content — and is very far from an adherent to right-wing ideology). The same attack was launched, and is still underway, against Substack, also for the crime of refusing to ban writers deemed by liberal corporate outlets and activists to be hateful and/or fonts of disinformation. After the first wave of liberal attacks on Substack failed — that script was that it is a place for anti-trans animus and harassment — The Post returned this week for round two, with a paint-by-numbers hit piece virtually identical to the one it published last year about Rumble. “Newsletter company Substack is making millions off anti-vaccine content, according to estimates,” blared the sub-headline. “Prominent figures known for spreading misinformation, such as [Joseph] Mercola, have flocked to Substack, podcasting platforms and a growing number of right-wing social media networks over the past year after getting kicked off or restricted on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube,” warned the Post. It is, evidently, extremely dangerous to society for voices to still be heard once Google decrees they should not be. This Post attack on Substack predictably provoked expressions of Serious Concern from good and responsible liberals. That included Chelsea Clinton, who lamented that Substack is profiting off a “grift.” Apparently, this political heiress — who is one of the world's richest individuals by virtue of winning the birth lottery of being born to rich and powerful parents, who in turn enriched themselves by cashing in on their political influence in exchange for $750,000 paychecks from Goldman Sachs for 45-minute speeches, and who herself somehow was showered with a $600,000 annual contract from NBC News despite no qualifications — believes she is in a position to accuse others of "grifting.” This Post-manufactured narrative about Substack instantly metastasized throughout the liberal sect of media. “Anti-vaxxers making ‘at least $2.5m’ a year from publishing on Substack,” read the headline of The Guardian, the paper that in 2018 published the outright lie that Julian Assange met twice with Paul Manafort inside the Ecuadorian Embassy and refuses to this day to retract it (i.e., “disinformation"). Like The Post, the British paper cited one of the seemingly endless number of shady pro-censorship groups — this one calling itself the “Center for Countering Digital Hate” — to argue for greater censorship by Substack. “They could just say no,” said the group's director, who has apparently convinced himself he should be able to dictate what views should and should not be aired: “This isn’t about freedom; this is about profiting from lies. . . . Substack should immediately stop profiting from medical misinformation that can seriously harm readers.” The emerging campaign to pressure Spotify to remove Joe Rogan from its platform is perhaps the most illustrative episode yet of both the dynamics at play and the desperation of liberals to ban anyone off-key. It was only a matter of time before this effort really galvanized in earnest. Rogan has simply become too influential, with too large of an audience of young people, for the liberal establishment to tolerate his continuing to act up. Prior efforts to coerce, cajole, or manipulate Rogan to fall into line were abject failures. On Tuesday, musician Neil Young demanded that Spotify either remove Rogan from its platform or cease featuring Young's music, claiming Rogan spreads COVID disinformation. Spotify predictably sided with Rogan, their most popular podcaster in whose show they invested $100 million, by removing Young's music and keeping Rogan. The pressure on Spotify mildly intensified on Friday when singer Joni Mitchell issued a similar demand. All sorts of censorship-mad liberals celebrated this effort to remove Rogan, then vowed to cancel their Spotify subscription in protest of Spotify's refusal to capitulate for now; a hashtag urging the deletion of Spotify's app trended for days. Many bizarrely urged that everyone buy music from Apple instead; apparently, handing over your cash to one of history's largest and richest corporations, repeatedly linked to the use of slave labor, is the liberal version of subversive social justice. Democrats are not only the dominant political faction in Washington, controlling the White House and both houses of Congress, but liberals in particular are clearly the hegemonic culture force in key institutions: media, academia and Hollywood. That is why it is a mistake to assume that we are near the end of their orgy of censorship and de-platforming victories. It is far more likely that we are much closer to the beginning than the end. The power to silence others is intoxicating. Once one gets a taste of its power, they rarely stop on their own. Indeed, it was once assumed that Silicon Valley giants steeped in the libertarian ethos of a free internet would be immune to demands to engage in political censorship ("content moderation” is the more palatable euphemism which liberal corporate media outlets prefer). But when the still-formidable megaphones of The New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC News, CNN and the rest of the liberal media axis unite to accuse Big Tech executives of having blood on their hands and being responsible for the destruction of American democracy, that is still an effective enforcement mechanism. Billionaires are, like all humans, social and political animals and instinctively avoid ostracization and societal scorn. Beyond the personal interest in avoiding vilification, corporate executives can be made to censor against their will and in violation of their political ideology out of self-interest. The corporate media still has the ability to render a company toxic, and the Democratic Party more now than ever has the power to abuse their lawmaking and regulatory powers to impose real punishment for disobedience, as it has repeatedly threatened to do. If Facebook or Spotify are deemed to be so toxic that no Good Liberals can use them without being attacked as complicit in fascism, white supremacy or anti-vax fanaticism, then that will severely limit, if not entirely sabotage, a company's future viability.