After a couple years of reading and listening to the information being put forward by the media and by many doctors and other highly qualified scientists and researchers, I decided to do a Q and A type format to share what I have learned so far regarding COVID and the mRNA vaccines. These answers may seem vague. They are not intended to be definitive. For the average person on the street, trying to find definitive answers around COVID and the vaccines can be a little like trying to grab an eel. There is no shortage of “true believers” on either side of the vaccine issue looking to proselytize you. It behooves all of us to look into this subject from both the pro and con perspectives. Possibly this Q and A can help you begin to formulate a viable risk/benefit analysis for your own decisions.
Q. Does COVID exist? A. Yes. There seems to be little dispute among qualified doctors and scientists that the COVID virus exists.
Q. Are some people dying from COVID? A. Yes.
Q. Do some people survive COVID without having been vaccinated? A. Yes.
Q. Does having been vaccinated reduce the severity of symptoms if contracting COVID? A. For some, not for all.
Q. Are there some lasting adverse health effects from having had COVID? A. For some.
Q. Are there risks associated with taking the vaccines? A. Yes. For some more than others.
Q. Are some people dying from the vaccines? A. Yes.
Q. Are some people experiencing severe, but non-fatal, adverse effects from the vaccines? A. Yes.
Q. Do all people who receive the vaccines experience lasting, adverse side effects? A. No.
Q. Does being vaccinated mean that you cannot transmit COVID to others? A. No.
Q. Do the vaccine manufacturers, or the governments which mandate vaccines, stand behind them by paying for losses due to adverse side effects? A. No. This was something which was definitively determined before the vaccines were released.
Q. Is it more dangerous for a school aged child to be vaccinated than to contract COVID? A. It depends upon the child. For some children, taking the vaccine has definitely produced tragic results.
Q. Are there effective treatments, other than vaccines, which are being used to protect people from COVID? A. Yes.
Q. Are these “other than vaccine” treatments safe and effective? A. Some are definitely safer and more effective than others.
Q. Can my doctor tell me if I am someone at a greater or lesser risk for adverse side effects if I am trying to decide whether or not to be vaccinated? A. With the amount of time that vaccinations have been taking place, and with the tens of thousands of cases of those who have experienced adverse side effects available for review, one might tend to think so. However, ask your doctor.
Q. If, due to pre-existing conditions, I believe I am at higher risk for an adverse reaction to the vaccines, will my doctor prescribe one or more of the medications which are showing efficacy in treating COVID? A. Ask your doctor. Good luck with that.
Q. Is the blanket statement that the vaccines are safe and effective true? A. No. Resultsin both areas, safety and effectiveness, can and do vary, sometimes greatly, from individual to individual.
Q. Especially with relatively safe and effective alternative treatments available, why isn’t the highly regarded practice of individual treatment plans, which take an individual’s existing health issues and personal lifestyle choices into account, being used when prescribing, or administering, mRNA vaccines? A. Good question.
Q. Is it true the sale of vaccines is producing extravagant profits for some? A. Yes.
Again, this Q and A presentation is not meant to be a definitive review of the topics presented. In fact, it may well produce more questions for you than answers. If so, that can be a good thing if you follow through and research the information, both pro and con, on the questions you have.
Much of what’s taking place in the world today has been made possible by amazing communication technologies. While these technologies bring much of positive value to the world, as with so many other developments, they also offer those with dishonorable motives new avenues through which to prey upon communities. The latter application of these technologies has reached such proportion, If I wasn’t seeing it happen, I’m not sure I would have believed it to be possible. I grieve that it is.
I was born in 1950. I remember the U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy. I remember what I saw as a child of life in those times. I remember the post WWII mind set which was predominant in those days in the midwestern United States. There was an undercurrent of optimism, positivity. Diseases were being conquered, diplomacy, rather than war, occupied the headlines. People felt good that tyranny, authoritarianism, genocide, had been defeated. As is all too clear now, the world wasn’t as free of some of these human problems as many believed.
It’s not that everything was ideal, not at all. There were (and sadly still are) issues of ignorance, misunderstanding, fear, hatred, between people of differing races and religions. There were the major rifts between the nations identifying with capitalism and those identifying with communism. However, during WWII, people from many nations, nations with histories of distrust, antagonism, had pulled together to defeat a common enemy. There was optimism that the common values which had surfaced during the war could be built upon to establish lasting peaceful relationships. It was a time of the belief in unlimited possibilities for a better world.
What is absolutely apparent now, is that those who perceived the possibilities for improving the conditions of life for all people, weren’t the only ones seeing unlimited possibilities. There were those who saw the potential of using the new technologies, the developments in transportation, communication, psychology, medicine, and other disciplines, as tools for plunder. Rather than embracing the opportunities to engage in massive development, to facilitate improvements for the common good, they saw, and continue to see, human deficits through the lens of exploitation. Not as areas of need to be addressed with pervasive development and education, but as openings to be exploited in order to establish themselves in predatory positions of power within the systems of the world.
It is apparent now, that post WWII, those seeking personal wealth and power have been working, manipulating public perception. Often co-opting the very symbols which had represented the defeat of tyranny, authoritarianism and inhuman behaviors. They employ words and symbols which once stirred the most positive motives within people to obfuscate and shield their predatory agendas. One of the first major coups these people won was, via magazines, television, and other media, establishing the idea of unrestrained pursuit of personal wealth as a positive primary value in the psyche of people around the world. Once that lie, a lie which ignores basic values necessary to maintaining both healthy individuals and healthy cultures, was pervasively established in the minds of the population, the door to pandemonium was opened.
Competitive economics establishes a system in which those at the top have the distinct advantage. The oppressive, sometimes murderous, methods used to maintain and expand the wealth of those at the top become just the methods of “business as usual”. After all, it’s what you would do if you had all that money? Isn’t it? It’s the value system the media repeatedly portrays as the way of the world. And many, especially those who have never been exposed to something different, simply assume that impression to be the global, inescapable reality.
Abraham Maslow provided us with a working framework, a skeleton, within which it is possible to “flesh out” not only healthy, thriving individuals, also healthy, thriving cultures.
How do we know what is needed to “flesh out”, to establish a viable, worldwide, thriving human culture? We have the findings of the work done in many scientific disciplines over many centuries to guide us. Psychology, sociology, medicine, agriculture, engineering, all of these disciplines, and more, hold information which provides the necessary answers. There are the developments in science and the arts which provide much instruction for the establishment and maintenance of a healthful, thriving human culture. There are answer available to us to the problems of housing, health, energy, pollution, and more. Sometimes these answers go unused because they interfere with the profit motive of those in positions of power. And we accept it because the culture of competitive economics has become normalized.
The thing is, we have got the tools we need to establish a world in which people of many different backgrounds can live together as vital aspects of our world ecology, interacting and enhancing each other’s experience of life. What is missing is the focus to make it happen. I would have said the “will” to make it happen, but I believe that will is present, inside every living human being. Sometimes it is dormant, sometimes it has been covered in so much pain and trauma, so many lies and misdirections, that it expresses itself in twisted, destructive ways. But it is there.
As a teacher of mine once said: “Life takes work, it’s death that’s easy. Just do nothing and you will die.”
All people emanate from and are inextricably a part of the Divine Creative Spirit. This aspect of our existence is represented by the golden circle in the center in the diagram above. The next area, the circle which surrounds the center circle, is the “Worldly Persona” which is the identity the rest of world knows us by. It is defined by our words and deeds which are observable to the rest of the people in the world. It is this persona that is the product of the process described below. Our persona reflects the sum total of our worldly experiences, desires and decisions.
There are no “bad people”, there are no “good people”, there are only people. What makes the difference between tyrants such as Adolf Hitler, Mary I of England, or Pol Pot and revered personalies such as Gautama Buddha, St. Teresa of Calcutta, or Martin Luther King Jr.? It is not some mysterious, unknown variables. The difference lies in the sum total of their individual experiences (education, indoctrination, relationships, interactions), their desires, and their decisions. It is important to note here that the “sum total” may include the experiences, desires and decisions of many lifetimes. Also that biology and/or injuries can play a major role in the development of an individual’s persona.
However, we are thinking beings with free will. We have the potential to change. We can mold not only ourselves, but the world we live in. If we decide we desire a better, more harmonious, world, and we act upon that desire, we can bring that vision to reality. It may take time, but the sooner we start, the sooner we arrive.
With the determination to do so, bitterness can be transmuted to understanding. Fear and hatred can be transmuted to caring and love. However, we must stay aware that the opposite is also true. Caring and love, with enough abuse and trauma, especially when accompanied by input and reinforcement to do so, can be replaced with hatred and cruelty. We must end the mistreatment, the cruelties we impose upon one another. We must see each other as being the children of the same Creator, which we are. As we now know, we are all inextricably interconnected. Isn’t it time we established the positive, harmonious, joyful, reality we all, at the core of our being, long for?
In summation, while we all can, at times, be negatively affected by the world around us, through enlightenment, education, understanding, we can transmute negative impulses into constructive actions. We can play a more positively determinate role within our own lives, within our relationships, and within the world around us.
At this time, around the world, we are being advised by individuals and agencies, which wield substantial worldly power, to be fearful. We are being urged, coerced, to be compliant, to follow the instructions we’re being given. Instructions which appeal to the fear the media and corporate powers are largely responsible for instilling. In their positions of power within the media, the corporate powers are wielding an incredible ability of censorship over information. They routinely do not publish truths which disagree with, which dispute the predatory agendas they are implementing. A predominant one at this time is the COVID/”vaccine” agenda. Any information which contradicts the fear based agenda they are pushing, is either censored in corporate media, or, if it is referred to, it is done so in such a way as to discredit that information.
A collection of various and sometimes overlapping people have introduced a previously unknown disease into the world apparently in the pursuit of a homicidal, special interest, agenda. And they may introduce more. They are offering toxic, death-dealing treatments and doing all they can to repress the knowledge of the existence of safe, effective treatments. And throughout it all, they are engineering the flow of vast amounts of the world’s wealth into their hands. Yet we can make the decision to comply with this heinous agenda, or not. We have the final decision in whether or not to allow the pollution of our minds and spirits with the fear and hate they are promoting. And, we have the final decision whether or not to allow the pollution of our bodies with the toxic substances they are pushing.
Changing the focus back to our inherent divine origin and heritage, even when we are being motivated by fear, anger, hatred, even then, through the filters of our mind which are active at that time, we are expressing the innate desire for life which is present within all of us. However, if we desire a more harmonious, healthful, joyful life, we need to discipline ourselves to refrain from expressions which lead to more harm, more trauma, more fear, anger and hatred in the world. While we cannot ignore such emotions when they are present, we must learn to see through to the primary, underlying reality of the desire for life which is there. We must learn to see it not only within ourselves, but in “the other”. When we can do that, and when we embrace the values of negotiation, understanding, mutuality, and the desire for resolutions which enhance the harmony of human interactions, we can have a genuine heaven on Earth.
All through my life I have heard skeptics, cynics, say that such a thing is “too idealistic”, not practical, not possible. Even they, in doing so, inadvertently acknowledge the ideal nature of such thinking. If we aren’t devoting our time and energies toward seeking and establishing the ideal, what are we spending them on? Seeking and establishing the mediocre? The dysfunctional? Or are we just letting entropy, the slow slide into dissolution, be our guiding motive?
Ultimately, whether in the United States or someplace else in the world at large, the term coined in the U.S. by the authors of the Declaration of Independence, “We the People“, represents a reality which can stop tyrannical abuses andelevate humanity. It is within our individual decisions, that we collectively possess the ability to determine the direction this period of history will follow.
I have personally witnessed a physician ridicule Dr. Zelenko for his assertion that there are self assembling nanobots. What that reveals to me is how reticent some people, even M.D.’s are to doing their own research. That is a major problem. If physicians were all content to stay regimented to the status quo, we’d still be seeing the use of leeches as a common medical practice. I venture few physicians are spending much time doing research on the incredible success of Ivermectin in India. I know when I mentioned it to one physician, they thought it was Remdesivir which had been the medication used to achieve the success. That is the propaganda physicians are being spoon fed via the established hierarchical information system they seem to rely upon. The problem is, when profiteers are sitting at the apex of the hierarchy, the information flowing through the system is not only vulnerable, but likely to be manipulated to facilitate a profit oriented, not necessarily a health oriented, agenda.
Below is a link to just one more piece of information which a lot of people do not believe is a reality. Radio controlled nanoparticles used to affect cellular activity. The more information which comes to light, the more it is becoming apparent that the most seemingly far-fetched allegations made by researchers into the contents of the COVID “vaccines” do relate to actual technology. There is no question that much has been hidden from the public about the contents of the mRNA injections.
I think we may be witnessing the creation of sequences of unintended consequences the like of which the world has never seen.
Let’s say a group of people are walking in the wild and they all fall into a nest of poisonous snakes, they all are bitten and they all begin to show symptoms of the effects of the poison. Some of the group, out of desperation, begin eating a plant which they know to have medicinal properties but are unsure if it will work against the snake venom. Miraculously it does! Within a short time, almost all who have eaten of the medicinal plant have fully recovered. However, another group, who call themselves scientists, state that they need time to conduct a double-blind study before they risk eating the plant. Several of them die.
It sounds ridiculous, right? That couldn’t happen in real life, could it? The group who call themselves scientists would see with their own eyes the miraculous recovery of the group who had eaten the plant, they would recognize the empirical legitimacy of what they’ve seen, and they would eat the plant and save themselves. Yes that, in all probability is what would happen if this imaginary example were to play out in the real world. Well, on a much larger scale, this example is playing out in the real world. Incredibly, the group who, in the example are the group who call themselves scientists, are not eating plant. Instead, as in the example, they claim they want to first conduct their double-blind studies.
There are some important distinctions in what’s happening in the real world as opposed to the example I’ve given above:.
The people who are dying aren’t limited, as in the example, to the group who call themselves scientists. They are the thousands of common people in the United States and it other countries who are dying from COVID and are being denied the benefits of Ivermectin. People whose physicians are following the directives of persons in positions of power within the public health community. Persons in positions of power who are speaking against, or forbidding, the widespread use of Ivermectin to treat COVID. But who, in the meantime, can claim to be objective by conducting, or authorizing, studies on Ivermectin’s efficacy and safety fighting COVID. Studies which, if used as a reason to withhold Ivermectin, are both ridiculous and serving a profit oriented agenda.
However, the supreme ludicrousness of it all is that however many people the NIH, or CDC, or the WHO, or whomever, might have in their experimental groups, that number will not even begin to approach the millions in India who are already the living proofs of the hypothesis that Ivermectin will effectively and safely, treat COVID. They have taken Ivermectin and dramatically benefited from doing so. There are no large numbers of adverse reactions. In other words, the experiment has already been conducted, in real life, and the results are in. In the meantime the pharmaceutical profiteers want to coerce millions more into taking their questionable, sometimes fatal, sometimes crippling, treatment. In fact, the experiments being conducted, or authorized as mentioned in item 1. above, seem more a delaying tactic to further facilitate the ongoing push of the mRNA injections.
If those fighting against Ivermectin were not making any money, but doing so just from an overabundance of caution, that could be seen as an idiosyncratic, but innocent, characteristic of that group. It would still be resulting in many unnecessary deaths, but it would be less criminal. However, the reality is that powerful people are making money from the ban on Ivermectin. And not just a little money, but raking in millions upon millions of dollars. Meanwhile, people are dying. People who, the vast majority of, the courageous real world, Indian experiment with Ivermectin indicates, would be saved if only they would be allowed that medicine.
It’s time all American medical practitioners are called upon to rouse from their complacency.Stop blindly following the wishes, the orders, from the profiteers who are endeavoring to disallow Ivermectin as a treatment for COVID! Follow the Hippocratic oath which states “I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required…”. Step forward, access the knowledge gained by your colleagues in India. Apply it here and now. Do what the people of America hope and count upon: save lives, engage in effectively treating the American public.
Most anyone who has taken a Psychology 101 course is familiar with Pavlov and his dogs. He taught them to salivate when he rang a bell. Such a simple thing, such profound implications. Over one hundred years since Ivan Pavlov and his assistant, Ivan Tolochinov, did their work on conditioning of reflexes, we find ourselves facing an application of the principles of his work in the most massive, and heinous, assault on humanity in recorded history.
For those who didn’t have the pleasure of taking a Psychology 101 course, what Pavlov did was to ring a bell before he gave food to the dogs that were in his experiment. He had surgically implanted a device to measure the dogs’ salivation. He found that, after repeating this sequence a number of times, the dogs would begin salivating after they heard the bell ring, before they received their food. The dogs had been taught to so closely associate the bell with the arrival of food, they now had a “conditioned reflex”. The dogs would even salivate when no food followed the bell.
In summary, a conditioned reflex is when a living thing, a dog, cat, bird, human being, has learned, or been taught, to respond in a certain way in response to a stimulus. A common example of a conditioned reflex in humans is, when driving a car, stopping for a “STOP” sign. Especially in those situations in which it may be perfectly clear there are no other cars on that section of road to worry about.
In Pavlov’s experiment what he didn’t have to teach the dogs is their reaction to food. That is a reaction they had learned, developed, from countless encounters with food. Pavlov just trained (conditioned) them to reacting the same way even when food wasn’t forthcoming.
Fast forward to the present.
There is no question that one of the major benefits societies today have experienced, over decades, is the ability of vaccines to protect individuals from certain diseases. The polio vaccine, smallpox vaccine, in Europe the tuberculosis vaccine and some others. Of course any good thing can be overdone, but that is another topic. The point is vaccines are most widely associated with saving lives. People have been conditioned to trust the word “vaccine”. Not as part of some diabolical plan, but just as a function of what most people’s experiences with vaccines, either directly or indirectly, has been. When I grew up I can remember two individuals in the small town in which I lived who bore the crippling after effects of having had polio. I venture there are many reading this who have never seen such effects. The reason for that is commonly attributed to the advent of the polio vaccine.
Just as having learned to salivate when given food was a reflex learned by Pavlov’s dogs simply by the reality of food, trusting vaccines is something that most people have learned from visits to benevolent doctors and nurses who oversaw the administration of them. I will qualify that generalization by saying that has not been everyone’s experience, even with polio vaccines. However, for the vast majority of people in the world, we have become conditioned, via decades of life experiences, decades of positive associations, to regard vaccines as a good thing. A great number of people on the face of the Earth have, via these experiences and associations, developed a conditioned reflex to “vaccines”.
What many may not stop to think about is that, along with the development and proliferation of vaccines, a definition of what a vaccine is and how a vaccine is made has been established. The following is direct quote from The CDC’s website. This is what was on the site on 8/13/2021 under the heading “Vaccines; The Basics“: (I have added italics.)
“Vaccines contain the same germs that cause disease. (For example, measles vaccine contains measles virus, and Hib vaccine contains Hib bacteria.) But they have been either killed or weakened to the point that they don’t make you sick. Some vaccines contain only a part of the disease germ.
A vaccine stimulates your immune system to produce antibodies, exactly like it would if you were exposed to the disease. After getting vaccinated, you develop immunity to that disease, without having to get the disease first.
This is what makes vaccines such powerful medicine. Unlike most medicines, which treat or cure diseases, vaccines prevent them.”
This definition of vaccines accurately describes every product defined as a vaccine which has ever existed, up until now. This definition does not describe the products which are being presented to the public as “COVID vaccines”. The COVID vaccines are not what is described in the CDC’s longstanding definition of a vaccine. None of the COVID “vaccines” have been made in the manner described and none of them function in the manner described. As anyone who has ever worked in a modern medical and/or technical field knows, accurate, reliable, terminology is essential. For centuries scientists have regarded the process of correctly, appropriately, classifying a new discovery as of the utmost importance. To try to inaccurately, inappropriately name a thing, to try to pass it as something it is not, is contrary to the entire concept of an orderly, reliable, scientific system. Which brings us to the question: why would the companies who have developed the mRNA injections want to call them a vaccine? If bringing a new treatment method to the world, why not celebrate it for what it is? Why try to pass it as something it is not?
There are some glaringly obvious answers to those questions. And, regrettably, none of them have to do with the health and wellbeing of the American citizenry or of any other nation’s citizens. Here are three of them:
The process of bringing a vaccine to market is much less complicated, much less expensive than bringing an entirely new treatment method to market. There is a less rigorous demand on safety testing. After all, vaccines are widely accepted as being generally safe. We know that, in reality, vaccines do have their fair share of problems which are too often cavalierly overlooked, however,that is another topic for another time.
The U.S. government has seen fit to grant vaccine manufacturers immunity from prosecution for adverse effects resulting from the use of their products. No other pharmaceutical nor treatment method of any kind has such a blanket absolution from any injuries which might result from their use. I’m sure every developer of a new pharmaceutical or treatment method would dearly love to be able to claim such immunity.
The word “vaccine” carries with it a conditioned reflex, a conditioned acceptance. A new vaccine, in general, do not evoke the appropriately circumspect attitude that people would have toward a new, particularly a new and not thoroughly tested, treatment method. A treatment method which has never been widely used on human beings, ever. A treatment method with virtually unknown long term effects.
If you think about those three benefits from being able to call the mRNA injections “vaccines”, it should be apparent to you that every shady operator dealing in any questionable product in the world, of any kind, would dearly love to have such advantages going for them. Call your product whatever you want. Don’t worry about penalties, liabilities. Capitalize upon a widespread trust that another product has established. Wow, it’s a charlatan’s dream come true.
How does a new product get away with calling itself something it is not, bypass stringent testing and safety protocols such a product is supposed to follow, and gain complete immunity from liability for whatever is going to happen when it is released upon an unsuspecting, and misled public? The only possible answer I can think of is “connections”, that’s how. Knowing the “right” people in the “right” places. Possibly having those same people beholden to you. And, possibly, by being involved in the pursuit of covert agenda which those in positions of power happen to also be involved with.
In closing, such a thing would not be possible without the conditioned reflexes which have been established, over decades, within peoples’ psyches toward “vaccines” and the entities responsible for public safety, such as the FDA. What is going on with how the mRNA injections are being depicted within the media and by public health officials. and in the push to see as many people as possible injected with the mRNA treatment, is a deliberate, glaring and unconscionable abuse of the public trust.
The citizens of the United States are being held hostage to the agenda of those pushing the mRNA injections. Employing falsehoods, manipulated and/or misleading data, and considerable political connections, those whose agenda it is, are preventing hospitals and individual physicians from prescribing and/or using Ivermectin with otherwise terminal COVID patients. Thousands of patients in U.S. hospitals have died and are dying as a result of this barbaric reality. When is it going to stop? As the references linked at the end of this article show, the empirical evidence of both Ivermectin’s efficacy against COVID and it’s safety when administered properly is overwhelming. Yet dying people are being denied it’s benefits. Even when it can save their lives. Why?
Is it all about the money? Is it all about the social control being sought in conjunction with the fear being promulgated around COVID? Is it both of these factors? I think it is all about both of these things. There are individuals raking in billions of dollars as a result of the widespread fear of COVID along with the myth that only the mRNA injections can offer relief from COVID’s threat upon the lives of the citizenry. Billions. And those raking in this money have some very strong, high level, connections within the CDC, the NIH and the U.S. Government as a whole. Also a lot of State Governors are heavily promoting that agenda. The President of the United States, and many State Governors, are exercising pervasive unilateral power, using declarations of emergency, to bypass the normal democratic processes.
The President of the United States has issued mandates, most notably with the members of the armed forces, in an attempt to coerce those not otherwise inclined to accept mRNA injection. Governors in several States also have issued mandates in an attempt to coerce citizens to accept the mRNA injections. These attempts are showing success with many workers in various affected professions who find themselves forced into accepting an injection which they do not want, but don’t see any way to avoid without jeopardizing their livelihoods. Such an acceptance is not a legitimate choice, but is taking place under extreme duress.
IF the mRNA injections actually showed great efficacy at preventing infection and the spread of infection, and, IF they were safe, such mandates might very well be totally unnecessary. The reality of what people were seeing around them would be all that would be necessary to get people to seek them. However none of these conditions is fulfilled with the mRNA injections. They do not prevent infection. They do not stop the spread of infection, and they ARE NOT categorically safe. Additionally, safer, less invasive, effective alternatives to prevent and treat COVID are available. Perhaps, what should be the final nail in the coffin of the mRNA “vaccines”, is that they are less effective than Ivermectin at preventing death in people who are ill with COVID. However, that fact is carefully kept from the awareness of the general public.
We are experiencing a tyranny imposed by a group of people who are powerful within the pharmaceutical, technical and political arenas within the U.S. and many other countries. It is an international conspiracy. I know, “conspiracy” has become an unpopular term, one which is too often disregarded in a knee jerk fashion. Yet it is entirely applicable to our current situation. Many aspects of both television, radio, newspaper and online media have been brought into play to selectively broadcast only information, or disinformation, which furthers the agenda of this group. This is a time in which independent thought, the ability to critically analyze information, and a cold awareness of the motives and methods of those attempting to subdue and oppress the general population within many countries, is essential to our wellbeing.
There is possibly no other single piece of information, no other currently ongoing reality, which so clearly demonstrates the de facto lack of care or concern for the average American citizen then the deceit around, and withholding of, Ivermectin from COVID patients. Rather, what we get are lies about Ivermectin’s lack of curative powers in the guise of care and concern for our wellbeing. Just looking at what has taken place in the country of India alone, which requires some digging on your part if you are sincerely interested in discovering the truth, shows how disingenuous the statement that “there is no evidence” regarding Ivermectin’s efficacy actually is.
The heinous grasping for riches and power is even leading to the persecution of medical practitioners who have the courage to follow their own reasoning in the face of the deceitful and homicidal official policies.
In the battle against COVID, we in the U.S. are being led, through official channels, by deceitful, profiteering, homicidal personages. They are clearly motivated by personal gain, increasing their wealth and power, rather than any care or concern for the health and wellbeing of the general population.
For many there is no controversy. Those who fall into this group are people who are either exclusively exposed to the mainstream media narrative around Covid and the so-called “vaccines”, or those without sufficient awareness in the issues to realize the validity of the many authoritative voices of dissent. Voices from many disciplines and many countries. The majority of the population of the world most likely fall into the second group. There is no degree of personal failing whatsoever in being in this group. We live in world which has been moving toward specialized fields of knowledge and professions for decades. We generally rely upon the honesty and ethics of those who work in different fields than our own. At times, due to the degree of specialization which can exist even within a particular field of knowledge, we often do not understand all the aspects of our own chosen career fields. Yet while there is no personal failing inherent in not knowing everything, all the time (no one does), sometimes what we don’t know can hurt us.
The reality is there is a great deal of controversy among those highly skilled in the fields of medicine, microbiology, and virology around both the presentation of the Covid virus itself and particularly around the nature and safety of the purported “vaccines” being pushed. That is the right word, “pushed”, so unrelentingly around the world. It would not be inaccurate to compare the approach to marketing the Covid “vaccines” to the “shock and awe” campaign of the Iraq war. For the most part, there is no genuine effort being put forward to obtain informed consent from those being injected. Also, there is the reality that none of the pharmaceutical companies nor the governments, nor the health organizations such as the CDC or the WHO, who are so relentlessly pushing the “vaccines”, can, or will, offer any guarantees as to the effectiveness, nor the safety of these products. In point of fact, the pharmaceutical companies have diligently worked to obtain governmental immunities which prevent them from being held responsible for any harm done by the products.
Why am I so resistant to calling the pharmaceutical concoctions being pushed vaccines? Because none of them, not the Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson, nor any other version of the mRNA concoctions are produced, nor designed, to work in the same manner as any previous vaccine. Previous vaccines have all been made by a process described in the CDC’s explanation of what a vaccine is made of, available on their website (unless they’ve taken it down since May 8, 2021). By this explanation, these concoctions are not vaccines.
I am going to endeavor to keep the rest of this article as brief and concise as possible. In doing this I am intending, and hoping, the reader will access the linked materials (in purple text). They are videos and articles by authoritative, independent, doctors and scientists whose perspectives on what is happening around Covid, and the vaccines, differ greatly from the mainstream media narrative. I am going to, of necessity (there are many such videos and articles) limit the number of these I am including links to in this article. I strongly encourage the reader to do some additional research on their own.
The first aspect of this controversy I want to address, however, is indirectly, rather than directly, related to the science around the virus and the “vaccines” themselves. You see, the trust people have in the doctors, scientists and corporations behind the information being put forward by the mainstream media, is as important a factor, if not more important, in peoples’ decision making than any information being put forward around the “science”. This is an issue my particular field of study, psychology/mental health, along with the experience I’ve had working in both mental health clinics and private practice, lends me to have some clarity in addressing.
From the time we’re small children we are taught that there are some people, who due to the office they occupy within our society, are worthy of our trust. However, by the time most people become adults we learn that sometimes, some “authorities” and/or public officials, do lie. As a matter of fact, it seems that at this point in time, the fact that some, or many, such authorities and/or officials may lie has become so commonplace that it hardly raises an eyebrow. That is not a healthy situation. It is a reality though that many people; common, honest, people, are resistant to understanding the depths of corruption which can and do exist within the halls of power. Such corruption as is currently occurring within the U.S. and within other countries. Although, it is always easier to believe the reports of heinous corruption which involve the “other”. To some people, to seriously consider the profound levels of corruption, which substantial evidence suggests currently exist, creates a condition of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is not a joke. At the risk of seeming to enter into hyperbole, extreme cognitive dissonance is capable of rendering a person dysfunctional, and has been recognized as even potentially resulting in death.
Simply put, we do not like the feeling of cognitive dissonance, and it seems to be a knee jerk defensive reaction of many to simply offhandedly dismiss information which, it is sensed, may result in cognitive dissonance. On the other hand, some have had to cope with situations that gave them no option but to face, critically analyze, and resolve information which involved considerable cognitive dissonance. Whatever group you’re in, you got there doing the things which seemed the most logical and survival oriented at the time.
However, at this time we are, the vast majority of us, facing an unprecedented challenge in our lives. There are people/corporations who are telling us they have our best interests at heart who want us to accept an irreversible injection of an unproven substance into our bodies and the bodies of our loved ones. Yet, within even the mainstream literature, there is no shortage of examples in which these very same people/corporations have misrepresented their products and/or have marketed a product which caused significant harm to a significant number of consumers. Accompanying this reality are these additional aspects to the Covid/”vaccine” situation:
The people most strongly pushing the injections are the people who stand to make the most money from them.
The people most strongly pushing the injections can offer no guarantees of either the effectiveness nor the safety of the injection.
The people most strongly pushing the injections made sure they had an immunity from any liability for harm caused by the injections before they began putting them on the market. Hardly a vote of confidence in their product.
While the CDC and other agencies/corporations commonly associated with public health are endorsing and promoting mandates for the injections, these people and agencies have close ties with the pharmaceutical companies marketing the injections. Some highly placed individuals within these agencies, if not the agencies themselves, stand to make a lot of money from the sales of the injections.
The ethical practice of informed consent is rarely, if ever, used in regard to the injections.
Instances of short-term adverse reactions to the injections, including deaths, are often being underreported or not reported at all within the mainstream media.
Many doctors and scientists refute the need for the injection at all, and, many caution that severe, negative, long-term effects can and will result from the injections.
In support of the last assertion, I offer these three essential video presentations. Presentations which I strongly recommend for anyone trying to understand the opposition to the mainstream Covid/vaccination agenda. These presentations are linked below. If seriously pursuing knowledge in this area, at a minimum watch these. Other videos and articles, which essentially compliment and support the viewpoints expressed in the three essential videos are also linked below. One video in the second group is not directly addressing the Covid phenomena, but the material contained translates significantly into understanding what is going on around Covid. This latter video is an interview with Kari Mullis, the Nobel Prize winning inventor of the PCR test. The test which is widely used to determine the prevalence of the Covid-19 virus.
As I mentioned above, most people, myself included, are not experts in medicine, microbiology, virology, DNA and RNA research, and/or other aspects of the sciences involved in the issues. I venture to say very few medical doctors (M.D.’s) themselves are experts in the sciences relative to the issues involved. This is a particularly salient truth when it comes to the long-term effects of the mRNA concoctions being injected into millions of people around the world. To the best of public knowledge, no one is an expert in the long-term effects upon humans of the mRNA concoctions. Therefore having reputable, independent, authoritative medical doctors and scientists willing to share their expert perspectives is an invaluable asset. However, before venturing into examining these issues, it is to our benefit to be willing look at our own cognitive programming and, if needed, have the internalized resolve to question our own pre-existing beliefs.
For the second two essential videos, go to the website of Dr. Lee Merritt., former Navy physician and surgeon and past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. There, click on the tab labeled “Media” and watch the video entitled “Dr. Lee Merritt-SARS-CoV2 and the Rise of Medical Technocracy“. (This video has been taken down on Dr. Merritt’s webpage, here is a current active link.) Then return to the first page on the site and watch the video “Bio-Warfare and the Weaponization of Medicine Amid Covid“.
I strongly encourage everyone to also do your own research into these issues. Weigh all the evidence, consider possible ulterior motives of the people involved. Equip yourself to make an informed decision about two of the most important issues facing people from around the world. The questions are: 1. What is the reality of the purported Covid pandemic? And, 2. How effective and how safe are the “vaccines” being so intensely pushed by the media, big pharma, various public health entities and even governments?
Stay positive, keep the faith, do the next right thing.
Circulation. Everything that keeps humanity alive circulates. From what we know at this time, it seems that everything that supports life in the entire universe, circulates. What happens when circulation is hampered? Stagnation, toxicity, starvation, illness, death. Without the proper circulation of the blood within our bodies, our cells will begin dying from starvation of oxygen and life supporting nutrients. Then our body as a whole will die. Without the circulation of the air and water upon our planet, our planet will lose it’s ability to sustain life. Within our cells, if the processes of life, of replenishment of nutrients and the disposal of waste were to stop, the circulation of the materials which sustain our bodies, the cell will die. On every level, from the microcosm to the macrocosm, circulation is an absolutely essential feature of the maintenance of life. Quite possibly of the existence of the universe itself.
Turn on the circulation of electricity through a light bulb and the light comes alive. Turn off that circulation and the light goes dark, dead. That same principle applies for the circulation of every life giving, life sustaining substance that there is and the existence of human life on Earth.
The awareness of this inescapable truth within the natural world leads one to ask whether this same principle applies to the realm of human creations? For those versed in metaphysics, it calls to question whether the axiom “As above so below; as below so above.” applies to the essential nature of the circulation of life sustaining resources. First, we must define what is a human, rather than a nature, created resource which is essential to the sustaining of life in the world? To the very best of my knowledge, there is only one: money.
This may be argued by some. Some may present that a person living simply off the land (first you must have land) which is blessed with the resources of water and temperate climate suitable for agriculture, can live quite nicely. In fact, there still are a few primitive tribes which live in such a fashion. Of course that means doing without all the conveniences and the assistance which modern technology and medicine offer. While I tend toward the simplification of life as a general proposition, there are limits beyond which I find myself reticent to venture. I like a number of the medical and technical benefits we receive from our collective human ingenuity. In fact, without some of those, it is a salient question whether or not I would still be alive in my current incarnation. Certainly I would not be writing this essay on a computer.
The reality for the vast majority of people alive on Earth today, is that money is an essential resource for the sustaining of life. Of course this is made a truth by the systems of commerce we have constructed within our societies. We have made money an intermediary, a regulating agent, between us and the, more or less, natural resources we inescapably require. Resources such as food, shelter, fuel and even water. I am quite sure that there are people, at this very moment, trying to figure out how to make us pay for air. While, in our modern world, there is often human effort required in the manufacture of what in earlier times were more purely naturally occurring resources, the fact is, ALL material substance comes to us via the beneficence of the creative forces of the universe. Humankind can manipulate these naturally provided resources to better suit the needs, or wants, of any or all of us, but the raw materials, the substances required, are all provided, free of charge, by the creative forces, the creative intelligence, underlying and within everything we see and are.
All the resources, all the life sustaining substances we rely upon are in circulation within the universe we exist within. All of them. From the most fleeting to what we perceive as the most stable, the most solid. Everything, including planets, stars and galaxies, is in circulation. Everything material comes into being, exists for however long it exists, and then ultimately is recycled back into the primordial stuff from which it emerged.
The rate of circulation conducive to the healthfulness of various substances under different conditions can vary. “Healthfulness” being relative to human life. Why would we measure it in any other terms? For instance, water, when frozen for centuries, can still retain the healthful qualities necessary and conducive to human life. However, if water sits for much less time, relatively motionless, within a pond or a puddle, it is most likely going to be stagnant. Stagnant, anaerobic, and possibly/probably containing substances toxic to human life. For us humans, the value of natural resources exists primarily in the value of that resource in sustaining our own lives.
That being said, how we manage that resource can depend a great deal upon how well we understand the interrelatedness of the world, the universe around us. For instance, to primitive humans the value of trees may have been exclusively their usefulness in building structures and making fires. Later we came to understand that trees and other plants are responsible for producing the oxygen we require for life. Now, a living tree has value where previously it’s value was realized only after it was chopped down. The value we place upon the resources, the “things” that exist around us, is dependent upon how well we understand the function of those things in relation to the interdependent web of existence, of which we are a part.This reality of how we place value extends to every person being born on Earth. We have no idea, no matter how inauspicious the circumstances of their birth may be, what contributions a person, newborn or elderly, may make to our communities and to our lives. It is a fault which surfaces frequently with us humans that we tend to judge the value of a thing, or a person, using the particular criteria the society we live within espouses. Often, if not always, in the greater scheme of things, that criteria is liable to be narrowly defined and hampered by lack of awareness of the interconnected realities a particular society does not yet recognize.
Which brings us back to essential circulation, resources, and the essential human-conceived resource; money. While the concept and reality of money is a human thing, the fact that money, in it’s practical application, has to do with the acquisition of the natural resources one needs to live, makes money, by extension, a critical aspect of life on Earth. The excessive withholding, hoarding, of money from circulation within communities, among citizens, has every bit the stagnating and/or deleterious effect upon life as would the withholding of the air or water from circulation upon the Earth. This is a lesson we must learn from our own bodies. We need enough. Too little, or too much, leads to unhealthful conditions within the body.
The viable management of all resources, including money, is a task which is all too easily sabotaged by the human ego. The challenge we all face is the cultivation of true humility, to recognize one’s genuine place, and role, within community. None of us are “all that”. And none of us are nothing. We exist as components within a spiritual/organic system. We are all dependent upon that system. For any of us to think we can co-opt the balance, the viability of the system for our own purposes is a symptom of a spiritual/mental illness within that individual. When we learn to act within a spirit of love, in our contributing to and taking from the collective wealth which has been developed by collective effort, we will find ourselves facing a present, and a future, wondrous enough to meet, and exceed, our most cherished expectations.
One of the biggest problems facing humanity is the problem of electrical energy. As shown in the documentary “Planet of the Humans”, the much touted solutions of solar and wind energy, in the final analysis, require the expenditure of as much fossil fuel to create the equipment and subsidize them when they cannot adequately produce due to weather conditions, as if fossil fuel were just in place without them. And as for the so-called “Green Energy”, it is just a horribly misguided idea which involves massive deforestation. However, it must be noted that the only solutions big energy evidently wants to look at are the solutions which include keeping massive energy grids in place. The big energy corporations do not want solutions which would change the system to smaller grids, local companies, and/or house by house production.
Our current reality seems to be that big corporations, including energy companies, have become intoxicated with and addicted to wealth and control We cannot look to them for leadership in eco-friendly, human-friendly solutions to the world’s problems. Two solutions I know of, and I am not at all the most knowledgeable person about the myriad possible solutions that actually exist, are the (extensively documented) machine developed by Joseph Newman, and an invention by K.R. Sridhar I read about years ago which involved no moving parts but uses a chemical action to produce a significant amount energy. This system uses a unit the size of a microwave, or smaller, to produce enough continual energy to power a house. And there are other options which I’ have heard or read bits and pieces of here and there.
The thing is, these solutions would take much of the business away from the big energy producers we’ve grown accustomed to and place it right in the home being powered. These solutions hold the promise of being ecologically friendly and freeing people from exorbitant energy bills. So of course big energy doesn’t want us to adopt such solutions. And, interestingly, we don’t hear much about them unless we go digging.
The issue of energy production is just one arena in which a problem which is pervasive across many industries is coming to the fore. How do we manage an economy in which technological advances are continually decreasing the workforce needed for factory production and other jobs previously occupied by humans? People still need homes, food, education, etc. And, we need to feel that we are contributing to our communities, our collective wellbeing. It’s part of our reality as social beings.
We need to be actively involved in developing solutions to these challenges. I submit one aspect of the solutions will necessarily involve wealth being less concentrated in the hands of a few and more equitably spread across the whole of the population. I believe such system will incorporate some aspects of most, if not all, economic systems attempted in the past. Primarily, we need to be looking for answers that work for us as a species, as a whole and which take the entirety of our being, our make-up into consideration. Abraham Maslow gives us a solid foundation from which to expand our thinking.
We are hearing and reading a lot about “the science” these days. When it comes to the Covid-19 phenomenon, we are constantly being urged to trust the science. There seem to be many who believe that trusting the science is a knee-jerk type of thing. If it’s science, trust it, enough said. Without belaboring the point, that same unquestioning trust used to be expected by religion. Those who refused to offer up a show of obedience (trust) frequently found themselves facing harsh consequences, possibly death. But we’ve outgrown that type of thinking, right? Have we?
There seems to be a mind-set in the world the carriers of which truly want (need?) there to be an ultimate authority. A worldly parent (god?) figure, or institution, which can answer all the most difficult questions and protect us from that which we don’t understand. This mind-set is to be found within people of all ages, races, genders, ethnic groups and political persuasions. If you spend much time among people who want to dig for their own answers, those of this aforementioned mind-set are frequently called by derogatory names: sheep, cattle, or other such terms. I think using such terms just serves to muddy the water between us as human beings. Beyond a shadow of a doubt there are people scattered around the world who are more developed, in various areas of knowledge, than others. I tend to think we humans are spiritual beings, in search of a harmonious physical existence, and some of us have been around longer than others of us. We all most likely fit somewhere in the middle of an infinite spectrum of knowledge and development. So let’s be a little kinder with each other, okay?
Getting back to the original topic, in order to “believe in the science”, don’t we first have to know what science is? If you’re expecting a long, technical, complex explanation, don’t, it doesn’t take all that to define “science”. Science is just a methodical, systemized way of looking at things, or working with things. Good scientific methods can give us answers to our questions about the world which can be relied upon to be provable and consistent. And when they do that, it’s great. They don’t always do that however, sometimes the answers we find mostly give us more questions. But that’s okay too, because it means we’re in the process of understanding whatever it is we’re studying. When we’re using scientific methods in our efforts to produce a thing, those methods help us track and understand our efforts, and insure that if we are successful once, we can, most likely repeat the process and be successful again.
One of the great things about science, is that when we’re using it to understand things, or to create things, it almost always is an evolving process. Just think about all the things we humans were sure we knew at some point in our history, only to learn we missed something. Then, after a sometimes long and violent process of change, we again became sure we knew it for sure. Only to again find we needed to refine our thinking. I think it’s a safe generalization that the more complex the question being studied is, or the thing we’re attempting to produce is, the more likely it is that we are going to find ourselves facing many revisions over time. And that’s okay, because, again, science is a process and being involved with it is better than not.
It’s when we start thinking we have the ultimate answer, that we know it all, that we setting ourselves up for a fall. And that is a big problem when we have concurrently developed a culture that expects perfection. As with religion in medieval times, today people expect “science” to be infallible. It isn’t, and it never has been. It is a dangerous proposition to pressure scientists to be infallible. What that is likely to mean in a significant number of cases is that there will be a lot of effort put into defending the indefensible.
Which isn’t to say that scientists don’t ever get it right. The point is, it is often (always?) in our best interests to be circumspect when it comes to the “facts” and products brought to us by those professing to be utilizing science in their methods. The ethical position of “first do no harm” (meaning “…your actions should not cause injury or injustice to people“) is a position we should expect, if not require, from those developing new ideas and new products.
Science, scientific methodology, has no inherent ethic or morality. The positive motives and practices within scientific endeavors are there because the people involved brought them. There is nothing in our natural world, nothing in the human mind, that prevents those who may wish to do so from using scientific methodology (science) to produce things, even products which they may market as medicines, which are harmful to us. Some of the malignant things brought into the world by intelligent, highly trained, scientists include: DDT, water fluoridation, Zyklon B, the atomic bomb, microwave weapons, and many other devious means of incapacitating, enslaving, and killing our fellow human beings. Science is a method, not a product. The quality of the products produced by scientists is dependent upon the goals, the ethics, those scientists bring with them. Science is a tool, that is all. As with other tools, it’s utility is only as benevolent as the methods and goals of those applying it.