lewrockwell--2020-03-12--How You’ve Been Misled About Statins

How You’ve Been Misled About Statins

Statins are HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors ; that is , they block the enzyme in your liver responsible for making cholesterol ( HMG-CoA reductase ) .
According to Drugs.com , more than 35 million Americans are on a statin drug , making it one of the most commonly prescribed medicines in the U.S.1 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data suggest 47.6 % of seniors over the age of 75 are on a statin drug.2 Lipitor — which is just one of several brand name statin drugs — is the most profitable drug in the history of medicine.3,4 Collectively , statins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were introduced.5 This , despite their being off patent .
There is simply no doubt that selling them is big business with major financial incentives to distort the truth to continue their sales .
Statin recommendations have become fairly complex , as they ’ re recommended for various age groups under different circumstances , and whether they ’ re used as primary prevention of cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) , or secondary prevention .
Guidelines also vary slightly depending on the organization providing the recommendation and the country you ’ re in.6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available are from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force ( USPSTF ) ,7 and the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association.8,9 The USPSTF guidelines recommend using a statin for the primary prevention of CVD when a patient:10 • Is between the age of 40 to 75 • Has one or more CVD risk factors ( dyslipidemia , diabetes , hypertension or smoking ) • Has a calculated 10-year risk of a cardiovascular event of 10 % or greater In secondary prevention of CVD , statins are “ a mainstay , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ College of Cardiology.11 Secondary prevention means the drug is used to prevent a recurrence of a heart attack or stroke in patients who have already had one .
A February 2020 analysis12 in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine ( paywall ) brings up the fact that while the use of statins in primary prevention of CVD “ has been controversial ” and there ’ s ongoing debate as to “ whether the benefits outweigh the harms , ” drug regulators around the world — which have approved statins for the prevention of CVD — have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ?
The analysis goes on to note : Have We Been Misled by the Evidence ?
EMF*D : 5G , Wi-Fi & Cel ... Dr. Joseph Mercola Buy New $ 22.49 In her 2018 peer-reviewed narrative review,13 “ Statin Wars : Have We Been Misled About the Evidence ?
” published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine , Maryanne Demasi , Ph.D. , a former medical science major turned investigative health reporter , delves into some of these ongoing controversies .
While Demasi ’ s paper is behind a paywall , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video above .
Among them is the fact that the “ statin empire ” is built on prescribing these drugs to people who really don ’ t need them and are likely to suffer side effects without getting any benefits .
For example , some have recommended statins should be given to everyone over the age of 50 , regardless of their cholesterol level .
Others have suggested screening and dosing young children .
Even more outrageous suggestions over the past few years include statin “ ’ condiments ’ in burger outlets to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food meal , ’ ” and adding statins to the municipal water supply .
Medical professionals are now largely divided into two camps , one saying statins are lifesaving and safe enough for everyone , and the other saying they ’ re largely unnecessary and harmful to boot .
How did such a divide arise , when all have access to the same research and data ?
Demasi suggests that in order to understand how health professionals can be so divided on this issue , you have to follow the money .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a new drug exceeds $ 2.5 billion .
“ A more effective way to fast-track company profits is to broaden the use of an existing drug , ” Demasi says , and this is precisely what happened with statins .
By simply revising the definition of “ high cholesterol , ” which was done in 2000 and again in 2004 , millions of people became eligible for statin treatment , without any evidence whatsoever that it would actually benefit them .
As it turns out , eight of the nine members on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsible for these revisions had “ direct ties to statin manufacturers , ” Demasi says , and that public revelation sowed the first seed of suspicion in many people ’ s minds .
Skepticism ratcheted up even more when , in 2013 , the American College of Cardiology and AHA revised their statin guideline to include a CVD risk calculation rather than a single cholesterol number .
U.S. patients with a 7.5 % risk of developing CVD in the next 10 years were now put on a statin .
( In the U.K. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable 20 % . )
This resulted in another 12.8 million Americans being put on statin treatment even though they didn ’ t have any real risk factors for CVD .
Worse , a majority of these were older people without heart disease — the very population that stand to gain the least from these medications .
What ’ s worse , 4 of 5 calculators were eventually found to overestimate the risk of CVD , some by as much as 115 % , which means the rate of overprescription was even greater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the definitions of high cholesterol and CVD risk massively augmented the statin market , industry-funded studies have further fueled the overprescription trend .
As noted by Demasi , when U.S. President Ronald Reagan cut funding to the National Institutes of Health , private industry moved in to sponsor their own clinical trials .
The vast majority of statin trials are funded by the manufacturers , and research has repeatedly found that funding plays a major role in research outcomes .
It ’ s not surprising then that most statin studies overestimate drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Peter Gøtzsche , a Danish physician-researcher who in 1993 co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre : “ The very nature of science is its contestability , ” Demasi notes .
“ We need to be able to challenge and rechallenge scientific results to ensure they ’ re reproducible and legitimate.
” However , there ’ s been a “ cloud of secrecy ” around clinical statin trials , Demasi says , as the raw data on side effects have never been released to the public , nor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ held by the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists ( CTT ) Collaboration at CTSU Oxford , headed by Rory Collins , which periodically publishes meta-analyses of the otherwise inaccessible data .
While the CTT claims to be an independent organization , it has received more than £260 million from statin makers .
Inevitably , its conclusions end up promoting wider use of statins , and no independent review is possible to contest or confirm the CTT Collaboration ’ s conclusions .
Tricks Used to Minimize Harms in Clinical Trials As explained by Demasi , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ influence the outcome of a drug trial .
One is by designing the study in such a way that it minimizes the chances of finding harm .
The example she gives in her lecture is the Heart Protection Study .
KetoFast : Rejuvenate Y ... Mercola , Dr. Joseph Check Amazon for Pricing .
Before the trial got started , all participants were given a statin drug for six weeks .
By the end of that run-in period , 36 % of the participants had dropped out due to side effects or lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ freshly culled ” population , where those suffering side effects had already been eliminated , that ’ s when the trial actually started .
Now , patients were divided into statin and placebo groups .
But since everyone had already taken a statin before the trial began , the side effects found in the statin and placebo groups by the end of the trial were relatively similar .
In short , this strategy grossly underestimates the percentage of the population that will experience side effects , and this “ may explain why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trials is wildly different from the rate of side effects seen in real-world observations , ” Demasi says .
Public opinion can also be influenced by exaggerating statistics .
A common statistic used to promote statins is that they lower your risk of heart attack by about 36 % .15 This statistic is derived from a 2008 study16 in the European Heart Journal .
One of the authors on this study is Rory Collins , who heads up the CTT Collaboration .
Table 4 in this study shows the rate of heart attack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the statin group ’ s rate was 2 % — a 36 % reduction in relative risk .
However , the absolute risk reduction — the actual difference between the two groups , i.e.
, 3.1 % minus 2 % — is only 1.1 % , which really isn ’ t very impressive .
In other words , in the real world , if you take a statin , your chance of a heart attack is only 1.1 % lower than if you ’ re not taking it .
At the end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what your risk of death is the absolute risk .
The study , however , only stresses the relative risk ( 36 % ) , not the absolute risk ( 1.1 % ) .
As noted in the review,17 “ How Statistical Deception Created the Appearance That Statins Are Safe and Effective in Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease , ” it ’ s very easy to confuse and mislead people with relative risks .
You can learn more about absolute and relative risk in my 2015 interview with David Diamond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet another strategy used to mislead people is to create the illusion of “ consensus ” by silencing dissenters , discrediting critics and/or censoring differing views .
In her lecture , Demasi quotes Collins of the CTT Collaboration saying that “ those who questioned statin side effects were ‘ far worse ’ and had probably ‘ killed more people ’ than ‘ the paper on the MMR vaccine ” … “ Accusing you of murdering people is an effective way [ to ] discredit you , ” she says .
Demasi also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who questioned the value of statins in his book .
It received widespread attention in the French press , until critics started saying the book and resulting press coverage posed a danger to public health .
One report blamed the book for causing a 50 % increase in statin discontinuation , which was predicted would lead to the death of 10,000 people .
On this particular occasion , however , researchers analyzed the number of actual deaths based on national statistics , and found the actual death toll decreased in the year following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authors , Demasi says , noted that it was “ ’ not evidence-based to claim that statin discontinuation increases mortality , ’ and that in the future , scientists should assess ‘ real effects of statin discontinuation rather than making dubious extrapolations and calculations.
’ ” Statins , originally introduced three decades ago as secondary prevention for those with established CVD and patients with congenital and familial hyperlipidemias , have now vastly expanded thanks to the strategies summarized above .
Tens if not hundreds of millions of people are now on these drugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they will actually benefit from them .
As noted in the EBM analysis , “ Statins for Primary Prevention : What Is the Regulator ’ s Role ?
” :18 Fat for Fuel : A Revolu ... Dr. Joseph Mercola Best Price : $ 7.40 Buy New $ 11.89 Considering the discrepancy in reported side effects between statin trials , clinical practice and statin usage surveys , what responsibility do regulators have ?
According to “ Statins for Primary Prevention : What Is the Regulator ’ s Role ?
” 19 regulators have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ articulate their position on the controversy and make the evidence base underlying those judgments available to third parties for independent scrutiny , ” none of which has been done to date .
The paper adds : The Best of Joseph Mercola

Statins are HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors; that is, they block the enzyme in your liver responsible for making cholesterol (HMG-CoA reductase). According to Drugs.com, more than 35 million Americans are on a statin drug, making it one of the most commonly prescribed medicines in the U.S.1
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data suggest 47.6% of seniors over the age of 75 are on a statin drug.2 Lipitor — which is just one of several brand name statin drugs — is the most profitable drug in the history of medicine.3,4
Collectively, statins have earned over $1 trillion since they were introduced.5 This, despite their being off patent. There is simply no doubt that selling them is big business with major financial incentives to distort the truth to continue their sales.
Statin recommendations have become fairly complex, as they’re recommended for various age groups under different circumstances, and whether they’re used as primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), or secondary prevention. Guidelines also vary slightly depending on the organization providing the recommendation and the country you’re in.6
In the U.S., the two guidelines available are from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF),7 and the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association.8,9 The USPSTF guidelines recommend using a statin for the primary prevention of CVD when a patient:10
Is between the age of 40 to 75
Has one or more CVD risk factors (dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension or smoking)
Has a calculated 10-year risk of a cardiovascular event of 10% or greater
In secondary prevention of CVD, statins are “a mainstay,” according to the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.11 Secondary prevention means the drug is used to prevent a recurrence of a heart attack or stroke in patients who have already had one.

Regulators’ Role Questioned
A February 2020 analysis12 in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (paywall) brings up the fact that while the use of statins in primary prevention of CVD “has been controversial” and there’s ongoing debate as to “whether the benefits outweigh the harms,” drug regulators around the world — which have approved statins for the prevention of CVD — have stayed out of the debate. Should they? The analysis goes on to note:
“Our aim was to navigate the decision-making processes of European drug regulators and ultimately request the data upon which statins were approved. Our findings revealed a system of fragmented regulation in which many countries licensed statins but did not analyze the data themselves.
There is no easily accessible archive containing information about the licensing approval of statins or a central location for holding the trial data. This is an unsustainable model and serves neither the general public, nor researchers.”
Advertisement
Have We Been Misled by the Evidence?
EMF*D: 5G, Wi-Fi & Cel... Dr. Joseph Mercola Buy New $22.49 (as of 09:53 UTC - Details) In her 2018 peer-reviewed narrative review,13 “Statin Wars: Have We Been Misled About the Evidence?” published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., a former medical science major turned investigative health reporter, delves into some of these ongoing controversies.
“A bitter dispute has erupted among doctors over suggestions that statins should be prescribed to millions of healthy people at low risk of heart disease. There are concerns that the benefits have been exaggerated and the risks have been underplayed.
Also, the raw data on the efficacy and safety of statins are being kept secret and have not been subjected to scrutiny by other scientists. This lack of transparency has led to an erosion of public confidence.
Doctors and patients are being misled about the true benefits and harms of statins, and it is now a matter of urgency that the raw data from the clinical trials are released,” Demasi writes.14
While Demasi’s paper is behind a paywall, she reviews her arguments in the featured video above. Among them is the fact that the “statin empire” is built on prescribing these drugs to people who really don’t need them and are likely to suffer side effects without getting any benefits.
For example, some have recommended statins should be given to everyone over the age of 50, regardless of their cholesterol level. Others have suggested screening and dosing young children.
Even more outrageous suggestions over the past few years include statin “’condiments’ in burger outlets to counter the negative effects of a fast food meal,’” and adding statins to the municipal water supply.
Simple Tricks, Big Payoffs
Medical professionals are now largely divided into two camps, one saying statins are lifesaving and safe enough for everyone, and the other saying they’re largely unnecessary and harmful to boot. How did such a divide arise, when all have access to the same research and data?
Demasi suggests that in order to understand how health professionals can be so divided on this issue, you have to follow the money. The cost of developing and getting market approval for a new drug exceeds $2.5 billion. “A more effective way to fast-track company profits is to broaden the use of an existing drug,” Demasi says, and this is precisely what happened with statins.
By simply revising the definition of “high cholesterol,” which was done in 2000 and again in 2004, millions of people became eligible for statin treatment, without any evidence whatsoever that it would actually benefit them.
As it turns out, eight of the nine members on the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Program panel responsible for these revisions had “direct ties to statin manufacturers,” Demasi says, and that public revelation sowed the first seed of suspicion in many people’s minds.
Skepticism ratcheted up even more when, in 2013, the American College of Cardiology and AHA revised their statin guideline to include a CVD risk calculation rather than a single cholesterol number. U.S. patients with a 7.5% risk of developing CVD in the next 10 years were now put on a statin. (In the U.K., the percentage used was a more reasonable 20%.)
This resulted in another 12.8 million Americans being put on statin treatment even though they didn’t have any real risk factors for CVD. Worse, a majority of these were older people without heart disease — the very population that stand to gain the least from these medications.
What’s worse, 4 of 5 calculators were eventually found to overestimate the risk of CVD, some by as much as 115%, which means the rate of overprescription was even greater than previously suspected.
Industry Bias
While simple revisions of the definitions of high cholesterol and CVD risk massively augmented the statin market, industry-funded studies have further fueled the overprescription trend. As noted by Demasi, when U.S. President Ronald Reagan cut funding to the National Institutes of Health, private industry moved in to sponsor their own clinical trials.
The vast majority of statin trials are funded by the manufacturers, and research has repeatedly found that funding plays a major role in research outcomes. It’s not surprising then that most statin studies overestimate drug benefits and underestimate risks.
Demasi quotes Dr. Peter Gøtzsche, a Danish physician-researcher who in 1993 co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre:
“When drug industry sponsored trials cannot be examined and questioned by independent researchers, science ceases to exist and it becomes nothing more than marketing.”
“The very nature of science is its contestability,” Demasi notes. “We need to be able to challenge and rechallenge scientific results to ensure they’re reproducible and legitimate.” However, there’s been a “cloud of secrecy” around clinical statin trials, Demasi says, as the raw data on side effects have never been released to the public, nor other scientists.
The data are being held by the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists (CTT) Collaboration at CTSU Oxford, headed by Rory Collins, which periodically publishes meta-analyses of the otherwise inaccessible data. While the CTT claims to be an independent organization, it has received more than £260 million from statin makers.
Inevitably, its conclusions end up promoting wider use of statins, and no independent review is possible to contest or confirm the CTT Collaboration’s conclusions.
Tricks Used to Minimize Harms in Clinical Trials
As explained by Demasi, there are many ways in which researchers can influence the outcome of a drug trial. One is by designing the study in such a way that it minimizes the chances of finding harm. The example she gives in her lecture is the Heart Protection Study. KetoFast: Rejuvenate Y... Mercola, Dr. Joseph Check Amazon for Pricing.
Before the trial got started, all participants were given a statin drug for six weeks. By the end of that run-in period, 36% of the participants had dropped out due to side effects or lack of compliance. Once they had this “freshly culled” population, where those suffering side effects had already been eliminated, that’s when the trial actually started.
Now, patients were divided into statin and placebo groups. But since everyone had already taken a statin before the trial began, the side effects found in the statin and placebo groups by the end of the trial were relatively similar.
In short, this strategy grossly underestimates the percentage of the population that will experience side effects, and this “may explain why the rate of side effects in statin trials is wildly different from the rate of side effects seen in real-world observations,” Demasi says.
Deception Through Statistics
Public opinion can also be influenced by exaggerating statistics. A common statistic used to promote statins is that they lower your risk of heart attack by about 36%.15 This statistic is derived from a 2008 study16 in the European Heart Journal. One of the authors on this study is Rory Collins, who heads up the CTT Collaboration.
Table 4 in this study shows the rate of heart attack in the placebo group was 3.1% while the statin group’s rate was 2% — a 36% reduction in relative risk. However, the absolute risk reduction — the actual difference between the two groups, i.e., 3.1% minus 2% — is only 1.1%, which really isn’t very impressive.
In other words, in the real world, if you take a statin, your chance of a heart attack is only 1.1% lower than if you’re not taking it. At the end of the day, what really matters is what your risk of death is the absolute risk. The study, however, only stresses the relative risk (36%), not the absolute risk (1.1%).
As noted in the review,17 “How Statistical Deception Created the Appearance That Statins Are Safe and Effective in Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease,” it’s very easy to confuse and mislead people with relative risks. You can learn more about absolute and relative risk in my 2015 interview with David Diamond, Ph.D., who co-wrote that paper.
Silencing Dissenters and Fear-Based PR
Yet another strategy used to mislead people is to create the illusion of “consensus” by silencing dissenters, discrediting critics and/or censoring differing views.
In her lecture, Demasi quotes Collins of the CTT Collaboration saying that “those who questioned statin side effects were ‘far worse’ and had probably ‘killed more people’ than ‘the paper on the MMR vaccine” … “Accusing you of murdering people is an effective way [to] discredit you,” she says.
Demasi also highlights the case of a French cardiologist who questioned the value of statins in his book. It received widespread attention in the French press, until critics started saying the book and resulting press coverage posed a danger to public health.
One report blamed the book for causing a 50% increase in statin discontinuation, which was predicted would lead to the death of 10,000 people. On this particular occasion, however, researchers analyzed the number of actual deaths based on national statistics, and found the actual death toll decreased in the year following the release of the book.
The authors, Demasi says, noted that it was “’not evidence-based to claim that statin discontinuation increases mortality,’ and that in the future, scientists should assess ‘real effects of statin discontinuation rather than making dubious extrapolations and calculations.’”
Trillion-Dollar Business Based on Flimsy Evidence
Statins, originally introduced three decades ago as secondary prevention for those with established CVD and patients with congenital and familial hyperlipidemias, have now vastly expanded thanks to the strategies summarized above.
Tens if not hundreds of millions of people are now on these drugs, without any scientific evidence to show they will actually benefit from them. As noted in the EBM analysis, “Statins for Primary Prevention: What Is the Regulator’s Role?”:18
“The central clinical controversy has been a fierce debate over whether their benefits in primary prevention outweigh their harms … The largest known statin usage survey conducted in the USA found that 75% of new statin users discontinued their therapy by the end of the first year, with 62% of them saying it was because of the side effects.
Regardless of what level of prevention statin prescription is aimed at, the proposed widening of the population to over 75s de facto includes people with multiple pathologies, whether symptomatic or not, and bypasses the distinction between primary and secondary prevention …
The CTT Collaboration estimates the frequency of myopathy is quite rare, at five cases per 10,000 statin users over five years. But others have contended that the CTT Collaboration’s work ‘simply does not match clinical experience’ … [Muscle-related adverse events] reportedly occur with a frequency of … as many as 20% of patients in clinical practice.”
Regulators Have a Duty to Create Transparency
Fat for Fuel: A Revolu... Dr. Joseph Mercola Best Price: $7.40 Buy New $11.89 (as of 10:20 UTC - Details) Considering the discrepancy in reported side effects between statin trials, clinical practice and statin usage surveys, what responsibility do regulators have?
According to “Statins for Primary Prevention: What Is the Regulator’s Role?”19 regulators have a responsibility to “engage and publicly articulate their position on the controversy and make the evidence base underlying those judgments available to third parties for independent scrutiny,” none of which has been done to date. The paper adds:
“Regulators holding clinical trial data, particularly for public health drugs, should make these data available in searchable format with curated and dedicated web-based resource. If national regulators are not resourced for this, pooling or centralizing resources may be necessary.
The isolation of regulators from the realities of prescribing medications based on incomplete or distorted information is not enshrined in law but is a product of a subculture in which commercial confidentiality is more important than people. This also needs to change.”
Sources and References
The Best of Dr. Joseph Mercola


Virus Fearmongerers Prevail

While Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , warns millions of people will be infected by a mutated coronavirus , public health authorities fail to inform politicians and the public that most ( 80+ % ) healthy people exhibit mild or no symptoms , develop natural antibodies that will provide life-long immunity and will not require future vaccination .
If we had a vaccine that is as effective as the natural immunity that is now being exhibited , we would call it a miracle vaccine .
The typical efficacy of flu vaccines ranges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among high-risk groups ( elderly and young children ) .
A Harvard professor says up 70 % of the global population will be infected with coronavirus within the next year .
That is actually a positive because most will naturally develop antibodies .
If one were to say 70 % of the world just got vaccinated against coronavirus that would be considered a major achievement but if 70 % were naturally immunized against coronavirus without a needle and syringe that would be considered a dire problem .
Why ?
For the first time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is no vaccine available for an infectious respiratory tract infection .
Millions of people are being exposed to a wintertime pathogen ( virus and/or bacterium ) in addition to the seasonal flu .
Better than 9 in 10 experience mild or no symptoms and develop natural life-long antibodies to these infectious germs without the aid of a vaccine .
This equates to massive over-vaccination for seasonal influenza .
The Vitamin D Cure , Re ... Stafford , Diane Best Price : $ 2.05 Buy New $ 2.99 As of March 12 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been reported in the U.S. , an unusually low number compared to deaths from wintertime influenza that are frankly over-stated by the Centers for Disease Control every year in an attempt to scare the masses to vaccinate .
Coronavirus outbreaks on ocean liners are instructive – hundreds of passengers , largely older vacationing adults , were initially found to be infected but the death rate was under 1 % .
( Note : news agencies are burying these early reports and re-linking to more recent updates ) .
An analysis of elderly vacationers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quarantine resulted in infection of 619 passengers rather than the predicted 70 if the quarantine was not mandated .
Quarantines are not likely to quell the epidemic as the more the public spends time indoors , often breathing air that is commonly shared in homes and offices , the more likelihood of vitamin D deficiency .
Hospitalization completely deprives patients of their primary source of vitamin D – – the sun , with no supplementation to normalize vitamin D blood levels .
Modern medicine is averse to vitamin therapy .
The public should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While at least a dozen biotech companies have coronavirus vaccines in development , an experimental study ended up killing laboratory animals .
No vaccine will ever be highly effective in high-risk groups ( diabetics , obese , smokers , etc . )
against ANY infectious disease because , due to nutrient shortages , these individuals can not adequately produce life-long T-cell generated antibodies against pathogenic bacteria or viruses .
Given that vaccination IS the disease ( so-called live or attenuated viruses ) , vaccination among immune-compromised individuals appears unwise , but is modern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analysis by this author reveals universal vaccination would result in more infections and deaths than no vaccination at all .
The number of people dying are not succumbing to potentially pathogenic viruses and bacteria , they are dying because of a weakened immune system .
The pathogens are always there .
Weakened immunity in winter allows pathogenic bacteria and viruses to replicate .
Smokers , diabetics , obese , alcohol abusers , prescription or illicit drug users , and nutrient deficient individuals are at greatest risk for a mortal outcome and should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D , vitamin C and zinc .
Is it only COVID-19 ?
The precise origin of these respiratory tract infections is in question as health authorities do not have a sufficient number of testing kits for the COVID-19 coronavirus and use mouth swabbing , x-rays and clinical symptoms to diagnose this infectious disease that appears to spread in households but not into the community .
Simultaneous co-infection may be in play , complicating any planned vaccines .
Health authorities didn ’ t tell you the tests for this virus have a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Authorities were saying the tests weren ’ t even available .
In one study , among 1460 cases of unexplained respiratory illnesses reported to the Centers For Disease Control , only 2 % were laboratory confirmed coronavirus .
The goal should be to target high risk groups and boost their immunity with vitamins and trace minerals like vitamins C and D and zinc – – zinc being required to produce T-cells that produce life-long memory antibodies .
Sunshine is the cure to ward off werewolves and coronavirus The obvious escapes public attention .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public to take vitamin D pills to ward off symptoms of a wintertime virus that will likely subside as the earth turns on its axis towards the sun ( from wintertime to spring solstice ) and will restore sunshine vitamin D levels in northern climates .
There are no coronavirus outbreaks reported among countries that are located near the equator where sunshine vitamin D blood levels remain high .
Handwashing and face masks are not likely to be effective as the primary problem is weak immunity .
The same germs are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vitamin D protects from infection .
An analysis of published studies reveals adequate vitamin D blood levels reduce the risk for pneumonia , the end-point in all infectious lung diseases .
Hundreds of millions of prescriptions are generated for ACE inhibitors to control blood pressure .
ACE is particularly high in lung tissues .
A receptor ( doorway ) for coronaviruses enter living cells is angiotensin converting enzyme-2 ( ACE2 ) .
Once inside the cell , these viruses utilize the genetic machinery of the cell to replicate .
ACE-inhibiting drugs would close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ... Jeff T Bowles Best Price : $ 4.97 Buy New $ 9.99 However , ACE-2 depends upon zinc and helps to activate white blood cells in their germ-killing .
ACE inhibitors ( Lisinopril ) operate to control blood pressure by depletion of zinc .
Over-production of ACE has been shown to demonstrably quell bacterial infections .
Anyone taking ACE-inhibiting drugs to widen their blood vessels in order to control blood pressure should supplement their diet with zinc to ensure antibody-producing T-cells are adequately produced .
America is healthier to begin with Because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American public is not as likely to exhibit the same level of mortality as in Wuhan , China , where the coronavirus outbreak was reported to have begun .
What the public is not learning from public health officials is that whatever potentially pathogenic germ ( virus or bacterium ) that is infecting world populations , it is not particularly deadly and over 9 in 10 healthy adults recover .
An analysis indicates a different germ may be in play ( not what hit Wuhan ) .
The people who flew back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread the disease beyond their immediate families .
Death rates inside the Wuhan , China area are low but much higher than the rest of the world .
Italy is another hotspot .
But these infectious hotspots are actually believed to be caused by a mycobacterium that causes a different lung disease – tuberculosis .

While Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, warns millions of people will be infected by a mutated coronavirus, public health authorities fail to inform politicians and the public that most (80+%) healthy people exhibit mild or no symptoms, develop natural antibodies that will provide life-long immunity and will not require future vaccination.
If we had a vaccine that is as effective as the natural immunity that is now being exhibited, we would call it a miracle vaccine. The typical efficacy of flu vaccines ranges from 30-50% with almost total ineffectiveness among high-risk groups (elderly and young children).
A Harvard professor says up 70% of the global population will be infected with coronavirus within the next year. That is actually a positive because most will naturally develop antibodies. If one were to say 70% of the world just got vaccinated against coronavirus that would be considered a major achievement but if 70% were naturally immunized against coronavirus without a needle and syringe that would be considered a dire problem. Why?
For the first time the public is witnessing what happens when there is no vaccine available for an infectious respiratory tract infection. Millions of people are being exposed to a wintertime pathogen (virus and/or bacterium) in addition to the seasonal flu. Better than 9 in 10 experience mild or no symptoms and develop natural life-long antibodies to these infectious germs without the aid of a vaccine. This equates to massive over-vaccination for seasonal influenza. The Vitamin D Cure, Re... Stafford, Diane Best Price: $2.05 Buy New $2.99 (as of 11:37 UTC - Details)
As of March 12, 2020, only 37 coronavirus deaths have been reported in the U.S., an unusually low number compared to deaths from wintertime influenza that are frankly over-stated by the Centers for Disease Control every year in an attempt to scare the masses to vaccinate.
Quarantines counterproductive
Coronavirus outbreaks on ocean liners are instructive – hundreds of passengers, largely older vacationing adults, were initially found to be infected but the death rate was under 1%. (Note: news agencies are burying these early reports and re-linking to more recent updates). An analysis of elderly vacationers on board an ocean liner reveals a quarantine resulted in infection of 619 passengers rather than the predicted 70 if the quarantine was not mandated.
Quarantines are not likely to quell the epidemic as the more the public spends time indoors, often breathing air that is commonly shared in homes and offices, the more likelihood of vitamin D deficiency.
Hospitalization completely deprives patients of their primary source of vitamin D – – the sun, with no supplementation to normalize vitamin D blood levels. Modern medicine is averse to vitamin therapy.
Vaccination questioned
The public should not be clamoring for a vaccine. While at least a dozen biotech companies have coronavirus vaccines in development, an experimental study ended up killing laboratory animals.
No vaccine will ever be highly effective in high-risk groups (diabetics, obese, smokers, etc.) against ANY infectious disease because, due to nutrient shortages, these individuals cannot adequately produce life-long T-cell generated antibodies against pathogenic bacteria or viruses.
Given that vaccination IS the disease (so-called live or attenuated viruses), vaccination among immune-compromised individuals appears unwise, but is modern medicine’s only preventive. An analysis by this author reveals universal vaccination would result in more infections and deaths than no vaccination at all.
Deaths from weakened immunity, not germs
The number of people dying are not succumbing to potentially pathogenic viruses and bacteria, they are dying because of a weakened immune system. The pathogens are always there. Weakened immunity in winter allows pathogenic bacteria and viruses to replicate.
Smokers, diabetics, obese, alcohol abusers, prescription or illicit drug users, and nutrient deficient individuals are at greatest risk for a mortal outcome and should be advised to supplement their diet with vitamin D, vitamin C and zinc.
Is it only COVID-19?
The precise origin of these respiratory tract infections is in question as health authorities do not have a sufficient number of testing kits for the COVID-19 coronavirus and use mouth swabbing, x-rays and clinical symptoms to diagnose this infectious disease that appears to spread in households but not into the community. Simultaneous co-infection may be in play, complicating any planned vaccines.
Health authorities didn’t tell you the tests for this virus have a lot of (47%) false positives. Authorities were saying the tests weren’t even available. In one study, among 1460 cases of unexplained respiratory illnesses reported to the Centers For Disease Control, only 2% were laboratory confirmed coronavirus.
Targeted prevention
The goal should be to target high risk groups and boost their immunity with vitamins and trace minerals like vitamins C and D and zinc – – zinc being required to produce T-cells that produce life-long memory antibodies.
Sunshine is the cure to ward off werewolves and coronavirus
The obvious escapes public attention. Public health authorities are remiss to advise the public to take vitamin D pills to ward off symptoms of a wintertime virus that will likely subside as the earth turns on its axis towards the sun (from wintertime to spring solstice) and will restore sunshine vitamin D levels in northern climates. There are no coronavirus outbreaks reported among countries that are located near the equator where sunshine vitamin D blood levels remain high.
Hand washing, face masks ineffective
Handwashing and face masks are not likely to be effective as the primary problem is weak immunity. The same germs are in circulation in summer months, but sunshine vitamin D protects from infection. An analysis of published studies reveals adequate vitamin D blood levels reduce the risk for pneumonia, the end-point in all infectious lung diseases.
ACE inhibitors
Hundreds of millions of prescriptions are generated for ACE inhibitors to control blood pressure. ACE is particularly high in lung tissues. A receptor (doorway) for coronaviruses enter living cells is angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE2). Once inside the cell, these viruses utilize the genetic machinery of the cell to replicate. ACE-inhibiting drugs would close that cellular doorway. The Miraculous Results... Bowles, Jeff T Best Price: $4.25 Buy New $6.99 (as of 01:50 UTC - Details)
However, ACE-2 depends upon zinc and helps to activate white blood cells in their germ-killing. ACE inhibitors (Lisinopril) operate to control blood pressure by depletion of zinc. Over-production of ACE has been shown to demonstrably quell bacterial infections. Anyone taking ACE-inhibiting drugs to widen their blood vessels in order to control blood pressure should supplement their diet with zinc to ensure antibody-producing T-cells are adequately produced.
America is healthier to begin with
Because of water chlorination and food fortification, the American public is not as likely to exhibit the same level of mortality as in Wuhan, China, where the coronavirus outbreak was reported to have begun.
What the public is not learning from public health officials is that whatever potentially pathogenic germ (virus or bacterium) that is infecting world populations, it is not particularly deadly and over 9 in 10 healthy adults recover.
An analysis indicates a different germ may be in play (not what hit Wuhan). The people who flew back to the U.S. from China did not spread the disease beyond their immediate families. Death rates inside the Wuhan, China area are low but much higher than the rest of the world. Italy is another hotspot. But these infectious hotspots are actually believed to be caused by a mycobacterium that causes a different lung disease – tuberculosis.


lewrockwell--2020-03-13--China’s Response to American Allegations on COVID-19

As if coping with COVID-19 is not enough , American government officials and media are attacking China , I believe without facts and frequently with misplaced malice .
I think that now whether or not COVID-19 was manufactured or not is less relevant to coping with the Pandemic in America and the world .
But this news just posted on the Zerohedge site : A truly bombshell and unprecedented accusation , underscoring that if Sino-US relations amid the broader crisis weren ’ t already bad enough , they ’ re about to crash much , much lower : China ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be the US Army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan ” — the widely acknowledged epicenter and origin point of the Covid-19 pandemic .
Such shock allegations have recently been swirling in foreign media , especially in Chinese , Iranian and Russian press ; however , this is the first time such a high Beijing has leveled the charge — this after President Trump controversially referred to it as a “ foreign virus.
” Fire TV Stick streamin ... Best Price : null Buy New $ 39.99 On March 11th , Global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Further Evidence that the Virus Originated in the US by Larry Romanoff in which he notes : Kristian Andersen is an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research Institute who has analyzed sequences of 2019-nCoV to try to clarify its origin .
He said the scenario was “ entirely plausible ” of infected persons bringing the virus into the seafood market from somewhere outside .
According to the Science article : “ Andersen posted his analysis of 27 available genomes of 2019-nCoV on 25 January on a virology research website .
It suggests they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” – meaning a common source – as early as 1 October 2019.
” ( 9 ) It was interesting that Lucey also noted that MERS was originally believed to have come from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June of 2012 , but later and more thorough studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year .
Lucey said that from stored samples from people who died in Jordan , medical authorities confirmed they had been infected with the MERS virus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for caution among the public in accepting the “ official standard narrative ” that the Western media are always so eager to provide – as they did with SARS , MERS , and ZIKA , all of which ‘ official narratives ’ were later proven to have been entirely wrong .
In this case , the Western media flooded their pages for months about the COVID-19 virus originating in the Wuhan seafood market , caused by people eating bats and wild animals .
All of this has been proven wrong .
Not only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seafood market , it did not originate in Wuhan at all , and it has now been proven that it did not originate in China but was brought to China from another country .
Part of the proof of this assertion is that the genome varieties of the virus in Iran and Italy have been sequenced and declared to have no part of the variety that infected China and must , by definition , have originated elsewhere .
Again , my own opinion is that the point of the origin of COVID-19 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proven ” for now the “ cat is out of the bag ” and for our individual health , discovering if COVID-19 was a bio-weapon originating from the U.S. or China or elsewhere can ’ t help in our fight against the illness .
Bill Sardi has written extensively in articles on what we can do to boost our immune system , many posted to LewRockwell.com recently .
His site Knowledge of Health hosts them also and they are easily accessible there ; while not a physician myself , I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Vitamin D levels , through sunshine exposure when possible and also by supplementing will be detrimental to our health ; in fact I ’ d offer my opinion that the vulnerable , especially the elderly , should take at least 5,000 IU daily now , and also take Vitamin C throughout the day , although if you have an underlying medical condition and are under a doctor ’ s care , feel free to seek out your physician ’ s advice to determine if doing so might be harmful to your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishment recommendation to fight COVID-19 is perhaps best represented in this editorial posted on USA Today : I ’ m an epidemiologist .
Here ’ s what I told my friends about the coronavirus and COVID-19 .
To summarize , the author suggests that you wash your hands frequently and use sanitizer and disinfectants ( and how to make your own since supplies are vanishing off store shelves ) and also consider less public contact .
On the other hand , Global Research , an alternative media site , has posted recently , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , Lying to Congress and the American People ?
As I am not a physician , I can not judge the veracity of this allegation , but it is worrying .
In addition , Global Research also posted this article , The Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic : The Real Danger is “ Agenda ID2020 ” that makes the following key point , and I believe is worth reading : NOW Supplements , Vitam ... Best Price : null Buy New $ 10.85 ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the infamous ID2020 ?
It is an alliance of public-private partners , including UN agencies and civil society .
It ’ s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity .
The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity .
GAVI , the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization , identifies itself on its website as a global health partnership of public and private sector organizations dedicated to “ immunization for all ” .
GAVI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say , its main partners and sponsors are the pharma-industry .
The ID2020 Alliance at their 2019 Summit , entitled “ Rising to the Good ID Challenge ” , in September 2019 in New York , decided to roll out their program in 2020 , a decision confirmed by the WEF in January 2020 in Davos .
Their digital identity program will be tested with the government of Bangladesh .
GAVI , the Vaccine Alliance , and “ partners from academia and humanitarian relief ” ( as they call it ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what WHO calls a Pandemic ?
– Or is a pandemic needed to ‘ roll out ’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020 ?
Also regarding the American response , Mint Press News posted this article , Creative Coronavirus Responses Appear Across the World , but Not in Trump ’ s America .
However , what I ’ d like to make more people aware is that YouTube , unlike its action terminating Iran ’ s PressTV YouTube @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from uploading new content , has not banned China ’ s answer to Russia Today and China ’ s CGTN posted several COVID-19 videos today on YouTube as I write this ( 12 March 2020 ) .
The most recent is titled , “ Five things China did right to contain COVID-19 ” and to summarize , makes the point , “ With WHO officially declaring the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic , China now perhaps has the most knowledge and experience about the virus .
Here are five things that China did to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , again through statements of politicians and media figures , is hostile to China , Europe is working with them , as shown in this video , “ China shares COVID-19 control experience with European experts.
” In this short video , “ China sends epidemic experts to Italy to help fight COVID-19 ” China sent “ nine Chinese experts on Thursday set out for Italy from Shanghai to help the worst coronavirus-hit European country to battle the outbreak .
The plane took off from the Shanghai Pudong International Airport on Thursday afternoon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including equipment for intensive care and protection gear.
” In this video , “ Italy ’ s civil protection chief thanks China for assistance ” is also worth considering .
Finally , this video shows China ’ s response to the hostile coverage in America .
“ Double standards on COVID-19 not helpful.
” From the description : “ When China locked down Wuhan , The New York Times said it came at a great cost to ‘ people ’ s livelihoods and personal liberties.
’ In contrast , Italy ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ contain Europe ’ s worst coronavirus outbreak.
’ How will double standards hamper the global fight against coronavirus ?
” Perhaps I ’ m naïve , perhaps you ’ d consider these videos only propaganda ( as if America ’ s legacy media broadcast news isn ’ t ) but I suspect China would help America if America asked and that mutual hostility as the pandemic escalates is not beneficial to either nation .
Nevertheless , the Trump administration is characterized by extreme belligerence and hostility to China ( and of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ describes here in How Black Swans Are Shaping Planet Panic . )
In any event , I believe we are facing a dangerous situation , and should consider all measures , the conventional as USA Today discussed and I cited above , Bill Sardi ’ s advice on boosting our immune systems , and please don ’ t ignore China ’ s response out of misplaced arrogance or contempt .
Our health is more important than “ Political Theater.
” Nature Made Extra Stre ... Best Price : null Buy New $ 14.72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vitamin C ... Buy New $ 29.50 ( $ 0.12 / Count ) Dr. Mercola , Liposomal ...
Check Amazon for Pricing .
Son of Thunder : The Sp ... Yvonne Lorenzo Buy New $ 12.00 The Best of Yvonne Lorenzo

As if coping with COVID-19 is not enough, American government officials and media are attacking China, I believe without facts and frequently with misplaced malice. I think that now whether or not COVID-19 was manufactured or not is less relevant to coping with the Pandemic in America and the world. But this news just posted on the Zerohedge site:
‘US Army Behind Covid-19 In Wuhan’: China’s Foreign Ministry Levels Bombastic Charge:
A truly bombshell and unprecedented accusation, underscoring that if Sino-US relations amid the broader crisis weren’t already bad enough, they’re about to crash much, much lower: China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman tweets “it might be the US Army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan” — the widely acknowledged epicenter and origin point of the Covid-19 pandemic. Such shock allegations have recently been swirling in foreign media, especially in Chinese, Iranian and Russian press; however, this is the first time such a high Beijing has leveled the charge — this after President Trump controversially referred to it as a “foreign virus.”
Fire TV Stick streamin... Buy New $39.99 (as of 11:14 UTC - Details) On March 11th, Global Research published this article, COVID-19: Further Evidence that the Virus Originated in the US by Larry Romanoff in which he notes:
Kristian Andersen is an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research Institute who has analyzed sequences of 2019-nCoV to try to clarify its origin. He said the scenario was “entirely plausible” of infected persons bringing the virus into the seafood market from somewhere outside. According to the Science article: “Andersen posted his analysis of 27 available genomes of 2019-nCoV on 25 January on a virology research website. It suggests they had a “most recent common ancestor” – meaning a common source – as early as 1 October 2019.” (9) It was interesting that Lucey also noted that MERS was originally believed to have come from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June of 2012, but later and more thorough studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year. Lucey said that from stored samples from people who died in Jordan, medical authorities confirmed they had been infected with the MERS virus. (10) This would provide impetus for caution among the public in accepting the “official standard narrative” that the Western media are always so eager to provide – as they did with SARS, MERS, and ZIKA, all of which ‘official narratives’ were later proven to have been entirely wrong. In this case, the Western media flooded their pages for months about the COVID-19 virus originating in the Wuhan seafood market, caused by people eating bats and wild animals. All of this has been proven wrong. Not only did the virus not originate at the seafood market, it did not originate in Wuhan at all, and it has now been proven that it did not originate in China but was brought to China from another country. Part of the proof of this assertion is that the genome varieties of the virus in Iran and Italy have been sequenced and declared to have no part of the variety that infected China and must, by definition, have originated elsewhere.
Again, my own opinion is that the point of the origin of COVID-19 is moot and perhaps will never be “proven” for now the “cat is out of the bag” and for our individual health, discovering if COVID-19 was a bio-weapon originating from the U.S. or China or elsewhere can’t help in our fight against the illness.
Bill Sardi has written extensively in articles on what we can do to boost our immune system, many posted to LewRockwell.com recently. His site Knowledge of Health hosts them also and they are easily accessible there; while not a physician myself, I don’t think that his advice on increasing one’s Vitamin D levels, through sunshine exposure when possible and also by supplementing will be detrimental to our health; in fact I’d offer my opinion that the vulnerable, especially the elderly, should take at least 5,000 IU daily now, and also take Vitamin C throughout the day, although if you have an underlying medical condition and are under a doctor’s care, feel free to seek out your physician’s advice to determine if doing so might be harmful to your health. The “orthodox” medical establishment recommendation to fight COVID-19 is perhaps best represented in this editorial posted on USA Today:
I’m an epidemiologist. Here’s what I told my friends about the coronavirus and COVID-19.
To summarize, the author suggests that you wash your hands frequently and use sanitizer and disinfectants (and how to make your own since supplies are vanishing off store shelves) and also consider less public contact.
On the other hand, Global Research, an alternative media site, has posted recently, Coronavirus: Why Is Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Lying to Congress and the American People? As I am not a physician, I cannot judge the veracity of this allegation, but it is worrying. In addition, Global Research also posted this article, The Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic: The Real Danger is “Agenda ID2020” that makes the following key point, and I believe is worth reading: NOW Supplements, Vitam... Buy New $9.92 ($0.04 / Count) (as of 04:43 UTC - Details)
What is the infamous ID2020? It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity. The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity. GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, identifies itself on its website as a global health partnership of public and private sector organizations dedicated to “immunization for all”. GAVI is supported by WHO, and needless to say, its main partners and sponsors are the pharma-industry. The ID2020 Alliance at their 2019 Summit, entitled “Rising to the Good ID Challenge”, in September 2019 in New York, decided to roll out their program in 2020, a decision confirmed by the WEF in January 2020 in Davos. Their digital identity program will be tested with the government of Bangladesh. GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and “partners from academia and humanitarian relief” (as they call it), are part of the pioneer party. Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what WHO calls a Pandemic? – Or is a pandemic needed to ‘roll out’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020?
Also regarding the American response, Mint Press News posted this article, Creative Coronavirus Responses Appear Across the World, but Not in Trump’s America.
However, what I’d like to make more people aware is that YouTube, unlike its action terminating Iran’s PressTV YouTube channel and Russia Vesti News YouTube channel from uploading new content, has not banned China’s answer to Russia Today and China’s CGTN posted several COVID-19 videos today on YouTube as I write this (12 March 2020).
The most recent is titled, “Five things China did right to contain COVID-19” and to summarize, makes the point, “With WHO officially declaring the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic, China now perhaps has the most knowledge and experience about the virus. Here are five things that China did to turn the situation around.”

While America, again through statements of politicians and media figures, is hostile to China, Europe is working with them, as shown in this video, “China shares COVID-19 control experience with European experts.”

In this short video, “China sends epidemic experts to Italy to help fight COVID-19” China sent “nine Chinese experts on Thursday set out for Italy from Shanghai to help the worst coronavirus-hit European country to battle the outbreak. The plane took off from the Shanghai Pudong International Airport on Thursday afternoon, carrying 31 tons of medical materials, including equipment for intensive care and protection gear.”

In this video, “Italy’s civil protection chief thanks China for assistance” is also worth considering.

Finally, this video shows China’s response to the hostile coverage in America. “Double standards on COVID-19 not helpful.” From the description:
“When China locked down Wuhan, The New York Times said it came at a great cost to ‘people’s livelihoods and personal liberties.’ In contrast, Italy’s lockdown was described as an effort to ‘contain Europe’s worst coronavirus outbreak.’ How will double standards hamper the global fight against coronavirus?”

Perhaps I’m naïve, perhaps you’d consider these videos only propaganda (as if America’s legacy media broadcast news isn’t) but I suspect China would help America if America asked and that mutual hostility as the pandemic escalates is not beneficial to either nation. Nevertheless, the Trump administration is characterized by extreme belligerence and hostility to China (and of course to Russia, with consequences Pepe Escobar describes here in How Black Swans Are Shaping Planet Panic.)
In any event, I believe we are facing a dangerous situation, and should consider all measures, the conventional as USA Today discussed and I cited above, Bill Sardi’s advice on boosting our immune systems, and please don’t ignore China’s response out of misplaced arrogance or contempt. Our health is more important than “Political Theater.”
Nature Made Extra Stre... Buy New $14.72 ($0.08 / Count) (as of 01:10 UTC - Details) Solarayu00ae Vitamin C... Buy New $29.50 ($0.12 / Count) (as of 04:34 UTC - Details) Dr. Mercola, Liposomal... Check Amazon for Pricing. Son of Thunder: The Sp... Yvonne Lorenzo Buy New $12.00 (as of 04:45 UTC - Details)
The Best of Yvonne Lorenzo


lewrockwell--2020-03-13--Fake News Starts in Washington: Perception Management and Influence Operations Manipulate Public Opi

Fake News Starts in Washington: Perception Management and Influence Operations Manipulate Public Opinion

It is perhaps unusual to have a government that has as much disregard for what most would consider to be the truth as does the current group of rascals running the United States of America .
To be sure , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is as shameless a liar as has ever been seen on any public platform while the president himself appears to make things up as he goes along , particularly if a certain embellishment makes him look good .
Nevertheless , it is important to recognize that lying and government have a long history , possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dwellers elected a leader to guide the tribe on a mastodon hunt .
Lying is a traditional role for intelligence services .
The Romans had a spy service run out of the imperial palace that provided military and political intelligence all across their vast empire .
It included what might be called deception operations carried out to confuse enemies about intentions and capabilities .
In more recent centuries , the British became masters of both spying and deception .
Major influencing intelligence operations run against the United States can be credited with having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars .
Currently , the world ’ s preeminent spy agency in terms of manpower , resources and global reach is undoubtedly the Central Intelligence Agency ( CIA ) .
That is not to suggest that it is necessarily the best intelligence agency , as smaller , more nimble , focused organizations can outperform the spies from the large countries in the niche areas that they consider important .
The Agency ’ s unofficial motto is taken from the Gospel of John : “ And you shall know the truth and the truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself a deception operation as the CIA , acting for the White House , has not blessed anyone with freedom lately .
The Israeli Mossad ’ s motto is more direct , also biblical , coming from the book of Proverbs .
It has been translated from the Hebrew as “ By way of deception , thou shall do war ” though it also appears as “ By wise counsel thou shall wage war.
” “ Wise counsel ” might be described as a deceptive way to describe deception .
Against the Left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 The federal government ’ s various intelligence agencies are into deception big time , so much so that they have a number of euphemisms that permit them to lie about lying .
The CIA regards spreading false information as part of its “ covert action ” activity while the military prefers variations on “ perception management.
” Both occasionally refer to “ influence ” or “ influencing ” operations .
Either way , it is in reality a form of “ information warfare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to shape a perspective favorable to the country engaging in the practice and damaging to one ’ s enemies .
The United States Department of Defense defines “ perception management ” as “ Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions , motives , and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates , ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator ’ s objectives .
In various ways , perception @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , cover and deception , and psychological operations.
” In other words , perception management is a multi-tasked mechanism designed to get an adversary to think or believe what one wishes , no matter what the truth actually is .
The CIA has historically disseminated disinformation primarily through press placements , using agents and collaborators worldwide to circulate stories that were presumed to be supportive of U.S. interests .
The danger was that stories circulated overseas also made their way back into the United States media and , as a result , were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the 1970s the Agency decided to limit the blowback by only placing stories in foreign media that was unlikely to be picked up in the U.S .
However , in an age of internet and easy global communications it is no longer possible to exercise that kind of control and one has to assume that a certain percentage , possibly large , of disinformation actually originates with the U.S. government .
The Pentagon has also been into the deception game , particularly in terms of justifying the Vietnam War by placing stories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was largely an invention .
This was similar to what followed with the Department of Defense ’ s Office of Strategic Influence ( OSI ) in 2001 , which was replaced by the Office of Special Plans and the Policy Counter Terror Evaluation Group ( PCTEG ) , all of which promoted false and inflated intelligence suggesting that the Iraqi government was building an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that could be used to attack the U.S .
The intention was to build public support for an attack on Iraq @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once admitted “ One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.
” Now comes the scary part .
Defense One , which circulates among defense contractors and within the armed services , is now reporting that “ Two former top special operations officials say their job was too junior and the Pentagon isn ’ t taking information warfare seriously enough .
Despite shifting military budgets to better keep up with competitors , there ’ s one area where countries like China , Russia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frustrating for the Department of Defense : influence operations.
” The article complains that “ Today , there is no one individual that ’ s directly in command of all ‘ influence operations ’ across the Department of Defense.
” That is , of course , a good thing but Defense One doesn ’ t see it that way .
The article goes on to describe how the current system works , which includes a WebOps Center created to “ access the opportunities and risks of the global information space , ” most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Pentagon-wonks .
One quote included in the piece rather mysteriously describes how “ The Department of Defense has a tremendous amount of capabilities , information-related capabilities , but they ’ re all stovepiped cylinders of excellence and they ’ re not integrated across the department to realize strategic messaging.
” The article concludes by considering how a new upgraded position of Undersecretary of Defense might be created to manage all the Pentagon ’ s “ influence operations , ” institutionalizing the process at a high level , making it something like a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so it should surprise no one that the United States does heavy handed propaganda , but what is interesting is that it does so openly and even discusses in detail how it does it in such a fashion that there is not even any “ plausible denial ” of what is going on .
And it is an illusion to think that lies put out by the government do not influence policy and even change the course of elections .
An informed citizenry is essential in a democracy , so policy making should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as possible .
It was the Pentagon , after all , stung by honest media reporting on Vietnam , that now embeds journalists in war zones to control what they see and write about .
Governing through lies does not make for good policy and it makes the government lack credibility even when it is telling the truth .
American citizens who are taken in and fooled by what comes out of the influencing operations deserve much better .
The Best of Philip Giraldi

It is perhaps unusual to have a government that has as much disregard for what most would consider to be the truth as does the current group of rascals running the United States of America. To be sure, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is as shameless a liar as has ever been seen on any public platform while the president himself appears to make things up as he goes along, particularly if a certain embellishment makes him look good. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that lying and government have a long history, possibly going back to when the first cave dwellers elected a leader to guide the tribe on a mastodon hunt.
Lying is a traditional role for intelligence services. The Romans had a spy service run out of the imperial palace that provided military and political intelligence all across their vast empire. It included what might be called deception operations carried out to confuse enemies about intentions and capabilities. In more recent centuries, the British became masters of both spying and deception. Major influencing intelligence operations run against the United States can be credited with having led to American involvement in both world wars.
Currently, the world’s preeminent spy agency in terms of manpower, resources and global reach is undoubtedly the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). That is not to suggest that it is necessarily the best intelligence agency, as smaller, more nimble, focused organizations can outperform the spies from the large countries in the niche areas that they consider important. The Agency’s unofficial motto is taken from the Gospel of John: “And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free,” in itself a deception operation as the CIA, acting for the White House, has not blessed anyone with freedom lately. The Israeli Mossad’s motto is more direct, also biblical, coming from the book of Proverbs. It has been translated from the Hebrew as “By way of deception, thou shall do war” though it also appears as “By wise counsel thou shall wage war.” “Wise counsel” might be described as a deceptive way to describe deception. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details)
The federal government’s various intelligence agencies are into deception big time, so much so that they have a number of euphemisms that permit them to lie about lying. The CIA regards spreading false information as part of its “covert action” activity while the military prefers variations on “perception management.” Both occasionally refer to “influence” or “influencing” operations. Either way, it is in reality a form of “information warfare” in which words and ideas are used to shape a perspective favorable to the country engaging in the practice and damaging to one’s enemies.
The United States Department of Defense defines “perception management” as “Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.” In other words, perception management is a multi-tasked mechanism designed to get an adversary to think or believe what one wishes, no matter what the truth actually is.
The CIA has historically disseminated disinformation primarily through press placements, using agents and collaborators worldwide to circulate stories that were presumed to be supportive of U.S. interests. The danger was that stories circulated overseas also made their way back into the United States media and, as a result, were pari pass disinforming the U.S. public. In the 1970s the Agency decided to limit the blowback by only placing stories in foreign media that was unlikely to be picked up in the U.S. However, in an age of internet and easy global communications it is no longer possible to exercise that kind of control and one has to assume that a certain percentage, possibly large, of disinformation actually originates with the U.S. government.
The Pentagon has also been into the deception game, particularly in terms of justifying the Vietnam War by placing stories emphasizing the threat to the United States, which was largely an invention. This was similar to what followed with the Department of Defense’s Office of Strategic Influence (OSI) in 2001, which was replaced by the Office of Special Plans and the Policy Counter Terror Evaluation Group (PCTEG), all of which promoted false and inflated intelligence suggesting that the Iraqi government was building an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that could be used to attack the U.S. The intention was to build public support for an attack on Iraq, because as President George W. Bush once admitted “One of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror.”
Now comes the scary part. Defense One, which circulates among defense contractors and within the armed services, is now reporting that “Two former top special operations officials say their job was too junior and the Pentagon isn’t taking information warfare seriously enough. Despite shifting military budgets to better keep up with competitors, there’s one area where countries like China, Russia, and even Iran are proving nimble and frustrating for the Department of Defense: influence operations.”
The article complains that “Today, there is no one individual that’s directly in command of all ‘influence operations’ across the Department of Defense.” That is, of course, a good thing but Defense One doesn’t see it that way. The article goes on to describe how the current system works, which includes a WebOps Center created to “access the opportunities and risks of the global information space,” most of which is only of interest to a Pentagon-wonks. One quote included in the piece rather mysteriously describes how “The Department of Defense has a tremendous amount of capabilities, information-related capabilities, but they’re all stovepiped cylinders of excellence and they’re not integrated across the department to realize strategic messaging.”
The article concludes by considering how a new upgraded position of Undersecretary of Defense might be created to manage all the Pentagon’s “influence operations,” institutionalizing the process at a high level, making it something like a Ministry of Lies. All right, so it should surprise no one that the United States does heavy handed propaganda, but what is interesting is that it does so openly and even discusses in detail how it does it in such a fashion that there is not even any “plausible denial” of what is going on. And it is an illusion to think that lies put out by the government do not influence policy and even change the course of elections. An informed citizenry is essential in a democracy, so policy making should be as close to “fact-based” as possible. It was the Pentagon, after all, stung by honest media reporting on Vietnam, that now embeds journalists in war zones to control what they see and write about. Governing through lies does not make for good policy and it makes the government lack credibility even when it is telling the truth. American citizens who are taken in and fooled by what comes out of the influencing operations deserve much better.
The Best of Philip Giraldi


lewrockwell--2020-03-13--Russia Now Proclaims a ‘Belief in God To Be Fundamental,’ While the US Embraces Paganism

Over the past six years I have written several essays and in-depth articles about Russia , about its president Vladimir Putin , and about the incredibly long-lived charade—the Russia Hoax—which has been foisted off on the American public , including on millions of those who call themselves “ conservatives ” and support Donald Trump .
It ’ s a constant narrative that we are spoon fed nightly , and not just by the Mainstream Media ( e.g.
, CNN , NBC , The New York Times , etc . )
, but vociferously by most pundits on Fox ( with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by much of the establishment “ conservative ” print media .
As I have noted and attempted to dissect , it is almost as if the fall of Soviet Communism in August 1991 never took place and the old Soviet Union somehow continued to exist and threaten our very lives and future with “ mutually-assured-destruction ” ( remember that term from our Cold War vocabulary ? )
.
Despite the nugatory results of the heavily Democratically-weighted Mueller Commission and the continued hysterical sqwawks of Congressmen Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler—what does it tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such men get elected ?
– the success of that template in our popular culture is clearly evident .
Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 But more than this resilient deep-seated impression , there is something far more sinister afoot .
The late Senator John McCain—notoriously—and Senators Lindsey Graham and Ben Sasse , James Kirchick , Jonah Goldberg , and other Neoconservatives—those who form the veritable “ conservative establishment ” in our day—have attacked and criticized Russia and its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” for discrimination against lesbians and homosexuals , for imposing a “ religious orthodoxy ” on Russia , and for “ not being democratic ” enough .
In other words , those Russkies should be more like us and our model democracy , right ?
That is , a system here in the United States where elections are bought and sold by major corporate and international billionaires , a system where George Soros can pour in millions of dollars to a targeted local race and convince ( via ads and TV ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ e.g.
, in Virginia , Pennsylvania , etc . )
, a system where the liberal-dominated courts refuse to countenance even the most minor voter ID conditions , a system where two giant incestuous power groups ( Democrats and Republicans ) literally control the real choices we have…that model democracy .
We officiously want the Russians to install that ?
We demand—in the name of “ democracy ” and “ human rights ” —that our corrupt model be their model .
And in so demanding we follow along exactly the pathway of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the other anxious globalists for whom any real sign of independence , of attachment to national and native traditions , of true religious belief , and of adherence to moral law is anathema and verboten in the New World Order .
There is a reason why the Neoconservative/Conservative “ establishment ” and the Progressivists are joined at the hip when it comes to post-Communist Russia : and it is that what has occurred and is occurring there is an embarrassment and a reminder of what we once aspired to—a reminder of what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamental—a reminder of what our historic culture was actually based on and in .
What Russia has been doing and achieving can not be allowed to stand , and certainly it can not be described in any fair or faithful manner by Mainstream Media , lest the veil and scales on our eyes by removed .
For Russia has become , ironically , a veritable “ sign of contradiction , ” a sign that should shame us and shame this American nation , the proclaimed “ home of freedom and liberty ” founded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in God and His Providence…and look what has happened to us now .
I pass on two short items : first , a short abbreviated item on new constitutional changes in Russia—where on “ conservative media ” [ sic ! ]
have you heard these mentioned ?
Maybe those “ conservative pundits ” don ’ t want you to know… Second , I offer another of my essays that appeared on LewRockwell.com , “ They ’ re Coming to Get You !
Build that Bomb Shelter Now !
”

Over the past six years I have written several essays and in-depth articles about Russia, about its president Vladimir Putin, and about the incredibly long-lived charade—the Russia Hoax—which has been foisted off on the American public, including on millions of those who call themselves “conservatives” and support Donald Trump.
It’s a constant narrative that we are spoon fed nightly, and not just by the Mainstream Media (e.g., CNN, NBC, The New York Times, etc.), but vociferously by most pundits on Fox (with the exception of Tucker Carlson) and by much of the establishment “conservative” print media.
As I have noted and attempted to dissect, it is almost as if the fall of Soviet Communism in August 1991 never took place and the old Soviet Union somehow continued to exist and threaten our very lives and future with
“mutually-assured-destruction” (remember that term from our Cold War vocabulary?).
Despite the nugatory results of the heavily Democratically-weighted Mueller Commission and the continued hysterical sqwawks of Congressmen Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler—what does it tell us about our American political system that such men get elected?– the success of that template in our popular culture is clearly evident. Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 03:52 UTC - Details)
But more than this resilient deep-seated impression, there is something far more sinister afoot.
The late Senator John McCain—notoriously—and Senators Lindsey Graham and Ben Sasse, James Kirchick, Jonah Goldberg, and other Neoconservatives—those who form the veritable “conservative establishment” in our day—have attacked and criticized Russia and its president for “violations of human rights,” for discrimination against lesbians and homosexuals, for imposing a “religious orthodoxy” on Russia, and for “not being democratic” enough.
In other words, those Russkies should be more like us and our model democracy, right?
That is, a system here in the United States where elections are bought and sold by major corporate and international billionaires, a system where George Soros can pour in millions of dollars to a targeted local race and convince (via ads and TV) voters to elect his chosen candidate (e.g., in Virginia, Pennsylvania, etc.), a system where the liberal-dominated courts refuse to countenance even the most minor voter ID conditions, a system where two giant incestuous power groups (Democrats and Republicans) literally control the real choices we have…that model democracy.
We officiously want the Russians to install that? We demand—in the name of “democracy” and “human rights”—that our corrupt model be their model. And in so demanding we follow along exactly the pathway of the George Soros’s of this world and the other anxious globalists for whom any real sign of independence, of attachment to national and native traditions, of true religious belief, and of adherence to moral law is anathema and verboten in the New World Order.
There is a reason why the Neoconservative/Conservative “establishment” and the Progressivists are joined at the hip when it comes to post-Communist Russia: and it is that what has occurred and is occurring there is an embarrassment and a reminder of what we once aspired to—a reminder of what Western Christian civilization once held to be fundamental—a reminder of what our historic culture was actually based on and in. What Russia has been doing and achieving cannot be allowed to stand, and certainly it cannot be described in any fair or faithful manner by Mainstream Media, lest the veil and scales on our eyes by removed.
For Russia has become, ironically, a veritable “sign of contradiction,” a sign that should shame us and shame this American nation, the proclaimed “home of freedom and liberty” founded on immutable principles based in a belief in God and His Providence…and look what has happened to us now.
I pass on two short items: first, a short abbreviated item on new constitutional changes in Russia—where on “conservative media” [sic!] have you heard these mentioned? Maybe those “conservative pundits” don’t want you to know…
Second, I offer another of my essays that appeared on LewRockwell.com, “They’re Coming to Get You! Build that Bomb Shelter Now!”
Russia passes Constitutional Reform
Reprinted with the author’s permission.