Vaccine zealot Paul Offit claims children can be given 10,000 vaccines all at once, with no harm

Fake news, fake science, fake boobs. Doesn’t it feel like we just can’t trust anything anymore? Take, for example, the super-heated vaccine debate that has been raging for a few years now. How are we as parents supposed to know who we should believe? We have wise-looking men in lab coats assuring us that vaccines save millions of lives each year, and that while they carry some risks, these are minimal, and every child should be vaccinated to protect “herd immunity.” On the other side of the spectrum, we have parents of children with neurodevelopment disorders asking us to believe that their children were damaged by vaccines, and the astronomical rise in autism rates in the last few decades that would seem to back them up. How are we supposed to know where to find the truth?

Well, the only way to find the truth is to follow the money. If scientists and doctors have a vested interest in pushing an agenda, how are we supposed to believe anything they say? Only scientists with nothing to gain financially and no conflicts of interest would be worth listening to, right?

Let’s consider this practically by comparing two vaccine studies with opposite findings.

The first study was published in 2002 in the journal Pediatrics, and the lead author was Paul A. Offit, a pediatrician who specializes in infectious diseases, and is an expert on vaccines, immunology and virology. Offit’s study set out to allay parents’ fears that multiple vaccines might overwhelm or weaken their children’s immune systems.

In the study’s summary the authors assured parents, “Current studies do not support the hypothesis that multiple vaccines overwhelm, weaken, or ‘use up’ the immune system. On the contrary, young infants have an enormous capacity to respond to multiple vaccines, as well as to the many other challenges present in the environment.” The authors also asserted that, “[E]ach infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time.” [Emphasis added]

The problem with this argument is that it completely misses the concern over toxic ingredients added to vaccines such as aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde, squalene and other chemicals that pose severe neurological risks. Surely Dr. Offit doesn’t believe a child can be injected with 10,000 doses of aluminum and mercury without any negative side effects… does he?

A visit to Amazon.com reveals that Offit has been the author or co-author of no less than eight books, all of which “prove” why vaccines are a great idea. Then there’s the fact that Offit is the co-creator (and patent holder) of the RotaTeq vaccine which supposedly protects against rotavirus. And what about the hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding that the professor received for 2008’s “Every child by two” program? Professor Offit certainly has a vested interest in insisting that vaccines are safe. [RELATED: Discover the truth at Vaccines.news]

Let’s consider the second study. Published recently in the Journal of Translational Science, this study had Professor Anthony R. Mawson as lead author. Dr. Mawson, too, has an impressive list of credentials, and is the author of over 50 published studies. After assessing the health outcomes and neurodevelopmental diseases of over 660 American children, the research team found that while vaccinated children exhibited slightly better protection against chicken pox and whooping cough, but not other viruses, as they “were significantly more likely to have been diagnosed with other infections, allergies, and other neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) like autism and ADHD.”

How much more likely? Vaccinated children were 4.2 times more likely to develop autism, at 4.2 times higher risk of an ADHD diagnosis, had 5.2 times the risk of learning disabilities, were 2.9 times more likely to have eczema, and were a shocking 30 times more likely to have allergic rhinitis!

Now, a careful Amazon.com search will reveal that Professor Mawson has written no pro- or anti-vaccine books. He has no vested interest that I could establish in trying to prove that vaccines are harmful. He’s just a highly-respected scientist who did the study and faithfully recorded the results.

So, who do you believe? The guy who’s built a lucrative and multi-faceted career on doggedly insisting that vaccines are safe? Or the respected scientist who has no hidden agenda and is simply reporting his findings?

Find more coverage of biased vaccine-pushing journalists at VaccineHolocaust.org.

Sources include:

Pediatrics.AAPPublications.org

TruthWiki.org

Amazon.com

OAText.com[PDF]

JSums.edu

WorldMercuryProject.org

SICK: Gloria Steinem says that allowing a human child to be born instead of murdering it will cause global warming

While scientists continue to debate what could be causing climate change, feminist icon Gloria Steinem thinks she knows the answer. In an interview with Refinery29, the outspoken 83-year-old said that climate change is actually a feminist issue. In her view, the fact that not all women have access to abortions is directly responsible for world overpopulation, thereby causing global warming.

She told the publication: “If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children they don’t want or can’t care for over the 500 years of patriarchy, we wouldn’t have the climate problems that we have. That’s the fundamental cause of climate change.”

It’s not the first time she has expressed this poorly reasoned stance. At a fundraiser for Planned Parenthood last September, she said: “Forced childbirth is the single biggest cause of global warming.”

Abort babies to save the planet?

Is she saying that the solution to global warming is aborting babies? The idea has more support than you might think. Planned Parenthood would undoubtedly be the first ones to nod in agreement. After all, anything that helps them get their blood-slathered hands on more baby body parts to sell for profit is a statement they can get behind, no matter how ludicrous it sounds to sane people.

It’s interesting to note that the interviewer did not point out the flaws in her logic. Who exactly are we trying to save the planet for if we are aborting the future generation en masse?

In the same interview, Steinem jumped on an opportunity to get in a dig against the Trumps. Because we all know that feminists only support fellow women when it’s convenient, she directed her ire toward Ivanka Trump rather than her father, the one who holds the actual power in this country. After saying that Ivanka is clearly not a feminist, she went on to compare Trump’s childcare and maternity policies, which Ivanka promotes, to those in Nazi Germany. Her beef with Ivanka is the fact that she has said that she views herself as a feminist but does not go out of her way to promote abortion rights.

Steinem did the interview while in New York to host part of the Create & Cultivate NYC conference, which is for women who want to “create and cultivate the career of their dreams.” She’s an interesting choice of a speaker for that event when you consider that she told her Refinery29 interviewer, Lindsey Stanberry, that she’s never really had a job.

The Pope is also causing global warming, Steinem says

In a 2015 interview, Steinem said that climate change is also somehow the Pope’s fault. “We should have this massive education campaign pointing out that the Pope and all of the other patriarchal religions that dictate to women in this way, accusing them of global warming,” she told Cosmopolitan. “Because the human load on this earth is the biggest cause of global warming, and that is because of forcing women to have children they would not on their own choose to have.”

She added that while she was glad that the Pope had spoken out about global warming, she asked if he knows that he is causing it. According to her logic, is her own mother also responsible for global warming by allowing her to be born?

Sources include:

LifeNews.com

LifeSiteNews.com

NaturalNews.com

Refinery29.com

Cosmopolitan.com

Silly Americans mock Venezuela’s 99.5% currency collapse, thinking it can’t happen here

Yet another real-life attempt at creating a successful Marxist government is going down in flames — this time in Venezuela — harming millions of people in the process even as the far-Left government of President Nicolas Maduro doubles, triples and quadruples down on the same failed fiscal policies.

To say that the country is an economic basket case is a gross understatement. Inflation can only be described as runaway; the country’s currency isn’t even worth the paper it is printed on; few can afford even basic foodstuffs and supplies and the government is broke. Store shelves are empty; there is fighting in the streets; the murder rate is soaring, and the army has to guard shipments of goods.

As reported by Zero Hedge, the anger has gotten so bad over conditions in what used to be South America’s economic behemoth, demonstrators are resorting to throwing “bombs” full of feces at government forces, as the currency (the bolivar) collapses again by 99.5 percent — 5,100 bolivars to every $1.

The monetary depreciation and inflation are so extreme that most peoples’ savings have been obliterated. It’s all but impossible to buy imported goods — and domestic production of goods has also fallen dramatically.

Like all good socialists, Maduro — who is essentially a dictator — has arbitrarily raised the minimum wage something like 20 times during his tenure (much like Democrats in the U.S. want to do and have done). But because artificially raising wages without taking into consideration whether businesses can even afford to pay them is a recipe for fiscal disaster, they have done no good and still only amount to about $40 a month. In fact, raising the wages by dictate rather than allowing the free market to determine wages has only made things worse.

Hence the feces bombs, which, as El Pais reports, some have dubbed “Puputov cocktails” on social media. Fast becoming the ‘weapon’ of choice to hurl at government forces, demonstrators launch them with giant slingshots called a “crapapult.”

You can’t make this stuff up.

And yet, they are part of the political reality in Venezuela today: Socialism taken to the extreme is directly responsible for the destruction of this once proud, once prosperous country.

“These kids live in a dictatorship, they have no other option but to protest however they see fit,” Maria Montilla, 49, staged behind the lines of a group of protestors, told El Pais.

“There’s nothing explosive here. It’s out way of saying, ‘Get lost Maduro, you’re useless!’” one protestor, who requested anonymity, added.

Miguel Torres, the one-time spy chief for Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, has broken with the current government. He sees major trouble ahead — even civil war — if nothing changes and the already massive protests spread even further to the poorer, generally pro-Chavez countryside.

“What is happening may be the starting point for a huge armed confrontation between Venezuelans,” he told Reuters. “Nobody wants that.”

Unfortunately, far too many Americans living in deep blue states and who were enamored with the presidential candidacy of socialist U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would favor exactly the kind of government that is destroying Venezuela and has left other countries like Cuba, Bolivia, Ecuador and others in desperate poverty.

If that form of government ever takes hold, it would not only be an economic disaster for the world, since the U.S. dollar is the globe’s reserve currency, it would doom generations of Americans to the same hopelessness and endless cycles of poverty and desperation being seen now in Venezuela and other socialist governments.

Anyone who seriously believes that America’s currency would not undergo a catastrophic, deadly collapse under socialist government is no serious student of history. The evidence proving otherwise abounds.

Stay informed at Collapse.news and Rioting.news.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources include:

ZeroHedge.com

Reuters.com

Prophecy.news

Peer-reviewed science journal gets HOAXED by fake science paper that claims PENISES cause climate change

Remember when I said recently that the entire left-wing scientific establishment has become convinced that everything causes climate change? My assertion has now been confirmed beyond any doubt.

A peer-reviewed science journal has just been caught publishing a hilariously fake science paper — written in leftish-sounding “sciency gibberish” — that literally claims penises cause climate change.

Because this junk science assertion fits into the lunatic narrative of the totalitarian Left, it was reviewed by multiple scientists and accepted for publication, even though the entire paper was deliberately written to consist of indecipherable nonsense pretending to sound like elitist left-wing “science.” (Find more news about fake science at FakeScience.news.)

James Delingpole at Breitbart.com covers this hilarious development as follows:

Gender studies is a fake academic industry populated by charlatans, deranged activists and gullible idiots.

Now, a pair of enterprising hoaxers has proved it scientifically by persuading an academic journal to peer-review and publish their paper claiming that the penis is not really a male genital organ but a social construct.

The paper, published by Cogent Social Sciences – “a multidisciplinary open access journal offering high quality peer review across the social sciences” – also claims that penises are responsible for causing climate change.

The two hoaxers are Peter Boghossian, a full-time faculty member in the Philosophy department at Portland State University, and James Lindsay, who has a doctorate in math and a background in physics.

They were hoping to emulate probably the most famous academic hoax in recent years: the Sokal Hoax – named after NYU and UCL physics professor Alan Sokal – who in 1996 persuaded an academic journal called Social Text to accept a paper titled “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”.

Sokal’s paper – comprising pages of impressive-sounding but meaningless pseudo-academic jargon – was written in part to demonstrate that humanities journals will publish pretty much anything so long as it sounds like “proper leftist thought;” and partly in order to send up the absurdity of so much post-modernist social science.

So, for this new spoof, Boghossian and Lindsay were careful to throw in lots of signifier phrases to indicate fashionable anti-male bias:

We intended to test the hypothesis that flattery of the academic Left’s moral architecture in general, and of the moral orthodoxy in gender studies in particular, is the overwhelming determiner of publication in an academic journal in the field. That is, we sought to demonstrate that a desire for a certain moral view of the world to be validated could overcome the critical assessment required for legitimate scholarship. Particularly, we suspected that gender studies is crippled academically by an overriding almost-religious belief that maleness is the root of all evil. On the evidence, our suspicion was justified.

They also took care to make it completely incomprehensible.

We didn’t try to make the paper coherent; instead, we stuffed it full of jargon (like “discursive” and “isomorphism”), nonsense (like arguing that hypermasculine men are both inside and outside of certain discourses at the same time), red-flag phrases (like “pre-post-patriarchal society”), lewd references to slang terms for the penis, insulting phrasing regarding men (including referring to some men who choose not to have children as being “unable to coerce a mate”), and allusions to rape (we stated that “manspreading,” a complaint levied against men for sitting with their legs spread wide, is “akin to raping the empty space around him”). After completing the paper, we read it carefully to ensure it didn’t say anything meaningful, and as neither one of us could determine what it is actually about, we deemed it a success.

Some of it was written with the help of the Postmodern Generator – “a website coded in the 1990s by Andrew Bulhak featuring an algorithm, based on NYU physicist Alan Sokal’s method of hoaxing a cultural studies journal called Social Text, that returns a different fake postmodern ‘paper’ every time the page is reloaded.”

… None of it should have survived more than a moment’s scrutiny by serious academics. But it was peer-reviewed by two experts in the field who, after suggesting only a few changes, passed it for publication:

Cogent Social Sciences eventually accepted “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct.” The reviewers were amazingly encouraging, giving us very high marks in nearly every category. For example, one reviewer graded our thesis statement “sound” and praised it thusly, “It capturs [sic] the issue of hypermasculinity through a multi-dimensional and nonlinear process” (which we take to mean that it wanders aimlessly through many layers of jargon and nonsense). The other reviewer marked the thesis, along with the entire paper, “outstanding” in every applicable category.

They didn’t accept the paper outright, however. Cogent Social Sciences’ Reviewer #2 offered us a few relatively easy fixes to make our paper “better.” We effortlessly completed them in about two hours, putting in a little more nonsense about “manspreading” (which we alleged to be a cause of climate change) and “dick-measuring contests.”

No claim made in the paper was considered too ludicrous by the peer-reviewers: not even the one claiming that the penis is “the universal performative source of rape, and is the conceptual driver behind much of climate change.”

Read more at Breitbart.com.

Oregon bureaucrats may be backing off forced glyphosate poisoning of 2,000-acre Azure organic farm

Thanks to the global activism against government insanity, it now appears that officials in Sherman County, Oregon are backing off their recent threats to forcibly spray a 2,000-acre organic farm with toxic glyphosate weedkiller (Roundup).

With Natural News and other pro-organics organizations sounding the alarm, Sherman County officials were hit with over 40,000 emails denouncing their insanely destructive intention to spray a cancer-causing, soil-destroying poison on a large organic farm. David Cross, the Director of Marketing for Azure Farm, issued the following email.

We have some great news to share with you.

Tonight we had a very productive meeting with the county commission and weed board officials in Moro, Sherman County, Oregon. Here is David Stelzer’s message recorded just moments after the meeting ended.

First, we would like to thank our loyal supporters for helping to spread the word and for voicing your concerns about the threat we faced. Sherman County reportedly received over 40,000 emails to date about the matter. You helped to open up a whole new level of debate about organic farming, and about the benefits of clean, healthy food.

Thank you.

The county commission has now agreed to work with us on a proper weed plan that does not include the use of toxic chemicals, and we would like to thank them for their level-headed approach to working together with Azure Farm.

There are still a couple of meetings… we will have with the county officials to work out the final implementation of this plan but we are now very optimistic that this will work out in a good way for all concerned.

Thank you for your support!

Sincerely,
David Cross
Director of Marketing

Don’t let our guard down… evil government bureaucrats will often claim to back down and then turn up the heat after the public outcry has faded

There’s one more important thing to keep in mind on all this: We must never let our guard down. Ignorant, insane government bureaucrats have a nasty habit of acting like they’re backing down on something in response to public outcry, then going “full rogue” against their intended targets later, using the full power and coercion of the state to punish people for daring to garner public support.

So I want you all to know that Natural News will be watching Sherman County, Oregon, and we will immediately report on any further attempt to intimidate Azure Farm or poison its organic fields with toxic weedkiller chemicals.

Perhaps now, with so much public outcry over this issue, Sherman County officials will wake up and realize that if they really love their community and their own children, they shouldn’t be spraying cancer-causing chemicals on the food supply. They should be thanking Azure Farm for growing organic and providing nutritious, non-toxic food to the local Oregon population.

Thank all of you who took action on this issue. We must continue to work to educate ignorant bureaucrats while defending our food supply from those who incessantly seek to poison it.

Follow more news about food freedom at FoodFreedom.news, and learn more about the toxicity of glyphosate at Glyphosate.news.

Transgenders found to exhibit shockingly high rates of suicidal thoughts and attempts

No matter how aggressively the social engineers try to push the notion that altering one’s gender is completely normal, the fact will always remain that transgender individuals are in need of therapy, not adulation. And don’t take our word for it: Consider the indisputable evidence presented in a new study published in the peer-reviewed journal Transgender Health, which shows that transgender people are up to 22 times more likely to entertain the idea of, or attempt, suicide compared to people who accept their biological genders.

The paper, which is sure to ruffle some feathers, contains meta-synthesis data collected from a large cohort of transgender suicidality literature, including some 22 studies published over a span of 19 years. After evaluating this data to look for variances in rates of attempted suicide, as well as suicidal thoughts, amongst male-to-female and female-to-male transgender respondents, a team of researchers from Canada came to the conclusion that something is horribly amiss in the way transgenders think compared to others.

Based on the data, transgender people are generally very unhappy with their lives, and suffer from severe mental anguish. And while some would try to blame the misery that many transgenders suffer on social stigmas surrounding transgenderism, there is no evidence that this is actually the case. Many transgenders, it turns out, are victims of mental illness who are in desperate need of someone to come along and help them recover – not to affirm them in their disorder.

“Suicidality and other forms of mental health distress are health disparities that increasingly are being documented and studied in the academic literature as disproportionately affecting transgender people and populations,” says Robert Garofalo, M.D., M.P.H., a professor of Pediatrics and Preventive Medicine at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine. Dr. Garofalo is also Editor-in-Chief of Transgender Health, and Director of the Center for Gender, Sexuality and HIV Prevention at Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

“With this work, Noah Adams and colleagues advance the field by conducting a meta-analysis giving important epidemiologic data that can then be used to develop interventions designed to help transgender people who are having suicidal thoughts or are experiencing psychological distress.”

World Health Organization says transgenderism is a mental illness

It is only in recent times that transgenderism has even been considered to be something other than a serious mental illness. The World Health Organization (WHO) has long classified transgenderism as deviant in terms of its correlation to mental health. WHO’s current edition of International Classification of Diseases (I.C.D.) implicates transgenderism being a mental illness, though its 2018 iteration is slated to have this classification removed.

But simply accepting transgenderism as normal, as much as this might placate our crumbling civilization, won’t in any way help transgenders to be happier, nor will it decrease their risk of wanting to kill themselves. Mental illnesses like transgenderism need to be addressed head on in order to help mentally ill people to get back on track – they certainly don’t need to be told that all is well.

“This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects,” says Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, citing evidence that the vast majority of children who express transgender feelings over time “spontaneously [lose] those feelings.”

“The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken – it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.”

Sources:

AlphaGalileo.org

WashingtonPost.com

CNSNews.com

U.S. satellites being threatened with destruction – prepare NOW to be able to communicate in a crisis

U.S. military satellites, as well as those used for civilian purposes like communications, are under threat now more than at any time in the past thanks to an array of advancing weaponry designed to take them out if our country finds itself in another great power conflict on the scale of a previous world war.

As reported by the Washington Times’ national security correspondent, Bill Gertz, the satellites are being threatened by lasers, kinetic anti-satellite weapons, cyber attacks, electronic jammers and other weapons.

Gertz notes that the Defense Science Board, in a recently issued report, is warning that military satellites, and others used for global operations, “will be contested by a myriad of effects ranging from reversible to destructive.”

And frankly, it’s those destructive methods that worry officials most — and it should worry you, too.

“The estimated and projected electronic threats against satellite communication (SATCOM) have rapidly escalated in the last few years and will continue to increase in the foreseeable future,” said an executive summary of the report.

“Advances and proliferation in advanced electronic warfare (EW), kinetic, space, and cyber capabilities threaten our ability to maintain information superiority,” and that “under severe stress situations, jamming can render all commercial SATCOM and most defense SATCOM inoperable.”

It adds: “This reality should be considered a crisis to be dealt with immediately.”

Hyperbole? Hardly. This is absolutely a real thing.

As the Defense Science Board report noted, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced major military reforms for his country in April — reforms that include a much bigger focus on electronic warfare systems that would help transform the People’s Liberation Army into an “indestructable combat force” by 2020.

Russia is also working to upgrade its systems. Also in April, the board noted, quoting Russian media, Moscow’s Electronic Warfare troops were making preparations to attack and disable American weapons systems “without firing a shot,” the Vesti online news portal reported, according to board.

“Our REW troops can detect and neutralize any target from a ship’s system and a radar, to a satellite,” said Vesti.

Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence earlier this month:

We assess that Russia and China perceive a need to offset any U.S. military advantage derived from military, civil, or commercial space systems and are increasingly considering attacks against satellite systems as part of their future warfare doctrine. Both will continue to pursue a full range of anti-satellite weapons as a means to reduce U.S. military effectiveness.

No doubt the U.S. military has developed similar technology. But while we may be able to attack and destroy an enemy’s SATCOM as well, losing ours in the process means that preppers should obtain alternative forms of communication now.

Obviously, without satellites, Graywolf Survival notes, your cell phone isn’t going to be of much use — for talking or for GPS. So what should you do?

Two way radios: The easiest solution here is to invest in a good set of two-way radios. Citizens Band radios are the most common commercial frequencies and there are some good products on the market. These, of course, are designed for short-range communications, but will come in handy for a number of things — patrolling, scouting, foraging or just staying in touch within your own neighborhood. (Related: Read Keeping In Touch When You Bug Out.)

In addition to hand-held radios, you should consider setting up a base model as well — one that comes with an outside antenna at least 30 feet in the air. These will give you much longer range, making it easier for you to make contact with the outside world, so to speak.

Limitations for CB radios, however, is that not a lot of people own them these days. About 40 years ago, believe it or not, they were all the rage, and today truck drivers still use them quite a bit, but the general public does not. Still, they do make a good alternative for short-distance communication between family members and members of your survival group.

Just remember, they run on batteries so make sure you’ve got a way to keep them charged. Solar panels and rechargeable batteries are a combo possibility.

Ham radios: These are the best for emergency communications, as Graywolf Survival notes, because it is used by MARS (Military Auxiliary Radio System) and ARES (Amateur Radio Emergency Service). Also, a number of search-and-rescue groups use them.

There are a number of emergency frequencies available on ham radio, too.

However, you need a license to operate a ham radio, and though they’re easy to get, they do require some studying, nonetheless. Check out Graywolf Survival’s extensive article on ham radios and why they really are the best choice for emergency communications.

Just know that in a global emergency, U.S. satellites are likely to be targeted by our enemies. Get a back-up communication plan ready now.

Stay informed at OffGrid.news and Homesteading.news.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources include:

GraywolfSurvival.com

Bugout.news