Public Health officials won't reveal specifically where in New Brunswick more than 40 cases of a mystery neurological disease have been identified, citing the "sensitive" and "confidential" nature of the information.


News last week that a cluster of cases of an unknown neurological disease has been found in New Brunswick immediately had residents of several communities on edge.

First diagnosed in 2015, according to a Public Health memo sent this month to medical professionals, the disease appears to be concentrated in the Acadian Peninsula in northeast New Brunswick and the Moncton region in the southeast. Forty-three cases have been identified, and five people have died.

The ketogenic diet (in earlier iterations known as the Atkins diet and the Low Carb High Fat diet) has been vilified for decades by members of the nutrition establishment, because it is pretty much telling people to do the exact opposite of what the establishment is telling them to do. While official diet guidelines recommend cutting down on fat intake, the ketogenic diet instead recommends cutting down on carbohydrate intake. Since cutting down on one of the sources of energy virtually requires increasing intake of the other, the two diets are completely incompatible.

The reason proponents of a low fat diet are so against the ketogenic diet is because they believe that fat, and in particular saturated fat, causes heart disease. But this belief has become increasingly hard to maintain over the last couple of decades. In spite of the fact that populations around the world have been dutifully following advice from nutritionists to cut down on fat intake, they've actually gotten fatter and more diabetic. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome (a combination of central obesity, type 2 diabetes, and high blood pressure) has exploded since governments started recommending that people cut down on fat. And metabolic syndrome is one of the leading risk factors for heart disease.

This suggests that the nutrition establishment has got everything terribly wrong. It suggests that it's a high intake of carbohydrates that is responsible for the current poor metabolic health of western populations, rather than a high fat/saturated fat intake. Of course, the data suggesting this is all observational, and observational data can show correlation, but they cannot prove causation.

So, let's look at what the randomized controlled trials of the ketogenic diet have to say on the matter. A systematic review and meta-analysis was published in Nutrients in July 2020 that gathered together all the trials of a ketogenic diet. The review was funded by the South Korean government.

As if it were a replay of the fiasco that went on with hydroxychloroquine, the establishment media, social media and governments have been collectively censoring information about a drug shown to be highly effective against Covid-19: Ivermectin.

The studies on the drug are nothing short of astounding - more effective than any drug or intervention previously studied. Yet YouTube felt justified in banning videos of congress testimony about the drug, Twitter has blocked links to a peer-reviewed medical journal that had the audacity to publish a study on the drug and the corporate media have been full of articles about the 'dangers' of this drug - despite the fact that it's been approved by the FDA (unlike Covid vaccines) and has been used safely for the last 5 decades.

Join us on this episode of Objective:Health where we give you the low-down on a truly amazing drug that 'THEY' don't want you to know about: Ivermectin.


For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:

♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth/
♥Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channel/objectivehealth
♥LBRY: https://lbry.tv/@objectivehealth:f

And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here:

♥https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16H-nK-N0ANdsA5JFTT12_HU5nUYRVS9YcQh331dG2MI/edit?usp=sharing

Running Time: 00:31:09

Download: MP3 — 28.5 MB

The following is Part 2 of an excerpt from The Monsanto Papers, a new book by journalist Carey Gillam.

The book tells the true life tale of Lee Johnson, a California groundskeeper who was diagnosed with terminal cancer he alleged was caused by his exposure to Monsanto's Roundup herbicides.

Lee wouldn't think about the sprayer accident again until many months later, when an odd-looking scaly lesion popped up just above his right knee. It itched and cracked and oozed. As time passed, the patch near his knee was matched by another on his arm. And another on his torso. Small bumps the size of BB pellets sprouted out of his skin. Lee changed the laundry soap and dryer sheets his family used and tried an assortment of creams, but nothing helped. Dread grew with every new spot that erupted. Eventually, nearly Lee's entire body, including his face and scalp, was covered in painful sores. Some became infected, including one on his head.

As his condition progressed, Lee's once unmarred skin broke open at the slightest touch in some places, and wearing clothing became almost unbearably painful. A lesion even developed on one of his eyelids, making it impossible for him to open the eye without grimacing in pain. The softer the skin where the lesions sprouted, the more searing the pain, Lee learned.

What do frontline health care workers and first responders know about COVID-19 vaccines that politicians and their public health advisers don't?

According to a January analysis by Gallup, 51 percent of health care workers and first responders polled in December 2020 were unconvinced of the merits of getting vaccinated, even if the vaccine "was free, available, FDA approved and 90% effective."

Gallup found these results especially concerning since those at highest risk of exposure to COVID-19 — the professionals required to meet America's health, safety, and critical economic needs and whom the National Academies of Engineering, Science and Medicine defines as "Tier 1A workers" — were the likeliest to refuse vaccination (34 percent).

Have you forgotten where you laid your keys? Ever wondered where you had parked your car? Or having trouble remembering the name of the new neighbor? Unfortunately, these things seem to get worse as one gets older. A big question for researchers is where does benign forgetfulness end and true disease begin?

One of the keys to having a healthy brain at any age is having a healthy blood-brain barrier, a complex interface of blood vessels that run through the brain. Researchers reviewed more than 150 articles to look at what happens to the blood-brain barrier as we age. Their findings were published March 15 in Nature Aging.

Whether the changes to the blood-brain barrier alters brain function is still up for debate. But research shows the blood-brain barrier leaks as we age, and we lose cells called pericytes.

"It turns out very little is known how the blood-brain barrier ages," said lead author William Banks, a gerontology researcher at the University of Washington School of Medicine and at the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System. "It's often hard to tell normal aging from early disease."

The blood-brain barrier, discovered in the late 1800s, prevents the unregulated leakage of substances from blood into the brain. The brain is an especially sensitive organ and cannot tolerate direct exposure to many of the substances in the blood. Increasingly, scientists have realized that the blood-brain barrier also allows many substances into the brain in a regulated way to serve the nutritional needs of the brain. It also transports informational molecules from the blood to the brain and pumps toxins out of the brain. A malfunctioning blood-brain barrier can contribute to diseases such as multiple sclerosis, diabetes, and Alzheimer's.

Before scientists can understand how such malfunctioning can contribute to the diseases of aging, they need to understand how a healthy blood-brain barrier normally ages.

The massive global effort to promote COVID vaccines plays on fears of getting the disease, despite the fact that they are experimental. Meaning that they have not gone through the rigorous, time-consuming and expensive randomized clinical trials that so many experts say is the gold standard for evaluating drugs.

This absence was used by the government to condemn and block the use of drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

Vaccine testing and regulatory approval have been rushed. Missing from nearly all information reaching the public are some key facts.

Studies in mammals have shown that the 'memories' of various environmental effects - such as diet, weight, and stress - are being passed on from dads to offspring, despite these states not being coded for in the DNA sequences carried by sperm. Now, we have a new explanation for how it's possible.

The story has much to do with epigenetics. Molecules that attach themselves to DNA can act like on-off switches that control which sections of DNA get used - but until now we haven't known which of these molecules can carry the settings marked by a father's life experiences, to be incorporated into an embryo via sperm.

"The big breakthrough with this study is that it has identified a non-DNA-based means by which sperm remember a father's environment (diet) and transmit that information to the embryo," said McGill University epigeneticist Sarah Kimmins.

The acute focus in this writing is on the vaccination of children under 12 years of age with the Covid-19 vaccines as this raises very serious and urgent issues that must be confronted by societies in terms of possible unnecessary harms to our children. SARS-CoV-2 virus that leads to Covid-19 disease may be used interchangeably in this report. Why this focus? Because there is now a major effort to test the new mRNA-based vaccines against SARS CoV-2 virus in young children.

What is the rationale for this and what is the basis? Why would there be a push to vaccinate six-month-old babies? Vaccinate two-year-old infants? Vaccinate six-year-old children? Ten-year-old children? Via an experimental vaccine that delivers genetic code into your cells instructing it to produce a mock portion of the virus?

Before examining this issue directly, we wish to situate the illogicality and real concerns of vaccinating children within the devastating Covid-19 societal restrictions. We point out that lockdowns, school closures, and mask mandate policies have made no sense whatsoever (particularly the prolonged restrictions) and as a consequence of their implementation, societal devastation has occurred and is still occurring and the impact on children's health and well-being has yet to be examined in toto. The crushing harms are amplified and thus even more dramatic on women and the poorer members of society.

Cancer immunotherapy may get a boost from an unexpected direction: bacteria residing within tumor cells. In a new study published in Nature, researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science and their collaborators have discovered that the immune system "sees" these bacteria and shown they can be harnessed to provoke an immune reaction against the tumor. The study may also help clarify the connection between immunotherapy and the gut microbiome, explaining the findings of previous research that the microbiome affects the success of immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy treatments of the past decade or so have dramatically improved recovery rates from certain cancers, particularly malignant melanoma; but in melanoma, they still work in only about 40% of the cases. Prof. Yardena Samuels of Weizmann's Molecular Cell Biology Department studies molecular "signposts" — protein fragments, or peptides, on the cell surface — that mark cancer cells as foreign and may therefore serve as potential added targets for immunotherapy. In the new study, she and colleagues extended their search for new cancer signposts to those bacteria known to colonize tumors.