New research by Dr. Bellut-Staeck in the journal Medical Research and Its Applications suggests chronic infrasound exposure can lead to serious blood vessel problems. This underpins earlier literature that have reached the similar conclusions.

But the government refuses to accept the results.

Wind turbines are known to disrupt wildlife and severely damage the surrounding biotope, And, despite being inaudible, it is known that low-frequency vibrations from wind turbines can be harmful to human health.

Hat-tip: Tichy's Einblick here.

Humans can only perceive sound waves over a range of approximately between 20 and 20,000 Hertz. Sound waves below 20 Hz cannot be heard by humans and are called infrasound.

Natural infrasound emitted by nature is harmless but it is increasingly being understood that infra-sound generated by wind turbines pulsates and make people who are subjected to them over extended time periods sick.

According to Sarah Sauneron, Deputy Director-General of Health, one of the major challenges is to "anchor the dual influenza-Covid vaccination as double protection for priority groups".

Doctors, nurses, midwives and pharmacists are authorised give the two injections, which can be given back-to-back, although this is not compulsory.

More than 17.2 million French people are being urged to be vaccinated against the two viruses, which can in some cases have fatal consequences.

In the last two years there has been increasing evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus arrived across the world as the result of a laboratory leak. There has likewise been increasing evidence that neither masks nor lockdowns materially altered the transmission of the virus, and also that the vaccines (which are in truth a gene therapy product) have significant risks of side-effects. The number and nature of these remain unclear, but some very recent research even suggests that repeat vaccination increases the likelihood of major side-effects. Worse, there is no clear evidence that they decrease individual susceptibility. Thus the mantra of "safe and effective" is open to question. Added to this is the discovery from Freedom of Information requests that some of the trials were constructed and run in a questionable manner, and that vaccine manufacturers were careful to write into their supply contracts absolution from indemnity. Yet this week a new advertising campaign by the NHS is encouraging the U.K. public to get revaccinated against coronavirus.

Three days ago the British government announced a new scheme to inject obese people with weight loss drugs to try and tackle "worklessness".

Writing in the Telegraph - where else would a "Labour" minister write? - Health Secretary Wes Streeting proudly announced the plans, and praised the new wave of anti-obesity medications:

The long-term benefits of these drugs could be monumental in our approach to tackling obesity. For many people, these weight-loss jabs will be life-changing, help them get back to work, and ease the demands on our NHS.

The specific drug in question is "Mounjaro", produced by pharma giant Lilly to compete with the Novo Nordisk's Ozempic/ Wegovy. And the first phase of the scheme is a five-year trial on 3000 obese people in the Manchester area, described in another Telegraph article:

Up to 3,000 obese patients - a mixture of those in and out of work, and on sickness leave - will be recruited for a five-year study that will explore whether the medication boosts productivity and could bring more people back to the workplace.

It was also announced that Lilly - the biggest of Big Pharma vultures - will be "investing" £280 million in the scheme.

Streeting describes it as:

a collaboration that includes exploring new ways of delivering health and care services to people living with obesity, and a five-year real-world study of a cutting-edge obesity treatment."

"Collaboration" is doing some work in that sentence.

If you order a pizza from Domino's, that's not a "collaboration". You don't "collaborate" on getting a pizza - You pay for a pizza, and you get a damn pizza or you get your money back.

...and £280 million buys a lot of pizza.

The quid pro quo here is pretty easy to see.

Cleveland Clinic and research partner USC both touted study on doubling of risk for heart attack, stroke and death for three years after COVID infection, but buried figures show increased risk only applies to hospitalized patients.

With federal authorities recognizing the plunge in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness as early as four months after each jab, which may actually increase the risk of subsequent infection, the public health establishment is trying to rekindle Americans' interest in a so-called layered mitigation strategy to keep COVID infections at bay.

While it leans into one-size-fits-all vaccination as the best way to avoid severe outcomes from an increasingly mild virus with near-total natural immunity nationwide, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still recommends wearing any kind of mask and social distancing as an "additional prevention strategy."

Mask mandates are back in several California Bay Area healthcare settings, including for visitors and patients in Silicon Valley's Santa Clara County, despite little evidence that even the highest-quality masks provide meaningful protection as worn in real life as opposed to models.

A recent study from Lund University in Sweden has unveiled a more straightforward path to taming irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Eating less starch and sugar, which describes an eating plan called the starch-and sucrose-reduced diet (SSRD), not only matched the popular low-"FODMAP" diet in symptom relief but also proved superior in promoting weight loss and curbing sugar cravings.

FODMAP (which stands for fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols) refers to a type of carbohydrate that can cause digestive issues.

Earlier research suggests that the SSRD is also associated with other health advantages, and the low-FODMAP diet has some drawbacks.

On 15 December 2021 Larry Lowe's life changed.

He was 54, rarely ill, fit, healthy and running 10km most days - until he got the Pfizer Covid booster.

Within days he developed numbness in the right side of his face and started experiencing pain.

"I had lost all the feeling in my face, teeth, nose, tongue, eye, that whole side of my head," he said.

These symptoms have spread through his body and intensified over the years, with doctors across the UK saying the vaccine is to blame.

Pfizer said patient safety was paramount and it took reports of adverse reactions very seriously.

It said hundreds of millions of doses had been administered globally "and the benefit-risk profile of the vaccine remains positive for all authorised indications and age groups".

Mr Lowe, who is from Omagh in Northern Ireland, said that while he was not opposed to vaccines, his life had been destroyed.

Some studies suggest synthetic caffeine may accelerate aging, but research is limited. Learn about the differences between natural and synthetic caffeine.

From Starbucks to Red Bull to Coke, caffeine has become an energy bump for 75 percent of Americans who consume it on a daily basis. Many count it as the spark that ignites their brains and bodies to get through a long day. However, not all caffeine presents itself the same, according to emerging research demonstrating that synthetic caffeine may accelerate aging while naturally occurring caffeine could slow age-related decline.

Does Synthetic Caffeine Accelerate Aging?

The type of caffeine in your coffee may play a role in its protective effect against aging. About 60 percent of the caffeine consumed by Americans is synthesized in a lab, meaning it doesn't come from natural sources such as coffee beans or tea plants. Synthetic caffeine is what popular companies such as Pepsi, Coke, and Red Bull add to their beverages to give their drinks an extra kick.

How ultraviolet blood irradiation treats many severe cardiovascular, infectious, obstetric, autoimmune and neurological diseases

Story at a Glance:

• Natural light is an essential nutrient many of us do not have enough of within our bodies. Because of this, when ultraviolet light is added to the bloodstream, phenomenal health benefits emerge.
• Once ultraviolet blood irradiation (UVBI) was discovered in the 1930s, it produced miraculous results for patients on the verge of death and was quickly adopted by hospitals throughout America. There, it demonstrated remarkable efficacy for a wide range of diseases, and the doctors who pioneered its use compiled a large body of research.
• To neutralize this competition, the American Medical Association published a small doctored study that "debunked" UVBI, and before long it became a forgotten side of medicine. The Russians and Germans however recognized the value of it, and for decades have produced research showing UBVI's remarkable utility for a variety of challenging medical conditions both within and outside the hospital. However, in America, UVBI is primarily used by integrative practitioners who need effective tools to treat complex illnesses (e.g., Lyme disease, Chronic fatigue syndrome, spike protein injuries, or migraine disorders).
• In this article we will review the hundreds of studies showing UVBI's utility for a wide range of medical conditions (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, infertility, preventing miscarriages, many autoimmune disorders, preventing complications from surgery, and treating a myriad of challenging bacterial and viral infections), explain how UVBI works, and provide the resources for those wishing to best utilize this therapy.

In this publication, I have attempted to make the case that we are routinely denied vital knowledge, treatment, and care, in order to protect the interests of the medical industrial complex (as you can only sell costly but abysmal therapeutics to people if no alternatives exist). As that is a rather extreme allegation to make, I've tried to show piece by piece how this is indeed the case. For example:

For six months, the MHRA and other national regulators have been sitting on a Pfizer report about Covid vaccine safety. Worryingly, the abstract which I have just found online doesn't look good at all:

• the vaccinated cohort have at least 23-40% higher risk of some heart-related conditions; and
• the risk is higher than in Pfizer's previous report (i.e., it is increasing over time since vaccination).

The report in question is Pfizer's report C4591021 'Interim Report 5' dated March 12th 2024. It is a Post Authorisation Safety Study (PASS) of Pfizer's Covid vaccine. In summary, national regulators routinely require pharmaceutical manufacturers to conduct PASS studies as a condition of authorisation of most new medicines. The regulators provide data to the manufacturer covering millions of patients registered in national healthcare systems. The manufacturer then conducts analysis to determine whether the medicine has increased the risk of specified health conditions.