meta content='width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0' name='viewport'/>

Thursday, January 17, 2019

MODERN SCIENCE PLAGUED BY CORRUPTION – DR. ASEEM MALHOTRA


Scientific fraud and lies are a threat to humanity

Scientific fraud and lies are a threat to humanity


According to Dr. Aseem Malhotra, the field of science today is plagued by corruption. It seems Malhotra, a doctor in Britain, had some choice words to say in front of the European Parliament about modern-day medical education and overall knowledge doctors possess. He's one of many who continues to emerge and speak out.


One of his questions; “Why do doctors continue to learn nothing about nutrition?” Yes, it seems we are trained to prescribe medicine and do not question what they are prescribing. They risk losing their jobs by speaking out and educating themselves. But as Einstein always stated; You must never stop questioning even if they don't like it.”

And yes, science today, in all fields, is plagued by corruption. Yet, more often than not, attempts to create awareness about scientific fraud, an issue that few journalists have been willing to address, are met with the response; “Well, is it peer-reviewed?”

Although good science should always be reviewed, using this label as a form of credibility can be dangerous, causing people to dismiss new information and research instantaneously if it doesn’t have it, particularly when that information counters long-held beliefs ingrained into human consciousness via mass marketing, education, bribery and more.

Unfortunately, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that we are being lied to about the products and medicines we use on a daily basis. If you’re one who commonly points to the “peer-reviewed” label, then you should know that there are many researchers and insiders who have been creating awareness about the problem with this label for years. Who says so? And from what fields?

Professor Lennart Bengtsson

Many people have spoken up against the corporatization and politicization of science. For example, Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish climatologist and former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, has voiced his concern that some scientists are, according to an interview given to the Daily Mail, “mixing up their scientific role with that of a climate activist.” He claims that there are multiple indicators for how; “Science is gradually being influenced by political views.”

Professor Joanna D. Haigh

Professor Joanna D. Haigh, a British physicist, professor of atmospheric physics at Imperial College London, co-director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change, and former president of the Royal Meteorological Society, has also spoken up about the politicization of climate science.

The Australian prime minister’s chief business advisor has done the same, and so have other politicians, like Senator James Inhofe, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Unfortunately, the mainstream vilifies such people, and to great effect. Below is an excellent snippet of a lecture given by Peter Rost, one of the world’s top pharmacists and former CEO of Pfizer he talks about the politics of manipulation of data, something that plagues all fields of science today. Peter Rost become a whistleblower as well.



Dr. Aseem Malhotra an ordinary doctor in Great Britain


Dr. Aseem Malhotra is known as one of the most influential cardiologists in Britain and a world-leading expert in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of heart disease. Currently, he is leading a huge campaign against excess sugar consumption. 

What also makes him unique is something he recently admitted took him decades to figure out: that our entire medical system, one of the main ‘protectors’ of the human race, is completely corrupt.

Malhotra now believes that medical education is in a state of “complete system failure,” causing “an epidemic of misinformed doctors.” He also stated that honest doctors can no longer practice honest medicine and that there is also a growing epidemic of patients who are being harmed.

There is no denying that to some extent, medicine and doctors have done a lot of good and saved a lot of lives. However, an over-reliance on doctors for our health and well-being has spawned a serious problem, one that should be in the spotlight and immediately fixed.

The Need To Think For Ourselves

We all have to realize that society has been manufactured in a way where we simply give up our own mind to someone else, who has been given theirs by someone else. We lack the ability to think for ourselves because, from birth, we are programmed to think a certain way by somebody else.

This is something important for us to change, and by ‘us’ I do not only mean patients; it should be a priority for all who practice medicine. And there are signs that it has started changing. Why? Because there is a shift in consciousness taking place. 

People within all societal systems (health, financial, education, government, etc.) are waking up, and starting to investigate what they have been taught. Rather than simply believing the promotional literature, more are pursuing self-education (which Dr. Malhotra stressed was the only real form of education).

Malhotra pointed out seven ‘sins’ that contribute to the lack of knowledge that not just doctors but everyone has, including patients, regarding modern day ‘medicine.’ He made these comments at a recent European Parliament meeting.


Other Prominent Doctors Speak Out


He’s not the only one to speak up about this issue. In fact, it seems that those who represent doctors have been speaking out about this for a long time. Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), considered one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world.

He has said that “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Then, there is Dr. Richard Horton, the current Editor-in-Chief of another prestigious peer-reviewed medical journal, The Lancet, who says, “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.”

There are many examples of statements and documented evidence to choose from, which is why doctors like Malhotra are speaking out. You can watch his full talk below the tweet from November 21, 2017.

Dr. Aseem Malhotra

Dr. Aseem Malhotra


We Are All Awakening


While many ordinary citizens have been awakening to the truth about misconduct, fraud, and deception in the Western Medical Establishment, it’s good to see more doctors with a voice within the system are speaking out about truth! 

It’s starting to look like these systems are no longer able to contain or censor inner dissent, bringing us closer to a time when all of our human systems will have to become beholden to truth and transparency.

Wednesday, January 16, 2019

WHEN WILL AFRICA EMBRACE DNA-FORENSIC METHOD FOR CRIME INVESTIGATION?


Forensic identification officer at a crime scene, using a swab to absorb saliva from the mouth of a beer bottle to find the perpetrator


Forensic identification officer at a crime scene, using a swab to absorb saliva from the mouth of a beer bottle to find the perpetrator


Decades ago, crimes were painstakingly investigated. Some detectives were using magnifying glass around the world with success or without success since certain investigations came to a standstill because comparative analysis of genetics was not carried out at that time.



This enabled crime to rise sporadically in many parts of the world. Crime rates reached unprecedented peaks in the ‘80s and early ‘90s in America, Asia, Africa, and the United Kingdom. It wasn’t until 1995 that the height of crime began declining due to new development in solving crime through technology in the laboratory.

DNA examination, or genetic fingerprinting, was used in the investigation of crimes in the 20th century. Today, in a costly way of examining evidence, it is getting closer to the routine, and the technology has been so advanced that you can detect DNA particles that are not visible to the eye. 

The success of forensic science and the use of laboratory investigations have transformed the judicial process, and the appearance of the results of genetic examinations in court seemed to have made it possible to find undeniable evidence of the guilt of the criminals. 

However, Africa is still holding on tightly to those primitive methods of crime investigation, resulting in the increase of crime in many countries. For example, after the fall of Apartheid, the regime which deprived blacks of equal access to education, and many other benefits, crime has increased in South Africa putting the lives people in danger every minute.

According to a crime rate survey, by the leadership of the South African police, every day, about 51 people die in South Africa, and about 150 women become victims of rape. The published data suggest that the crime rate increased by 4.9% compared to last year.

Since the beginning of March 2017 to March 2018, a total of 18,673 people have been killed. The Law Enforcement Minister, Nati Nhleko acknowledged that despite the efforts being made, the country continues to plunge into a culture of violence. Illiteracy and poverty are the sources of crimes in the country which hasn’t fully embraced DNA and forensic methods in solving a crime.

DNA is a molecule that contains genetic instructions and in many ways determines how we look. 99.9% of our DNA is identical to that of other people, but it is the remaining 0.1% that distinguishes us as individuals. 

They are important for forensic geneticists, who use this data to create a DNA profile from a biomaterial from the crime scene. The sample is compared to the reference DNA of the suspect. To calculate how much the probability that a person is involved in a crime.

Since such a large part of our DNA is almost the same, forensic scientists do not analyze DNA completely. It would be very expensive. Instead, they usually concentrate on short, highly variable regions of repetitive DNA, called short tandem repeats, or STR. 

In individuals, they differ and can be used as genetic markers to create a DNA profile that is extremely rare among unrelated individuals. When a DNA profile is created from a sample taken from the crime scene, it can be compared with other profiles already listed in the national base, and with the DNA of the suspect and the victim. 

If both profiles are identical, it is a complete match; partial matching of profiles is also possible. Once a match is found, you can calculate how high the probability of a particular person. Extracting DNA profiles from various body tissues is not always easy.

So, it is relatively easy to create a DNA profile from a fresh sample of blood, saliva, and sperm, but getting DNA from objects that a person has touched is not an easy task. Relatively recently, it became clear that a lot of useful information was hidden at the crime scene, which can be interpreted and presented to the court with the help of science. 

Even though South Africa is one of the most violent countries in the world, Africa has to move forward as technology advances to embrace forensic methods in crime investigation.

Not South Africa, alone, crime is escalating rapidly but also throughout many African countries, including Ghana. 

Thus, without embracing these modern methods for crime investigation, dealing with criminals and putting them behind bars will be a daunting task as well as giving them the chance to commit more crime.

VACCINATION COVERUP EXPOSED BY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST SHARYL ATTKISSON


Sharyl Attkisson

Sharyl Attkisson


Dr. Zimmerman was the government’s top expert witness and had testified that vaccines didn’t cause autism. The debate was declared over. But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information. 

He claims that during the vaccine hearings all those years ago, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children.



Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson has broken several major stories in US news, and this latest bombshell is just another of an example of her fearless pursuit of the truth in her investigations and reporting.  

Her latest "Full Measure" episode, The Vaccine Debate, features the true story of Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a pediatric neurologist who was the government’s own expert witness in secret vaccine court proceedings.  

Though his testimony was used to promote the government and big Pharma's lies that vaccinations don't cause autism, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children.

According to the interview on "Full Measure":

Dr. Zimmerman was the government’s top expert witness and had testified that vaccines didn’t cause autism. The debate was declared over.

But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information. He claims that during the vaccine hearings all those years ago, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children. That turnabout from the government’s own chief medical expert stood to change everything about the vaccine-autism debate. If the public were to find out.

And he has come forward and explained how he told the United States government vaccines can cause autism in a certain subset of children and the United States government, the Department of Justice suppressed his true opinions.
This was one of the most consequential frauds, arguably in human history.

Seeing that Attkisson has been harassed and censored for her other investigative work, and this is likely to find similar attacks.  This is why the guys at Brigheon.com have archived the original report there.  


Here's the full transcript of the report

Today we investigate one of the biggest medical controversies of our time: vaccines. There’s little dispute about this much– vaccines save many lives, and rarely, they injure or kill. A special federal vaccine court has paid out billions for injuries from brain damage to death. But not for the form of brain injury we call autism. 

Now—we have remarkable new information: a respected pro-vaccine medical expert used by the federal government to debunk the vaccine-autism link says vaccines can cause autism after all. He claims he told that to government officials long ago, but they kept it secret.

Yates Hazlehurst was born February 11, 2000. Everything was normal, according to his medical records, until he suffered a severe reaction to vaccinations. Rolf Hazlehurst is Yates’ dad.

Rolf Hazlehurst: And at first, I didn’t believe it. I did not think that I did not believe that vaccines could cause autism. I didn’t believe it.

But there’s a hard reality for Yates. The trademark brain disease, pain and inability to communicate that’s common with severe autism.

In 2007, Yates’ father sued over his son’s injuries in the little known Federal Vaccine court. It was one of more than 5000 vaccine-autism claims.

Congress created the vaccine court in 1988, in consultation with the pharmaceutical industry. In the special court, vaccine makers don’t defend their products—the federal government does it for them, using lawyers from the Justice Department. Money for victims comes from us, not the pharmaceutical industry, through patient fees added to every vaccine is given.

Denise Vowell: Our hearings are all closed to the public. And that’s statutory.

In 2007, Yates’ case and nearly all the other vaccine-autism claims lost. The decision was based largely on the expert opinion of this man, Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a world-renowned pediatric neurologist shown here at a lecture.

Dr. Zimmerman was the government’s top expert witness and had testified that vaccines didn’t cause autism. The debate was declared over.

But now Dr. Zimmerman has provided remarkable new information. He claims that during the vaccine hearings all those years ago, he privately told government lawyers that vaccines can, and did cause autism in some children. 

That turnabout from the government’s own chief medical expert stood to change everything about the vaccine-autism debate. If the public were to find out.

Hazlehurst: And he has come forward and explained how he told the United States government vaccines can cause autism in a certain subset of children and United States government, the Department of Justice suppressed his true opinions.

Hazlehurst discovered that later when Dr. Zimmerman evaluated Yates as a teenager. That’s when he partnered with vaccine safety advocate Robert F. Kennedy, Junior—who has a voice condition.

Kennedy: This was one of the most consequential frauds, arguably in human history.

Kennedy was instrumental in convincing Dr. Zimmerman to document his remarkable claim of the government covering up his true expert opinion on vaccines and autism.

Dr. Zimmerman declined our interview request and referred us to his sworn affidavit. It says: On June 15, 2007, he took aside the Department of Justice—or DOJ lawyers he worked for defending vaccines in vaccine court. 

He told them that he’d discovered “exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.” “I explained that in a subset of children, vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation did cause regressive brain disease with features of autism spectrum disorder.”

Kennedy: This panicked the two DOJ attorneys and they immediately fired Zimmerman. That was on a Friday and over the weekend they called Zimmerman and said his services would no longer be needed. They wanted to silence him.

Days after the Department of Justice lawyers fired Dr. Zimmerman as their expert witness, he alleges, they went on to misrepresent his opinion to continue to debunk autism claims. Records show that on June 18, 2007, a DOJ attorney Dr. Zimmerman spoke to told vaccine court, “We know [Dr. Zimmerman’s] views on the issue…There is no scientific basis for a connection” between vaccines and autism. 

Dr. Zimmerman now calls that “highly misleading.” The former DOJ lawyer didn’t return our calls and emails. Kennedy has filed a fraud complaint with the Justice Department Inspector General, who told us they don’t “comment on investigations or potential investigations.”

Meantime, CDC—which promotes vaccines and monitors vaccine safety– never disclosed that the government’s own one-time medical expert concluded vaccines can cause autism – and to this day public health officials deny that’s the case.

Dr. Anne Schuchat: “Based on dozens of studies and everything I know as a physician and a scientist, there’s no link between autism and vaccines.”

CDC declined our interview request. In addition to filing a fraud complaint, Kennedy has delivered Dr. Zimmerman’s affidavit to leaders on Capitol Hill. But there he claims, is another key part of this story: roadblocks set up by the pharmaceutical industry—or PhRMA.

Kennedy: But everybody takes money from PhRMA so they’ve all been corrupted. And it’s almost impossible to get anything done on Capitol Hill.

Kennedy, a Democrat, isn’t the only one claiming vaccine industry money rules the day. We spoke to 11 current and former members of Congress and staff who claim they faced pressure, bullying or threats when they raised vaccine safety questions. Several of them agreed to appear on camera.

Burton: There’s no question in my mind whatsoever that the pharmaceutical industry had great influence with people over at the CDC and FDA. There’s no question in my mind.

Republican Dan Burton—former Chairman of the House Oversight Committee—has an autistic grandson.

Burton: I am not against vaccinations.

He pursued vaccine investigations in the early 2000s. Beth Clay was one of his staffers.

Clay: There was a lot of pressure from people on the Hill.

When you say people on the hill were exerting pressure, what kind of people? Colleagues?

Clay: Colleagues, there were pharmaceutical lobbyists. The pharmaceutical lobbyists had, you know, they are the same people that have been entrenched. They can walk into any office in Capitol Hill, and they’ll talk to staff, they’ll talk to members and they’ll encourage them to discourage our investigation.

Sharyl: At the risk of stating the obvious why did they have that kind of access to members?

Clay: It’s money. And if you look at the donations over the last 20 years, the pharmaceutical industry, and Republican and Democrat, they’re nonpartisan. They put money everywhere.

Former Congressman, Dr. Dave Weldon, a Republican, says he got the message loud and clear.

Sharyl: If you would want to hold a hearing on an issue like vaccines and autism, your own leadership might fight you on that because of the financial influence, the pharmaceutical industry

Dave Weldon: They wouldn’t fight you. They’d kill it. It’s dead. They don’t even want to discuss it. It’s dead on arrival. If you, if you as an individual member want to take on the pharmaceutical industries. It forgets it.

Sharyl: Can you describe an incident or just how it, how that would go?
Weldon: It would typically be in a hallway or the street and people would come up to you and say, “You know, you really need to, you know, back off on this. It could be, it could be bad for the community or bad for the country or bad for you.”

Weldon says he’s generally pro-vaccine, depending on the patient and the shot—and gives flu shots to adults. We asked him to review Dr. Zimmerman’s new affidavit.

Weldon: I found his affidavit and testimony through that affidavit to be consistent with my opinions. That some children can get an autism spectrum disorder from a vaccine.

Republican Bill Posey is a current member of Congress.

Rep. Bill Posey: I don’t have to tell you that industry is a very, very powerful industry. Matter of fact, I don’t know of anyone more powerful than that industry.

Posey says his own party leaders twice promised to hold hearings on the topic, only to scuttle them in the end.

Hazlehurst – who happens to be a criminal prosecutor– was scheduled to be a witness at one such Congressional hearing. Two weeks before the hearing in 2013, he briefed Congressional staff.

Hazlehurst: I presented at that Congressional briefing and I explained in that hearing, if I did to a criminal in a court of law what the United States Department of Justice did to vaccine injured children, I would be disbarred and I would be facing criminal charges. I think that scared the hell out of them.

The hearing was abruptly cancelled. Meantime, Dr. Zimmerman – the one-time expert used to debunk vaccine-autism claims—now says several of his own patients got autism from vaccines. They include Yates Hazlehurst.

Today, with intensive treatment, Yates is doing better. His dad hopes the new testimony from a most unlikely source will get new attention.

Hazlehurst: A child that was unnecessarily sacrificed and hopefully some good, will come from his suffering.

The lobby group representing the pharmaceutical industry wouldn’t agree to an interview but told us they’re working with Congress and other stakeholders on the importance and safety of vaccines to support the health and safety of individuals and communities.


Source: Freedom Outpost - by Tim Brown