Avaaz and Facebook censorship collusion?
Covid-19 'nudges' don’t work
Supplements improve immunity
FCC sued over EMR regulations
What cost hand sanitisers?
Stop Wikipedia’s natural medicine bias
Eat more veg
Avaaz and Facebook collusion in natural health censorship?
A new reportfrom campaign group Avaaz aims to encourage Facebook to ramp up its efforts to censor natural health information. In recent years, Avaaz has extended its remit to uncover and combat online disinformation that it deems a threat to the mainstream narrative. However, instead of clamping down on genuine health ‘misinformation’, the report alleges Facebook has encouraged the spread of natural health ‘misinformation’ which has generated an estimated 3.8 billion views of ‘misinformation’ in the last year alone. The report reveals 42 ‘super-spreader’ Facebook pages (based on how many pieces of information had been fact-checked by so called "credible" third-parties fact-checkers) along with 82 websites that have been flagged as peddling health misinformation - although the names of the websites have not been disclosed. In the US, the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) has filed a lawsuit against Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg and three fact-checking bodies for their censorship of “…truthful public health posts and for fraudulently misrepresenting and defaming CHD”. Also stating that the ongoing censorship of its Facebook page violates the First Amendment. The screws of state censorship are being increasingly and ever more rapidly tightened preventing citizens from making informed decisions around the management of their health, especially when choosing to use natural means of support.
Covid-19 'nudges' don’t work as expected
Studies conducted by researchers at King’s College London have revealed behavioural ‘nudges’ used during the pandemic did not work as expected. Many citizens have been left terrified they will die if infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus through the use of messaging driven by behavioural science techniques. The new findings have cast doubt on the continued use of such messaging to control individual behaviours. The first study looking at the use of loss aversion found that highlighting potential loss of life did not moderate behaviours. In the second, nudges designed to increase participants' compliance did not result in the expected behaviour change. In Sweden, the government has been far more open and transparent with its citizens in order to help them adapt to virus' presence. The country has consequently weathered the first wave of infection with limited collateral damage given the light lockdown.
Remember to take your supplements for immunity
People over the age of 55 who take regular multivitamin and mineral supplements experience milder symptoms and shorter duration of illness, according a new double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study published in the journal Nutrients by researchers at OSU’s Linus Pauling Institute. They found that those taking the supplements enjoyed higher levels of zinc and vitamin C and when they became ill, experienced milder symptoms and recovered more quickly than those in the placebo group. The supplements used contained modest doses of the various nutrients, but still had a beneficial effect on those taking them. This study is further evidence that governments are remiss in not providing public health advice on affordable changes to diet and nutritional supplementation that aims to support a healthy and resilient immune system during the current pandemic.
FFC sued over unchanged radiofrequency regulations
The Environmental Health Trust, in collaboration with the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) in the USA, has launched a court case against the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to force it to “…reconsider, revise and update its 24-year old exposure limits” for electromagnetic radiation. The FCC is also being sued by the Healthy Heavens Trust Initiative (HHTI) over the massive influx of satellites being launched into orbit around the Earth as part of the acceleration of the fourth industrial revolution. In the rush to profit from this technology, the potentially harmful impacts not only on human health, but also on other animals, plants and microbial populations has yet to be properly evaluated.
Hand sanitisers are now ubiquitous but at what cost?
In March, the following question was asked on ResearchGate: “Has anyone guesstimated the impact on microbiomes due to large-scale us of sanitizers and disinfectants in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic?” The current pandemic has resulted in an exponential growth in demand for hand sanitiser to combat the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in recent months. But the resulting impact on the microbiomes of our body along with the potential for them to cause even greater harm than the virus itself has not been properly considered or tested. One of the key ingredients in many such products, triclosan, has been shown to increase antibiotic resistance. However, warnings about the negative health impact of these products are starting to be shared by some media sources. A market in fake sanitisers has exploded putting individual health at even greater risk. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has posted recalls for multiple products due to concerns over the deadly toxins they contain, such as 1-propanol, which can damage the central nervous system. Mouth wash is now also being touted as a protection against coronavirus infection as well as a treatment for the newly named ‘mask mouth’. Again, such products can cause damage to the oral microbiome that forms part of our first-line defence against pathogens. Regular handwashing using soap and water is just effective and far less damaging to our microbiomes, both inside and outside of our body.
Mainstream rhetoric around the ‘need’ for a vaccine to combat SARS-CoV-2 is growing as citizens are groomed to accept experimental and potentially harmful vaccines using genetic engineering technologies that have never been used successfully on humans at scale. German physicians have issued a warning over the unknown and potentially disastrous consequences of rapidly developed coronavirus vaccines to our health. The rush to push vaccines through is raising red flags for many medical professionals and scientists the world over. Dr Walter Weber warned that multiple harms could result from the new vaccines that may not be apparent for many years to come. He also accused the German Chancellor of allowing the pharmaceutical industry to use German citizens as lab rats. A new poll carried out by Childcare.co.uk underlines the suspicion with which the new vaccines are being viewed by parents in the UK. Nearly half of those surveyed said they would not consent to their children receiving a coronavirus vaccine citing potentially nasty side effects and that children don’t need to be vaccinated against the virus as it has such a small effect on them.
Yet another potential coronavirus vaccine has joined the hundreds already under development. Cambridge University in partnership with DIOSynVax is being funded to the tune of £1.9m by the UK government to develop a vaccine that will be based around DNA rather than RNA. They believe their strategy to train the immune system to recognise a range of synthetic genes to target key regions of the virus is less likely to cause autoimmune issues. The vaccine will be administered using a jet of air rather than a needle making it apparently a pain-free option. The side effects are mooted to be less severe than for conventional intra-muscular delivery, although this won't be known positively until trials are complete next year.
Stop Wikipedia’s bias against natural medicine
Wikipedia has been controlled by skeptic groups for many years particularly in regard to the narrative around natural medicine. Gary Null PhD has put out a call to executives of professional associations, deans of colleges, chief editors of journals and publications, university professors, and journalists, and certified and licensed practitioners of natural medicines to send a petition letter to Wikipedia’s 500-plus principle benefactors asking them to terminate their financial support of Wikipedia until the blatant censorship of natural medicine information on the site is stopped.
Eat more veg says study
Those who eat 5 or more portions of vegetables and fruit a day have a lower risk of dying early. A new study from researchers at the London School of Tropical Hygiene assessing the health impacts and environmental consequences of following the UK’s Eatwell Guide (EWG) found that those who followed the EWG’s guidelines in regard to vegetable and fruit consumption had a 10% reduction in total mortality risk. However, reducing saturated fat was only associated with a 3% reduction in risk. Our own view is that the available science would suggest consuming a lower carbohydrate diet than the EWG based on ANH-Intl's Food4Health guidelines would deliver even better long term health outcomes.