Excessive systemic exposure to fluorides can lead to disturbances of bone homeostasis (skeletal fluorosis) and enamel development (dental/enamel fluorosis). The severity of dental fluorosis is also dependent upon fluoride dose and the timing and duration of fluoride exposure. Fluoride’s actions on bone cells predominate as anabolic effects both in vitro and in vivo. More recently, fluoride has been shown to induce osteoclastogenesis in mice.
Osteoclastogenesis is defined as the development of osteoclasts, bone cells that breaks down bone tissue.
So if flouride isn’t helpful in preventing cavities, and actually causes enamel damage, then why have they been touting it as a healthy thing? Here is a little background into the where the flouride in our water comes from.
Fox News reported on a study showing how many toxins are actually in our water today:
This USGS map shows the number of PFAS detected in tap water samples from select sites across the nation. The findings are based on a USGS study of samples taken between 2016 and 2021 from private and public supplies at 716 locations. The map does not represent the only locations in the U.S. with PFAS.
Epidemiological studies have suggested that fluoride is a human developmental neurotoxicant that reduces measures of intelligence in children, placing it into the same category as toxic metals (lead, methylmercury, arsenic) and polychlorinated biphenyls. If true, this assessment would be highly relevant considering the widespread fluoridation of drinking water and the worldwide use of fluoride in oral hygiene products such as toothpaste.
Only 2% of Europe fluoridates water. Fluoride is banned in China, where studies on large populations showed an I.Q. decrease. Parts of Canada have also banned it, as well as Japan and Israel. The world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, classified fluoride as a neurotoxin and placed it in the same dangerous category as arsenic, lead and mercury.
Results continually showed that higher prenatal fluoride exposure was linked to lower scores on tests of cognitive function in children at age 4 and then again between ages 6 and 12.
Fluoride can accumulate and calcify on the pineal gland, blocking its effectiveness, and these deposits can get worse as we age. A blocked pineal gland could lead to things like trouble sleeping or weight gain. One study even suggests toxic calcification could lead to early onset of puberty in girls.
Yet another study links water fluoridation to higher ADHD rates.
Here is a clip from “The Great Culling“, an investigation into the possible effects of putting fluoride in drinking water, and how it could not be as beneficial as originally thought. You can watch the full documentary on diggingdeepertv.com.
In a governmental report from May 2022 states “The consistency of the data supports an inverse association between flouride association and IQ”. That means that as flouride exposure increases, IQ decreases in the developing brain. Flouride causes neurological damage, thus the name Smartwater.
Stop drinking WATER with Flouride
Recommend: Smart Water: yeah 3$ a bottle but can you put a price on living longer then the next guy. pic.twitter.com/L4fJLEdleD
No, I’m not talking about perfectionism, I’m referring to their genetic makeup, their DNA so to speak. Ken and Barbie are made primarily of plastic and it is becoming clear that we are also being riddled with this same foreign substance.
Microplastics refer to plastic debris that is less than five millimeters, or about the size of a sesame seed. Most microplastics are sorted into two categories based on how they form: primary microplastics and secondary microplastics.
Primary microplastics are made for commercial use such as “microbeads” in cosmetics, lotions and toothpaste, or microfibers in textiles or netting. Although the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015 prohibits manufacturing microbeads in cosmetic products in America, primary microplastics are still accumulating in the environment.
Secondary microplastics are particles that are broken down from larger plastic products like containers and water bottles, usually through environmental means like erosion. Most secondary microplastics will not decompose completely.
The prevalence of microplastics in the environment is well documented, along with their negative impacts on marine life. However, only a handful of studies have examined their potential health impacts on mammals.
According to studies, microplastics have turned up in Antarctic sea ice, in snowfall in the Arctic and in human stool samples collected across the globe.
We found that a lot of micro- and nanoparticles were released from plastic food containers. We also found the potential toxicity of these released plastic particles on human kidney cells.
Microwaving released the highest amount of both micro- and nanoplastics into food than the other use conditions, with some containers releasing as many as 4.22 million microplastic and 2.11 billion nanoplastic particles from just one square centimetre of plastic area within three minutes of microwave heating.
So how about hot drinks, would they effect the release of plastics and chemicals?
Watch this video, she makes some valid points.
Microplastics accumulate in the brain and cause behavioral changes associated with dementia
A recent study found that microplastics can latch on to the outer membranes of red blood cells and may limit their ability to transport oxygen. The particles have also been found in the placentas of pregnant women, and in pregnant rats they pass rapidly through the lungs into the hearts, brains and other organs of the fetuses.
For the study, the researchers exposed young and old mice to different levels of microplastics via their drinking water for three weeks. The results showed that microplastic exposure induces behavioral changes and alterations in immune markers in liver and brain tissues.
After being exposed to microplastics, the research team noticed that the mice began to move and behave peculiarly, exhibiting behaviors similar to those caused by dementia in humans. The results were more profound among older mice.
Microplastics alter the shape of human lung cells, warn scientists
FSU researchers analyzed the health risks of inhaling and ingesting microplastics. They conducted experiments on human lung cells in a Petri dish that were subjected to environmental concentrations of polystyrene particles. Within several days, the scientists observed some unusual changes. The tiny plastic particles caused the cells’ metabolism to slow down and hampered their proliferation and growth.
Microplastics accumulate in all organs
Researchers in Ross’ study found that microplastic particles had started to bioaccumulate in every organ, including the brain, and even in bodily waste. Because the microplastics got inside the animals’ bodies through their drinking water, Ross and her colleagues expected to find microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract as well as in the liver and kidneys.
Ross noted that the presence of microplastics in the heart and lungs indicates that they spread beyond the digestive system and potentially undergo systemic circulation. This is dangerous because the blood-brain barrier is supposed to be “difficult to permeate.”
Microplastics found in human blood for first time
Microplastic pollution has been detected in human blood for the first time, with scientists finding the tiny particles in almost 80% of the people tested.
The discovery shows the particles can travel around the body and may lodge in organs. The full impact on health is as yet unknown. But researchers are concerned as microplastics cause damage to human cells in the laboratory and air pollution particles are already known to enter the body and cause millions of early deaths a year.
The scientists analysed blood samples from 22 anonymous donors, all healthy adults and found plastic particles in 17. Half the samples contained PET plastic, which is commonly used in drinks bottles, while a third contained polystyrene, used for packaging food and other products. A quarter of the blood samples contained polyethylene, from which plastic carrier bags are made.
Tips to reduce exposure to microplastics
Do not purchase ready-to-heat products such as boil-in-the-bag rice.
Don’t buy fruit sealed in plastic.
Avoid heating anything in plastic.
Avoid consuming food or beverages that have come into contact with plastic.
Avoid food-grade nylon used for food packaging and as liners in slow cookers.
If possible, drink filtered tap water over bottled water.
When buying clothes or furnishings, choose more natural fabrics.
If you’re buying carpet, look for something made of wool, not polyester. While natural fibers are usually more expensive, you can save some money with second-hand carpets.
Here are some of the most common culprits in the American kitchen today.
Salt – best to use is from Utah, the ancient seabed is isolated from the ocean, so it’s less likely to have microplastics and the unrefined version is not bleaches and has all the minerals we need.
Water – Stop using single-use bottled water, not just because you don’t know how it was filtered, but also you don’t know what temperature flux each bottle has gone through. Extreme heat can cause plastic to leak chemicals and extreem cold can leak microplastics. Drink filtered tap water in refillable bottle (that are NOT plastic).
Tea – Most tea bags are now made of plastic mesh. Opt for paper tea bags or better yet, buy loose leaf and use an infuser.
Cutting boards – don’t use plastic cutting boards. Just cutting your food on them ADDs more microplastic to your meal. Instead, opt for a bamboo, wooden or glass cutting board.
Non-stick cookware – We all know the coating on non-stick cookware gets gross after continued use, but it is also a big culprit in adding plastic to your diet. Instead, cast iron and stainless steel are your best options.
Microwave safe containers – This is a misnomer when it comes to plastic exposure. When reheating your food in the microwave, use glass containers. Better yet, avoid the microwave and use the stove or oven.
Plastic utensils – Even on low heat, that plastic spoon you use to stir your soup is melting or discarding microplastic into your meal. Use stainless steel, bamboo or wooden spoons instead.
Single-use plastics – Instead of using the single-use plastics like plastic wrap, baggies and plastic plates and silverware, opt for reusble beeswax wrap, reuseable containers and paper goods.
Even though Ken and Barbie are cute and popular, I really don’t want to turn into them. I know that I can’t eliminate all plastic from my life, but I can make choices every day to help reduce it a little bit more. By the way, recycling is a red herring! Only about 9% of all the plastic thrown away is actually recycled, so don’t let that deter you.
We have all come across, on a daily basis, certain chemicals that could be considered dangerous, whether we know it or not.
For those of us who grew up in the 70s or earlier, I am sure that you remember one particular substance that was used widely. It was later banned in 1972 because it was determined in 1962 to be one of the most dangerous applications ever approved and distributed by the U.S. Government.
Do you remember what it was called?
So what is DDT and where does it come from?
Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane, commonly known as DDT, is a colorless, tasteless, and almost odorless crystalline chemical compound, an organochloride. Originally developed as an insecticide, it became infamous for its environmental impacts. DDT was first synthesized in 1874 by the Austrian chemist Othmar Zeidler.
What is it used for?
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) was developed as the first of the modern synthetic insecticides in the 1940s. It was initially used with great effect to combat malaria, typhus, and the other insect-borne human diseases among both military and civilian populations. It also was effective for insect control in crop and livestock production, institutions, homes, and gardens. DDT’s quick success as a pesticide and broad use in the United States and other countries led to the development of resistance by many insect pest species.
Is it deadly dangerous?
DDT is deadly dangerous to insects, yes.
However, when used according to the manufacturer’s specifications, the organochlorine compounds were considered to be relatively safe, but the objection to their use stemmed from the fact that they are not degraded by natural biological processes and become a permanent part of the environment.
What about humans and other animals?
Since absorption from the gut is poor, the major portion of ingested DDT is excreted unchanged in the feces, with the remaining DDT excreted in the bile or stored in adipose tissue from which it is removed and gradually eliminated in the urine. DDT is metabolized by the liver, is fat soluble and therefore, its absorption through the skin is enhanced when present in an oil base solution or emulsion form. Absorption by the lung is rapid when DDT is present as an aerosol.
The Book That Started It All
In order to completely understand the issues associated with DDT, one must know how the chemical operates once applied to an organism. In short, DDT attacks the nervous system via the obstruction of natural nerve impulses, which can cause symptoms such as loss of coordination, convulsions, and vomiting in both animals and humans.6 However, before scientific research was released during the 1960s and the publication of Silent Spring, no one could have understood the full extent to which DDT affected the entire natural environment, including human life. This ignorance persisted until Rachel Carson helped bring these issues into the public
On the first page of the book widely credited with launching the environmental movement as well as bringing about the ban on DDT, Rachel Carson wrote: “Dedicated to Dr. Albert Schweitzer, who said ‘Man has lost the capacity to foresee and forestall. He will end by destroying the earth’.” She surely knew that he was referring to atomic warfare, but she implied that he meant there were deadly hazards from chemicals such as DDT. Because I had already found a great many untruths in her book, I obtained a copy of Dr. Schweitzer’s autobiography, to see whether he even mentioned DDT. He wrote: “How much labor and waste of time these wicked insects do cause, but a ray of hope, in the use of DDT, is now held out to us.
DDT was no stranger to propaganda; for every one man killed in battle, malaria would kill eight, which gave the United States a stepping-stone from which to push its DDT agenda during the war. DDT was used largely due to its reasonable cost, demonstrated effectiveness, and persistence in killing insects.8 DDT was also used on the commercial and residential levels, by farmers on their crops, and in office buildings to control insect populations. The insecticide also proved to be relatively inexpensive to manufacture and stayed in the environment for a long time, effectively killing any insects that came within a certain range.
Were there official studies?
Between 1946 and 1950, cases of malaria fell from approximately 400,000 to practically none because of the use of DDT. DDT is still used today in parts of South America, Asia, and Africa with the aim of controlling malaria in places that may not be able to afford more expensive and potentially safer alternatives.9 As one can see, the early stages of DDT’s development showed much promise and cost-effectiveness when dealing with global diseases. Because of the ban on DDT in the United States in 1972, restrictions have been applied to its use; DDT can legally be produced in the United States but may only be sold to or used by foreign countries. Two of the major reasons behind the ban of DDT were the scientific evidence that exhibited buildup in the fatty tissues of wildlife while persisting in the natural environment and proved the existence of an evolutionary resistance that insects began to develop towards the chemical.
A Case Study in Scientific Fraud by Dr. Gordon Gregory supported our belief that the government has been using science to commit fraud on multiple fronts.
The chemical compound that has saved more human lives than any other in history, DDT, was banned by order of one man, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Public pressure was generated by one popular book and sustained by faulty or fraudulent research. Widely believed claims of carcinogenicity, toxicity to birds, anti-androgenic properties, and prolonged environmental persistence are false or grossly exaggerated. The worldwide effect of the U.S. ban has been millions of preventable deaths.
On May 15, 1975, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a report claiming that people in the United States were ingesting 15 milligrams of DDT every day. In response to a letter stating that this was obviously untrue, an EPA official responded: “You are correct in stating that EPA’s DDT report erred on human dietary uptake. The correct figure should have been 15 per day, instead of 15 per day” (Laurence O’Neall, personal communication, Sept. 11, 1975). He stated that “We will make every effort to rectify the erroneous figures with the news media.”
Indeed, the EPA did issue a correction stating that the actual number was a thousand times less than that given in their report. Human volunteers in Georgia ingested up to 35 milligrams daily, for nearly two years, and did not experience any difficulties then or later. Workers in the Montrose Chemical Company had 1,300 man-years of exposure, and there was never any case of cancer during 19 years of continuous exposure to about 17 mg/man/day. Concerns were sometimes raised about possible carcinogenic effects of DDT, but instead its metabolites were often found to be -carcinogenic, significantly reducing tumors in rats. DDT ingestion induces hepatic microsomal enzymes, which destroy carcinogenic aflatoxins and thereby inhibit tumors.
After an 80-day hearing in 1972 on the potential for carcinogenicity, the EPAconcluded that “DDTis not a carcinogenic hazard for man.” Nevertheless, EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus banned DDT two months later, stating that “DDT poses a carcinogenic risk” to humans. The primary evidence used to support his assertion was two animal studies. The first was challenged because it was not replicated by other workers using similar dosages and because the findings might have resulted from food contaminated with aflatoxin. The second study, which used a nearly lethal dose, reported hepatomas in 32 percent of the experimental group compared to 4 percent of the control group.
However, the tumors were not shown to be malignant, and the litters were not distributed randomly. Many anti-DDT activists alleged that DDT was killing birds or causing them to produce thin-shelled eggs. Some extremists even wrote that because of DDT “birds dropped from the sky, dead.”
Others said that “birds were falling out of trees by the thousands.” No such tragedies actually occurred, not even to a few birds. It was easy to test such claims of toxicity by simply feeding known quantities of DDT to caged birds. Even extreme amounts of DDT in the food did not seriously poison birds.
Rachel Carson declared that “like the robin, another American bird, [the Bald Eagle] seems to be on the verge of extinction.” That same year Roger Tory Peterson, America’s greatest ornithologist, wrote that the robin was “the most abundant bird in North America.” There is no doubt as to which writer was correct!
What are the alternatives to DDT?
The alternatives to DDT is an array of equally dangerous and toxic chemicals that (currently) carry official approval. Approval does NOT MEAN they got it right. Time has PROVEN that over and over.
Other examples of Scientific Fraud
The most common examples of fraud in the United States appear to be environmental, including acid rain, ozone holes, carbon dioxide, ultraviolet radiation, global cooling, global warming, endangered species, and pesticides. This article primarily concerned DDT, but here are just a few others;
C19
HIV
Van Allan Radiation Belts
Marijuana
Brain Dead
UFOs / UAPs
Statistical Impossibilities
Scientific Fraud has it’s tentacles in every aspect of our lives now. Buyer Beware.
What’s the bottom line?
Isn’t it always about the money?
DDT was affordable and readily available to just about anyone from the 40’s – 60’s. There was no big money involved. DDT was everywhere and it was very effective at saving lives.
Currently, no obvious efforts are being made to reduce the numbers of infective mosquito adults or larvae, and neither the WHO nor any of the dozens of recent malaria researchers have proposed plans to help save human lives by killing mosquitoes or their larvae. Such humane preventive endeavors have not even been mentioned in in recent years! Instead, hundreds of millions of dollars are devoted to the search for vaccines, which might or might not be effective.
Vaccines? Here we go again!
At least two malaria vaccine researchers have been indicted. Dr. Miodrag Ristic received $3.28 million in grants, but developed nothing. In 1990 he was indicted on four counts and heavily fined, but not imprisoned. Dr.Wasim Siddiqui of the University of Hawaii, who had claimed that his vaccine was almost ready for clinical trials, was accused by the U.S. Inspector General of “an apparent diversion and theft of funds, submission of false claims, and criminal conspiracy.” Siddiqui was arrested by Honolulu police, but that very day the Vaccine Research Office of AID awarded him another $1.65 million “to continue his research.” Hawaiian Senator Inouye then announced on live television that if Siddiqui was handed any more federal funds he personally would see to it that the University of Hawaii would never get another grant of federal research money. Siddiqui served six months of house detention, but the local newspapers reported that he was still receiving his salary of $92,340 a year, even though not teaching classes.
The malaria protections that were hoped to replace mosquito controls have simply been expensive fantasies.
With no better methods available, past mosquito control programs were terminated. From 1974 to 1977, the U.S. Export-Import Bank financed more than $3 billion of pesticides, saving millions of human lives.
Dozens of other countries, where massive numbers of malaria deaths continue to occur, also cannot receive financial aid unless they agree to control mosquitoes by using DDT.
Conclusion
The ban on DDT, founded on erroneous or fraudulent reports and imposed by one powerful bureaucrat, has caused millions of deaths, while sapping the strength and productivity of countless human beings in underdeveloped countries. It is time for an honest appraisal and for immediate deployment of the best currently available means to control insect-borne diseases. This means DDT.
Think of all the things in your life that contain the soft, silvery metal aluminum. The thirteenth element on the periodic table is a light, durable material that has plenty of commercial applications, and you can find it in everything from that roll of aluminum foil in the kitchen and cooking pots to antacid tablets and personal products such as deodorant.
Though it’s one of the most widely distributed metals in the environment, it’s not a nutritive mineral, meaning that unlike calcium or sodium, our bodies don’t need aluminum to survive. In fact, in very large doses aluminum can become toxic, and therein lies a concern about how it may have a negative effect on the brain.
We know that they use aluminum as a binder in vaccines so they stick in the body. This fact leads me to believe that aluminum continues to build in our bodies throughout our lives, making the risk of high doses of aluminum exponentially increase with age. So how many health issues are related to large doses of aluminum?
Aluminum and Alzheimers
For years, aluminum has been suspected as potentially playing a role in the development of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, but conclusive evidence has been difficult to find.
Dr. Douglas Scharre, a neurologist at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, says, “I think that what is pretty well established is that if you have too much aluminum in your brain, that’s not healthy. Aluminum can be a neurotoxin, and if you ingest it or get it into your brain, it can cause a dementia-like condition.”
“There have been some large studies which show individuals with higher and chronic aluminum exposure in drinking water and especially occupational exposure were more likely to develop Alzheimer’s. However, there are other studies which show no association and further, it is unclear exactly how this research translates into risk for the average person.” Alex Mroszczyk-McDonald, a practicing family physician with Kaiser Permanente Fontana Medical Center in Fontana, California.
Aluminum and Autisim & Asthma
A new study funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirms that aluminum compounds found in childhood vaccines are linked to an array of illnesses, including neurological disorders, asthma, and the Big A: autism.
Though the study’s authors tried their best to minimize the link, they were unable to sidestep a “positive association” between “vaccine-related aluminum exposure” and “persistent asthma” in children aged 24-59 months. Overall, children in the study who received 3 milligrams (mg) or more of vaccine-related aluminum had a 36 percent higher risk than children who took other vaccines to develop persistent asthma.
“In the paper I did with Neil Miller (SAGE Open Medicine, 2020), we saw an odds ratio of 4.49 (statistically significant) for asthma in vaccinated children versus unvaccinated children. This was limited to vaccines in the first year of life. The CDC seems to be confirming my results here.”
As a nurse and the daughter of a stage 3 breast cancer survivor, this is a topic I’m very passionate about.
Area in red is where you apply your aluminum based antiperspirant every day.
And notice where the highest probability of breast cancer is.
Coincidence?
I’ll take moist pits over breast cancer. Not stinky but sweaty.
What would your children choose? To see their momma sweat or go through chemo?
Wake up and quit putting a METAL on your pits. #duh.
Fun fact: I sweat less now using deodorant only than I did when I used antiperspirant. Go figure. I think my body was overproducing sweat trying to get the aluminum out.
Why Use Natural Deodorant
Have you seen what is in conventional deodorant? Likely you’ve glanced at the bottom at least once in your life and seen a list of ingredients that appear to be written in a different language. But did you know that many of these ingredients can be incredibly harmful for your body?
Let’s go through a couple of them:
–aluminum: this is the ingredient that clogs your sweat glands and prevents sweating (more on this below). Aluminum exposure has been linked to Alzheimers as well as to build-up of estrogen in the body which can also be correlated with increased chances of breast and prostate cancer.
–parabens: these ingredients are used as a preservative in deodorants but can also mimic estrogen in your body. This leads to hormonal disruptions and is also linked to breast and prostate cancers.
–phthalates: these chemicals are used to make other ingredients more flexible and are also used as fragrance ingredients for artificial fragrance. They primarily affect the endocrine system and exposure can lead to early onset puberty as well as breast cancer later in life.
-Triclosan: An antibacterial chemical that can also disrupt the hormone system and is associated with increased chance of breast cancer. It was actually banned by the FDA in hand soaps but for some reason they still allow it in deodorants?!
The study published in the Lancet in 2017 titled Use of Underarm Cosmetic Products in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer, found that self-reported use of underarm cosmetics was significantly associated with breast cancer risk. Similarly, aluminum concentration in extracted breast tissue was significantly associated with underarm cosmetic use. Aluminum concentrations were also significantly higher in the subgroup of breast cancer cases where the tumor was localized to the upper, outer quadrant of the breast.
PS. I stopped using aluminum based antiperspirants when my moms surgical oncologist recommended the cessation in 1993. She had stage 3 mucanous adeno carcinoma with 7/10 lymph node involvement. When I was in nursing school 23+ years ago, she had a RADICAL mastectomy, chemo, radiation and a bone marrow transplant. I studied for my nursing exams on the toilet in her room of the transplant floor. So yes, I’m a bit passionate about this subject.
Humble, Lume, Native brands are a few aluminum free options. But you can also make your own and know exactly what you are putting on your body.
A simple DIY Deodorant recipe that smells amazing and works too! Made with clean, all-natural ingredients and ready in under 10 minutes, this natural deodorant recipe will quickly become a staple in your body routine.
Place coconut oil and shea butter in a glass bowl or jar and place the bowl/jar inside a medium sauce pan.
Add water to the saucepan (enough to surround bowl/jar but not to overflow it) and bring to a boil.
As water is heating up, ensure to stir coconut oil and shea butter and continue to do so until it melts.
Once melted, add in arrowroot starch, baking soda and essential oils.
Place in a small glass jar (or pour into empty deodorant stick(s)) and allow to cool at room temp or in fridge (will harden faster in fridge) until it’s reached a solid state. Cover with lid until use.
DIRECTIONS FOR USE:
Wet underarms slightly (this helps with even application)
Spoon out a pea-sized amount with a wooden scoop or with fingers and rub between fingers before applying directly to underarms.
For a regular day, one application in the morning should be fine. For hotter days, workouts or if you’re particularly sweaty, feel free to reapply as needed.
*Certain people are sensitive to tea tree oil so be sure to test your skin with a drop before adding to mixture. It is not necessary to include but tea tree is antibacterial and it is the bacteria in your underarms that leads to smell so it is a nice addition if you are not sensitive.
Magnesium… a secret weapon to help your body detox.
Magnesium is most known for it’s relaxing properties, but it’s also involved in over 300 enzymatic reactions in your body and critical for metabolic processes, cell growth and reproduction, and your body’s natural ability to detoxify.
Here’s 3 ways magnesium supports a healthy detoxification process:
Magnesium (specifically the malate form), binds to heavy metals such as aluminum or lead and excretes them from your body (1).
Magnesium supports healthy bowel movements to remove toxic waste from your body.
Magnesium is an important cofactor to your entire liver detoxification process to eliminate harmful toxins from your body (2).
Unfortunately, magnesium is one of the most depleted minerals in soil, making it difficult to get required amounts of magnesium from the fruits and vegetables we eat (which could help explain why many experts believe approximately 80% of the U.S. population is magnesium deficient).
Although these findings raise red flags for most of us, it’s not clear to the medical community whether higher levels of aluminum exposure over the course of a lifetime raises risk, nor is it clear what level of exposure to aluminum is unsafe.
Nevertheless, it’s probably not a bad idea to limit your exposure to aluminum, and indeed any other potential toxin in the environment. Take action and do a heavy metal detox then avoid aluminum products from your deodorant to your pots and pans.
Petroleum is the same ingredient that is used for oil and gas. The FDA has admitted that ingestion is typically under the “concern threshold.”
Well, I am not letting my child or myself ingest this nor do I trust their “concern threshold.” Why is any amount of petroleum good?
If you see Yellow 5 and Red 40 as part of the ingredients, chances are these are made from petroleum. They’ve been found to cause hyperactivity in children, cancer, allergic reactions. headaches, hypersensitivity, obesity, ADD/ADHD, chromosomal damage, hives, asthma, diabetes, eczema, insomnia.
And we know that they want to convert the human population to full on bug eaters. Their excuse of course being we need to control carbon emissions and to address exploding human population growth.
Snacks with organic cricket flour contain a substance called “chitin” which cannot be properly digested by the human gut, but can possibly contribute to illnesses including cancer.
But did you know they are using insects in our foods. One natural red food dye is cochineal extract. Anytime you see an ingredients list that includes carmine, cochineal extract or natural red 4, there’s a little powdered bug there too.
Cochineal extract is extracted from the cochineal, specifically the female, a species of insect that belongs to the order entomologists refer to as the “true bugs.” (Don’t trust any account that calls this bug a beetle — it’s not).
When Europeans descended on South America in the 1500s, they discovered that the Aztecs were producing vibrant, cochineal-dyed fabrics that retained their color for an incredibly long time. Soon, dried cochineal became a major trade good.
Today, cochineals are harvested mainly in Peru and the Canary Islands on plantations of prickly pear cacti, the bugs’ preferred host. There, the insects are sun-dried, crushed, and dunked in an acidic alcohol solution to produce carminic acid, the pigment that eventually becomes carmine or cochineal extract, depending on processing. About 70,000 insects are needed to produce a pound of dye.
Until 2009, cochineal was one of many dyes that fell under the umbrella term “natural color” on ingredients lists. But because cochineal provokes severe allergic reactions in some people, the Food and Drug Administration requires carmine and cochineal extract to be explicitly identified in ingredients lists.
In addition to food, cochineal is used as a dye in cosmetics products, including lipstick, and at least one person has reported a severe allergic reaction to a cochineal dye used in a pill coating.
Most products have quantities under the threshold required by the FDA. The problem is if it is in more than one product, you have already gone over the threshold. Most likely, everyone has toxic amounts of dyes and preservatives in their bodies, because it is in everything they eat. America is being poisoned by this stuff!
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday announced it has limited the use of Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals COVID-19 vaccine over concerns associated with blood clots.
The agency determined that the risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), which can cause rare but potentially life-threatening blood clots one to two weeks after receiving the J&J vaccine, warrants limiting the shot’s authorized use.
Federal officials also acknowledge the COVID-19 vaccines have generated a larger than usual number of adverse reaction reports, including suspected deaths and some heart inflammation, and that concerns have grown about the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and its ties to blood clotting. Federal officials say those concerns aside, they believe serious vaccine reactions are still fairly rare and in most cases, their protections outweigh the risks.
COVID-19 vaccination was “significantly associated” with a 25% jump in emergency medical services (EMS) for heart problems in 16-39 year-olds in Israel, whose vaccination rate is among the world’s highest, according to a peer-reviewed study by MIT researchers.
While not establishing causal relationships, the findings raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side-effects and underscore the already established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals,
The research adds more fuel to the legal and grassroots campaigns against compelled vaccination.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used location data from tens of millions of Americans’ phones to track compliance with lockdown orders and vaccination efforts, according to newly revealed documents.
The CDC specifically monitored Americans’ visits to churches and schools, as well as “detailed counts of visits to participating pharmacies for vaccine monitoring,” internal documents from the federal agency obtained by Vice show.
The CDC also reportedly tracked peoples’ movement during curfews and visits between neighbors.
A controversial “data broker” called SafeGraph initially provided the data to the CDC for free during the outbreak of the pandemic, the documents show. Then in 2021, the CDC reportedly hatched a deal to pay the company $420,000 for continued access.
A new study, “Evidence for Aerosol Transfer of SARS-CoV2-specific Humoral Immunity” shows that vaccinated adults are more likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 infection to their children who live in the same household. Researchers from the University of Colorado detected the presence of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgGs and IgAs in swab samples taken from children who live with “fully vaccinated” parents.
Children who live in unvaccinated households are less likely to have SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies in their nasal passageways and saliva. This evidence shows that unvaccinated children could be developing specific immune responses to the spike proteins that vaccinated people are shedding through their skin and into the air.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Wednesday that using Pfizer’s Paxlovid pill has “no evidence of benefit at this time for a longer course of treatment” in patients with recurrent Covid-19 symptoms, contradicting Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla’s comments.
In cases where virus levels rebound, “then you give a second course, like you do with antibiotics, and that’s it,” Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told Bloomberg on Tuesday.
We are continuing to review data from clinical trials and will provide additional information as it becomes available. However, there is no evidence of benefit at this time for a longer course of treatment (e.g., 10 days rather than the 5 days recommended in the Provider Fact Sheet for Paxlovid) or repeating a treatment course of Paxlovid in patients with recurrent COVID-19 symptoms following completion of a treatment course,
John Farley, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Office of Infectious Diseases.
Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a Thai-German microbiologist and expert on Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines, has warned that mRNA vaccines are very dangerous. They will kill more people daily, and those who survive will be easier subjects for the New World Order to control.
Bhakdi issued the warning during a recent interview with Brighteon.TVhost Dr. Peter Breggin on the program “ReFounding America.”
I gathered all vaccine ingredients into a list and contacted Poison Control. After intros and such, and asking to speak with someone tenured and knowledgeable, this is the gist of that conversation.
Me: My question to you is how are these ingredients categorized? As benign or poison? (I ran a few ingredients, formaldehyde, Tween 80, mercury, aluminum, phenoxyethanol, potassium phosphate, sodium phosphate, sorbitol, etc.)
He: Well, that’s quite a list… But I’d have to easily say that they’re all toxic to humans… Used in fertilizers… Pesticides… To stop the heart… To preserve a dead body… They’re registered with us in different categories, but pretty much poisons. Why?
Me: If I were deliberately to feed or inject my child with these ingredients often, as a schedule, obviously I’d put my daughter in harm’s way… But what would legally happen to me?
He: Odd question… But you’d likely be charged with criminal negligence… perhaps with intent to kill… and of course child abuse… Your child would be taken away from you… Do you know of someone’s who’s doing this to their child? This is criminal…
Me: An industry… These are the ingredients used in vaccines… With binding agents to make sure the body won’t flush these out… To keep the antibody levels up indefinitely…
He: WHAT?!
Your conclusion?
The man was beside himself. He asked if I would email him all this information. He wanted to share it with his adult kids who are parents. He was horrified and felt awful he didn’t know… his kids are vaccinated and they have health issues…”
A documentary by Dr. Bryan Ardis and Stew Peters, Published April 11, 2022
In early Feb 2020, Dr. Bryan Ardis’s father in law was killed in 9 days by horrific drug protocols for a diagnosis of the flu. Within a couple weeks, the first cases of COVID hit Texas. In the 3 months of grieving and frustration that followed the death of his father in law Weldon, Dr. Ardis discovered the alarming research studies on the failed and toxic drug called Remdesivir that Anthony Fauci professed to have been proven “safe an effective” against the Ebola Virus and Covid-19. Only to discover that Remdesivir was even more toxic and dangerous than the toxic antibiotic vancomycin used to destroy the kidneys of his father in law. He was on The Stew Peters show to talk about the drug Remdesivir, – about how this drug that completely failed at treating Ebola, that causes kidney failure, that costs a boatload of money, and that has a direct link to Tony Fauci – how that drug became the drug of choice in the Covid hospital protocol.
Dr. Ardis has continued to look for the full truth about Covid. In March, he called Stew. He said “I need to meet with you, in person. It’s urgent,” He didn’t want to send the information he had electronically. He said the information related to the origins of Covid-19: Where it came from, what it really is, and who is really responsible for it. He said that with the information he had, everything about Covid would come together: how they track it, how the CDC predicts “hotspots,” how people fall ill and die from it.
The way Dr. Ardis had described how he started his investigation, all the circumstances and coincidences that guided him down this path, I believe, and Brian believes, that God has helped guide him through the research process. Maybe that sounds sappy, but it shouldn’t: The battle we are fighting is spiritual as well as physical. This isn’t a fight over policy. It’s a battle between good and evil, and that means God and Satan are right at the heart of it.
