Measles Cures Myeloma?

Multiple myeloma is a cancer that forms in a type of white blood cell called a plasma cell.” It affects bone marrow.

Researchers at Mayo think that introducing a strain of measles into a cancer patient has ‘cured’ her condition.

“Two patients in the study received a single intravenous dose of an engineered measles virus (MV-NIS) that is selectively toxic to myeloma plasma cells. Both patients responded, showing reduction of both bone marrow cancer and myeloma protein. One patient, a 49-year-old woman, experienced complete remission of myeloma and has been clear of the disease for over six months.”

The paper goes on to state,

“In their article, the researchers explain they were reporting on these two patients because they were the first two studied at the highest possible dose, had limited previous exposure to measles, and therefore fewer antibodies to the virus, and essentially had no remaining treatment options.”

Is it safe to say that measles vaccines would prevent treatment of this condition in this way?

What other diseases are vaccinations preventing us from curing? And how long has this been known? The theory has, in fact, been posited since before vaccines were commonly administered.

“Oncolytic virotherapy – using re-engineered viruses to fight cancer – has a history dating back to the 1950s. Thousands of cancer patients have been treated with oncolytic viruses from many different virus families (herpesviruses, poxviruses, common cold viruses, etc.). However, this study provides the first well-documented case of a patient with disseminated cancer having a complete remission at all disease sites after virus administration. 


 

*Update*

Multiple Myeloma Measles Vaccine Clinical Trial Now Open at UAMS

“A major factor of eligibility is that patients have no detectable measles antibody. If this is present, it prevents the vaccine from working. About a third of all myeloma patients tested will have this lack of measles antibody, regardless of whether they have had measles before or have been vaccinated.”

“Two tests are run to see if patients are measles antibody-negative.”

Perhaps we will need an anti-vaccine vaccine if we end up with a treatable cancer.


 

*Mayo update*

Dr. Kapoor, in turn, has informed us that the principal investigators leading the Phase 2 trial have confirmed that there were, indeed, no responses to the vaccine therapy observed in the first 12 patients treated in the Phase 2 portion of the trial. “

Wonky+…

The true state of the environment is nothing particularly abnormal as can very clearly be seen in the following chart.

image157

On the other hand, this next chart is the kind of pseudo-science which is all-pervasive these days. Note the dotted line and that the next forty year rise is equal to the previous 60,000 year decline. The graph itself is speculative even displaying a question mark, but this is the kind of thing that passes for science in this debate.

Last 100 million years

Despite the fact that both vaccines and chem-trails contain some of the same neuro-toxins, vaccines are safe and chem-trails don’t exist.

As stated in a recent article by Mother Jones, “People who have measles are more susceptible to starvation through climate change… In its landmark report last year, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that global warming poses a range of health threats… Kirk Smith—an environmental health expert at UC, Berkeley, and a lead author of the IPCC chapter on health impacts—points out that “a child weakened by measles is more likely to die from the malnutrition caused by climate change.” In other words, anything we can do to reduce the impact of existing health problems will be even more important in a warming world. And vaccinating children, he says, is one of the most cost-effective public health tools we have.

I would also like to mention that if you are susceptible to starvation, measles and climate change are not your biggest problems. Kirk Smith points out that “one of the most cost-effective public health tools we have” is vaccines. I would like to point out that THE most cost-effective public health tool we have is better nutrition. Warmer temperatures, increased rainfall, and increased levels of CO2 would only increase crop yields.

Continue reading “Wonky+…”

Conspi-Racist

People with wealth, power, and influence say many things. Of those things, some seem to come up more often than others, namely:

1- Overpopulation is our biggest problem

2- CO2 is pollution, and climate change is bad

3- GMO’s are safe and can feed more people

4- Vaccines will make you healthy

5- Wireless radiation isn’t harmful

6- Nuclear energy is green energy

7- There are no conspiracies

8- Did I mention overpopulation?

Based on the initial premise that there are too many people on the planet; do you think that the powers that be would suggest doing anything which would make that problem worse? Why implement plans that make the biggest problem bigger? So the rest of the things on that list should not help increase the population, should they? In fact, all of those things will actually reduce the population, as they should; given that over-population is such a problem.

It would be akin to saying that despite the fact that nuclear weapons are the biggest threat to mankind and must be eradicated, we need more nuclear weapons to keep us safe. No, wait, that’s a bad example. It would be like saying that we must find a cure for cancer, and then spend most of the money to research treatment options. Scratch that, another bad example. Like self-regulating financial industries… no. Like we need more debt to pay our debts… no. Oh, like more security means less freedom… no, no, no. Ok, so these aren’t the best examples; but you get the gist, right?

Well, the truth of the matter is that the narratives are becoming hopelessly intertwined.

Continue reading “Conspi-Racist”

From Death Comes Life (And Other Justifications)

Let’s begin by assuming two things, (1) that you can influence massive amounts of capital flow (and have friends in many industries who can do the same) and, (2) that you genuinely think there are far too many people on Earth. In the immortal words of Keanu Reeves, “What do you do?” There are three courses of action you could take: decrease the birth rate; increase the death rate; or both. Let’s break this down.

In order to decrease the birth rate, there are several options available, namely: reduce the amount of available food; sterilize a certain segment of the population; convince people to stop reproducing (by ‘education’ or by mandate.)

Reducing food supplies in a global way would necessitate impeding the forces of nature from supplying energy to plants. Decreasing CO2 concentrations, preventing sunlight from reaching the earth, acidification of soil, make private ownership of seed illegal, environmental manipulation (more/less rain, hail, pesticide resistance,) re-zoning agricultural land (Bundy ranch.)

Sterilization in humans can occur through several mechanisms. Some known causes: ELF, VLF, LF radiation (microwaves, cell-phones, wi-fi, Bluetooth, SMART meters, RFID;) other radiation (depleted uranium, Fukushima, x-ray, chemo-therapy;) GMOs (which also cause allergies;) certain vaccines; certain reproductive diseases and conditions, STDs; mercury and other neurotoxin contamination; castration (enforced up until 1967 in Britain for ‘treatment’ of homosexuality.) There are many other ways in which humans can be sterilized; these will be examined in future posts.

As an added bonus, if you can reduce the ability of people to think, there would be far less resistance to your movement, should the ‘truth’ or parts of it begin to leak out. So distractions (sports, celebrities, activities, make the important stuff boring,) lowering the level of education (teach by wrote not by reason, don’t teach about money,) and drug-induced dementia could be useful tools, as well.

Another tack is to promote the gay agenda (gay people don’t reproduce,) and yet another is to limit births to a certain number per family by mandate (as was done in China.) A less overt way might be to indoctrinate people in school that less people is a good thing (read a modern social studies textbook.)

Increasing the death rate could be brought about by killing lots of people outright either through war or starvation or disease.

Some of the many ways to start a war (civil or otherwise*) are: political movements can be subverted (Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Ukraine;) economies can be crashed (Greece, EU, US, Japan;) food could be made scarce (California drought, honey-bee die-off, lower nutrition content, increased price of oil;) access to water could be limited (privatization of resources, pollution of natural sources;) increase poverty (wealth gap;) invade foreign sovereign states (the post-WWII list is prohibitively long;) start wars by proxy and religious belligerence – bring about ‘Armageddon’; and limit access to energy (by quashing new technologies.)

*(For the purposes of this article, war and revolt are considered synonymous.)

Starvation could be achieved by reducing plant size thereby reducing crop yields (decreasing plant nutrients like CO2, limiting solar radiation needed for photosynthesis by increasing the earth’s albedo,) limiting the nutrition in foods (fast foods, GMOs, poor soil conditions/pH balance,) regulating nutrients (codex alimentarius,) increasing the cost of producing food (regulations, seed cost, oil price,) killing pollinating insects (like honey-bees,) and by introducing droughts and floods and hail (geo-engineering projects in Calgary started by the insurance companies transport bad weather [hail] from the metropolitan area over to the prairies. Better to destroy a crop than dent some luxury automobiles. Through derivatives trading espoused by ‘disaster capitalists,’ a profit can be gleaned by crop failure, but insurance claims divert cash in the wrong direction in the economy: downwards.)

Disease is easy enough to spread. Many diseases could be custom-made in a lab to target certain segments of the population (weaponized anthrax, mad-cow disease, ebola, AIDS) and could be spread either by injection through vaccination programs or other medical interventions (gonorrhoea in South America, sterilization in Kenya, MKUltra in Canada) or by giving them an infectious component such that they can spread on their own (HIV/AIDS.) Blood and vaccines can easily be infected (Bayer.) Birth defects can also be introduced (thalidomide,) the environment can be polluted (cancers,) and voluntary disease can be cultivated (lung cancers through smoking, liver disease from drinking, heart disease through inactivity.)

So far, so good. Through these measures, we have effectively reduced the world’s population by fifty percent and have lowered the birth rate into negative territory. The projected population by the year 2050 is now two billion people. This number can still be tweaked, but we now have the time to be more selective about who to keep and who to discard. Eugenics is back!

The only thing one needs in order to be considered a VIP is money. You don’t even need to be important, just rich. But let’s just assume that these two words (rich and important) are synonymous. Now, who are you going to save? Are you going to allow masses of uneducated labourers to run the world as they see fit, or are you going to save the important people? The question answers itself, doesn’t it?

Now all you need is an excuse to go about doing all these things. “Pollution caused by man-made CO2 emissions is destroying the planet and we need to put an end to it before it is too late.” Whether or not the basic premise is flawed, and if this is what you believe, then your course of action becomes limited to lowering the global population or facing death (real or imagined.) The CO2 issue is central to the question of depopulation. Now, to re-state, “What do you do?”

There you have it. CO2, vaccines, GMOs, and the rush towards global depopulation; that, in a nutshell (or in a nuthouse) is all you need to know about the New World Order. Oh… that, and that there are actually a large number of VIPs who are in just that position and who really do believe it.

Sleep tight.

*UPDATE*

As if it weren’t already obvious enough, Mother Jones just published this article which states in black and white, and as clear as day that “Vaccines Are One of Our Best Weapons Against Global Warming.” Well, if humans are to blame for global warming, then vaccines are our best weapons against people?!?

From the article:

“A child weakened by measles is more likely to die from the malnutrition caused by climate change.”

This goes to show just how intertwined these narratives have become. The unwind is going to be a lot of fun to watch. This MJ article is full of nonsense, but it does show to what extent these political pseudo-pundits will go to drive their drivel home.

And consider this article from the Toronto Star.

“While this study evaluates climate, social and economic data and consequently its impact on Syria, it is not the first to suggest that extreme weather events — especially droughts, water scarcity and consequently food insecurity — could lead to violence.”

Turkey’s control on the flow of the Euphrates is doing just that. That’s anthropogenic, I guess.

“In 2013, the Centre for American Progress and the Centre for Climate and Security in Washington released a series of essays that argued climate change played a significant role in the Arab Spring.”

Another stunningly short-sighted article by Raveena Aulakh.

More twisted logic, more non-sequitur arguments, and a complete lack of any science in these articles go to show just how important these themes have become to the ‘de-population is more urgent now than ever’ crowd.

What Do Chem-trails, Juice Boxes, and Vaccines Have in Common?

These may seem like completely unrelated topics, at first glance; but the reality is that they have much more in common than you might like to know.

One of the claims made by the geo-engineering crowd is that very tiny particles of certain metals (aluminum, barium, strontium, silver, et al.) are being sprayed into the sky in order to control various aspects of the weather cycle and to control global warming through an increased albedo. This argument is flawed in its own right, but I digress. The point being made is that nano-sized particles of aluminum are being pumped into the air, and as a result, end up in our lungs and in the water supply through run-off.

Here is some of what has been observed in the environment after geo-engineering spraying was conducted.

This article by Dr. Russell Blaylock, shows that the really insidious part of this story is that tiny particles of aluminum (which has been linked to dementia and Alzheimer’s) can and will penetrate the blood-brain barrier through either the lungs, the nose, or the gut.

“Studies have shown that these particles pass along the olfactory neural tracts, which connect directly to the area of the brain that is not only most effected by Alzheimer’s disease, but also the earliest affected in the course of the disease. It also has the highest level of brain aluminum in Alzheimer’s cases.”

It is not possible, once the aluminum is in the environment, to remove it through any means except distillation. Water filters are ineffective due to their pore size which is much bigger than the particles they are meant to remove. One would expect the metal particles to fall out of solution and settle on the bottom of rivers, lakes, and oceans, but this is not the case. As anyone who has studied fluid mechanics will attest to, underwater currents and surface flows do not mix. Temperature gradients, density, and salinity prevent streams of water from combining with others. This means that if the surface water being taken up by a filtration plant contains nano-sized particles of aluminum (or any other metal, for that matter) the water which is then pumped out as potable will contain those same particles. Whether they are breathed in or they are swallowed, these particles find their way into the body where they accumulate and cannot be easily removed, if at all.

From:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3056430/

“…aluminum is a widely recognized neurotoxin that inhibits more than 200 biologically important functions and causes various adverse effects in plants, animals, and humans.”

The Alzheimer’s Society’s official position is that there is no conclusive proof that Al leads directly to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Perhaps Al is not the only cause of AD, there could be other factors involved; and Al might lead to or aggravate the situation despite not being the sole causal agent. Any way one looks at this, nobody claims that Al is good for the body, Al is considered a toxic metal and can be found in many places, including vaccines and chem-trails.

From:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/03/22/aluminum-toxicity-alzheimers.aspx

“Aluminum is found in a shocking number of foods and consumer products, including:

– Foods such as baking powder, self rising flour, salt, baby formula, coffee creamers, baked goods and processed foods, coloring and caking agents

– Drugs, such as antacids, analgesics, anti-diarrheals, and others; additives such as magnesium stearate

– Vaccines—Hepatitis A and B, Hib, DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis), pneumococcal vaccine, Gardasil (HPV), and others

– Cosmetics and personal care products such as antiperspirants, deodorants (including salt crystals, made of alum), lotions, sunscreens, and shampoos

– Aluminum products, including foil, cans, juice pouches, tins, and water bottles”

Whether Al causes AD, leads to AD, or contributes to the development of AD, this is not a substance we want in our bodies, period. The introduction of nano-sized particles of aluminum, mercury, or any other toxic metals into our environment, and hence, our bodies, should be regarded as a non-consensual medical intervention with potentially harmful effects to ourselves, to our food supply, and to life in general.