As an observer and participant in modern biomedical research, and a lover of deep history, I tend to focus not on the immediate or last few years, but look for trends of accumulating risk over longer periods of time. Seeking an answer to the question of “when”, I used Pubmed to estimate, per yer, the number of studies and papers discussing diseases and conditions of unknown origin. I search for the term “unknown causes”, and also for the term “journal” to get some idea of the percentage of studies, papers and editorials discussing disease of unknown causes. I had no idea what to expect.
Looking at a trend of topics per year, one has to correct for some estimate of the total number of articles published, because a mere count would, in part, reflect the overall trend in the explosion of total articles published. I chose as my control term the word “journal”, because many titles of publications include that term (e.g., “Journal of Nephrology). Here is the control result, which is not surprising, and completely expected:
Again, this merely reflects the trend in the increase in publications in Pubmed, and so using it would provide a relative control for that trend.
Next I searched for “Unknown Causes”, and calculated the number of articles citing unknown causes per 10,000 articles (again, relative denominator term).
What I found is shocking. Here is a graph of the number of articles per 10,000 discussing “unknown causes” (Y = #articles mentioning “unknown causes” / #articles mentioning “journal”, as in the title of journals).
Because the studies in Pubmed include all sorts of journals studying all sorts of things, the actual number is not as important as the trend. The signature is undeniable. Something changed dramatically in 1976. To the skeptic: the increase is greater if one does not correct for total publications.
What changed was national mass vaccination against influenza….
Nukes are coming back to Asia!
America’s Nuclear Posture Review is out, and it offers a blueprint for a nuclear war with China. China’s not gonna like it, you’re not gonna like it, but it’s the Pentagon’s miracle cure for declining US conventional strength in Asia.
It’s another sign that the uniformed military, its anxieties, and its priorities are at the heart of US foreign policy. The acronyms you want to watch for are SLCS, LRSO, and B O O M. The powderkeg you want to keep your eye on is Taiwan, where it looks like the hegemon hopes and nuclear fantasies of the China hawks are going to collide.
And foreign influence in Australia is real! In a China Watch exclusive, I uncover a genuine foreign influence scandal at the heart of Australia’s national security establishment.
The history of Wall Street and Anglo-American finance in China is one that is rarely discussed in western media or even academia, whereas knowing it would explain much about both China’s stunning economic rise over the past 70 years, as well as certainly seemingly rising tensions between China and the US today. It’s hard to tell if there is genuine tension and enmity because of credible rivalry status between the US and China, or if everything is proceeding according to wider, deeper, much longer-term planning based on desired, durable and thus political coordination. Large US, UK and EU investment banks are new entrants into China’s nascent bond sector, yet also retain longstanding presences pertaining to China’s financial and economic development. Such factors should be weighed alongside other historical details in evaluating China’s recent threats to ‘dump US Treasury bonds’, as well as to ultimately view any sense of symbiosis which the US and China are serving, and why. Are banks such as JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Standard Chartered, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and others necessarily against a ‘bond run’ and wider trashing of US debt? Or not so much? Who benefits? More specifically, who profits?
In this episode of Money & Fear, we’ll review some monetary and political history involving Wall Street and Beijing in order to weigh the mentioned factors. Details not shared, let alone analyzed, by mainstream corporate business press supposedly reporting on US-China trade, tariffs and/or currency wars, even.
If you’re not a Newsbud member yet, please join and tell others. It costs practically nothing, yet gives you information you’re not supposed to know, thus empowering you to stay ahead of the herd and think like Establishment planners think.
We’ll bring you Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel’s tweetstorm in a moment, but I’ll take a stab at answering her question about the media right out of the gate. Three possibilities: (1) The GOP hyped the Nunes memo, which quickly became the center of this whole firestorm — replete with counter-memos, FBI objections, etc. The press followed the spotlight. (2) As we’ve been saying, there are so many complex pieces of this larger puzzle, following the plot is difficult. It’s not just news consumers wondering, “which memo is this now?” — it’s many of the people trying to cover this drama, too. The document in question here is a second, less redacted, version of a Senate memo that few people have even heard of. (3) The Senate memo, produced by non-bomb-throwers Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham, is substantially more disruptive to the Democrats’ narrative than the Nunes document. And the press generally prefers Democratic narratives to Republican ones because most journalists are liberals.
My guess is that some blend of all three factors helps explain why the Grassley/Graham memo has barely registered on the national radar, even after we’ve endured multiple high-octane news cycles starring Nunes and Schiff. But on the substance, does Strassel have a point, or is this just the latest shiny object the right-wing is waving around to distract from “the real story,” now that the Nunes memo was arguably a bit of a dud? Here’s her case: …
Readers of this blog already know the answer to this question. It’s all about social engineering. See below.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 200 million females alive today have been subjected to female genital mutilation (FGM). Aliens from the 30 countries where this practice is concentrated are immigrating to the United States, and a serious effort is not being made to prevent them from practicing FGM here.
UNICEF says that FGM is “concentrated in a swath of countries from the Atlantic Coast to the Horn of Africa…”
By stripping sex of physical pleasure, it is thought the female’s libido will be reduced, her virginity safeguarded, and her marital fidelity ensured. Similar practices have occurred in the United States too. American physicians treated females for masturbation by removing their clitoris from the mid-19th century through the mid-20th century.
The immediate effects of FGM may include blood loss, severe pain, and sometimes death. Long-term health problems may include urinary infections, infertility, painful menstruation, and painful sexual intercourse. Women who have had FGM are significantly more likely to experience difficulties during childbirth, and their babies are more likely to die.
Our debt-based currency has proven that all money is a total psyop anyway, but at this point a gold-based dollar may be the last politically attainable option to avoid catastrophe.
The recent hullabaloo among President Trump’s top monetary officials about the Administration’s “dollar policy” is just the start of what will likely be the first of many contradictory pronouncements and reversals which will take place in the coming months and years as the world’s reserve currency continues to be compromised. So far, the Greenback has had its worst start since 1987, the year of a major stock market reset….
Of course, the entire uproar about a strong dollar versus weak dollar is a sham. When the dollar (and for that matter all other national currencies) cannot be redeemed for either gold or silver, it is inherently “weak” and ultimately worthless.
That this obvious fact is not recognized by the Trump Administration, international monetary authorities, and the financial press demonstrates just how unstable the dollar and world currencies actually are.
The US dollar today and in 1987 – in both years the Federal Reserve had embarked on a rate hike campaign, a new and untested Fed chairman took the helm at the Fed, and the US dollar was very weak. As you can see it actually reached “oversold” levels in late January/early February in both years, and started to bounce from there in the short term (before resuming its slide in 1987 – we cannot be certain yet what will happen this time around, but the parallels are slightly worrisome). [PT]
How to Create a MAGA Dollar
If President Trump truly wants to see a strong dollar that will become a linchpin in “making America great again,” he should enact policies that will return the dollar to its original function – a warehouse receipt that can be redeemed for precious metals. Just as important, an authentic strong dollar policy would mean that no dollar can be created that did not have “an equal amount” of gold/silver in bank vaults – in essence a 100% gold dollar.
These two acts would guarantee a strong dollar and ensure that the dollar would remain the world’s reserve currency. Moreover, a fully redeemable dollar would likely lead to other nations adopting similar measures.
A gold-backed dollar would also head off China’s not too subtle attempt at replacement of the Greenback with the Yuan as the world’s reserve currency. Its “Belt & Road Initiative,” its massive accumulation of gold, and other actions are all aimed at making the Yuan the dominant world currency which, if successful, will have catastrophic financial repercussions for the US and Western Europe….
Gold-backed money will not only have positive international effects, but domestic benefits as well. Crippling price inflation that has been intentionally under reported by government statistics will be a thing of the past. Prices in a gold-backed currency will actually fall, raising living standards for everyone.
Without the ability of the Federal Reserve to create money out of thin air, the massive federal budget deficits would have to be dealt with. And without the Fed’s purchasing of US debt, the government would be forced to actually cut spending. Spending cuts would have to be deep and across the board.
Happily, under such a scenario, a reduction in spending would mean a pullback in the American Empire. The US would simply not have the resources to maintain bases abroad or involve itself in the countless conflicts and wars it is now engaged in. It is more likely that when the American Empire comes to an end, it will not be because of a military defeat, but because it can no longer be sustained financially.
Sadly, under current ideological conditions, a return to gold money is definitely not on the financial horizon. It will most likely take a collapse of the irredeemable paper monetary system before commodity money is re-established as a general medium of exchange.
The biggest problem I have with this is that elite criminals and organized crime groups have looted so much public gold (a total validation of gold’s monetary function in itself) that this move would solidify their stranglehold over the west. A currently unimaginable return to something resembling the rule of law would be required, with RICO-type dragnets and saudi arabian type “luxury imprisonment” becoming the necessary reality in europe and the USA. Gitmo could actually be used for something constructive, but without the torture of course. Depriving these deranged satanic pedophiles of their last psychological crutch would be torture enough.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Our mainstream source is included below. Here it is up front for the trolls who have sent us death threats and cannot scroll down 5 seconds until end of article. http://www.burnettcountysentinel.com/news/influenza-potentially-made-stronger-by-vaccines/article_4bd056da-0c21-11e8-b6ae-533d3d165845.html
The flu season has been in full swing for a few months. The seasonal disease has mutated over the years, and professionals say it has been made stronger as medicine continues to process vaccines.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) this season’s flu is widespread in 49 states, Wisconsin and Minnesota are covered in high levels of the flu.
“I believe that the low effective rate of the vaccine this year is due to the mutations that the virus made in the processing of the vaccine itself,” said Anna Treague, nurse for Public Health. “That is at LEAST part of the reason that influenza cases are so widespread this year.”
The flu or influenza is a seasonal contagious respiratory disease that is caused by influenza viruses. The CDC says the dominant strain this year is H3N2, which tends to be more severe and causes more severe symptoms than most other strains.
Treague said that symptoms include fever, chills, headache, dry cough and aching of muscles and joints. They usually appear 1 to 3 days after being infected with most people recovering within a week.
“The H3N2 strain also has proven to not be as impacted by the vaccines as other strains,” Treague said.
That being said, Treague still suggests everyone should get a flu shot. < (Really? You’ve got to be kidding us. The cognitive dissonance is disgusting).
“If you are able, get the flu shot,” Treague said. “Even if the flu vaccine isn’t as effective as it has been in year’s past it does help. Some protection is better than no protection.”
Oh and even if it potentially causing the epidemic too?…