Are 5G-Enabled “Smart Ambulance” Tests Contributing to Multiple Deaths of UK Ambulance Workers?

Providing new technologies to frontline staff to create a facility for patients to be diagnosed and triaged in an immediate and appropriate medical setting, this type of 5G connectivity will enable paramedics to perform remote diagnostics, supported by clinicians based in the hospital. Sounds great, but there are dire health consequences for both patient and paramedic in this microwave box on wheels. And are we already seeing this play out?

In September 2019, O2, a leading telecommunications services provider in the United Kingdom, announced it will be providing connectivity for a new “Smart Ambulance” at Millbrook Proving Ground, a vehicle testing facility in Bedford. The purpose of the trial is to enable O2 to develop and test the system “before it is deployed on the public network, replicating real world 5G capabilities.” According to the press release on O2’s website,

“The project will involve equipping a standard ambulance with state-of-the-art devices and connectivity to create a ‘Smart Ambulance’ that will simulate 5G connectivity, transforming the vehicle into a unique remote consultation room.”

What could possibly go wrong?

In a concerning series of events, news reports out of England have revealed that three employees at the East of England Ambulance Service Trust (EEAST) died suddenly last month. An article in the Welwyn Hatfield Times reports that the EEAST employees included: Christopher Gill, 41, who died at Welwyn Garden City’s Birch Court in Howlands on November 15; and another paramedic from Luton, Richard Grimes, and 999 operator Luke Wright, 24, from Norwich also died between November 11 and 21.

The Mirror reports that “Shortly before their deaths a whistleblower wrote to the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust’s boss complaining about psychological abuse. Former health minister and local Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb, who also received the letter, is calling for an independent investigation into the deaths…”


Japan Leads the Way in Child Health: No Compulsory Vaccines. Banned MMR Vaccine

In the United States, many legislators and public health officials are busy trying to make vaccines de facto compulsory—either by removing parental/personal choice given by existing vaccine exemptions or by imposing undue quarantines and fines on those who do not comply with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) vaccine edicts. Officials in California are seeking to override medical opinion about fitness for vaccination, while those in New York are mandating the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine for 6-12-month-old infants for whom its safety and effectiveness “have not been established.”

The U.S. has the very highest infant mortality rate of all industrialized developed countries, with more American children dying at birth and in their first year than in any other comparable nation—and more than half of those who survive develop at least one chronic illness.

American children would be better served if these officials—before imposing questionable and draconian measures—studied child health outcomes in Japan. With a population of 127 million, Japan has the healthiest children and the very highest “healthy life expectancy” in the world—and the least vaccinated children of any developed country. The U.S., in contrast, has the developed world’s most aggressive vaccination schedule in number and timing, starting at pregnancy, at birth and in the first two years of life. Does this make U.S. children healthier? The clear answer is no. The U.S. has the very highest infant mortality rate of all industrialized countries, with more American children dying at birth and in their first year than in any other comparable nation—and more than half of those who survive develop at least one chronic illness. Analysis of real-world infant mortality and health results shows that U.S. vaccine policy does not add up to a win for American children.

Japan and the U.S.; Two Different Vaccine Policies

In 1994, Japan transitioned away from mandated vaccination in public health centers to voluntary vaccination in doctors’ offices, guided by “the concept that it is better that vaccinations are performed by children’s family doctors who are familiar with their health conditions.” The country created two categories of non-compulsory vaccines: “routine” vaccines that the government covers and “strongly recommends” but does not mandate, and additional “voluntary” vaccines, generally paid for out-of-pocket. Unlike in the U.S., Japan has no vaccine requirements for children entering preschool or elementary school.

Japan also banned the MMR vaccine in the same time frame, due to thousands of serious injuries over a four-year period—producing an injury rate of one in 900 children that was “over 2,000 times higher than the expected rate.” It initially offered separate measles and rubella vaccines following its abandonment of the MMR vaccine; Japan now recommends a combined measles-rubella (MR) vaccine for routine use but still shuns the MMR. The mumps vaccine is in the “voluntary” category.

Here are key differences between the Japanese and U.S. vaccine programs:

  • Japan has no vaccine mandates, instead recommending vaccines that (as discussed above) are either “routine” (covered by insurance) or “voluntary” (self-pay).
  • Japan does not vaccinate newborns with the hepatitis B (HepB) vaccine, unless the mother is hepatitis B positive.
  • Japan does not vaccinate pregnant mothers with the tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine.
  • Japan does not give flu shots to pregnant mothers or to six-month-old infants.
  • Japan does not give the MMR vaccine, instead recommending an MR vaccine.
  • Japan does not require the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine.

In contrast, the U.S. vaccine schedule (see Table 1) prescribes routine vaccination during pregnancy, calls for the first HepB vaccine dose within 24 hours of birth—even though 99.9% of pregnant women, upon testing, are hepatitis B negative, and follows up with 20 to 22 vaccine doses in the first year alone. No other developed country administers as many vaccine doses in the first two years of life….

Success: 50% more U.S. infants die on the first day than all other industrialized countries combined

Corbett: Who’s Afraid of Decentralized Currency?

I’ve noticed an interesting phenomenon in my 12 years of watching the news headlines for a living: Stories often pop up in mirror image pairs.

Take these two recent stories, for example.

One from the Department of (in)Justice: “Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Arrest Of United States Citizen For Assisting North Korea In Evading Sanctions.”

And the other courtesy of the Pentagon . . . uhhh, I mean, the MIT Technology Review: “China may be just about to launch its digital currency in two cities.”

Just glancing at the headlines, it would seem that these are two completely unrelated stories. But once we look at the details, we will see how these two tales represent a fork in the path. Down one path we can see the promise of currency decentralization and the real threat that it poses to the existing establishment. Down the other path lies a future in which all transactions are centralized once and for all, a nightmare of constant and total surveillance from which there will be no escape.

Once we recognize this fork in the road for what it is, we can make an informed decision about which path we wish to follow. But we don’t have long before this window of opportunity closes and the elitists choose our path for us.

The problem, as usual, is that most people are unaware we are even at this fork in the path, let alone that we have a decision to make. So let’s examine these stories and see what they tell us about where humanity is heading in the next decade.

The press release from the DOJ tells the tale of Virgil Griffith, dastardly cryptocurrency enthusiast turned sanction-evading felon. As U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman helpfully explains: “As alleged, Virgil Griffith provided highly technical information to North Korea, knowing that this information could be used to help North Korea launder money and evade sanctions. In allegedly doing so, Griffith jeopardized the sanctions that both Congress and the president have enacted to place maximum pressure on North Korea’s dangerous regime.”

So what “highly technical information” did he supply the North Korean bogeymen with, precisely? Nothing less than information on “how to use blockchain technology to evade sanctions.”

Heavens to murgatroid! Shut the barn door! Won’t someone think of the children? (etc.) Clearly this man needs to be shut in a prison for the rest of his natural life. Or at least the next 20 years, which is the maximum penalty for his egregious offense.

But what was his offense, exactly? Surely they’re not locking a man up for attending a technology conference, are they?

Of course they are!

But they don’t really have the authority to do that, do they?

Well, not really, but assuming you believe in The Most Dangerous Superstition, this is all perfectly legitimate. You see, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act holds that “United States Persons are prohibited from exporting any goods, services, or technology to the DPRK without a license from Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control.” And, needless to say, Virgil Griffith did not have a license to attend that conference.

In fact, if Griffith can be faulted for anything, it’s that he not only made no effort whatsoever to hide his travel plans (even tweeting out a photograph of his DPRK visa), but actually asked the government for permission to go to North Korea, talked with the FBI after his trip, and even allowed them to inspect his cell phone. And his reward for all of this enthusiastic cooperation is a pit stop in prison on the way to a trial that could see him facing 20 years behind bars.

And all of this because an Ethereum developer attended a conference called “The Pyongyang Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Conference” to talk about cryptocurrency. Strange, huh?

Now let’s contrast this with that other article we highlighted above, the one from MIT. This article tells the story of China’s “digital currency electronic payment” system (DCEP), which promises to be the world’s first digitized domestic currency. According to a report cited by MIT, the system could be operational by the end of the year and may be rolled out as a small-scale experiment in Shenzen before being introduced more broadly across the country next year.

Details of what the DCEP will entail or how it will actually function, however, are sketchy at best. But don’t worry, everyone. The Chinese government wants everyone to know that DCEP will come with “controllable anonymity.” In case you’re wondering what that means . . . well, keep wondering. But it probably doesn’t mean actual anonymity.

As the deputy director of the central bank’s payments department recently explained: “As long as you aren’t committing any crimes and you want to make purchases that you don’t want others to know about, we still want to protect this kind of privacy.”

Oh, great. So Big Brother will be looking over your shoulder at each and every one of your transactions to make sure you’re not doing anything against the ChiComs’ dictates, but don’t worry, they totally won’t tell your kids what you bought them for Christmas.

That the world’s first domestic digital currency would be used as a way to track each and every transaction of each and every citizens of that country is hardly surprising. In fact, as I’ve talked about many times before, the cashless society is the ultimate dream of the technocrats. This is why China is rushing headlong to implement it in their country first. It’s why arch-bankster Mark Carney has taken to going around urging that a “Libra-like” currency replace the dollar as the world reserve currency. It’s why the BIS and all their globalist bankster cronies have been showing such interest in digital national currencies in recent years.

Now, some in the crowd may be asking why Uncle Sam is busy cracking down on cryptocurrency advocates at the same time that the globalists are pimping digital currencies. And that, my friend, is because The Bitcoin Psyop is complete. People who can’t even set the time on their VCR (am I dating myself?) are unable to distinguish between permissionless, open, distributed cryptocurrencies and permissioned, closed, centralized digital currencies.

If you’re confused about the difference, don’t worry; the BIS has a handy-dandy guide to all of this that definitely won’t bore you to tears.

Now, let’s be clear: It is not Ethereum that the powers that shouldn’t be are worried about. Nor is it Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash or Dash or any of the other blockchain-based cryptocurrencies that are currently available. None of them have yet delivered on the promise of an actually decentralized, truly anonymous, totally uncensorable currency for the masses.

No, it is not one or the other of these particular cryptocurrencies that is threatening to the establishment. It isn’t even the idea of cryptocurrency that’s the threat. It’s the idea that the public might actually one day contemplate the nature of the central bank-dominated fiat funny money system we currently live in and wonder if there are alternatives to it. That they might be tempted to start thinking about alternative currencies and complementary currencies and community currencies and cryptocurrencies and all the other ways that people can start to wean themselves off the bankster system. …

Trump Impeachment… Slapstick Diversion From Reality

… With faux solemnity, Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi said the impeachment vote was a “sad and tragic day” for US democracy. Then she had to quickly check Democrats from bursting into cheers and applause when the impeachment vote was announced. So much for a “sad day”! The Democrats were elated that their three-year plan to oust Trump was at last happening – albeit for a short-lived period until the Senate takes up the matter.

What was truly sad, however, is how the impeachment fiasco dominated other news, thereby drawing the curtain on several far more significant events.

On the same day as the House brouhaha, over in the Senate Inspector General Michael Horowitz was continuing to give withering testimony from his report into FBI wiretapping of the Trump election campaign back in 2016. The misconduct by the FBI in carrying out surveillance on private American citizens is a shocking abuse of power by the intelligence agency. All the implications suggest that the Obama administration engaged with secret services to sabotage the election campaign of Donald Trump in 2016 with phony allegations about Russia collusion. The constitutional violations by the FBI are colossal.

Knowing the murky past of the FBI and its dirty tricks, we shouldn’t be surprised by Horowitz’s findings. A follow-up report by attorney John Durham promises to be even more damning. But what is so astounding is how the US media, by and large, had their focus on the impeachment debacle instead of this far bigger show of grave importance. Perhaps not really astounding given that major media outlets like CNN, New York Times, MSNBC and Washington Post have invested so much capital in whipping up the Russia claims. Their ignoring the FBI misconduct is vital for self-preservation by avoiding accountability for their “Russia collusion” fantasies.

Another blockbuster story roundly ignored was the unfolding scandal at the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The number of whistleblowers from the UN body has grown to 20, according to Wikileaks. They allege that an OPCW report published in 2018 into a purported chemical weapon incident in Syria was “doctored” to wrongly incriminate the Assad government for carrying out an attack on civilians. As a result of the incident on April 7, 2018, the United States, Britain and France days later launched over 100 air strikes against Syria in apparent revenge. President Trump labeled Assad “an animal”. According to the whistleblowers, the OPCW report later in 2018 was deliberately suppressed by senior officials in the organization’s headquarters in The Hague under pressure from the American government. The implication is that the US, British and French air strikes against Syria were naked aggression based on false information. Indeed, the incident on April 7 has the hallmarks of a false-flag operation carried out by Western-backed anti-government militants.

Despite the urgent public interest of this scandal, the Western corporate media have largely ignored the matter, apart from notable exceptions, such as Tucker Carlson at Fox and Peter Hitchens in Britain’s Mail newspaper.

Surely on any objective scale, the OPCW scandal is worth far more media attention than the turgid proceedings in the House. But then again invoking objectivity is a naive request when the polarized politics in the US have become so hyper-subjective.

Other important stories that got sidelined this week was the appeal by 100 Australian doctors demanding the release of Julian Assange from prison in Britain. They reiterated similar concerns expressed by Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur, warning that Assange could die in prison if he is not given immediate medical care. The Wikileaks founder is awaiting extradition to the US where he faces 175 years in jail for “espionage”. As the leaks this week from Wikileaks regarding corruption at the OPCW demonstrate the real “offense” committed by Assange is his exposure of war crimes by the US and its Western allies. He is being tortured for telling the truth by Western governments that claim to be bastions of democracy and law. Why aren’t Western media covering this bombshell?

Still another huge story to be buried this week under the avalanche of impeachment popcorn was the report that over 90 US companies on the Fortune 500 list paid zero tax in the year 2018, despite having made combined profits of $100 billion. The companies include Amazon, Bank of American, Chevron, General Motors, Goodyear, Honeywell, JP Morgan Chase, Starbucks, and Verizon, to mention only a few. These companies were able to reduce their federal tax bill to zero because of corporate tax breaks and accounting loopholes introduced by President Trump in 2017.

If the Democrat party was a genuine political opposition to Trump then it should be taking up issues that really matter to ordinary citizens. Issues like abuse of power by unelected state agencies that spy illegally on civilians. But the Democrats this month voted for the latest edition of the Patriot Act extending such powers. They also voted for a record $738 billion spend on the US military, instead of deploying some of that for public good in healthcare and education.

If the Democrat party was a genuine political opposition, then it would be highlighting the crimes of illegal wars the US carries out on foreign countries with impunity. It would be defending the rights of whistleblowers like Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden who have exposed systematic state crimes.

If the Democrat party was a genuine political opposition, it would be campaigning for US corporations to pay their fair share of taxes so that working families can benefit from a decent society. They would be going after Trump for aiding and abetting the corporate kleptocracy that America has become.

But they don’t. Because the Democrats – most of them anyway – are part of the same bipartisan corporate feeding trough and war machine that is Washington….

Researchers Call to End Financial Conflicts in Medicine

A group of researchers called for an end to monetary entanglements between medicine and industry, outlining several “pathways” to achieving financial independence in a paper in The BMJ that coincides with this year’s Preventing Overdiagnosis conference in Sydney, Australia.

Those pathways include using only practice guidelines written by groups with no financial ties to industry; ending reliance on industry funding for physician education and medical journals; and governments requiring independent evidence for healthcare decision-making.

“There is massive unease within the medical profession about the unhealthy closeness and much desire to clean things up,” Ray Moynihan, PhD, of Bond University in Australia, lead author on the paper and co-founder of the Preventing Overdiagnosis conference, told MedPage Today. “The current system is already changing. Doctor organizations in many places are moving away from relying on industry-funded information, education, and marketing, and more independent evaluation of new treatments is on the agenda.”…

The most toxic and tenacious conflicts of interest are endemic to medicine itself in those cases where bogus and harmful treatments have already been adopted as SOP.  (circumcision, obstetrical abuse, toxic and contaminated vaccines, shock treatment, lying about “chemical imbalances” etc).   There’s a great deal of reluctance to admit error due to legal liability as well as loss of income as people seek alternatives.   And so harmful treatments will continue.