The Great Ivermectin Deworming Hoax

By Justus R. Hope, MD, Sept 6, 2021 | Original article here.

“In a normal year, the Kentucky Poison Control Center might receive one call from someone who has taken ivermectin, a drug commonly used to treat parasites in livestock. But amid increasing misinformation about the drug’s ability to both treat and prevent COVID-19, that number has increased to six this year.”

This alarming news was published in Spectrum News – formerly known as Time Warner Cable – on August 24, 2021, and should be a lesson to every American.

https://spectrumnews1.com/ky/louisville/news/2021/08/24/ivermectin-calls-to-kentucky-poison-control-are-up

The lesson is not about Ivermectin being poisonous because it isn’t, but about the pervasiveness of a type of new internet propaganda termed “informational flooding.”

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/12274299/Roberts_gsas.harvard_0084L_11469.pdf?sequence=1

In an even more “alarming” report, NPR wrote,

“Minnesota’s Poison Control System is dealing with the same problem. According to the department, only one Ivermectin exposure case [telephone call] was reported in July, but in August, the figure jumped to nine.”

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/04/1034217306/ivermectin-overdose-exposure-cases-poison-control-centers

Are you kidding me? Nine telephone calls are enough to make the news?

We have 2,213 deaths on August 26 from COVID-19, but these nine telephone calls are enough to make the headlines?

We have a media blackout on how India used cheap Ivermectin to obliterate the Delta variant while we struggle unsuccessfully to sell the public on problematic yet profitable vaccines.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/indias-ivermectin-blackout

The CDC coordinates all 55 poison control centers across the nation, and they are closely aligned with the FDA, which we now know is captured by Big Pharma. more on this later.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537316/

Suddenly we see hundreds of articles on so-called “Ivermectin poisoning.” Indeed, we see more ARTICLES published than there were TELEPHONE CALLS in August on Ivermectin to poison control centers in the ENTIRE NATION.

NPR reports that during the period January 1 to August 31, there were 1,143 Ivermectin telephone calls to poison control centers which works out to 143 calls per month.

The Mississippi State Department of Health was careful to clarify that although telephone calls to poison control had increased, the vast majority of callers had only mild symptoms, and there were “no hospitalizations due to Ivermectin toxicity.”

https://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/resources/15400.pdf

If you are still left wondering whether there might have been a tiny grain of truth in these articles, consider what was reported in Utah. This alarmist article is entitled, “The Utah Poison Control Center has seen a bump in calls about Ivermectin – which is not recommended for treating COVID-19.”

However, inside the article, you will notice the false alarm. The Medical Director of Utah poison control is quoted as admitting that it was only “some small increase” in Ivermectin phone calls, and no one required hospitalization.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/08/30/utah-poison-control/

Yet for Utah alone, I counted at least twenty Ivermectin poison control articles, and for the nation, the count was well into the hundreds.

At least one publication made the leap from exaggeration to fabrication. Rolling Stone Magazine published an interview with an Oklahoma osteopathic physician, Dr. Jason McElyea, who claimed that Northeastern Hospital System’s emergency departments were overrun with so many Ivermectin overdoses that gunshot victims were having difficulty getting treatment. Dr. McElyea stated,

“The ERs are so backed up that gunshots victims were having a hard time getting to facilities where they can get definitive care and be treated.”

Multiple networks repeated the story, and it went viral.

https://kfor.com/news/local/patients-overdosing-on-ivermectin-backing-up-rural-oklahoma-hospitals-ambulances/

But the report turned out to be false.

Rolling Stone was forced to publish a retraction of sorts, a correction to their report, wherein they stated the truth of the matter was the opposite. Northeastern Hospital System Sequoyah informed them that Dr. Jason McElyea, although affiliated with them, had not worked in the Sallisaw location in the last two months.

Furthermore, in a statement issued September 5, 2021, Northeastern Hospital System Sequoyah reported that no patients had been treated for Ivermectin overdose. Indeed no patients were treated for any complications of taking Ivermectin – and no gunshot wound patients or otherwise had been turned away from seeking emergency care.

It was all untrue. We were all lied to.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rolling-stone-forced-issue-update-after-viral-hospital-ivermectin-story-false

However, you can do your own research. For example, google the news on Ivermectin poisoning articles, and you will find almost all of them were published within the last few weeks. Nothing before then.

https://trends.google.com/trends/

Then have a look at the graphs above. Notice the steady increase in google searches on Ivermectin over the past 90 days. Notice these searches originated in ALL 50 STATES. This chart reflects truth and accurately portrays the broad interest of the public.

Contrast this with the abrupt onset of interest in this so-called “Ivermectin poisoning.” Does it make sense that only two states have enough searches to register this supposed national problem? Again, this reflects manufactured publicity, a fabricated story. If there were a real problem, one would see corroborating search interest nationally, not only in two isolated spots.

For example, when a physician from Tamil Nadu accused Uttar Pradesh of faking their numbers for political reasons, Juan Chamie, the Cambridge-based data analyst, looked at geographically localized google searches. The interest in oxygen tanks precisely reflected the number of COVID cases the data indicated. Very few searched for oxygen tanks in Uttar Pradesh, where there were few infections. Yet, at the height of their surge, the interest in Tamil Nadu tanks was off the charts and proportional to their COVID hospitalizations. Confirmation.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/tamil-nadu-leads-india-in-new-infections-denies-citizens-ivermectin/article_32634012-ba66-11eb-9211-ab378d521f9a.html

Here we see the hundreds of articles on Ivermectin poisoning exceeding the relatively tiny number of telephone calls. Moreover, the searches confirmed this was not a genuine problem; it was due to the technique of informational flooding, well known to experts in the science of internet propaganda.

Informational flooding is where the purveyor of the propaganda attempts to out-compete other accessible information to gain the consumers’ attention. It is aptly described in this Harvard article entitled, “Fear, Friction, and Flooding: Methods of Online Information Control.”

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/12274299/Roberts_gsas.harvard_0084L_11469.pdf?sequence=1

NPR writes this, “Poison control centers are seeing a dramatic surge in calls from people who are self-medicating with ivermectin, an anti-parasite drug for animals…”

On the contrary, Ivermectin is used every day for scabies and is not confined to animals any more than penicillin is purely an animal antibiotic.

We are asked to believe that six telephone calls to poison control about Ivermectin are somehow newsworthy, yet over 100,000 calls to poison control on Tylenol each year are not. Moreover, no one dies of Ivermectin in a typical year, yet Tylenol accounts for 56,000 annual emergency room visits, 2,600 hospitalizations, and almost 500 deaths.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15239078/

The fact that Ivermectin is so much SAFER than over-the-counter Tylenol should make you wonder exactly why these articles made the news. The reason is simple. Pfizer and Merck are getting ready to launch expensive new anti-viral pills that can provide early outpatient treatment for COVID-19 and perhaps even be used preventatively. Yet Ivermectin remains effective, cheap, and safe and thus poses a HUGE threat to their profits.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/pfizer-starts-dosing-patients-oral-covid-19-drug-trial-2021-09-01/

What Profits?

Let’s say that if Ivermectin costs a few dollars a pill, these new medicines will be one hundred to one thousand times pricier. Merck’s Molnupiravir has already been funded to the tune of 1.2 billion by the US government – translated, it means we – our tax dollars – have paid Merck for it already.

https://www.merck.com/news/merck-announces-supply-agreement-with-u-s-government-for-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-candidate-for-treatment-of-mild-to-moderate-covid-19/

By ignoring cheap repurposed drug early outpatient treatments, we have already paid with our lives, in addition to whatever money it has cost us to entice Big Media to publish these hundreds of “hit pieces.”

We know early outpatient treatment works for COVID-19, just as early treatment works against cancer, diabetes, glaucoma, hepatitis, and most other diseases. Yet our FDA and NIH, in their infinite wisdom, have asked us to do nothing for early outpatient treatment against COVID-19. Instead, however, we have repurposed drugs that help enormously. This science was published in the peer-reviewed literature by Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist, and Dr. Harvey Risch, an editor for “The International Journal of Cancer.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32771461/

Merck, more than anyone, knows Ivermectin to be safe as they developed this drug and used it in over three billion doses IN HUMANS in the Mectizan Program to eradicate River Blindness.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/merck-sees-the-light—provides-ivermectin-for-humanity/article_df5674ee-d530-11eb-98a1-3fc9e8ddc005.html

Yet Merck was among the first to cast stones against it. Merck was among the most vocal to denounce their drug regardless of the blood that would inevitably land on their hands. Merck sold us out for precisely 1.2 billion pieces of silver.

What is the evidence that Ivermectin is effective in COVID-19, you might ask?

There is Plenty of Evidence

Let us begin with basic science. In the laboratory, after Ivermectin was given to a cell culture teeming with COVID-19 infection, it killed virtually all the virus within 48 hours. There was a 5000 fold reduction in viral load, which translates to a 99.98% pathogen eradication. However, when I wrote my book on cancer, I realized that many drugs that work in the lab may not always work in live patients.

https://www.amazon.com/Surviving-Cancer-COVID-19-Disease-Repurposed/dp/0998055425

So you want to ALSO review clinical studies in people. For example, Remdesivir, a favorite of Big Pharma, a failure against Hepatitis and the Respiratory Syncytial Virus, worked in a test tube against Ebola. Still, when they tested it in people, it was a dud – just as many died in the placebo group as the Remdesivir group – about 53%.

So they tested it against COVID-19. A small study with 541 patients getting Remdesivir versus 521 on placebo showed no statistical difference in death and a 24% rate of serious adverse events in Remdesivir; however, against all odds, the FDA approved the drug for emergency use against COVID-19.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2007764

To add insult to injury, the WHO later completed another study in which Remdesivir failed miserably and failed to reduce death in COVID. Dr. Ilan Schwartz made it clear, “This puts the issue to rest — there is certainly no mortality benefit (from Remdesivir).”

Yet, the FDA did not revoke their Emergency Use Authorization for some strange reason, and they have maintained Remdesivir as their “go-to” drug. You can bet the majority of our 648,000 Americans who died from COVID-19 first received a dose of Remdesivir – at an average of $3,100 a pop – because it was on the protocol. We cannot expect a small thing, like the drug doesn’t work, to subtract from our FDA’s absolute prerogative to decide what is best for us – and what drugs we should purchase with our hard-earned health care dollars.

The story on Ivermectin, thankfully, is quite the opposite of Remdesivir’s abject failure. Ivermectin has been a resounding success. It not only worked in the lab, it spectacularly reduced death in the living, and it worked early in the disease and late in the disease, often rescuing patients from ventilators and the jaws of death. It even performed before the infection began by effectively preventing it and nicely stopping viral transmission. And it was safe without serious adverse effects. In short, God Himself could not have given us a better tool to eradicate this disease.

We now have 63 studies — and counting — involving some 26,000 patients showing up to a 96% reduction in death associated with Ivermectin.

We have many peer-reviewed medical journal publications showing significant reductions in mortality associated with Ivermectin use. The meta-analyses are considered the highest form of medical evidence and even outweigh the randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Thus, the meta-analysis is regarded as the holy grail of medical research. We have two influential such publications authored by Drs. Tess Lawrie and Andrew Hill, British W.H.O. consultants. Both strongly show Ivermectin reduces death in COVID-19.

Dr. Pierre Kory also published a review:

Dr. Pierre Kory and his group, the FLCCC, have recently published another comprehensive review, which updates the Ivermectin data to current as of August 29, 2021. This incorporates all the relevant evidence and is best described as the “the totality of the evidence for Ivermectin in COVID-19.”

Dr. Peter McCullough published via preprint yet another review, and all of these strongly showed the drug to be safe and effective against COVID-19.

We have real-world experience from numerous countries, including Mexico, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and India that adopted Ivermectin and saw their COVID cases evaporate.

We saw the real-world experiences of Drs. George Fareed and Brian Tyson from California’s Imperial Valley in saving 99.9 % of their 6,000 patients using a cocktail that included Ivermectin.

Beyond all the scientific evidence, we have plain common sense. Ralph Lorigo is an attorney who has won numerous court orders for Ivermectin for dying COVID patients on ventilators. In nearly every case, after the Ivermectin, they rapidly improved. Most recovered and went home. Many were able to go off the ventilator within 24 hours of the Ivermectin dose.

If Ivermectin did not work, as our trusted agencies continue to advise us, why would this occur? Why would these patients so consistently respond to a drug they advise against? Are Lorigo’s cases just lucky, or might the obvious be true?

Always use common sense when the government tells you the science is “too complicated” for you to understand or that all their paid experts agree it doesn’t work. Perhaps the question you should ask is not whether Ivermectin works but how much they are paying their experts.

We have watched the movement on Ivermectin proceed with steadily increasing global attention on google searches – in sharp contrast to the concocted ad hoc PR campaign hastily crafted in August by Big Pharma on these laughable poison control stories.

When will the next expensive, toxic and ineffective drug be forced upon us? We should be on high alert that more propaganda is coming our way. If we haven’t seen enough horse and cow articles or enough “Public Service Messages” to get the vaccine, soon we may hear that some fancy new pill that claims to do what Ivermectin already does is finally “approved” by the FDA.

Soon we may be allowed to take a medicine that may work against COVID-19. But unless it contains Ivermectin in some form, don’t count on it being effective – or safe.

And don’t believe they will ever approve Ivermectin. Over the last two months, the large pharmacy chains have started to refuse to fill valid physician prescriptions. Although they continue dispensing it for scabies, many refuse to fill it for anything else. The drug is not dangerous as no one with scabies is calling the hotline.

It is more than 100 times safer than Tylenol, judging by telephone calls to poison control. And it is almost as cheap. And its effectiveness against COVID-19 is without parallel. For example, on August 30, 2021, in India in the State of Uttar Pradesh, there were only 23 new cases of COVID-19 out of a population of 240 million people. That is about one case per ten million.

On the same day, in the United States, we saw 280,403 cases or about one new case per thousand people. The difference between one per ten million and one per thousand is 10,000. Here in the United States, we are ten thousand times MORE LIKELY to get sick with the Delta variant. Uttar Pradesh WIDELY USES IVERMECTIN. The US does not.

The United States demonizes it in their media, pressures their pharmacists to NOT dispense it, and threatens doctors who do.

Regulatory Capture is the reason why, says Dr. Pierre Kory. See mark 14:35 and 16:00.

It boils down to plain old corruption. It is when the prison guard is paid to look the other way when someone is being knifed, or a drug deal is being made. It is when Big Tobacco sends a US Senator to the Cayman Islands to go snorkeling in exchange for voting against a law taxing cigarettes. It is when ten out of eleven physician panel members vote against approving a $56,000 a year questionably effective and toxic Alzheimer’s drug, yet the drug gets FDA approved anyway.

It is when a cheap repurposed drug that could end the pandemic – if widely used as prevention in all contacts – gets thrown under the bus to pave the way for Molnupiravir. It is when two Senate Hearings on early outpatient treatment are ignored to promote profit at the cost of 648 thousand American lives.

We may not be able to do much about poisonous informational flooding, but we can all recognize it when it occurs by the sheer number of copycat stories. We can usually see who or what is behind it and boycott those groups UNLESS it is our own government agency, in which case we need to vote for some different people who will reform it. Like Henry Waxman reformed Big Tobacco, someone needs to reform our agencies before we lose more American lives.

Until we end the Regulatory Capture of the US Food and Drug Administration and its Big Brother, Centers for Disease Control, we can continue to expect more of the same: expensive, dangerous, and marginally effective drug approvals. And a smokescreen on anything cheap that actually works.

Dr. Justus R. Hope, writer’s pseudonym, graduated summa cum laude from Wabash College where he was named a Lilly Scholar. He attended Baylor College of Medicine where he was awarded the M.D. degree. He completed a residency in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation at The University of California Irvine Medical Center. He is board-certified and has taught at The University of California Davis Medical Center in the departments of Family Practice and Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. He has practiced medicine for over 35 years and maintains a private practice in Northern California.

View CHD Webinar and Q&A re OTARD Lawsuit

By Children’s Health Defense (CHD), June 30, 2021 | Original The Defender article here.

Watch the webinar and Q & A session regarding the filing of CHD’s main brief in its case against the Federal Communications Commission’s amendment of the OTARD rule, allowing base station antennas, including 5G, on homes without notice to neighbors or any ability to object their installation. The rule preempts state and zoning laws as well as federal and state disability laws and unlawfully violates numerous constitutional rights. CHD’s case challenging the rule was filed on 2/26/21; the main brief in the case was filed on 6/23/21. In this webinar, attorneys Dafna Tachover, Director of CHD’s 5G & Wireless Harms Project, and Scott McCollough, a seasoned telecommunications and administrative law attorney and CHD’s lead attorney for this case, explain in layman’s terms what OTARD is and discuss the arguments they raised in the brief. They were also joined by attorney Petra Brokken to discuss the Amicus Brief she spearheaded that was filed on behalf of 68 organizations representing over 1,000,000 people. The Amicus Brief was filed on 6/30/21.

Learn what you can do to oppose OTARD in your community.

Personal Message

From Dafna Tachover, Esq:

The CHD Principal Brief Was Filed on Wed, June 23

We think we have a good case and are pleased with the brief we filed.

  • Read the here or here.
  • Read also a The Defender article which provides a good summary of the legal arguments we raised in our brief.

In addition to the brief, we filed 11 affidavits including 3 expert affidavits and an addendum which includes a collection of 246 personal comments filed with the FCC describing the suffering of adults and children from wireless and the negative effects the OTARD rule may cause. The addendum also includes a table that analyzes close to 500 comments filed with the FCC. We color code the issue raised, which shows that the FCC ignored the comments and the issues that were raised in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.

Amicus Brief for the OTARD Case Was Filed on Wed, June 30

On Wednesday, dozens of organizations in the US filed an Amicus Brief in the OTARD case. Petra Brokken, from Safe Tech Minnesota initiated and organized the brief. The attorney who filed the Amicus, Stephen Dias-Gavin, was one of the attorneys in the successful case against the FCC’s 5G “small cell” regulation for preempting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. #### Personal Note from Dafna Tachover

I am very grateful to W. Scott McCollough, Esq. for his brilliance, skills and effort. When I read the brief for the last time, I thought the brief was excellent and a job well done. I was glad that our hard word resulted in a brief we can all be very proud to file with the court. As an Electromagnetically Sensitive (EMS) person who is suffering from exposures to excessive RF Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) in our environment, I felt that the brief stated the case perfectly.

The FCC’s OTARD (Over-the-air reception device) amendment attempts to take all our rights to oppose this unnecessary rollout of the 4G/5G surveillance and crowd control grid. The OTARD case is the case that can achieve acknowledgement and substantive protection for EMS Americans. Now that the US government via the FCC and OTARD, made it clear that it is intending to sacrifice the sick on the altar of wireless, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals judges, will have to make a statement about our rights. This is the purpose of our brief. I concluded my affidavit to the court with Gandhi’s words: “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.”

Principal Brief Filed in Children’s Health Defense’s Cases Against FCC Rule Allowing Base Station Antennas on Homes

CHD Press Release

Children’s Health Defense, June 27, 2021

Washington, DC – Children’s Health Defense (CHD) filed its principal brief on Wednesday, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in its case against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The case challenges the agency’s amendment of its “Over-the-Air Reception Devices” (OTARD) Rule that went into effect on March 29, 2021. The case was filed on February 26, 2021.

CHD is opposing the amended rule, which allows fixed wireless companies to contract with private property owners, including homeowners, to place point-to-point antennas on their property and, for the first time, add carrier-grade base station antenna installations to extend wireless service, including 5G, to users over a wide area.

The rule preempted all state and local zoning laws. No application, permit or notice to neighboring properties is required. Homeowners’ associations and deed restrictions and any other state laws are preempted.

CHD argued that the FCC failed to provide significant and sufficient policy reasons to justify these sweeping preemptions and therefore violated the Administrative Procedures Act.

The organization claims that The FCC’s rule amendment is not authorized by the Communications Act, and conflicts with other laws and policies protecting public interest and property rights.

The rule amendment preemption of federal and state civil rights laws protecting the disabled was the focus of CHD’s brief.

According to experts’ declarations filed with the brief, many children and adults suffer from Microwave Radiation Sickness, or other conditions aggravated by wireless radiation exposure. The preemptions allow non-consensual radiation to be forced on those who can be severely harmed by it, constructively evicting them from their homes while removing their right for accommodation and all their due process rights.

CHD argued that the amended rule is inconsistent with policies underlying federal and state disabilities laws.

According to the brief, the amendment also violates vested constitutional personal rights and liberties secured by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments, and rights that have been recognized by the Supreme Court as fundamental, including rights to “life,” “property,” “liberty,” “bodily-integrity” and privacy-related rights.

CHD’s brief claims that the FCC treats those who are sick as a “barrier” for deployment and that the elimination of their due process rights by the FCC is “calculated and deliberate.”

The FCC’s Reply brief is due on 8/23/21.

Brief Filed Against FCC by Children’s Health Defense, Challenging 5G Installations

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) filed its main brief on June 23 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in its case against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The case challenges the agency’s amendment of its “Over-the-Air Reception Devices” (OTARD) Rule that went into effect on March 29, 2021.

The case was filed on February 26, 2021. CHD is opposing the amended rule, which allows fixed wireless companies to contract with private property owners, including homeowners, to place point-to-point antennas on their property and, for the first time, add carrier-grade base station antenna installations to extend wireless service, including 5G, to users over a wide area.

The rule preempted all state and local zoning laws. No application, permit or notice to neighboring properties is required. Homeowners’ associations and deed restrictions and any other state laws are preempted. CHD argued that the FCC failed to provide significant and sufficient policy reasons to justify these sweeping preemptions and therefore violated the Administrative Procedures Act. The organization claims that the FCC’s rule amendment is not authorized by the Communications Act, and conflicts with other laws and policies protecting public interest and property rights.

The rule amendment preemption of federal and state civil rights laws protecting the disabled was the focus of CHD’s brief.

According to experts’ declarations filed with the brief, many children and adults suffer from Microwave Radiation Sickness, or other conditions aggravated by wireless radiation exposure. The preemptions allow non-consensual radiation to be forced on those who can be severely harmed by it, constructively evicting them from their homes while removing their right for accommodation and all their due process rights.

CHD argued that the amended rule is inconsistent with policies underlying federal and state disabilities laws.

According to the brief, the amendment also violates vested constitutional personal rights and liberties secured by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments, and rights that have been recognized by the Supreme Court as fundamental, including rights to “life,” “property,” “liberty,” “bodily-integrity” and privacy-related rights.

CHD’s brief claims that the FCC treats those who are sick as a “barrier” for deployment and that the elimination of their due process rights by the FCC is “calculated and deliberate.”

The FCC’s Reply brief is due on Aug 23, 2021.

Dense 4G/5G Rollout in Tucson Meets Strong Opposition

Adapted from an article and news report by Chorus Nylander, June 14, 2021 | KVOA News 4 Tucson article here

TUCSON (KVOA) – It’s the highly anticipated future for mobile service but for many Tucsonans 5G is not a future they asked for. These days dense 4G/5G Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) are popping up just about everywhere, and many homeowners tell the News 4 Tucson Investigators that they are furious.

Tucson resident Bryan Goldkuhl said:

“They Hid It From Us Until the Last Minute.”

 

Goldkuhl is outraged after a 4G/5G WTF was put up across the street from his home:

“They started by jacking pipe underneath the street that was probably three months ago. When we asked them about it, they told us they were just putting in fiber optic cable then when we found out it was for a cell tower, now we’re being told it’s too late to do anything about it,”

He’s not alone, a group of neighbors from Tucson’s Peter Howell neighborhood held a protest a couple weeks ago against the installation of several towers in the area, one by a school.

“This is happening because Verizon and AT&T would like to implement what our future should look like nobody asked us if we wanted this,” said Lisa Smith.

The telecommunication companies, mainly Verizon and AT&T right now, are able to move with such haste and not be slowed by community opposition due to the City Council of Tucson not reading carefully enough a State law, House Bill 2365, that was passed in 2017. The bill allows the companies to install so-called “small” Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) within the rights-of-way without following normal permitting procedures. Arizona was the first state to pass such a law for the dense 4G/5G rollout.

Even though HB.2365 purports to limits local government’s ability to have a say where the towers go, the law does provide exceptions for the city to regulate the operations of WTFs of any size or any “G” to ensure that the City, as a joint venture partner in this roll out, delivers actual public safety to Tusconsans.

“§9-592 (K). An authority shall approve an application unless the authority finds that the utility pole fails to comply with any of the following . . . Local code provisions or regulations that concern any of the following: (a) public safety.”

Even Councilmember Steve Kozachik seems confused about how the Federal and State Telecom laws apply to the City of Tucson, seeming oblivious to the actual words of these important laws:

Tucson Councilmember Steve Kozachik:

“Based on work that the telecom industry has done lobbying congress at both the federal and state level, they have basically taken our voice out of where we can compel these things to go,” said Tucson Ward 6 councilmember Steve Kozachik.

Kozachik has been hosting discussions with representatives from the telecom companies, but has been unwilling to meet wit Tucson residents and discuss what these residents did: they beat the Tucson City Attorney to the punch by writing and submitting a protective Tucsonans’ Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance, over three months ago in early April.

Kozachik is only “urging” Telecom companies to focus on what’s called collocation, which is installing the overpowered 4G/5G equipment onto or next to existing infrastructure like power poles and street lights. Instead, Kozachik and the City Council members could be limiting the maximum power output from these WTFs to that which provides Telecommunications Signal Strengths sufficient for telecommunications service (-85 dBm to -125 dBm) — and no higher.

Professional measurements for a Verizon sWTF in Sacramento, CA provide evidence that a typical sWTF 60 feet from a second-story bedrooms is way overpowered: in the bedroom of the two little girls who sickened in a matter of weeks, Wireless Signal Strength that was 30 million times higher than -85 dBm).

Instead of taking matters into his own hands, Kozachik appealed to the Telecom Cos:

“Our constituents are your customers and you ought to care about that. The first question your site selector ought to ask is would I want that in front of my house if the answer is no then find another spot.”

Many of the knowledgeable Tucson homeowners said they have evidence that proves the siting WTFs of any size or any “G” next to home lowering their home values by 20-30% and ruins the quiet enjoyment of their streets and homes.

Dr. Russell Witte, a professor of Medical Imaging, Optical Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Applied Mathematics – GIDP, Neurosurgery and Neuroscience – GIDP, said “there are significant hazard and dangers to increasing the proliferation of microwaves in residential areas.”

Dr. Witte said he has reviewed thousands of studies on microwave radiation released from Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) and says there is established science that proves that current power output levels, which are far below federal guidelines cause adverse biological impacts, including direct neurological injury, cognitive deficits, early dementia, blood and cardiac abnormalities, irregular heartbeats and, eventually, cancer.

Dr. Russell Witte said:

“When you actually measure exposure in homes of people because of the close proximity of these small cells they are getting much more exposure from these cells sometimes 25-30 million times more than needed for telecommunications service. And this is for 24/7 exposure: people can’t escape it or turn it off,”
We reached out to AT&T and Verizon about 5G safety. In a statement to the N4T Investigators in February, Verizon called claims of the towers being unsafe “baseless conspiracy theories” and said, “all equipment used for 5G must comply with federal safety standards. Those standards it says have wide safety margins and are designed to protect everyone, including children.”

AT&T said in an email that questions of safety didn’t directly involve them and referred us to CTIA, a company that says it’s the voice of the telecommunication industry.

After our report Monday CTIA sent us the following statement:

“Radiofrequency energy from wireless devices and networks, including 5G, has not been shown to cause health problems, according to the consensus of the international scientific community, including expert organizations such as the FDA, WHO and American Cancer Society.”

Of course, that industry trade association statement is actually false. The statement means nothing because there are medical doctors making diagnoses in 2019-2021 using WHO medical codes: ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Codes W90.0: Exposure to other Nonionizing Radiation — Radio-frequency Radiation et seq. Actual medical evidence of injury, illness and death from exposure to electromagnetic power through-the-air at power levels that are hundreds of thousands of times lower than the Federal Guidelines trumps any self-serving Wireless industry statements.

Dr. Witte said that the general public should be shown the are many peer-reviewed studies on the subject and able to make up their own minds without being labeled a conspiracy theorist to question the installation of a dense 4G/5G WTF grid in their neighborhood. He believes Wired Broadband via fiber optic cables installed directly to homes and business is far superior to Wireless broadband on nearly every measure. FTTP (Fiber to the Premises) broadband (unlike Wireless broadband) is faster, more reliable, more secure, lower cost to install, has much higher data caps (if any, at all) and does not cause adverse biological effects. In, short, FTTP is the answer because FTTP also means Freeedom to the People of Tucson.

Steve Kozachik, who is up for re-election in November, said he expects thousands of 5G towers to be installed in Tucson within a matter of months. The residents of Tucson say otherwise. It looks like a real showdown in Tucson.

If you have a story you’d like us to investigate email us at investigators@kvoa.com or call our tip line at 520-955-4444.

IARC on RF: What’s Next?

Adapted from an article by Louis Slesin, PhD, June 11, 2021 | Original Microwave News article here.

In 2019, an IARC advisory group recommended — as a “high priority” — that the agency reassess the risk after the release of the NTP and Ramazzini animal studies, both of which showed increases in tumor counts following long-term RF exposure.1 The advisory group recommended that the reevaluation be completed between 2022 and 2024.

Briefing at the European Parliament

On May 30, just three days after colloquium of the German Federal Office of Radiation Protection (known as the BfS), the European Parliament held a briefing on 5G radiation and health at which Michèle Rivasi, a member from France, called for action. “It is time for IARC to reevaluate the impact of RF radiation on health,” she said.

Fiorella Belpoggi, the lead author of the Ramazzini RF–animal study, was the first speaker at the briefing. She has urged IARC to do a fresh cancer assessment ever since her findings were released in 2018.

Continue reading “IARC on RF: What’s Next?”

A Much Bigger, Dumber Plan

by Karl Bode; Dec 20 2017; Original article here.

The attack on Net Neutrality is just one small part of a much bigger, dumber plan: the end goal is blind deregulation of federal and state oversight of big telecom.

Internet users have been justly outraged by the FCC’s decision to ignore the public and repeal net neutrality rules. But few media outlets or internet users seem to understand that the net neutrality repeal is just one small part of a massive, larger plan to eliminate nearly all meaningful federal and state oversight of some of the least-liked and least-competitive companies in America.

To be clear: the net neutrality repeal itself is awful policy that ignores both the will of the public and the people who built the damn internet. It eliminates a wide variety of consumer protections that prevent incumbent ISPs from abusing a lack of competition in the broadband market.

Continue reading “A Much Bigger, Dumber Plan”

Napa Clears Verizon to Top Traffic and Light Poles With Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Transmitters

HOWARD YUNE | hyune@napanews.com Dec 20, 2017; Original article here.

Across Napa, city-owned light poles and traffic signal poles will start taking on a new look – courtesy of an agreement between the city of Napa and Verizon Wireless.

Micowave Radiation transmitters will start appearing on utility poles owned by the city, under a rollout meant to improve cellphone and Wireless Internet reception while creating a backbone for synchronized stoplights and, Napa hopes, less congestion on the streets below. The City Council signed off on the plan Tuesday afternoon, nearly a year after expressing support for improved cellular coverage instead of a never-built implementations of citywide Wi-Fi service.

Continue reading “Napa Clears Verizon to Top Traffic and Light Poles With Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Transmitters”

New Set of Palo Alto Cell Towers Proposed for Residential Zones

Oppose This Unconstitutional Expansion of
Wireless into Residential Zones

Watch highly-educated, well-informed Palo Alto residents who oppose
so-called “Small Cell” cell towers in residential neighborhoods
(View from 1:03:53 to 1:10:25 in this video)


On 6/27/16, Verizon Wireless signed a Master License Agreement (“MLA”) with the City of Palo Alto allowing the attachment of antennas and other equipment (so-called “Small Cell” Cell Towers) on city owned poles in the public Right-of-Way for a paltry $260 per antenna per year.

  • Ninety-three (93) such wireless communication facility (“WCF”) installations are currently planned to be co-located on wood utility poles and metal streetlights. – Approximately seventy-nine (79) of these small cells are proposed to be colocated on existing wood utility poles;
  • Fourteen (14) small cells are proposed to be installed on existing city streetlights.
  • The fifteen (15) cell towers shown in the image target the Midtown, Palo Verde, St. Claire Gardens, and South of Midtown neighborhoods.
  • These proposed so-called “Small Cell” Cell Towers are purported to provide the City of Palo Alto with better Verizon network capacity and coverage, but are they really needed? Palo Alto already has full Verizon coverage and Verizon has not proven that there is a significant gap in coverage in these targeted neighborhoods.

Is This Wireless Expansion Needed or Even Legal?

Comcast and AT&T Funded Millions of Fake Net Neutrality Comments

“Illegal schemes are unacceptable,” says New York Attorney General Letitia James

By Cortney O’Brien, May 7, 2021 | Original Fox New article here.

Jen Psaki admitting that Biden taking impromptu questions from reporters is not something the White House recommends and more round out today’s top media headlines.

The Office of New York Attorney General Letitia James has revealed in a new report that nearly 18 million of the more than 22 million comments the FCC received during its 2017 rulemaking were fake, intended to support the repeal of net neutrality, the idea that internet service providers (ISPs) should provide all online content equally and prevent them from favoring their own services or customers over their competitors.

A $4.2 million effort funded by Broadband for America, which includes major internet providers like AT&T, Comcast and Charter, reportedly accounted for more than 8.5 million of the fake FCC comments. Millions more were submitted by a teenage college student in California.
Continue reading “Comcast and AT&T Funded Millions of Fake Net Neutrality Comments”

The Hippocratic Oath is Being CANCELLED

By Tore Maras , Apr 12, 2021 | Original post here

img

There have been many reports lately that Doctors and Medical Institutions are electing to REFUSE treatment. They refuse treatment because they feel they do not have to respect the will of the patient. Lately, a barrage of grievances and complaints are coming from citizens. The content is consistent in how their doctors do not care for their personal beliefs or care for their religious beliefs and say, “I do not have to treat you.”

It’s happening all over the world. The MSM has elevated doctors and nurses to a status of “GODS” and has called them heroes, yet these heroes have elevated themselves to DEMAGOGUES.

img

We must revisit the ORIGINAL Hippocratic Oath and the REVISED version – both of which infer to DO NO HARM.

ORIGINAL HIPPOCRATIC OATH

I swear by Apollo Healer, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture.

To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the Healer’s oath, but to nobody else.

I will use those dietary regimens which will benefit my patients according to my greatest ability and judgment, and I will do no harm or injustice to them. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even, verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.

Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, and I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm, especially from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets.

Now if I carry out this oath, and break it not, may I gain for ever reputation among all men for my life and for my art; but if I break it and forswear myself, may the opposite befall me.

Translation by WHS

Med Students Craft Hippocratic Oath Addressing Racial Injustice : Shots

Med Students Craft Hippocratic Oath Addressing Racial Injustice : Shots

REVISED HIPPOCRATIC OATH

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon’s knife or the chemist’s drug.

I will not be ashamed to say “I know not”, nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient’s recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person’s family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

The Hippocratic Oath Today

Incredibly, from ancient times privacy and respect were key components as physicians have the power to heal and to destroy a person. It seems that physicians are now considering CHOICES on who gets treatment and who doesn’t. This was observed in NAZI Germany and Soviet Russia, where Jews, or NON-COMPLIANT citizens, were left to die. What has happened to our medical professionals?

MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS

img

Doctors are now FORCED to vaccinate, or they lose their insurance coverages. Hospitals FORCE Doctors to give medicine and or treatments that are not always in the best interest of a patient. Doctors no longer CARE for the patient’s wishes but what their INSTITUTIONS or other influencing operators tell them.

img

Last week, St. Vincent’s government told the island residents that they would NOT be EVACUATED if they were not vaccinated. In other words: Get Vaccinate or Burn.

RELATED ARTICLE: St. Vincent’s Island | OBEY OR BURN

People cannot TRUST their medical professionals. The medical professionals have now decided that they are ABOVE any archaic oath because they get to decide what human life is worth fussing over and which is not.

In essence, if you do not OBEY, you will not receive treatment. How is this even happening in our great nation of the United States of America? We have doctors refusing treatment, clinics refusing access for health based on immune status (non-COVID vaccinated people NOT ALLOWED), and simply because they said so.

WHERE IS THE SCIENCE?

Vaccines use LIVE (barely) specimens of viruses to innoculate patients. How come there is no LIVE VIRUS sample of COVID? No laboratory has received ANY virus specimen, yet the “cure” is making humans PRODUCE the virus? It’s 2021, and the information we have access to is at our fingertips. How can they obfuscate facts and try to convince people to overlook facts? Medical Doctors and Nurses have been educated in FACTS. Why are they ignoring facts for social justice and groupthink at the expense of patients?

The worse thing about this is that people are dependent on doctors for health conditions to be monitored, and these actions and behaviors are abused with the power vested in them. OBEY or DIE.

It is dangerous when PEOPLE fear their DOCTORS. It’s dangerous when the fourth unelected branch – THE CORPORATIONS – OWN your doctors. Patients are money for doctors – therefore, your disobedience is a cost to them.

img

“You always thought you are a consumer for the corporations. It turns out you are the one being consumed by the corporations.” #LETTHATSINKIN

How is any of this OK? Cancel culture, obey or die, and refusing to treat patients are all crimes against humanity and reminiscent of what Adolf Hitler did. History is indeed repeating itself, and the new “nazis” can’t even see the crimes they are committing in the name of virtue signaling and “science.”

Hippocrates is rolling over in his grave.

To All Doctors and Nurses :

REMEMBER YOUR OATH