Ralph, if you don't want to trust a toxicologist and immunologist who is known for his honesty and competence, please google the toxicological evaluation of animal testing. I'm sure you'll find more confirming answers.
When you take on board that this is a massive, intricate and thoroughly thought out plan to eradicate most of humanity, it makes sense. Very clever, promoting something as an alternative/preventative treatment for a virus that doesn't even exist, but will actually reduce fertility in futherance of the eugenics agenda. I've also chucked out all supplements after reading about how toxic vitamin supplements are on Agent's
substack. It's galling how the perpetrators pretend to care for our well being when instead they utilise every avenue they can to poison and sicken us.
I really appreciate your words of support for the most censored man in the world, Dr. Mike Yeadon, and your foresight. Thank you very much for that. Namasté,
I totally agree. They are doing their best to silence the truth and those that speak the truth. But they can't stop it spreading. Mike is on the right side.
Ralph, you haven't read the numerous studies linked in the article by Tim Truth suggested here. Whether these studies are reliable or not is not the subject of my current consideration. However, they are evidence. Without mentioning any arguments to the contrary, the short statement seems "Risible nonsense" almost like a targeted, malicious attack and cheap propaganda. This is not at all atypical: Dr. Mike Yeadon's statements can always be proven, but his opponents usually only come up with such meaningless statements because they cannot really refute his statements with appropriate arguments. If, in rare cases, any evidence to the contrary does emerge, then it is often very thin.
For me personally, the topic of fertility comes third. Much more important to me is the recommendation of Ivermectin for a non-existent disease ( in case of the wrong “Covid” diagnosis ). This is exactly what the "Covid" cartel is doing and those who often want to call themselves "resistance heroes" and who obviously use effective propaganda to promote this personal image.
The recommendation of medication against a non-existent disease I call TONED syndrome, because I find this completely abnormal and extremely harmful to honest enlightenment work. That is why it is the most important thing for me. The second most important issue that concerns me a lot is the following question:
Why does the Covid cartel always avoid this point of criticism instead of taking a stand on it? You also leave the topic unmentioned. Doesn't it bother you at all that the "Covid" cartel is spreading "Covid" and "pandemic" propaganda by recommending Ivermectin against "Covid"?
“Animal studies are completely irrelevant to humans”.
I’m a toxicologist among other things, having trained a long time ago.
There are certainly important differences between species, such as any given animal & humans. That’s correct.
However, there are more similarities than differences. Our fundamental biochemistry is all but identical in the majority of cases.
Here’s a rule of thumb which has been successfully applied for many decades.
If a chemical harms more than one species in the same way, it almost always also harms humans in the same manner.
If I’d seen published articles only about mice and lots of negative results in other species, I’d have probably ignored it.
But there are anti-fertility effects in mice, rats, rabbits (or sheep iirc) and humans (sperm study).
These occur at higher blood levels than are reached after the lower end of recommended doses “for the early treatment of covid19”, a novel illness which does not exist.
However, people are also encouraged to take one or more claimed “health supplements”, for which evidence of efficacy is usually lacking.
A disproportionate number of these supplements are cleared from the body by pgp, the very same elimination pathway used by our bodies ti clear ivermectin.
The effect of combined consumption is unquestionably to INCREASE the drug levels of ivermectin.
NO ONE has studied & quantified this drug/drug interaction.
Therefore, no one can dismiss the potential for harm on reproduction.
I do not have to prove that there is actually a problem.
Those recommending it’s unnecessary consumption in “covid19” must prove that there IS NOT a problem.
This isn’t even about the safety profile of a particular product. I’d be almost as concerned about its promotion for non existent illness, even if it was a tiny, sugar pill.
The reason is that I wasn’t wrong the first time. It’s widespread use, up 800% globally, is being used subliminally to reinforce the scary virus lie, the pandemic lie, indirectly the gain of function lie and more.
That’s extremely useful to the perpetrators of these lies, don’t you agree?
Is it possible that both the "no virus theory" and the radical new position on Ivermectin, have been introduced to Dr Yeadon by "bad actors" who are intent on creating division, wasting our energy and distracting our focus from the important issue of the Globalists' agenda ?
Are we seeing "Bad Actors" influencing Mike Dr Yeadon ?
For approximately the last 12 months, since Dr Yeadon left the Monotti Telegram Channel, ( apparently due to a weariness of listening to Monotti's endless carping about Israel ), we have had to endure listening to the messages of Dr Yeadon through the filter of the owner of the so called "solo channel".
Let us be clear, Dr Yeadon does not own the "solo" channel. The channel is owned by the supposed admin of the "solo" channel. This admin had exercised absolute control of opinions and comments, to such an extent , that it is impossible to have any kind of rational debate with Dr Yeadon.
This has resulted in Dr Yeadon's opinions being relegated to the fringes and dismissed by many, who would otherwise have been willing to listen to, and to consider, what he was saying.
Dr Yeadon's decision to saddle up with his so called admin, who appears to be more of a handler, appears to have reduced Dr Yeadon's influence and reach.
Ben, I am also a "bad actor" because I start from the same evidence base as Dr Yeadon and then act accordingly. I have invested quite a lot of time in knowing that all of Dr Yeadon's narratives are true and useful. The "no virus" narrative, in my opinion, causes a certain amount of excitement, perhaps even a division, but that is how it has always been with the truth. Anyone with a little patience will be able to convince themselves in the future that it pays off in the long run. In Germany, where I live, this narrative seems to be described with goodwill in the alternative media and is sometimes met with a kind of reserved curiosity. However, negative criticism or outrage is absent. In English-speaking countries, I have encountered very little criticism of this narrative. However, when reading, I noticed that one or two authors have written something without having the slightest idea about it.
As for the censorship on the Telegram channel you mentioned, I have developed my own take on it. I also do not offer a space on this Substack where people can flood the comments with their "Covid" claims. About 170 articles here consist almost exclusively of the accumulated evidence that there was no "Covid" and no "pandemic". Anyone who comments on these articles before reading them and claims that there was a "pandemic" will be censored. I cannot always distinguish the paid agents of the 77th Brigade from "normal" people. Everyone is free to set up their own information channel and act according to their own knowledge and conscience. Sorry for saying this, but on your channel I see about 75% only people who have no idea about the depth of the problem because they supposedly "don't have time to read", but they have an enormous amount of time to write nonsense about "Covid". I think that your channel has become more of a "whining channel" rather than remaining an information channel. I think that every public statement inevitably leads to division, because no one can count on 100 percent agreement. I also divide. The topic of division is even treated (very positively) in the New Testament. But that is not my area of activity. In other words, not everything is bad, but if the factor of "time" is not taken into account, then many things can appear bleak.
Is it possible that both the "no virus theory" and the radical new position on Ivermectin, have been introduced to Dr Yeadon by "bad actors" who are intent on creating division, wasting our energy and distracting our focus from the important issue of the Globalists' agenda ?
Ben, I'm happy to answer your question. But what does "we" mean? Do you mean the "resistance heroes" who think they can cure "Covid" with Ivermectin and thereby spread the globalists' narrative? As for the issue of "speaking with one voice", I already have an answer to that. It is a trap that was invented for this purpose to enable the so-called "spokespersons of the globalists" to join the resistance and to guarantee their leadership role in this resistance as "resistance heroes". These people claim that there was a real health threat in 2020 and that mRNA was not a case of deliberate poisoning and shortening of billions of people’s lives (“toxic by design”), but of medical errors and corruption. Katherine Watt calls these people "spokesmen for the US Department of Defense" because this ministry is the originators of the bioweapon called "vaccine," the design of which cannot indicate "noble intentions." The criminal coercion to vaccinate and the recommendation for pregnant women and children also do not indicate that anyone here wanted to take care of our health. Ivermectin is often recommended against "Covid" to pretend that this disease exists and that "only" mistakes were made in the design and political handling of the "vaccine." The spokesmen for the perpetrators insist on "speaking with one voice" in order not to lose popularity and to continue to be seen as "resistance heroes." An honest person who knows the truth would not be photographed with these people or contribute to their popularity by advertising for them and copying their articles. This applies to anyone who thinks that there was a "real pandemic" or "Covid." If you are not willing to criticize these people and cannot distinguish friends from enemies, then you can continue to rant here. Please don't spread narratives about the "extraordinary Covid disease" after I have already provided the opposite evidence in almost 170 articles. I do this work so that people can get to know the evidence BEFORE they twist the facts here in the comments and confuse friends with enemies.
Regarding the "no virus" narrative, all I can say is that I don't know when the right window of time exists to evaluate and interpret the study results that do not prove viral infection. I don't have a crystal ball that can tell me if and when the "no virus" narrative will pay off tactically. For me personally, it paid off because I was able to broaden my horizons a little (which are notoriously prone to comfortable and stress-free narrow-mindedness by nature). I see a certain parallel to the time when those who presented the evidence for the heliocentric system against the church opinion were criticized. Even then there was an outcry because people feared a split in the church and the believers. The split came anyway and the Catholic Church is still considered the source of the lies to this day. The last lie I know of was: "Vaccination is love of neighbor").
If you continue to not recognize the "Speak with one voice" narrative as a deliberately created trap and run after the false idols, then there is nothing more I can do for you. There is still plenty of room for you to complain here, but please do not mention that "Covid" is a new, real disease that can be cured with Ivermectin. Robert Malone's statement that PCR tests produce 95% false positive results is, in my opinion, also such perpetrator propaganda. "Covid" can only be 100% misdiagnosed because this disease never existed. Almost all 170 articles in this Substack were written just for the purpose of accumulating the evidence so that people can easily get to know that evidence before commenting here.
Best wishes,
Suavek
PS.
I am glad that I am one of those who did not fall into the trap of the "common voice" (actually: "common lie"). The propaganda (and its trolls) now call these people "heroes of the resistance". I hope that it is not at all difficult to see through this simple "trick of unity".
Where did this concept of "resistance heroes" come from which claims convid can be cured with IVM?
It's a nonsense.
You cannot cure a non-existent disease with anything - there is nothing to cure.
BUT, if you deliberately misdiagnose illness as convid (as was the case) and accidentally cure a parasitic infestation with IVM the patient will get better.
A happy co-incidence for the patient but nothing to do with "resistance heroes'.
This is classic misdirection. Pure and simple.
I genuinely don't understand why IVM has suddenly become such an issue.
It's highly reminiscent of the dodgy dossier which led to a completely uncessessary war in Iraq.
That's exactly what it's about. IVM is often recommended against "Covid" and frightened people take it prophylactically. These doctors thereby spread the "Covid" narrative and call themselves "resistance". Robert Malone claims that the PCR test produces 95% false positive Covid results. This confirms the existence of this disease. 5% "Covid" ? Most doctors who recommend IVM to people recommend this drug against "Covid". Sales of Ivermectin have increased by 800% since 2020. Along with this drug, the fear of non-existent "pandemics" is also being sold. In my opinion, this is collaboration with the perpetrators. And then there is propaganda that calls these doctors and scientists "resistance heroes" because they warned early about the mRNA "vaccines" and became famous because of them. The propaganda clearly helps to maintain the fear of "Covid" and to increase the credibility of the pharmaceutical industry with regard to "pandemics". THAT is, in my opinion, the main problem. The REAL expert (toxicologist and immunologist) Dr. Yeadon does not get such backing from the propaganda. And the "Covid" lie spreaders are basking in the sun of heroism. Can you just watch this activity in the interests of the perpetrators? I can't.
Ralph, I don't want to be concerned with your concerns any more because I don't have the time. You comment on my articles without reading them. You suggest that I should make people aware that "Covid" doesn't exist? Almost all of my articles are accumulations of evidence for this matter. Haven't you noticed this? And I have to explain in the comments for the second time what I have already written in almost 170 articles? Ralph, there are only 24 hours in a day and I can't afford something like that because I'm not a pensioner. This problem affects not only me, but also other readers and contributors who are also wasting their time here. Besides, I'm offering information here and not a battlefield for personal scores between the warring parties.
If Mike Yeadon is concerned about the reproduction of living species, he should be interested in anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation which also alters the metabolism of carbohydrates, lipids, but also drugs. It is the worst danger for living things, all species combined, and COVID is strongly associated with it!
Question to Brave Search AI : Between ivermectin and anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation, which represents the greatest threat to the reproduction of living species?
The answer :
Based on the provided search results, anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (EMR) represents a greater threat to the reproduction of living species compared to ivermectin. The search results highlight numerous studies demonstrating adverse effects of EMR on various organisms, including:
1. Disruption of orientation and migration patterns in birds and insects (e.g., [1], [2], [3]).
2. Impacts on reproductive abilities, mating, and survivorship in insects (e.g., [4], [5]).
3. Effects on plant health and growth (e.g., [6]).
4. Potential harm to pollinators (e.g., [7]).
In contrast, ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, primarily targets specific parasites and has a targeted effect on reproduction, whereas EMR has a broader, non-targeted impact on various species and ecosystems.
The search results emphasize the cumulative and synergistic effects of EMR, which can interact with other environmental stressors (e.g., climate change, pesticides) to exacerbate threats to species reproduction. In contrast, ivermectin’s effects are generally more localized and species-specific.
While ivermectin can have unintended consequences, such as potential harm to non-target organisms or ecosystem disruption, the evidence suggests that anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation poses a greater and more widespread threat to the reproduction of living species.
I am very grateful that you are a reader of the information collected on this Substack. I would be even more pleased if the comments section was not used as a battleground or a platform for venting frustration. If you want to send a message to Dr Yeadon or Tim West that has nothing to do with the article in question, please do not use this Substack as a kind of telephone switchboard. I can understand your confusion, but such facilities have not existed for decades.
Ralph, if you don't want to trust a toxicologist and immunologist who is known for his honesty and competence, please google the toxicological evaluation of animal testing. I'm sure you'll find more confirming answers.
When you take on board that this is a massive, intricate and thoroughly thought out plan to eradicate most of humanity, it makes sense. Very clever, promoting something as an alternative/preventative treatment for a virus that doesn't even exist, but will actually reduce fertility in futherance of the eugenics agenda. I've also chucked out all supplements after reading about how toxic vitamin supplements are on Agent's
substack. It's galling how the perpetrators pretend to care for our well being when instead they utilise every avenue they can to poison and sicken us.
Dear Monica,
I really appreciate your words of support for the most censored man in the world, Dr. Mike Yeadon, and your foresight. Thank you very much for that. Namasté,
Suavek
The censorship he's experiencing shows he's on the right track. He's helping to expose the deception of the perpetrators and their demonic plan.
I totally agree. They are doing their best to silence the truth and those that speak the truth. But they can't stop it spreading. Mike is on the right side.
To quote:
"Ivermectin, is one of the most violent fertility toxins I've ever come across."
Risible nonsense.
Ralph, you haven't read the numerous studies linked in the article by Tim Truth suggested here. Whether these studies are reliable or not is not the subject of my current consideration. However, they are evidence. Without mentioning any arguments to the contrary, the short statement seems "Risible nonsense" almost like a targeted, malicious attack and cheap propaganda. This is not at all atypical: Dr. Mike Yeadon's statements can always be proven, but his opponents usually only come up with such meaningless statements because they cannot really refute his statements with appropriate arguments. If, in rare cases, any evidence to the contrary does emerge, then it is often very thin.
For me personally, the topic of fertility comes third. Much more important to me is the recommendation of Ivermectin for a non-existent disease ( in case of the wrong “Covid” diagnosis ). This is exactly what the "Covid" cartel is doing and those who often want to call themselves "resistance heroes" and who obviously use effective propaganda to promote this personal image.
The recommendation of medication against a non-existent disease I call TONED syndrome, because I find this completely abnormal and extremely harmful to honest enlightenment work. That is why it is the most important thing for me. The second most important issue that concerns me a lot is the following question:
Why does the Covid cartel always avoid this point of criticism instead of taking a stand on it? You also leave the topic unmentioned. Doesn't it bother you at all that the "Covid" cartel is spreading "Covid" and "pandemic" propaganda by recommending Ivermectin against "Covid"?
Sauvek, you are wrong.
I have read the "evidence".
As far as I am concerned Tim Truth is an Orwellian Inversion.
Animal studies are completely irrelevant to humans.
I don't promote, condone or endorse ivermectin or any other Rockerfellian drug.
I do rely on the known evidence and the recent rhetoric about IVM and "famous" supplement toxicity does our cause nothing but harm.
I could go on but there is little to no point when hysteria seems to be the overriding factor in this debate.
“Animal studies are completely irrelevant to humans”.
I’m a toxicologist among other things, having trained a long time ago.
There are certainly important differences between species, such as any given animal & humans. That’s correct.
However, there are more similarities than differences. Our fundamental biochemistry is all but identical in the majority of cases.
Here’s a rule of thumb which has been successfully applied for many decades.
If a chemical harms more than one species in the same way, it almost always also harms humans in the same manner.
If I’d seen published articles only about mice and lots of negative results in other species, I’d have probably ignored it.
But there are anti-fertility effects in mice, rats, rabbits (or sheep iirc) and humans (sperm study).
These occur at higher blood levels than are reached after the lower end of recommended doses “for the early treatment of covid19”, a novel illness which does not exist.
However, people are also encouraged to take one or more claimed “health supplements”, for which evidence of efficacy is usually lacking.
A disproportionate number of these supplements are cleared from the body by pgp, the very same elimination pathway used by our bodies ti clear ivermectin.
The effect of combined consumption is unquestionably to INCREASE the drug levels of ivermectin.
NO ONE has studied & quantified this drug/drug interaction.
Therefore, no one can dismiss the potential for harm on reproduction.
I do not have to prove that there is actually a problem.
Those recommending it’s unnecessary consumption in “covid19” must prove that there IS NOT a problem.
This isn’t even about the safety profile of a particular product. I’d be almost as concerned about its promotion for non existent illness, even if it was a tiny, sugar pill.
The reason is that I wasn’t wrong the first time. It’s widespread use, up 800% globally, is being used subliminally to reinforce the scary virus lie, the pandemic lie, indirectly the gain of function lie and more.
That’s extremely useful to the perpetrators of these lies, don’t you agree?
Is it possible that both the "no virus theory" and the radical new position on Ivermectin, have been introduced to Dr Yeadon by "bad actors" who are intent on creating division, wasting our energy and distracting our focus from the important issue of the Globalists' agenda ?
Ben,
Since you made the same comment twice, I'll just say that you can find my answer under your first comment.
Are we seeing "Bad Actors" influencing Mike Dr Yeadon ?
For approximately the last 12 months, since Dr Yeadon left the Monotti Telegram Channel, ( apparently due to a weariness of listening to Monotti's endless carping about Israel ), we have had to endure listening to the messages of Dr Yeadon through the filter of the owner of the so called "solo channel".
Let us be clear, Dr Yeadon does not own the "solo" channel. The channel is owned by the supposed admin of the "solo" channel. This admin had exercised absolute control of opinions and comments, to such an extent , that it is impossible to have any kind of rational debate with Dr Yeadon.
This has resulted in Dr Yeadon's opinions being relegated to the fringes and dismissed by many, who would otherwise have been willing to listen to, and to consider, what he was saying.
Dr Yeadon's decision to saddle up with his so called admin, who appears to be more of a handler, appears to have reduced Dr Yeadon's influence and reach.
Ben, I am also a "bad actor" because I start from the same evidence base as Dr Yeadon and then act accordingly. I have invested quite a lot of time in knowing that all of Dr Yeadon's narratives are true and useful. The "no virus" narrative, in my opinion, causes a certain amount of excitement, perhaps even a division, but that is how it has always been with the truth. Anyone with a little patience will be able to convince themselves in the future that it pays off in the long run. In Germany, where I live, this narrative seems to be described with goodwill in the alternative media and is sometimes met with a kind of reserved curiosity. However, negative criticism or outrage is absent. In English-speaking countries, I have encountered very little criticism of this narrative. However, when reading, I noticed that one or two authors have written something without having the slightest idea about it.
As for the censorship on the Telegram channel you mentioned, I have developed my own take on it. I also do not offer a space on this Substack where people can flood the comments with their "Covid" claims. About 170 articles here consist almost exclusively of the accumulated evidence that there was no "Covid" and no "pandemic". Anyone who comments on these articles before reading them and claims that there was a "pandemic" will be censored. I cannot always distinguish the paid agents of the 77th Brigade from "normal" people. Everyone is free to set up their own information channel and act according to their own knowledge and conscience. Sorry for saying this, but on your channel I see about 75% only people who have no idea about the depth of the problem because they supposedly "don't have time to read", but they have an enormous amount of time to write nonsense about "Covid". I think that your channel has become more of a "whining channel" rather than remaining an information channel. I think that every public statement inevitably leads to division, because no one can count on 100 percent agreement. I also divide. The topic of division is even treated (very positively) in the New Testament. But that is not my area of activity. In other words, not everything is bad, but if the factor of "time" is not taken into account, then many things can appear bleak.
Best wishes,
Suavek
Is it possible that both the "no virus theory" and the radical new position on Ivermectin, have been introduced to Dr Yeadon by "bad actors" who are intent on creating division, wasting our energy and distracting our focus from the important issue of the Globalists' agenda ?
Ben, I'm happy to answer your question. But what does "we" mean? Do you mean the "resistance heroes" who think they can cure "Covid" with Ivermectin and thereby spread the globalists' narrative? As for the issue of "speaking with one voice", I already have an answer to that. It is a trap that was invented for this purpose to enable the so-called "spokespersons of the globalists" to join the resistance and to guarantee their leadership role in this resistance as "resistance heroes". These people claim that there was a real health threat in 2020 and that mRNA was not a case of deliberate poisoning and shortening of billions of people’s lives (“toxic by design”), but of medical errors and corruption. Katherine Watt calls these people "spokesmen for the US Department of Defense" because this ministry is the originators of the bioweapon called "vaccine," the design of which cannot indicate "noble intentions." The criminal coercion to vaccinate and the recommendation for pregnant women and children also do not indicate that anyone here wanted to take care of our health. Ivermectin is often recommended against "Covid" to pretend that this disease exists and that "only" mistakes were made in the design and political handling of the "vaccine." The spokesmen for the perpetrators insist on "speaking with one voice" in order not to lose popularity and to continue to be seen as "resistance heroes." An honest person who knows the truth would not be photographed with these people or contribute to their popularity by advertising for them and copying their articles. This applies to anyone who thinks that there was a "real pandemic" or "Covid." If you are not willing to criticize these people and cannot distinguish friends from enemies, then you can continue to rant here. Please don't spread narratives about the "extraordinary Covid disease" after I have already provided the opposite evidence in almost 170 articles. I do this work so that people can get to know the evidence BEFORE they twist the facts here in the comments and confuse friends with enemies.
Regarding the "no virus" narrative, all I can say is that I don't know when the right window of time exists to evaluate and interpret the study results that do not prove viral infection. I don't have a crystal ball that can tell me if and when the "no virus" narrative will pay off tactically. For me personally, it paid off because I was able to broaden my horizons a little (which are notoriously prone to comfortable and stress-free narrow-mindedness by nature). I see a certain parallel to the time when those who presented the evidence for the heliocentric system against the church opinion were criticized. Even then there was an outcry because people feared a split in the church and the believers. The split came anyway and the Catholic Church is still considered the source of the lies to this day. The last lie I know of was: "Vaccination is love of neighbor").
If you continue to not recognize the "Speak with one voice" narrative as a deliberately created trap and run after the false idols, then there is nothing more I can do for you. There is still plenty of room for you to complain here, but please do not mention that "Covid" is a new, real disease that can be cured with Ivermectin. Robert Malone's statement that PCR tests produce 95% false positive results is, in my opinion, also such perpetrator propaganda. "Covid" can only be 100% misdiagnosed because this disease never existed. Almost all 170 articles in this Substack were written just for the purpose of accumulating the evidence so that people can easily get to know that evidence before commenting here.
Best wishes,
Suavek
PS.
I am glad that I am one of those who did not fall into the trap of the "common voice" (actually: "common lie"). The propaganda (and its trolls) now call these people "heroes of the resistance". I hope that it is not at all difficult to see through this simple "trick of unity".
Where did this concept of "resistance heroes" come from which claims convid can be cured with IVM?
It's a nonsense.
You cannot cure a non-existent disease with anything - there is nothing to cure.
BUT, if you deliberately misdiagnose illness as convid (as was the case) and accidentally cure a parasitic infestation with IVM the patient will get better.
A happy co-incidence for the patient but nothing to do with "resistance heroes'.
This is classic misdirection. Pure and simple.
I genuinely don't understand why IVM has suddenly become such an issue.
It's highly reminiscent of the dodgy dossier which led to a completely uncessessary war in Iraq.
Ralph,
That's exactly what it's about. IVM is often recommended against "Covid" and frightened people take it prophylactically. These doctors thereby spread the "Covid" narrative and call themselves "resistance". Robert Malone claims that the PCR test produces 95% false positive Covid results. This confirms the existence of this disease. 5% "Covid" ? Most doctors who recommend IVM to people recommend this drug against "Covid". Sales of Ivermectin have increased by 800% since 2020. Along with this drug, the fear of non-existent "pandemics" is also being sold. In my opinion, this is collaboration with the perpetrators. And then there is propaganda that calls these doctors and scientists "resistance heroes" because they warned early about the mRNA "vaccines" and became famous because of them. The propaganda clearly helps to maintain the fear of "Covid" and to increase the credibility of the pharmaceutical industry with regard to "pandemics". THAT is, in my opinion, the main problem. The REAL expert (toxicologist and immunologist) Dr. Yeadon does not get such backing from the propaganda. And the "Covid" lie spreaders are basking in the sun of heroism. Can you just watch this activity in the interests of the perpetrators? I can't.
Ralph, I don't want to be concerned with your concerns any more because I don't have the time. You comment on my articles without reading them. You suggest that I should make people aware that "Covid" doesn't exist? Almost all of my articles are accumulations of evidence for this matter. Haven't you noticed this? And I have to explain in the comments for the second time what I have already written in almost 170 articles? Ralph, there are only 24 hours in a day and I can't afford something like that because I'm not a pensioner. This problem affects not only me, but also other readers and contributors who are also wasting their time here. Besides, I'm offering information here and not a battlefield for personal scores between the warring parties.
I wish you all the best,
Suavek
If Mike Yeadon is concerned about the reproduction of living species, he should be interested in anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation which also alters the metabolism of carbohydrates, lipids, but also drugs. It is the worst danger for living things, all species combined, and COVID is strongly associated with it!
Question to Brave Search AI : Between ivermectin and anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation, which represents the greatest threat to the reproduction of living species?
The answer :
Based on the provided search results, anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (EMR) represents a greater threat to the reproduction of living species compared to ivermectin. The search results highlight numerous studies demonstrating adverse effects of EMR on various organisms, including:
1. Disruption of orientation and migration patterns in birds and insects (e.g., [1], [2], [3]).
2. Impacts on reproductive abilities, mating, and survivorship in insects (e.g., [4], [5]).
3. Effects on plant health and growth (e.g., [6]).
4. Potential harm to pollinators (e.g., [7]).
In contrast, ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, primarily targets specific parasites and has a targeted effect on reproduction, whereas EMR has a broader, non-targeted impact on various species and ecosystems.
The search results emphasize the cumulative and synergistic effects of EMR, which can interact with other environmental stressors (e.g., climate change, pesticides) to exacerbate threats to species reproduction. In contrast, ivermectin’s effects are generally more localized and species-specific.
While ivermectin can have unintended consequences, such as potential harm to non-target organisms or ecosystem disruption, the evidence suggests that anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation poses a greater and more widespread threat to the reproduction of living species.
For fertility and EMR/EMF :
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4355556/
https://ehtrust.org/electromagnetic-radiation-wildlife-and-environment/
https://www.saferemr.com/2018/05/EMF-wildlife.html
https://magdahavas.com/category/health-issues/infertility-sex-organs/
https://www.wirelesseducationaction.org/dr-martin-pall/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300355
For Covid and EMR/EMF :
https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/2371
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8580522/
https://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/5g-covid-19-epidemic/
https://hive.blog/five-g/@in2itiveart/message-from-arthur-firstenberg-regarding-5g-and-covid-19-plus-new-bird-flu-in-germany
I am very grateful that you are a reader of the information collected on this Substack. I would be even more pleased if the comments section was not used as a battleground or a platform for venting frustration. If you want to send a message to Dr Yeadon or Tim West that has nothing to do with the article in question, please do not use this Substack as a kind of telephone switchboard. I can understand your confusion, but such facilities have not existed for decades.
Thank you for your understanding, all the best,
Suavek