The Most Revolutionary Act

Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine

The Most Revolutionary Act

About stuartbramhall

Retired child and adolescent psychiatrist and American expatriate in New Zealand. In 2002, I made the difficult decision to close my 25-year Seattle practice after 15 years of covert FBI harassment. I describe the unrelenting phone harassment, illegal break-ins and six attempts on my life in my 2010 book The Most Revolutionary Act: Memoir of an American Refugee.

1 in 36 Kids Have Autism – Critics Slam CDC’s Failure to Investgate Causes

One in 36 (2.8%) 8-year-old children — 4% of boys and 1% of girls — have an autism spectrum disorder (ASD), based on an analysis of data from 2020, published today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The latest findings, reported in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, show an increase from the last report, which found 1 in 44 8-year-olds (2.3%) had autism in 2018.

Since the CDC started collecting the data, prevalence estimates have skyrocketed from 1 in 150 in 2000, to today’s estimate of 1 in 36 children.

The trend has persisted for decades. Autism prevalence in the 1990s, which was 1 in 1,000 children, already represented a tenfold increase over the condition’s estimated prevalence in the 1970s.


A second CDC report on 4-year-old children, also released today, emphasized that in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 4-year-old children were less likely to be evaluated for or identified with ASD than 8-year-olds of the same age.

Prior to the pandemic, 4-year-old children were diagnosed with autism at even higher rates than the 8-year-old cohort.

For the first time since the CDC began doing these studies, both studies found autism prevalence was higher among Black, Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander children than among White and biracial children. ASD prevalence among these groups increased 30% between 2018 and 2020.

The prevalence report suggested these numbers “might reflect improved screening, awareness, and access to services among historically underserved groups.”

Commenting on the CDC’s assertion that children of color have higher rates of autism than white children because of improved screening and awareness, Sallie Bernard, co-founder and board president of SafeMinds, told The Defender:

“That does not explain why their rate is higher than white children. As a group, no racial or ethnic minority here gets better assessment and diagnosis than white children, so to explain the disparity in the rate now as due to better assessment for minorities is just ludicrous.”

Conclusory statements attributing growth in autism numbers to “more awareness and a wider ability of services” is part of a long-term trend among public health officials and the media.

Most autistic children were found to either have an intellectual disability (37.9%) or to be on the borderline for having one (23.5%).

Black children with autism were far more likely than white children to have a co-occurring intellectual disability, which the report said might stem from “underascertainment of ASD among Black children without intellectual disability.”

The recommendation for “public health action” is to develop “enhanced infrastructure to provide equitable diagnostic, treatment, and support services for all children with ASD.”

Bernard agreed that there is a need for greater infrastructure and support. “The services and supports have been lacking forever. And now if you have a four-fold increase [in ASD], it is going to be four times worse,” she said.


But the report makes no comment on the causes of autism, nor does it offer an explanation for the rising rates beyond increased testing.

The Defender asked Bernard whether she thought better testing could be driving the trends. She said:


Toby Rogers, Ph.D., had this to say about the CDC’s claims that better testing is behind the growing number of autism cases:

“The unwillingness of the CDC to even ask why these numbers are increasing is a massive ‘poker tell’ that they know but are prohibited from talking about it.

“Two high-quality, multi-million dollar studies in California (Byrd et al., 2002; Hertz-Picciotto and Delwiche, 2009) both concluded that better awareness, changes in diagnostic criteria and earlier age of diagnosis only explain a small fraction of the rise in autism.

“The authors of these studies urged public health officials to place greater emphasis on researching the toxicants that might be driving the increase in autism prevalence. [For a longer discussion of these studies please see Rogers, 2019.] The fact that the CDC is still refusing to properly investigate autism causation is outrageous.”


As autism rates skyrocketed among U.S. children over the past several decades, along with concern among parents, much research has turned to investigate the role of environmental risk factors in compounding underlying diverse genetic factors.

Environmental risk factors include metals like aluminum and mercury in vaccines, glyphosate exposure, use of acetaminophen during pregnancy and infancy, heavy metals in baby food and other organic environmental pollutants.

Studies also link industrial chemicals, such as lead, arsenic, copper, selenium, iron and magnesium, to the disorder.

Despite growing evidence that environmental factors may play a role in the development of ASD, the CDC did not investigate environmental exposures as a potential cause.


Higher rates of autism: ‘encouraging patterns?’

The ADDM study on prevalence among 8-year-olds is the CDC’s standard for estimating autism rates. It uses the ADDM Network to estimate the number of children with ASD and other developmental disabilities living in different areas of the U.S.

The CDC established the ADDM Network in 2000. It tracks rates of autism in 8-year-old children by analyzing education, medical and service provider records. It releases reports every two years.

The first ADDM Network site was in Georgia. The study released today includes research sites in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin.

The report found autism prevalence rates vary widely geographically, with the lowest rates in Maryland and the highest rates in California.

The early ADDM Report analyzes autism diagnoses for 4-year-old children among the same network sites. It reported that rates also varied substantially by location, and attributed higher rates of autism diagnoses among 4-year-olds than 8-year-olds to higher diagnosis rates.


Commenting on the regulatory and other failures that brought autism rates to this point, Rogers told The Defender:

“The CDC, FDA and NIH have all failed. Their leadership should be sacked, arrested and prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

“We absolutely know how to stop the autism epidemic — keep toxic substances out of kids’ bodies. Toxic substances known to increase the risk of developing autism include mercury, ingredients in plastics and fire retardants, pesticides and herbicides, EMF/RFR, and pharmaceuticals (Tylenol, SSRIs and vaccines).

“Autism is not a scientific mystery. The autism epidemic is largely the result of bad laws, regulatory capture, and the CDC childhood vaccine schedule.”



Southwest Pilot Suffers Medical Emergency, Becomes Incapacitated Mid-Flight

The Gateway Pundit

A Southwest pilot became incapacitated on a flight from Vegas to Ohio after departure on Wednesday.

According to CBS News Texas, the captain became incapacitated soon after takeoff Wednesday morning and was removed from the flight deck.

The plane returned to Las Vegas and landed safely, according to the CBS affiliate.

“Condition of pilot who had medical event not being shared,” the reporter said.

Last week a United Airlines flight from Guatemala diverted to Houston Airport after the pilot suffered a medical emergency.



75% of fresh (non-organic) produce grown in US found to contain toxic pesticide residue

Image: TOXIC GROCERY WARNING: 75 percent of fresh (non-organic) produce grown in the USA found to contain toxic pesticide residue

(Natural News) The Environmental Working Group (EWG) named its “dirty dozen” produce items this week highlighting the most dangerous produce items on the market when grown conventionally. And some of the items on the list may shock you since they are widely regarded as healthy “superfoods.”

Unless produce is grown cleanly without pesticides and herbicides and is laboratory tested, it can be risky to consume to some degree because it might be chock full of hidden chemical poisons that are unseen to the naked eye.

Mind you, EWG’s dirty dozen produce items are especially dangerous when grown in the United States due to lax regulations surrounding the spraying of deadly chemicals on crops. If grown elsewhere in the world, many of these foods are likely safer and less tainted than their American-grown counterparts, even when grown conventionally.

For their research, EWG looked at 46 different produce staples. Overall, the organization found that 75 percent of freshly grown produce in the U.S. contains some degree of harmful pesticide residue, which is deeply concerning.

The worst offenders, just like dirty dozen lists from previous years have shown, are among the healthiest fruits and vegetables when grown cleanly. In this case, though, these conventionally grown produce items are risky to consume because of the hidden chemicals they contain.

Strawberries, grapes, apples, nectarines, pears, and cherries ranked at the top of the list for being the most dangerous when grown conventionally, the latest EWG findings show. The same is true for antioxidant-rich blueberries and leafy green vegetables like kale, which are heavily sprayed with chemicals when grown conventionally.


Amazingly, more than 90 percent of all samples of strawberries, apples, cherries, spinach, nectarines, and grapes were found to have at least two different chemicals pesticides on them, according to tests. All in all, more than 250 different pesticides were discovered on American produce – pesticides that, in many cases, are illegal to use in other countries. (Related: Check out our earlier report about the EWG dirty dozen to compare what was true then to today’s results.)

American produce growers caught using illegal pesticides that were banned many years ago

In some cases, the pesticides identified by EWG on American produce are not even legal here in the U.S. Six percent of green beans, the group found, contain the neurotoxic organophosphate insecticide acephate, which was banned from use on green beans in 2011 for being a “possible” human carcinogen, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Organophosphates were among the most common class of crop chemicals identified by EWG on American produce. Green beans and blueberries, when grown conventionally, tend to contain the highest and most worrying levels of them.

What do organophosphates do to the body? For one, they damage the nervous system and poison children’s developing brains. And parents who feed their children conventional blueberries should know that 10 percent of them contain an organophosphate known as phosmet, while 9 percent contain another called malathion.

“Both are organophosphates and malathion was categorized as probably carcinogenic to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2015,” reported the Daily Mail Online.

On every kind of crop on the dirty dozen list, with cherries being the one exception, more than 50 different pesticides were detected. The worst offenders in terms of quantity of pesticide residues were kale, collard and mustard greens, and hot and bell peppers.



GAO to Investigate Dubious FBI Surveillance Practice


Posted BY: | NwoReport

(Ken Silva, Headline USA) The Government Accountability Office has informed Headline USA that it will soon begin reviewing the FBI’s use of “assessments”—a constitutionally dubious practice that allows the bureau to target groups and individuals without evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

FBI assessments have come under recent scrutiny in relation to the DOJ’s targeting of parents who hotly protested COVID-19 restrictions and other issues at school board meetings. A report published Tuesday by the House Weaponization Subcommittee revealed that the FBI conducted at least 25 assessments of school board threats—only one of which resulted in a full investigation, and none of which resulted in federal prosecutions.

However, the impending GAO audit stems from a request more than a year ago from Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and Jamie Raskin, D-N.Y.

“We ask that GAO examine whether assessments result in the improper monitoring of protected First Amendment activity—including by political, racial, or religious organizations—and whether the FBI has sufficient controls in place to ensure that they do not run afoul of constitutional protections,” Mace and Raskin wrote to the GAO last March.



Obesity Tied to ‘Food Swamps’ — Counties That Have More Stores Selling Unhealthy Foods

By  Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

The authors of a new study tying higher obesity rates to counties that have more food stores selling unhealthy food options said they were motivated by the need to get past “medical mainstream mantra” by understanding the structural drivers of obesity.

Counties with higher obesity rates across the U.S. tend to have more food stores selling more unhealthy food options relative to counties with lower obesity rates, according to a report from The Urban Institute published this month.

“We find that areas of higher obesity prevalence are more likely to have greater exposure to the types of food stores likely to offer less healthy options, even when controlling for differences across counties,” the authors wrote.

In high-obesity counties, the study reported that 65.5% of food establishments are likely to be “unhealthy,” as opposed to low-obesity counties where just 51.5% of food establishments are “unhealthy.”

This was true across rural and non-rural areas.

The researchers studied the distribution of places selling groceries — things that people would eat or prepare at home — as opposed to restaurants. That was in part because research already linked high concentrations of fast food restaurants to obesity, but the role of different types of food stores is less well understood.

Notably, the study found that “Dollar” stores — as in Dollar Tree, Dollar General and Family Dollar — represented a substantially larger share of unhealthy food establishments in high-obesity areas than in low-obesity areas.

Dollar stores and other places that sell unhealthy food, such as convenience stores and gas stations, make up what food environment researchers call “food swamps” — places drenched in unhealthy food options and with lower access to healthy food, according to the authors.

Getting past the ‘medical mainstream mantra’

Obesity rates have been skyrocketing in the U.S. and across the world over the past several years — by 2035 experts predict over half of the global population will be overweight or obese.

In the U.S. obesity presence was 41.9% between 2017 and 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), with Black adults experiencing the highest rates (49.9%) followed by Latinos (45.6%), whites (41.1%) and Asian adults (16.1%).

Obesity is one of the most common pediatric chronic diseases in the U.S. According to the CDC, 1 in 5 U.S. children and teens are considered obese.

Treatment for obesity tends to focus on administering drugs or modifying individual behavior.

For example, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) earlier this year issued new clinical guidelines for treating childhood obesity, recommending physicians offer weight-loss drugs and surgery alongside “intense health behavior and lifestyle treatment” for almost all obese children.

But even before the new AAP guidelines, critics argued this approach is limited and won’t resolve the issue.

Dr. Michelle Perro, integrative pediatrician and executive director of told The Defender:

“The medical mainstream mantra that obesity is secondary to laziness and overeating has to be abandoned and abolished.

“The primary culprits have to do with chronic poisoning from environmental toxicants also known as obesogens that are causing metabolic disruption, endocrine disruption, and obesity.

“If we don’t look at the root cause we will never solve the problem.”

The Urban Institute report takes on that challenge. Dr. Elaine Waxman, lead author of the study, told The Defender that the need to understand structural drivers of obesity was the key motivation for doing the research.

She said:

“We often focus on the role of eating and eating behaviors in managing obesity. But a lot of that attention goes to individual choice without paying attention to the food environment.

“And the question we wanted to ask is what do communities potentially need to be talking about changing in order to make more progress, because obesity is so widespread that just taking it individual by individual lives is not going to be a very effective way of moving a population challenge.”

Waxman acknowledged that the study’s findings show correlation and can’t prove for certain that having more stores selling unhealthy foods in a community causes obesity.

However, she said, the study points to a key intervention that ought to be understood and debated at the community level.

“There’s enough of a difference there [in the distribution of unhealthy food vendors] that communities need to be having this conversation about, well, where can people even shop and what’s affordable in those communities?” she said.

“And that becomes a conversation about infrastructure in a community,” Waxman said.

Mapping food vendors and unhealthy food

To do the study, the researchers gathered obesity data from across the nation from the CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, a large telephone survey that collects information about chronic conditions, along with county-level data from the CDC’s PLACES 2021.

They analyzed this together with geographic data on the food environment drawn from Data Axle, a national business database that provides detailed information on location, business type, etc. for all businesses in the U.S.

The researchers mapped the presence of food retailers per thousand people across the country and they distinguished among different types of food businesses — grocery stores, gas stations, Dollar Generals, warehouse clubs, etc.

Each business was classified as offering food that is “likely healthy” or “likely unhealthy” by drawing on existing literature about food and food retailers.

“Likely unhealthy” food establishments included convenience stores, Dollar stores, pharmacies and gas stations, which tend to sell “mostly shelf stable and processed,” foods, according to Waxman.

Increased consumption of processed food is linked to increased obesity and related chronic disease. These foods account for about 90% of added sugars — usually in the form of high fructose corn syrup — consumed in the U.S. They also contain other obesogens.

“Likely healthy” food establishments included grocery stores, warehouse clubs, and other department stores because they are likely to have fresh foods and proteins, although they also carry many processed and unhealthy foods, Waxman noted.

The study excluded restaurants and also places like farmers’ markets where only a small sector of the population purchases food.

From food deserts to food swamps?

The study found that obesity is not distributed equally across the U.S. The highest obesity rates are concentrated in the South — in parts of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Kentucky and West Virginia.

The lowest obesity rates are in the West — in parts of Colorado, Wyoming, California and Nevada.

They also found that the counties with the highest obesity rates have more food establishments per 1,000 residents than counties with low obesity rates. These counties tend to have a larger variety of food stores, but more of them are unhealthy.

These findings counter earlier research that linked obesity to lack of access to food stores in what was called a “food desert.”

This shift may indicate a shifting food environment, the authors said. Recent research, including this study, found the presence of food outlets offering less healthy options — or “food swamps” may play a key role in obesity, the study reported.

For example, the study found a much higher frequency of dollar stores in high obesity areas:

“The difference in the number of dollar stores between high- and low-obesity areas is particularly large — with high-obesity areas averaging 0.24 dollar stores per 1,000 residents and low-obesity areas averaging only 0.09 dollar stores per 1,000 residents.”

This may be because Dollar stores have proliferated across the country, particularly in low income areas, in the last decade.

In contrast, over the past 25 years, the median number of grocery stores per capita has declined by 40%, the study reported.




UCSF orders their doctors to ignore COVID vaccine injuries

Dr. Josh Adler is executive vice president and chief clinical officer at UCSF Health as well as vice dean for clinical affairs at the UCSF School of Medicine 

They don’t file VAERS reports either. That’s a violation of federal law. I had a bunch of questions for their media relations department, but they ghosted me. Here’s what I wanted to know.

Executive summary

I sent a list of questions to UCSF media relations on March 20 at 10am PST. I also emailed and called the head of media relations at UCSF to let her know about my questions.

Their response: silence.

You know what that means, don’t you?

The questions I sent them

  1. The UCSF Chief Medical Officer has issued a verbal directive that medical staff (doctors, nurses, techs, etc.) are specifically instructed NOT to associate the COVID vaccine to any injuries. So even if they believe the vaccine caused the injury they are NOT allowed to talk to the patient about it. Can you explain how this is in a patient’s best interest? World health authorities such as Karl Lauterbach, Federal Minister of Germany for Health, have publicly admitted that the rate of severe vaccine injury is 1 in 10,000 and the V-safe data in the US shows the rate of severe injury (requiring medical care) is actually 100X higher: 8 SEVERE INJURIES per 100 fully vaccinated people. So why is the UCSF medical staff forbidden to make an association??
  2. I’ve been told that the staff are told not to ask if the person was recently vaccinated with the COVID vaccine because that would suggest to the patient that the COVID vaccine might have caused their medical condition. Is this true? So the patient must offer it to the doctor because the doctor isn’t allowed to ask? How does that improve clinical outcomes?
  3. I’ve been told that 70% of the Radiology Department (in Marin specifically) requested and were granted religious exemptions after seeing what happened to people who received the COVID vaccine. If it wasn’t 70%, what is the number?
  4. I’ve been told that the placentas of a majority of vaccinated women who give birth are not normal (calcified, blood clots, etc.). This started happening after the shots rolled out. Can you tell me what percentage was observed and why nobody at the hospital is speaking out to the press about this situation?
  5. Most troubling to me is that I was not able to find anyone who currently works at UCSF (including doctors, nurses, and lab techs) who would talk to me on the record for fear of being fired. Why would these doctors and nurses have such a fear? Will you guarantee in writing that any staff member who speaks out about any of the points above will be protected and not be fired just for speaking out? Have you fired anyone for speaking the truth? Who?
  6. With all the chatter about fear and intimidation tactics, have you issued WRITTEN assurances to the staff that 1) it is OK to ask about COVID vaccine status, 2) that it is OK to write vaccine exemptions when warranted such as allergic reactions, 3) that if they believe the vaccine caused an injury that they are free to talk about it with the patient and 4) that staff members who talk publicly about what they are seeing in the clinic with respect to vaccine-associated injuries/deaths and don’t violate any confidentiality/HIPAA rules will be protected from being fired? I want to know whether TRUE speech is protected and whether UCSF has notified staff of this in WRITING. If not, why not? Do fear and intimidation tactics yield better health outcomes?


How many UCSF staff have died within 6 months of receiving a COVID vaccine shot? Were autopsies done? Did they do the histopathology studies to rule out the COVID vaccine as a cause of death? Can we see the slides?

How many UCSF staff have been seriously injured from the COVID vaccine?

Why didn’t any doctor at UCSF file a VAERS report on the vaccine injuries of <redacted>, Jan Maisel, and Angela Wulbrecht. This is required by law. <redacted> was a former Chief Medical Officer at UCSF. Maisel is Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at UCSF. Wulbrecht was a top UCSF nurse. All of their injuries were required by law to be reported, yet no VAERS reports were filed. Why not? What are you doing to correct the problem?


One of my readers wrote “I have tried to talk to my fellow physicians about covid policy, masks and mrna shots and they are all terrified. They know covid shots are killing people. And just do nothing. I have to give up and think of a better solution.” How is UCSF addressing this problem?

Nearly all of the UCSF neurologists know that the COVID vaccines have caused serious injuries to huge numbers of UCSF patients. Can you explain why none of them are speaking out publicly about what they are observing in the clinic?


US Terrorist Attack on Nord Stream Pipelines and Tectonic Weapons in Turkey

US Terrorist Attack

Valery Kulikov

New Eastern Outlook

The United States’ use of terrorist methods to eliminate Russian gas competition by undermining the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea on September 26 and numerous well-founded suspicions about Washington’s possible use of tectonic weapons in the February earthquake in Turkey are among the most widely discussed topics in many nations today.


Against the backdrop of the current American authorities’ boundless lies, ever louder accusations are starting to appear against Washington and for the natural disaster that erupted in February, killing 48 thousand people in Turkey alone and causing more than $100 billion in damage to this country. The version of the artificial nature of the recent earthquake in the region, previously voiced in Turkish society and in an article in Sözcü by the head of the Turkish space agency, Serdar Hussein Yildrim, is becoming stronger by the day.


Also, the fact that several Western embassies, including the US Embassy in Turkey, abruptly closed just a few days prior to the earthquake may be evidence that Washington may have forewarned some of its friends about the potential impending use of tectonic weapons. Especially given that similar “preventive” actions have previously been made, most notably when the US was preparing to “punish” the Erdoğan administration by using the Turkish military to attempt a violent coup in this country by destabilizing the situation in Turkey in 2016.

The American military facility HAARP, or High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program, which is situated in Alaska, has already been mentioned in connection with the earthquake in Turkey as a tool of tectonic warfare, in particular, when studying the causes of the unexpected earthquake in Colombia in January 1999. At the time it was stated that subduction, a shift of the Nazca tectonic plate, could be the cause of tremors, although in fact no vertical movements were detected on the fault line, unlike earthquakes on the San Andreas fault in California. In this regard, back then the topic of the possible use of tectonic weapons by the United States was also discussed.


As a significant number of scientists in different countries suggest, a tectonic weapon can really cause such catastrophic earthquakes, for which it is enough to use the so-called magnetohydrodynamic generator, which sends strong electromagnetic pulses deep into the crust. It was such installations that already appeared in the United States in the 1970s and have been tested for many years since. It is known that it is especially easy to artificially provoke an earthquake using such a generator in those regions where there are stresses in the earth’s crust. Yet, strangely enough, the country that is most suited for this situation is Turkey (and Colombia in 1999).

In this regard, it will not be superfluous to recall that the disaster in Turkey occurred after the demand of Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu to the United States to remove “its dirty hands” from the Turkish Republic. Such an unambiguous attack by Ankara could, of course, “hurt” Washington, which takes offense at such attacks, especially from representatives of the “freedom-loving Erdoğan administration.” Consequently, couldn’t the White House approve the necessary “punishment of Turkey,” including employing “tectonic weapons”? And, at the same time, resolve its long-standing commitment to remove Erdoğan from his position of power?

Everyone is familiar with HAARP, an American scientific initiative that investigates how intense electromagnetic radiation interacts with the ionosphere, particularly, controlling the human brain, creating a nuclear explosion without radiation release, moving and melting polar ice, interfering with the ozone layer, causing earthquakes and tsunamis, and controlling ocean waves.

The American Embassy in Turkey issued a warning that “security is under threat here” after the Turkish newspaper dikGAZETE published an article regarding mysterious bluish outbreaks in the sky of Turkey right before the powerful earthquake. This article and several others in this field sought to make a connection between this extremely bizarre atmospheric phenomenon and the ensuing catastrophic earthquake, a sign of potential HAARP activity. And in this regard, it is unavoidably brought to mind as the media reported that on November 12, 2012, when HAARP was used to send strong high-frequency electromagnetic radiation to the upper atmosphere, the ionosphere at an altitude of 170 kilometers was literally lit up, creating a stable plasma cloud there that lasted for about an hour.



California Farmers: “We’ve Lost EVERYTHING” – $BILLIONS of Food Lost in Floods in State that Produces Half of America’s Agriculture


by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

Almost half of America’s agriculture is produced in the State of California, producing over 50 $BILLION annually in revenues.


Now, with recent historical and unprecedented flooding, many farmers in California are reporting that they have “lost everything.”

And it is not over yet, as the rains continue, and record amounts of snow in the Sierra Nevada mountains still need to melt, which will flow into farmlands that are already devastated in California’s Central Valley. See:

The emphasis today is still on saving people’s lives as the rain and flooding continue, and nobody knows yet what the final damages will be to America’s richest farmlands and how that will impact food security in the United States, and the nation’s already fragile economy. Almost half of California’s agricultural products are exported to other countries.

Tulare County in Central California is the county that is suffering the most, and it is also the second largest county in the U.S. in terms of food production, producing over $8 BILLION annually, with sales of dairy products making up almost one fourth of those sales, followed by citrus and nuts. (Source.)

Kern County, just to the south of Tulare County, is the nation’s #1 county in agricultural production, and Fresno County, just to the north of Tulare County, is the nation’s 3rd largest producer of agriculture, and both of those counties have also seen devastating floods in the Central Valley of California.

Monterey County on the Central Coast of California, is the 4th largest county in the U.S. in terms of agriculture production, and they too have been hit with devastating floods, wiping out most of the vegetable and strawberry farms.

I have put together a video report that is just under 15 minutes. I have friends and family members who live in Tulare County, so I can confirm from first hand experiences that none of this is exaggerated. It is real.

This was a very emotional video for me to compile. It is on our Bitchute channel.



Chaco Canyon: The First Advanced Civilization in the Southwest

Episode 19: The Chaco Phenomenon

Ancient Civilizations of North America

Dr Edwin Barnhart (2018)

Film Review

The Chaco Canyon site (dating between 800-1200 AD) shows the first clear evidence of advanced civilization in the southwestern US. Requiring the haulage of 10,000 tall trees (from outside the desert) for roofs, walls and lentils, the size and complexity of Chaco dwellings suggests both centralized management and the input of master builders. At the same time, there is no evidence Chaco elite lived in fancier housing or imposed any kind of social hierarchy.

The construction of Chaco great houses started in the mid-800s, leading to a peak in the 1100s. Surrounding the Chaco great houses, were dozens of satellite settlements filling an area of roughly 25 square miles. Owing to severe drought, the whole area was abandoned around 1150 AD.

Residents grew crops in the canyon floor, employing check dams* for irrigation. Although there are enough block houses in the greater Chaco Canyon area to house 10,000 people, archeologists are skeptical the homes were occupied year-round, owing to the absence of burial or trash sites.

Chaco Canyon Pueblo maintained large numbers of workshops (making Chaco bowls found nowhere else in North America) and massive trade networks. They imported turquoise (from Cerrillos Hills near modern Santa Fe 120 miles away) and obsidian. There are also remains of scarlet macaws (from southern Mexico) and chocolate in Mayan containers.

The greater Chaco Canyon area had 14 great houses four or five stories high with hundreds of rooms constructed around a central plaza and numerous kivas** interspersed in between. The latter had substantial load bearing walls and employed a core and veneer structure. Stone blocks were mined from the canyon floor and covered with a plaster veneer.

Mysteries of the U.S.'s Four Corners: The Vanishing - Condé Nast Traveler

Unlike Chaco Canyon, nearby Salmon and Pueblo Bonito were well populated. Only Pueblo Benito produced artifacts suggestive of a wealthy elite.

Most buildings in the Chaco Canyon region show a variety of astronomical alignments. Pueblo Benito has a great kiva capable of holding hundreds of people. All the kivas had T-shaped windows, possibly imitating the Mayan city of Palenque, also known for T-shaped windows.

The Chaco area is also known for eight wide well-made roads, some leading to  horseshoe-shaped shrines facing the sunrise. Barnhart believes that Chaco Canyon was most likely a destination for pilgrims who lived elsewhere. Modern Pueblo communities have pilgrimages focused on the winter solstice, ancestor worship and kachinas (spirits concerned with the welfare of people and crops).

*A check dam is a small, sometimes temporary, dam constructed across a drainage ditch or waterway to counteract erosion by reducing water flow velocity.

**Small underground circular rooms used for spiritual ceremonies.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.

If Kids and Teens Keep Getting COVID Boosters, What Will Happen in 10 Years?

By  Dr. Joseph Mercola

The COVID-19 vaccine inhibits the type-1 interferon pathway — an immune molecule that protects cells against invading pathogens — so mass injecting young children may erase natural herd immunity that would develop if children remained unjabbed.

  • So far, children have been largely unfazed by COVID-19 because their interferon pathway works really well. Interferon is an immune molecule that protects cells against invading pathogens.
  • The COVID-19 jab inhibits the type-1 interferon pathway, so mass injecting young children may actually erase the natural herd immunity against COVID-19 that would develop if all children remained unjabbed.
  • Aggressive cancers have exploded among adults who got the shots, even though it’s only been a little over two years since their rollout.
  • Analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report data suggests the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is redesignating cancer deaths as COVID-19 deaths to eliminate the cancer signal, and has been doing so since April 2021.
  • We’ve also seen massive increases in excess mortality from abnormal clotting issues and heart problems since the COVID-19 shots rolled out. If side effects such as cancer, heart disease and stroke are killing working-age adults in unprecedented numbers already, what will the excess mortality be, say, 10 years from now if children and teens keep getting mRNA boosters every year?

What will the future hold for people whose exposure to COVID-19 occurs during the first years of life? That question was recently asked by Katherine J. Wu, a staff writer at The Atlantic.

Wu writes:

“To be a newborn in the year 2023 — and, almost certainly, every year that follows — means emerging into a world where the coronavirus is ubiquitous … Beyond a shadow of a doubt, this virus will be one of the very first serious pathogens that today’s infants — and all future infants — meet. . .”


COVID jab prevents natural herd immunity

Wu praises the COVID-19 jab as being part of why we can be hopeful for future generations that have to live with this new virus, but is that really realistic?

Right now, everything points to the COVID-19 shot being a disaster, and no one actually knows what the long-term effect will be on children who get it.

Wu highlights the fact that children’s immune systems have the advantage of “marshaling hordes of interferon — an immune molecule that armors cells against viruses.” This is thought to be a primary reason why COVID-19 isn’t nearly as lethal in young children as in older adults.

The problem that Wu completely misses is that the COVID-19 jab inhibits the type-1 interferon pathway, so mass injecting young children may actually erase the natural herd immunity against COVID-19 that would develop if all children remained unjabbed. The shots will NOT, as Wu suggests, help us achieve herd immunity at all.

Cancer rates in young people will likely rise

Mass injecting children with a drug that impairs their immune system may also (rather predictably) result in exploding cancer rates. Already, aggressive cancers have exploded among adults who got the shots, even though it’s only been a little over two years since their rollout.

For example, data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database — historically one of the most well-kept and most heavily relied-upon medical databases in the world — showed that, compared to the previous five-year averages, cancer among U.S. Department of Defense personnel in 2021 skyrocketed.

Overall, cancers tripled among servicemen and their family members after the rollout of the COVID-19 shots. Breast cancer went up 487%. Exploding cancer rates are also seen elsewhere.

Indeed, the explosion of cases is so bad that cancer is now one of the top three leading causes of premature death among young working-age adults — a trend that in turn has driven down U.S. life expectancy by three years.

Cancer relapses and metastasis rates are exploding

On Nov. 26, 2022, The Daily Sceptic published a letter to the editor of The BMJ, written by Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor of oncology at St. George’s University of London, warning that COVID-19 boosters may be causing aggressive metastatic cancers:

“COVID no longer needs a vaccine programme given the average age of death of COVID in the U.K. is 82 and from all other causes is 81 and falling.

“The link with clots, myocarditis, heart attacks and strokes is now well accepted, as is the link with myelitis and neuropathy …

“However, there is now another reason to halt all vaccine programmes. As a practicing oncologist I am seeing people with stable disease rapidly progress after being forced to have a booster, usually so they can travel. Even within my own personal contacts I am seeing B cell-based disease after the boosters.

“They describe being distinctly unwell a few days to weeks after the booster — one developing leukemia, two work colleagues Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and an old friend who has felt like he has had Long COVID-19 since receiving his booster and who, after getting severe bone pain, has been diagnosed as having multiple metastases from a rare B cell disorder.

“I am experienced enough to know that these are not coincidental anecdotes … The reports of innate immune suppression after mRNA for several weeks would fit, as all these patients to date have melanoma or B cell-based cancers, which are very susceptible to immune control — and that is before the reports of suppressor gene suppression by mRNA in laboratory experiments. This must be aired and debated immediately.”

In a Dec. 19, 2022, article in Conservative Woman, Dalgleish continued discussing the phenomenon of rapidly spreading cancers in patients who were in stable remission for years before receiving their COVID-19 boosters.

He noted that after his letter to The BMJ was published, several oncologists contacted him to say they’re seeing the same thing in their own practices.


Cancer deaths are being intentionally hidden

Disturbingly, as detailed in “How Cancer Deaths From the COVID Jabs Are Being Hidden,” analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report data suggests the CDC is filtering out and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID-19 deaths to eliminate the cancer signal, and has been doing so since April 2021.

The signal is being hidden by swapping the underlying cause of death with main cause of death. As many as 20% of the weekly so-called COVID-19 deaths are actually cancer deaths.

An unconscionable experiment on humanity

Absolutely no one knows what the long-term ramifications of giving these injections to infants and young children will be. It’s a public health experiment unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. So far, we’ve not seen cancer rates among children skyrocket, but the uptake among young children has also been low.

Since their immune systems are also more robust, children may be protected from cancer for a time even if they do get the jab. The question is how long?

The U.S. childhood vaccination schedule now includes the initial series plus an annual COVID-19 booster. How many boosters will it take before a child’s immune system breaks and cancer starts to proliferate?

Excess mortality skyrocketing

We’ve also seen massive increases in excess mortality from abnormal clotting issues and heart problems since the COVID-19 shots rolled out.

If side effects such as cancer, heart disease and stroke are killing working-age adults in unprecedented numbers already, what will the excess mortality be, say, 10 years from now if children and teens keep getting mRNA boosters every year?



%d bloggers like this: