A major new study has finally confirmed the cause of soaring heart failure cases among children that are being reported all around the world.
Since early 2021, there has been a global surge in reports of children suffering heart failure and cardiac-related deaths.
The once-rare phenomenon has become almost commonplace in the post-Covid era.
As Slay News has been reporting, cases of cardiac-related deaths and heart failure such as myocarditis and pericarditis have increased dramatically over the past three years.
Myocarditis and pericarditis are inflammatory conditions of the heart and are generally considered to be rare, especially among children.
Severe cases can lead to serious complications and even death.
Both conditions are known side effects of the Covid mRNA shots.
In response, health officials and the corporate media have been pushing the claim that the COVID-19 virus, and not the shots, is behind the phenomenon.
However, a new large-scale study from renowned scientists at the prestigious University of Oxford has just confirmed that myocarditis and pericarditis only appear in children and adolescents after Covid vaccination and not after infection from the virus.
The new study looked at the official government data of more than 1 million English children and adolescents aged between five and 11 and 12 and 15.
The study compared vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.
The researchers also took into account the number of doses of vaccine received.
In detailing their findings, the researchers wrote:
“All myocarditis and pericarditis events during the study period occurred in vaccinated individuals.”
The study also noted that hospitalization related to COVID-19 was extremely rare among children and adolescents.
Additionally, there were no deaths from the virus recorded among the entire subject population.
The English data show that myocarditis and pericarditis were only recorded in vaccinated children and adolescents.
Other studies have claimed that myocarditis risk is higher after infection with the virus.
Adolescents had a significantly higher risk of contracting the conditions than children.
The vast majority of myocarditis and pericarditis cases occurred after the first dose of the vaccine, the study found.
Over half of the adolescents who suffered from the conditions visited the hospital as a result.
This news follows another recent study, from some of America’s most well-respected researchers, that found that Covid shots were responsible for soaring sudden deaths around the world.
As Slay News reported, the case study was conducted by Harvard Medical School and chronicled soaring cases of fatal
cerebral ischemia over the past three years.
Cerebral ischemia is a form of deadly brain damage triggered by insufficient blood flow to the brain.
The Harvard researchers found that Moderna’s Covid mRNA injections specifically caused the recent spike in the fatal disorder.
Leading experts have been responding to the explosive study by raising the alarm about the mRNA vaccines.
The Harvard study is the latest in a long line of studies linking the shots to sudden death and potentially fatal side effects.
In response to the Harvard study, Dr. John Campbell – a top British oncologist, immunologist, and immunotherapy expert, published a video breaking down the results.
“This could not be a more serious report,” Campbell warns.
Dr. Peter McCullough also discussed this case study on his Substack.
“We are becoming accustomed to unexpected death after COVID-19 among young persons who have taken one or more injections of the COVID-19 vaccine,” McCullough said.
“It is important to realize that not all deaths after vaccination are cardiac.”
Slay News recently reported on the bombshell admission from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that the Covid mRNA sots have killed hundreds of thousands of American children and young people.
The explosive admission was uncovered in a secret CDC report showing that a staggering half a million American hildren and young adults have been killed by Covid shots.
The CDC report has revealed that almost 500,000 Americans aged between 0 and 44 years old died from the angerous side effects of the Covid mRNA injections.
The recorded deaths occurred between the start of the public rollout of the shots in early 2021 and October 9, 2022.
However, due to the timeline of the data, the already shocking figures do not include deaths recorded over the past year and a half.
The Ukraine War was started in February
2014 by a U.S. coup which replaced the democratically elected and
neutralist Ukrainian President, with a U.S. selected and rabidly
anti-Russian leader, who immediately imposed an ethnic-cleansing program
to get rid of the residents in the regions that had voted
overwhelmingly for the overthrown President.
I shall here state and — by means of links to my sources — document,
the actual history of the war in Ukraine, and then will present the
Russian version of this history, as that was stated at the U.N. Security
Council on July 16th by Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
The most important difference between these two historical accounts
is that whereas mine attributes Russia’s 24 February 2022 invasion of
Ukraine, to Russia’s main reason for the invasion being Russia’s need to
prevent the U.S. Government from achieving its long-held dream of
placing its nuclear missiles a mere 317 miles away (five minutes of
missile-flying time away) from The Kremlin (since only Ukraine is even
nearly that close to the Kremlin); Russia’s instead attributes its 24
February 2022 invasion of Ukraine to Russia’s main reason for the
invasion (“Special Military Operation”) being Russia’s desire to protect
the residents in the breakaway far-eastern former Donbass region of
Ukraine (which by then had separated itself from Ukraine), to protect
them from the military attacks that ever since April 2014 Ukraine’s
government was making against the residents there.
Did Russia do it to protect itself, or to protect the Donbassers?
(I note here that buried in the middle of the Russian explanation is the statement that, “A special military operation was
launched to eliminate threats to Russia’s security and protect people
who feel that they are part of Russian culture and live on lands that
were settled by their ancestors for centuries, and to save them from
legislative and physical extermination.” However, though Lavrov mentions
first there the “eliminate threats to Russia’s security,” no clear
amplification is provided in his speech as to what that phrase is
actually referring to. And this has been the way all official Russian
explanations of the 24 February 2022 Russian invasion have been.
Furthermore, I am not disagreeing with anything that was said in the
Russian presentation; I believe all of it to be true. But I do think
that its primary emphasis upon the admirable but nonetheless secondary
reason for the 24 February 2024 invasion — to protect the residents in
Donbass — tends to give a distorted view of why Russia invaded, and is
also otherwise entirely unconstructive. Moreover, I believe that the
true primary reason for that invasion would be MUCH more persuasive to
people in The West — and even elsewhere — than a continuation of
reliance upon the secondary reason for that invasion would be.)
Any reader-comments about these two contrasting historical accounts —
these very different attributions of what Russia’s main reason was for
the 24 February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine — will be appreciated.
The U.S. Government had engaged the Gallup polling organization, bothbefore and after the coup,
in order to poll Ukrainians, and especially ones who lived in its
Crimean independent republic (where Russia has had its main naval base
ever since 1783), regarding their views on U.S., Russia, NATO, and the
EU; and, generally, Ukrainians were far more pro-Russia than pro-U.S.,
pro-NATO, or pro-EU, but this was especially the case in
Crimea; so, America’s Government knew that Crimeans would be especially
resistant. However, this was not really new information.
In other words: what Obama did was generally successful: it grabbed Ukraine, or most of it,
and it changed Ukrainians’ minds regarding America and Russia. But only
after the subsequent passage of time did the American billionaires’
neoconservative heart become successfully grafted into the Ukrainian
nation so as to make Ukraine a viable place to position U.S. nuclear
missiles against Moscow (which is the U.S. Government’s goal there).
Furthermore: America’s rulers also needed to do some work upon U.S. public opinion. Not until
February of 2014 — the time of Obama’s coup — did more than 15% of the
American public have a “very unfavorable” view of Russia.
(Right before Russia invaded Ukraine, that figure had already risen to
42%. America’s press — and academia or public-policy ‘experts’ — have
been very effective at managing public opinion, for the benefit of
America’s billionaires.)
Then came the Minsk Agreements (#1 & #2, with #2 being the final version, which is shown here, as a U.N. Security Council Resolution),
between Ukraine and the separatist region in its far east, and which
the U.S. Government refused to participate in, but the U.S.-installed
Ukrainian government (then under the oligarch Petro Poroshenko) signed
it in order to have a chance of Ukraine’s gaining EU membership, but
never complied with any of it; and, so, the war continued); and, then,
finally, as the Ukrainian government (now under Volodmyr Zelensky) was
greatly intensifying its shelling of the break-away far-eastern region,
Russia presented, to both the U.S. Government and its NATO military
alliance against Russia, two proposed agreements for negotiation (one to
U.S., the other to NATO), but neither the U.S. nor its NATO agreed to
negotiate. The key portions of the two 17 December 2021 proposed
Agreements, with both the U.S. and with its NATO, were, in regards to NATO:
Article 1
The Parties shall guide in their relations by the principles of
cooperation, equal and indivisible security. They shall not strengthen
their security individually, within international organizations,
military alliances or coalitions at the expense of the security of other
Parties. …
Article 4
The Russian Federation and all the Parties that were member
States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as of 27 May 1997,
respectively, shall not deploy military forces and weaponry on the
territory of any of the other States in Europe in addition to the forces
stationed on that territory as of 27 May 1997. With the consent of all
the Parties such deployments can take place in exceptional cases to
eliminate a threat to security of one or more Parties.
Article 5
The Parties shall not deploy land-based intermediate- and
short-range missiles in areas allowing them to reach the territory of
the other Parties.
Article 6
All member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
commit themselves to refrain from any further enlargement of NATO,
including the accession of Ukraine as well as other States.
The Parties shall seek to ensure that all international
organizations, military alliances and coalitions in which at least one
of the Parties is taking part adhere to the principles contained in the
Charter of the United Nations.
Article 3
The Parties shall not use the territories of other States with a
view to preparing or carrying out an armed attack against the other
Party or other actions affecting core security interests of the other
Party.
Article 4
The United States of America shall undertake to prevent further
eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and deny
accession to the Alliance to the States of the former Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics.
The United States of America shall not establish military bases
in the territory of the States of the former Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics that are not members of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, use their infrastructure for any military activities or
develop bilateral military cooperation with them.
Any reader here can easily click onto the respective link to either
proposed Agreement, in order to read that entire document, so as to
evaluate whether or not all of its proposed provisions are acceptable
and reasonable. What was proposed by Russia in each of the two was only a
proposal, and the other side (the U.S. side) in each of the two
instances, was therefore able to pick and choose amongst those proposed
provisions, which ones were accepted, and to negotiate regarding any of
the others; but, instead, the U.S. side simply rejected all of them.
Washington and NATO have formally rejected Russia’s key demands
for assurances that the US-led military bloc will not expand closer
towards its borders, leaked correspondence reportedly shows.
According to documents seen
by Spanish daily El Pais and published on Wednesday morning, Moscow’s
calls for a written guarantee that Ukraine will not be admitted as a
member of NATO were dismissed following several rounds of talks between
Russian and Western diplomats. …
The US-led bloc denied that it posed a threat to Russia. …
The US similarly rejected the demand that NATO does not expand
even closer to Russia’s borders. “The United States continues to firmly
support NATO’s Open Door Policy.”
NATO-U.S. was by now clearly determined to get Ukraine into NATO and
to place its nukes so near to The Kremlin as to constitute, like a
checkmate in chess, a forced defeat of Russia, a capture of its central
command. This was, but in reverse, the situation that America’s
President JFK had faced with regard to the Soviet Union in the 1962
Cuban Missile Crisis, when the U.S. would have invaded Cuba if
Khrushchev wouldn’t agree to a mutually acceptable settlement — which he
did, and so WW3 was averted on that occasion. But whereas Khrushchev
was reasonable, Biden is not; and, so, we again stand at the brink of
WW3, but this time with a truly evil head-of-state (Biden — no better
than Obama), who might even be willing to go beyond that brink in order
to become able to achieve world-conquest.
Russia did what it had to do: it invaded Ukraine, on 24 February 2022.
Statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the UN
Security Council meeting on Multilateral Cooperation for a More Just,
Democratic and Sustainable World Order, New York, July 16, 2024
I would like to extend a warm welcome to the distinguished high representatives present in the Security Council Chamber.
Their participation in today’s meeting confirms the importance of the
topic under discussion. In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s
provisional legal procedures, I invite the representatives of Australia,
Bangladesh, Belarus, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Brazil,
Cambodia, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ghana, Guatemala,
Hungary, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq,
Kazakhstan, Kuwait, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Viet Nam to
participate in the meeting. Maldives, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, United
Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Syrian Arab Republic,
Thailand, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Uganda, Chile, Ethiopia and South Africa.
In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional legal
procedures, I invite His Excellency S. Lambrinidis, Head of the
delegation of the European Union to the United Nations, to participate in this meeting.
The UN Security Council will now begin its consideration of agenda
item 2. I would like to draw the attention of the Council members to
document S/2024/537 – Letter dated 9 July 2024 from the Permanent
Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations addressed
to the Secretary-General of the United Nations Guterres, transmitting a
concept note on the item under consideration.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
Your Excellency,
Today, the very foundations of the international legal order –
strategic stability and the UN-centered system of world politics – are
being tested for their strength. It is impossible to resolve the
multiplying conflicts unless we understand their root causes and restore
faith in our ability to join forces for the common good and justice for
all.
Let’s be frank: not all the States represented in this Hall recognize the key principle of the UN Charter:
the sovereign equality of all States. The United States has long
declared its own exclusivity through the mouths of its presidents. This
concerns Washington’s attitude towards its allies, who are required to
obey unquestioningly, even to the detriment of their national interests.
Rule, America! This is the essence of the notorious “rules – based
order” – a direct threat to multilateralism and international peace.
The most important components of international law – the UN Charter
and the decisions of our Council – are interpreted by the “collective
West” in a perverse and selective way, depending on what attitude came
from the White House. And many Security Council resolutions are ignored
altogether. Among them are resolution 2202, which approved the Minsk
Agreements on Ukraine, and resolution 1031, which approved the Dayton
Agreement on Peace in BiH on the basis of the principle of equal rights
of three state-forming peoples and two entities. You can talk endlessly
about sabotage of resolutions on the Middle East – what is the value of
A. Blinken’s statement in an interview with CNN in February 2021 in
response to a question about what he thinks about the decision of the
previous US administration to recognize Israel’s ownership of the Syrian
Golan Heights. If anyone doesn’t remember, I’ll refresh your memory. In
response to this question, the Secretary of State said: “Leaving aside
the question of legality, from a practical point of view, the Golan is
very important for ensuring Israel’s security.” And this is despite the
fact that UN Security Council Resolution 497 of 1981, as we all know
very well, which no one has canceled, qualifies Israel’s illegal
annexation of the Golan Heights. But, according to these “rules”, it is
necessary-to quote A. Blinken – “to leave aside the question of
legality”. And, of course, the statement of the US Permanent
Representative that resolution 2728, adopted on March 25 this year,
demanding an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, “is not legally
binding” is fresh in everyone’s memory. In other words, American “rules”
are more important than Article 25 of the UN Charter.
In the last century, J. R. R. Tolkien, Orwell, in Animal Farm,
already foresaw the essence of “rule-based order”: “all animals are
equal, but some are more equal than others.” If you do the will of the
hegemon, you are allowed to do anything. And if you dare and start
defending your national interests, you will be declared an outcast and
subject to sanctions.
Washington’s hegemonic policy has not changed for decades. Without
exception, all Euro-Atlantic security schemes were based on ensuring US
dominance, including subjugating Europe and “containing” Russia. The
main role was assigned to NATO, which eventually “crushed” the European Union, which was supposedly created for Europeans. The OSCE structures were shamelessly privatized in gross violation of the Helsinki Final Act.
The reckless expansion of NATO, despite repeated warnings from Moscow
over the years, has also triggered the Ukrainian crisis, starting with
the coup d’etat organized by Washington in February 2014 to establish
full control over Ukraine in
order to prepare an offensive against Russia with the help of the
neo-Nazi regime brought to power. When P. A. Poroshenko and then V. A.
Zelensky waged a war against their own citizens in the Donbas, legally
destroyed Russian education, Russian culture, Russian media and the
Russian language in general, banned the UOC [Ukrainian Orthodox Church],
no one in the West noticed this, did not demand that their wards in
Kiev “observe decency”, do not violate international conventions on the
rights of national minorities, and the Constitution of Ukraine itself,
which requires that these rights be respected. A special military operation was
launched to eliminate threats to Russia’s security and protect people
who feel that they are part of Russian culture and live on lands that
were settled by their ancestors for centuries, and to save them from
legislative and physical extermination.
It is significant that even now, when numerous initiatives are being
put forward for the Ukrainian settlement, few people remember Kiev’s
violation of human rights and national minorities. Only recently did the
EU documents on the start of negotiations on Ukraine’s accession
formulate a corresponding requirement, mainly due to the principled and
persistent position of Hungary. However, the real possibilities and
desire of Brussels to influence the Kiev regime are questionable.
We call on all those who show a sincere interest in overcoming the
crisis in Ukraine to take into account in their proposals the key issue
of the rights of all national minorities without exception. Its silence
devalues peaceful initiatives, and V. A. Zelensky’s racist policy
actually gets approval. It is characteristic that in 2014 (ten years
ago) V. A. Zelensky said: “If in the East of Ukraine and in Crimea
people want to speak Russian-let go, leave them alone, legally let them
speak Russian. The language will never divide our native country.” Since
then, Washington has successfully re-educated him, and already in 2021,
Vladimir Zelensky in an interview demanded that those who feel involved
in Russian culture should go to Russia for the sake of the future of
their children and grandchildren.
I appeal to the masters of the Ukrainian regime: force them to comply
with Article 1.3 of the UN Charter, which guarantees the fundamental
rights and freedoms of all people “without distinction between race,
gender, language or religion.”
Dear colleagues,
The North Atlantic Alliance is no longer satisfied with the war that
it unleashed against Russia at the hands of the illegal authorities in
Kiev, and the entire OSCE space is not enough for it. Having almost
completely destroyed the fundamental agreements on arms control, the
United States continues to escalate the confrontation. The other day, at
a summit in Washington, the leaders of the alliance countries confirmed
their claims to a dominant role not only in the Euro-Atlantic region,
but also in the Asia-Pacific region. It is declared that NATO is still
guided by the task of protecting the territory of its members, but for
this, they say, it is necessary to extend the alliance’s dominance to
the entire Eurasian continent and adjacent sea areas. NATO’s military
infrastructure is moving into the Pacific with the obvious goal of
undermining the ASEAN-centric architecture that has been built on the
principles of equality, mutual interests and consensus for decades. To
replace the inclusive mechanisms created around ASEAN,
the United States and its allies are putting together closed
confrontational blocks subordinate to them, such as AUCUS and other
various “fours” and “threes”. The other day, the deputy head of the
Pentagon, K. Hicks, said that the United States and its allies “must
prepare for protracted wars, and not only in Europe.”
In order to “contain” Russia, China and other countries whose
independent policies are perceived as a challenge to hegemony, the West
is aggressively breaking the system of globalization that was originally
formed according to its own patterns. Washington did everything
possible to blow up (including literally – by organizing terrorist
attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines) the foundations of mutually
beneficial energy cooperation between Russia and Germany and Europe as a
whole. Berlin was silent then. Today we see yet another humiliation for
Germany, whose government has implicitly obeyed the US decision to
deploy US medium-range ground-based missiles on German territory. The
German Chancellor, O. Scholz, simply said: “The United States has
decided to deploy high-precision strike systems in Germany, and this is a
good decision.” The US decided.
And with all this, Mr. J. Kirby, Media Coordinator in Washington, on
behalf of the President of the United States, states: “We are not
looking for a third world war. This would have terrible consequences for
the European continent.” As they say, a Freudian caveat: Washington is
convinced that the new global war will not affect the United States, but
its European allies. If such an analysis is the basis for the strategy
of the J. P. Morgan administration, Biden, then this is an extremely
dangerous misconception. But Europeans, of course, must realize what a
suicidal role they are destined to play.
The Americans, having put the entire collective West “under the gun”,
are expanding the trade and economic war with the undesirable ones,
unleashing an unprecedented campaign of unilateral coercive measures
that boomerang primarily in Europe and lead to further fragmentation of
the world economy. The neocolonial practices of Western countries affect
the countries of the Global South in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Illegal sanctions, numerous protectionist measures, and restrictions on
access to technology directly contradict true multilateralism and create
serious obstacles to achieving the goals of the UN development agenda.
Where are all the trappings of the free market that the United States
and its allies have taught everyone for so many years? The market
economy, fair competition, inviolability of property, the presumption of
innocence, freedom of movement of people, goods, capital and services –
all this is now being scrapped. Geopolitics has buried the once sacred
laws of the market for the West. Recently, we have heard public demands
from US and EU officials for China to reduce “excess production” in
high-tech industries, as the West has begun to lose its long-standing
advantages in these areas. Now, instead of market principles – the same
“rules”.
Dear colleagues,
The actions of the United States and its allies hinder international
cooperation and [the goal to] build a more just world, take entire
countries and regions hostage, prevent peoples from exercising their
sovereign rights set forth in the UN Charter, and distract from
much-needed joint work to resolve conflicts in the Middle East, Africa,
and other regions, reduce global inequality, and eliminate the threats
of terrorism and drug crime, hunger and disease.
I am convinced that this situation can be corrected – of course, if
there is good will. In order to stop the negative scenario from
unfolding, we would like to propose a number of steps aimed at restoring
confidence and stabilizing the international situation.
1. The root causes of the current crisis in Europe must be addressed
once and for all. The conditions for establishing sustainable peace in
Ukraine were set out by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir
Putin, and I will not repeat them.
A political and diplomatic settlement should be accompanied by
concrete steps to remove the threats to the Russian Federation emanating
from the western, Euro-Atlantic direction. When agreeing on mutual
guarantees and agreements, we will have to take into account the new
geostrategic realities on the Eurasian continent, where a continent-wide
architecture of truly equal and indivisible security is being formed.
Europe risks falling behind in this objective historical process. We are
ready to find a balance of interests.
2. The restoration of the regional and global balance of power should
be accompanied by active efforts to eliminate the injustices in the
global economy. In a multipolar world, by definition, there should be no
monopolists in monetary and financial regulation, trade, or technology.
This point of view is shared by the overwhelming majority of members of
the world community. Of particular importance is the rapid reform of
the Bretton Woods institutions and the WTO, whose activities should
reflect the real weight of non-Western growth and development centers.
3. Major, qualitative changes must also take place in other
institutions of global governance if they are to work for the benefit of
all. First of all, this concerns our Organization, which still, despite
everything, is the epitome of multilateralism, has a unique, universal
legitimacy and a generally recognized breadth of competencies.
An important step towards restoring the effectiveness of the UN would
be for all its members to reconfirm their commitment to the principles
of the UN Charter, not selectively, but in their entirety and
interrelation. We can think together about what form such a
re-confirmation might take.
The Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter, formed on the
initiative of Venezuela, is doing a lot of work. We invite all countries
that still believe in the rule of international law to join its work.
A key element of UN reform should be a change in the composition of
the Security Council, although this in itself will not help to establish
productive work if there is no basic agreement on working methods among
the permanent members. This consideration, however, does not negate the
imperative of eliminating geographical and geopolitical distortions in
the Security Council, where today the countries of the collective West
are clearly overrepresented. A long-overdue step is to reach the
broadest possible agreement on the specific parameters of reform aimed
at strengthening the representation of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Changes in the personnel policy of the Secretariat are also needed to
eliminate the dominance of citizens and subjects of Western countries
in the administrative structures of the Organization. The
Secretary-General and his staff must strictly observe, without any
exceptions, the principles of impartiality and neutrality, as prescribed
by Article 100 of the UN Charter, which we do not tire of reminding.
4. In addition to the United Nations, other multilateral
organizations should contribute to strengthening the multipolar
principles of international life. Among them is the Group of Twenty,
which includes both World-majority countries and Western states. The
G20’s mandate is strictly limited to economic and development issues, so
it is important that the substantive dialogue on this platform is
spared from opportunistic attempts to throw in geopolitical plots.
Otherwise, we will ruin this useful platform.
BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization are
playing an increasingly important role in building a just multilateral
order based on the principles of the UN Charter. They bring together
countries representing different regions and civilizations, cooperating
on the basis of equality, mutual respect, consensus and mutually
acceptable compromises – the “gold standard” of multilateral interaction
involving great Powers.
Such regional associations as the CIS, CSTO, EAEU,
ASEAN, GCC, LAS, Afro-Union, CELAC are of practical importance for the
establishment of multipolarity. We see it as an important task to
establish diverse relations between them, including involving the UN’s
potential. The Russian Presidency of the Council will focus one of its
upcoming meetings on cooperation between the UN and Eurasian regional
organizations.
Dear colleagues,
Speaking at the BRICS Parliamentary Forum on July 9 this year In
St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin said: “The formation
of a world order that reflects the real balance of power is a complex
and in many ways even painful process.” We believe that discussions on
this topic should be organized without falling into fruitless polemics,
based on a sober analysis of the totality of facts. First of all, it is
necessary to restore professional diplomacy, a culture of dialogue, the
ability to listen, and preserve channels of crisis communication.
The lives of millions of people depend on the ability of politicians
and diplomats to formulate something like a unified vision of the
future. Whether our world will be diverse and just depends only on the
Member States. I would like to emphasize once again that there is a
point of support – this is the Charter of our Organization. If everyone,
without exception, follows its spirit and letter, then the United
Nations will be able to overcome the current differences and reach a
common denominator on most issues. The “end of history” did not take
place. Let us work together for the beginning of a history of genuine
multilateralism, reflecting the richness of the cultural and
civilizational diversity of the world’s peoples. We invite you to
discuss it, of course, it should only be honest.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change,
is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to
enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the
world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social
‘sciences’ — duping the public.
The Biden Administration pressured Amazon to hide books for sale on its platform that were critical of vaccines during the pandemic, it has been revealed.
The findings were presented by the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in documents that show Amazon reduced the visibility of titles that the government deemed overly critical of big pharma shots.
The documents show that some books were simply generally critical of vaccines, with several written by medical professionals. Some were even just reviews of scientific studies.
The Federal government compiled a “Do Not Promote” list, to which more than 40 titles were added.
In a series of X posts, Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan explained how internal emails from Amazon contain employees revealed that “the impetus for this request is criticism from the Biden Administration.”
In response to a subpoena from @JudiciaryGOP, @Amazon revealed the 43 book titles it censored because of the Biden White House’s pressure.
Whether you love or hate the books on this list, no bookstore should be censoring books because of government pressure. pic.twitter.com/64PGF1fxJU — Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 21, 2024
They even targeted a children’s book that they deemed to be too friendly toward the unvaccinated.
The children’s book said the vaccinated & unvaccinated can be friends.
Instead of censoring it, Amazon should have sent the book to Fauci, @GavinNewsom, and @JoeBiden. Remember when they said everyone had to comply with their made-up rules and vax mandates or lose their jobs? pic.twitter.com/32rkxBaqnm — Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 21, 2024
And if these efforts weren’t enough to effectively deamplify opposing viewpoints, Amazon also censored books reviewing scientific papers.
The book also had the audacity to address whether Big Pharma’s funding of research has the potential to create conflicts of interest. pic.twitter.com/U1UiJYwpLP — Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 21, 2024
“Don’t let the Biden Admin tell you that their censorship campaign was about concerns of misinformation going viral on social media,” Jordan wrote.
He further urged “They were going after BOOKS too. This is–and always has been–about suppressing difavored views, not purported challenges of new technologies.”
This is unconstitutional government censorship, full stop.
Whether you agree with this speech or not, free speech is free speech and the Biden Admin pressured private companies to censor constitutionally protected speech. — Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) June 21, 2024
There is a deep irony attached to this story in that the Biden Administration has repeatedly accused Republicans of trying to ‘ban’ books nationwide.
While in almost all of these cases, the likes of Florida governor Ron DeSantis were expressing opposition to school libraries carrying sexually explicit books aimed at children, it turns out the Biden Administration was actively working to censor books for adults.
Since 2021, Walter Chestnut has been investigating whether SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein causes accelerated biological ageing.
On Monday, researchers from Qatar published a paper that explored and summarised research on biological ageing markers in covid patients. This paper confirmed Chestnut’s hypothesis that the spike protein induces accelerated ageing.
The hallmarks of ageing are a set of biological processes that contribute to the ageing process and are characterised by a progressive loss of physiological integrity, leading to impaired function and increased vulnerability to death. These hallmarks were first proposed by Carlos López-Otín and his colleagues in 2013 and have since been widely accepted as a framework for understanding the molecular basis of ageing.
There are nine hallmarks of ageing. The Qatari researchers focused on two: epigenetic alterations and telomere attrition.
Epigenetic alterations are changes in gene expression that occur without altering the underlying DNA sequence, which can lead to altered cellular function and behaviour. Telomere attrition is the shortening of telomeres, the protective caps on the ends of chromosomes, which can lead to cellular senescence and genomic instability.
The Qatari researchers found “multiple studies utilising different epigenetic clocks unveiled epigenetic age acceleration and telomere shortening in covid-19 patients, particularly in severe cases.”
Yesterday, Chestnut published an article about the newly published study, comparing it to his own research. While both the Qatari researchers and Chestnut focus on SARS-CoV-2, we should bear in mind that covid injections induce cells in the bodies of recipients to produce the spike protein that is found on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
In November 2021, I published a post on Twitter (now X) demonstrating how the Spike Protein of SARS-CoV-2 induces all nine “hallmarks of ageing” as defined in the classic paper by Carlos López-Otín et al.
I had formed the hypothesis in early 2021 and by November enough had been published to prove it in theory. The paper published yesterday proves it in fact.
Here is my post from November 2021: ‘Hallmarks of Ageing and the Spike’.
The findings published yesterday focus on two of the nine hallmarks of ageing that the spike protein induces. These are epigenetic alterations by methylation and telomere attrition.
Let’s first look at DNA methylation.
A study conducted by Mongelli et al. determined the Biological Age (bAge) of 117 individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 (referred to as post-COVID-19) and 144 healthy participants using pyrosequencing focusing on CpG islands that have previously been identified as reliable indicators of bAge developed by Beckaert et al. The results indicate an increase in bAge among the post-COVID-19 group with an acceleration of DeltaAge by approximately 5.25 years, beyond the normal range (26, 46).
The calculated EAA showed a significant DNAm age acceleration across different clocks including Horvath, Hannum, PhenoAge, and GrimAge clocks in severe COVID-19 patients (48). Similarly, non-severe COVID-19 cases exhibited significant DNAm age acceleration in the Horvath, Hannum, skin&blood, and GrimAge clocks. Further analysis of epigenetic age dynamic acceleration across each COVID-19 disease phase revealed an acceleration from the initial phase, which was partly reversed in later phase. The impact of COVID-19 on “biological ageing”, Frontiers Immunology, 10 June 2024
As I wrote in November 2021, the spike protein induces this:
Viral Protein: Spike protein Host Machinery: ACE2R Epigenetic Change: Methylation at CpG site An immune epigenetic insight to COVID-19 infection, National Library of Medicine, 9 March 2021
The other aspect of biological ageing that yesterday’s paper focused on is telomere shortening.
In a prospective study, telomere length in hospitalized COVID-19 patients revealed a significantly higher proportion of COVID-19 patients with shorter telomeres when compared to the control cohort. Telomere attrition was associated with a higher risk of critical disease, defined as admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or death without ICU (59). In another study on COVID-19 survivors, significant telomere shortening was observed following absolute human telomere length measurement (26). A similar finding was reported by Sanchez-Vazquez et al. where telomeres in severe COVID-19 cases were observed to be shorter than those in patients with mild COVID-19 symptoms (53, 60). The impact of COVID-19 on “biological ageing”, Frontiers Immunology, 10 June 2024
Once again, as I wrote in November 2021, the spike protein alone induces telomere shortening.
We predict that S2 spike RNA treated AEC2 will produce less telomerase activity in this peak of 24h. The reduction in the activity can be quantified with G-quadruplex-intercalating porphyrin telomerase inhibitor. Further, the telomerase activity can also be quantified with PCR based Telomere Repeat Amplification Protocol (TRAP). SARS-CoV2 Spike and Telomerase RNA’s Compared to Arrive at an Explanation for Increased Ageing in Alveolar Cells in Severe COVID-19, Journal of Bacteriology and Parasitology
What concerns me is that the forest is not being seen, only the trees. Isn’t it clear? Repeated exposures to the spike protein will almost certainly continually induce these effects. Three exposures? Thank you very much for fifteen years of your life! Capisce?
If there is a silver lining in all of this, it is that since we understood the fundamentals correctly here, it is much more likely that the therapeutics we have been discussing are perhaps more likely to ameliorate these conditions. I will keep working. As always.
About the Author
Walter Chestnut is an American web developer, market strategist, covid researcher and the principal investigator at WMC Research, a website that contains hypotheses, which are intended to stimulate studies, additional research and dialogue about covid-19. In 2021, he co-authored an opinion piece in France-Soir with the late Luc Montagnier about SARS-CoV-2 accelerating biological age. He also publishes articles on a Substack page titled ‘WMC Research’ which you can subscribe to and follow HERE https://wmcresearch.substack.com/
Last week, the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals agreed that mandating covid-19 “vaccines” violates the individual human rights of teachers and other staff of Los Angeles School Unified Districts (“LAUSD”), remanding a lower court’s dismissal of their case against the LA County School District’s vaccine mandate for employees.
This gives some hope that Dr. Joseph Sansome’s case – which if successful, compels Florida’s governor to stop distributing covid injections – will be moved forward in the courts. After being dismissed the case is now in the Appellate Court. An appeal to which Dr. Francis Boyle has added his affidavit.
“It is my expert opinion that, [the covid injections] meet the criteria of biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction according to Biological Weapons [Convention],” his affidavit states.
At the end of last month, Dr. Francis Boyle submitted an affidavit to strengthen an appeal against a decision to dismiss a legal case filed to compel Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to prohibit the distribution of covid injections. If successful, the case will also compel Florida’s Attorney General to confiscate vials of vaccines.
The case is being brought by psychotherapist Dr. Joseph Sansone. The first formal written application, the ‘Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus’ (“the writ”), was filed with the Florida Supreme Court on 3 March 2024. The case was then transferred to the Circuit Court on 20 March 2024.
On 9 April, the Circuit Court dismissed the case. On 14 April, Dr. Sansome filed a motion for reconsideration. This motion was denied the following day. So, on 22 April, Dr. Sansome filed a motion for rehearing. The following day, this motion was also denied. Later that day, on 22 April, Dr. Sansome filed a notice of appeal.
On 27 May, he filed an appellate brief with the Appellate Court or Court of Appeals. The appellate brief is a document submitted to an appeals court by a lawyer, outlining the legal arguments as to why their client should win the case.
You can follow the court case on Dr. Sansome’s Substack page ‘Mind Matters and Everything Else with Dr. Joseph Sansone’. His latest article on the subject was published on 6 June 2024, HERE.
Included in the writ, are affidavits from medical legal advisor and biotech analyst Karen Kingston and Dr. Ana Maria Mihalcea. Now, Harvard-educated law professor Dr. Francis Boyle has added his affidavit to the case.
Dr. Boyle is considered one of the world’s leading legal experts on biological weapons and he drafted the US Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act (“the Act”), which was passed into law in 1989 to implement the Biological Weapons Convention and to criminalise the development, production and possession of biological weapons.
In his affidavit for Dr. Sansone’s case, Dr. Boyle stated that covid injections violate the Act. He asserted that “covid-19 injections,” “covid-19 nanoparticle injections,” and “mRNA nanoparticle injections” are biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction which violate Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023). Dr. Francis Boyle’s Affidavit
Pursuant to 28 USC 1746, I, Francis A. Boyle declare under penalty of perjury that the statements contained herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
I am Francis A. Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. I received an AB (1971) in Political Science from the University of Chicago, then a JD degree magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, and AM and PhD degrees in Political Science from Harvard University.
I have advised numerous international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and bio-warfare. In 1985 I publicly called for and then drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the US Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush with the approval of the United States Department of Justice. See my book Biowarfare and Terrorism (Clarity Press: 2005).
It is my expert opinion that, ‘COVID-19 nanoparticle injections’ or ‘mRNA nanoparticle injections’ or ‘COVID-19 injections’ meet the criteria of biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction according to Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023).
I hereby certify that the stylistically edited transcript of an interview I had with Stew Peters is a fair and accurate statement of my professional opinion on the matters set forth therein. See the attached Exhibit.
Respectfully submitted by Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law
Signature:
Date: 5/27/2024 Interview with Stew Peters
Dr. Sansone has not provided the “attached exhibit” as mentioned in Dr. Boyle’s affidavit. However, in a Substack posted in April 2023, Dr. Sansone highlighted a Stew Peters’ interview stating: “This is Dr. Boyle’s interview on Stew Peters talking about his endorsement of the ban the jab resolution that I authored.”
The interview Dr. Sansone was referring to is the video below. In this interview, Dr. Boyle argued that covid-19 is a bioweapon, not a natural virus.
In 2013, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (“DARPA”) awarded Moderna Therapeutics up to $25 million to research and develop its messenger RNA therapeutics. “DARPA is the Pentagon,” Dr. Boyle said. “The Pentagon bought, paid for, envisioned these mRNA frakenshots.”
“I should also point out that Fort Detrick was involved in the development of covid-19 – the offensive biological warfare weapon – at the University of North Carolina BSL3 [Biosafety Level-3 laboratory],” he said.
“So, the Pentagon is both sides of the argument here – they’re developing the weapon and the alleged vaccines which is also a weapon,” he added.
Another interview Dr. Boyle had on The Stew Peters Show was titled ‘Plandemic Elites BROKE Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act: Author Of 1989 Law: Covid Is A Bioweapon!’ which was aired on 24 February 2023.
Dr. Francis Boyle mentioned the powerful documentary film “Anthrax War” during this important discussion. Investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley published the film on her YouTube channel way back in early 2020, and YouTube has since removed the film, not surprisingly, for “violating YouTube’s terms of service”.
YouTube’s censoring action should be seen as proof positive that what Dr. Francis Boyle is saying in this interview reflects nothing less than the absolute truth. People can watch the film (embedded via Rumble.com) at the following link:
2009 Documentary Connects With Pandemic 2020. – THE ONENESS of HUMANITY
Why all the fuss over vaxx deaths. Death is nothing to be scared of and the Daily Mail has proof, see below for “startling visions and unexplained incidents that prove death is nothing to be scared of”. Sarcasm over.
Here’s a conspiracy theory and I know I’m right about this one.
The deep state knows that the huge increase in deaths is being noticed by even the dumbest of the sheeple and they need to do something about it to prevent the perpetrators of the scamdemic and vaxx deaths from being led to the gallows – or death by lethal injection which would be more appropriate.
So they have started a propaganda campaign to placate the masses. It is a form of propaganda that was used in WW2.
Over the last few months the Mail has been running articles about how death is not to be feared, it can fun. I’ve lost count, here are some examples.
“Hospice nurse reveals REAL reasons why NOBODY should be afraid of dying – as she details exactly what happens to the body when it begins to ‘shut down'”
“I’ve seen death and it’s nothing to be scared of: One night, I saw an angel comforting a dying patient. Countless others have told me about their spellbinding visions. There is nothing to fear”
“How you can foresee when a loved one will die, reveals DR PENNI SANTORI who has a PHD on near-death experiences. I’ve witnessed startling visions and unexplained incidents that prove death is nothing to be scared of”
“I’ve studied near-death experiences for eight years and seen countless people die, says DR PENNY SARTORI. Here are the wonderful things you see and hear when you pass on – and why it’s nothing to be scared of…”
See – nothing to be scared of. You should look forward to going to Carousel.
This form of propaganda was used in WW2 – a noted example being in a very enjoyable film called “The Halfway House”.
“A group of travellers, each with a personal problem that they want to hide, arrives at a mysterious Welsh country inn. There is a certain strangeness in the air as they are greeted by the innkeeper and his daughter (Mervyn Johns and his real life daughter Glynis Johns). Why are all the newspapers a year old? And why doesn’t Gwyneth seem to cast a shadow?”
It turns out that the innkeeper and his daughter are dead. They have come back to tell the people that they need not fear death.
This was to counteract the public’s grief and depression caused by their loved ones being slaughtered in the contrived war.
No so-called vaccine, probably including covid products, has maimed and killed more adolescents over the past twenty years than Merck’s HPV vaccine – Gardasil.
Highlighting a paper titled ‘A reactogenic “placebo” and the ethics of informed consent in Gardasil HPV vaccine clinical trials: A case study from Denmark’ published on 31 May 2024, Dr. Christopher Exley said:
“There are a number of lawsuits ongoing looking to bring Merck, the pedlar of Gardasil HPV vaccines, to justice. This paper and our collective efforts can help to bring this to pass.”
We have reproduced Dr. Exley’s Substack article below, taking the liberty to embed the videos he mentioned in it.
HPV Vaccine By Dr. Christopher Exley
There are no “top trumps” on the worst of vaccines that include an aluminium adjuvant. However, so-called vaccines against the human papilloma virus (“HPV”) must give most a run for their money.
Herein I simply wish to direct you to critical comment and information on this subject. I hope that this will be sufficient to deter you from subjecting yourself or your child to this evil vaccine.
I say vaccine and not vaccines because we were at least able to knock GlaxoSmithKline’s Cervarix on the head. This leaves us with Merck’s Gardasil vaccines. No so-called vaccine, probably including covid products, has maimed and killed more adolescents over the past twenty years.
I have always and rightly been outspoken about this evil product and herein I would like to share this with you. Let’s start about ten years ago with an interview I gave for Christina England. The interview would be aired at a conference on HPV that she had organised [see https://www.bitchute.com/video/45nc7lV0WMWz/].
A few years later I gave an interview to Courtenay Heading on the Isle of Man [see below]. Courtenay Heading is a giant of free speech and specifically targeting the independent government of the Isle of Man where he lives.
I will finish this brief exposition with the most important paper yet published on this subject. This paper has survived the extreme rigours of publication bias and prejudice within mainstream scientific publishing and has earned the respect of the editorial team at the International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine, a reputed journal.
The paper is open access please make sure that you read it in its entirety and share it and disseminate it as widely as possible. There are a number of lawsuits ongoing looking to bring Merck, the pedlar of Gardasil HPV vaccines, to justice. This paper and our collective efforts can help to bring this to pass.
No more children must be maimed and killed by this evil and worthless product.
About the Author
Christopher Exley is an English chemist known for his research on the health effects of aluminium exposure. He is one of the most knowledgeable and widely cited aluminium researchers in the world.
Dr. Exley graduated in 1985 with a degree in Biology (Univ. Stirling) and in 1989 with a PhD in the ecotoxicology of aluminium (Univ. Stirling). In 1992 he moved to Keele University with Professor JD Birchall FRS OBE to establish what is now The Birchall Centre. In 2015 Dr. Exley was elected Fellow Royal Society of Biology.
At Keele University he became Professor of Bioinorganic Chemistry and group leader of the Bioinorganic Chemistry Laboratory. After he started publishing research that called into question the safety of the aluminium used in vaccines he became the subject of disciplinary hearings.
In 2020, he challenged the covid shutdowns which stopped his ongoing research. He criticised the government’s hypocritical policies that allowed birdseed workers to continue their employment but shut down scientists. For leaving the comment “So the birdseed people were able to continue working but scientists were not” he was again singled out for disciplinary action. A difficult situation became intolerable when Keele University refused to accept a research donation from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to support Dr. Exley’s work. Thirteen months later, the university shut down Dr. Exley’s website.
Dr. Exley believes that it wasn’t only due to outside pressure for his research showing aluminium in the brain caused Alzheimer’s but also the peer-reviewed published science that his prolific team was producing about how aluminium, found in adjuvants, gets into the brain, that made Keele University administrators want to silence him.
After the Vice-Chancellor successfully prevented Dr. Exley from obtaining research funding from any philanthropic organisations, personal donations or charities, Dr. Exley felt he had no choice but to leave his job.
Read more: How a University, its major funders and a Newspaper killed reliable research into the toxicity of Aluminium adjuvants in Vaccines
Dr. Bhakdi told us that the clot shots take over the brain and “they change the very essence of who you are. You can’t think, you can’t reason. You are not the same person.”
This was a thoroughly fascinating read. Cellular Memory exists in the body, even without a donor transplant. For instance, if a person experiences trauma, he or she will hold onto that trauma in the physical body, even if that person has tried to emotionally or mentally suppress the memory. This, in turn, will tax your immune system. Look up Dr. Joe Dispenza. His story is remarkable, as is message. Stay safe and healthy everyone!
Recipients of organ transplants report inheriting their donor’s traits such as behaviours and diets. Some scientists argue that this is due to physiological and psychological imprinting. However, the hypothesis of microchimerism appears to be more compelling.
Microchimerism is the presence of cells (or DNA) from one person in another genetically distinct person. It can occur naturally, for example, during pregnancy, when foetal cells transfer to the mother’s bloodstream and vice versa. And it can occur artificially from organ/tissue transplantation or blood transfusion, where donor cells can persist in the recipient’s body for years.
According to Dr. Mathew Maavak, the experimental gene therapy injections known as “vaccines” allegedly cause microchimerism.
Because organ transplant recipients report inheriting traits from donors, possibly through microchimerism, Dr. Maavik asks the question: Can foreign DNA control your soul?
Can foreign DNA control your soul? — Part 1 By Dr. Mathew Maavak
Can Biotechnology Control Human Behaviour? That was the title of a thought-provoking article penned by Guy Hatchard for the Brownstone Institute recently. The article was partly based on a paper published by the journal Transplantology which documented “the experiences of individuals who received a range of donated organs including hearts, kidneys, liver, and lungs.” According to the Hatchard:
In all, 87% of subjects experienced marked unusual changes that challenged their behaviour, sense of identity, and personal preferences. First-person reports and evidence from donor families confirm that some of these effects involve the transfer of personality traits such as food or behavioural preferences from the donor to the organ recipient. For example, an avid meat eater might become a vegetarian who cannot face meat on their plate.
This is an unexpected result that challenges conventional ideas. This study points to the distributed location of memory throughout physiology and its close association with a variety of organ systems. It amply illustrates how little the life sciences understand about the interface between consciousness and matter.
But has this phenomenon been conclusively established, at least in terms of correlation? The Transplantology paper conducted a cross-sectional study among 47 participants (23 heart and 24 other organ recipients) which is an admittedly
small sample but its observations have been echoed by other studies. Repository of the soul?
Dr James Kneller, a cardiac electrophysiologist, has described how an organ, particularly the heart, within the transplant
recipient, may borrow “certain personality traits, preferences, and even character features from the donor. It is as though
the transplanted heart contains the mind and soul of the donor which then finds expression in the recipient…So, while
heart transplant is extending the life of the recipient, it is also giving new life to the donor.”(Emphasis added)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVwIm0VL5w8
Kneller’s succinct YouTube presentation included several startling examples. He described how the heart from a dead
cyclist had triggered a new passion for the pastime in a recipient; how a dead stuntman’s heart likewise sparked a new
athletic fad in an executive who had no prior interest in sports, along with an uncanny predisposition towards a particular
singer whom the deceased donor had once adored. In a similar fashion, a 47-year-old woman, who received the heart of
a teenage boy killed in a motorcycle accident, soon developed a craving for beer, green peppers, Snickers bars and
KFC after her transplant. She began to feel more aggressive, assertive, tougher and fitter. Even her walk became more
manly and she eventually lost the desire to have a boyfriend.
While most examples cited thus far could be described as “fascinating,” others were outright disquieting. In one particular
case, the dead donor began to appear in the dreams of the recipient and promised “never to be separated” from her.
Kneller recounted how the heart of a suicide victim led the recipient to gravitate towards, and later marry, the widow of the donor. The recipient ultimately committed suicide in a manner that was identical to the donor.
In yet another case, an eight-year-old girl who received the heart of a 10-year-old female murder victim began to experience dramatic post-operative nightmares about the donor’s murder which, upon further investigation by a psychiatrist, led to the identification and arrest of the murderer.
Kneller cautioned against underestimating the hidden dynamics of the heart. He noted how recipients of artificial hearts – one where the heart is replaced by a mechanical contraption – may completely lose their sense of “emotion, warmth and empathy.”
Apart from the human heart, a transplanted liver may cause a similar behavioural effect. Rather curiously, the Malay word for the figurative heart or soul is “hati”but literally, it refers to the liver. Was this knowledge of distributed physiological memory known to the ancients?
Alongside a biblical explanation, Kneller proffered a scientific theory for this phenomenon. Both the brain and heart are “electrical organs” which operate in symbiosis with each other. The “electrical density of the heart is reportedly 5,000 times stronger than the brain” and it generates an electromagnetic aura that extends to 10 metres in radius around the person.
Imagine what happens when the electromagnetic auras of people overlap. Crowded social settings can affect people in more ways than one – even when active interactions i.e. conversations are absent. Close physical contact between people, such as the holding of hands, can also synchronise heartbeats. In such instances, a person’s brain wave (measured via EEG) may begin to mirror another’s heartbeat (measured via ECG). The level of resonance should be stronger when intense physical intimacy is involved. Heartbeat synchronisation can also occur between a much-loved pet and its owner.
The interactions between the heart, cerebral spinal fluid and the brain is a complex one as each continuously attempts to influence the whole. This is a medical necessity as biological systems need to continuously adapt to deal with new physiological and psychological circumstances i.e. exercise, intimacy, work, sudden injuries or the introduction of particular foods, toxins or microbes. These adjustments are performed 24/7/365. As I have written many times before, the human body is the ultimate complex adaptive system (“CAS”) – one which is nearly impossible to deconstruct through Cartesian means.
There is a famous saying that “you are what you eat” but I have also lived by the dictum that “you are who you mingle with.”
Ever been with people who appear nice or considerate on the surface but whose presence ignites certain negative
reflexes, memories or trains of thought? Ever attended church services that had constantly induced a sense of uneasiness or even anxiety? Can this be explained away by human electromagnetic auras? Or is there something deeper at work here, involving physiological, mnemonic (memory) and spiritual elements?
Here is a personal example. A few years back, I was invited to attend my primary school reunion dinner. I had lost touch with my old classmates and could not remember most of them. But I was hit with a sudden blast of nostalgia upon receiving the invitation. Apart from recalling old sights, smells and innocent experiences, Boney M songs began to pervade my mind as they were hugely popular during my childhood.
Upon meeting these people, however, the sweet sense of nostalgia was instantly replaced by a crude blast from the past. Everyone was nice to me. Yet my mind (and perhaps my body too) could visibly discern the ubiquitous one-upmanship of yore. Certain reflexes which were long dormant began to resurface. I began to feel sick, beginning with my gut.
My experience was akin to a dog returning to its vomit as the Bible puts it (Proverbs 26:11). The human mind and body routinely sift memories in order to optimise the potentials of the person. Nostalgia can be a deceptive pit for the unwary.
So, what caused me to view the past through a rose-tinted lens, at least in the days leading up to the reunion and a short period thereafter? Maybe, it had to do with Boney M whose tunes once ruled the airways and which defined the zeitgeist of my childhood? Maybe it had to do with the common notion of the “good old days” when “life was simpler”? Were these collective experiences imprinted into my mind and body? Or maybe, I had forgotten that Boney M album covers were once gratuitously sickening, in stark contrast to their songs? When bonds are forged in the cauldrons of contradictions, character deficiency and malice, false memories may be a primary outcome. A person’s collective experience and character can literally be deposited in the heart. As the Bible puts it: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).
Your social circles should have the right auras. Redress them before it is too late.
Microchimerism
A transplanted heart can create new hobbies, predilections and even a newfound desire to kill. The phenomenon where organ recipients inherit donor traits is a fascinating and controversial area of study. Some scientists argue that transplantation may cause physiological and psychological imprinting. As a result, several terms have been coined to describe this arcane phenomenon, including:
1. Cellular Memory: According to this hypothesis, cells within an organ may retain “memories” or characteristics of the donor, which can be transferred to the recipient. Although cellular memory is not widely accepted in the scientific community due to a lack of empirical evidence, it is a term often used in discussions about post-transplant changes in recipients.
2. Donor-Derived Traits: This is a more general term referring to any characteristics or behaviours that appear in the recipient post-transplant and seem to be attributable to the donor. These traits can range from changes in preferences and habits to alterations in personality.
3. Transplant Acquired Characteristics: Similar to donor-derived traits, this term refers to new characteristics or changes that a recipient acquires after receiving a transplant, potentially linked to the donor’s traits.
4. Psychosocial Changes: This term is used more broadly to describe changes in a recipient’s psychological state or social behaviours following an organ transplant. These changes can be influenced by the stress and emotional impacts accompanying a major medical procedure.
All the conditions described above appear to be nuanced terminologies which describe the same underlying phenomenon. They are part of what some researchers call the “systemic memory hypothesis” which suggests that cells, tissues, or entire organisms in biological systems have a form of “memory” that influences their responses to environmental stimuli or stressors based on past experiences. (Systemic memory can be applied to environmental and computational systems as well).
There is however one other hypothesis that explains post-transplant trait changes in a more expansive manner.
5. Microchimerism: This refers to the presence of a small number of cells in an individual that originates from a genetically different individual. This condition, which can occur after organ transplantation, might provide a biological basis for the transfer of some donor traits.
The microchimerism hypothesis appears to be the most compelling one in the context of donor trait transfer. The common denominator across all human organs is the DNA which is unique to the person. Perhaps this is where particular traits are subtly encoded? Perhaps the DNA is the “repository of the soul” or at least an extension thereof? If so, it can also be the ultimate gateway for the manipulation of the soul.
It is important for the layman to differentiate between “genetic imprinting” and “microchimerism.” Both occur naturally but the distinction between the two has now been somewhat blurred by advancements in biotechnology, particularly the CRISPR-Cas9 method. Think of experimental gene therapies aka “vaccines” for starters! It allegedly causes both genetic imprinting and microchimerism.
Natural genetic imprinting involves the silencing of certain genes inherited from either parent. Such imprinting is crucial to the suppression of defective genes upon conception. Natural microchimerism, on the other hand, involves the presence of a small number of cells in a person that originate from another genetically distinct person. This can occur naturally, such as during pregnancy when cells from the foetus migrate into the mother’s body and vice versa. Foetal cells can persist in the mother’s body for decades after pregnancy and microchimerism has been implicated in various autoimmune diseases and other conditions. It can also occur during organ transplantation and blood transfusion.
But what about artificial gene imprinting and microchimerism? I have touched on some of the dangers associated with gene-edited chimerism in the following article. It reads like a depressing Jurassic Park script.
Now, if the organ of a human donor can induce changes – for the better or worse – in a recipient, imagine what could happen when you have a heart transplanted from a genetically modified pig. Two such recipients did not survive beyond 60 days but that is not deterring medical researchers from “perfecting” the cutting-edge technique.
After watching the clip above, I was reminded of the biblical account of the man possessed by legions of demons in Mark 5:1-13. Was that account included in the Bible to warn us of peculiar End Times dangers?
Finally, I strongly recommend a specific prayer – expressed according to the wisdom of the believer – before or after one receives a new human organ or blood transfusion. I would also be obliged if the reader can enlighten me on what else the Bible says on this subject matter.
We shall explore this topic further in Part 2.
- - - About the Author
Mathew Maavak holds a PhD in Policy Studies and is affiliated with the Big Data Excellence Centre. He specialises in systems science, global risks, strategic foresight, geopolitics and governance. He is a Malaysian expert on risk foresight and governance.
Dr. Maavak has published numerous Op-Eds on a variety of eclectic subjects for over 20 years – by “connecting the dots” in a disjointed world. He has written articles for various publications including Eurasia Review, Modern Diplomacy and Business Standard. He has also appeared on CCTV (China), Sputnik (Russia), and other media outlets, sharing his expertise on global issues.
He is the author of a Substack page titled ‘The Eye Opener’ which you can subscribe to and follow HERE https://drmathewmaavak.substack.com/
