John Chhan

John Chhan

Every morning for nearly thirty years, John Chhan arrived at his donut shop at 2 a.m.

Not 6 a.m. Not 5 a.m.

Two in the morning. Every single day. Seven days a week. No exceptions.

He and his wife Stella had come to the United States as refugees from Cambodia in 1979 — arriving with nothing, building everything. They opened Donut City in Seal Beach, California, and for nearly three decades, the two of them worked side by side in that small shop, making everything fresh before the sun came up, opening the doors at 4:30 a.m. to a community that had come to think of them as family.

Generations of families had grown up buying donuts from John and Stella. Children who had sat on the counter as toddlers brought their own children in years later. The Chhans had become, as one customer put it, “national treasures” of Seal Beach.

Then, in September 2018, Stella suffered a brain aneurysm.

She fell into a coma. Doctors weren’t certain she would survive. When she emerged, she was partially paralyzed and unable to speak. The woman who had stood beside John every morning at 2 a.m. for thirty years was now in a rehabilitation facility, fighting to come back.

And John — alone — kept going to the shop at 2 a.m.

Because what else do you do? The bills don’t stop. The rent doesn’t stop. You bake the donuts. You open the doors. You sell what you can. And then, when the day is done, you drive to the rehabilitation center and you sit beside the person you’ve worked next to every single morning for three decades, and you hold their hand.

Customers noticed immediately that Stella was gone. When they asked John where she was, he told them the truth.

Word spread.

People immediately wanted to help. Someone suggested a GoFundMe. Someone else offered to cover the medical bills directly.

John Chhan said no. To all of it.

He wouldn’t accept a handout. He didn’t want money. He just wanted more time with his wife.

That answer broke Dawn Caviola’s heart.

She was a regular customer — had been for thirteen years. She went home after hearing John’s story and couldn’t stop thinking about it. “I just couldn’t get it out of my head,” she said later. She had never done anything like what she was about to do. But she sat down and wrote a post on Nextdoor — the private community network for Seal Beach residents — and she asked a simple question.

What if everyone just came in and bought donuts early? As many as possible, as fast as possible? Because the moment John sells out for the day, he can close the shop, get in his car, and go be with Stella.

The post spread. Then it jumped to Facebook. Then it went further.

The next morning, the line outside Donut City started forming before dawn.

And then every morning after that.

People came from 50 miles away. From 60 miles. From 70. A woman flew in from Minnesota. A man heard about it through his daughter in Hawaii. People arrived in lines that stretched around the block, buying donuts by the dozen — sometimes two dozen, sometimes more. Some of them didn’t even particularly want donuts.

They wanted John to be able to close early.

By 6:30 some mornings, every donut in the shop was gone. A store that normally stayed open until 3 p.m. was selling out before sunrise.

“A lot of people, they come to buy a lot of doughnuts from us,” John said quietly, “and gave me more time to go visit my wife.”

That was the gift. Not money. Not a fundraiser.

Time.

Every dozen donuts sold was twenty minutes John could spend at Stella’s side instead of behind the counter. Every early sellout was an afternoon he got back. The community wasn’t buying donuts. They were buying him hours — one glazed, one apple fritter, one chocolate old-fashioned at a time.

Stella Chhan came back.

About a year after her aneurysm, after the coma, after the paralysis and the silence and the doubt that she would ever return — Stella walked back behind the counter at Donut City.

“I feel grateful,” she said.

“They give me a hug.”

John and Stella Chhan arrived in America with nothing. They built a life at 2 a.m., one morning at a time, for thirty years. And when that life was threatened, the people who had eaten their donuts for decades showed up before sunrise and bought every single one — not because they were hungry, but because a man who wouldn’t accept charity deserved to be with his wife.

The donuts were just the method.

The message was: we see you. We’ve always seen you. Go be with her.

Have You Heard Of Yuka

I received this email from a friend and thought her idea worth sharing.

Some good stuff in there Tom, very informative, love how you put Dr Berg in there, my go to guy!

Sun is not the Enemy…. I’m a big believer in that. I’ve been cycling out in the sun for 16 years now, bare arms and shorts nine months of the year, plus sunscreen on my face and arms. Only had one very small bcc cut out last year.

By the way, do you use the app Yuka (https://yuka.io/en/) to scan barcodes on foods, sunscreens, moisturisers, almost anything. You’d be amazed about what you find in your cupboard! It assesses the good or badness of what is contained in the product. Gives you a full list of contents, how bad or good they are and a recommendation of a better one.

I found out that Vaseline Intensive Care that I had been using on face and body for 60 years contained too many chemicals and I was recommended to switch to Cetaphil. Which I did. All my sunscreens and 90% of the ones in Woolies rated awfully. So out they went and got the ones Yuka recommended. More expensive, but better for me. Cant say I feel any better but in the long run there will be benefits!

Anyway Tom, stay cool!

Lv Judee

Doing Chores For Success

Doing Chores For Success

In 1938, Harvard researchers launched the most ambitious study in history by tracking the lives of 724 people, from their adolescence until their death, in order to discover what truly makes a person happy and fulfilled.

For decades, they analyzed their brains, their salaries, their relationships, and their traumas. After 85 years of data, they uncovered a surprising correlation that no one had expected.

Professional success in adulthood did not depend on IQ, nor on parental wealth, nor on school grades. One of the most powerful predictors of success was something very simple: doing household chores during childhood.

Taking out the trash or washing the dishes is not just a matter of cleanliness; it’s brain training. The study, known as the Grant Study, revealed that household tasks teach a lesson that no school can replicate: “the ethic of contribution.”

When a child has to stop playing to set the table, they learn that the world does not revolve around them. They understand that they are part of an ecosystem and that their effort is necessary for the group to function well.

The researchers found that children who participated in chores became adults who:
– know how to recognize what needs to be done and do it without being asked (initiative);
– feel more empathy for others’ work;
– manage frustration and delayed gratification better.

In the era of “helicopter parenting,” where we prevent children from getting bored or working, Harvard warns us that by protecting them from boring tasks, we are stripping them of the foundations of their future professional competence.

If you want your child to become a fulfilled adult, don’t buy them more educational toys. Give them a broom.

Source: Harvard Study of Adult Development (Grant Study) and Julie Lythcott-Haims (How to Raise an Adult).

Universo Sorprendente.

Renee Dufault – Mercury In High-Fructose Corn Syrup

Renee Dufault

There is mercury in your kitchen right now, and an FDA scientist tried to warn you eighteen years ago. They silenced her.

Her name is Renee Dufault. In 2005 she is an Environmental Health Officer at the Food and Drug Administration an investigator, a mercury specialist, the exact person whose entire job is to keep that poison out of your food. And she has just found it *in* your food.

It starts with a missing number. Around 2000, roughly 58 tons of mercury vanish from American chemical plants. Plants that make chlorine and caustic soda lye. Gone. Nobody can say where.

Dufault wants to know. And she learns one thing that changes everything: that same lye is used to make high fructose corn syrup. HFCS. The cheap sweetener in almost everything you buy. Soda. Ketchup. Yogurt. Bread. Salad dressing. The average American eats about 40 pounds of it a year.

So she asks the obvious question. If the lye is made in plants leaking mercury, and the lye goes into the corn syrup does the mercury go into the food?

In 2005 she tests it. She pulls samples off the shelf and sends them to a lab. The results come back: mercury in nearly half of them. Not trace rumor. Measured poison. In products carrying names you have in your house right now Quaker. Hershey’s. Yoplait. Kraft. Smucker’s. Hunt’s. The mercury is in the syrup. The syrup is in the food. The food is in millions of people. In children.

She does exactly what an honest scientist does. She walks the data straight to her bosses at the FDA and waits for them to act. Investigate. Warn parents. Pull the products.

They do nothing.

No investigation. No press release. No warning. The single agency on Earth whose job is to keep poison out of your food looks at proof of poison in your food — and looks away.

So she tries to publish it herself. Get it to other scientists, to the public, around the silence.

The FDA blocks that too. They deny her the federal data she needs. They tie her hands.

Now she has a choice. Keep quiet, keep the paycheck, keep the pension, keep the title — like everyone else. Or burn the safe career to the ground to tell strangers what is in their kids’ breakfast.

In 2008 she quits. Twenty years of federal service, gone, because leaving is the only way they can’t gag her.

Then the part the FDA was afraid of. Independent researchers test her work. They find the same thing — mercury in about a third of brand-name HFCS products pulled straight off store shelves. Canadian researchers find it too. She is not wrong. She is not exaggerating. She is right.

In 2009 her study is published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health. The world can finally read it.

And the FDA’s response? On the record: they will not test for it. No surveillance program. No follow-up. Nothing — based on her research.

Sit with that. A scientist hands the food-safety agency proof of a neurotoxin in the food supply, and the agency’s official answer is that it would rather not look.

Here is why this is not history. Renee Dufault is alive. She lives in Hawaii. She runs her own institute — the Food Ingredient and Health Research Institute — and she is *still* publishing, as recently as last year, on how heavy metals in ultra-processed food may be wiring the rise in autism and ADHD in children. She never stopped. She gave up the government career and kept the fight.

The FDA never changed its answer. High fructose corn syrup is still in thousands of products on the shelf tonight. The agency still does not screen the nation’s food sugar for the mercury she proved was there. The poison she found in 2005 was never required, never removed, and never tested for and your children are the largest consumers of it.

Go look at the bottle in your fridge. Read the second ingredient. She already told you what could be in it. The people paid to protect you decided you didn’t need to know.

So you tell them.

Most people will never hear Renee Dufault’s name. They’ll never know an FDA scientist found mercury in their kids’ food and got buried for saying so. You know now. Send this forward — be the warning the FDA refused to print, the reason one more parent reads the label tonight. They spent everything to make this disappear. Pass it on and make it impossible.

Share it. The truth she lost her career to tell only travels if you carry it.

Lyndsy MoffattLyndsy Moffatt

Lyndsy Moffatt

There is no science that shows evidence supporting an association between childhood vaccines and the subsequent risk of an autism diagnosis except for in these published studies which show evidence supporting an association between childhood vaccines and the subsequent risk of an autism diagnosis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25198681

Although I never needed a study to tell me what I saw happen to my child with my own eyes.

Don’t shoot the messenger!

Michael Ruppert

Michael Ruppert

“I can tell you, Director Deutch, emphatically and without equivocation, that the Agency has dealt drugs in this country for a long time.”

A former cop said that. To the face of the Director of the CIA. On camera. And the most powerful spy in America had no answer.

Here’s how that moment happened.

November 15, 1996. South Central Los Angeles. The city was on fire with rage. A journalist named Gary Webb had just published a series called Dark Alliance, alleging the CIA was tied to the Contra rebels and the crack cocaine flooding the streets. People who had buried family in the crack epidemic wanted answers.

So the CIA did something it almost never does. It sent its own director into the room. John Deutch. The head of the entire agency. He came to a town hall at Locke High School to calm the crowd. C-SPAN was rolling.

Then a man stood up and took the microphone.

His name was Michael Ruppert. Former LAPD narcotics detective. UCLA graduate. He’d joined the force in 1973 at 22 wanting to fight crime, and they put him on the most dangerous streets in Los Angeles. And starting in the late 1970s, he said, he saw something he was never supposed to see. A drug network that ran far above the street dealers. He said it reached into the government itself.

He said he got death threats. He said there were attempts on his life. He resigned in 1978, even with the highest performance ratings the department gave. And for almost twenty years, almost nobody listened. They called him crazy. A conspiracy guy. The system had thrown him away.

Now he was standing in front of the Director of the CIA with a microphone in his hand.

He looked Deutch in the eye and said it. The Agency has dealt drugs in this country for a long time.

The room erupted. People roared. They were finally hearing someone say out loud, to the most powerful spy in America, the thing they had lived through. Ruppert kept going. He named three secret operations he claimed to know about. Amadeus. Pegasus. Watchtower. He said he had documents. He said CIA officers had tried to pull him into protecting these operations back in the 1970s.

Deutch stood there. Cornered. No real answer. The clip went everywhere.

Now here’s the honest part, because the truth matters more than a clean story.

Ruppert never proved those three operations. Amadeus, Pegasus and Watchtower are still his claims and nothing more. No declassified document has ever confirmed them. To this day they remain allegations.

But the bigger thing he was shouting about did not go away.

In 1998, the CIA’s own Inspector General released a report. And buried in the careful language was an admission. The agency had worked with dozens of people tied to the Contras who were involved in drug trafficking. In at least six cases, it knew about the drug allegations and kept working with them anyway. It didn’t cut ties. The CIA’s own watchdog confirmed the relationship Ruppert and Gary Webb had been screaming about for years.

Not every claim was true. But the core was not crazy. The most powerful intelligence agency on earth really had climbed into bed with drug traffickers. And the government’s own report said so in writing.

That’s the part that should stop you.

A discarded ex-cop, mocked for twenty years, stood up in a high school gym and accused the CIA of dealing drugs to the director’s face. Then a federal report quietly proved the heart of it. And the question he forced into the open that day, who really protected the people poisoning American streets, has never been fully answered.

He didn’t win in a courtroom. He didn’t get an apology. He won the moment. He made the most powerful agency in America stand in front of a camera and have no answer.

One cop. One microphone. One sentence the CIA could not make disappear. And a question that is still sitting there, unanswered, all these years later. One cop, one microphone, one question the most powerful spy in America couldn’t answer and it’s still unanswered today.

Send it forward and be the reason that question keeps getting asked long after they hoped it died.

Bruno Lafont

Bruno Lafont

Last month, while a judge in a Paris courtroom finished reading her verdict, police walked over and arrested Bruno Lafont. He’s 69, the former CEO of Lafarge, the largest cement manufacturer in the world. He’s now serving a 6 year prison sentence, and his former second-in-command is serving 5.

When corporations cause real harm in pursuit of profit, when they poison rivers, flood communities with deadly drugs, or fund violence to keep a factory running, the typical outcome is a fine. The company pays out, the executives keep their jobs or retire quietly or move on to a board seat somewhere else, and almost no one personally goes to prison. We see this massively in the pharmaceutical field.

But this ruling may change things moving forward.

What Lafarge actually did

Between 2013 and 2014, as Syria collapsed into civil war, Lafarge paid roughly 6.5 million dollars to ISIS and two other groups designated as terror organizations. The payments bought safe passage through ISIS checkpoints, which meant the company’s Syrian cement plant could keep running and keep generating revenue.

Nobel laureate Nadia Murad and more than 400 other Yazidi survivors, all of them American citizens, eventually sued Lafarge directly. Their argument was that the company’s payments helped finance the genocide of the Yazidi people, the mass executions, the sexual slavery, the abduction of thousands of women and children.

According to the lawsuit, Lafarge’s own cement was even used to construct the underground tunnels and bunkers where ISIS held Yazidi hostages captive.

While the European staff at the plant were evacuated to safety, the Syrian workers were told to keep working, crossing checkpoints under sniper fire, risking kidnapping, showing up to a job inside an active war zone because the cement had to keep flowing.

The judge, in delivering her verdict, said something that has stayed with me since I read it. “I am trying to make you understand,” she told the executives, “how choices made in your offices, thousands of kilometers away, turned into Kalashnikov bullets, into blood.”

This level of downline thinking is what responsibility looks like. It’s what we have been trying to offer to our readers for 17 years, the idea that as a culture, we have to think more deeply about what we’re creating and what effects it has downline, vs. thinking about more short term gratifications.

In defense, Lafont told the court he hadn’t read the emails documenting the payments. His exact line, which I cannot improve on, was “I’m not a child of the internet.” His former deputy was more direct in that he admitted in court that the groups receiving the payments had been described, in writing, as “hard-core terrorists,” and that he kept authorizing payments to them anyway. When the judge pressed him, he said they had a choice between two bad options. The judge asked, “The worst one and the less bad one?” “Exactly,” he replied.

Translated out of legalese, the defense was not surprisingly: “We were faced with losing profit or funding terror, and we chose the less expensive option for the company.”

These types of decisions are being made all over the place in our world within it’s current design. CEO’s follow incentive and fiduciary responsibility, which in essence provides them plausible deniability in most cases.

To be clear, this isn’t really a story about individually wicked men, it’s a story about a system that trains its decision-makers to weigh two things on the same scale and choose whichever one protects revenue. The race to the bottom logic baked into modern incentive structures is doing a lot of the moral work here, long before any individual executive signs off on a payment.

The court ultimately did not buy the CEO’s story and Judge Isabelle Prévost-Desprez called the conduct “stunningly cynical.” She fined the company €1.12 million, ordered the confiscation of €30 million in assets, and sent the executives to prison.

Why this matters more than the fine

To understand why this verdict is a big deal, you have to understand what hasn’t been happening for the last eight decades.

The most directly comparable case goes back to 1947, when executives of I.G. Farben, the German chemical company that supplied the gas used in Nazi concentration camps, were tried at Nuremberg. Most were acquitted. The few who were convicted received light sentences that were quietly commuted not long after. The legal precedent that a corporation and its leaders could be criminally accountable for the violence their products enabled was established, and then more or less left to sit on a shelf for 80 years.

In the meantime, when corporations have been found liable for harming people, the standard response has been a fine. In many cases, those fines get absorbed as a normal cost of doing business, paid out of one revenue stream while the rest keep flowing untouched.

When the fines get big enough to actually threaten profit, the response has often been overwhelming retaliation against whoever is fighting for justice. Chevron, for example, spent roughly 2 billion dollars dragging out a legal war against the lawyer who beat them in Ecuadorian court for poisoning the Amazon.

A fine is a transaction, but a prison sentence is something else entirely. It changes who, personally, is on the line, and that changes the way companies will operate form there on out. The system needs accountability, or else incentives will always win out.

The good news is that this verdict is a real crack in the assumption that corporate decision-makers can operate at a safe altitude above the consequences of what their companies actually do in the world.

But here is where I want to slow down a little, because there’s a fair question that still needs to be asked here:

Why did this one end in prison sentences when Chevron in Ecuador didn’t? When Purdue Pharma’s executives walked? Or Pfizer’s or Monsanto’s or Big Tobacco’s?

One honest part of the answer is that Lafarge’s payments helped fund a network that eventually killed French civilians on French soil. That made the politics of prosecution very different from the politics of poisoning Indigenous rivers in the Amazon, or flooding rural American towns with opioids, or any number of other harms that fall outside what Western states are willing to call a serious crime.

The legal systems we have are largely the same ones that have historically protected capital’s right to extract from communities deemed expendable.

So this verdict is a real step forward, and at the same time, it’s a reminder of where the line currently sits for who gets protected and who doesn’t. Both things can be true. The win is real, and the asymmetry is real, and pretending otherwise is just another way of not seeing the situation clearly.

What’s next

A few related cases are already moving. Starting in July of this year, EU member states will require large companies to identify and address human rights and environmental harms across their supply chains, with actual consequences for failure.

Last October, a federal jury in New York found BNP Paribas liable for aiding atrocities in Sudan. The Lundin Oil trial in Sweden, which looks structurally similar to Lafarge, is expected to deliver a verdict soon. The next Lafarge trial, this one on charges of complicity in crimes against humanity, will likely follow.

There is also reasonable concern about backlash. A US administration that has sanctioned a UN rapporteur for documenting corporate complicity in Gaza, presided over a 660 million dollar verdict against Greenpeace for opposing an oil pipeline, and dismantled large parts of the EPA’s regulatory powers is not going to quietly accept a wave of accountability rulings.

The process of accountability is not fast or easy. I’ve been doing this work for 17 years and most of the stories I’ve followed or talked about don’t end up in real accountability. Pfizer’s C0VID vax trials were fraudulent, we’re not even talking about that anymore. Look at the lack of Epstein network accountability. This isn’t meant to get us down, but to realie the power of the system at hand and maintain our sense of resilience in working toward a better world.

Ultimately, this all has to still move through courtrooms, through journalism, through people who are willing to spend years pressing on a story that powerful interests would much rather have buried. None of those tools is sufficient on its own, but together, slowly, they shift what powerful people can get away with.

The good news is, the judge in Paris drew a line that hasn’t really been drawn in 80 years, and that line now exists. What we choose to build on top of it is the next question.

`

Quote of the Day

“You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself.” – Galileo Galilei (1564 – 1642)

I have heard this from other wise men and personally observed the inability to impart data to those ‘who do not have it within themself’.

I also helps partially explain the failures many of have had over the last 6 years trying to impart to others what seems to be obvious and incontrovertible truths.