Report Release: Estriol’s Status in Serious Danger


Patient health and safety is at stake. A review of the clinical literature concluded that bioidentical hormones are associated with lower risks, including the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, and are more effective than synthetic or animal-derived hormones. On the other hand, studies have consistently demonstrated that synthetic hormones are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Synthetic and animal-derived hormones have also been shown to produce negative cardiovascular effects and to negate the cardio-protective effects of estrogen.

5 Qs with Zach Bush and Sacha Stone

Sasha Stone and Zach Bush

Zach Bush has done some brilliant research to explain exactly why this particular virus has caused what it has, why we contributed to the lethality of it by poisons, toxins and maltreatment, and, even more importantly, how to reverse our present vulnerability.

A really must watch presentation!

You cannot fail to be more optimistic after listening to this!

Vaccine Adjuvants Cause Autoimmunity

AutoImmune Factors

Adjuvants are used in vaccines to activate the immune system. They are toxicants (i.e. poisons) included in the vaccine against which the body attempts to protect itself. During this heightened immune response, the body also creates antibodies against the vaccine antigen (the dead or attenuated virus, for example) that it would normally ignore.

But these adjuvants create a series of non-specific effects or NSEs; the specific effect is the creation of antibodies against the antigen. A more colloquial term for NSEs is “side-effects.”

One primary NSE is the creation of antibodies against the vaccine recipient’s own human tissue. In other words, the body starts to attack itself. The US currently has approximately 50 million people experiencing autoimmune reactions and autoimmunity is especially prevalent in women [1]. The US population is also one of the most vaccinated populations on the planet.

This just-published paper discusses one of “immunology’s dirty little secrets,” that including a poison is required for many vaccines to work [2] (btw, there are other secrets [3]).

Amazingly, doctors and public health officials deny that one of the primary NSEs of vaccines is an autoimmune reaction. Moreover, they have no official reason for the autoimmune epidemic—but vaccines, they say, have nothing to do with it.

Those following the science know that this is false. Every vaccine increases the chance of the body attacking itself such that “polyautoimmunity” is now common. If one is experiencing autoimmunity, it is actually more likely to have multiple autoimmune conditions than just one. That’s how bad the autoimmune epidemic has become.

This case study discusses a 34-year-old researcher who mistakenly injected himself with Freund’s adjuvant and experienced multiple autoimmune reactions: arthritis [4], serositis [5], and epididymitis [6]. Note that arthritis is listed on some vaccine product inserts as a risk of the injection.

The syndrome for this is called ASIA—autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.

In my view, it is not a question of whether vaccine adjuvants are contributing to the autoimmune epidemic; it’s merely a matter of quantifying how much is its contribution, which is difficult to do because public health authorities deny that vaccines can cause these issues so as not to scare the population and thus risk vaccination rates declining.

“Yes, with these vaccines your child will not get a self-clearing temporary infection of the measles but may get multiple autoimmune reactions that may cause extensive suffering and early death” is a conversation they don’t want to have with parents. Thus, those medical professionals who know about ASIA lie and deny it. Many other medical professionals are poorly trained and thus don’t even know vaccines are a major contributor to the autoimmunity epidemic.

Immunologist’s Little Dirty Secret Finger: A Case Report of Polyautoimmunity Following an Accidental Self-injection of Complete Freund’s Adjuvant

[1] “According to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Women’s Health, autoimmune disease and disorders ranked #1 in a top ten list of most popular health topics requested by callers to the National Women’s Health Information Center.

[2] Unraveling “the immunologist’s dirty little secret”

[3] Immunology’s dirty little secret

[4] arthritis: “Actually, “arthritis” is not a single disease; it is an informal way of referring to joint pain or joint disease. There are more than 100 types of arthritis and related conditions. People of all ages, sexes and races can and do have arthritis, and it is the leading cause of disability in America. More than 50 million adults and 300,000 children have some type of arthritis. It is most common among women and occurs more frequently as people get older.”

[5] serositis: “The organs of your chest and abdomen are lined with thin layers of tissue called serous membranes. They have two layers: one connected to the organ and the other connected to the inside of your body cavity.

Between the two layers, there’s a thin film of serous fluid that allows your organs to move smoothly within your body. For example, your lungs can expand when you take a deep breath without being damaged by friction.

Serositis occurs when your serous membranes are inflamed. This makes it hard for your organs to smoothly slide around in your body, causing pain and other symptoms.”

[6] “Epididymitis (ep-ih-did-uh-MY-tis) is an inflammation of the coiled tube (epididymis) at the back of the testicle that stores and carries sperm. Males of any age can get epididymitis.”

Human Rights Video #3: The Right To Life

The lack of peace in certain regions is proof positive that these principles are actually valid and needed, more than ever. Please promote the Youth for Human Rights videos so more people are aware of and insist upon their rights so that we can live in a peaceful society.

Watch the video and if you think so too, please share it!

Secret Trials Down Under

by Binoy Kampmark June 24, 2020

There a few more spiteful things in political life than a security establishment attempting to punish a leaker or whistleblower for having exposed an impropriety. Such a tendency has no ideological stripe or colouring: it is common to all political systems. In Australia, it has become clear that secret trials are all the rage. The disclosure of their existence tends to be accidental, and trials held partly in secret are also matters considered necessary by the current attorney general.

Last year, the case of Witness J made its way into the press like a threatening menace, a reminder that Australian authorities do not shy away from holding trials without scrutiny or public record. A former military intelligence officer had been prosecuted in the courts of the Australian Capital Territory and jailed under a cloak of secrecy so heavy it even eluded the ACT’s justice minister. Had it not been for separate proceedings arising from the penning of his draft memoir, no one would have known.

For all the generously scattered propaganda about Australia being a devotee of open justice, the converse is closer to the mark. As the Attorney-General, Christian Porter, told the ABC last year regarding Witness J, “The court determined, consistent with the Government submission, that it was contrary to the public interest that the information be disclosed and the information was of a kind that could endanger the lives or safety of others.”

Such trials are invisible affairs. They repel scrutiny. They repudiate the very idea of legal accountability. All the running is made by government prosecutors. Law Council Arthur Moses describes it in rather mundane fashion. “The details of the case will not be found on the court website, or on the noticeboard with the list of all the other cases.”

There are other troubling cases, two of which are taking place in the Australian capital: that of former Australian Secret Intelligence Service agent Witness K and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery. The largely secret prosecution of both men concerns a generally venal affair: the conduct of an ASIS operation in 2004 against diplomats of the impoverished state of Timor-Leste in their negotiations with Australia regarding the continental shelf rich in oil and gas. Using the cover of an aid project, ASIS agents installed listening devices in the Timor-Leste cabinet office in Dili.

The hope was to furnish the Australian government, then led by John Howard, a robust advantage in negotiations. It was predatory, commercially minded, and indifferent to the plight of a country still crippled by the effects of Indonesian occupation. Witness K, with the assistance of Collaery, subsequently blew the lid on the operation, though they did so, ironically enough, through legal channels. The Inspector General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) was informed. Permission to retain the services of Collaery was sought and granted. Armed with such information, Collaery proceeded to assist Timor-Leste in mounting their 2013 case in The Hague against the validity of the treaty that had arisen out of the compromised negotiations. During that time Collaery’s home was raided by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) and Witness K detained. Charges were duly laid, but only after the final treaty’s conclusion in March 2018.

The whole affair left a stinging impression. “It was outrageous,” fumed chief negotiator for the Timor-Leste government Peter Galbraith. “I’d taken protective measures against Australian espionage, which I thought would be based on cell phones and internet, but I thought it was pretty crude to be bugging the prime minister’s offices.”

The Collaery case is now making its way through the channels of secrecy, and we are none the wiser for it. It is troublingly odd, not merely for its clandestine nature, but also for the fact that he was ever charged.

Last week, reporters gathered in the public gallery in Canberra awaiting Collaery’s pre-trial hearing. It was a speedy affair. Those gathered were told to leave, doing so with a statement furnished by Collaery. “I am unable to say much and you are unable to report much. This is the state of our now fragile democracy.”

But prosecuting the wily lawyer is something that the Morrison government should be wary of. As the Australian Financial Review notes, Collaery “is expected to instruct his legal team to issue subpoenas to have former Australian prime minister John Howard and former foreign minister Alexander Downer summoned to give evidence.” In open court, Collaery has already announced his wish to call former Timor-Leste presidents Xanana Gusmão and José Ramos-Horta, former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans and former chief of defence Chris Barrie.

The presiding judge, David Mossop, is also to be petitioned to make the proceedings public, though he is juggling with government arguments based on the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004. The justice must now deliberate over what, exactly, is appropriate to warrant shielding from the public. This is a rather delicate exercise, given that legal staff, not to mention the judge himself, might face the prospect of jail for any inadvertent breaches of secrecy arrangements.

Porter is attempting to normalise the entire matter, giving this disturbing case the gloss of tolerable banality. “There are court cases all the time where some matters are not made public,” he explained on the ABC’s Insiders program. “This is an argument about what matters may be heard inside the court, and what matters may be heard publicly.”

For its part, the government is pursuing a strategy that neither confirms nor denies that the surveillance operation against Timor-Leste officials ever took place. Farcically, it contends that Collaery unlawfully communicated information of such surveillance, irrespective of whether it took place or not. Such witch-burning logic should be laughed out of court, but is being treated with utmost seriousness.

Collaery is certainly rolling out the ammunition with tenacity. “This is Coalition dirty linen. There’s a multibillion-dollar restitution issue to do with the helium [extracted] from Bayu-Undan Field in the Timor Sea being treated as waste gas and being given away for nothing to the contractors.” But that is not all. So much of the operation in 2004 reeks, be it from the perspective of undermining a supposedly friendly state in the name of commerce, or the prioritisation of intelligence resources. As Clinton Fernandes of the Australian Defence Force Academy has pointed out, the bugging operation was executed even as an attack on the Australian embassy in Jakarta was taking place. It is a scandal that remains impervious to parliamentary review, as that body is barred by the Intelligence Services Act 2001 from examining intelligence-gathering operations of the agencies.

All that is left are the courageous efforts of a few troubled by conscience in what the services of their country do. Should patriotism ever have any meaning beyond its otherwise cowardly assertion, it will be found in such acts as those of Collaery and his client, Witness K.
More articles by:Binoy Kampmark

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email:


COVID Mortality and Vitamin D

(OMNS June 22, 2020) If we act on the data showing that it is highly probable that vitamin D can save lives, we could fix this pandemic in a month, for perhaps $2 per person. There would be no significant adverse effects. If we wait for “evidence” that vitamin D mitigates the impact of COVID-19, thousands more will die. If we could arrange to give everyone vitamin D, and it failed to protect them, so what? The risk from not acting is much greater than the risk from acting. Dosage is important and generally misunderstood.

Two countries have acted on this already: Egypt and Slovenia. Why can’t we?

The Orthomolecular Medicine News Service has been publicizing the importance of vitamins D and C, and the minerals zinc and magnesium, in this pandemic since January [1]. I have been writing about Vitamin D and sunlight for over 30 years [2], and it has never been more relevant.

If you caught the COVID19 virus right now, having a good vitamin D status (from already having taken a supplement) would

Reduce your risk of the disease becoming severe by 90%
Reduce your risk of dying by 96%

This is not “proven” or “evidence-based” until we have done controlled trials comparing it to placebo. Any volunteers for that? But the data, already strong, has been pouring in since the start of the pandemic. Here’s the data for the two statements above.

Recent studies have suggested in discussion that more than 4000 IU per day of vitamin D3 may carry a risk of harm, citing the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition report of 2016 which set the recommended Upper Level (UL) intakes of 50mcg/2000IU per day. [10] That report says; “Excessive vitamin D intakes have, however, been shown to have toxic effects (Vieth, 2006)”. [10] However this is misleading, as the Vieth paper [11] states: “Published reports suggest toxicity may occur with 25(OH)D concentrations beyond 500 nmol/L.” This leaves a wide margin of safety.

(Tom: I watched a video presentation on vitamin D3 given by the world’s most ecperienced researcher who said 50,000 IU a day of D3 produces NO toxicity. Personally I would add some K2 to minimise hardening of the arteries.)

The 3 papers mentioned above [3-5] show that a vitamin D3 blood level of at least 75 nmol/L (30 ng/ml) is needed for protection against COVID-19. Government recommendations for vitamin D intake – 400 IU/day for the UK and 600 IU/day for the USA (800 IU for >70 years) and the EU – are based primarily on bone health. This is woefully inadequate in the pandemic context. An adult will need to take 4000 IU/day of vitamin D3 for 3 months to reliably achieve a 75 nmol/L level [12]. Persons of color may need twice as much [13]. These doses can reduce the risk of infection, but are not for treatment of an acute viral infection. And since vitamin D is fat-soluble and its level in the body rises slowly, for those with a deficiency, taking a initial dose of 5-fold the normal dose (20,000 IU/day) for 2 weeks can help to raise the level up to an adequate level to lower infection risk.