Read this reply on "X" and the message it is reference to.

Now I want you to look at this image:

What you're often told is that cholesterol is sort of like putting too much toilet paper in a pipe.  You see that sort of "diagram" on the walls of doctor's offices all over the place.  They're lies.

The above is what actually happens.

Don't think so?  Look at Johns Hopkins page.  Same thing.

How about Boston Heart Diagnostics?  Do you think they've seen plenty of diseased arteries?

If you want go look for sectioned slide images, which also show this quite-clearly.

Why is the plaque build-up inside the arterial wall?  Not on the surface -- inside the wall, between the inner and outer surfaces of the artery?  What is going on there?  Do you need a medical degree to understand it?

NO, YOU DO NOT NEED A DEGREE OF ANY SORT BECAUSE EVERY ONE OF YOU HAS SEEN EXACTLY THIS in your daily life on your skin at some point in your life!

EVERY SINGLE PERSON knows that above image is correct because you have ALL seen it on your person, with your own eyes, during your own life.

So has EVERY PHYSICIAN which means every single one of them knows they're lying.

Most of you had zits when you were a teen.  Many of you have been bitten by fire arts and essentially everyone has stuck themselves with something -- a thorn or whatever, or been stung by a bee or bitten by a mosquito.  You've all seen it, you've all experienced it and you know precisely what happens -- it gets inflamed just like that arterial wall.  Have a zit (or fire ant bite pustule) pop and what that looks like is basically identical to that last image above -- except obviously its on your skin rather that in your cardiac artery!

In short your body attempts to repair the insult.  Cholesterol is part of that repair mechanism.

The problem is the insult that results in the inflammation, not the repair mechanism.  You can't fix the underlying problem by lowering cholesterol levels because cholesterol isn't the issue -- inflammation is.  You might be able to mask the problem by decreasing the body's repair resources but if you don't correct the underlying problem then at best you are masking it, it is likely to cause other problems since you only addressed one outcome, you've now denied the body the full use of one of its essential repair mechanisms to repair injuries and worse, the medication has risks as do all drugs and when taken on an effective permanent basis the odds go way up you're going to get hammered by those because each day you take a drug the risk of a bad outcome multiplies.

It's simply a matter of time and exposure; if I take an aspirin for a headache while aspirin can cause bleeding (that is, a hemorrhagic stroke, which is very frequently fatal) my risk is tiny because it only occurs during the time I have the headache -- like an evening or so.  If I take that aspirin every day I must now take that risk every day and the odds of me getting hammered with the bad effect are much, much higher.  This is why there has been much debate over taking a "baby" aspirin to prevent clot-related strokes -- taking one for a headache is very safe but taking one every day runs the risk of a hemorrhagic stroke and which is the more-dangerous has been a subject of quite a bit of debate over the years with recommendations going back and forth.

The solution to the problem if you have the above issue going on in your arteries is to determine and address the cause of the inflammation.  If you remove the inflammation source (e.g. you pull the thorn out of your foot) the inflammation will dissipate as the insult has been removed.

There are many causes of systemic inflammation.  Seed oils, fast carbohydrates and the outcomes of consumption of both, obesity and poor glucose control are in the top tier causes but obviously are not the only ones.  Other drugs, legal and otherwise, along with other lifestyle decisions are obviously also involved.

In addition note that there is a decent amount of evidence that if you stop consuming those things that cause systemic inflammation not only will your obesity and glucose control issues improve but at the same time the "bad" cholesterol will decrease as well.

Why is that?

I don't know that its scientifically known but is it not a fair question as to whether your body is making it in excess (nearly all cholesterol is in fact manufactured in the liver, it does NOT come from the food you consume) because your body believes it needs that level to repair inflamed tissue?

We know that the liver produces cholesterol and the reason statins lower it is that they block the synthesis pathway.  Where is the evidence that this pathway is in fact diseased rather than reacting to a diseased condition caused by something else?  There is none and there is no reasonable hypothesis of genetic mutation as an explanation either because these issues are relatively new and their increase happens to correlate with the introduction and widescale use of seed oils and other fast carbohydrates such as refined grains and high-fructose corn syrup.

The belief that "every body is diseased and a drug is the answer" is not only idiotic it makes no scientific sense.  Humans have survived an evolutionary path of millions of years, as has every other animal that happens to still be around.  Does your cat need a statin?  Well, he might if you feed him processed carbohydrates -- may I ask how many carbs are in the average mouse, which is what he would eat living outdoors?

Why do basically no physicians seek to find and work with you to eliminate the cause of said inflammation rather than reach for the Rx pad?

Addressing systemic inflammation is a permanent fix and requires no drugs -- therefore it not only resolves the problem at the same time it avoids all risk of side effects since you're not consuming the drugs.  Of course this doesn't make the drug companies any money and it also doesn't make the doctor any money from treating the side effects either since you don't get any of those.

Which is the wiser path folks and what leads any physician to offer a professional opinion that the "correct" path is to suppress a normal bodily function?  What evidence is there that the apparent "dysregulation" is not an expected and normal response of the body to an external insult that the person can remove?

I'm rather tired of this and am going to go down a short litany of facts which not even Musk, with his so-called "commitment" to free speech, will permit.

But first, receipts on the claim that Elon was and is lying in that he now admits his platform will censor FACTS:

Note that there are claims this "only applies to Brazil" due to some court case, but as you can see there is no distinction made in the cited post.  Therefore, if this is the case then let's see it in the formal TOS so it is in fact a tort IF IT IS A LIE.

Let me be clear:  Your sex/gender is determined at the moment of fusion of the two gametes no matter your species among sexually-reproducing organisms -- including but certainly not limited to human beings.  It cannot be changed from that instant in time forward, ever, no matter what you do because every single cell in that organism carries forward that determination as every single cell comes from that first cell's division into two.

Said organism is either male or female in every single case.  Yes, there are cases in which an error occurs and you get more than one or two "X" chromosomes, or for that matter only one X and no others at all, for example; the scientific name for that is "intersex."  This is quite rare but does happen -- its a genetic accident and properly characterized as an error, but it does occur.

This is not a "disease" but it is a genetic mutation and while a few of those people can in fact either sire or carry a child, its rare.  Most of the time if you're in that category you're sterile.  XXY, for example, is called Klinefelter's syndrome and typically results in a micropenis; most men with this produce little or no sperm as they also produce little testosterone.  But these people are male, despite having two "X" chromosomes (because they also have a "Y".)  Unfortunately most boys with this also have serious intellectual challenges.

Likewise someone who is born with "XXX" is female.  Many women with this have no outward symptoms but some have learning problems, seizures, and sometimes serious kidney abnormalities and premature menopause (ovarian failure at an uncharacteristic age.)  However, such a person is female.

There is nothing, however, anyone can do to change any of this from the first cellular division at conception forward.  A male, whether ordinarily XY or some combination that includes a "Y", can never become female.  A female, that is a person without a "Y" chromosome, can never become male.

From the moment of conception your neural, circulatory and other body systems develop differently depending on that chromosomal arrangement. This cannot be altered beyond that point no matter what you do; it is what it is.  A woman's body develops from conception with the blood supply capacity for a uterus and the child that may develop in same which no man ever has as just one example.  There is no way to create a female sexual response in a person conceived as a man because the neural connections are simply not there and never will be, and vice-versa, so even if we could fashion functional physical components and we can't even successfully do that.  As a result if you are conceived male you can never have a female sexual response, and if conceived female you can never have a man's sexual response.  It is not possible as from your first cellular division forward the neural connections for the other sex never develop and thus are not present.

As such sex is not "assigned at birth" and anyone saying that should be immediately and permanently committed to a rubber room; your sex is observed at birth (if Mom never had an ultrasound) but in most cases since women do it is observed while said child is still in-utero because the penis, if said child is male, is visible.  No penis?  It's a girl.  Penis?  It's a boy.  Period.

This doesn't mean you can't be unhappy you are male or female, or that your particular chromosomal assortment is unpleasant in your mind -- of course you can be unhappy with that just as you can be unhappy that your skin is white, black, brown or for that matter, if we discover little green men at some point, green.

But that you are unhappy with a fact does not make it untrue -- it just means you're unhappy.  As an adult you are free to undertake whatever actions you wish in an attempt to be happy (thus "pursuit of happiness") but you have no capacity or right to compel any other person to assist you in any way whatsoever, including "recognizing" what you desire but is physically impossible.  To demand otherwise or to enforce otherwise is to enslave someone else and worse, force them to lie which is never acceptable nor may it be compelled under any circumstance.

In fact someone who tries to compel you to speak a factual lie is violating both the Constitution and your rights which predate said Constitution and thus, by any reasonable standard has forfeited all their rights.  Yes, all of them.

Further, if you refuse to accept physical facts you are mentally defective and society must assume you will refuse to accept other physical facts which renders you manifestly dangerous when it comes to any task where the evaluation of physical facts is necessary for anyone else's safety.

No problem can ever be resolved without stating things that are facts.  We can debate that which is not a fact, but putting those opinions on the table in the open is how we find and reinforce facts and demote and ultimately destroy lies.  This is an essential part of any civil society.

Elon seems to think he has the right to abrogate that.  He does not, particularly after claiming that he stands for "free speech."  Neither does any other government official or private party.  A private party may tell you that your statement of facts is inconsistent with their private property rights and free association and thus demand you leave provided they did not make a former representation that you had the right to speak freely or they became, due to their position in society, an effective public square where such right of control of association has been lost as a consequence of their for-profit operation of what amounts to said public square.

Exactly where is that line?  That's a good debate but large social media sites are clearly under this purview in that they form an effective oligopoly and further give their membership the means to block communication with those who disagree.

Once you reach that critical threshold and provide the means to block said interaction you no longer can make a reasonable claim to "freedom to not associate in gross" because each person can choose on their own.

On a societal level this gets even more-serious when facts are concealed on purpose, as they are here.

For example, here: https://www.kctv5.com/2024/03/03/hundreds-fighting-six-flags-turns-into-firefight-with-officers-1-hospitalized/

It is incredibly disappointing that our community is disrupted at public events throughout the region by groups of underaged youth. Just like other venues in the area, we are committed to keeping this type of trouble outside our park and off our property. There was police activity involving gunshots; we want to confirm there was no shooting at our property or parking lot. This took place on South Service Road that is not owned or operated by Six Flags. However, we join our community and the Atlanta region in our commitment to safety and security. We won’t put up with that type of activity here.”

We all know what the probable distribution of the races of the people involved were.  Oh, and while the press won't say it there is video evidence from people who were there.  Where did the guns come from among underaged persons?  It is specifically that we refuse to call out the wild over-representation in this behavior among one specific group, that being young blacks, and making clear that we will not tolerate it and will throw those who commit felonies in prison irrespective of their underage status that leads to this happening.  If you say this on "X" -- or virtually any other social media -- you will get banned.  Well, I'm saying it and I don't give a shit if anyone likes it or not because it has been true for the last several decades, still is, and it won't stop until we call out the facts and demand that the government enforce the goddamned law against said persons without regard to their skin color or age and we make clear that is not a request -- either they do their job OR WE WILL on a summary basis.

Or how about this: https://rumble.com/v4glv96-senators-watch-in-disbelief-as-democrat-defends-child-sex-dolls-for-pedophi.html

Here's a Kentucky State Senator defending giving child sex dolls to pedophiles.

Remember that there are a whole bunch of people who defend this particular perversion saying that "well, you might be a minor-attracted person but you can choose to act on it."  True perhaps, but now have we decided that "acting on it" doesn't include fucking a doll that is in the shape and size of a child?  What happens when the doll pops or is simply unavailable and the urge to act on it is still there?  Oh gee that's really hard to figure out -- right?

Or how about the fact that illegal immigrants are not "newcomers" they are criminals.  Never mind that 8 USC 1324 defines as a criminal, 10 year in prison felony the following offenses related to any US and foreign persons and entities assisting said illegal aliens:

• Attempting to bring an alien into the United States at any place other than a designated port of entry irrespective of whether said person has received authorization to enter or remain in the US or not.  Any entity or person doing so has violated said law and every person involved in promoting or enabling such illegal crossings is a felon.  
• Transportation or movement of an alien knowing or recklessly disregarding that said person illegally entered into the United States is a criminal felony.
• Concealing an alien knowing or with reckless disregard for their illegal entry anywhere in the United States, whether by transportation, housing (e.g. in a building) or otherwise.
• Encouraging or inducing an alien to enter or remain in the United States, knowing or with reckless disregard for the fact that such entry is illegal, or engages in any conspiracy (e.g. combination of people or entities or planning) such acts.

For each person a party does this with where the intent is for financial gain or commercial advantage (e.g. employment, rental to such a person, etc.) the penalty is 10 years in prison.

If the violation is not for commercial or private financial gain (e.g. trafficking) the penalty is five years in prison.

If the alien commits an offense of bodily injury every person who was involved in the above gets 20 years in prison.

If the alien commits homicide the term for every person so-involved in any of the above is of any number of years up to and including life.

There is an exception for missionaries, believe it or not.  None of these people are of course.

There's more: If you merely attempt to bring an alien into the US without authorization (but fail, obviously, since the above covers if you succeed) you get one year in prison unless you do not bring said person immediately to a port of entry, in which case you get 10 (which is what the above carries, so that makes sense.)

If you knowingly hire ten or more illegal aliens within a 12 month period you get five years in prison.

Oh by the way, any conveyance used for any of this is subject to seizure and forfeiture!

So tell me, everyone, why do we tolerate the government intentionally violating this law and refusing to arrest anyone who harbors, transports, rents to, provides services to, treats medically, transports or otherwise harbors or assists anyone who is here illegally, all of which aids and abets said behavior and all of which is, under that actual law, already illegal.

These so-called "sanctuary cities" and states are in fact committing felonies and no, the elements of the State Government, private actors, NGOs, apartment and hotel owners, food vendors, transportation operators including airlines and others are not exempt from said law.  And yes this includes all the so-called "DREAMers" and every school, food vendor, lunchroom or employer who in any way assists them in being or remaining here.  It is all a serious crime.

Where was Donald Douchenozzle Trump on this?  This is not new law.  Why didn't he use it?  You know goddamn well the reason he didn't use it -- he didn't want to use it because his cocksucking voters love the illegal labor that destroys your wages, any more than Biden refuses because he wants them to be given the capacity to vote for more handouts, yet you still SUCK TRUMP'S DICK even after he refused to put in prison each and every single entity that broke the above law, including every landlord and other entity who so much as gives such a person a fucking sandwich.  Like, for example, all the farmers and other businesses who are using illegal labor.

Spare me the bullshit about "harassing" people who are, under this law, clearly felons, many of them US citizens or US corporations and government employees who are breaking the law by giving aid and comfort to said persons and harboring them, despite whatever excuse you wish to make when exactly none of them who entered here illegally have a right to be here.  Period.  Throw them all out and fry anyone in this nation who in any way assists or supports their entry or remaining here.  I don't give a shit who they are; they're criminals under the law -- and not "minor" criminals either.  End of conversation, full stop, that is the law and if the government will not enforce it then for each of those crimes not one person who is here illegally nor anyone who assists them in any way, no matter if government affiliated or not, has cause to complain if a felony is committed against THEM.

Let's continue because while this bullshit is a huge thing today its by no means the only bullshit that is ruining us and in fact in some cases killing us.

It is a fact that virtually everything in our modern civilization exists only because only competent people were hired to build and maintain same, most of which were White men, and as soon as we allowed anything other than competence to determine this process it all went to shit.

An example is Flint Michigan and their water system.  The lead feeder pipes for their water system were and are perfectly safe provided someone competent is running the system.  Why?  Because the lead pipe with proper water chemistry protects itself with a microscopic layer of oxide exactly as does aluminum when exposed to air and thus none of the lead goes into the water and poisons you.  Proof of this is that nobody got poisoned for decades until the water system shifted its source without people who knew what the fuck they were doing running it keeping said chemical balance intact.  THEN kids (and adults) started getting poisoned.

The people who built the system and operated it were mostly WHITE MEN.  Flint was an industrial town FULL OF WHITE MEN who ran the city services and did so competently.  Guess who this benefited tremendously?  All the black people who lived there, roughly half the population at the time, and who were not competent to build and run all of this on their own.  This was all well and fine until incompetent people were hired to replace the competent ones who either retired, quit because they were passed over for incompetent others or were literally forced out in the name of "diversity."

Who was the mayor when the water crisis hit?  Karen Weaver, who proudly claimed to be the 5th Black Mayor of Flint and first woman to hold the office, and by the way as noted she was only the person who was there when the decades-long degeneration of competence, which most-certainly did not happen in a year or two, finally got to the point of poisoning people.  Nonetheless rather than take responsibility for it and fixing it by restoring competence in the water department she blamed others and so did Obama, who I remind you is also Black.  Either of them could have demanded competence be restored to the water department and immediately resolved the problem instead of ripping up and replacing pipes while forcing the distribution of bottled water  (at great profit to the bottlers, I'm sure, and I'll bet that was a crony set of agreements too) that wasn't poisonous.

And who was most-likely to be poisoned?  Why black kids, of course, because when the color of your skin, sex and whatever gender you think you might be this afternoon is more important than your mental firepower you tend to wind up fucking your own people.  This was, of course, blamed on white people even though Flint first elected a Black Mayor in 1966.

Incidentally the 1950s were one of Flint's most-prosperous decades, centered in its middle-class manufacturing base and also incidentally in 1964, just before McCree's election, a massive scandal erupted over... you guessed it.... a plan to bring Lake Huron water into the city!  It was in the wake of that scandal that the city's water connection with Detroit was established.

Mayor McCree and all of his successors up until the crisis clearly did not believe having competent people run the water plant with full understanding of the supply's chemistry and any changes well in advance of them happening was the first and foremost job in order to insure the stability and safety of the water supply system in the city.  Whether that was due to lack of understanding that actual technical competence was required or willfully and intentionally hiring incompetent assholes I do not know -- but what I do know is that a bunch of black kids got poisoned as a direct result of not taking due care to make certain said chemistry requirements were met when the water source was changed.

Why is there no discussion of this?  Why don't we discuss how and why this actually happened?

Oh, that's an isolated incident eh?

Fani Willis anyone?  Yes, my first and foremost indication that Fani is incompetent at best might be her selection of "Gorilla Grip Pussy Pal" as her bluetooth device name.  That is clearly a clean indication that said person is extremely serious as a litigator and thinks with her head instead of her cunt.  Never mind the apparent presentation of evidence that she was both skimming public funds indirectly for her little indiscretions with a man she hired to participate in prosecuting Trump and was fucking him besides so one has to question whether the actual intent was to hire the best and finest to prosecute or to both get laid and have lavish vacations on the taxpayer dime while attacking a political enemy.  Of course her defense was "oh I'm Black and that's why people are after me" when it all blew up in her face.  Uh huh.

Any white person would already be under indictment for this sort of crap so sit down and shut the fuck up Fani, never mind your vapid County government which, I note, the Governor has utterly failed to stomp on.  He damn well should have years ago so there goes Georgia in the "DIEEEEEVERSITY" lottery as well.  Disqualified?  Where's the rather-obviously justified indictment from the STATE Attorney General and which party do people claim has actual competent and reasonable persons running under their banner?  Looks and smells like bullshit to me.

Good thing there weren't any black kids downstream of a water plant where she was controlling the chemical balance of the water, eh?  There might have been literal shit in that supply.

Oh, doesn't this sound a lot like the Smollett case?  Why, I think it might be sort of the same crap eh?

Just these couple of examples?

Oh, maybe not.  Let's talk about New York!  Lettia James (gee, what an odd coincidence that all of these people are black?) infamously went after Trump.  Oh, and by the way, James campaigned on "getting Trump" which incidentally is about as crooked as it gets and you'd think that standing alone would disqualify her from holding office never mind Howard University revoking her JD.  Nope.  But then of course Governor ("I think with my pussy, hear it ROAR!") Hochul tries to claim "oh this was a one off", only to have James almost-immediately go after one of the largest meat-processing firms in the United States under that very same law claiming that they're "climate abusers" and by God, she's going to single-handedly save the fucking planet!

Is this all just simple corruption or do we add in rank incompetence driven by sub-80 IQs across the board with an obvious outcome sort of like this:

Oh, that's offensive you say?  Well it might be but here's my reply:

Offended you I have, a shit I do not give.

Let's ask the question a different way:

Where is this sort of degeneration not in evidence?

You'll have a hard time with that.

We replace reliable carbon-fueled base load power plants with wind and solar which are not reliable as the wind does not always blow and the sun does not always shine.  We haven't hanged a single person who did this shit anywhere even when it was proved to not work because you can't guarantee wind or sun in a given place and if that doesn't coincide with when you want power you don't get power at all.  ERCOT had its infamous freeze and they're not alone -- everyone is pulling this crap and the power companies and entities (some government run, some private sector) either have nobody in charge who is saying "heh ASSHOLES, our first job is to make goddamn sure we can generate the power when the customers require it and only when that is assured can we choose other priorities" or some diversity and/or green douchebag is telling those people to sit down and shut up or be fired -- and they're running the show.

Go watch that video up a bit again as many times as it takes because that's exactly what this sort of stupid shit constitutes when it comes to intelligence and this is going to be the repeated result if we don't cut it out right fucking now.

Oh, its just power?  Uh, no, it isn't.  We know based on simple facts that one cannot determine the long term effects of a medication without the time passing.  Its not possible, duh.  So we mandate, coerce and lie that we know something is safe when we know damn well that you can't figure out what will happen in five years until five years goes by.  If that's not deranged enough we gave the people who make this crap legal immunity and nobody hanged the politicians, the physicians, the pharmaceutical executives or all of the above even without waiting the required period of years because it is obvious that the claims are frauds as you can't figure out what will happen in a given time until the time passes.  That we now have discovered that indeed they're not "safe as promised" isn't really material in that the claim was a fraud right up front and now, given the passage of time, it is ADMITTED that the shots have killed and severely maimed people.  The only debate today is how many people got killed or maimed!

There are a couple hundred people who are alive today only due to dumb luck because someone at Boeing, Spirit (one of their contractors), both of which trumpet their "diversity initiatives" (see Boeing's and Spirit's bullshit for yourself), or someone doing work on the plane under either or both of their alleged supervision, did not install all four bolts on a hatch in one of their 737 aircraft.  Any ONE of the four bolts, nuts and cotter (or safety wire) would have held the door in place on the frame.  The NTSB has now shown (which was obvious by the way within minutes of landing when photos were posted publicly by passengers and which I commented on in a separate posting at the time) that none of the four bolts, nuts and keepers were installed.  Only dumb luck kept that door from hitting the stabilizer after it detached as it tumbled free.  Since that door masses somewhere around 70lbs if it had hit the stabilizer at a hundred knots or more of relative velocity (consider a car battery being shot at the tail of the plane at 100mph for an idea of the level of impact involved here) odds are extremely high that the stabilizer would have been severely damaged or destroyed and the entire aircraft and everyone on board would have been lost.

There have been several recent incidents between aircraft where near collisions have occurred during landing and takeoff -- and one actual impact.  The rate of these incidents recently has been stunningly high and may I remind you that a plane impacting another while landing or taking off is quite-likely to kill everyone in both aircraft.  A landing 737 comes in at about 120kts just before touchdown so how would you like to get hit if you're about to take off at 130mph because that is roughly the speed at which the collision will take place!  Is this apparent increase because we hire for diversity in the control tower and cockpit instead of for competence?  How long will it before one of those near-misses isn't a miss and a airliner full of passengers, or even two airliners, are destroyed along with everyone on board?  May I remind you that at least one of the planes usually has plenty of fuel on board to be turned into a mist and ignite on impact too.  If the impact doesn't get you the fireball probably will.

We hear of "cyber incidents" all the time.  One of the latest is a health care portal company that interconnects various providers and insurance firms.  Why is it happening in the first place and by the way why aren't the firms involved, when it is a cryptojack thing or similar, equipped with competent people who can roll back to the few hours or day before the cryptojacking got them?  Yes, you lose the couple of hours of work -- that beats being offline for days or weeks doesn't it?  Modern systems can do this if they're set up properly and if compartmentalized properly then the impact is localized to one small area anyway.  Oh, but that takes actual skill instead of a bunch of idiots over in India writing garbage code and by the way who's doing system administration and how come they're not competent enough to compartmentalize and limit this sort of damage?  Again we get to the base question: How do you expect things that require a group of people who have roughly a 115 IQ or better to operate them competently to continue working as expected when you hire people on their skin color or pronouns and don't give a crap that they have an 80 IQ or can't discern the fact that being born with a penis makes them male?

How many more examples would you like?

How about just one more?

What makes you believe that your physician actually understands anything about health?  Before you say "but mine is good even if many suck" I give you one RICHARD LEVINE who can't even discern that he is a man by the fact that he had a penis when born and further, he also can't manage his own body mass yet we are told that this person is an "expert" on human health AND WE MUST OBEY that which issues from his mouth!  What sort of mentally-defective IDIOT (that's all of us, by the way) allow anyone who can't figure out basic biological facts related to whether you're a man or a woman along with the inability to maintain reasonable body mass to make recommendations and even DICTATE POLICY MANDATES for the rest of America's people?  Has your doctor told you point-blank that Levine is both ridiculously obese and mentally deranged?  If he or she hasn't then that person is deranged too and you're insane to listen to a single thing that comes from their mouth.

How much of our civilization will survive if we keep putting people in positions of both authority and responsibility for things that we all count on working when they simply don't have the chops to do the job but are hired because they're either cheaper, their skin or sex is "correct" or they use the right pronouns?  If someone cannot tell from the presence of a penis or vagina on their body at the time of their birth if they're a man or a woman why would you believe they can accurately process anything else in their head?  Exactly how many examples of obvious failure to accurately process information do you need to see before you realize that if fantasy is permitted to intrude anywhere that matters in job performance you will have serious problems -- up to and including people becoming dead as a consequence.

Guess what?  People like me won't put up with that sort of shit and you can't make people like me, who are competent in our fields, work for you.  As those who are both competent and intelligent retire or simply say "fuck you" and quit rather than coddle another's mental derangement, never mind the probability of them screwing the pooch then blaming the competent guy because he "misgendered" them, leaving you with the green-haired, pronoun-spouting person who you don't dare call "sir" or "ma'm" lest you get a complaint filed against you through HR running the water plant or the data interchange for your local hospital the odds of you getting fucked up the ass rise precipitously.

We either stop all of this, right now, by whatever means we must, or what we currently claim to enjoy as "civilization" will collapse incrementally and each of us will get doled out our personal "find out" to go with the "fuck around" the hard way.  Perhaps it will come in different ways for each of us -- we'll be hit at 130mph while waiting for take-off in a plane, drink poisoned water out of our tap at home, get an injection of shit at the doctors office that paralyzes us, gives us cancer or a heart attack, we'll freeze to death because we let the power company replace reliable carbon-based generators with wind and solar and then it will be -20F at night and calm, resulting in our power going off, our furnace will not fire and we will freeze to death and similar sorts of means of going to meet God.

Oh by the way what do you think the S&P will trade at when all this happens and for how long do you think the average 80IQ person will sit back quietly when it does before they come looking for whatever food you might have, which just might include an intent to eat you personally?

I hear Venezuelans sometimes demand the right to rape young women and, if said women refuses, they just kill her and crush their skulls.  THAT is what we have degenerated to already on the illegal alien issue alone.  The next dead woman could very well be you, your wife or young daughter and yet nobody will get off their ass, demand it ALL stop NOW and enforce that demand even when the clear consequence of not doing so is possible DEATH and is on full display in your FACE.

It isn't like we had a prior display of this exact same insanity in Iowa not all that long ago with another illegal alien, is it?

Oh wait -- WE DID AND THE VICTIM'S NAME WAS MOLLIE.

If you've read this column for any length of time you know I'm not in any way bullish on the intermediate and longer-term path our government and fiscal policy are on.  In fact the problems go back for at least 20 years and arguably 40 in that every challenge has been met with more and more government credit emission.

Now a certain amount of this might be tolerable -- roughly that which is covered by the improvement in productivity.  In my book Leverage I argued (and still do) that even at this level its theft, because productivity doesn't improve because government improves (that is, it would be "theirs" to dole out) it improves because people improve things.

Since we cause it we should get the benefit, not some glad-handed decision coming from a state or federal legislature or, as is currently the case, not even through legislative process such as NY deciding to hand out EBT cards with huge amounts of money on them to persons who are neither citizens or who entered the US lawfully.

As you also may recall back well before I started penning this column I have pointed out that the medical system specifically, which was about 3% of GDP when Medicare was passed and about 4% when Medicaid became common, now consists of 20% of the economy and about one third of federal spending yet the tax remains right near 3% -- meaning that as the expense as grown as a piece of the whole the tax revenue has not.  The entire problem with our budget, on a simple fiscal analysis, lies here -- not in Social Security or anywhere else.  Politicians and other analysts always conflate these and its intentional; anyone can read the MTS, effectively the Federal Government's "by category" transaction summation (commonly called a "cash flow statement") and see these facts.

It is also a fact that as "medical employment" has grown virtually none of it, on a per-capita basis, has been in doctors and nurses.  In other words none of it has anything to do with actually providing medical care to human beings; the entire expansion is elsewhere.  We should not have permitted this but we have and once again nobody on either side of the aisle will do anything about this as evidenced by the last 20+ years of it.

The over-extension of asset prices of all sorts has followed from these policies.  This is not sustainable and it will break.  It has broken many times before, and it will again.  We can argue over timing, but not outcome.

Here's the important point I want to impress with this article:

When it does, and I believe it is imminent (meaning weeks or months, perhaps a year or so but I will take the under on that) it will be very tempting to try to call bottoms in the belief that the same cycle that has played out since 2000 will occur again and thus you should use the financial leverage you can obtain because you'll get wealthy if you do.

It is my considered opinion that you're foolish to take that risk because if you're wrong you will be bankrupted or worse.

Further you don't need to do that to make out ok.  That is, if you buy a house once prices collapse you don't need to take on leverage, buy five, and try to be a landlord and make a ton of money on the "appreciation" you expect to come.  Buying one where you want to live, and living in it, treating it as a consumer durable good, leaves you way ahead of the game than if you buy one now and wind up sitting on a 50% or more loss hoping prices come back up.

If you can buy business equipment for a nickel on the dollar even a modest amount of money purchases something that makes a profit because your cost of operations is cheaper than the other guy's cost.  If you take leverage and the asset does not go back up in value the other guy who doesn't do that will destroy you because the leverage costs money and he doesn't have to spend it.

Living beyond your cash earnings power is dangerous.  It has paid off for the last 20 years with the only requirement being that you be able to withstand short-term, usually less than a year or two, drawdowns.

This time the drawdown and flat-line is likely to be a decade or more -- similar to the Long Depression of the late 1800s.  If it is, and you have leverage on, you will be ruined because your earnings power will decrease but the leverage costs money and that expense is fixed for the term when you take it.

During both the Long Depression and Great Depression those who had not taken on such leverage were ultimately able to buy assets for a nickel on the dollar but that strategy only works if you do not take on leverage.  If you do and either miss the bottom or the exit from the condition does not come quickly enough you lose everything because leverage multiples the losses exactly as it does the gains and worse, if you lose half you now need a double to get back to even.

In the 1990s I was able to take advantage of a relatively minor economic downturn with cash and obtain both high-quality office space on lease and other assets.  This was a tremendous advantage.  Had I employed leverage I could have, of course, gotten much more but the risk in that was a complete wipe-out if I timed the exit wrong or had to hold through the 2000 wreck and was too far out over my skis.  I had seen that movie before as a customer of mine before MCSNet was an Internet firm who had leverage on with a quite-profitable small business out in the suburbs had his operating line get called by the bank.  He could not replace it on terms that he could meet and was immediately and entirely destroyed.

I'll point out that we had roughly 100 competitors in our local market and I knew many others in the business in other regions and areas.  Of the local competitors I know a couple of who sold out as I did at various valuations and one who stayed in, navigated the 2000 crash and now has a lot more money than I do.  Most of the rest were literally destroyed.  In 2008 I knew several people who had put on a bunch of leverage and were entirely ruined including losing their primary residence.

Do not make this mistake by believing that asset prices, when they dive, will come back in a reasonable period of time.  They might not come back in your remaining lifespan but even if they do you need to assume that the timeline will be over one to three decades, not years and your income over that period of time may decline to a material degree so even fixed-rate debt is likely to destroy you if you use it to purchase them.

Note: I am not a physician.  I cannot back any of this up against a random controlled trial or even lab testing since I am unwilling to provide "formal" test results into a system that can and will be used to fuck me down the road.  Thus, absent emergent need, I permit no such thing to occur, and there have been no emergent needs in my adult life.

As a result I do not know my serum Vitamin D level, for example.  I do know, however, a number of metabolic things about my person that I can test on my own with available and inexpensive items I can purchase over the counter or online, such as blood glucose, A1c, blood pressure and several elements of kidney function (urine test strips are available OTC and provide quite a bit of information.)

Until and unless I can have actual hard, enforceable privacy, with felony criminal and heavy punitive financial damages for any breach, no matter why or how, along with iron-clad and lifetime statutory guarantees that such cannot be abused now or at any time during my remaining life, my position on this will not change.  I am especially concerned, incidentally, with genetic-related information as that is a literal minefield for all of humanity; the potential on a forward basis to use that data in a discriminatory manner is unbounded and that we cannot typically do it today in most circumstances matters not because you can't change your genetic make up no matter what you do and thus once that data is in someone's hands it can be used to fuck you up the ass for the rest of your life.  If you are one of the fools who used something like "23 and me" and you, or your offspring, get boned 20 years from now you deserve it -- I've repeatedly warned against this.  By the way that company is in financial trouble if their stock price of roughly 70 cents means anything which in turn means all their data is going to end up in someone else's hands and you have no control over any of it if you previously let them have it.  I warned people of this, and now it is going to happen so bend over and grab your ankles; someone, in the future, is almost-certain to screw you with that data if you gave them a sample.

YOU, AND ONLY YOU, are responsible for your own health.  I sell nothing.  I stand to gain nothing by sharing this information.  It is by definition an N = 1 test on one person (me) with one observer of the results (me) and said observations are limited in time to no further along than the present.  I could easily be wrong, but it is my ass, my choice and this is the set of choices I've made.  If you do any or all of this and get fucked its on you; this is fair warning that it is not a recommendation or a "prescription."  I've read a lot of medical papers and taken the time to understand them and interpret them, then test against instrumentation I bought with my own money and against my uniquely-DNA-encoded body, which is different than every other human body, to some degree, on the planet.

Faux Snooz is of course at it again with "surprisingly simple ways to keep yourself healthy" which omit the most important -- what you put in the pie hole and your immune system's status.  I do agree that activity is a very good thing and being sedentary is bad.  And yes, digestion is important.  But note that of course they talk about "recommended vaccinations" which of course means flu and covid and if anything those are the opposite when it comes to immunity because they are a crutch.  If you get measles there won't be any question as to whether you have a serious problem or not -- right?

And of course the "crank up the stupid" has to come in through "organic this and that."  These cocksuckers never passed organic chem, I see -- so what are they -- diversity doctors?  Probably.  Why?  Some of the nastiest chemicals on the planet are organic which makes sense if you think about it for five seconds; being organic they can interfere with you as an organism quite easily.  And of course they entirely omit the Granddaddy of immunity that in fact is likely the most-important of all, Vitamin D, which is impossible to get from the sun if you're indoors, it is impossible to get enough of it in winter for most people in the US and if you're black the problem is worse because you absorb less of it through your skin due to your pigmentation.

So pardon me if I have a jaundiced eye toward you when you ignore the biggest issue entirely and then play the "organic food" game.  This is nothing more than a cheap shot at those without a huge amount of money (that "organic" steak is twice as expensive as the not, and if you eschew it for the breaded chicken tenders or the pot pie in the freezer because of cost, well.... yeah.  Eat the damned steak before any of that other garbage.)

With that as a preamble here it is.

Due to the fact that roughly north of Atlanta, more or less, it is not possible to obtain adequate Vitamin D from exposure to the sun for about six months out of the year for a person of generally-white skin (the more melanin you have the further south that line goes!), Vitamin D is fat-soluble and thus in the winter all you have is that stored in the body, specifically the liver, and that during Covid we discovered that even in Central and South America most people are deficient (which was a surprise to me but it does make sense given how often people simply don't go outside these days) along with the extraordinary correlation between Vitamin D levels and fatal coronavirus infections (essentially zero persons who were not deficient died of it before any shots were available) I have taken the following daily since August of 2021:

• 5,000 IU of Vitamin D
• 100mcg of Vitamin K2

It is now nearly 2-1/2 years later and I have suffered exactly zero symptomatic respiratory infections.

The goal is to make sure that I am not severely deficient.  This should do so.  I am 60 and while I spend a lot of time outdoors in summer as we get older it is well-documented that your skin's capacity to make Vitamin D goes down, never mind that nobody likes getting fried and thus we tend to cover up, use sunblock or both.  Statistically-speaking this level is extremely unlikely to cause problems with having too much -- and the K2 is a buffer against that, although the base risk is very small.  Excessive Vitamin D levels are dangerous, including the possibility of precipitating calcium drop-out in the arteries which might be permanent, but there is quite a wide band before that area is reached.  I will note for reference that at one point during the pandemic Fauci stated that he took twice this amount daily.  I am uncomfortable with a higher amount and again, there is risk of possible permanent and serious damage if you go too far -- then again nearly anything is poisonous in sufficient quantity.  Were I younger and active outdoors on a regular basis I would use this only from roughly October to April -- but the key here is both age and regular outdoor exposure, as that study work during Covid in Central and South America showed.

There is, by the way, an argument for adding magnesium.  If you eat seafood, dairy and green vegetables you probably won't have a seriously-low level and too much is not good -- but if not you might want to add it. Just be aware that as with Vitamin D it is possible to overdose.

• Vitamin C, liposomal

I keep a stash of Vitamin C around and at the first hint of any sort of respiratory trouble I gobble it in moderate size.  That is, if I feel a bit "off" at night before going to bed (e.g. a bit of a tickle in the throat, etc.) I will gobble up 3-4 grams of the liposomal form of it in capsules.  I am not concerned about overdosing since it is basically impossible to do in a way that will harm you, although getting the squirts, which will happen if you take too much of it, isn't very pleasant.  When I had covid I used a huge amount of it and never found that alleged "bowel tolerance", so the claims of your tolerance going way up when you're sick are, at least for me, very true.  I also will take 2-3 grams of it at once one time a week simply because I do not eat much citrus and while I do routinely eat green vegetables (and they are an excellent source) they're intermittent enough that I want to make sure I have enough of it.  Humans cannot synthesize ascorbate (Vitamin C) due to an error in our DNA that arose a very, very long time ago similarly to the error in feline DNA that prohibits them from synthesizing Taurine (thus they are obligate carnivores.)  You have to be pretty deficient to get scurvy but there is no downside to having more than you need short of bowel tolerance, so this is a vitamin that I gobble with abandon at any, no matter how small, sign of trouble.

I do not like the "powder" form although I have a big jug of it.  For routine use I am very much not a fan because Vitamin C is ascorbic acid and acid exposure is rough on the enamel of the teeth.  I have crappy genetics in this regard and don't need any trouble there but if I needed extremely large doses in order to fight something off I'd deal with it for a few days.  So far that jug has remained unopened (and I'm not concerned about it "expiring" either.)  For the same reason I would not use chewable tablets; there's no concern about tablets or capsules you swallow as your stomach acid will trivially etch paint so once down the pipe its not a concern.

• Quercetin and Zinc

Quercetin is a flavonoid found in, among other things, grapes.  It has very decent anti-inflammatory properties alone and for a lot of people (myself included) it works as well as OTC allergy meds such as Claritin.  When combined with Zinc it has antiviral properties.  Being a flavonoid in any reasonable amount it has a statistically tiny risk profile and thus I use it without concern, although again -- not without reason.  I used to have severe seasonal allergies before I went low-carb in eating; they are now minor annoyances, but Quercetin is equally if not more effective than Claritin and unlike every OTC antihistamine I've ever tried I do not build a tolerance to it so I choose it instead in the spring, summer and fall months if I'm having allergy issues.  If I have reason to believe I've been exposed to a viral thing or feel any sort of incipient trouble I hit both it and the zinc for a couple of days.  Note that there is some evidence of potential drug interference with this (not significant risk, but non-zero) so if you're on prescriptions check that first.

• Claritin

I rarely use this today but do keep some around.  There was a small retrospective study during covid out of Spain in severely compromised people (nursing home residents) that showed that immediate use of it had a very statistically significant (100%!) positive impact on preventing the infection from progressing -- with no adverse effects from the treatment.  They bundled the antihistamine with Z-pak but of course that is a prescription drug.  This is logical as it is an antihistamine and has a drying effect on the upper respiratory and sinus area, that is, it changes the environment in the nose, sinuses and upper throat.  That appears to be enough to give the body a better shot at attacking the invading virus before it can break through and cause more-serious trouble.  Prior to discovering quercetin I used to use it on a very regular basis during allergy season as part of a rotation (to evade tolerance build) so I have many years of experience taking it and know it doesn't do anything bad to me.  As such it is now part of my protocol for any incipient upper respiratory infection that I feel coming on, although in the last 2-1/2 years I've only used it once for that purpose -- and didn't get actually sick.  Was it a nothing or did it help?  I don't know but the generic at WalMart or elsewhere is extremely cheap and very safe so having a bottle of it around is an easy thing to have on-hand.  Today I would hit any incipient upper respiratory infection with it immediately given the Spanish data and its known safety profile, never mind that its trivially cheap to keep a bottle in your drawer.

• NAC

Were I to get a serious respiratory infection anyway I would hit it with NAC and I keep some on hand.  I do not use it all the time because there is some question as to its safety in long term continual use.  However, it is known as an anti-inflammatory, immune modulator and helps with respiratory symptoms.  Therefore were I to get something nasty I'd use it and have it on-hand for that reason, but would stop when the reason to use it is alleviated.  Be aware that if you are using prescriptions you need to check for interactions -- some drugs have known interactions where there is reason to be concerned.  I have not had reason to use this since got covid -- but I do keep it in the cabinet.

That's it.  None of these are expensive, none of them pose material risk (other than possibly NAC if you are using certain prescription drugs), the Vitamin D and K2 are likely to promote a better immune profile across-the board which may extend materially beyond respiratory viruses.

In addition it is now nearly 2-1/2 years beyond when I got Covid and in the time since I have not had any respiratory virus of any symptomatic note at all.  I have hit a few things that felt "off" or where my Garmin has pegged a low overnight HRV without any obvious provocation (e.g. a few beers at the bar) with the above protocol and none turned into actual illness.  Statistically, for me, this is quite significant as my "usual" in my years on this rock have seen me get some sort of minor respiratory infection once or twice and more years than not a mild to moderate flu (and once in a while, a real ass-kicker such as the first week of 2020) on top of it.  To go nearly 2-1/2 years with zero such illnesses is quite remarkable in my experience, yet there you have it and, given that experience, I have every intention of continuing to do so.

YMMV.

PS: What difference could we have made with this set of recommendations, ex perhaps the NAC, on Covid in the United States?  The cost of having this on-hand is less than one "quick test" package and the cost of Vit-D and K2 supplementation is literally pennies a day.  Between that and the Spanish nursing home data it is reasonable to expect that an enormous percentage, and perhaps statistically all of the people who got whacked by this virus would not have died, and few would have wound up in the hospital -- perhaps 1 in 100 who actually did.  Of course nobody would have made any money and there would have been no fear of anything if that was recommended and had worked -- would there?  Something to think about.

Oh, you thought Covid was bad?

How about a decades-long scam which put a huge percentage of American adults on drugs that are dangerous and do nothing in terms of improving your odds of not having the ultimate bad thing happen -- death?  How would you like it if it was proved that your doctor lied, pharmaceutical companies lied, the government lied with their "recommendations", everyone lied -- and many of your friends and family suffered insane deterioration of their condition and ultimately died as a result?

Well, all of that happened.

You were told that cholesterol -- specifically, non-HDL (that is, LDL) cholesterol, was a cause of death via heart attacks and strokes.  You were given medication and told to take it, specifically statins, which do in fact lower cholesterol.  But statins have serious side effects and while they don't screw everyone who takes them (gee, where we have seen that in the last couple of years?) they do, in every case, result in detectable metabolic damage.  That's true for basically all drugs by the way: The question is always whether the damage from the drugs, and by the way those are averse effects, not "side" effects, and are deliberately misnamed in order to mislead you, is greater or lesser than the benefit from taking them.

If the benefit is zero then it is not a drug -- it is a poison.

Well here we are....

Harmonized individual-level data from a global cohort showed that 57.2% and 52.6% of cases of incident cardiovascular disease among women and men, respectively, and 22.2% and 19.1% of deaths from any cause among women and men, respectively, may be attributable to five modifiable risk factors. 

Wow, that sounds like five things you can change to modify your risk of dying.  That's a great thing, right?

So what were the five things?

BMI, systolic blood pressure (the top number), non-HDL cholesterol, smoking and diabetes.

Two outcomes were assessed: Cardiovascular disease and death from any cause.

I like the latter one far more than the former because dead is dead and why is irrelevant if you're the one who's dead.  We all can wring our hands on the  "why" when it happens, but from the perspective of the "trial of one" it matters not one whit.  In other words I'm not impressed in a "reduction" in cardiovascular disease if the thing that we do to produce it kills you in equal numbers, thus doing nothing has the same ultimate outcome.  Indeed that is a wild-eyed scam as the "something" that a doctor or other medical professional does is never free so unless you can demonstrate all-cause mortality benefit the only person getting actual "benefit" has to be presumed to be the doctor, hospital or pharmaceutical company -- and not you.

Further, this was an extremely large cohort -- roughly 1.5 million people.  Statistical power is greatly enhanced by large numbers, so that they looked at an utterly huge number of people is an excellent factor in favor of the results being valid.

Of the factors, however, only three of the five actually had a statistically significant correlation with being dead: Smoking, diabetes, and blood pressure.

LDL Cholesterol did not; it had a weak association that faded with age with cardiovascular disease but not dying in any of the age groups, which strongly implies that there is no value whatsoever to trying to reduce it in terms of being dead, which is what matters to you.  In addition, which did surprise me a bit, being fat itself was not dangerous in terms of killing you.

Smoking had the expected negative effect and so did blood pressure elevation.  The latter, of course, is highly-associated with body mass but there are fat people with normal blood pressure.

And finally, diabetes was the Gorilla in the room; at all ages it was a serious risk factor, and not a little either, roughly doubling your risk of being dead all the up until you got to be nearly 80, and even then it was good for a 1.6x elevation in risk.  At younger ages the elevation of risk was as much as four times.

Oh by the way one of the documented side effects of statins is CAUSING Type 2 diabetes.

In addition the global nature of this data and study has shown that no, the region of the world and thus the genetics of the person is not statistically relevant to the outcomes.  That is, there is no "magic genetic" or "magic dirt" factor involved; this applies to humans no matter where they came from or where they live.  While there are small differences from region to region there are none that stand out as statistical outliers, which is extremely important because one of the tropes often run is that "well, I'm from and thus I don't have to worry about it because I have magic genes."  No you don't, by the data, and if you keep believing that bullshit you are likely to be dead as a result of your own stupidity.

So what do we learn from this study?

• Your doctor is and has been lying, and so have all the medical "authorities" for decades when it comes to cholesterol.  It is a mild risk elevation for cardiovascular disease but not death, and death is what matters.  The "stomp on that now" approach to medicine in this regard is now proved bankrupt and the billions extracted were at best worthless and at worst poisonous, literally, resulting in an increased risk of mortality.
  
  
• Your doctor in fact raised your risk of dying when he prescribed statins.  Statins have a known adverse event risk of causing Type 2 diabetes, which is proved to be a wild (more than double and as much as four times the risk) of being dead across basically all age groups up until you get to be 80, and even then its roughly 1.6x.  Diabetes kills, period, and anything that increases the risk of diabetes is thus poison, period.  Since lowering non-HDL cholesterol has no mortality benefit at all the consumption of statins has no available benefit to your health, but does have a significant risk of causing a mortal disorder.  You have to be out of your damn mind to consume them given this data.
  
  
• Dietary "guidelines" that include carbohydrates, specifically "fast" carbohydrates such as potatoes, rice, wheat in any form (flour, bread, cookies, etc.) potentiate and worsen glycemic control issues and thus cause diabetes.  So do statins.  We know both of these things are facts.  Any "physician" who, given a lack of body mass or glucose control, say much less both, who does not recommend immediately getting all of that crap out of your diet is making recommendations that raise, not lower, your risk of dying.  This study proves that.
  
  
• While being fat alone does not raise your risk of dying we know being fat raises the risk of blood pressure elevation and diabetes.  If you are fat but not either hypertensive or diabetic the fat alone will probably not kill you and other than the other morbidity factors involved in being fat (joint damage, reduced exercise tolerance and mobility, etc.) since it doesn't make your dead the decision (and yes it is a decision) to be overweight or obese is not likely to give you a dirt nap. However, being fat will, over time, greatly increase the risk of one of the other two things happening and both of those do make it more likely that you will be dead.  The bullet point above, or if you prefer this article, will both control or even possibly reverse Type II diabetes and at the same time make you profoundly less-fat, reducing the risk of both developing or worsening that and high blood pressure and it costs zero dollars and thus makes nobody rich.  In fact it may make you more-rich in that diabetes, in particular, is extraordinarily expensive when it progresses to insulin dependence, amputations, blindness, kidney dialysis and death all of which are really bad for you but make your doctor, the local hospital and others in the medical system extremely wealthy.

Remember the last three years folks.

You were told that "masks prevented Covid-19 transmission."  Did they?  Did you get Covid despite wearing a mask?  Make all the excuses you wish; if a mask prevents you from inhaling a virus how is it that you got a virus if you wore one?  Obviously you were lied to.

You were also told that "taking the shots would prevent getting Covid and also giving it to others."  President Biden said this, the CEO of Pfizer said this, your doctor probably said it, the CDC said it and so did many others.  Deborah Birx admitted that she knew that claim was unfounded when it was made and said nothing, and she's allegedly one of the "experts."  I pointed out that it was unfounded as the original studies never were designed to demonstrate it.  The White House, it is now known, knew within months there were serious safety signals and ignored them on purpose.  Further, as soon as mass "breakthrough" events were reported, which was as early as April and May of 2021, anyone with two nickels worth of IQ points knew damn well that preventing getting it was a lie too, since if there's a 5% failure rate (for example) the odds of all 20 people in a gathering all having said failure occur at once is less than that of being by an asteroid while getting your mail.  Yet exactly that was reported, repeatedly.

Now we know that the claims that cholesterol will kill you, a trope run for decades by damn near every medical provider on the planet and used to promote billions of dollars in sales of drugs, is in fact false.  Its not only false its worse than false in that those drugs do promote a disorder, Type 2 diabetes, that actually does wildly raise your risk of dying.

The only thing worse than that is that we know how to reduce or even eliminate Type 2 diabetes in a particular person at zero cost by doing nothing more than changing what you eat on a permanent, lifestyle basis.

The choice is yours, of course.