Veganism

Vegetarians are people who do not eat meat. Their diet consists mainly of plant foods but they will often consume animal products like milk, cheese, yoghurt and eggs. Some of them are pescatarians and they will include fish in their diet. Vegans take things a step further and exclude all animal foods. They only consume plant foods and some will also refuse to use any animal products like wearing leather shoes or belts. There has been a surge of interest in veganism in recent times. Reports in the media suggest that a vegan, or plant-based, diet is more healthy than an omnivore diet; it is kinder to animals and it is better for the environment. Are these claims true?

No, they are not true. An important aspect of this site is to demonstrate the benefits of animal-sourced foods for our physical and mental health and the necessity of correctly managed livestock for environmental health. An entirely plant-based diet leads to nutrient deficiencies, especially in children. The intensive farming of single plant crops involves herbicides and pesticides with devastating effects on biodiversity. Vastly more creatures die in the production of grains and vegetables than die for the meat on your plate. This section of the website concentrates on why the pro-vegan story is a fallacy.

How did veganism begin?

We evolved into the people we are because, for millions of years, our ancestors ate the meat and fat of large animals. Our species is the most dominant species on the planet and we have adapted to life in all the extreme climates that exist on Earth. Indigenous tribes, unaffected by modern life, still exist around the world from rainforests and deserts to the Arctic Circle. Their diets vary but none of them have adopted a meat-free, vegan diet.

The avoidance of animal-based foods began in America in the 1850s within an illogical, religious sect called the Seventh Day Adventist Church. I call them illogical because, although they believe that God created them, they believe that sexual arousal is a sin. (Surely, if God created us, God created arousal so we ‘would go forth and multiply’.) Their leader, Ellen White, also believed that eating rich foods, like meat, stimulated sinful passion and bland foods diminished it. She preached this doctrine with great determination and convinced everyone in the Seventh Day Adventist Church to accept this idea as part of their belief. (John Harvey Kellogg was a member of this church and you can read about him here.)

In Britain, veganism began with a man called Donald Watson who founded the Vegan Society in 1944. He is credited with coining the word ‘vegan’ which he created by joining the beginning and end of the word vegetarian. He was an animal rights campaigner whose interest in veganism began when he witnessed the slaughter of a pig on a farm. He campaigned for a meat free diet because he thought farming was cruel to animals.

A plant-based diet, without the animal foods that our ancestors ate for a million years, was invented in America to reduce sexual arousal and was copied in Britain because one man thought it was cruel to animals. In neither case did it have anything to do with improvements to human health or the environment. Both of those false ideas have been added later in a cynical attempt to persuade unsuspecting people to avoid the most nutritious foods available to us, namely meat, fish, eggs and dairy.

The Real Health Crisis

I sent this letter to all the major newspapers in the UK but none of them printed it.

We were told by Boris Johnson, in March, that we needed to have a national lockdown ‘to save the NHS from being overwhelmed’ and we received the same message in November. The Health Service is constantly under pressure because millions of people in the UK suffer from metabolic diseases caused largely by bad diets and lifestyles. Mr Johnson and his advisers never mention the fact that 95% of the people who have died with Covid19 had at least one pre-existing metabolic disorder.

The obesity epidemic and all its associated diseases is a far bigger health crisis than this particular, seasonal coronavirus and it is the people suffering from those morbidities who die from Covid19. Following advice from the Sage committee, the Government has spent hundreds of billions of pounds, caused considerable unemployment and bankruptcy in previously viable businesses along with untold misery and distress. If the Government had put the same time, money and effort into tackling the real health crisis in this country, the NHS would never be overrun, the nation would be far healthier and richer, and far fewer people would have died from this coronavirus.The truth is they never mention the risk factor of underlying ill-health and imply the virus is equally dangerous to everybody, which it is not. This was the perfect opportunity to tackle our biggest problem but Messrs Johnson, Hancock, Whitty and Vallance have failed to do so.

yours faithfully

1922 Committee

This is the message I put on the Facebook page of the Chairman of the 1922 Committee, Sir Graham Brady.

Sir, I commend your courage in voting against your Party and in favour of the country. As you are Chair of the 1922 committee, I ask for even more courage from you. The UK and the Conservative Party need to change Prime Minister. Johnson is guilty of misconduct, corruption, dishonesty and negligence. He tried to Prorogue Parliament, break International Treaty, he has ruled by decree, he has confined healthy people without a valid law to do so. He has found billions of £s out of thin air and spent it on firms with no expertise but plenty of connections to Tory MPs. He has employed wives of MPs to run £ billion organisations without consideration of other candidates. He has locked down the country without a benefit to harm assessment. He listens only to Sage and ignores an array of independent expert opinion. He fails to realise the PCR test is not fit for purpose and that the Sage committee is full of people with conflicts of interest. His ‘Moonshot’ testing of millions of healthy people is a criminal waste of money. He has allowed Hancock and Sage to ramp up the fear out of all proportion to the danger and has caused huge psychological damage to millions of adults and children. The idea that he ‘follows the science’ has made him a laughingstock. (e.g. You can’t sit in a pub drinking beer, but you can sit in a pub drinking beer if you eat a meal.) The trouble is nobody is laughing. Please gather your backbenchers and rid us of this disastrous man.

Complaint to the Conservative Party.

To the Chairman of the Board of the Conservative Party

Dear Mr Elliot,

Mr Jeremy Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour Party, was recently suspended from the Party for his failings regarding anti-Semitism. I believe the failings, misconduct, corruption and negligence of the Conservative Party Leader, Mr Boris Johnson, leaves you, and the Board, with no alternative but to suspend him from the Party and I ask that you do so.

I believe the Conservative Party’s Code of Conduct has been breached by Mr Johnson on multiple occasions.

Misconduct:

1. In September 2019, he attempted to Prorogue Parliament. He involved the Queen in an action which 11 judges from the Supreme Court unanimously ruled to be unlawful.

2. In November 2019, the House of Lords overwhelmingly rejected Mr Johnson’s plan to renege on an International Treaty he had signed. Baroness Smith said, “There are serious concerns across the UK, and beyond, about ministers putting themselves above and beyond the rule of law.”

3. The introduction of the Coronavirus Act was rushed through Parliament without time for proper scrutiny. This Act does not give Parliament the power to confine healthy people, via lockdowns and other restrictions. The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 gives the power to confine healthy people but it requires stringent Parliamentary control. The Government did not use this legislation to confine tens of millions of healthy people but, instead, chose the Public Health Act 1984, which does not require such Parliamentary control but is written in unspecific general words. It is a basic constitutional principle that general words are not to be read as authorising the infringement of fundamental rights, but Mr Johnson’s Government has precisely done that. I refer you to a lecture by the former Supreme Court Judge, Lord Sumption, entitled, ‘Government by decree: Covid19 and the Constitution’ in which he describes all the constitutional failings of Mr Johnson’s Party. It was as long ago as 1689 that Government by Decree was made illegal in England by the Bill of Rights.

4. Mr Johnson appointed Dido Harding, the wife of a Tory MP, to run the £12 billion Test and Trace scheme without consideration of other candidates. He appointed Kate Bingham, the wife of a Tory MP, to lead the Vaccine Taskforce without consideration of other candidates and without her having any experience in vaccines. A company called Randox has been paid £497 million pounds to produce Covid test kits: Randox pays a Tory MP, Owen Patterson, £100,000 per year as a consultant. Legal action is already in progress against the Government regarding £3 billion of contracts, which cannot be accounted for. There are too many other examples to list them all. Surely, corruption is enough, by itself, to have a Minister suspended from the Party. 

5. Having been thwarted, by the Supreme Court, in his attempt to eliminate input from our democratically elected representatives, it seems to me that Mr Johnson has partially Prorogued Parliament by stealth. Social distancing rules have reduced the maximum number of MPs in the Commons from 650 to 50. If the close contact of players in football and rugby teams is allowed because they have all tested negative, why can we not have a full house of MPs if they too have tested negative?

Negligence

1. The Lockdowns and Tiers he has enforced upon tens of millions of healthy people have inflicted some level of harm on every single person in the UK. For many, the harm has been catastrophic. It is negligent to do this without first studying a clear analysis of the benefit compared to the harm.

2. He has imposed these restrictions using dishonest information. The daily death toll as reported across all the media includes people who died of any cause within 28 days of a positive Covid test. People who have died of untreated cancer or suicide caused by the lockdowns are counted as dying of Covid if they tested positive. This accounting method makes it impossible to know how many people have died as a direct result of Covid. It is a corruption of the truth and it is negligent not to insist on more accurate data.

3. Mr Johnson relies entirely on advice form the Sage committee, who have demanded lockdowns to reduce the spread of the virus until a vaccine is found. Any sensible person who was going to spend a considerable sum on, say, home improvements would always get two or three quotes. Mr Johnson has spent hundreds of billions of pounds on draconian measures without seeking any alternative opinion from other, independent experts. He has also failed to realise that 12 members of the Sage committee work for, or have been funded by, organisations involved in the manufacture of vaccines. Patrick Vallance and Chis Whitty both have conflicts of interest in this area.

4. Lockdowns have been imposed based on ‘case’ numbers. Mr Johnson has failed to understand that the PCR test upon which ‘cases’ and lockdowns are predicated is not fit for purpose. The test identifies a piece of viral genetic material but it cannot tell if that material came from a live virus or the remnants of a dead virus which has already been killed by the person’s immune system. To suggest that every positive test represents an infectious person is dishonest.

5. Mr Johnson has imposed Lockdowns on the premise that they are needed to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The NHS is constantly under pressure because of this country’s high prevalence of obesity and all the associated metabolic diseases. Apart from a brief mention of his own obesity, he has consistently failed to highlight the fact that 95% of Covid deaths have been in people with pre-existing metabolic diseases. He and Sage have misled the nation by implying that everyone is equally susceptible to this coronavirus, which is not true. Metabolic ill-health is by far the greatest threat to the nation’s health and is involved in the vast majority of Covid deaths. It is incompetent and negligent of Mr Johnson to tackle a virus with so much money, time and effort whilst doing nothing about our far greater health crisis.

The argument in favour of Mr Johnson’s actions will no doubt rely on the notion that these are exceptional times and require exceptional measures. As a medical professional, I dispute they are as exceptional as claimed. Covid19 is undoubtedly a nasty disease but the death toll from it is not exceptional when compared to previous severe outbreaks of flu. The winter of 2017/18 saw 64,000 flu deaths and there were no restrictions on our daily lives. Mr Johnson’s lockdowns are completely disproportionate to the danger posed and therefore in breach of section 1 of your Code of Conduct.

The good name of the Conservative Party is at stake and I trust you will carefully consider the long-term consequences for your Party if you condone misconduct, dishonesty, corruption and negligence in a Conservative Minister.

Yours sincerely,

Misconduct and Corruption

Some people believe that a national emergency allows politicians to use exceptional powers to tackle the problem. In some circumstances this may be true but it never warrants misconduct, corruption, dishonesty and negligence in our leaders. I believe that our Prime Minister is guilty of all these things and I have made an official complaint to the Conservative Party. I am quite sure they will fob me off with something about ‘exceptional circumstances’. So you can judge for yourself, I have copied my complaint below.

“Dear Mr Elliot and fellow members of the Board of the Conservative Party,

Mr Jeremy Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour Party, was recently suspended from the Party for his failings regarding anti-Semitism. I believe the failings, misconduct, corruption and negligence of the Conservative Party Leader, Mr Boris Johnson, leaves you, and the Board, with no alternative but to suspend him from the Party and I ask that you do so.

I believe the Conservative Party’s Code of Conduct has been breached by Mr Johnson on multiple occasions.

Misconduct:

1. In September 2019, he attempted to Prorogue Parliament. He involved the Queen in an action which 11 judges from the Supreme Court unanimously ruled to be unlawful.

2. In November 2019, the House of Lords overwhelmingly rejected Mr Johnson’s plan to renege on an International Treaty he had signed. Baroness Smith said, “There are serious concerns across the UK, and beyond, about ministers putting themselves above and beyond the rule of law.”

3. The introduction of the Coronavirus Act was rushed through Parliament without time for proper scrutiny. This Act does not give Parliament the power to confine healthy people, via lockdowns and other restrictions. The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 gives the power to confine healthy people but it requires stringent Parliamentary control. The Government did not use this legislation to confine tens of millions of healthy people but, instead, chose the Public Health Act 1984, which does not require such Parliamentary control but is written in unspecific general words. It is a basic constitutional principle that general words are not to be read as authorising the infringement of fundamental rights, but Mr Johnson’s Government has precisely done that. I refer you to a lecture by the former Supreme Court Judge, Lord Sumption, entitled, ‘Government by decree: Covid19 and the Constitution’ in which he describes all the constitutional failings of Mr Johnson’s Party. It was as long ago as 1689 that Government by Decree was made illegal in England by the Bill of Rights.

4. Mr Johnson appointed Dido Harding, the wife of a Tory MP, to run the £12 billion Test and Trace scheme without consideration of other candidates. He appointed Kate Bingham, the wife of a Tory MP, to lead the Vaccine Taskforce without consideration of other candidates and without her having any experience in vaccines. A company called Randox has been paid £497 million pounds to produce Covid test kits: Randox pays a Tory MP, Owen Patterson, £100,000 per year as a consultant. Legal action is already in progress against the Government regarding £3 billion of contracts, which cannot be accounted for. There are too many other examples to list them all. Surely, corruption is enough, by itself, to have a Minister suspended from the Party. 

5. Having been thwarted, by the Supreme Court, in his attempt to eliminate input from our democratically elected representatives, it seems to me that Mr Johnson has partially Prorogued Parliament by stealth. Social distancing rules have reduced the maximum number of MPs in the Commons from 650 to 50. If the close contact of players in football and rugby teams is allowed because they have all tested negative, why can we not have a full house of MPs if they too have tested negative?

Negligence

1. The Lockdowns and Tiers he has enforced upon tens of millions of healthy people have inflicted some level of harm on every single person in the UK. For many, the harm has been catastrophic. It is negligent to do this without first studying a clear analysis of the benefit compared to the harm.

2. He has imposed these restrictions using dishonest information. The daily death toll as reported across all the media includes people who died of any cause within 28 days of a positive Covid test. People who have died of untreated cancer or suicide caused by the lockdowns are counted as dying of Covid if they tested positive. This accounting method makes it impossible to know how many people have died as a direct result of Covid. It is a corruption of the truth and it is negligent not to insist on more accurate data.

3. Mr Johnson relies entirely on advice form the Sage committee, who have demanded lockdowns to reduce the spread of the virus until a vaccine is found. Any sensible person who was going to spend a considerable sum on, say, home improvements would always get two or three quotes. Mr Johnson has spent hundreds of billions of pounds on draconian measures without seeking any alternative opinion from other, independent experts. He has also failed to realise that 12 members of the Sage committee work for, or have been funded by, organisations involved in the manufacture of vaccines. Patrick Vallance and Chis Whitty both have conflicts of interest in this area.

4. Lockdowns have been imposed based on ‘case’ numbers. Mr Johnson has failed to understand that the PCR test upon which ‘cases’ and lockdowns are predicated is not fit for purpose. The test identifies a piece of viral genetic material but it cannot tell if that material came from a live virus or the remnants of a dead virus which has already been killed by the person’s immune system. To suggest that every positive test represents an infectious person is dishonest.

5. Mr Johnson has imposed Lockdowns on the premise that they are needed to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. The NHS is constantly under pressure because of this country’s high prevalence of obesity and all the associated metabolic diseases. Apart from a brief mention of his own obesity, he has consistently failed to highlight the fact that 95% of Covid deaths have been in people with pre-existing metabolic diseases. He and Sage have misled the nation by implying that everyone is equally susceptible to this coronavirus, which is not true. Metabolic ill-health is by far the greatest threat to the nation’s health and is involved in the vast majority of Covid deaths. It is incompetent and negligent of Mr Johnson to tackle a virus with so much money, time and effort whilst doing nothing about our far greater health crisis.

The argument in favour of Mr Johnson’s actions will no doubt rely on the notion that these are exceptional times and require exceptional measures. As a medical professional, I dispute they are as exceptional as claimed. Covid19 is undoubtedly a nasty disease but the death toll from it is not exceptional when compared to previous severe outbreaks of flu. The winter of 2017/18 saw 64,000 flu deaths and there were no restrictions on our daily lives. Mr Johnson’s lockdowns are completely disproportionate to the danger posed and therefore in breach of section 1 of your Code of Conduct.

The good name of the Conservative Party is at stake and I trust you will carefully consider the long-term consequences for your Party if you condone misconduct, dishonesty, corruption and negligence in a Conservative Minister.”

Covid Corruption

The Coronavirus which causes Covid19 is a nasty virus but it appears to be no more deadly than a severe strain of influenza. I and many other people believe the response to the epidemic is completely disproportionate to the danger of the disease. Lockdowns have not been shown to reduce overall mortality but they wreak havoc on the lives of tens of millions of people. Boris Johnson’s Government in the UK has squandered billions of pounds creating a national debt which our children and their children will be shackled by. Many people believe that Boris Johnson is corrupt and negligent. He has trampled all over Parliamentary democracy and thrown our civil liberties in the bin. If you want to fight back against this tyranny there are things you can do. Marching through the streets demanding an end to lockdown may make you feel better but it is unlikely to achieve anything. The Main Stream Media will brand you as a Covidiot (a despicable term for holding an alternate opinion) and the police may arrest you.

Good vaccines have saved the lives of millions of people. However, the constant theme that only a vaccine can save us form Covid19 is something that was planned back in 2018 when the authorities decided we would all need to have a Vaccine Passport to go anywhere or do anything.

The first thing to do is to understand what is wrong.

  1. Lord Jonathon Sumption is a retired Supreme Court Judge who is appalled at Johnson’s disregard for Parliamentary procedure. This is a video of his lecture on the subject.

‘Government by decree – Covid-19 and the Constitution’: Lord Sumption – YouTube

2. Dr Michael Yeadon explains why Sage and the Government are wrong about Covid

An Education in Viruses and Public Health, from Michael Yeadon, Former VP of Pfizer – AIER

3. Dr Reiner Fullmich is a German Lawyer who has successfully prosecuted huge corporations like VW and Deutsche Bank for corruption. He is in the process of suing the advocates of the PCR test. They claim it detects coronavirus when it cannot tell the difference between live virus and dead virus.

Dr Reiner Füllmich ~ ZLOČINI PROTIV ČOVJEČNOSTI – YouTube

4. “We believe that the Government has acted illegally and disproportionately over the COVID 19 lockdown and we are taking action.” These are the words of Simon Dolan who is taking the Government to court. Read more about it and support him at

Crowd Justice.

5. “As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.” 

Great Barrington Declaration (gbdeclaration.org)

6. Professor of Pathology, John Lee talks complete sense in an interview with george Hook.

George Hook Show – with Professor John Lee – Viral Reality! – YouTube

What can you do? Share this information with your friends and, please, see this page and do everything you can.

Vitamin D and disease

Chris Whitty and Patrick Valence have consistently failed to mention the potential benefits of adequate Vitamin D levels in Covid19 patients. The following links are a sample of references relating to Vitamin D and infectious diseases, which those two senior medical advisers should be aware of. Sensible supplementation with Vitamin D carries no risk but can be of great benefit. There is no excuse for not making this information available.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27714929/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20067648/

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2770157

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.04.20188268v1.full.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7455115/

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/9/2757

http://www.societaitalianadiendocrinologia.it/public/pdf/hypovitaminosis_d_covid19.pdf

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/315886

Covid Testing and Cases

The media is still full of horror stories about Covid19. The Government is still imposing local lockdowns and international quarantines in and from a constantly changing array of locations. The fear of this viral disease is rampant and constantly maintained by the mandatory wearing of face masks so that wherever we go we are reminded that our fellow humans may be dangerous. The graph below of Daily Deaths shows that for the last two months there have been almost no deaths related to the Coronavirus. So why do we suffer all this loss of liberty?

The story has changed. We used to hear about the number of people dying but now we only hear about the number of new cases. We are told that new cases mean the virus is spreading and, even if we have no symptoms, we could be giving it to someone who will die. As we can see in the Cases graph below numbers diminished steadily from April to mid June but have since risen slowly. The media want us to believe that the “second wave” is coming and we will have to lockdown all over again. However, there is another explanation.

During March and April, when the virus was peaking, people who were clearly ill and hospitalised were the only ones tested. When they all started getting better, the ‘Test and Trace’ idea became prevalent. This involves testing as many people as possible, especially those who may have had contact with someone else who has tested positive. When more people are tested more positive test results will be found. Does this mean the virus is spreading? The answer is not necessarily because of what the test is actually looking for. The PCR test involves taking a swab of the back of the throat and nostrils. The swab is then tested for genetic material from the virus. Remnants of viral RNA can remain in the body for weeks, or even months, and can be detected by this very sensitive test. Therefore, if you had the virus 5 weeks ago you can still test positive but you are neither infected nor infectious.

Most of these new cases are in people who are asymptomatic, but if you have no symptoms you have no illness. The definition of ‘illness’ is to be in poor health or sickness. All these cases are irrelevant if the people are not ill.

Michael Mina is an Epidemiologist, Immunologist & Physician at Harvard School of Public Health & Harvard Medical School. On August 21, 2020 he wrote this to explain the sensitivity of PCR tests for Covid19 and how they are able to give a positive result for people who are no longer infected nor infectious.

1/The molecular tools we use like PCR for #COVID19 tests detect the virus genome. Like detecting DNA in a piece of hair, detecting virus RNA tells little about whether the virus is still active…

2/When the virus is growing and someone is transmitting virus, it grows to billions of viruses. So it’s easy to detect when virus load is high using antigen tests (look for the virus proteins themselves) or PCR (look for the RNA) …

3/But after the virus is cleared by the immune system, all of those viruses leave little trails of RNA behind. The RNA gets stuck in vesicles on the cells and it can sit there, in the nose or mouth, for weeks or months at very low levels…

4/So what does this have to do with a super sensitive PCR test being too sensitive that it can potentially cause more harm than good…?

5/The PCR test can continue picking up that leftover RNA the whole time it is there – for weeks or months AFTER the viral infection has been essentially cleared. So ultimately, the majority of time spent in the PCR positive state is after infection, not transmissible

6/So this can be harmful if testing is very infrequent like it is in the US (most people get tested only once, if ever – but even if testing every few weeks)The idea of the super sensitive PCR test is to detect people when at low viral load at the beginning of infection

7/But if screening tests are only every few weeks, the chances you detect someone in the very short window of time between turning PCR positive and having 10x higher viral loads (the virus grows fast and exponentially inside the body) is very slim. This window is hours.

8/On the other hand, with a very sensitive test, people might stay positive for many weeks or even months because it continues to detect the leftover RNA from the past infection. But this can be bad – it leads to unnecessary quarantines of people already past their infection

9/ If doing low frequency screening of asymptomatic people with PCR, the majority of people found to be positive will be detected only after their infection. So in the US we are unnecessarily quarantining millions of people, assuming they are infected when they’re already recovered

10/And we are contact tracing all of these people and quarantining and testing their contacts looking only at the two days prior to their swab for the test – meanwhile they were likely infectious 1-5 weeks earlier! So wasting resources tracing the wrong people.

11/To sum, we are using extremely sensitive PCR tests for screening. They are expensive and limited so we do them very infrequently. What we gain is ability to find someone a few hours earlier – only IF by chance the swab is taken in the few hours where it makes a difference

12/What we lose is ability to more frequent tests and thus do not catch people when it matters. Further, we mistakenly end up quarantining millions of people for 10 days because we erroneously assume any PCR + test was collected at the beginning of an infection. When most are after.

13/So maybe the most sensitive PCR test is not only costly for screening, but maybe even more damaging than a cheaper more frequent lower sensitivity test. The apparent missed cases maybe aren’t false negatives. Maybe the (+) on the PCR are False (+) for actionable results

14/I think it’s time we take a hard look at the types of tests we are using, what they do and do not tell us about infection, and figure out how to use them accordingly, instead of just assuming that more sensitive is better. Maybe less sensitive is better for some things.

15/ To finish, high sensitivity PCR is great if you are a doctor and need to know what is wrong with your patient. Like a detective, you want all shreds of (RNA) evidence. But it’s not always better & sometimes a lower sensitivity test is more accurate at detecting active infection. We published on some of these issues as well as how the viral load data from the PCR could be better used clinically earlier this year: “To Interpret the SARS-CoV-2 year, consider the Cycle Threshold Value” 

Thousands of people have lost their jobs; businesses have closed; depression, suicides and paranoia are on the rise; cancer patients go untreated; children are frightened, unschooled and masked; we are not allowed to have parties or go to watch sport; we are suspicious of our fellow humans; we have sacrificed so many freedoms for the sake of ….. what? We are doing this for a rise in test results that show that people who are not ill had a virus at some time. This is not okay. This is not science. This is an agenda and it is not for our benefit. We need to complain and fight back.

Meat for Health

The media frequently report that people are cutting back on their meat consumption with the implication that eating less meat is better for our health. This misconception is often based on the idea that meat contains lots of saturated fat and has been associated with colon cancer. Neither of these things are strictly true. What meat contains a lot of is protein. The fat content varies considerably depending on the cut of meat but typically consists of more mono-unsaturated fat than saturated fat. (You can read more about why saturated fat is not to be feared here.)

The reports linking red meat to a possible rise in cancer have been severely criticised by many independent experts and you can read more about that here.

What a typical media reports fail to mention is the exceptional nutrient density of animal-sourced foods, especially red meat. A wide range of vitamins and minerals are available in significant quantities and in a bio-available form. For example, how much iron a food contains is nowhere near as important as how much of that iron can be absorbed and used. In red meat, iron exists as heme-iron, which is readily absorbed from the intestines. Plants contain an inorganic form of iron which is difficult to absorb.

To read the rest of this post please log in or join the club