Podcasts about glaxo

The Flu Vaccine: Science at its Worst   Richard Gale and Gary Null Progressive Radio Network, December 20, 2024   Joshua Hadfield was a normal, healthy developing child as a toddler. In the midst of the H1N1 swine flu frenzy and the media fear mongering about the horrible consequences children face if left unvaccinated, the Hadfield family had Joshua vaccinated with Glaxo's Pandermrix influenza vaccine.  Within weeks, Joshua could barely wake up, sleeping up to nineteen hours a day. Laughter would trigger seizures. Joshua was diagnosed with narcolepsy, “an incurable, debilitating condition” associated with acute brain damage.[1]  Looking back, Pandermrix was a horrible vaccine.  Research indicates that it was associated with a 1400% increase in narcolepsy risk. A medical team at Finland's National Institute for Health and Welfare recorded 800 cases of narcolepsy associated with this vaccine.  Aside from the engineered viral antigens, the other vaccine ingredients are most often found to be the primary culprits to adverse vaccine reactions. The Finnish research, on the other hand, indicated that the vaccine's altered viral nucleotide likely contributed to the sudden rise in sleeping sickness.[2] Although Pandermrix was pulled from the market for its association with narcolepsy and cataplexy (sudden muscle weakness), particularly in children, it should never have been approved and released in the first place.  The regulatory fast tracking of the HINI flu vaccines is a classic, and now common, example of regulatory negligence by nations' health officials. The failure of proper regulatory evaluation and oversight resulted in Joshua and over 1,000 other people becoming disabled for life. Settlements to cover lawsuits exceeded 63 million pounds in the UK alone.  No one should feel complacent and assume flu vaccine risks only affect young children. Sarah Behie was 20 years old after receiving a flu shot.  Three weeks later her health deteriorated dramatically. Diagnosed with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a not uncommon adverse effect of influenza vaccination, four years later Sarah remains paralyzed from the waist down, incapable of dressing and feeding herself, and rotting away in hospitals and nursing homes.[3]  Flu vaccines are perhaps the most ineffective vaccine on the market.  Repeatedly we are told by health officials that the moral argument for its continued use is for “the greater good,” although this imaginary good has never been defined scientifically. Year to year, how effective any given seasonal flu vaccine will be is a throw of the dice. Annual flu vaccine efficacy rates in the US have demonstrated significant variability. Data from the CDC reveal efficacy estimates of approximately 39% for the 2020–2021 season, 37% for 2021–2022, 52% for 2022–2023, and a preliminary estimate of 50% for the 2023–2024 season.  Preliminary CDC estimates for this flu season estimates 34% likely efficacy. Although these are CDC's figures, independent figures are consistently much lower. At their best, flu vaccines in recent years are around 50% effective according to official health analysis. During some seasons, vaccine efficacy is a bust. For example, the 2014-2015 flu season strain match was such a failure that the CDC warned the American public that the vaccine was only 23% effective.[4]  Nevertheless, these rates underscore the vaccine's inconsistent protection. Studies such as those by Skowronski and Belongia further highlight flu vaccines' variability and force to question whether the vaccine is capable of providing any reliable protection.[5,6] Moreover, Cochrane Collaboration reviews, known for their rigorous analyses, consistently find that flu vaccines reduce influenza-like illness by only about 1% in healthy adults and have negligible impact on hospitalizations and mortality rates. This limited efficacy raises critical concerns about the vaccine's utility, particularly when weighed against its risks.  Perhaps the most useless flu vaccine that should have never been approved was Medimmune's live attenuated flu vaccine (LAIV) FluMist, which the CDC later had removed from the market because it was found to so ineffective—only 3 percent according to an NBC report.[6] However the real reason may be more dire, and this a fundamental problem of all live and attenuated vaccines: these vaccines have been shown to “shed” and infect people in contact with the vaccinated persons, especially those with compromised immune systems.  Consequently, both the unvaccinated and the vaccinated are at risk.  The CDC acknowledges this risk and warns “Persons who care for severely immunosuppressed persons who require a protective environment should not receive LAIV, or should avoid contact with such persons for 7 days after receipt, given the theoretical risk for transmission of the live attenuated vaccine virus.”[7]  According to the FDA's literature on FluMist, the vaccine was not studied for immunocompromised individuals (yet was still administered to them), and has been associated with acute allergic reactions, asthma, Guillain-Barre, and a high rate of hospitalizations among children under 24 months – largely due to upper respiratory tract infections.  Other adverse effects include pericarditis, congenital and genetic disorders, mitochondrial encephalomyopathy or Leigh Syndrome, meningitis, and others.[8]  The development and promotion of the influenza vaccine was never completely about protecting the public. It has been the least popular vaccine in the US, including among healthcare workers. Rather, similar to the mumps vaccine in the MMR, it has been the cash cow for vaccine makers.  Determining the actual severity of any given flu season is burdened by federal intentional confusion to mislead the public.  The CDC's first line of propaganda defense to enforce flu vaccinations is to exaggerate flu infections as the cause of preventable deaths.   However, validating this claim is near impossible because the CDC does not differentiate deaths caused by influenza infection and deaths due to pneumonia.  On its website, the CDC lumps flu and pneumonia deaths together, currently estimated at 51,000 per year. The large majority of these were pneumonia deaths of elderly patients. Yet in any given year, only 3-18% of suspected influenza infections actually test positive for a Type A or B influenza strain.[9]  As an aside, it is worth noting that during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, an extraordinary and unprecedented phenomenon occurred: influenza infections, which have long been a seasonal health challenge, seemingly disappeared. Federal health agencies such as the CDC attributed this sharp decline in flu cases to the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) like mask-wearing, social distancing, and widespread lockdowns. However, this explanation raises critical questions about its plausibility. If these measures were effective enough to virtually eliminate influenza, why did they not similarly prevent the widespread transmission of SARS-CoV-2? This contradiction highlights the need to critically examine the possible explanations behind the anomaly, questioning whether the disappearance of the flu was truly a result of public health measures or due to other factors such as diagnostic practices, viral interference, and disruptions to seasonal flu patterns. If these interventions were indeed effective, their impact should not have been so starkly selective between two similarly transmitted viruses. This contradiction undermines the plausibility of attributing the disappearance of flu cases solely to NPIs. A more plausible explanation for the disappearance of flu cases lies in the diagnostic focus on SARS-CoV-2 during the pandemic. Individuals presenting with flu-like symptoms were overwhelmingly diagnosed for COVID-19 with faulty PCR testing methods rather than influenza, as public health resources were directed toward managing the pandemic. This prioritization inevitably led to a significant underreporting of flu cases. Furthermore, the symptoms of influenza and COVID-19 overlap significantly, including fever, cough, and fatigue. In the absence of influenza testing, many flu cases were wrongly diagnosed as COVID-19, further inflating SARS-CoV-2 case numbers while contributing to the perceived disappearance of the flu.  One of the more controversial findings in recent flu vaccine research involves the phenomenon of viral interference, wherein vaccinated individuals may become more susceptible to other respiratory pathogens. To date there is only one gold standard clinical trial with the flu vaccine that compares vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, and it is not good news for the CDC, the vaccine makers, and the push to booster everyone with the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. This Hong Kong funded double-blind placebo controlled study followed the health conditions of vaccinated and unvaccinated children between the ages of 6-15 years for 272 days. The trial concluded the flu vaccine holds no health benefits. In fact, those vaccinated with the flu virus were observed to have a 550% higher risk of contracting non-flu virus respiratory infections. Among the vaccinated children, there were 116 flu cases compared to 88 among the unvaccinated; there were 487 other non-influenza virus infections, including coronavirus, rhinovirus, coxsackie, and others, among the vaccinated versus 88 with the unvaccinated.[10]  This single study alone poses a scientifically sound warning and rationale to avoid flu vaccines at all costs. It raises a further question: how many Covid-19 cases could be directly attributed to weakened immune systems because of prior flu vaccination? A 2019 study conducted by the US Armed Forces investigated the relationship between influenza vaccination and susceptibility to other respiratory infections, including coronaviruses. Analyzing data from over 9,000 individuals, the researchers found that people who received the flu vaccine were more likely to test positive for certain non-influenza respiratory viruses. Notably, influenza vaccination was associated with an increased likelihood of contracting coronaviruses and human metapneumovirus.[11] These findings suggest a complex interaction between influenza vaccination and susceptibility to different respiratory pathogens, and challenges the belief that flu vaccines provide greater benefits over risks. The same researchers' follow up study in in 2020 furthermore concluded that “vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus.[12] Additional recent studies, such as those by Bodewes, which identified immune interference due to repeated annual flu vaccinations,[13] and Shinjoh, which highlighted increased viral interference in vaccinated children, provide further evidence of this relationship.[14] These findings challenge the prevailing assumption that flu vaccination has only positive effects on immune health and raise important questions about the broader implications of repeated annual vaccination. In a follow up study after the H1N1 swine flu scare, Canadian researcher Dr. Danuta Skowronski noted that individuals with a history of receiving consecutive seasonal flu shots over several years had an increased risk of becoming infected with H1N1 swine flu.  Skowronski commented on the findings, “policy makers have not yet had a chance to fully digest them [the study's conclusions] or understand the implications.”  He continued, “Who knows, frankly? The wise man knows he knows nothing when it comes to influenza, so you always have to be cautious in speculating.”[15] There is strong evidence suggesting that all vaccine clinical trials carried out by manufacturers fall short of demonstrating vaccine efficacy accurately. And when they are shown to be efficacious, it is frequently in the short term and offer only partial or temporary protection. According to an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Infectious Diseases, the only way to evaluate vaccines is to scrutinize the epidemiological data obtained from real-life conditions. In other words, researchers simply cannot -- or will not -- adequately test a vaccine's effectiveness and immunogenicity prior to its release onto an unsuspecting public.[16] According to Dr. Tom Jefferson, who formerly led the Cochrane Collaboration's vaccine analyses, it makes little sense to keep vaccinating against seasonal influenza based on the evidence.[17] Jefferson has also endorsed more cost-effective and scientifically-proven means of minimizing the transmission of flu, including regular hand washing and wearing masks. There is also substantial peer-reviewed literature supporting the supplementation of Vitamin D.  Dr. Jefferson's conclusions are backed by former Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine scientist Peter Doshi, PhD, in the British Journal of Medicine. In his article Doshi questions the flu vaccine paradigm stating:  “Closer examination of influenza vaccine policies shows that although proponents employ the rhetoric of science, the studies underlying the policy are often of low quality, and do not substantiate officials' claims. The vaccine might be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and the threat of influenza appears overstated.”[18]         A significant body of research proves that receiving the flu shot does not reduce mortality among seniors.[19] One particularly compelling study was carried out by scientists at the federal National Institutes of Health (NIH) and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Not only did the study indicate that the flu vaccine did nothing to prevent deaths from influenza among seniors, but that flu mortality rates increased as a greater percentage of seniors received the shot.[20] Dr. Sherri Tenpenny reviewed the Cochrane Database reviews on the flu vaccine's efficacy. In a review of 51 studies involving over 294,000 children, there was “no evidence that injecting children 6-24 months of age with a flu shot was any more effective than placebo. In children over 2 years of age, flu vaccine effectiveness was 33 percent of the time preventing flu. In children with asthma, inactivated flu vaccines did not prevent influenza related hospitalizations in children. The database shows that children who received the flu vaccine were at a higher risk of hospitalization than children who did not receive the vaccine.[21]  In a separate study involving 400 asthmatic children receiving a flu vaccine and 400 who were not immunized, there was no difference in the number of clinic and emergency room visits and hospitalizations between the two groups.[22]  In 64 studies involving 66,000 adults, “Vaccination of healthy adults only reduced risk of influenza by 6 percent and reduced the number of missed work days by less than one day. There was a change in the number of hospitalizations compared to the non-vaccinated. In further studies of elderly adults residing in nursing homes over the course of several flu seasons, flu vaccinations were insignificant for preventing infection.[23] Today, the most extreme wing of the pro-vaccine community continue to diligently pursue mandatory vaccination across all 50 states.  During the flu season, the debate over mandatory vaccination becomes most heated as medical facilities and government departments attempt to threaten employees and schools who refuse vaccination. Although this is deeply worrisome to those who advocate their Constitutional rights to freedom of choice in their healthcare, there are respectable groups opposing mandatory flu shots.  The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons “objects strenuously to any coercion of healthcare personnel to receive influenza immunization. It is a fundamental human right not to be subjected to medical interventions without fully informed consent.”  The good news is that the majority of Americans have lost confidence in the CDC after the agency's dismal handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. Positive endorsement of the CDC would plummet further if the public knew the full extent of CDC officials lying to Congress and their conspiracy to commit medical fraud for two decades to cover=up evidence of an autism-vaccine association.  When considering the totality of evidence, the benefit-risk ratio of flu vaccination becomes increasingly problematic. The poor and inconsistent efficacy rates, combined with the potential for serious adverse reactions and the phenomenon of viral interference, clearly indicates that the vaccine does not deliver the public health benefits it promises. Public health strategies must balance the benefits of vaccination against its risks, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children and pregnant women.  Imagine the tens of thousands of children and families who would have been saved from life-long neurological damage and immeasurable suffering if the CDC was not indebted to protecting the pharmaceutical industry's toxic products and was in fact serving Americans' health and well-being? One step that can be taken to begin dismantling the marriage between the federal health agencies and drug companies is to simply refuse the flu vaccine and protect ourselves by adopting a healthier lifestyle during the flu season.    NOTES [1] http://yournewswire.com/boy-awarded-174000-after-flu-vaccine-causes-permanent-brain-damage/  [2]  http://www.globalresearch.ca/finnish-scientists-identify-link-between-glaxosmithklines-swine-flu-vaccine-pandemrix-and-narcolepsy/5423154 [3] http://sharylattkisson.com/woman-paralyzed-after-flu-shot-receives-11-million-for-treatment/ [4]  http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/12/3/flu-vaccine-ineffective.html  [5]Skowronski DM, Leir S, et al. Influenza vaccine effectiveness by A (H3N2) phylogenetic subcluster and prior vaccination history: 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 epidemics in Canada. J Infectious Diseases, 2021; 225(8), 1387–1397. [6] Belongia EA, Skowronski DM, et al. Repeated annual influenza vaccination and vaccine effectiveness: review of evidence. Expert Review of Vaccines, 2023; 16(7), 743–759. [7]  Barbara Lo Fisher, The Emerging Risks of Live Virus and Virus Vectored Vaccines.  National Vaccine Information Center, 2014  [8]  http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM294307.pdf  [9] Barbara Lo Fisher, “CDC Admits Flu Shots Fail Half the Time.”  NVIC, October 19, 2016 [10] http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2013-06-02/flu-vax-causes-5-5-times-more-respiratory-infections/  [11] Wolff GG. Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017–2018 influenza season. Vaccine. 2019 Oct 10;38(2):350–354.   [12] Wolff GG. (2020). Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel. Vaccine, 2020 38(2), 350-354.  [13] Bodwes F, Janssens Y, et al. The role of cell-mediated immunity against influenza and its implications for vaccine evaluation. Frontiers in Immunology, 2021 13, 959379. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.959379  [14] Sinojoh M, Sugaya N, et al. Effectiveness of inactivated influenza and COVID-19 vaccines in hospitalized children in the 2022/23 season in Japan: The first season of co-circulation of influenza and COVID-19. Vaccine, 2022; 41(1), 100-107.  [15]  http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/flu-shot-linked-to-higher-incidence-of-flu-in-pandemic-year-1.1287363 [16]   Weinberg GA, Szilagyi PG. Vaccine Epidemiology: Efficacy, Effectiveness, and the Translational Research Roadmap. J Infect Dis 20210;201.1: 1607-610.  [17] ‘A Whole Industry Is Waiting For A Pandemic', Der Spiegel, http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,637119-2,00.html, [18] Dolshi P. "Influenza: Marketing Vaccine by Marketing Disease." BMJ 2013;346: F3037.  [19] Simonsen L, Reichert T, et al. . Impact of Influenza Vaccination on Seasonal Mortality in the US Elderly Population. Arch Intern Med Archives 2005;165(3): 265.  [20] Glezen WP, Simonsen L. Commentary: Benefits of Influenza Vaccine in US Elderly--new Studies Raise Questions. Internat J Epidemiology2006;35(2): 352-53. [21] 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Sociey, May 15-20, 2009 (quoted in , Sherri Tenpenny.  “The Truth about Flu Shots”.  Idaho Observer, June 1, 2009)  [22] ibid  [23] Ibid.

The Mohua Show is a weekly podcast about everything from business, technology to art and lifestyle, But done and spoken ईमानदारी सेConnect with UsMohua Chinappa: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mohua-chinappa/The Mohua Show: https://www.themohuashow.com/Connect with the GuestProfessor Dhruv Nath: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dhruvnathprof/Follow UsYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheMohuaShowInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/themohuashow/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/themohuashow/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/themohuashowFor any other queries EMAILhello@themohuashow.comBook LinkThe Earnicorns: Stories of Rare Profitable Unicorns: https://amzn.in/d/8rUj8N6Episode Summary: In this insightful episode, we have the privilege of hosting Professor Dhruv Nath, a prolific author, angel investor, startup mentor, and Director with Lead Angels Network. Formerly a Professor at MDI, Gurgaon, and Senior Vice President at NIIT Ltd., Prof. Nath has consulted with top management at companies like Glaxo, Gillette, Nestle, and Bajaj Auto, as well as leaders like the Prime Minister of Namibia and the Chief Minister of Delhi.Prof. Nath, a bestselling author, introduces a groundbreaking concept in his latest book, The Earnicorns, where he redefines the Indian startup ecosystem by focusing on unicorns that prioritize profitability. Drawing from his extensive experience as an angel investor, he explores the success stories of four Indian unicorns that defied the odds to become profitable, despite the challenges that many others face.We explore the mindset and strategies that drive these companies, highlighting the importance of a persistent business approach and a perfect attitude. Through insightful case studies of prolific B2C and B2B companies like Zoho, Zerodha, Naukri.com and Dream11, we uncover the key aspects that make a company an Earnicorn. We also discuss the evolving role of investors and VCs in the Indian startup ecosystem, offering valuable advice for both founders and investors. Whether you're a startup founder, investor, or simply interested in the future of Indian startups, this episode provides practical insights and inspiring stories that showcase what it takes to build sustainable, profitable businesses.Chapters:00:00 - Introduction02:53 - Inspiration Behind Writing The Book06:00 - Key Aspects to Become an Earnicorn08:43 - The Perfect Attitude: Key to Long-Term Success17:23 - Evolving Roles of Investors Towards Indian StartUps23:50 - Why Unicorns Fail?31:05 - Lessons from Earnicorns in Driving Sustainable Growth32:37 - Evaluating Upcoming IPOS in the Indian Stock Market35:10 - More Unicorns in The Future39:17 - Insights From The BookDisclaimerThe views expressed by our guests are their own. We do not endorse and are not responsible for any views expressed by our guests on our podcast and its associated platforms.TheMohuaShow #MohuaChinappa #Podcast #ProfDhruvNath #Unicorns #Earnicorns#Founders#Zoho #Dream11 #Naukri.com #Zerodha #IndianStartUps #PodcastEpisode Thanks for Listening!

Join FEG CIO Greg Dowling and Richard Bruce, founder of Trinity Street Asset Management, as they explore the untapped potential of European markets. Discover why European equities are often overlooked compared to their U.S. counterparts, and explore diverse, undervalued sectors like tech giants ASML and ARM. Bruce discusses the impact of the "Magnificent Seven" in the U.S., the differences in regulatory environments between the U.S. and Europe, and Europe's focus on data privacy. Also, understand how geopolitical events, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, shape market dynamics. And finally, Bruce explores luxury iconic brand strategies, revealing the secrets behind LVMH's success and the contrasting approaches of Louis Vuitton and Gucci. Tune in for an analysis of European equities and discover its treasure. Key Takeaways: Although U.S. tech giants dominate headlines, European companies like ASML and ARM play crucial roles in the tech industry, particularly in AI development.Bruce advocates for a selective, bottom-up approach to investing, identifying individual companies poised for long-term growth rather than relying on broad indices.Countries like Switzerland, the UK, and Denmark have led the path in pharmaceutical innovation, with companies like Roche, Novartis, Glaxo, and Novo Nordisk making significant strides, particularly in developing GLP-1 obesity drugs. Bruce discusses the challenges and adaptations within Europe, such as Germany's energy transition and the automotive industry's shift towards electric vehicles. He notes the competitive threat from Chinese manufacturers like BYD. You can find every episode of FEG Insight Bridge podcasts in one place and sign up to receive our other publications here.

London's FTSE 100 recouped some of yesterday's lost ground in early trades on another day stacked with results. London's blue-chip index was up 18 at 7,643 in the first hour led by Ocado and Glaxo spin-off Haleon. Grocery delivery specialist Ocado posted an underlying profit as both sides of its business moved into the black, though the company still showed a hefty net loss overall. Haleon said its first quarter this year had started slowly but eased the pain with a £500 million share buyback. Revenues and profits both rose in 2023 in what analysts described as a solid performance. British Airways owner IAG made record profits in its 2023 trading year but this was largely expected and the shares eased lower. London Stock Exchange Group meanwhile said it was seeing signs of IPO life in London again after a miserable twelve months for new listings. #ProactiveInvestors #FTSE #FTSE100 #footsie #Ocado #Haleon #Glaxo #IAG #BritishAirways #invest #investing #investment #investor #stockmarket #stocks #stock #stockmarketnews

A diferencia de libros anteriores, como su trilogía pampeana formada por La descomposición, Glaxo y Lumbre, en Una música Ronsino construye un paisaje distinto alrededor de la relación entre un padre y un hijo

One may assume that a socialized healthcare system, in which the government pays for the majority of medical expenses, would be more concerned to prevent illnesses in the first place.  Nevertheless, Dr. Max Gulhane, a general practice registrar, describes the Australian healthcare system as one that operates more like the profit-driven healthcare system of the US. The change in the population's diet and nutrition - one that promotes eating more grains, more bread, and more carbohydrate consumption - has led to an increase in the prevalence of metabolic illnesses. Yet despite the overwhelming support from credible studies that a low-carb diet helps with disease reversals, it still isn't widely accepted.Listen to Dr. Max Gulhane as he talks about animal-based diets as a key to reversing chronic diseases, why doctors are trapped in a system that heavily favors disease management more than disease reversal, and how pharmaceutical industries are weaponizing science.Quick Guide:0:50 Introduction07:17 The comparison of the Australian diet and the American diet11:48 Availability of lambs14:33 Nutritional reason to eat lambs or beef16:15 The state of obesity and diabetes in Australia21:34 What's the community's response toward the low-carb diet26:35 A look at the US and Australia's healthcare system40:14 Glaxo has known Zantac is linked to causing cancer 45:50 Science being weaponized by pharmaceutical industries48:25 Closing and contactsGet to know our guest:Dr. Max Gulhane is an Australian physician who practices family medicine. He advocates animal-based diets for metabolic health and regenerative farming. He also hosts a podcast called Regenerative Health.“Perhaps as long as you have someone in between your relationship with the patient and the doctor, in our case, Medicare, which is a government-funded health care system, who pays us as GPs to administer care to our patients, until there is, I guess, more of a direct relationship with us in the patient, you're gonna get, I guess, outcomes or treatment outcomes that aren't necessarily directed at the patient's disease and reversing the patient's disease. So yeah, no, it's not very land down here from a disease reversal point of view by any means.” - Dr. Max GulhaneConnect with him:https://linktr.ee/maxgulhanemdEmail: regenerativehealth@proton.me Episode snippets:08:32 - 09:57 The common Australian diet14:45 - 15:50 Lamb is nutritionally better than beef16:33 - 17:54 The higher BMIs are now evident in younger people22:41 - 23:10 - The patients are not benefitting from the advice they're given24:43 - 25:25 - A diet that reverses diabetes, but is offensive to the status quo27:47 - 28:55 - What influences the healthcare system37:09 - 39:03 - A financial stake in their health Contact Stay Off My Operating TableTweet with us: Dr. Ovadia: @iFixHearts Jack Heald: @JackHeald5 Learn more: Get Dr. Ovadia's book Stay Off My Operating Table on Amazon. Take Dr. Ovadia's metabolic health quiz: iFixHearts visit Dr. Ovadia's website: Ovadia Heart Health visit Jack Heald's website: CultYourBrand.com Theme Song : Rage AgainstWritten & Performed by Logan Gritton & Colin Gailey(c) 2016 Mercury Retro Recordings

Dennis Koulatsos and Nestor discuss cars, Lamar and how high the bar is for Terps in March

In 2020, the enormously popular heartburn medication Zantac was pulled from store shelves after samples were found to contain the probable carcinogen NDMA. The drug has since been re-introduced with a new formula that is considered safe to use as directed.But tens of thousands of people who took the old version of the drug, made with the active ingredient ranitidine, are now suing Zantac's maker, then called Glaxo and now known as GSK. They claim the medication gave them cancer and are seeking compensation. The company is pushing back, saying there is no conclusive evidence or scientific consensus that ranitidine can degrade and form NDMA in harmful amounts under normal conditions.Reporters Anna Edney, Susan Berfield, and Jef Feeley dug into the claims and counterclaims for Bloomberg Businessweek, and they join this episode to talk about Zantac's rise and fall and where these lawsuits are headed. And Dr. Jaap Venema, chief science officer at US Pharmacopeia, explains how potential carcinogens get into drugs–and what pharmaceutical companies and government agencies are–and should be–doing to ensure the safety of the medications we take. Read the story: https://bloom.bg/3Yxzno2 Listen to The Big Take podcast every weekday and subscribe to our daily newsletter: https://bloom.bg/3F3EJAK  Have questions or comments for Wes and the team? Reach us at bigtake@bloomberg.net.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

La obra literaria de Hernán Ronsino está conformada por novelas que a su vez tienen personajes y escenarios pero fundamentalmente hay un tono que define su narrativa. Esto es lo que podríamos denominar un estilo: una lengua sobria, una sintaxis elegante y una Pampa melancólica que distingue sus historias. Ronsino nació en Chivilcoy, Provincia de Buenos Aires, en 1975. Es autor de las novelas La descomposición, Glaxo y Lumbre, que conforman una trilogía, de Cameron y del ensayo Notas de Campo. En 2020 fue distinguido con el Premio Anna Seghers que se entrega en Berlín todos los años y que es destinado a un autor latinoamericano. En 2021 recibió el Premio Municipal de Literatura de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Sus libros fueron traducidos a ocho idiomas. La nueva novela de Ronsino se llama Una música y fue publicada por Eterna Cadencia. El protagonista es Juan Sebastián Lebonté, un músico profesional que se dedica a la música más allá del gusto o la vocación. Se trata de un destino señalado por su padre, melómano furioso y obsesivo y, a la vez, una persona que cree en el dinero como valor absoluto y más allá de todo. La novela comienza con el protagonista y narrador en una de sus giras europeas, cuando llega la noticia de la muerte de su padre. Al regreso, sabrá que el hombre que había conseguido consolidar una cierta fortuna en los 70 solo le dejó un campito en el conurbano bonaerense, cerca de la estación de Paso del Rey. La paternidad, los mandatos, los proyectos de vida y los secretos familiares son los temas que desarrolla Una música, que también aborda cuestiones de la vida política de los años feroces y violentos de la Argentina y del progresivo declive social que, así y todo, puede también convertirse en un horizonte posible para alguien cuyo tormento es no haber vivido una vida signada por el propio deseo. En la sección En voz alta, María Onetto leyó  la escena final de "Bodas de sangre" de Federico García Lorca. María forma parte del elenco de la nueva versión de la obra de Lorca que se estrena en el Teatro San Martín con la dirección de Vivi Tellas, escenografía de Guillermo Kuitca y vestuario de Pablo Ramírez. En Mesita de luz, la psicoanalista y escritora Silvia López, autora de las novelas  "El cerco rojo de la luna", finalista del Premio Clarín de Novela; Diván francés (2016) y que acaba de publicar por Alfaguara "Suite presidencial", en dónde cuenta la historia de una joven médica que es convocada para trabajar en una clínica en Tierra del Fuego, donde se practica la eutanasia nos cuenta que libros está leyendo. En Bienvenidos, Hinde habló de “Luciérnagas”, de Gioconda Belli (Seix Barral), “Crónicas del litio”, de Ernesto Picco (Futurock) y “El libro de las diatribas”, varios autores (Vinilo) y en Libros que sí recomendó “Nuestras esposas bajo el mar” de Julia Armfield editado por Sigilo y “Un hijo cualquiera” de Eduardo Halfon publicado por Libros del Asteroide.

Life is about events, the challenges we overcome or not, our successes and failures, but, even more, it's about how we touch and are touched by the people we meet.  Nicole is back! She is here this week to help me answer your listener questions. In this episode, we discuss the challenges of making friends in retirement, the value of international diversification, contributing to a Roth 401K vs. a regular 401K, the 4% rule, and much more.  I created the Retirement Answer Man show to help you, not just with the business side of retirement, but also to help you build a successful life so that you can lean in and really rock retirement. This month we are answering your retirement questions. If you have a question to submit, head on over to RogerWhitney.com/AskRoger to proffer your questions. Remember, if you want to get bumped to the front of the line and use our fastpass option by recording an audio question.  Check out these resources to learn more about inflation in retirement and the RRC Have you been thinking about joining the Rock Retirement Club? If so, sign up for our updates so that you can be the first to learn about the next online open house. We'll be opening enrollment at the end of October and plan to have a few open house opportunities between now and then. These open houses will be an informative way to for you to learn more about the club so that you can decide whether it is right for you.  Are you worried about inflation in retirement? If so, we have created a resource to help you navigate this worrisome hurdle. Check out DoRetirementRight.com to get this FREE information to help you think strategically about inflation in retirement.  Trying to make friends as a single person in retirement can be a challenge In many 55+ communities, it is pretty easy to make new friends. Everyone is a transplant from somewhere else and there are endless opportunities to join activities and clubs.  However, if you are single it may not be as easy as it is if you are married. Many retirement activities are geared toward couples so single people can have a harder time getting invitations.  Are you single in retirement? What strategies have you implemented to help you make friends? Reply to the 6-Shot Saturday newsletter with your suggestions.  Why keep international equities? Many people wonder what the point of keeping international equities in a portfolio is. It seems as though global equities fall at the time when we need them to be stable or growing, so why bother to include them in our portfolios? Traditionally, they do poorly as compared to other markets, yet including international equities is recommended as a part of having a diversified portfolio strategy.  I tend to recommend international equities, not for diversification, but for the fact that many fantastic companies aren't based in the U.S. Think about Toyota, Mercedes, Glaxo, Novartis, and even Ikea. Rather than considering a different asset class to add to your portfolio, choose the best worldwide companies to expand your portfolio to include top-notch mid to large-cap international companies.  OUTLINE OF THIS EPISODE OF THE RETIREMENT ANSWER MAN PRACTICAL PLANNING SEGMENT [5:23] On making friends [8:23] The value of international diversification LISTENER QUESTIONS [12:05] Should I contribute to my Roth 401K or just a 401K near retirement [16:12] Are investment advisor fees worth it? [26:00] Why haven't I heard back from the IRS? [29:06] Where do my 401K profits go when inflation goes up? [32:33] How does the 4% rule apply to dividends? [35:22] Is 15% enough to save for retirement? [37:20] Why is there a disclaimer about indices at the end of the show? TODAY'S SMART SPRINT SEGMENT [40:43] Be inclusive make an effort to reach out to new people you meet Resources Mentioned In This Episode Rock Retirement Club DoRetirementRight.com Roger's YouTube Channel - Roger That BOOK - Rock Retirement  by Roger Whitney Roger's Retirement Learning Center

Los muchachos se reunen para hablar de Juan Dalmau y su tour de adoctrinamiento por las escuelas, la demanda a Glaxo por mercadear medicamentos sin permiso y el engreimiento de Valeria Collazo. Pero antes hablamos con el Pastor Rene Pereira Jr sobre la hostilidad de la prensa hacia el sector conservador. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/bajaledos/support

In our continuing series looking at the latest medical research and news on COVID-19, Larry Mantle speaks with Dr. Arthur Reingold, professor of epidemiology and Head of the Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at UC Berkeley's School of Public Health.  Topics today include:  Israeli study finds second booster offered short-term protection against Omicron.  Cases rise in San Diego and San Francisco.  Why haven't cases risen throughout the United States?  CA lifts its proof of vaccination for indoor mega events.  United Kingdom detects omicron XE, a new variant.  Risk management for immunocompromised people.  COVID-19 concerns dropping in the United States.  Recent clinical studies could lead to vaccines that are easier to store.  NYT: FDA suspends Glaxo's antibody drug.  President Biden's global COVID-19 summit postponed.  This program is made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private corporation funded by the American people. 

Mike Hayes is an expert in the medical sales industry and has worked for top companies including Johnson & Johnson, Glaxo, Novartis and Merck. Mike is also the host of the Get Hired In Medical Sales podcast.   In this episode, Mike tells us how field salespeople can develop a long-term career plan, as well as tips he has for field salespeople who are looking to network and build a group of influential connections.   Here are some topics covered in this episode:   How salespeople can stay up-to-date on new sales trends and work on their sales skills What role mentorship plays in a salesperson's career How salespeople can assess whether or not it's time to look for new sales job opportunities What all salespeople should do daily to become more successful   More From the Guest: Get Hired in Medical Sales Podcast: http://www.gethiredinmedicalsales.com/podcast.html  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-hayes-827a8792    Listen to more episodes of the Outside Sales Talk here! https://www.badgermapping.com/podcast     Start Selling More Today with Badger Maps - The #1 Route Planner for Field Sales   See Badger in Action: https://www.badgermapping.com/outside-sales-talk-listener/  If you love the Outside Sales Talk podcast, you'll also love Badger's newsletters!  Our 95,000+ subscribers stay at the top of their game with actionable tips from top sales experts.   Are you in? Subscribe to Badger Maps' newsletters now! https://www.badgermapping.com/newsletters/

{{ Click the play button above for an immersive audio experience, and/or READ along below }}Bobby Fraley was a person of interest. No one was quite sure how he arrived at the position. His whole life was spent doing the right things; saying hello to the strangers he passed on the sidewalk, cleaning the dishes at home, and even cutting his neighbor’s lawn. Twice in one week back in June. Bobby woke at 6:00 a.m. every day, including Sundays. His morning routine consisted of the usual bathroom stuff, and he drank his coffee black from the machine he was gifted at the end of the year party for Stewart, Kilner, & Glaxo, where he worked as an accountant. He made his bed daily, and even washed his car at home, using the finest cloth to dry it, so as not to scratch his 2006 white Toyota Camry that he purchased from a man named Caesar, who owned a used car dealership on the Northside of Van Nuys. Due to his early waking schedule, Bobby was often tired, and he refused to take naps, as he claimed it would ruin his energy later in the day. He normally dressed in khaki slacks, brown Steve Madden dress shoes, and a short sleeve button up shirt, colors varying from white to cream. He combed his hair twice a day, parted left to right, and wore brown framed glasses that he found at the local thrift store, for which he never changed the prescription of. Bobby Fraley was the usual man, an everyman of common status, living out his life in the hopes that his lunchtime bagel would stay fresh in the Saran Wrap he folded it in early that morning. But Bobby would never get to eat his plain bagel on the day of October 2nd, 2011, for he was punched square in the face by a teenage misfit who was robbing the gas station market Bobby had gone in to retrieve some change, four quarters for a dollar, so that later that day he could purchase a Nestle Crunch bar from the vending machine on the third floor of the office building he worked at just one block south of Ventura Boulevard in Sherman Oaks.Bobby eventually quit his accounting job that same month, declaring to his boss that he lacked the patience for numbers. He said that numbers acted like children; stubborn in their way, always mocking him behind his back. Bobby’s boss thought this was an interesting perspective, and accepted Bobby’s two week notice. Bobby Fraley never executed the remaining two weeks of work. He simply started waking up whenever his body wanted to. Bobby started to put his morning toothpaste into his dark roasted coffee, claiming that he found a process to quicken his morning routine, meanwhile giving his breath the much needed minty boost that he strived for. Bobby Fraley started to enjoy wearing capes, and eating spicy tacos at lunch from the various Mexican food trucks that The Valley had to offer. He was never one for the “hot stuff”, but had somehow morphed his eating habits to include the likes of jalapeno, cayenne, and innumerable sorts of hot sauces. Those seated at the outdoor tables near Bobby, would often hear sounds emanating from his direction while he ate. “Yip yip yeeeooowww!” Bobby would yell, after taking several continuous bites of his fiery dish. And if there were less than seven people eating near him, he would usually buy the lot a round of horchata on his way out. “Interesting,” said the middle-aged Mexican woman, sipping her milky drink, as she watched Bobby walk away while his red and black plaid polyester cape waved through the air behind him. Bobby began taking long naps in the park after his lunchtime meals, letting the sun’s UV rays dive deep into his epidermis. Sometimes Bobby slept so long in one position, that the sunburns he developed left him days later with peeling skin across his forehead and nose. A devastating blow to many, but Bobby carried on in all confidence, even once getting his portrait taken from a local photographer while his face looked like a crab shell. The photographer asked Bobby if he could use the portrait in his upcoming art show. Bobby obliged the man, telling him his image was “fair use,” and to, “use at will”. The portrait was such a hit, that Bobby’s photo was featured on page five of the Van Nuys Tribune. And in even greater news, the 20 x 24 inch framed portrait of Bobby Fraley was stolen from the art show just a day after that publication was released. A sad day in the art world for all. A sadder day for the sunburned man, who vowed to track down the thief of he, himself, in print form, Bobby Fraley. - Part One. Get full access to ArtWalk Newsletter at artwalk.substack.com/subscribe

Sim Sitkin is a Founding Partner of Delta Leadership Inc. Delta is a leadership development organization that offers educational programs and materials, including those based on the Six Domains of Leadership™ Model.   Sim also serves as Michael W. Krzyzewski University Professor of Leadership, Professor of Management and Public Policy, and founding Faculty Director of the Fuqua/Coach K Center on Leadership and Ethics (COLE) at the Fuqua School of Business, and Director of the Behavioral Science and Policy Center at Duke University. Sim's research focuses on the effects of leadership and organizational control on trust, risk-taking, experimentation, learning, and innovation. His most recent books are Organizational Control (2010), The Six Domains of Leadership (2016), and Routledge Companion to Trust (2017). He has won numerous awards for his research and teaching. He is a Fellow of the Academy of Management and the Society for Organizational Behavior. He is Co-Founder and Co-President of the Behavioral Science and Policy Association.   He has extensive consulting, coaching, and executive education experience with organizations around the world, including American Airlines, Cisco Systems, Compaq Computer, Corning, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutschebank, Duke Medical Center, Ericsson, Glaxo, General Electric, IBM, Lenovo, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Red Hat Software, Siemens, State Farm Insurance, U.S. Dept of Justice, Xerox Corporation.   Connect with us! WEBSITES: Speaking: https://www.cbbowman.com/ Coaching Association: https://www.acec-association.org/ Workplace Equity & Equality: https://www.wee-consulting.org/ Institute/ Certification: https://www.meeco-institute.org/ SOCIAL MEDIA: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cbbowman/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/execcoaches Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CB.BowmanMBA/ YouTube - https://bit.ly/3iQP5Z3 Apple Podcast - https://apple.co/3skrfIi

Pfizer Regional President for Africa and Middle East Patrick van der Loo joins Atlantic Council empowerME Conversations host Amjad Ahmad for a conversation about the COVID vaccine rollout in the region, prospects for machine learning and AI to revolutionize healthcare, policies that will promote innovation, and ways companies can nurture women leaders in the workplace.Key Takeaways:0:00 Intro1:30 Patrick talks about his observations of what is happening in Africa and Middle East regions after rolling out the vaccine and other initiatives and what they are focused on5:33 Patrick talks about the significant areas specifically in the Middle East that they are present in in the 19 country portfolio 7:39 Patrick talks about how the pandemic has affected their strategy or way of operating in the region11:11 Patrick talks about the current trends and the role that Pfizer is playing in the SME and entrepreneurship and what he would tell the entrepreneurs to focus more on15:53 Patrick talks about some of the interesting models of distribution that he is seeing in the Middle East 17:48 Patrick talks about the establishment of a manufacturing hub for the vaccine and where he sees that playing out during the pandemic 22:48 Patrick also explains if there is a more important than the other in terms of regulations to drive change in the positive direction23:59 Patrick talks about what he has found to be interesting managing Middle East and Africa region and he is from Asia 28:07 Patrick talks about what it is about Pfizer that made him the most attractive place for women in the Middle East to work for and why they actively encourage the exchange of talent34:30 Patrick talks about policies that are instrumental in allowing for retention of women employees at Pfizer and what other leaders should do 37:55 Patrick talks about what he thinks the government needs to do to increase the talent base in the Middle East region and specifically in his sector 41:08 Patrick talks about what he is expecting to see in the near future with regards to new variants of the pandemic popping up and with the manufacturing of the vaccine Shows Mentioned:COVAX: https://www.who.int/initiatives/act-accelerator/covax Glaxo: https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/home/ B-Imtiyaz: https://twitter.com/ambalgindc/status/1389283107837186050?lang=en African Union: https://au.int/ BBBEE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad-Based_Black_Economic_Empowerment DICO: https://www.dicogroup.com/ Quotes Mentioned:“Breakthroughs change patient lives.”“Many of our go-to-market initiatives now are not the traditional rep just visiting a doctor model, but it's really driven by the use of A.I.”“In every business, customers should come first.” “We're constantly searching for solutions that simplify that patient experience.”“It takes a little bit more time to get also to the right level of vaccination.”“You need a strong IP culture to help promote medical progress.”“Many employers don't really listen to what the colleagues have to say.”“Nobody had made or thought about a covid-19 vaccine until this pandemic.”Guests Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-van-der-loo-42048b2/?originalSubdomain=ae Company Website: https://www.pfizer.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/PFJvanderLoo Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/vanderloopatrick/ 

In today's episode we have two short segments, both on bioscience topics: [0:00] Moderna has started clinical trials for a flu vaccine, called mRNA-1010, that is based on the same mRNA technology that Moderna and Pfizer used for their COVID vaccines, and that several other companies including Sanofi and Glaxo all are actively working on for the influenza use case. Our experts are general partners Vineeta Agarwala and Jorge Conde of the a16z bio team, who have joined us on many of our vaccine-related episodes, which you can find at a16z.com/vaccines. They discuss what comes next for the clinical trials of this mRNA-based flu vaccines, why companies aren't planning to use the faster and more-targeted mRNA technology for COVID's Delta variant, and how mRNA vaccines will change not only our approach to flu shots but to other respiratory viruses. [9:53] Google's DeepMind AlphaFold, in partnership with the European Molecular Biology Laboratory, is publicly sharing its entire protein structure database -- with predicted protein structure models for ~20,000 proteins expressed by the human genome -- meaning that all its data will be freely and openly available to the scientific community. (We previously discussed DeepMind's AlphaFold protein-folding AI on this show in episode #48.) General partner Vijay Pande of the a16z bio team helps us answer the question: Why does it matter that a huge database of very accurate predicted protein structures is now freely available?

Steve Foord trained as a Physiologist and Pharmacologist and worked for Glaxo through to GSK from 1986 to 2008. He introduced molecular pharmacology to a wide range of the companies GPCR projects and was able to initiate some projects. These included the identification of RAMPs (solving some CGRP family issues) and the GABA B, carboxylic and nicotinic acid receptors. He also discovered and championed a novel prostaglandin EP4 drug candidate to development. He finished his career as Head of Bioinformatics for Neuroscience and working on GSKs novel genetics initiative ------------------------------------------- Imagine a world in which the vast majority of us are healthy. The #DrGPCR Ecosystem is all about dynamic interactions between us who are working towards exploiting the druggability of #GPCR's. We aspire to provide opportunities to connect, share, form trusting partnerships, grow, and thrive together. To build our #GPCR Ecosystem, we created various enabling outlets. For more details, visit our website http://www.DrGPCR.com/Ecosystem/. Are you a #GPCR professional? - Register to become a Virtual Cafe speaker http://www.drgpcr.com/virtual-cafe/ - Subscribe to our Monthly Newsletter http://www.drgpcr.com/newsletter/ - Listen and subscribe to #DrGPCR Podcasts http://www.drgpcr.com/podcast/ - Support #DrGPCR Ecosystem with your Donation. http://www.drgpcr.com/sponsors/ - Reserve your spots for the next #DrGPCR Virtual Cafe http://www.drgpcr.com/virtual-cafe/ - Watch recorded #DRGPCR Virtual Cafe presentations: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJvKL3smMEEXBulKdgT_yCw - Bring in a #GPCR Consultant http://www.drgpcr.com/consulting/ - Share your feedback with us: http://www.drgpcr.com/audience-survey/ - Become a #DrGPCR Ecosystem Member http://www.drgpcr.com/membership/

In this episode Jonathan Rosenfeld chats with Martin D. Gould an Attorney at Romanucci & Blandin, LLC. Here, they discuss: Zantac Lawsuits Update   Read the Transcript Download the PDF Jonathan Rosenfeld : Hi, I am Jonathan Rosenfeld and I am an attorney, and I am with my good friend and colleague Marty Gould today. We are here to talk about probably one of the largest and most prolific drug recalls in the United States ever, certainly in recent history, and that involves the popular heartburn medication Zantac. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Marty is very active with the Zantac litigation, and he is here today to discuss the status of the litigation who qualifies for this and to sort of give us some insight as to how these cases may play out. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Marty, first off, thank you for joining me today. I appreciate it, and could you just briefly introduce yourself, and let us know a little bit about the background and just what Zantac is and bring us up to date with the current status of the recall on Zantac? Marty Gould: John, thanks for the introduction. I'm of counsel with Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers. Our team represents hundreds and hundreds of individuals that have cancer that we believe was caused by a Zantac consumption or generic. Zantac was a very popular heartburn and acid reflux medication. Marty Gould: Millions and millions of people have used Zantac for those purposes, and recent studies have shown that there's a connection between an ingredient in Zantac, ranitidine, and cancer. It's the chemical structure of the Zantac tablet that once it's consumed, and once it's mixed with water in your body, it causes what's called NDMA, a very toxic substance that is linked to cancer. Marty Gould: For that reason, people that have been taking Zantac, many of these people for years and years on a frequent basis, are now getting cancer. Typically, it's a stomach cancer, bladder cancer, stomach cancer, but also the blood-based cancers such as liver cancer. Right now, there's a litigation that's being handled, a multi-district litigation, where all the Zantac cases are being filed in the Southern District of Florida. Marty Gould: Anyone who has a case, they're filing their claims there, and the lawyers are litigating those cases now. We're still in the earlier stages, and there's trials that are expected to start going in probably 2022. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Now, you mentioned that these cases are filed in what's called a multi-district litigation or MDL. I want to talk with you about the differences between an MDL that some people may not be familiar with and a traditional lawsuit. First off, I guess, as a starting point, I guess, what is an MDL case? Marty Gould: Sure. Multi-district litigation is essentially a type of case where all the cases may be a little bit different, so if you've been taking Zantac for one year, several times a week, and somebody else has been taking Zantac for 10 years on a daily basis, you may have a different type of case because your exposure was different. If you have a family history of cancer, that may be a relevant facts. Marty Gould: Everyone's case is a little bit different. Everyone's injuries are a little different. Some people tragically are filing a case on behalf of a loved one who's deceased, who has died because of cancer linked to Zantac. Others may just have an early diagnosis, so the injuries are different every case. Marty Gould: A multi-district litigation, essentially, consolidates all the different cases into one courtroom for efficiency purposes. It's typically done in a federal courthouse. In this case, it's a federal courthouse in the Southern District of Florida. Marty Gould: To avoid having rulings in many different states, in many different jurisdictions that could be conflicting, you'll have one judge who will oversee the litigation. Will set various deadlines, and essentially, the cases are litigated in a fashion where there's bellwether cases. The steering committee that's litigating most of these cases will choose a certain number of cases, that will be the first cases to be litigated, the first cases to go to trial. Marty Gould: Once these bellwether cases are concluded, that usually allows the rest of the plaintiffs to know what the potential value of these zantac cases are, and it usually drives settlements. If there's successful results at trial, it usually results in a settlement agreements or settlement discussions on other people that have cancer that was linked to Zantac. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Right now, we have this MDL that's been filed in Florida, but we also have a recall that was issued by the food and Drug Administration, the FDA, related to Zantac, and that would happen in 2000... I'm sorry, in September 13, 2019, the FDA issued that recall. Why, I guess, did the FDA issued this recall, and what is the impact that you see in terms of the recall on the pending litigation? Marty Gould: There are studies going back to the '80s that linked NDMA and Zantac to cancer, and as of late, because lawsuits were filed, the US Food and Drug Administration started its own investigation, and September 13, 2019, they essentially published a public warning about the link. There was additional research and lab testing. Marty Gould: The levels of NDMA found were significantly higher than which was deemed to be safe for a body to consume, certainly very alarming. The FDA certainly announced that this was a potential health hazard. Marty Gould: In the wake of the FDA safety warnings, the drug manufacturers for Zantac and its generic brands pulled off the drug from shelves across the country. Walmart, Walgreens, CVS, many of the big retailers pulled the drug because the consensus was it wasn't safe to be consumed. Marty Gould: The unfortunate reality is that, while people now aren't being exposed to Zantac and the cancer-causing substances within the tablets, we still have thousands and thousands of people that have been using Zantac for years and have existing injuries. That's what these cases are about. It's about compensating people for their past harms and for their current harms. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Let me ask you this, so you mentioned that, first off, Zantac has been on the market since the 1980s, so this has been on the market for a long time. I guess as a consequence of the patents are on the original drug expiring, now we have different manufacturers and generic versions of this that were on the market. Is that correct? Marty Gould: That's correct. You had various drug manufacturers that were producing Zantac or a generic version of it, ranitidine, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, [Oringer 00:09:03], and the claims are essentially falling into two categories, defective design or manufacturer of that drug, that it was defective. It was harmful. It shouldn't have been sold to the public in the first place. Marty Gould: The second part of that is the failure to warn consumers, because people are taking these drugs because the advertisements are saying, look, this is a safe drug, and I can remember some of the Zantac commercials. They had somebody with a fire extinguisher, and he's using it and it's, "Hey, this is going to extinguish your heartburn and your acid reflux. It's a safe drug to use." That was the message, and that wasn't the case. Marty Gould: I think through the discovery process, we'll get more specifics. When did these drug manufacturers first know that it wasn't harmful? If there's studies out there from the '80s saying that there was that potential harmful cancer-causing link, there's good reason to believe that the manufacturers had that information, and because they were selling it to millions and millions of consumers, they didn't act on that information. Jonathan Rosenfeld : I guess at this point, if you took Zantac or the generic equivalent, first off, does it make any difference in terms of pursuing a legal claim? In other words, if I took Zantac manufactured by Sanofi or by Glaxo, does it make any difference in terms of my legal rights, in terms of filing a lawsuit at this point? Marty Gould: Well, John, as you know, we represent hundreds and hundreds of plaintiffs who have used either the name brand or the generic. There are legal differences, and that's why I think it's important for people to speak with a lawyer to understand what the potential legal ramifications are if you were only consuming a generic, but there's a few things to keep in mind. Marty Gould: When we sign a case, the first thing we tell people is, for one, do you have any Zantac in the house? Do you have any ranitidine in the house? Were you prescribed it? We've had many clients that still have the bottle, preserved the bottle. That's going to be evidence in the case. It's something we certainly want to hold on to. Marty Gould: Then, I guess, the next part of that is proving the use of the drug, medical records. Some people were prescribed it. Other people maybe, because it was sold over the counter, weren't prescribed it, but had reported to other primary care physician or other doctors when they were asked, are you on any drugs prescribed or over counter? They mentioned Zantac. Marty Gould: Those are some things to keep in mind, but there is a difference in terms of the cases, if it's generic versus name brand. That's why it's important to speak to a lawyer about that. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Now, these cases are filed, and they're pending in this MDL in Southern District of Florida. Can you give us a little insight as to how these cases are handled in terms of an MDL, what the court really does to sort of get a grasp of these cases? Jonathan Rosenfeld : We have people from really all over the country who have been impacted and what the court is doing in terms of unifying these cases and getting a grasp as to how people have been impacted. Logistically, it seems like a little bit of a nightmare to have all these different people and all these different cases and everything else. Jonathan Rosenfeld : As a person who has been impacted, either individually or if I have a family member who may have been impacted, and I'm looking at this and saying like, oh boy, do I even want to get involved? Can you just give some insight as to what a plaintiff could expect if they were to get involved with the case? Marty Gould: Sure. Step one is, we have an internal questionnaire that we have potential clients fill out, which asks a lot of the questions that the court is going to want to know, the type of cancer the individual has, when they used the drug, how often they use it, are they still using it, and that's essentially the information that we're going to have to submit to the court. Marty Gould: Judge Rosenberg from the Southern District of Florida, the federal judge who's overseeing the case, has essentially issued a questionnaire. It's called a census plus form that all claimants have to complete and file in the Zantac case. Those questions are the questions that we have our clients answer, when they used it, how often, for how long, what's their diagnosis. Marty Gould: From there, that allows the court, the defense and the lawyers, to have a better idea of each individual's claim. It provides a basis to verify the claims and make sure that the ones we have are legitimate claims that we can ideally get compensation for. Marty Gould: With that, there may be a second phase to the case, where after the census plus form is submitted, we may have a more detailed questionnaire that we have to submit to the court, sometimes with you attached medical records, verifying your cancer diagnosis and any medical records that list Zantac as a drug that you use, whether it was prescribed, or perhaps you referenced it to a doctor. Marty Gould: That's not the only way you can prove use. Your testimony is evidence, so many people don't keep receipts. Maybe they didn't tell their doctors they're taking it because it's over the counter. You can still have a case, even if you don't have that. Your testimony is evidence. If you have family members that knew you were taking it, their witnesses, they can provide evidence. Marty Gould: There's many ways in which we go about proving your use and litigating your case. It starts with that initial intake to find out whether you meet the certain criteria that we believe would put you in a position to file a claim. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Now, before you even get to the point where you're filing a claim, I guess the first step is, hey, are you eligible? When I'm talking about eligible, I'm talking about the timeframe for bringing a case. Every single case is governed by a statute of limitations, and the statute of limitations in these cases, it varies by where the person lives. Is that correct? Marty Gould: That's correct. Even though there is a multi-district litigation in Florida, that doesn't mean that Florida law is controlling here. Every case, every claim in every client's case can be a little bit different, because you're applying laws often from that state in which the individual had experienced the harm, where they were consuming the Zantac. Marty Gould: If you were consuming the Zantac while you were living in Illinois and then you were diagnosed with cancer, and then you move to Michigan or Florida, the law that would apply in terms of the statute of limitations would likely be Illinois law, but every case is a little bit different. It's important to speak with a lawyer to help you find out whether there's an issue with the statute limitations. Marty Gould: With cases against drug companies, such as this or Roundup or Losartan, many people have consumed the drug decades earlier, and they consumed it for a long period of time. It's not like being in a car accident where if you were hit by a car, you knew that you were injured the day of the accident. There is a period of time, a latency period, where you may not be diagnosed with cancer. Marty Gould: It's the worst news to get. It's a very traumatic situation, but you may not get that diagnosis until 10 years after you had been taking Zantac. There's something called the discovery rule in many states, a point in time where you discovered that you were injured and discovered why you were injured. That could trigger the running of the statute of limitations. Marty Gould: Every case is a little bit different, but if you had consumed it a long time ago, that may not close the door to pursue a case, and you should certainly call lawyer and find out if you still can. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Interesting. One of the ancillary issues here is we have a whole nother group of potential plaintiffs who may have taken Zantac or the generic equivalent, and they may have developed a cancer and they may have have died from that cancer. Jonathan Rosenfeld : In those situations, can the family of the deceased pursue a claim at this point? Can they pursue a wrongful death claim if their loved one took Zantac in the past? They may not have been aware of the connection between their cancer and the NDMA in Zantac. Marty Gould: In many cases, you can. A family can file a wrongful death case on behalf of a loved one who was taking Zantac and, unfortunately, died of cancer. There's still the same process is involved, where we file a census plus form. We try and retrieve as many of the medical records as we can, although you can still pursue it. Marty Gould: Then there's also something to note is, sometimes, because we're dealing with cancer cases, we have clients that file lawsuits while they're still alive, and then tragically, they died during litigation. The family can then step in and pursue that litigation for the loss of that loved one, for the wrongful death and survival damages. Marty Gould: Courts recognize the sad reality that many claimants may not survive to see the under this case or really any of these cases, and because of that, in some of those circumstances, we can fight to have a deposition of the individual before they pass away. It varies from case to case, and it varies in terms of the health of the plaintiff. Marty Gould: But it's certainly something we've done in many cases where we've taken a deposition of our client before he passed away, and judges understand that, and the defense attorneys understand that. Then they're sensitive to the situation and the emotional difficulties surrounding giving testimony in that circumstance. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Now these, the pending Zantac cases, they're civil lawsuits, and I want to talk with you about damages in a case like this. Now you and I, we don't have a crystal ball. We have no way of anticipating how these cases may play out. There's still a lot of evidence that needs to be disclosed by all parties involved, but obviously, when you file a civil lawsuit, your sole recourse really is to get economic compensation. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Obviously, we have no way of predicting the value of these cases, but can you just talk through the available damages in a civil case, such as Zantac, where someone at home may be thinking, well, I don't know if it's worth bringing a case. It may not be that much, which I hear pretty consistently. Can you just sort of explain the potential damages available in these cases? Marty Gould: Yes. We're talking about cancer lawsuits here. The damages are catastrophic. It's the worst news for anybody to hear that they were diagnosed with cancer, and we're also talking about a case where the allegation is that these drug manufacturers were creating a drug that was dangerous, was cancer-causing. Marty Gould: People were consuming this, and it was essentially like putting gunpowder and a fuse in somebody's body. It was being lit once it's mixed with water and other substances within your body and causing a very toxic cancer-causing substance, NDMA. The types of recoveries in a situation like that, where somebody's wrongful conduct caused somebody else to get cancer, in some cases to die. Marty Gould: You can get what's called loss of consortium. The family can get a recovery and survival claim, family can get a recovery for the loss of love, the loss of having that person around, pain and suffering for when the person was alive, emotional trauma, emotional distress, economic damages, lost income that the person could have earned, past and future lost income. If they weren't able to work for a period of time, because of the cancer treatment. Marty Gould: You can also get punitive damages in these cases. At this stage, we don't know yet whether we will, but there's certainly going, in many of these cases, we do get punitive damages. Those are additional damages, which can be significant, as a way to punish the drug manufacturers if they in fact knew about the harms and didn't warn people, or didn't take the necessary actions to protect the consumers. Jonathan Rosenfeld : Well, it certainly seems like these are cases which really are going to be an emerging area of litigation. I really appreciate you sharing your insight with us. Jonathan Rosenfeld : If someone is sitting on the sideline, sitting at home, is there anything you would tell them to do at this point in terms of moving forward? If they're sitting on the sideline and they're a little hesitant at this point, do you have any suggestions for them? Marty Gould: They should immediately contact a lawyer to understand their rights, because they don't have to make a decision whether they want to file a claim or not just yet. But they should understand are there any deadlines that could apply to them, is there any statute limitations that may be expiring soon, and speak with a lawyer and find out what their rights are and also whether they have a potential claim. Marty Gould: Maybe they don't, but it would probably give them some peace of mind to know that they had asked the lawyer. They had spoken to a lawyer, and they did not meet the criteria, but you don't want to sit around and do nothing if there's a chance that your Zantac consumption did cause serious injuries up to and including cancer. Marty Gould: If you were taking Zantac for a long period of time and you don't have cancer, you should still be monitoring their health. I would speak to a doctor about it, just to get their opinions on whether you are at risk, and more importantly, to make sure that you don't take any other substances like Zantac that have this toxic substance, and that you switched to alternative drugs that are safer for heartburn or acid reflux. Jonathan Rosenfeld : This is great information, Marty. I really appreciate you sharing your expertise with us today. I look forward to talking with you about this again as these cases proceed towards trial. Thanks again, and I'm going to put your contact information in our show notes, but we appreciate your time. Thank you.

The Weaponization of the CDC Against Public Health Richard Gale and Gary Null Progressive Radio Network, April 30, 2021   What if you were to know that a cabal of corrupt bureaucrats and scientists at the heart of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have known for almost two decades that vaccines, including the MMR, can lead to autism and other neurological disorders? Most people are unaware that the CDC is a militarized federal agency further influenced by private pharmaceutical interests. Due to the politicization of national immunization, vaccine efficacy and safety has become all but irrelevant.  Its policies drive profits for itself and its partners. Now the agency is committed to have as many Americans mandated to be fully vaccinated as soon as possible, irrespective of how many lives are destroyed.  The very mindset and disregard for human life that created the notorious Tuskegee experiment is alive and thriving in the innards of the CDC.    It is time to take a hard look at the advocates of compromised pharmaceutical science and the motivations that compel the CDC and it’s vaccine network to systematically mislead the public for personal benefit, power, and greed.  We need to begin to understand that the agency operates as an independent “deep state,” secretive, non-transparent, and conducting itself in covert ways behind the disguise of heralding public health. When the brilliant journalist I.F. Stone wrote, “Every government is run by liars, and nothing they say should be believed,” he may have just as well been speaking about the CDC and its alliance with the pharmaceutical industry, many medical journals, and the mainstream media.   The money-driven institutions of evidence-based medicine and science, which have hijacked America's health agencies--the CDC, FDA, Health and Human Services (HHS), National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Mental Health, the National Cancer Institute, and the USDA-- have plunged a stake into the heart of authentic scientific inquiry, knowledge and innovative medical progress.  Its efforts to hermetically seal and silence the debate on vaccination safety with propaganda, coercion, erroneous and deceptive research, and blatant criminality have succeeded in transforming modern vaccinology into an egregious pseudo-science that is today destroying the lives of millions of infants, children and their families.    The deep-seated problems that reside in the CDC are not going unnoticed by a growing number of Americans. A Rand Corporation survey of public trust in the agency during the Covid-19 pandemic found a 10 percent decline. For decades distrust in the CDC has been high among Black Americans; today, levels of trust among non-Hispanic whites and Hispanic respondents are comparable.  One of the fundamental reasons for Americans’ mistrust and skepticism has been the agency’s culture of muddying the lines between scientific facts and compromised opinions that support gross and deep-seated conflicts of interest.     This problem has also entered the ranks of CDC personnel.  A group of CDC scientists who called themselves SPIDER (Scientists Preserving the Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research) became anonymous whistleblowers after releasing a written complaint criticizing the agency for operating as a tax-funded subsidiary of the drug industry in partnership with the FDA.  And after a Congressional Government Reform Committee brought CDC officials to testify before legislators, the Committee concluded the agency had routinely allowed scientists with conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies to serve on its two advisory committees that make recommendations on vaccine policy   The blurring of the lines between the pharmaceutical industry and our federal health agencies has been a scandal evolving over the course of several decades. The revolving door between private interests and top government employees never ceases to gyrate.  For example, former CDC director Julie Gerberding left government to become president of Merck's vaccine division, a move that has since earned her upwards to $3 million in stock options.  This may seem to be a modest reward for Gerberding heading the agency now irrefutably responsible for the cover-up of the CDC's own studies proving the MMR vaccine increases the risk of autism in African American boys.  The MMR is manufactured by Merck.   Robert Kennedy Jr, one of the nation’s expert watchdogs in the corporatization of our federal medical establishment, has called the CDC "a cesspool of corruption." Unlike the FDA, which has a contract with the American public to assure warnings about health risks and contraindications of registered drugs and medical devices, the CDC has no such contract with the nation's citizenry.  It seemingly holds no ethical standard and abides by no mandated rules of law. For this reason it may be best regarded as an intelligence agency rather than an institution committed to public health.   One recent example of the CDC's covert activities took place in 2016. Across the mainstream media, journalists en masse denounced the documentary film Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe. The film recounted the events of CDC whistle-blower Dr. William Thompson and his agency's intentional cover-up and destruction of documents of scientific evidence proving the MMR vaccine caused autism. Rather than denouncing the nation's vaccine agenda, the film uncovers massive corruption in the CDC's vaccine division.  But a problem with the media-wide demonization of the film arose, which included outlets such as ABC, CNN, MSNBC, the Guardian, the Washington Post and the New York Times, Forbes, Rolling Stone and many others. The media blitzkrieg occurred before the film's actual release. None of the journalists had watched it. None knew the underlying story line aside from what could be gleaned from a 3 minute trailer. Our investigative article, "Why is the CDC petrified of the film Vaxxed" uncovered a template for an editorial script upon which all of these reviews were based.  They originated from a single source, and the tracks led to the halls of the CDC. The CDC's partnership and fellowship programs with the Association of Health Care Journalists is nothing less than an intelligence indoctrination program to train journalists to be the mouthpieces of the CDC's fake science. The curriculum held at the CDC's Atlanta campus includes propaganda in federal health policies, epidemiology (no authentic gold standard biological science), pandemic preparedness, vaccine safety and autism. Journalists are also instructed to access CDC publications and databases to peruse federal resources, public relations kits, and propaganda.    Vaccine policy and the development and promotion of the childhood vaccine schedule is only one of the CDC's many corporate tasks. It is not exclusively concerned with the physical and mental health of the nation. It is also engaged in the design and development of biological weapons and threats of bioterrorism. Because vaccines are biological drugs that may be weaponized, they fall under the CDC's purview and jurisdiction. Consequently the Centers work closely with the Department of Defense and the intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency with whom there is the exchange of data collection and sharing of classified information.  In its April 21, 2000 MMWR report entitled "Biological and Chemical Terrorism: Strategic Plan for Preparedness and Response" the CDC reported that for "the first time the CDC has joined with law enforcement, intelligence and defense agencies in addition to traditional CDC partners to address a national security threat."    This may have been the turning point when the Centers morphed into a pseudo-intelligence agency and assumed a “deep state” role by adopting an inquisitional task of population surveillance and information data collection as a matter of intelligence gathering instead of improving healthcare. During the past years, this has further grown into spying and covert operations against the critics of our national health and immunization policies. Immunization, as described on the CDC's website, is now a matter of national and global security.  Therefore, no longer are vaccines simply a public health intervention. In fact, immunization has been removed from science altogether and consequently can only rely upon flawed and unreliable research to support policy templates and recommendations that get enacted at state levels. These policies are left for politicians to debate, which is rarely done, and is no longer open for discussion among expert medical researchers outside of the CDC’s ranks and its network of trolls, shills and medical puppets spewing disinformation into the public sector.  This alone is sufficient incentive for targeting and silencing voices challenging vaccine safety and efficacy and who demand a reevaluation of vaccination and its toxic ingredients.    Few people realize that the CDC owns 56 vaccine patents; these patents are licensed to drug makers with royalties who later buy and distribute $4.6 billion worth of vaccines through its Vaccines for Children Program, which accounts for 40% of its budget. This has given rise to a 2015 British Medical Journalinvestigative report accusing the CDC of becoming a lapdog for commercial interests.    The CDC also controls a separate non-profit institution known as the CDC Foundation, which operates like an astro turf organization. Founded in 1992 through an amendment inserted into the George H.W. Bush’s Preventative Health Act, the Foundation operates outside of Congressional oversight. This is clearly stated in its documentation:     “The Foundation shall not be an agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government, and officers, employees and members of the board of the Foundation shall not be officers of the Federal government…. The purpose of the Foundation shall be to support and carry out activities for the prevention and control of diseases, disorders, injuries and disabilities, and for promotion of public health… the Foundation shall establish a fund for providing endowments for positions that are associated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…”   In other words, the Foundation has been established as a recruiting service, funded by non-Federal sources, which can include private corporations and drug makers, for the sole purpose to serving the tax-funded CDC.  Moreover, endowments to the Foundation are “unrestricted,” which means they can be spent solely based upon the discretion of the donator and to support the giver’s vested interests.  Among the CDC Foundation’s list of partners we find all of the large vaccine makers – Glaxo, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi Pasteur – and of course the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. A Freedom of Information Act submission discovered that the CDC had been providing guidance to the companies for influencing authorities on sugar and beverage policies. For example, the CDC Foundation receives large donations from Pepsi and Coca Cola, and thereby exerts its influence to taint national guidelines about diabetes, liver disease and other illnesses. In another example, Roche, the manufacturer of the drug Tamiflu against influenza infection, donated $193,000 to the Foundation in return for the CDC’s advocating the drug’s benefits for relieving flu symptoms.  This completely undermines the FDA’s own ruling that Tamiflu’s clinical trial data does not support the claims that the drug saves lives or lessens hospitalization.    It has been through the Foundation that Bill Gates’ faux philanthropy has bought off the CDC. Gates has given tens of millions of dollars to the CDC Foundation over the years.  In 2013, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gave $13.5 million to support the CDC’s efforts to undertake surveillance and increase meningitis and rotavirus vaccination rates in Sub-Sahara Africa.    Furthermore, the Centers' activities are no longer limited to the US' domestic health; after 911, its mission expanded, far beyond its original mandate, and today the agency is globally engaged.  On the Centers’ website, it defines itself as America's "Global Health Protection Agency" in charge of "implementing global health security" and works in partnership with other nations. Since 2006, the CDC claimed it had trained over 115,000 professional personnel in its interpretation of health issues. It’s Global Rapid Response Team of over 400 experts "can deploy in as little as 48 hours" to respond to local and regional health emergencies. In brief, the Centers are immersed in the technology of surveillance, information gathering and analysis. These are among the defining characteristics of an intelligence agency.    Other intelligence activities often associated with a “deep state” and now undertaken by the CDC include pressuring peer-reviewed medical journals to retract studies that challenge their ideology or endanger the agency's reputation.  In 2014, Prof Brian Hooker, a biochemist at Simpson University, reevaluated the CDC's own data showing a 350% increase in autism among African American boys receiving the MMR. Initially approved for publication by the journal Translational Neurodegeneration, the study was shortly thereafter suspended after the CDC pressured the journal with fabricated claims against Dr. Hooker. This is a textbook case of intelligence sabotage of a critic by false accusation.     Similar to the Pentagon and the CIA, the CDC has also infiltrated Hollywood. Hidden within the corridors on the University of Southern California campus is the relatively unknown organization Hollywood Health and Society. Its top funders include the CDC, the National Cancer Institute, the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the largest private funder of vaccines, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.  The small organization's mission is to provide "briefings and consultations with experts, case examples, panel discussions about timely health issues" for Hollywood script writers and producers. Among the main topics listed on its website are influenza, smallpox and autism, all official propaganda stamped with the CDC's seal of approval.    Among the trove of classified national security documents released by NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden, were several regarding the government's intelligence agencies' infiltration of the internet in order to manipulate information, deceive the public and destroy personal reputations of opponents, including independent journalists.  Among the documents was a manual, "The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations." One of its stated missions is to flood the internet with false information and data to destroy the reputation of its opponents.  Furthermore, the manual provides instructions on taking control of online public discourse in order to generate allegiance to the intelligence agency's false point of view.    Vaccine opponents often complain about the blogosphere being riddled with anonymous trolls, most who would be unable to debate their way out of cardboard box on scientific issues regarding vaccines, but who nevertheless follow the intelligence manual's strategies to disparage vaccine critics.  Bill Gates, who is on record condemning parents who refuse vaccines and who is no stranger to the higher echelon of executives in the vaccine industry and department heads at the CDC, funded a professor at the University of Connecticut to develop a monitoring system to track all anti-vaccine internet traffic. Given Gate's utter disdain towards voices speaking out against vaccines, we can be certain this was not for humanitarian, research purposes but as part of intelligence gathering in the CDC's war against the health of the nation.  Others who have been CDC mouthpieces yet are viewed as respectable and medically credentialed kingpins, such as Paul Offit, Peter Hotez, Senator Richard Pan, and others are welcomed by the media as the foremost authorities and final voices on vaccine topics.    To our peril, federal agencies take full advantage of the average American's scientific illiteracy.  An important survey conducted by Michigan State University found that only 4% of American adults had an understanding about stem cells. Seventy percent could "not read or understand" the science section in the New York Times.  An earlier study funded by the US National Science Foundation noted that about half of Americans understood that the earth rotates once around the sun annually, 45% of people had an "acceptable" understanding of DNA, and only 22% knew what a molecule was.  Although scientific illiteracy is an enormous threat to a functioning democracy and an informed public, nevertheless it is a boon for the CDC and the vaccine industry. Manipulating this ignorance with heavy doses of fear tactics, such as revealed through the CDC's press model to guide the mainstream media's role in increasing vaccine compliance, health officials have managed to successfully thwart many efforts to educate the public to evaluate the pros and cons of vaccination.    Along with the corporatization of Washington's three branches of government, and the emergence of a surveillance state watching over the shoulders of every citizen, the politicization of medicine, particularly vaccines, is another sign of the further decay of the nation towards totalitarianism. For almost two decades, fake news and bureaucratic deception, anger, hatred and disproportional distrust has taken the spotlight as the nation's health further erodes. Annually, the quality of Americans' health is declining and this is most evident in the younger generations who have received the bulk of vaccines. While the CDC and its allies conjure distorted statistics with no sound scientific basis from thin air in order to convince us that vaccines have saved countless lives, in fact these screeds are no more scientifically reliable than visiting the local gypsy soothsayer to have your palm read. A doctorate in science or a medical degree from Harvard does not excuse a person from duplicitous chicanery.    The good news is that the tide is slowly turning. The populace is steadily losing its faith in government. Autism rates continue to rise and parents are able to access extensive independent medical research to understand the real dangers of vaccines. A fundamental reason why parents increasingly refuse to vaccinate themselves and their children is quite simple; the cartel of pharmaceutical-friendly bureaucrats writing the nation's healthcare policies has been losing the public's trust. There is no secret why federal health officials and their absolutist claims to mandate vaccine compliance are untrustworthy. In 2016 over 1500 medical researchers surveyed by the prestigious journal Nature failed to reproduce another scientist's experimental results. Over half were unable to reproduce their own experiments. The article concludes that the potential reasons for this lack of scientific confirmation are numerous. However, most important is that no single scientific study or paper can claim to be the final word on any medical issue, and this is especially true with vaccine research. The complexities of the human immune system, its biomolecular mechanisms and epigenetic relationships with external environmental factors are not fully understood.  And there remains much more to discover and digest.  Modern immunology still has a long ways to go and needs frequent revision as new discoveries emerge. In contrast, vaccine science continues to rely partially upon an antiquated understanding of the body's immune system focused almost exclusively on antibody generation.   One example of medical negligence has been the rising epidemic of citizens who are immune-compromised and therefore most susceptible to adverse vaccine reactions. When a severe condition of immunosuppression is clearly diagnosed, it is not uncommon for physicians to withhold vaccinations.  But how many Americans are immune-compromised?  When this question was posed to a researcher at Johns Hopkins University in 2015, to his surprise Theo Schall discovered there were no population accurate statistics and none of our federal health agencies nor medical institutions were tracking it.  Not only are these people at higher risk for vaccine injury, they are also at a higher risk for infection from wild viruses. Federal vaccine policies do not differentiate the population with weakened immune systems from healthier individuals. The CDC' immunization schedule is a one-size-fits-all paradigm/ Its bottom line demands that everyone should and must be vaccinated.    After reviewing the different immune-compromised populations (eg, immunosenescence or weakened immunity due to age in the senior population, malnourishment, cancer patients, people with AIDS and HIV, transplant recipients, patients under immunosuppressive drugs with autoimmune conditions, and primary genetic immunodeficiency disorders, Schall estimated there were approximately 122.6 million Americans with a weakened immune system and stand at higher risk for infections. Our revaluation of the available figures places this figure now at 130.4 million, over one-third of the US population.   The question whether 130 million people, including hundreds of thousands of children, should be subject to injections with infectious viruses-- live, attenuated or killed – or now the new generation of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines that have no prior precedence for observing long-term adverse effects, is never discussed. Volumes of medical and biochemical research confirming the severe vaccine ingredients are also ignored. Nor is any consideration given to the number of vaccines administered and the risks due to the accumulative levels of toxic ingredients when multiple vaccines are given simultaneously or within short time intervals. Nor do pediatricians routinely evaluate the state of children's immunological health before determining whether or not to administer vaccines. There is no profit from delaying or postponing vaccination.  No perks are received from insurance companies for increasing vaccination compliance.  And finally, physicians and pediatricians are largely as ignorant as the general public about the scientific evidence supporting and debunking vaccine safety and efficacy myths.  Their primary source of information is channeled through the CDC and its disinformation campaign.    The CDC has yet to conduct or fund definitive and legitimate studies to determine once and for all individual vaccine safety and whether or not vaccines as exogenous factors are contributing to the onslaught of illnesses ravishing the country. Yes, such gold standard studies, which remain absent from the pro-vaccine arsenal, would be very costly.  But that would be the price to pay to bring sanity to the irrational conclusions of the CDC’s decision makers on our nation’s national advisory vaccine committee. Nevertheless, the cumulative financial cost of all previous government sponsored fake science would be a small price to pay for the future well-being of children.     During Congressional proceedings in 2002 into the causes for the unaccountable rise in autism in the United States, CDC officials confirmed no studies have been undertaken to compare the quality of health between vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Yet the subcommittee was assured by the CDC that such studies would be conducted. A decade later, when the CDC was again yanked back into a subcommittee, still no studies had been conducted, and again, Congress was assured such studies were forthcoming.    We should not hold our breath. Officials at the CDC and Department of Health and Human Services know perfectly well that vaccinated children are susceptible to far more allergies and illnesses than their unvaccinated peers.  Their greatest fear is a thorough long-term study to see whether unvaccinated children are indeed healthier. Otherwise, the necessary research to prove the health advantages of vaccines would have been conducted long ago.    Yet there are reasons why such studies are not mandated nor funded. Health agencies are fully aware that vaccines are a scourge. Instead they pump out ecological and epidemiological cohort studies, notorious for subjective manipulation, confounders and biases to support their dogma. Such studies, which are little more than algorithmic equations for sifting, shifting and fudging data, are scientifically invalid for determining any medical truth.  Nevertheless, epidemiological studies remain the most cited articles by the most vocal proponents of vaccination and vaccine mandates.    However, corruption at the CDC is not limited to national vaccine policies and the deceptive manipulation of scientific data to further advance a national vaccination regime. The agency has also been discovered to mislead the nation on other health issues that in turn shape government policies. Earlier it was accused of inflating numbers of rapes in the US. The CDC estimated 2 million rapes occurred within a single year (2011); however, the Justice Department's crime statistics recorded only 238,000. Later Time magazine reported that the manner the CDC gathered its information was extremely flawed and biased.   In 2016 The Hill reported that the CDC misled Congress with its WISEWOMAN project --  a national screening and evaluation project to help reduce heart disease risks in women between 40-64 and to promote healthier lifestyles.  The CDC's data of the project was all "cooked" to make the results look better than it was and that the project was larger and more inclusive than it actually was   The writings of Hannah Arendt over fifty years ago about the origins of totalitarian ideologies and states have never been more poignant and prophetic than today.  She worried deeply about the language of absolutism, and particularly in the realm of science, which is now the underlying mission of the CDC to politicize immunization. The attempt to reduce all of human life to well-defined processes, to predictable patterns and primitive linear reductionism, was in Arendt's view both self-defeating and extremely dangerous for a healthy society. In a totalitarian state, objectivity is tyrannical. Scientific objectivity that threatens the official policy even more so. In the case of vaccines, the entire industry is a creed that has institutionalized a denial of the most fundamental principles of science and fact finding. And worse, the CDC's ongoing war of terror against the unvaccinated has become lawful.  And this is what gives rise to a totalitarian culture of science.    Arendt was certain that a fascist worldview does not necessarily have to be framed in nationalism, religious doctrine nor based upon race and ethnicity. She worried that science, and its technologies, once they become politicized, would give rise to new forms of totalitarianism and persecution in the future. And today this totalitarian stench breathes through many scientific institutions and universities, throughout the private vaccine industry, and its most pungent odor of rot and decay fills the halls of the CDC. 

It is Time to Dismantle the World Health Organization Richard Gale & Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, April 19, 2021   The ultimate international authority for infectious diseases is the World Health Organization (WHO). Due to its widespread acceptance by the world's national governments, it has been extremely successful in assuming the helm to monitor regional and global infectious diseases and dictate medical intervention policies to international health agencies. The organization has become the final word to rule whether the spread of a serious pathogen is a pandemic or not. For the majority of the medical community, the media and the average person, the WHO is the front line command post for medical prevention (i.e., vaccination) and treatment.  Consequently its rulings are often regarded as the gold standard.  On matters of global health, the WHO holds dominance.  For approximately a year the WHO has propagated the belief that the first line of defense for curtailing the COVID-19 pandemic is self-isolation, distancing, masks and, ultimately, vaccination. Although it approved Ivermectin as a cost-effective treatment against SARS-CoV-2 infections, it disapproved hydroxychloroquine in favor of Gilead Bioscience’s and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease’s (NIAID) Anthony Fauci’s novel and costly drug Remdesivir.  Much of it’s funding efforts have been reserved for mass-vaccination with the new generation of experimental vaccines. Throughout these efforts, the WHO has allied itself with the US's and UK’s national health systems, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and his Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) initiative.  Most people wrongly assume the WHO acts independently from private commercial and national government interests for the welfare of the world's population. The legitimacy of the WHO as a gold standard of health is dubious. The organization has frequently been accused of conflicts of interests with private pharmaceutical companies and mega-philanthropic organizations such as the Gates’ Foundation, as well as being riddled with political alliances, ideologies, and profiteering motives. Despite it’s mega-pharmaceutical interests and consultants representing private vaccine interests, in the past the WHO has had the audacity to ridicule the pharmaceutical industry of corruption. “Corruption in the pharmaceutical sector occurs throughout all stages of the medicine chain, from research and development to dispensing and promotion…. A lack of transparency and accountability within the medicines chain can also contribute to unethical practices and corruption.” These are similar charges that have been leveled against the WHO. An article in the National Review called the WHO "scandal plagued" with "wasteful spending, utter disregard for transparency, pervasive incompetence, and failure to adhere to even basic democratic standards." In his book, Immunization: How Vaccines Became Controversial, University of Amsterdam professor emeritus Dr. Stuart Blume raises the serious problem of the WHO’s most influential advisors on emergency health conditions, such as the current Covid-19 pandemic and earlier the 2009 H1N1 swine flu scare that never was, serve as consultants for the vaccine industry. During times of global emergencies and crises, the WHO confers with a separate group of advisors outside its formal sitting Strategic Advisory Group of Experts or SAGE; the names of this group’s members are not made public.  We would add that the WHO’s level of incompetence has resulted in serious misinformation about pandemics, medical risks of vaccines and other health-threatening chemicals.  For example, during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, the organization reported it could not find any evidence of human transmission. However, the WHO has repeatedly kowtowed to China’s demands and unscrupulously accepts whatever statistics and statements the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) provides. Responding to a petition signed by over 700,000 signatories demanding the resignation of the current WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom, Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso told the Japanese parliament that the organization “should be renamed the Chinese Health Organization” for favoring China’s policy to stall and obstruct international investigations and for lauding unsubstantiated praise on the country’s transparency and handling of the pandemic. Back on December 31, 2019, Taiwan – which has been barred from WHO membership due to China’s political maneuvering – had been warning of a possible human-to-human transmission contrary to the wet-market narrative, but this was largely ignored in order to avoid upsetting the CCP. The UK’s Sunday Times reported that Chinese scientists were forced to destroy their proof of the virus shortly after its discovery. In the province of Hubei, authorities ordered the cessation of further testing and the destruction of existing samples. Other researchers who made efforts to warn the public were punished.  Writing for The Hill, University of Texas at San Antonio professor Bradley Thayer wrote, “Tedros apparently turned a blind eye to what happened in Wuhan and the rest of China and… has helped play down the severity, prevalence and scope of the Covid-19 outbreak.” Thayer concludes, “Tedros is not fit to lead the WHO.” He has no formal medical training as a physician or any international management experience in global health. Many others have voiced similar criticisms pointing out Tedro’s unsuitable background.  Moreover, the Director General’s conflicts of interest with China abound. Immediately before and after his tenure as the Health Minister for Ethiopia’s ruling Communist party, the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, China had donated an estimated $60 million to the terrorist government and its social programs. Now heading the WHO, Tedros appears to continue lobbying on China’s behalf. In 2017, the Washington Post noted the fundamental problem:  “[China] worked tirelessly behind the scenes to help Tedros defeat the United Kingdom candidate for the WHO job, David Nabarro. Tedros’s victory was also a victory for Beijing, whose leader Xi Jinping has made public his goal of flexing China’s muscle in the world.” Upon assuming his new position at the WHO, Tedros had left Ethiopia’s healthcare system in ruin.  As one young healthcare worker reported, there was no “bare necessities of a health care office…. Sterile gloves, paper exam gowns and covers, cotton swabs, gauze, tongue depressors, alcohol prep pads, chemical test strips, suturing equipment, syringes, stethoscopes… were non-existent. This is a fact in most health care centers in Ethiopia.”  During the more recent re-investigation of SARS-CoV-2 origins, the Chinese authorities refused to provide raw case data and created repressive conditions to curtail reliable analysis and disclosure. The WHO’s final report concluded that the virus had an animal origin and did not escape Wuhan’s high security pathogen laboratory. But there are viable reasons to discredit the report as untrustworthy at best and perhaps intentionally deceptive.  First, the entire agenda of the investigation was staged theater rather than a deep investigation to uncover empirical evidence. The team simply inspected seafood and open-air markets. Consequently, the WHO team returned empty handed and without laboratory records for a proper forensic examination. To call the entire WHO effort gross incompetence would be an understatement. Based upon all the evidence that has emerged, a large number of professional medical voices are calling the entire investigation a farce. Most problematic is the appointment of Peter Daszak on the WHO’s group to carry out the investigation. Daszak, the founding president of the shadowy non-profit organization EcoHealth Alliance, has headed many hunting adventures worldwide to identify the emergence of potential pathogens that could become pandemics. With the intention to divert attention away from an escaped laboratory virus, Daszak stated on a Going Viral podcast there was no evidential reason to visit and inspect the Wuhan laboratory. According to Independent Science News, despite Daszak’s denial of a lab origin, “EcoHealth Alliance funded bat coronavirus research, including virus collection, at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and thus could themselves be directly implicated in the outbreak.” The research at the Wuhan lab included ‘gain of function” efforts on coronaviruses, and received funds directly approved by Anthony Fauci. Newsweek reports the NIH had given a total of $7.4 million to the Chinese lab for the research. The organization has received over $100 million from a variety of sources, including the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, the NIH and undisclosed amounts from the Chinese government. Daszak himself has authored 25 studies funded by the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, think tanks, universities, military institutions, and ministries directly connected with the Chinese Communist Party.  Given the halls of power within the WHO, we are outlining some of the more salient reasons why the organization's declarations about infectious diseases, pandemics and vaccination should not be trusted.  Vaccine Promotional Misconduct For many years the WHO's recommendations for certain vaccines were kept secret. Writing in a 2006 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Dr. Marc Girard uncovered "scientific incompetence, misconduct or even criminal malfeasance" over the intentional inflation of vaccines' benefits while undermining toxicity and adverse effects. Dr. Girard testified as a medical expert for a French court in a criminal trial against the WHO after French health officials obliged the organization to launch its universal Hepatitis B vaccine campaign. The campaign resulted in the deaths of French children. Girard gained access to confidential WHO documents. He noted that the WHO's "French figures about chronic liver diseases were simply extrapolated from the U.S. reports." He further accused the WHO serving "merely as a screen for commercial promotion, in particular via the Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board (VHPB), which was created, sponsored, and infiltrated by the manufacturers." Now during the Covid-19 pandemic, as early as last July, the WHO approved of China’s first vaccine for emergency use, long before it had undergone proper clinical trials and much earlier than Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines’ approval. Orchestration of Pandemic Panics Before the current COVID-19 pandemic, there was the H1N1 swine flu scare in 2009. However, at the very start the WHO's fear mongering of a global contagion that could exceed the death counts of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic was solely based on false rhetoric rather than empirical evidence.  The fabrications are believed to have originated from the WHO's senior consultant on viral outbreaks who happens to carry the reputation of being one of the world's leading pandemic alarmists: Dr. Albert Osterhaus, nicknamed "Dr. Flu." At the time, Osterhaus was head of the Department of Virology at Erasmus University in the Netherlands. When the swine flu scare appeared, he was also the president of the European Scientific Working Group on Influenza (ESWI), an organization funded by the major vaccine manufacturers including Baxter, MedImmune, Glaxo, Sanofi Pasteur and others. It was also Osterhaus who transformed an otherwise potentially bad flu season into a global pandemic. The WHO has been criticized harshly in the media for changing the definition of a "pandemic" and in doing so has been charged with benefitting the pharmaceutical industry. The British Medical Journal reported that the WHO failed to report conflicts of interest in its H1N1 advisory group. The journal's Editor-in-Chief Fiona Godlee wrote, "WHO must act now to restore its credibility, and Europe should legislate." The former head of the prestigious Cochrane Database Collaboration’s vaccine studies, Dr. Tom Jefferson, told a Der Spiegel interviewer, “the WHO and public health officials, virologists and the pharmaceutical companies... built this machine around the impending [H1N1] pandemic. And there’s a lot of money involved, and influence and careers, and entire institutions.” When the 2009 H1N1 influenza strain appeared, the WHO rushed forward to mangle its earlier criteria that would realistically define a pandemic. The organization intentionally removed reference to a pathogen’s “severity” as a necessary requirement. “Don’t you think there’s something noteworthy,” Dr. Jefferson continues, “about the fact that the WHO has changed its definition of a pandemic?.... that’s how swine flu has been categorized as a pandemic.” Moreover, the WHO’s decision to label the outbreak as a pandemic was not based upon its own permanent vaccine experts but on the recommendations of a non-disclosed group of outside consultants.  According to a financial forecast published by JP Morgan, the collaboration between the WHO and Osterhaus's ESWI to orchestrate the pandemic would have profited the pharmaceutical industry up to $10 billion. Der Spiegel reported: “The WHO and those in charge of public health, the virologists and the pharmaceutical laboratories....  created a whole system around the imminence of a pandemic. There is a lot of money at stake, as well as networks of influence, careers and whole institutions! And the minute one of the flu viruses mutates we’d see the whole machine roll into action.” In 2010, the EU’s Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe launched an investigation into the evidence that the WHO had created “a fake pandemic” in order to financially benefit the pharmaceutical giants’ vaccine market and to strengthen the influence private drug interests have over the health organization. The Assembly’s chairperson Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg charged the WHO’s fake pandemic as “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century that resulted in “millions being needlessly vaccinated.” Epidemic of Conflict of Interests According to former World Bank geopolitical analyst Peter Koenig, about half of the WHO's budget is derived from private sources -- primarily pharmaceutical companies but also other corporate sectors including the telecommunication and agro-chemical industries. It also receives large donations from large philanthropic organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI. Eleven years ago, Gates had committed $10 billion to the WHO; after the US, his Foundation is its second largest donor providing 10 percent of its funding.  His financial commitment aligned with his global ambition to “make this the decade of vaccines.” Koenig also believes that Tedros’s appointment was due to Gates' influence. This may carry some truth because Tedros is a former Chair of GAVI’s Vaccine Alliance. Barbara Loe Fisher at the National Vaccine Information Center estimates that "only about 10 percent of total funding provided by GAVI ($862M) was used to strengthen health systems in developing countries, such as improving sanitation and nutrition, while nearly 80 percent was used to purchase, deliver and promote vaccines."  There is also the deep personal and financial relationship between Gates and the Chinese Communist government that demands further investigation. Gates is a member of the Chinese Academy of Science. For the moment, the WHO has been advising against Covid-19 vaccine passports as a mandate to travel. Nevertheless, China has already launched encrypted digital certificates as proof of vaccination. Given Gates’ close relationship with Chinese officials, perhaps he is awaiting on China to establish a precedent for other nations to agree on a global mandate that will eventually be propagated by the Gate’s network and the World Economic Forum and its Great Reset.  During a 2020 TED talk, Gates had already revealed that digital vaccine passports may be necessary; that part of his speech was edited from the original video, however, Robert Kennedy Jr. tracked down the original footage.  Gates has also 1) commissioned MIT to develop injectable a quantum dot dye system for children, 2) funded MicroChips, a company developing implantable chip-based devices, and 3) purchased 3.7 million shares in Serco who is developing tracing technology to track pandemic infections and vaccine compliance. Finally, Gates shares the Chinese Communist Party’s interests in collecting and ‘mining” citizens’ DNA. A 60 Minutes expose presented the covert activities of BGI Genomics, a CCP-linked firm that has exported Covid-19 tests to “collect, store and exploit biometric information” on American citizens. Independent investigations reveal that the Gates Foundation has collaborated with BGI and it was through Gates’ influence over Obama that the Chinese company entered the US market.  BGI’s RT-PCR kit was promoted by the WHO back in May 2020 for first line emergency diagnostic use. The rationale was that the test was highly sensitive, specific and user-friendly. Subsequently the EU, FDA, and the Australian, Canadian and Japanese health ministries rapidly purchased and deployed it. On its website, the Gates Foundation acknowledges its role in having the PCR tests supplied to the WHO. “Nine Chinese PCR tests were approved by WHO during 2020 under its Emergency Use Listing (EUL) mechanism, with one of the foundation’s partners supplying tests to WHO” Three months later, Sweden filed complaints after reports of a high percentage of false positives from the Chinese tests.  There is in our opinion little doubt that the WHO is another one of Gates' bought off entities for furthering his personal agenda to promote vaccines, genetically modified seeds and chemical agriculture in the developing world.  Vaccine Adverse Effects Monitoring System Needs Overhaul The WHO's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety is the group responsible for administering vaccine programs in poorer, developing countries. It is also responsible for gathering data on incidents of vaccine injuries. Any deaths following vaccination campaigns are ignored and ruled as coincidental. This policy is based on the erroneous assumption that if no one died during a vaccine's clinical trials, then the vaccine should be regarded as automatically safe and unrelated to any deaths that might occur later. Consequently, the WHO's monitoring system is seriously flawed and requires a major overhaul.  One of the more controversial incidences was the WHO's collaboration with the Bill Gates’ GAVI campaign to launch the Pentavalent vaccine (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HIP and Hepatitis B) in Africa and later in South and Southeast Asia. In India, health officials recorded upwards to 8,190 additional infant deaths annually following Pentavalent campaign.  The WHO’s response was to reclassify its adverse event reporting system to disregard "infant" deaths altogether. Dr. Jacob Puliyel, a member of the Indian government's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization concluded,  “deaths and other serious adverse events following vaccination in the third world, that use WHO-AEFI classification are not recorded in any database for pharmaco-vigilance. It is as if the deaths of children in low (and middle) income countries are of no consequence.” WHO's Double Standards of Vaccine Safety A more recent scandal erupted during the WHO's Global Vaccine Safety Summit convened in December 2019.  Days before the summit, one of the WHO's medical directors for vaccination, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, appeared in a public advertisement touting the unquestionable safety of vaccines and ridiculing parents who speak out against vaccination. She assured viewers that the WHO was in control of matters and monitored any potential adverse risks carefully. However, during the Summit, the same Dr. Swaminathan acknowledged vaccine health risks and stated, "We really don't have very good safety monitoring systems." Another Summit participant, Dr. Heidi Larson stated, "We have a very wobbly ‘health professional frontline’ that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the frontline professionals are starting to question or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to the person asking the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you are lucky if you have half a day on vaccines.” And more noteworthy were the statements by Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator of the WHO's Initiative for Vaccine Research,  "... I give courses every year on how do you develop vaccines, how do you make vaccines. And the first lesson is while you’re making your vaccine if you can avoid using an adjuvant please do so. Lesson two is if you’re going to use an adjuvant use one that has a history of safety. And lesson three is if you’re not going to do that, think very carefully." In other words, what the WHO presents to the public contradicts what is discussed behind closed doors, another example of the veil of secrecy the organization operates within.  Now we are witnessing more countries halting further administration of AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine, a vaccine Trump had committed $1.2 billion towards its development. Subsequently the CDC paused Johnson & Johnson’s similar engineered adenovirus vaccine in order to investigate its association with an otherwise rare condition of fatal blood clotting. The WHO on the other hand has ignored these nations’ ethical responsibility to adhere to the precautionary principle. Its own review claimed there were no blood clot links to AstraZeneca’s vaccine; later the WHO changed its tune to “plausible” after EU regulators found a causal link and the New England Journal of Medicine published two studies providing specific details confirming these adverse reactions.  Although acknowledging these risks, the WHO has continued to recommend that mass vaccination proceed as if there were no red alarms.   WHO's Depopulation Efforts with Vaccines Without doubt, the most nefarious activity conducted by the WHO is its alleged support and distribution of vaccines to poorer developing countries that may have been intentionally designed to decrease population rates.  Back in 1989, the WHO sponsored a symposium at its Geneva headquarters on "Antifertility Vaccines and Contraceptive Vaccines." The symposium presented proposals for vaccines that were later discovered to have been laced with the sterilizing hormones HCG and estradiol; the former prevents pregnancy and triggers spontaneous abortions and miscarriages, and the latter can turn men infertile.   In 2015, the Kenyan Conference of Catholic Bishops reported its discovery of a polio vaccine laced with estradiol that was manufactured in India and distributed by the WHO. A year earlier, Dr. Wahome Ngare from the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association uncovered a tetanus vaccine specifically being administered to women, also distributed by the WHO, that contained the HCG hormone. All of the polio vaccine samples tested contained HCG, estrogen-related compounds, follicle stimulating and luteinizing hormones, which will damage sperm formation in the testes. Even more disturbing, this vaccine was going to be administered to children under five years of age.  However, this is not the first time the WHO appears to have made efforts to use vaccination campaigns for depopulation.  A decade earlier, in 2004, the WHO, UNICIF and CDC launched a vaccination campaign to immunize 74 million African children during a polio outbreak. The initiative encountered a serious obstacle. In Nigeria, laboratory tests on the WHO's vaccine samples resulted in the presence of estrogen and other female hormones. And in the mid-1990s, a tetanus vaccine being administered to Nicaraguan and Filipino girls and women in their child-bearing years was discovered to contain HCG, which accounted for a large number of spontaneous abortions that were reported by Catholic health workers.  Illegal Vaccine Experiments In 2014, The Economic Times of India published a report that provided details of a joint venture between the WHO and the Gates Foundation to test an experimental HPV vaccine on approximately 16,000 tribal girls between the ages of 9 and 15 unwittingly. The experiment was conducted in 2008, and the vaccine is now what we commonly know as Gardasil. Many of the girls, the report states, became ill and some died.  The following year the WHO and Gates Foundation conducted a similar experiment on 14,000 girls with the HPV vaccine Cervarix. Again "scores of teenage girls were hospitalized."  Investigations led by Indian health officials uncovered gross violations in India's laws regarding medical safety. In numerous cases there was no consent and the children had no idea what they were being vaccinated for. The Indian Supreme Court has taken up a case against the duo for criminal charges.  There are many other questionable activities that the WHO has been involved with over the years. However, the above provide sufficient evidence to argue the case that, at least within the upper echelons of the WHO, global health does not stand in high priority.  The organization employs over 7,000 people around the world and most of these have deep concern for improving the lives of populations in poor and developing nations. On the other hand, the WHO's leaders are there largely because the powers of Washington, London and the pharmaceutical industry benefit by the organization advancing its agendas.  Of course, the WHO is not the only health entity with a legacy of corruption.  Corruption appears to be systemic throughout global health and national health agencies.  This topic was featured last year in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet. Author Dr. Patricia Garcia writes,  "Corruption is embedded in health systems. Throughout my life—as a researcher, public health worker, and a Minister of Health—I have been able to see entrenched dishonesty and fraud. But despite being one of the most important barriers to implementing universal health coverage around the world, corruption is rarely openly discussed." Bear in mind, the WHO, along with Bill Gates and his Foundation, and Anthony Fauci at the National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Disease, are leading the efforts to get the COVID-19 vaccine administered as quickly as possible. Already the Gates Foundation has given $1.75 billion for developing and distributing these vaccines. Do you believe we can trust their judgment and the intense public relations effort that will immediately follow after such a vaccine reaches the market? 

GlaxoSmithKline is linking up with Novovax to help the UK manufacture 60 million doses of another vaccine at its base in Stockton-on-Tees. Its boss Roger Connor tells Sean what's involved and what it's like heading up a vaccines company during the Covid crisis.

Healthy aging is serious business to Jon Warner. As CEO of Silver Moonshots, he helps startups turn ideas into scalable solutions. Jon shares his picks for communication, mobility and wellness technologies that make older adult lives better. About Jon Five-time company CEO, Jon Warner is a widely respected entrepreneur having founded and led 3 startups (with 2 successful exits). His career started in the corporate world with Air Products and Chemicals, working in the US and across Europe before joining Exxon-Mobil. Following his 15 years in the corporate world, Warner founded and grew The Worldwide Center for Organizational Development, a management consulting business with global clients including Ford Motor Company, L'Oreal, British Airways, HSBC, Microsoft, Glaxo, Foster-Wheeler, Toyota, Johnson and Johnson, Coca-Cola, PWC, The UK NHS, Roche and MasterCard. In addition to his position as CEO of Silver Moonshots, Jon is a deal flow adviser at Adaptive Health Capital and longtime Ambassador at Aging 2.0. A noted speaker at corporations and colleges across the world, he is author of 40 books. Key Takeaways We are overly pejorative about the older adult population. We don't treat people between 0 and 50 as if they're all the same, but we do with people between 50 and 100. Advice for start-ups for the 55+ market: Do a deep customer discovery around your target population, then solve a tangible customer problem. The pain point should drive a solution, which drives the technology you deploy. Do not generalize about a population of people or the unmet need. You will be building “on a bed of sand as opposed to a bed of rock.” Senior Living needs interoperability of data and has only recently realized the importance of resident data, not just for sales purposes or to manage churn. “Walled gardens of data” don't talk to one another. Health data is the solid foundation for building better systems. Good data envelopes psychosocial and social determinants and offers a holistic view of health.

Merck's History of Crimes and Misdemeanors   Richard Gale and Gary Null Progressive Radio Network, March 18, 2021     As the Covid-19 pandemic wears on past a full year, several of the world’s top pharmaceutical companies have dominated the world headlines, notably Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, along with the smaller start-ups such Moderna and Novavax. Each is now vying to usurp the coveted Covid-19 vaccine market. Prior to the pandemic, the vaccine market worldwide was only a small slice of the overall $1 trillion pharmaceutical market at about $24 billion annually. Now sales of the new generation of vaccines to fight the pandemic are poised to exceed global vaccine sales exponentially. Ronny Gal at the market analysis firm Bernstein estimates that Covid vaccine sales will reach $40 billion this year. We believe this is a very conservative estimate as newer vaccines come on line and with companies making efforts to outdo each other on its efficacy and safety profile. Moderna and Pfizer together are expected to earn $32 billion this year and we are not taking into account Russia’s Sputnik-V vaccine and now five approved in China. The frenetic race is underway to vaccinate billions of human beings naively standing in line after drinking from the government health agencies’ and the mainstream media’s cattle trowels of vaccine hype and propaganda. What is certain is that a new era of drug discovery has begun and all will be driven by the surge in vaccines’ new celebrity status. The very definition of a vaccine is now being redefined and it is clearly predictable that we will be witnessing prophylactic and therapeutic drugs being reevaluated as vaccines to leap-frog regulatory hurdles and to escape legal actions for product injury and death.    It may be surprising that the world’s second largest vaccine maker Merck is missing from the Covid vaccine cash cow. Along with the other two of the top three global vaccine makers, Glaxo and Sanofi, Merck exited the Covid vaccine arena after its candidates flopped in generating sufficient neutralizing antibodies in Phase 1 trials. Instead the company has shuffled its resources to develop two new novel drugs that will target serious risks of the body’s over-reactive immune response to SARS-CoV2 infection. Although we will not likely see a Merck Covid vaccine any time in the coming years, it has nevertheless lucratively reaped rewards after selling its Moderna stock late last year when the price went out the roof. Merck has also partnered with J&J to increase production of the latter’s vaccine in order to meet demand.   Merck's legacy of lawsuits for crimes and misdemeanors goes back at least to the 1960s. In 1975, it was busted by the SEC for illegal payments to foreign government officials from "approximately" 36 nations. The scam was orchestrated through personal bank accounts with the sole purpose of advancing drug approvals through foreign nations' regulatory medical agencies.     One of the largest scandals in modern medical history was the company's anti-inflammatory drug Vioxx that resulted in fines above $4.8 billion for causing over a minimum 60,000 deathsfrom sudden heart attacks and over 120,000 serious medical injuries. At its height, Vioxx was earning over $2 billion in revenues annually and it is estimated that 25 million patients were prescribed the medication. The securities class action suit against Merck alone reached $1 billion, placing it in the top 15 securities lawsuits in US corporate history. The main criminal charge was Merck's intentional withholding of scientific data about the drug's adverse cardiovascular side effects.    Years after the settlement, Ron Unz, the publisher of The American Conservative, undertook his own investigation to validate Vioxx's death toll. Analyzing the drug's adverse effects over a longer time period, Unz estimated Merck may have been responsible for nearly half a million premature deaths in elderly patients, the drug's primary target group. That is roughly the same number of total civilian, military and terrorist deaths from the US's military escapades in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan combined.    Merck's settlement of 47,000 pending lawsuits for personal injuries and 265 class action cases was a small pittance for the harm Vioxx left in its wake. Merck executives were never properly punished for willingly concealing the drug's dangers in order to assure FDA approval.    In Australia, Merck's efforts to increase Vioxx profits employed other forms of malfeasance. The Australian government launched a class action suit against the drug maker on charges that employees allegedly schemed a fake scientific paper that was ghostwritten for a medical journal in order to put Vioxx into a positive light. Testimonies during the trial stated data was completely based upon "wishful thinking." Merck also founded the peer-reviewed journal Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine. The journal was a fraud; it was not properly peer-reviewed and its primary purpose was to promote Vioxx on the Australian continent.    Moreover, the class action lawsuit contained Merck emails accessed by Australian officials. The company's internal communications allegedly ordered select employees to draft up a hit list of physicians who were critical of Vioxx. According to the documents, these physicians were targeted to be "neutralized" or "discredited." Some, including Dr. James Fries at Sanford University's medical school, were clinical investigators who happened to speak out about the drug's shortcomings. One email stated, "We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live..."     But Merck's troubles with the dangers of its products, falsifying data about drugs' efficacy and safety and exaggeration of medical claims go back sixty years. In the 1960s, the FDA discovered that the drug maker's arthritis medication Indocin had not been properly tested for efficacy and its adverse effects were being completely ignored.  In the 1970s, Merck's drug dietheylstilbestrol (DES) prescribed for the prevention of miscarriages caused a flurry of vaginal cancer cases and other gynecological disorders. Merck had all along known that DES was carcinogenic based upon its own animal clinical trials. In 2007, its cholesterol drug Zetiawas shown to increase liver disease. Again Merck had known about Zetia's liver risks but withheld the clinical trial's damning results.    It would also appear that Merck has managed to hijack US courts. This includes an early 2019 ruling by Trump's corporate-friendly US Supreme Court to side with the drug maker and squash hundreds of lawsuits for failing to issue warnings that its osteoporosis drug Fosamax's may contribute to debilitating bone fractures. A federal court in California found that Merck committed perjury for lying in a patent infringement case against Gilead Sciences over the latter's blockbuster Hepatitis C drug Sovaldi. The judge ruled that Merck carried out a "systematic and outrageous deception in conjunction with unethical business practices and litigation misconduct."  It turned out that Merck's patent claims were a sham and orchestrated by its legal division.   Besides pushing through the FDA dangerous medications onto the market, the company has also found itself in the courtroom on many occasions for allegedly price-fixing, routinely defrauding and overbilling states' Medicare and Medicaid programs, and violating the Anti-Kickback Statute. In 2006, the IRS went after Merck for owing almost $2 billion in back taxes. According to the Wall Street Journal, Merck partnered with a British bank to create an offshore subsidiary in tax-friendly Bermuda to divert taxable revenue on its bestselling cholesterol drugs Zocor and Mevacor through a patent scheme. The company ran the operation for ten years before the FDA uncovered the racket.    Merck is America's leading vaccine manufacturer. Despite public perception and the ruse that vaccines are somehow safer and more effective than pharmaceutical drugs in general, it is the same industry and corporate culture that manufactures both. Currently Merck markets vaccines for Haemophilus B, Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B (individually and in combination), human papilomavirus (Gardasil), Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR), pneumococcal, rotavirus, varicella (chickenpox) and Zoster virus (for shingles). In 2010, Merck obtained exclusive rights to MassBiologics’ vaccine portfolio. The consequence is that Merck's Adult Vaccine Portfolio expanded to include 9 of the 10 vaccines on the CDC's adult immunization schedule. The company now holds almost a full monopoly on the government's recommended vaccines   On its website, the FDA assures the public that "Vaccines, as with all products regulated by the FDA, undergo a rigorous review of laboratory and clinical data to ensure the safety, efficacy, purity and potency of these products."  However, not a single one of Merck's vaccines has ever been tested in a scientifically viable double-blinded placebo controlled trial. In each case, the placebo in the control group was not inert, such as the use of sterile saline. Rather Merck only tested its vaccines with the viral component against a faux placebo containing the same ingredients, including aluminum, but minus the virus. Known as a "carrier solution," the standard scientific protocol does not designate it as a proper placebo for measuring the efficacy and disease risks of a drug. And in the case of Gardasil, the trial was statistical trickery to mask Gardasil's adverse effects. One placebo group received the company’s proprietary adjuvant amorphous aluminum hydroxyphospate sulfate (AAHS), a known neurotoxin. The adjuvant has yet to be properly tested for safety. One of the more serious risks of aluminum adjuvants is the triggering of an extreme autoimmune response, what Israeli immunologist Yehuda Schoenfeld has called “autoimmue/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.”   In the Cochrane Database Collaboration’s 2016 analysis of Merck's Gardasil, the investigators were so alarmed they filed a complaint against the European Medical Agency for failing to adequately assess the vaccine's neurological harms. More recently, a meta-analysis published in Systemic Reviews journal concluded “HPV vaccines increased serious nervous system disorders and general harms.”   Robert Kennedy Jr is currently taking steps to sue Merck over the Gardasil deception. Kennedy's in-depth investigations through his Children's Health Defense organization has uncovered evidence that the vaccine increases birth defects in children conceived of HPV-vaccinated moms; miscarriages have increased 2000 percent above normal, and girls are experiencing serious reproductive complications, including infertility, at approximately ten-fold above the normal rate. During an interview on the Progressive Radio Network, Kennedy noted that there was 10 times greater risk of dying from cervical cancer among Gardasil trial participants compared to the general public. There is a 10-fold increase for ovarian failure, and 1 in 37 girls who receive the vaccine will experience an autoimmune disease after 6 months of receiving the series of injections. When we consider that 1 in 37,000 women have a chance of dying from cervical cancer, it puts HPV vaccines into a completely different light. Sadly, across the nation, politicians from both sides of the aisle in state legislatures, notably Governor Andrew Cuomo in New York, are seemingly doing Merck's bidding to mandate Gardasil for all girls and boys upon entering school.    Based upon Kennedy's research and documents received from Freedom of Information Act filings, during Merck's own Gardasil clinical trials, 2.3 percent of girls and women between the ages of 9 through 26 developed a serious autoimmune disease and crippling neurological disorders within seven months of vaccination. The most frequent adverse effects were arthritis and anthropathy, autoimmune thyroiditis, celiac disease, hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, Raynaud's Phenomenon, rheumatoid arthritis and uveitis. In other words, it was the aluminum adjuvant responsible for this enormous suffering. He stated that according to Merck's own statistics, girls are one hundred times more likely to experience a serious adverse effect from the vaccine than to be protected from cervical cancer.    In a 2012 article published in the Journal of Law and Medical Ethics, researchers at the University of British Columbia wrote that ever since Gardasil was approved in 2006, Merck has engaged in an "overly aggressive marketing strategies and lobbying campaigns aimed at promoting Gardasil as a mandatory vaccine."  One strategy Merck has employed is to take advantage of FDA loopholes to fast track its drugs. In the case of its expanded Gardasil-9 for adults between the ages of 27 to 45, the company applied for fast tracking two days after the Journal of Toxicological and Environmental Health published a study that the HPV vaccine was lowering the probability of pregnancy for women in their 20s.   Unfortunately, the media has indiscriminately colluded with Merck. Drug companies, according to Kennedy, pay $4.5 billion to the major media networks and publications to promote their drugs. And none of the media outlets are willing to sacrifice their profits for advertising drugs on moral and ethical grounds.    Another scandal erupted within Merck's vaccine business in 2010 after two whistleblowers gave testimony that the mumps' component in its Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine was based on fraudulent data about it's efficacy, and the company knowingly proceeded in order to corner the mumps vaccine market. Merck had been defrauding the US government, which purchases the MMR, for over a decade. The government and two Merck whistleblowers, virologists Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski, filed a lawsuit against Merck for being in violation of the False Claims Act. According to the charges, Merck had "falsified its mumps vaccine test results to hit an efficacy rate of 95 percent. The company achieved this by adding "animal antibodies to a blood sample to give the impression of increased antibodies." This would certainly explain why mumps outbreaks in summer camps and on college campuses are found to occur among those vaccinated.    Merck has gained enormous political and social influence over the national perception about vaccines.  One example is Merck's behind the scenes aggression against the flim Vaxxed.  When the documentary film was officially selected to screen during the 2016 Tribeca Film Festival in Manhattan, we discovered in an earlier report that Merck left its fingerprints on the film's removal and censorship. The Alfred Sloan Foundation is the festival's largest sponsor; pro-vaccine advocate Bill Gates is also a notable contributor. One of the leading persons on the Foundation's board of trustees was Dr. Peter Kim.  Kim happens to be the former president of Merck's Research Laboratories who was directly responsible for the launch of Gardasil and Merck's other vaccines for the Zoster virus and rotavirus. The film presents a harsh indictment against Dr Julie Gerberding, the former head of the CDC who allegedly coordinated the cover up of data that confirmed thimerosal's role in the onset of autism. After managing the agency's operations to mine sweep the data and generate new studies with public funds to suggest thimerosal's safety, Gerberding accepted her reward from the pharmaceutical industry by becoming the head of Merck's vaccine division. In addition, according to the whistleblowing of a senior CDC scientist, Dr. William Thompson, Gerberding was allegedly responsible for destroying the CDC's research that showed African American boys were at a substantially higher risk of becoming autistic from Merck's MMR vaccine. Fortunately, Dr. Thompson, who was present during the order to shred documents, saved copies which he subsequently turned over to Congressman Bill Posy and an independent biologist Prof. Brian Hooker. Since then, Congress has refused to hold hearings thereby supporting the cover-up.    All told, these examples of Merck's culture of greed, deception, political maneuvering and aggression has collectively injured countless people. Its prime directive is selling drugs; its history of crimes and misdemeanors should indicate the company holds little integrity in its commitment to prevent and treat disease. The full extent of the casualties from Merck's drugs and vaccines may never be properly calculated. For firms such as Merck, Pfizer and Johnson and Johnson, injuries and deaths are the necessary collateral damage of getting poorly tested products on the market and as fast as possible.    Can we really trust such a company with such a criminal reputation to be forthright about its product’s safety records? Therefore we recommend people to support the efforts of Bobby Kennedy and the Children's Health Defense in its lawsuit against Merck's Gardasil. A victory may well weaken the entire edifice of vaccine pseudoscience and the public will realize that for decades it has been little more than a house of cards.

Why Should We Trust a Vaccine from a Condom Maker?   Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, March 5, 2021     For decades, according to a Guardian article, “consumers worldwide have named the $347 billion pharmaceutical behemoth Johnson and Johnson (J&J) as one of its most trusted brands.” From its humble beginnings in the 1880s, making cotton gauze dressings and eventually band aids, baby powder and shampoo, J&J  has expanded into one of the most powerful multinational pharmaceutical and medical device companies in the world.  In 1959, it entered the world of Big Pharma as a leading player after succeeding in getting Tylenol approved as an over-the-counter drug.  Shortly thereafter J&J commenced with a flurry of acquisitions to increase its product line, which included Neutrogena, Cordis, DePuy, Janssen Pharmaceutica and Centocor.  Today, in most American home medicine cabinets one will find a popular J&J product:  Listerine, Tylenol and Benadryl, Neutrogena skin cream, Rogaine, Neosporin antibacterial ointment, or Destin to treat diaper rashes.   Now, people are eager for J&J’s “one shot and you’re done” Covid-19 vaccine despite health officials’ fears it may be less effective than Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA competitors. Nevertheless, vaccination centers and pharmacies are racing to get their hands on the new adenovirus-based vaccine.  And as we will further note below, this is from a company that has absolutely no past experience in vaccine development and manufacturing.    However, we need to seriously challenge J&J’s reputation. A 2019 report by the British intelligence firm Alva has noted that J&J’s reputation has sunk dramatically during the past years, from 9th place among 58 major pharmaceutical firms to 57th. Certainly, this is not a company with a clean ethical record.   A review of J&J’s rap sheet over the past three decades presents a dire and contrary image that should lead us to question the company’s claims about its Covid-19 vaccine given the lucrative market the pandemic has created for the most aggressive medical corporations.    Similar to its equally over-sized competitors Glaxo, Merck and Pfizer, J&J too has had to pay out billions of dollars over the decades for civil settlements and criminal activities.  As the pharmaceutical giant receives applause across the mainstream media for the release and FDA emergency approval for its Covid-19 vaccine, Brazil’s Public Prosecution Service started an investigation into J&J’s antitrust activities under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for “possible improper payments in its medical device industry.” This was part of an FBI bribery scheme investigation that included Seimens, General Electric and Philips acting as a larger cartel to illegally payoff government officials in return for securing contracts with Brail’s national health programs.  The charges also include price gouging, inflating prices up to 800 percent the market price to cover bribes.    This is not the first time J&J has violated FCPA laws. In 2011, J&J was charged by the Department of Justice with conspiracy for paying off Greek doctors to advance its product sales.  The SEC also charged civil complaints. The company had to pay out a $70 million penalty for buying off officials in Greece, Poland and Romania. In 2010, an executive for J&J’s subsidiary DePuy was sentenced to a year in prison for corrupt payments to physicians within the Greek national healthcare system.     As one of the world’s leading medical device companies, J&J has had its share of recalls for faulty products including contact lenses and hip implants  In 2013, it paid nearly $2.5 billion to compensate 8,000 recipients for its flawed hip implants  Again in 2016, another $1 billion was awarded to plaintiffs injured from this device.   One particular dubious activity the company became involved with in 2008 was to launch a “phantom recall.” When its Motrin IB caplets were discovered to not properly dissolve, it hired outside contractors to buy up store supplies in order to avoid making public declaration. No one would have known of this activity and it would have gotten past the eyes of FDA inspectors had the deception not been exposed during a Congressional investigation.   Other major J&J lawsuits and recalls for faulty products include:   1995 - $7.5 million fine for destroying documents to cover up an investigation into wrongful marketing of its Retin-A acne cream to remove wrinkles   1996 – An undisclosed settlement on false claims over condom protection claims to protect against HIV and other STDs.   2000 – J&J’s subsidiary LifeScan was found guilty for selling defective blood glucose monitors and failed to inform the FDA.  All total, $105 million was paid out.    2001 – Paid out $860 million in a class action lawsuit for misleading customers about prematurely discarding its 1-Day Acuvue soft contact lens.  J&J recommended they should only be worn once although it was discovered the lenses were no different than the regular Acuvue lens that would last for two weeks   2010 - $81 million settlement for misbranding its anti-epileptic drug Topamax to treat psychiatric disorders and hiring outside physicians to join its sales force to promote the drug for unapproved conditions.  The following year, J&J paid $85 million for similar charges against its heart drug Natrecor   2011 – Several of its baby products were discovered to contain carcinogenic ingredients   2013 – The US Justice Department charged the company $2.2 billion in criminal fines for marking its autism and anti-psychotic drug Risperdal for unapproved uses. Forty-five states had filed civil lawsuits against J&J in the scandal   Risperdal is  horrendous drug that contributes to rapid weight gain and a condition known as gynescomastia, irregular enlarged breasts in men. Semmelweis reports that J&J’s subsidiary Janssen also had an aggressive campaign to market its use in children with behavioral challenges.  Other serious adverse effects from Risperdal reported by the FDA include diabetes mellitus, hyperprolactinaemia, somnolence, depression, anxiety, psychotic behavior, suicide and death.    The company’s legal problems over Risperdal do not appear to have ended. In October 2019, a Philadelphia jury awarded a man $8 billion in punitive damages for failing to warn that the drug could cause young men to grow breasts. Other recent suits include litigation over its blood thinner Xarelto risks of internal bleeding, and a $775 million settlement to 25,000 plaintiffs.    2016 -  Two women were awarded $127 million in damages for the talc in its J&J Baby Powder causing ovarian cancer.  Later, over 1,000 similar cases came forward. During the trial it was discovered that J&J suspected a link between talcum and ovarian cancer back in the 1970s.  A Missouri verdict fined the company over $4 billion but it was later reduced to $2.1 billion.  A New York Times investigation into internal J&J memos uncovered evidence that the talcum powder may have contained asbestos. These cases continue. In July 2019, J&J made efforts to dismiss 14,000 lawsuits over the talcum-cancer risk.   More recently, J&J has been in the spotlight for its role in contributing to the deadly opioid crisis.  The company holds the patent for a unique strain of opium poppy commonly named Norman. It is the leading provider of the opioid for Purdue Pharma’s painkiller OxyContin. An Oklahoma court ordered a $465 million fine. This opened the door for other states to follow suit.  To fully realize how insane the system is, the half a billion dollar civil fine was good news on Wall Street, which anticipated the verdict would be in the billions of dollars. Consequently, J&J’s stock rose 2 percent after the judge’s ruling.  And despite J&J being Purdue’s major supplier, and a major contributor in the US’s opioid epidemic, the latter was forced to file for bankruptcy due to mounting lawsuits for overdose deaths.   Finally, we might ask why a 140 year old company, with no history whatsoever in vaccine development, has now become among the heroes in the immunological war against Covid-19?  J&J is not a household name in the vaccine industry. It is utterly absent, let alone ranks among the world’s 20 major vaccine makers. Among the 53 vaccines for other infections approved and licensed by the CDC, not one is manufactured by the nation’s leader in mouthwash and baby powder.  It is therefore no surprise that the company had to partner with Merck to manufacture its Covid vaccine to meet demand. It has no history or expertise in this medical field.    However, the Covid pandemic is a cash cow for the drug industry’s taking. Bernstein market analyst Ronny Gal predicts Covid-19 vaccine sales will reach $40 billion this year.  A more realistic figure is likely higher since together Moderna and Pfizer project their revenues at $32 billion. Then there are the other major vaccines by AstraZeneca, J&J and Novavax entering the competition.  According to the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine’s vaccine research tracker, over 200 vaccines against Covid-19 are in development worldwide. It is an enormous pumpkin pie and everyone in the medical universe wants a slice from it.  So why shouldn’t we expect a non-vaccine player such as J&J to be eager to leap into the frenzy?     Finally, there is a disturbing question that we have no certain answer for.  How is it that a drug and household health product company, with no prior history in vaccine development, can develop and rush to market its first vaccine against a viral strain that was only identified 14 months ago?  Developing a vaccine requires many years and necessitates the establishment of an R&D infrastructure vastly different than conventional drug development.  The other major companies developing Covid-19 vaccines have been in the business for decades. But not J&J. There is something more to this story that demands investigation.  And if the company’s long rap sheet offers any warning, it is that we must be wary of any claims J&J publicly states about the efficacy and safety of its products.  Especially when the pandemic promise to increase the profits of numerous shareholders. 

There were a few ENIGMAS in this puzzle -- the most perplexing being, how did Galileo, born in the 1500's, earn the monicker of 39A, The Father of Modern Physics? Schroedinger is probably rolling over (and simultaneously not rolling over) in his grave

This week’s podcast dives into the world of cryptocurrencies and explores why Tesla has jumped on the bitcoin bandwagon. Discover why shares in GlaxoSmithKline and Ocado fell on their latest updates, and why the FTSE 100 is treading water. The team debate the future of annuities as investors look for sources of income in retirement. This week’s special guest is Madeline Wright who explains her journey joining asset manager Lindsell Train almost straight out of university and how she now plays a key role with popular funds Finsbury Growth & Income and Lindsell Train UK Equity. Madeline explains what she has learned from highly respected fund manager Nick Train and how her research into Prada and Experian resulted in Lindsell Train investing in both companies. Presented by AJ Bell’s Dan Coatsworth and Laith Khalaf

America’s Sacrificial Altar for Google, Wikipedia and the Pharmaceutical Empire   Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, December 3, 2020   Weekly, millions of people do Google searches for advice about their personal health, a large variety of illnesses, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, dementia, etc., drug and vaccine safety, and scores of other topics affecting physical and mental health.  They depend upon speed and accuracy to find the current scientifically based and clinically proven information. For the large majority of people, a personal medical condition or health crisis begins by turning exclusively to established medical, drug-based protocols. However, these treatments do not always relieve symptoms and very rarely reverse disease. Certainly they have not shown success to prevent them.    Consequently, increasingly people are seeking second and third opinions. More often than not Google will take a person immediately to Wikipedia. Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales acknowledges that “60 to 70 percent of Wikipedia’s traffic originates from Google.  There is an assumption and a reasonable expectation that the information we find on Wikipedia is 1) accurate, 2) soundly researched and referenced from high quality and reliable resources, 3) written by credentialed writers and editors with expertise in the subject, 4) unbiased, and finally 5) objective and neutral. At a minimum it is assumed that content is scientifically validated and on matters of health and disease from the National Institutes of Health PubMed database. Whether it regards a pharmaceutical, surgical or radiological approach, or perhaps a more natural medical modality such as lifestyle change, nutrition, medical botanicals, Chiropractic and Chinese Medicine, information is expected to be accurately described. Then using our freedom of choice and informed consent, we can select the medical route that we believe would be most safe and effective.    Unfortunately, our four-year investigation into Wikipedia's treatment of health issues reveals exactly the opposite. Many individuals with outstanding credentials are terrified of having their biographies appear on the open-source encyclopedia. Once a person's biography is added she or he will no longer have control over its content. Often they will be faced with character assassination and denigration about their careers and life's work. Their biographies are frozen as if confined in a Russian gulag for a political crime. They may seek redress by reaching out to the media; but the media also is fully compromised.  They may seek open hearings on Wikipedia's backside to expose unfair behavior and misinformation but will be met either by deafening silence, ridicule or censorship. They may even seek redress from the IRS or state's attorney generals for Wikipedia's gross serial violations of its non-profit status. You enter a highly politicized ideological war and the encyclopedia’s parent organization, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), will do essentially nothing to correct errors or reprimand belligerent senior administrators and editors.    Much of Wikipedia’s chaos over unreliable health information is due to a relatively small group of non-credentialed, hate-filled individuals, popularly known as Skeptics. With Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales’ full support, Skeptics have hijacked the site and converted it into their personal social media platform to condemn all non-conventional and alternative medical therapies and its practitionersand voices who are critical of the dominant drug and vaccine based medical paradigm.   Since its founding certain editors realized that Wikipedia was prime game for writing entries and reshaping content as a means to proselytize their personal ideological agendas. This is due to the encyclopedia’s systemic vulnerabilities and its naïve belief that truth can emerge by reaching a faux democratic consensus.  In 2006 Wikipedia editor Paul Lee, a physical therapist in California’s Central Valley and an avowed Skeptic, started to reach out to internet Skeptic groups to recruit editors to advance the Skeptic mission to ridicule and discredit all forms of complementary and alternative medicine, marginalize those who question vaccination safety and efficacy, and attack critics of corporate commercial interests adversely impacting the nation’s health such as genetically modified crops, fluoridation, sugar and junk food, etc.    That year Lee posted on the International Skeptic Forum:   “I would like to invite webmasters and site owners to begin editing Wikipedia and SkepticWiki. There are many subjects for skeptics to get involved with, and we really need help. There are plenty of loons out there doing the editing right now, and far too few skeptics to keep them at bay. Any coordination of efforts should be done by private email, since Wikipedia keeps a very public history and “every” little edit, and you can’t get them removed. We don’t need any accusations of a conspiracy… I hope to see more skeptics in action!”   Lee also lists the subjects Skeptics should focus on, which include the National Vaccine Information Center, vaccine critics Barbara Loe Fisher and Viera Scheibner, Chiropractic, and complementary and alternative medicine. Lee happens to be the former list master for the pro-pharmaceutical and junk food friendly Quackwatch, a personal blog founded by a psychiatrist Dr. Stephen Barrett. Over time, Quackwatch and its Skeptic allies such as the Center for Inquiry and the Science Based Medicine blog have exponentially increased their presence on Wikipedia to become the single most cited references in the Skeptics’ arsenal to attack alternative medical therapies and the critics of conventional medicine’s power base. The consequence is that personal bias has trumped Wikipedia’s rules of objectivity and neutrality.   New York Times best-selling human rights author Edwin Black described the dangers Wikipedia poses for social progress in his article “Wikipedia: The Dumbing Down of World Knowledge” published on the History News Network:   “…. Wikipedia, the constantly changing knowledge base created a global free-for-all of anonymous users, now stands as the leading force for dumbing down the world of knowledge. If Wikipedia’s almost unstoppable momentum continues, critics say, it threatens to quickly reverse centuries of progress… In its place would be a constant cacophony of fact and falsity that Wikipedia critics call a “law of the jungle.”[16]   Writing for the Huffington Post, journalist Sam Slovick posed a question we might ask ourselves every time we click into Wikipedia. "Has Jimmy Wales' marauding encyclopedic beast finally corrupted the Internet? Has Wikipedia lost all credibility, its purported neutral system compromised by toxic editors?” The most toxic Wikipedia editors now terrorizing the encyclopedia’s pages more often than not are the anonymous non-experts and computer hacks who identify themselves with this extreme militant form of scientific materialism. They also fiercely protect their own Skeptic pages from any citable truths that may cast them in a poor light.   Indeed commercial science is constantly attempting to develop new technological solutions through genetic engineering of crops, vaccines and novel patentable drugs, artificial intelligence, 5G wireless technology, etc. These are held up in the public's eyes as great achievements. On the other hand, you will rarely find Wikipedia or the mainstream media ever highlighting these technologies’ flaws and greater risks that undermine their commercial benefits; and certainly private corporations will never leak evidence about these risks and dangers.    For example, we accessed Wikipedia pages for each of the vaccines recommended on the CDC's childhood immunization schedule. In every case, adverse effects were undermined and the vaccines’ benefits were inflated. Not a single entry had a complete list of adverse effects as printed on the vaccine maker's manufacturing package insert – literature that is easily accessible on the CDC's website. Nor was there to be found a list of vaccine ingredients, many of which are scientifically shown to be toxic. Consequently a visitor to any given Wikipedia vaccine page accesses a very incomplete and twisted understanding of the vaccines' actual safety and efficacy profile.    We are also led to believe that if a scientific invention or a study for a new drug or vaccine appears in the peer-reviewed literature, it represents a gold standard. Consequently it is assumed that any controversy has been settled. A peer-reviewed paper becomes a scientific law unto itself if it favors tendentious interests. However, repeatedly the peer-reviewed journal system has proven to be unreliable. No decisive effort has been made to reform it. It is simply too profitable to disrupt.    But the Skeptics’ distorted and biased narratives about medicine and health are only one reason to be deeply worried about the WMF’s long-term mission to bring all medical knowledge to the inhabitable world.  By and large, Wikipedia Skeptics are not motivated by financial gain nor is there strong evidence of conflicts of interest with either the pharmaceutical industry or our federal health agencies.  Rather the Skeptic movement is more likely motivated by a cult-like ideology that is fanatically embraced by its followers with religious zeal.  Yet on the backside, WMF also has deep ties with the pharmaceutical industry and this takes us to its close relationship with Google for over a decade.    The Google-WMF association is no secret. There is plenty of evidence confirming Google’s preferential treatment of Wikipedia aside from the millions of daily Google searches that bring users directly to the encyclopedia.    Although Wikipedia editors take full advantage of flawed medical literature if the conclusions serve their purpose and agenda, Google, through its algorithmic modeling to censor voices challenging the medical regime’s status-quo, ignores efforts to determine whether the medical literature is bogus or not. Google’s mission is to protect the global medical regime -- not just private drug companies but also government health bodies and international organizations such as the World Health Organization.    No longer should Google be perceived solely as a technological platform to promote the pharmaceutical industry’s agenda. It is also a drug company itself. During the past seven years, Google's parent company Alphabet has launched two pharmaceutical companies. In 2013, it founded Calico, headed by Genentech's former CEO Arthur Levinson. Calico operates an R&D facility in the San Francisco Bay Area for the discovery of treatments associated with age-related diseases.  Two years later, Alphabet founded Verily Life Sciences (previously Google Life Sciences).  Both companies partner with other drug firms, including Johnson and Johnson, Novartis, and vaccine giants Pfizer and Sanofi. In October Verily launched an aggressive multimillion dollar campaign to expand Covid-19 testing in California’s most distressed communities in 28 counties. However, some counties are starting to sever their ties with the company. In order to qualify for the program’s Covid test people are required to have a Gmail account and provide highly sensitive personal information. Alphabet’s drug companies therefore are intricately linked to Google’s ambition to gather, control and own everyone’s personal information.   In 2016, Verily collaborated with the European pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to form a third company, Galvani Bioelectronics, for the development of "bioelectronic medicines." Among its initiatives are nanotechnology for drug delivery and the development of “miniaturized, implantable devices that can monitor nerve signals in the body.” Galvani’s Chairman is Moncef Siaoui, Glaxo's former chairman of its global vaccines business who now serves as Trump’s appointed chief science adviser for Operation Warp Speed.    Nor should it be forgotten that Google’s co-founder Sergey Brin’s former wife Anne Wojcicki also co-founded the biotech company 23andMe to develop personal DNA testing kits. In 2018 it entered a partnership with Glaxo to expand into drug development.    In January 2019, Google's president of Customer Solutions Mary Ellen Coe joined Merck's Board of Directors. Formerly working at the corporate consulting firm McKinsey and Company, her role at Google includes overseeing the firm's global advertising for contracted companies. Merck's chairman Kenneth Frazier remarked in a press release that Coe "will be a significant asset to Merck."   To better appreciate the enormity of the global pharmaceutical regime now unfolding, we need to fully acknowledge this nightmarish marriage between the tech and information-based companies, such as Google and the WMF, and Big Pharma. As the world's most advanced search engine, Google has gained control over the internet's most technically sophisticated surveillance systems and algorithms. Therefore the company has positioned itself to perhaps be the greatest potential threat to human health via the flow of information and data viewed on our laptops and mobile phones.    During the past five years, the pharmaceutical industry has shown a growing interest in the concept of virtual pharmacies, whereby drug companies can leverage their influence over consumers. Social media, notably Wikipedia, has become the consumer’s most utilized resource for gaining knowledge about disease, drugs and health. In a University of Sydney survey, Wikipedia was the first source of choice for gaining information about unfamiliar health topics, even among medical professionals. According to a 2013 joint analysis of this emerging trend, conducted by the University of Zurich and Johnson and Johnson, drug companies can use these virtual platforms to tackle the challenges they face in the financial market and even within medical communities. However, the analysis also recommended that the best strategy would be for Big Pharma to invest heavily in virtual companies and secure partnerships. This strategy is gaining steam whereby tech and social media companies such as Google and WMF are being absorbed into the pharmaceutical machinery and vice versa. The dire results from this marriage are already being felt as we now witness Wikipedia morphing into another mouthpiece for Big Pharma.    If Google's transformation into a drug company is not alone disturbing, the world's largest open source knowledge site is acutely entangled with the Silicon Valley giant and its pharmaceutical agenda. In early 2019, Google dumped $3.1 million into WMF’s coffers, which brings total contributions from Google and Sergey Brin to over $7.5 million. Curiously, the announcement of Google's endowment was made at the World Economic Forum at Davos. The donation also includes Google's intention to provide Wikipedia editors with its high tech learning tools. Wired Magazine published an article that further defines the Google-WMF relationship over the years. With respect to Google's generous contribution, journalist Louise Matsakis writes, "but the decision isn’t altruistic... Google already uses Wikipedia content in a number of its own products.... The company also has used Wikipedia articles to train machine learning algorithms, as well as fight misinformation on YouTube." Now with Jimmy Wales' intention to take on the cause of fighting "fake news" – a cause also aligned to his personal Skeptic ideology as the ultimate arbitrator that determines what is real or fake -- Skeptic editors have free access to advanced algorithmic apps to proceed with their agenda to scrub Wikipedia of content favorable towards alternative medicine or content critical of the pharmaceutical empire.    Yet Google’s and Jimmy Wales’ mutual interests go beyond the construction of a pharmaceutical ruled society.  Brin and Wales first sealed a close relationship during their early efforts to counter the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Together both executives, among others, signed a joint Open Letter to the federal government opposing SOPA, which was coincidently around the same time as Brin’s half-million dollar donation. In 2014, in a reaction against legal issues over privacy matters, Google created an “Advisory Council.” Wales was one of its founding members.    In 2012, Google’s charitable arm, Google.org, initiated a collaboration with WMF’s WikiProject Medicine “to further improve the quality of articles” by recruiting and hiring “professional medical editors.”  Dr. James Heilman, a Canadian emergency room physician and a seasoned senior Wikipedia administrator who frequently comes to the defense of Skeptic Wikipedians, sits on the WMF’s Board of Trustees. Heilman is one of the founders of the Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMF) to advance its mission to give “every single person free access to the sum of all medical knowledge.” WPMF now has collaborative relationships with the National Institutes of Health, Cancer Research UK, Cochrane Collaboration, the University of California at San Francisco, the Wellcome Trust and several open-access medical journals.    Recently during the Covid-19 pandemic, WMF has strengthened its ties with the global medical establishment. Last October it entered a collaboration with the World Health Organization to assure that public health information and data about Covid-19 is regulated in accordance with the latest pronouncements made by the anointed authorities in the institutional medical establishment. Wikipedia already contains over 5,200 Covid-related entries in 175 languages and these are largely based upon WHO sources. It is estimated that this content is accessed at least a million times a day.  Part of the WMF’s commitment is to monitor and censor “the spread of misinformation” according to the WHO’s criteria.  In a New York Times article reporting on the new partnership, if this initial pilot Covid-19 project succeeds, it will be expanded to launch additional efforts “to counter misinformation regarding AIDS, Ebola, influenza, polio and dozens of other diseases.”   So where exactly in the cesspool of modern medicine and the toxic food, vaccine and the agro-chemical industries are we to discover truth. Few in the scientific and federal health agencies can be trusted anymore. Most are compromised and this distortion of truth for global leverage clearly extends throughout Google and Wikipedia. Rarely is a mainstream journalist trustworthy, and no one can be certain whether a paper appearing in a peer-reviewed science journal or an medical entry on Wikipedia is reliable or not. Even clinical physicians on the front lines of healthcare work in the dark. It is only after large numbers of injuries and deaths due to Agent Orange, DDT, life-threatening vaccine adverse reactions, a Vioxx scandal, or an epidemic of corporate liable opiate drug overdoses that a light bulb eventually goes on. But only for a limited time before it is quickly forgotten and goes dark again.    The reason for American medicine turning into the nation's largest and deadliest battlefield is because scientific corruption is legally protected to proceed with impunity. The Surgeon General, the heads of federal health agencies, drug makers, the insurance industry, medical schools and professional associations, Google and WMF, and the media operate as a single voice that the American health system is the best in the world when it is surely not. Corporate interests and massive profiteering control everything. Modern medicine has morphed into a religious cult that is incapable of self-reflection about its own vulnerabilities and failures. This hubris of power and domination plagues Google and the WMF equally. And numerous patients are being played for fools.      The fact is that all players in the architecture of our medical system are vulnerable to corruption. Private industry and government know this perfectly. The checks and balances between private and public interests have collapsed. Today, the medical regime is a single entity. All of its parts are consolidated and entwined into a monolithic behemoth to protect its bottom line. In our opinion Google and WMF have been co-opted to serve as the guardians of this culture of corruption. Therefore they both are equally culpable in the widespread destruction of the nation’s public health.    Yet we mustn’t expect that the trajectory of an emerging global pharmaceutical hegemony will experience a collapse anytime soon. Rather, with the aid of Google and WMF, it will increasingly monopolize the medical discourse and define the national policies shaping public health. And this requires greater efforts to censor and silence the medical critics and honest investigative journalists bringing light to the medical and scientific flaws upon which health policies and laws are based through the virtual technological apparatus and information control Google and WMF provides. In short, tech companies now control and dictate orders to the morally-deficient incompetents in Washington.   Yet the emergence of a pharmaceutical regime as a natural consequence of humanity being in the midst of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is unfolding to the delight of Jimmy Wales and his Skeptic denizens who worship his messianic mission to make all knowledge free to the world’s population. But the question has always been “whose knowledge?” Skepticm’s “pseudo-knowledge,” of course. It is not uncommon to find Skeptics acknowledging Wales as one of their own. Wales has provided plenty of assistance to Skeptics and on occasion has come to their defense in discussion groups. Replying to comments Wales wrote on Quora to offer his assistance to rid the world of homeopathy, the co-founder of Guerrilla Skeptics on Wikipedia Susan Gerbic replied:   “Jimmy you have already done more than anyone could possibly dream that can be done. You created the most amazing resource in the world. I mean that, not only in English but in every language possible…. Thank you. Allowing us editors to ‘do our job’ and keep these articles honest and correctly cited is enough. I can’t imagine what else you can do, my brain is teeny tiny compared to your mighty brain, if you come up with something please oh please let us in on it, we want to help.”   The pharmaceutical industry has no need to attack the competition of non-conventional and natural medicine on Wikipedia. Nor is there a need to hire or pay off Wikipedians to do this dirty work for them since Skeptics are already doing so freely or involuntarily, and Skeptic administrators receive the perks of being provided with Google’s algorithmic tools and apps to protect their message. It is a completely rigged game and Wales and the WMF seem to have every intention to keep it that way.   America’s 21st century technological god with a silicon-crafted body demands the sacrifice of the world’s children and elderly and persons for profit in its furnace of drugs and vaccines. John Milton and Beat poet Allen Ginsberg would surely agree. If alive we might hear Ginsberg howling against this devouring techno-Pharma empire on YouTube. From its humble beginnings, and with the technological resources and generous funding received from Google, Wikipedia has morphed into a chaotic war between truth and falsehoods amusingly ruled over by this postmodern Moloch. The dangerous fallout is that objectivity and ethics are being increasingly sacrificed on a cold virtual altar devoted to a perverted metaphysical realism disguised as medical science and fact.  

Another collaboration this week between mindwars and the awakening podcast Topics discussed - Bill Gates comes to the roundtable with the English Prime minister Boris Johnson to help the vaccine roll out for Britain. - Chief medical officer Chris Witty receives $40 million for a research project from the Gates foundation. - Chief scientific advisor and former executive with Glaxo smith Kline sir Patrick Vallance still has £600000 worth of shares with GSK. - Jeremy Farrar, scientific advisory group emergencies (SAGE) board member of the Global preparedness monitoring group(GPMB) and director of the welcome trust. - Ticketmaster going forward with digital ticket app to merge with health pass company to allow or not allow music goers into their venues depending upon test/vaccine result. - Roys personal dealings with the corrupt riged criminal court system. - Police in Italy stand in solidarity with protesters. https://loudwire.com/ticketmaster-covid-19-vaccination-negative-test/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/13159687/boris-bill-gates-national-vaccine/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebarweb All episodes of Mindwars can be found at https://anchor.fm/mindwars Mindwars Bitchute channel https://www.bitchute.com/channel/Gt4uHP3cjoCt/ Connect with Roy: All Episodes can be found at www.awakeningpodcast.org To Subscribe or find our videos https://linktr.ee/awakeningpodcast All other Podcasts https://linktr.ee/roycoughlan Video Can be see at https://www.bitchute.com/channel/y2XWI0VCPVqX/ Please like, share and subscribe to our channels as it really helps getting the message out their and keeping people awake!

Another collaboration this week between mindwars and the awakening podcast Topics discussed - Bill Gates comes to the roundtable with the English Prime minister Boris Johnson to help the vaccine roll out for Britain. - Chief medical officer Chris Witty receives $40 million for a research project from the Gates foundation. - Chief scientific advisor and former executive with Glaxo smith Kline sir Patrick Vallance still has £600000 worth of shares with GSK. - Jeremy Farrar, scientific advisory group emergencies (SAGE) board member of the Global preparedness monitoring group(GPMB) and director of the welcome trust. - Ticketmaster going forward with digital ticket app to merge with health pass company to allow or not allow music goers into their venues depending upon test/vaccine result. - Roys personal dealings with the corrupt riged criminal court system. - Police in Italy stand in solidarity with protesters. https://loudwire.com/ticketmaster-covid-19-vaccination-negative-test/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/13159687/boris-bill-gates-national-vaccine/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebarweb All episodes of Mindwars can be found at https://anchor.fm/mindwars Mindwars Bitchute channel https://www.bitchute.com/channel/Gt4uHP3cjoCt/ Connect with Roy: All Episodes can be found at www.awakeningpodcast.org To Subscribe or find our videos https://linktr.ee/awakeningpodcast All other Podcasts https://linktr.ee/roycoughlan Video Can be see at https://www.bitchute.com/channel/y2XWI0VCPVqX/ Please like, share and subscribe to our channels as it really helps getting the message out their and keeping people awake!

This week we talk to Jasmine Pradissitto, artist and physicist.  Jasmine introduces her self below in her biography, you can find out more on  Jasmine on her website https://www.pradissitto.com/ and she is on instagram and twitter.  “Just be you; everyone else is already taken.” Oscar WildeParadoxically, just being ‘you' is the hardest thing to be, especially when you feel compelled to change the system. For many, I am an artist; but my family would tell you, I am simply a dreamer. I was lucky as, from a very early age; my dreams were shaped by the intense colours of Italy. We had an Italian painter friend then, Eliot, who I apparently watched sitting from a step, for hours. I have never stopped drawing and making since.Born in Taunton to an Italian father and French mother, we moved to South London, where I still live and where my practice is based. My path to art was through the sciences, working for ICI for a brief stint and finally culminating with a Ph. D from UCL in 1996 on the Quantum behaviour of silicon. But I was also attending Goldsmiths College in the evening to study fine art. Like a lost melody that kept resonating in my head, the two worlds just seemed linked.In addition to painting, I then set up a successful, consultancy delivering creative science and maths to children and teachers and STEAM too, has crossed into my practise. Children are the most creative of all thinkers as they simply don't get ‘impossible'. In 2006, I finished a BA in Fine Art and since then, have shown extensively as well as taught and lectured at all levels including for companies such as Glaxo and The BBC. I am currently a Visiting Fellow, delivering a new body of lectures on Creativity, to Engineers and Scientists. This is leading me onto exciting new collaborations with businesses as well as more public speaking. Creativity and 'play' in any arena, really does strike me as a necessary evolution in an age of such scientific and technological possibilities. I believe that Artists and Art have an enormous responsibility in presenting a different perspective on the 21st Century Renaissance which is happening so very fast, especially now post-Covid.Apart my passion for making connections, I love open space, speed, simplicity yet paradox, time spent in the 'art cave', mind minestrone, good friends, belly laughs, nature and the sun on my back.We really are just the sum of all the things we experience and the people we meet. This holds truer for artists than for most. I have been so fortunate in the people who have added to the sum of my parts. I cannot thank you enough.“Every good artist paints what he is.” Jackson Pollock  Her path to art was through science.  Whilst completing a PhD from UCL on the Quantum behaviour of silicon in 1996 she was also attending Goldsmiths College in the evenings studying fine art. Art has always been her passion.Her ‘Flower Girl' sculpture currently displayed in the Horniman Museum garden uses pioneering pollution absorbing materials to clean the air around it.We talk to Jasmine about:What joy means to herHow she curates joy in her own lifeHow a tutor at art college gave her the freedom to merge science with artHer childhoodClimate change and living sustainablyIf you are a new listener to Portrait of a Londoner we would LOVE to hear from you!Join the conversation or give us feedback by contacting us on:Instagram: @portrait_of_a_londonerFacebook:  @Portrait of a LondonerTwitter: @portraitpodcast Or email us at portraitofalondoner@gmail.comWe are completely self funded so if you would like to support us we would be extremely gratefulhttps://www.patreon.com/user?u=34411265As always please rate review and subscribe! 

•Vamos a tener otra reunión con padres y madres de Ayotzinapa: AMLO•Sanofi y Glaxo inician ensayos de vacuna contra covid en humanos

In this episode, special guest Dr. Terry McInnis joins us to talk about what we’ve learned about the coronavirus, since she spoke with us back in April. Terry began her career as a physician in the Air Force, and has since held many roles as chief medical director and chief medical officer at large and small companies, including GE, Michelin, Glaxo, and most recently, leading the value-based care organization at LabCorp. Today, Terry shares her perspectives on what we know, several months in, about Covid-19. She shares updates around the symptoms people are experiencing, concerns over the long-term impact of the virus, and the hot topics that are on all of our mind – When will we see a vaccine? Is it safe to send my kids back to school? What kind of mask is best?The not-to-be-missed episode ends with some Q-and-A with Medecision’s Liberators, and was recorded on Monday, August 10, 2020.

Max: Welcome to the Recruitment Hackers Podcast, a show about innovation, technology and leaders in the recruitment industry. Brought to you by Talkpush, the leading recruitment automation platform.Hello everybody. And welcome to the Recruitment Hackers podcast with Max. Today. I'm pleased to welcome Elaine Davis, Chief Human Resources Officer at Continuum who is going to tell us about her 25 years of experience in the industry. And we'll focus a little bit on the recent crisis we've been through and how it's affected the talent acquisition team at Continuum, and her experience working with some of the largest high volume employers in the world. Elaine has worked with Conduit, Xerox, JSK, and has vast experience in sourcing, and the art of sourcing at scale —, which is how we started our, email exchange, Elaine. So to kick things off, welcome to the show, Elaine. Great to have you here. Elaine: Thank you, max. Appreciate it. Max: So, would you mind starting off by telling us a little bit about Continuum? (your current company). Elaine: Oh , yeah.  So continuum began life as a carve out from a larger company called Conduent. And, Continuum has been standing on its own,  since February, 2019.  It's primarily the customer care business from the Conduent company. Conduent had been a carve out from  Xerox, a huge company.And I was with Xerox at that time. And with Conduent. I left Conduent right after it actually became a standalone company itself in 2017 and took a couple of years off. Did some work in venture capital and got interested in HR...  Yeah, well, the HR, well… I enjoyed the venture capital space.  I was sort of the firm's expert in HR technology, the HR technology space, where there's a lot of really interesting things happening, particularly in talent acquisition.And then I got a call from the folks that were carving out Continuum and they asked  if I'd  come back into a more standard corporate role and  set up the HR timekeeping, payroll and communications functions for Continuum. So I said, yes. Max: Timekeeping, payroll and Talent Acquisition.Elaine: And all of HR. And, Oh, I also run communications, which is the fun part of my job. Max: Great. Well, I'm happy that you got to experience basically, kind of like, can we say that you went from a bigger, to a smaller, to a smaller company? Are you, are you feeling that, you're moving towards the more human sized organizations over the last 20 years?Elaine: You know, the problems and the issues and the things that need to be solved for are the same, no matter what size the company is. You know. It's all human behavior related and it's all revenue related. So what I would say is fun about being in a smaller company and we're about, 15 to 16 thousand people or so, about a half a billion in revenue.It''s fun to sort of own a big piece of that. So, I mentioned various planks in my world. Right? It's a lot, but it's manageable, for me. And, I get to impact a whole, a pretty big swath of daily operations in the company, and that's fun. And some of my previous experiences with big companies, I had great jobs and was working with great people. But, boy, it's hard to turn a big ship around. Max: Well, 15,000 it's pretty massive already. That's what you said, 15 to 16 K was this headcount and Continuum today?Elaine: Yeah, we, we go up and down seasonally. We have some pretty big healthcare clients and there's a portion of their year where they're doing healthcare open enrollment.And so we increase our head count to support them on a seasonal basis so we can get up to 18,000 depending on the client and the time of the year. But to me, it feels small because when I was at Xerox, it was over a hundred thousand then, at Glaxo Smith Kline. we were over a hundred thousand, so 15 to 18 seems very small to me.Max: Okay. Well, one day I hope Talkpush can...  I don't know if we want 15,000 employees, but if we could have 15,000 users, that'll be a good start, you know, at least two years before we get there.  Well for our listeners who aren't familiar with the concept of a carve out, this is when a company's shareholders decide they're going to take a piece of the business and it's going to run better on its own than it does as part of the mothership.And you're part of two carve-outs, but within the same group. So that's pretty unique experience in itself. Can you share with me, what do you think is, you know, maybe the specifics are deal by deal, but what do you think is the motivation behind a carve out? Is it  a size question where you think you run better and faster at 15 K, then you run at 50?Elaine: I really can't pretend to understand the motivation of the carve-outs other than it's financially driven. And I think it has more to do with stripping out underperforming assets.  So that the company left behind can, focus on it's,  I guess I use an old nineties word, you know, core competencies,  in the Conduit,  Continuum carve-out, Customer Care business was not performing and Conduit wanted to strip it out and let it stand on its own.It's actually been a great business on its own and not weighed down by the larger infrastructure of a big company. You know, you're right. I've been part of some interesting transactions. When I was first at Glaxo, in the United States, we did a hostile acquisition of a company called Burroughs Wellcome company, also a British pharmaceutical. That was quite a ride. And then Glaxo merged with SmithKline Beecham. That was a wild ride. Massive, pharmaceutical engines coming together to try to build research pipelines and get drugs on market, faster deal with the patent expirations, which were financially devastating for a lot of the pharmaceutical companies.So I've been involved in some interesting transactions.  Almost always in an HR tech and HR technology role, sometimes in a commercial role. I've done Commercial Strategy and Marketing for businesses as well. So through all of it, I mean, I've had great opportunities to understand the levers of  profitability.And big or small, I mean, in the end, you're trying to solve the same problems and that's even true in Talent Acquisition. Big or, small, you know, you have to make your way in a crowded field of employers and figure out a way to differentiate yourself, attract the best people and make their onboarding as gentle as possible,  and to get them as productive as possible. And particularly in the call center business, that is super important because after you've hired people, you're training them. And that entire time that you've got people that you've hired, onboarded and you're training them, you're not generating any revenue off of that.That's an expense that a call center company has. It has to shoulder until you can get that person on the phone or on a chat or whatever, to start driving, to start building revenue. Max: I heard somebody told me that if the new hire, the agent, in a call center environment stays there for three months, that's long enough to pay for the hire. Anything beyond that is where the margin starts  to be generated. Elaine: That's probably about right. Actually. But I will say that, I have been very focused on driving down cost per hire. I actually had to laugh the other day because at first I thought it was a joke, but somebody... I get a lot of... everybody, all your listeners and you get a lot of marketing emails right?And I got one from a company that wanted to tell me that they could help me hire a call center agents at the low, low price of a thousand dollars per hire. And I actually thought it was funny because I can hire — my metrics are under a $100 dollars per hire. So yeah. So, because everybody counts things differently.Max: Yeah. I need to make sure we're counting the same thing here because a hundred dollars… Are we talking marketing cost per hire or total cost per hire?Elaine: I am talking,  marketing and assessment and background investigation per hire. Yeah. Max: Amazing. Which geography?Elaine:  This is U.S.Max: Wow. Elaine: Yeah,  it can actually be more expensive, not in U.S dollars, but it can be a little pricier on a cost per hire basis than some of the international markets, because some of the backgrounding is more extensive and much more expensive to actually run.Max: Well,  I think that's a great metric. It seems that,  you know, given that we're entering a recession or in the middle of a recession, that people will take another look at cost as a driver for decision.  But of course, bringing the cost down also means that you can hire from a broader pool and you can be a little bit more picky, perhaps. It's a lever to increase quality, eventually, and retention, which as you were saying is the real cost of the business, because you've got high turnover. So if you bring the cost down, then, you know, a wider funnel means the whole journey benefits from it. Elaine: So you're absolutely right. That's insightful. You understand what I'm doing. I have a huge funnel. The other day.... and we're not in a rapid, robust hiring phase right now, today. We will be ramping up shortly, but right now we've come through the pivot. Out of the brick and mortar to people's homes and establishing our work at home model and trying to keep things reasonably stable.  So we haven't been doing a lot of hiring,  I think in June,  we need to hire just in the United States, around 6 or 700 people.That's not a lot for us. I checked into our lead flow and we have 14,000 leads. So,  That's a lot to hire 5 or 600 people. Right. So the funnel is wide open.  And you're right. That is what helps me get to— there's  goalposts or gates along the way. Right.  If you're going to talk, you know,  we're going to make it super easy to connect with us. Super, super simple. Whereas, you know, we have quick apply. We're scraping an XML feed. We are contacting you within seconds of you showing interest in us. Literally. I have a very, very rapid response. And then there's some gate posts, right? You got to schedule an interview with us and you gotta show up for the interview. And then assuming  you get through that and it's not terribly difficult to get through it, to be honest.You've got to go through our assessment process. So people start to self select out. They don't want to do those things. It's not as easy as they thought it was going to be, they maybe don't want to take an assessment. So people start to self select out. But if I'm doing all those things right, and I have enough at the top of the funnel, I'm going to end up with, you know, I overfill classes every week. So in call center, you're hiring training classes, right?  So you might have a training class, I think we have one starting on July 6th. We have 400 people starting, so I'll hire 480. I'll actually hire and onboard that many because, you know, the final gate post is, or mile marker, or whatever we call it is people actually showing up for the training, right.They actually need to show up, pass their drug screen, pass the background and they have to show up. So there's a lot of ways that people can fall out along the way. So I absolutely have to have that funnel wide open with a big pool of people. So I can end up with the people that I need at the very end.Max: Yeah. you can,  you know, get mad and scream yourself,  mute, at candidates for not showing up and dropping out. But, you can also accept the fact that, well, I mean, these are positions, which are not necessarily, you know, long term career plans and it's okay to get some dropout. You got to build around that. So completely agree with you.  I'm still trying to digest your $100 dollars cost per hire. I remember seeing those studies that said that even for call center employees, a $1000 dollars cost per hire was the industry norm just a few years ago. And obviously being in a in a buyer's market, if you're an employer where there's going to be a lot more job seekers out there in this market today we're, you know, in the middle of a global recession.  But, then of course there were all these other factors.So where do you think you got to, how did you, I mean, first of all, was a thousand dollars per hire, ever a number that was reasonable to you, at some point in your 25 year history in talent acquisition?Elaine: I can tell you that when I was with Xerox. When Xerox owned what became Conduent, Xerox had about 140,000 people in the company.This is a short several years ago, right. And 100,000 of those were BPO people. And the other 30,000 were the traditional document technology business, right, that we all think of. When we think about Xerox, we think about the machine, right.  And the paper. But, a 100,000 of that was a very big BPO company.And I ran a lot of the HR business for that company and I ran Talent Acquisition. And  we processed a million candidates in a 12 month period, candidates, applicants to end up with about 85,000 hires. And  we were probably spending more than a thousand dollars per hire. It was such an overwhelming huge business and I was running it, so I can say this, we weren't doing it well. We didn't have control of our financials. We didn't know what we were spending. It was really super messy. Right? It was messy.Max: You said 85,000 hires and a $1,000 dollars per hire. That's like $85 million dollars.Elaine: Well, you know, it was geographic. So in the U S we were spending a thousand dollars to hire, but in other geographies, we were not spending that much. I mean, my budget wasn't quite 85 million, but it was very, very large and I never felt like I really had control of the process anywhere in the world.It was messy. It was a huge company. And then of course, Xerox divested that. And then it was divested again. So, you know, it's hard to keep track of all of the numbers. That's maybe why the shareholders were not happy. Max: Well,  I've had many opportunities to sell to companies because Finance or Procurement was looking into TA and thinking “I don't know where the money is going.”Elaine: It's a mess. And I'll say one of the things that I really appreciated about being part of a carve out. So we're, we're owned by a private equity firm in Los Angeles called Skyview Capital. And the people in that firm they're sort of industry and function agnostic.They have a variety of companies that they either own, or they're heavily invested in from food processing to a cold brew coffee company, to our company, a security company. It's interesting. It's kind of all over the map. And what's been great about being part of that experience is that they're just trying to solve problems and make money.So when I joined about a year ago, the company Continuum had been stood up for a couple of months, had been carved out and they were trying to get their arms around it and figure out what the business model was and how we were making money. Or if we were making money and how things were working. And the first thing they saw was that the recruiting engine was broken. And how they figured that out is because the revenue engine was sputtering.And that's because in the call center business, if you don't have people in the center to answer the phone, you're not going to make any money. Recruiting drives everything. Max: You get penalties. Penalties for being slow to hire. Elaine: Oh, sure you do. Yeah. So recruiting is the revenue engine. You need the people in the seats answering the calls or you're not going to make any money. So they very quickly saw that when I joined, they were laser focused on how do you hire people in this environment? And they were not HR people. They weren't Talent Acquisition people. They were smart people, some with deep technology backgrounds and they just tore the thing apart and said, we're going to solve this problem one step at a time. And they did, and they helped us build a really phenomenal lead generation machine, an AI based machine that we use. And I think it's our competitive secret sauce I can hire faster and cheaper than any of my competitors.Absolutely. Hands down every day, all day long. Max: And something I've noticed as well. Some of my hardest, and I mean that in a complimentary manner, hardest customers to work with are those who do not come from an HR and TA background, but who come from Operations or Finance. Because they're like, everything's on the table, right? Why are we doing this assessment? Why are those two things not merged together? Do you really need to ask 10 questions, etc, etc. Why aren't we spending more time on this channel? That's more cost effective, but I guess it's the cost of like these relationships, right? When, if you're in one place for too long.Elaine: You know I've spent  a lot of hours at this company trying to reshape how we do business. And I thought I knew how to do transformations because as a veteran of big companies, you know, you're going to go through one or two transformations. And, I never felt like a lot got accomplished by any of them in the really big companies I was part of. They were just a lot of PowerPoint decks and consultants in the room. And what's been interesting about this experience has been working with our owners, our private equity owners and people that they've brought in to help.  Yeah, in the beginning they would say to me, well, I said, you know what?This is an advertising problem. We have a recruitment marketing problems. So I'm going to go solve our recruiting issue with recruitment marketing tools and advertising. And I need to hire this advertising firm and that one. And they said, hold up. No, we're not convinced it's an advertising problem. You need to prove that to us. So we went through a lot of exercises of me trying to prove what I believed because of my long background in Talent Acquisition and in HR. And I was wrong. They showed me how my thinking really was kind of mired in what my background was and what my belief system was.And they showed me that just by walking through and solving problem by problem at a very detailed and basic level, I came to different conclusions. And that was hard. Max: You just told us Elaine that you have a huge front of the funnel. And hence, naturally if advertising was not the secret sauce, the secret to making this, wide funnel work, where are you getting all those leads, for so cheap?Elaine: Well, I think that we had advertising, but we weren't capturing. The game now — everybody knows how to generate leads. The game now is converting. It's assessing and converting. So we now run contests as we've moved from using our recruiting engine in the U.S to our other markets, Dominican Republic, Philippines, Netherlands, Jamaica. We run games with our recruiters to show who can convert the most at quality. So  what we did was we simply moved the problem down the body of the snake, right. In the beginning, we weren't getting leads. So then we got a bunch of leads and then we had to figure out, okay, how do we convert them?So we worked on converting them. And then we thought, oh gosh, we need to convert the right people. So we worked on assessment, so we just keep moving the problem further down our snake. You know, now we're kind of through, we've gotten through getting the right people. We've got great assessment metrics in place. We reshaped our backgrounding, to lower the barrier, but not the bar for us to bring people in. One thing about the call center business and one of the reasons I like it is that it's a first opportunity for a lot of people to, you know, to put food on the table for their families all over the world. It's an entry level opportunity for people that don't have a lot of opportunities. Max: it's not sexy for people who have been a few years in their career necessarily. Although you do have veteran call center agents as well. Yeah, but it's easy to forget, you know, what it's like to be a 20 year old coming out of school. I mean I  was paralyzed at the thought of picking up the phone and talking to somebody just 15 years ago. It seems completely insane to me, but you know, I remember that. Elaine: Yeah, and in some countries, it's the difference between what stands in front of them and, and starvation. I mean, it really is.It's an opportunity for people in developing countries who don't have any opportunity, particularly women to put food on the table. And it's also a job that can be a second chance for somebody. And there's no shame in being an employer who can offer somebody a second chance.it's not a glamorous sexy job, but we have some examples in the company of people that have gone from basic call center agents to Supervisors, Operations Managers, they switch over to training. They come into recruiting. Max: I've loved it. I've been dealing with this industry for four or five years now.And, I feel absolutely inspired by, you know, the fact that it drives the launch of so many careers and it helps so many families. So I love it. I love just the high volume space for that reason. It's just how many people can you impact. And I wanted to ask you about the recent experience with the work from home transition, and how it's affected the morale of your team, of people who are not driving to work anymore, working from their PJ's shaving, et cetera. Are you starting to feel, you know, the weight of this lockdown affect the morale or if people are just  finding it beautiful, the new normal?Elaine: From a corporate standpoint, you know, my global HR, payroll, etc. teams we've almost always worked remotely. when Conduent released this company, when it was carved out, we didn't really have headquarters. And people just worked where they worked.They left their office at Conduent and moved into their homes. So from an exempt perspective, we've all been home for quite a long time and we know how to work that way in Recruiting and Talent Acquisition. We're in a cloud. My recruiters are all over the world and the model that I'm running is, if I have a lot of volume coming into the U.S, a lot of leads coming in, and my U.S team is asleep, then my Jamaican team will pick that up and do the interviews or my Philippines. So I'm running a kind of 24 hour global model for grabbing those leads and converting them. So we were very accustomed to that, but ...When COVID hit us in early March in the U.S, so the leadership, most of the leadership is in the U.S. Initially we felt kind of paralyzed. We weren't sure what to do or what was going to happen, but we quickly realized that we needed to get everybody out of those centers and home before we were told to — all over the world, and we have 14 locations, Europe, Asia, etc, like our competitors do.And everybody was sort of working that from a different angle. How much revenue can we save? How much, you know, what kind of profitability can we gain? What do we have to do with managing our clients? What are they thinking? And I was kind of focused on what do we have to do to make sure that these people can continue to put food on the table?That was where I came from. I wanted to make sure — and I made sure people knew it. So when we told staff around the world, come to the center today and be prepared to walk out with your computer and, you know, whatever else they needed to be productive at home. I made sure that they understood that we're doing this because your health and safety and your ability to generate an income to take care of your family is the most important thing to this company. And if we do all those things right, and support you, the revenue and the profitability are going to come. And you know what, I wasn't even sure I believed that myself in the beginning, because it was so chaotic and it was so hard in the Philippines, they were shutting everything down. We had to hire vans to get people out of the centers, with their computers. We had to send people out to people's homes. People were locked in their homes. It felt chaotic to me. But for me as an HR professional, I just kept focusing on what do I have to do to make sure these folks can buy what they need to feed their families? And I made sure people knew it and I think it really helped coalesce our company around that feeling that, yes, it's not a cliche, we really are in this together and we're going to help you so that you can help our customers. And by doing that, we're all going to get through this one way or the other. Max: I think it sounds like I went through the same thing you did.  And for me it was really helpful that I was, you know, I was a professional when 2000 and 2009, the 2000-2001 crisis, and then 2008. As the world falls down around you, and we hadn't had a real crisis of this magnitude since 2008, then you can, you can be a rock, even if you don't a hundred percent believe in it as the walls are falling down. Elaine: Yeah. I thought about, there's that sort of famous Ted talk by Anne Cuddy. Who's a Researcher. I think she's a linguist. I could be wrong, but I think she's a linguist and she uses that term, fake it till you make it.So I just kept thinking, we're going to get through this. Everybody's going to keep a job. We're going to be able to meet payroll. We're going to be able to service our customers. And I just kept saying, this is where we're going. You know, in a crisis, you got to pick a direction and march and just go and bring as many people with you as you can.And then the other great saying is, of course, never let a good crisis go to waste. So we used the crisis to go back to our customers and say, look, we're a work-at-home company now. And everything we do from now to the foreseeable future, which could be tomorrow, actually the way things are going, we're going to just be making that model more robust. And we're going to change how we hire and who we hire. Now we're looking for people who are perfectly happy to work at home, as opposed to people that are doing it because they have to.So we just took that first mover position and said, we're a work-at-home company, and this is how we're going to do it. As opposed to, sometimes in call center, you kind of get told by your customer how you're going to do things, how you're going to hire — there's a lot of rules. It's a commoditized business. The providers don't have a lot of say, and we've had a little bit of opportunity to say, look, we pivoted faster than any of your other channel partners. And this is true. It's a true statement. We pivoted faster. So, we're moving down this road really quick and come with us and we'll be the better for it.Max: Nice.  I think that this crisis has also been an opportunity for us where some companies were waiting to do digital transformation, kind of sitting and waiting for a reason because you can only really take on one or two big transformation initiatives every year. And they were, you know, that gave them the extra nudge.So we got, obviously things slowed down to almost a standard standstill in March and April. But since then, you know, we're having some good discussions. One thing, I guess, how do you adapt your recruitment process to hire work-from-home agents? I guess you're looking for, you said, the more autonomous people. Maybe check their internet speed? Any other tips and advice on how to adapt the recruitment process for work from home. Elaine: Well, you got to make decisions about — so just focusing on the United States, you know, where we had, I think, 13 or so locations, just in the U.S. So we were very limited to these geographic markets. And most of them are where our competitors are too.So El Paso, big center for us, we have a thousand people, 1300 people in the center and all of our competitors are right down the road from us. So that drives a certain way of recruiting and a certain way of thinking about retention and a certain amount of kind of looking around the corner to see what your competitor's doing and what kind of taco truck they're bringing in that day.So in the beginning when we started to think about hiring, we thought, well, gosh, we should just still hire around those locations because what if we go back, we don't want to have people all over Texas, we want them near El Paso. And then we, pretty quickly, threw that out the window and said, forget it, we're a work-at-home company now. So, you know, we went through a process of looking at the various states that had attractive labor markets, attractive tax implications. Like any company, we ran the gamut of where we want to hire, where we want to try to source candidates from and we came up with some pretty interesting things. Max: So you went full, work from home.Elaine: Pretty much. Yeah. But we're staying away from the coasts, you know, because those are expensive places to do business. And we have a lot of data about where the people are, the kind of people that we think would be happy working for us and want to stay with us. And we've got a lot of data on how they want to be paid and we're kind of playing with some of those models. And we're offering different money and incentives in different metro areas or in different rural areas. I mean, we're playing with a lot of information. Max: I'd like to point you to,  I'll send you the link. I'll put it for our listeners too, the link, the link to the salary grading. I mean, I think they phased it out, but there was a company called Buffer, which specialized in social media  blasting and communication. They were work-from-home from inception and they had a salary grid that was per state. They would openly share to all of their employees, you know, for the same exact role, same exact expertise. Your salary is going to be 20% more because you're based here. And the transparency is something that is part of their core values. So it works for them, but basically they even, I think they still do to this day, publish the salaries of every one of their employees online.Elaine: That's a bridge too far for me. I've always been in favor of salary transparency in terms of showing people what the range is, showing what the midpoint is showing what the geographic differential is. I've always said that companies should do this. But I've also always said that people shouldn't do performance ratings.I've never believed in performance ratings and I still don't. Assigning a number to people based on how they perform is just not something I've ever been interested in. But that's a different discussion.Max: Yes. Agreed it's a different discussion. I have already taken a good chunk of your time. And I really think we got a lot of great insights there about,  BPO industry and thank you for sharing. I wanted to ask you one last question, which is if there's one area where you feel like there's still some automation left? I mean, it sounds like you've built such a great automated journey for your candidates. And you've talked about how you kind of started at the front of the funnel and then, you know, eventually tried to automate screening and then improve the quality of the people's screens so that you improve retention. Now as you look through this entire end to end journey, is there still some pockets of opportunity? What's the next piece that you want to automate, or you want to accelerate? Elaine: The part that I'm not doing yet is you know, the integration of the technical components of Talent Acquisition can always be improved. There's a lot of people out there building interesting stuff and trying to connect it to ATSs.And that's all pretty interesting, but I'm kind of, I feel like I've kind of moved beyond that. What I need to do. And I think all Talent Acquisition professionals should be thinking about is, following that lead through conversion to trainee, to productive employee and tying. I can't really know. I shouldn't be tracking cost per hire if I'm doing this right.What I should be tracking is value per hire. So how that person that I scraped off of an indeed quick apply site, how much value did that person bring to my company? That's what I should be tracking. I'm tracking the wrong thing. Because it's the easy thing to track. But if I'm doing all these things right, and I'm going to the right places to source my people, I'm training them effectively. I also have operational training, so all of those new hires come to me to be trained to answer phones for our customer service chat or whatever. I should be able to point to what's the value of that class that I started on July 6th, six months later, what value did they drive for my company?And I should be able to prove that. So that's what I'm thinking about next. Right? Max: We've got to find a name for this magical number.Elaine: Yes. Max: We have the CPH, CPL marketing CPH, MCPS. Now we need to have...Elaine: Yeah, but isn't that the end? I mean, that's the end game, right? What value did that lead that I converted bring to our company and how do I express that value? That's that's the name of the game. That's what I'm trying to do. We're trying to make money. We're trying to be profitable. So I have to distill that. And that will really tell me whether I've been successful with that front of the funnel or not. I'm measuring it along the way, but the end game still hasn't been answered and I'd like to get there before the next crisis. I'd like to know the answer to that question soon. Call me in a year. Max: I will and I thank you.  And I want to end it on this positive note and your contagious laughter. And thinking about, it's wonderful that you're already thinking about the next crisis, so thanks for your time. Thanks for sharing.And we'll be in touch in a years time. Elaine: Thanks, max. Good to see you.Max: There you have it. That was Elaine Davis, Chief Human Resources Officer at Continuum with some awesome insights on how to build a recruitment marketing machine that delivers thousands of hires at less than a hundred dollars cost per hire in North America. What a performance. Thank you, Elaine, for all your insights.And I hope you enjoyed the show. Please, if you didn't, subscribe to the recruitment hackers podcast for more of the similar content. Please leave a review. That will help us get the word out there. And, please listen to one of our other episodes. Thank you very much and hope to see you on the podcast soon.

Have you heard Heather Small's iconic number “Proud”? I heard this song for the first time in 2000 at a packed auditorium under dazzling lights, great acoustics and mesmerizing visuals followed by a loud roar of applause as Glaxo and SmithKline announced their merger. Half a dozen or so corporate executives gathered on stage to unveil the newly formed entity's vision, mission, values, and strategic priorities. Do more, feel better, live longer - powerful words that make up GlaxoSmithKline's purpose statement. As an impressionable young executive in her first job, I was gob smacked and filled with pride in the work I was doing and love for the company. Fast forward a few decades and those words and Heather Small's song still stay with me and guide my work and life. In my work with startups and SMEs, advice revolves around 3Ps - purpose, performance, and pay. - Start with “purpose” to define the talent strategy, values, a robust organization structure and a strategic workforce plan tied in with business milestones. All the hard wiring of the soft stuff and the key pillars of a great recruiting machine. - Put in place a coaching culture to deliver extraordinary results. - Finally, craft a meaningful reward strategy that links purpose driven performance. In my work with more established firms, it is about moving from process to impact. At a time when corporations around the world are moving beyond the narrow definition of maximizing shareholder value, and expanding their scope to include the well-being of the larger community and all stakeholders, a purpose led goal and culture are at the heart of everything they wish to accomplish. Purpose statements are democratic in that they apply to companies big and small, communities and individuals. Are well-crafted purpose statements the purview of large corporations with smart copywriters? How does purpose guide the entrepreneur and the small business owner? To find out, I started interviewing some remarkable people who have gone on to do great things in their lives and put those interviews out in my podcast, Tell it like it is. Season 1 covered some great stories including some smash hits like Lessons from the Special Forces featuring Abhay Sapru and Help Thy Neighbour featuring the residents' association of a large condo. Others that I thought had tremendous potential are the Beer Geek featuring Navin Mittal and Feeding Fellow Indians featuring a bunch of volunteer professionals who went on to provide 5MM meals during the lockdown. I've had great fun listening to and telling their stories and in the process, I learnt something new from each interview. Here are some of the things I learnt: - Interviewing is an art, it involves tremendous research and even after 21 years spent in interviewing people in my day job, there is still something new to learn each time. - Building a narrative is key to storytelling. - Editing is tough, ruthless and I have tremendous respect for editors who literally polish rough stories into shimmering diamonds. - Once an episode is published, it no longer remains “my story”. It belongs to the listeners. They react to it in ways known and unknown and I don't think I will ever be able to predict or program audience response. As Season 1 comes to an end, and I take some time to recharge and research new stories, I thank you for listening and sending me your love, criticism and feedback. Season 2 will be out soon with new stories, tighter edits and some fantastic people. Do check in. Stay well, stay safe. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/manisha-kadagathur/message

A puzzle that may baffle the inquiring mind is how a college dropout, a computer nerd without any notable biological or medical background, and at one time the wealthiest person in the world before being unseated by the self-centered playboy Jeff Bezos, could rise to become one of humanity's leading spokespersons about vaccination. After transitioning away from Microsoft to work full time for his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006, funding vaccine development and agricultural genetic engineering seems to have turned into one of Bill Gates' deeper passion. in the past, he has been a public protector of Monsanto's chemical-dependent GMOs and continues to promote the agro-chemical paradigm throughout the developing world. Although there is nothing wrong with philanthropic enterprises for causes we believe in, what is disturbing is that a non-medical expert has assumed the role of being a national thought leader on vaccination safety and policy. What people do is less important than their motivations and intentions.  Personality- wise, it is no secret that Gates was a difficult boss to work with. He was known to be extremely critical, belligerent, sarcastic and his anger would often degrade employees. He was a fierce taskmaster as the Washington Post reported, and Fortune magazine listed him as an "egotistical jerk" along with other billionaires such Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos.  Now with COVID-19 upon us, some, such as NPR, would call Gates prophetic for warning about viral pandemics five years ago. However, there is nothing extraordinarily novel, and definitely not Delphian, in this pronouncement. Gates is certainly no oracle. As personal experience confirms, such conversations among scientists have gone on in the corridors and cafeterias of biotech firms for over three decades. More likely is Gates simply fear mongering to turn his enormous investments into vaccine research and development for a coronavirus vaccine with the outcome being greater profits? To call Gates a vaccine and genetic engineering fanatic is an understatement. While lecturing at the elitist TED 2010 conference in Long Beach, CA, he slipped a statement while speaking about the dangers of climate change and over population: “Vaccines? I love them.” His admission was made in the context of his philanthropic strategy and vaccines play a crucial role in his firm conviction that population reduction is an urgent priority for the survival of humanity. Of course the question that arises is who should be eliminated from the population? And who is elected from the public to make such decisions? The short answer is no one. Nevertheless this agenda is covertly proceeding through foundations, international agencies, non-profits, and private industry. In 2000, the Gates Foundation founded the International Finance Facility for Immunization (GAVI) and that organization's Global Fund for Children's Vaccines. GAVI is a global collaboration that includes governments health ministries, the Rockefeller Foundation, the World Bank, WHO, the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers, UNICEF, corporate vaccine makers, and other influential entities. All of these are zealot vaccination promoters. One of the organization's goals is to vaccinate every child in Africa. In 2019, GAVI reported having reached over 960 million campaign immunizations in developing countries.  In his deconstruction of Bill Gates' charitable agenda, F. William Engdahl writes, “Vaccinating a child who then goes to drink feces-polluted river water is hardly healthy in any respect. But of course cleaning up the water and sewage systems of Africa would revolutionize the health conditions of the Continent.” Far more effective would be the Foundation donating its billions to improve sanitation and hygiene, and provide nutrition to the 2.6 billion people who have little to none, for increasing clean water sources so 900 million global residents can have access to drinkable water (now at 1 in 3 Africans). Instead, the Foundation could be funding thousands of health clinics focusing on the chronic illnesses these populations suffer from most. This is simply common sense. “Bad water,” says the Stockholm International Water Institute's director, Anders Bentell, “kills more people than HIV, malaria and war together.”  And globally, contaminated water, which kills approximately 9 million people annually, is a far more serious crisis than the evidence now indicates for coronavirus.  Over the past several years, the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet has printed a series of in-depth analyses of the Gates Foundation with disturbing revelations. In a September 2008 article, “Misfinancing Global Health: A Case for Transparency in Disbursements and Decision Making,” the authors' investigation came to the conclusion that aside from excessive funding of high profile Western institutions and organizations, there was “a heavy bias in funding towards malaria and HIV/AIDS, with relatively little investment into tuberculosis, maternal and child health, and nutrition–with chronic diseases being entirely absent from its spending portfolio.” And a later study by Dr. David McCoy from the Center for International Health found that “the grants made by the Foundation do not reflect the burden of disease endured by those in deepest poverty.” None of these findings have been covered to any extent by mainstream media nor any governing body. Seemingly Gates is riding on the coat tails of the COVID-19 panic that has infected much of the global community, when in fact, some analyses, such as one recently out of Stanford, indicate that the danger is likely over exaggerated. Earlier this month, Gates announced he would be spending billions of dollars to fund seven separate coronavirus vaccine development initiatives. As a result, his Foundation has emerged as perhaps the foremost leader in the vaccine industry's response to the pandemic. Gates has gained free entrance into the offices and boardrooms of all the leading players savoring the opportunity to launch a fast-tracked coronavirus vaccine that may likely be made mandatory for Americans, including National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Disease director Anthony Fauci, the CDC's vaccine advisory committee and the WHO. Thus far, Gates has shown reservation against a hasty launch of a vaccine that will likely not have been reviewed long enough to determine its safety and efficacy in long-term immunity. During a White House press conference with Trump, Fauci indicated a vaccine might take a year or two before approval. The anti-science Trump replied he would prefer it were a couple months. There is a strong possibility that like the influenza vaccine, immunity will wane quickly. We may recall that Fauci aggressively pushed for fast-tracking the H1N1 flu vaccine during the swine flu epidemic that never appeared as predicted. He was called out on this failure by Senator Tom Coburn for advocating a vaccine found to be only 30% effective in trials conducted in Thailand. Recent studies out of Shanghai already show that 30 percent of those who contract a wild COVID-19 virus show only minor or no neutralizing antibodies. And South Korea is now reporting cases of individuals getting infected with COVID-19 a second time. Other seasonal coronaviruses, which are only mild common colds, return repeatedly and indicate infection triggers only short temporary immune responses and even then not in everyone. However, not all leading vaccine advocates are on board with rushing a vaccine. During a Philadelphia Inquirer interview with rotavirus vaccine inventor Dr. Paul Offit at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Offit warned against efforts being made to get a vaccine on the market as swiftly as possible. This is a virus, according to Offit, that we still know very little about. He stated, "If you're going to be testing this in otherwise healthy people who are very, very unlikely to die from this infection, you better make sure it's safe." He offers the example of the poorly developed dengue vaccine that was tested in Latin America and the Philippines and found to increase the risk of dengue shock syndrome. The same could happen with a COVID-19.  Peter Hotez, Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor University, developed a vaccine against SARS in 2016 before money dried up. Yet in a recent appearance before Congress, he testified a coronavirus vaccine could have a "unique potential safety problem."  We should be warned that questions would remain if and whether Hotez's team were to get a vaccine into advanced trials. An earlier University of Texas effort to develop a vaccine against the SARS coronavirus was appalling. Despite inducing neutralizing antibodies, all the mice in the trial exhibited immunopathological events in the lungs. More recently, a global analytics firm, Clarivate, investigated two COVID19 vaccines in the pipeline that have reached later clinical trials. Their report estimates that it will require over 5 years for developing a safe vaccine and it will likely be only 5 percent effective. In other words, it is an enormous waste of funding.  Gates, on the other hand, seems to be ignoring these warnings from persons who have devoted their lives to vaccine development. He is stubbornly determined, irrespective of money spent, to get a COVID19 vaccine onto the market. A question that arises in our minds is how concerned Gates might be of vaccine safety issues. If the past is any indication of his priorities, it appears his focus is to increase vaccine compliance while ignoring the high incidence of serious adverse events and deaths. Bobby Kennedy Jr. at the Children's Health Defense organization has listed some of the vaccination debacles that are directly associated with his Foundation: In 2002, operatives in the Gates network enforced a meningitis campaign in Sub-Sahara Africa that paralyzed up to 500 children. In 2010, his foundations support for Glaxo's experimental malaria vaccine trials killed 151 African infants and seriously injured another 1,000.  Gates collaboration with India's National Technical Advisory Group resulted in a catastrophe of unmonitored overlapping polio immunization programs triggering an epidemic of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis that affected 490,000 children. Gates vaccine programs were forced to leave India. Cases of vaccine derived polio now outnumber cases from wild polio.  In 2014, Foundation funds went to experimental HPV vaccine trials in India, in joint collaboration with Glaxo and Merck, that violated ethical standards. Over 1,000 girls developed severe autoimmune diseases and fertility disorders.  It is easy to overlook the larger significance of the results Gates' vaccination campaigns. In short, Gates was responsible for implementing and funding these programs that injured and caused the deaths of innocent children and adults. Due to his stature among governmental and international health agencies, he has not been held accountable. People such as Gates are judged by a different standard, meaning they are not judged at all. Equally worrisome, aside from his vaccine frenzy, Gates makes efforts to influence the nation's health policies. In the past he has been a fanatical advocate for mandatory vaccination.  During a recent TED Talk interview, Gates advocated a national campaign to issue certificates for those who have been either infected with COVID-19 or vaccinated against it. "Eventually what we'll have to have is certificates of who's a recovered person and who's a vaccinated person," he stated, "because you don't want people moving around the world... (without their certificates)." Gates however is a symptom of another side of national crisis. There would be no need for citizen billionaires to be taking the helm to manipulate national policy responses to health crises, such as the COVC-19 pandemic, if there was in place a functioning healthcare system. Unfortunately it has been the gross failures of the Trump and previous presidential administrations that have opened the doors for others like Gates to step in. For too long, the US's federal health agencies have been thoroughly compromised and corrupted by private pharmaceutical interests. The pandemic is revealing to Americans that we have the most dysfunctional medical system in the developed world.  Unfortunately the wealthiest elite on the planet are rarely questioned about the correctness of their actions and schemes. As long as a Bill Gates says he is giving huge sums of money to a cause to end disease and suffering, we are not suppose to probe further. Rather, in the case of mainstream media, such people are to be worshiped as saviors. The oligarchic elite are so well interconnected on multiple boards of directors, clubs for the rich and powerful, think tanks, media conglomerates, and among the high ranks of elected legislators and politicians that it is difficult to have an open and honest debate on the merits of their actions and spending.  So when someone like Ted Turner says we should reduce the world's population by more than half, and Bill Gates suggests a 15 percent reduction, do we fully understand the potential for eugenic efforts?  And this is another issue about Gates that should disturb every person on the planet.  As a keynote speaker at the TED 2010 conference, Gates laid out his rationale for an international effort towards global depopulation. He said, “If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [projected to be 9 billion people by 2050] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.“ Therefore it was shocking to learn that a tetanus vaccine administered to Kenyan women in child bearing years was purportedly laced with Human Chorionic Gondatropin (hCG) that causes miscarriage and renders a woman sterile. The discovery was made by the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association that noted something was seriously wrong with women following vaccination and had the vaccine analyzed. But more appalling was tracing the vaccination campaign to funding by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for distribution by UNICEF. Further evidence is found in a 2005 Foundation press release stating Gates' gift of $26 million to UNICEF for a vaccine to eliminate maternal and neonatal tetanus. Curiously, Brian Shilhavy at Health Impact News observed, "there was no outbreak of tetanus in Kenya, on the perceived threat of tetanus due to local flood conditions." Therefore, why the campaign to vaccinate young women en masse? In conclusion, we have the world's second richest billionaire who deeply believes he has a personal authority to be a policy maker for America's public health. Therefore, do we truly realize the dangers of billionaires, unelected to any position of authority over the nation, and their threats that undermine democracy?  

Why the World Health Organization Deserves Our Distrust Richard Gale & Gary Null PhD Progressive Radio Network, May 8, 2020   Many more questions are being raised than there are answers being discovered concerning the recent strains of coronavirus. Where and how did it originate? Was it the result of human engineering and manipulation or is it a strain that mutated naturally?  What are the best tests to determine exposure and infection? Why are so many infected individuals asymptomatic? Are all elderly people equally susceptible to infection and how much do co-morbidities determine outcomes? These are just several of the important questions that still require definitive answers. The ultimate international authority for infectious diseases is the World Health Organization (WHO). Because of its acceptance by the world's national governments, it has been extremely successful in its mission. The WHO is the final word in determining whether the spread of a serious pathogen is ruled as a pandemic or not. For the majority of the medical community, the media and the average person, the WHO is the front line command post for medical prevention (i.e., vaccination) and treatment.  Consequently it's rulings are often regarded as the gold standard by which many nations design their health policies and intervening protocols to protect their citizens.  On matters of global health, the WHO holds dominance. We are currently being told by the Director General of the WHO that the solutions for curtailing the COVID-19 pandemic are self-isolation, distancing, masks, and, for those in acute stages of infection, ventilation. To date there is no drug that has been found to be universally safe and effective. Therefore, all efforts, with massive funding, are being devoted to rapidly get a coronavirus vaccine on the market.  And in this effort, the WHO is a close ally and advocate in the US's federal health system, notably the CDC and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Most people assume the WHO acts independently from private commercial and national government interests for the welfare of the world's population. However, at best this is an assumption. Moreover, the very legitimacy of the WHO as a gold standard of health is questionable. The organization has been accused of conflicts of interests with private pharmaceutical companies and mega-philanthropic organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as being riddled with political alliances, ideologies, and profiteering motives.  An article in the National Review called the WHO "scandal plagued" with "wasteful spending, utter disregard for transparency, pervasive incompetence, and failure to adhere to even basic democratic standards." We would also add that its level of incompetence has resulted in serious misinformation about the medical risks of vaccines and other health-threatening chemicals.  For example, during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, the organization reported it could not find any evidence of human transmission. Now we know it is perhaps the most transmittable respiratory viral infection encountered in modern medical history. Given the halls of power within the WHO, we are outlining some of the more salient reasons why the organization's declarations about infectious diseases, pandemics and vaccination should not entirely be trusted. Vaccine Promotional Misconduct Very few will know that for a long time, the WHO's recommendations for certain vaccines were kept secret. Writing in a 2006 issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Dr. Marc Girard uncovered "scientific incompetence, misconduct or even criminal malfeasance" over the intentional inflation of vaccines' benefits while undermining toxicity and adverse effects. Dr. Girard was called upon as a medical expert by the French courts in a criminal trial against the WHO after French health officials obliged the organization to launch its universal Hepatitis B vaccine campaign. The campaign resulted in the deaths of French children.  Consequently, Girard gained access to confidential WHO documents. He notes that the WHO's "French figures about chronic liver diseases were simply extrapolated from the U.S. reports." He further accused the WHO serving "merely as a screen for commercial promotion, in particular via the Viral Hepatitis Prevention Board (VHPB), which was created, sponsored, and infiltrated by the manufacturers." Orchestration of Pandemic Panics Before the current COVID-19 pandemic, there was the H1N1 swine flu scare in 2009 that came and went as a church mouse. However, at the very start the WHO's fear mongering of a global contagion that could exceed the death counts of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic was based on false assumptions.  The fabrications are believed to have originated from the WHO's senior consultant on viral outbreaks who happens to be one of the world's leading pandemic alarmists: Dr. Albert Osterhaus who carries the nickname "Dr. Flu." Osterhaus is head of the Department of Virology at Erasmus University in the Netherlands. At the time of the H1N1 pandemic, he was the president of the European Scientific Working Group on Influenza (ESWI), an organization funded by the major vaccine manufacturers including Baxter, MedImmune, Glaxo, Sanofi Pasteur and others. It is ESWI's agenda to vaccinate the entire world against the swine flu. It was also Osterhaus who transformed an otherwise potentially bad flu season into a global pandemic. The WHO has been criticized harshly in the media for changing the definition of a "pandemic" and in doing so has been charged with benefitting the pharmaceutical industry. Moreover, the British Medical Journal reported that the WHO failed to report conflicts of interest in its H1N1 advisory group. The journal's Editor-in-Chief Fiona Godlee wrote, "WHO must act now to restore its credibility, and Europe should legislate." According to a financial forecast published by JP Morgan, the collaboration between the WHO and Osterhaus's ESWI to orchestrate the pandemic would have profited the pharmaceutical industry up to $10 billion. The popular German magazine Der Spiegel reported: “The WHO and those in charge of public health, the virologists and the pharmaceutical laboratories....  created a whole system around the imminence of a pandemic. There is a lot of money at stake, as well as networks of influence, careers and whole institutions! And the minute one of the flu viruses mutates we'd see the whole machine roll into action.” Epidemic of Conflict of Interests According to former World Bank geopolitical analyst Peter Koenig, about half of the WHO's budget is derived from private sources -- primarily pharmaceutical companies but also other corporate sectors including the telecommunication and agro-chemical industries. It also receives large donations from large philanthropic organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It is believed, according to Koenig, that the appointment of the WHO's current Director General, Dr. Tedro Adhanom, was due to Gates' influence. Tedros is the former Chairman of Gates funded GAVI Vaccine Alliance. GAVI's sole mission is to vaccinate every child in the world. The WHO and the US and British governments are the primary partners and the largest funder is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. There is in our opinion little doubt that the WHO is another one of Gates' bought off entities for furthering his personal agenda to promote vaccines, genetically modified seeds and chemical agriculture in the developing world. Barbara Loe Fisher at the National Vaccine Information Center estimates that "only about 10 percent of total funding provided by Gavi ($862M) was used to strengthen health systems in developing countries, such as improving sanitation and nutrition, while nearly 80 percent was used to purchase, deliver and promote vaccines." The WHO as America's Poodle According to the Kaiser Family Foundation's fact sheet for the US government and WHO, the US is the largest contributor to the global organization. The CDC also provides its technical support and has liaisons at the WHO's Geneva headquarters and regional offices. In summary, there is a strong rationale to suggest that the WHO, aside from its global health programs in other countries, is largely doing the bidding of the US government to advance corporate interests and American neoliberal hegemony. Vaccine Adverse Effects Monitoring System Needs Overhaul The WHO's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety is the group responsible for administering vaccine programs in poorer, developing countries. It is also responsible for gathering data on incidents of vaccine injuries. Any deaths following vaccination campaigns are ignored and ruled as coincidental. This policy is based on the erroneous assumption that if no one died during a vaccine's clinical trials, then the vaccine should be regarded as automatically safe and unrelated to any deaths that might occur. Consequently, the WHO's monitoring system is seriously flawed and requires a major overhaul. One of the more controversial incidences is the WHO's collaboration with the Bill Gates funded GAVI Vaccine Alliance campaign to launch the pentavalent vaccine (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HIP and Hepatitis B)  in Africa and later in South and Southeast Asia. In India, health officials recorded upwards to 8,190 additional infant deaths annually following pentavalent vaccination.  The WHO response was to reclassify its adverse event reporting system to disregard "infant" deaths altogether. Dr. Jacob Puliyel, a member of the Indian government's National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization concluded, “deaths and other serious adverse events following vaccination in the third world, that use WHO-AEFI classification are not recorded in any database for pharmacovigilance. It is as if the deaths of children in low (and middle) income countries are of no consequence.” The WHO's Director General's Troubled Past Given the enormous number of experts in infectious disease and control, it is astounding that the WHO's current Director General is Dr. Tedros Adhanom Gebreyesus. He was a leading politician in the militant communist Tigray People's Liberation Front that ruled Ethiopia between 1991 to 2018.  Tedros served dual roles as the country's Health and Foreign Minister. According to the British journalist Thomas Mountain, who has lived in neighboring Eritrea for many years and has reported on the corrupt Tigray regime, Tedros had a direct role in the atrocities alleged to have been committed by the government.  It was Tedros who has been reported to have been responsible for the removal of the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders following Ethiopia's brutal massacre of Ogaden citizens in Somalia, which was immediately followed by a cholera outbreak. As noted above, his approval to head of the organization may likely have been vetted by Bill Gates. Looking back at his past three years at the WHO, Mountain remarks, "For almost three years he remained quiet about the almost total lack of preparation at the WHO for what numerous panels had warned was inevitable, a highly contagious and deadly virus quickly spreading across the world." WHO's Depopulation Efforts with Vaccines Without doubt, the most nefarious activity conducted by the WHO is its alleged support and distribution of vaccines to poorer developing countries that may have been intentionally designed to decrease population rates.  Back in 1989, the WHO sponsored a symposium at its Geneva headquarters on "Antifertility Vaccines and Contraceptive Vaccines." The symposium presented proposals for vaccines that were later discovered to have been laced with the sterilizing hormones HCG and estradiol; the former prevents pregnancy and triggers spontaneous abortions and miscarriages, and the latter can turn men infertile.  In 2015, the Kenyan Conference of Catholic Bishops reported its discovery of a polio vaccine laced with estradiol that was manufactured in India and distributed by the WHO. A year earlier, Dr. Wahome Ngare from the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association uncovered a tetanus vaccine specifically being administered to women, also distributed by the WHO, that contained the HCG hormone. All of the polio vaccine samples tested contained HCG, estrogen-related compounds, follicle stimulating and luteinizing hormones, which will damage sperm formation in the testes. Even more disturbing, this vaccine was going to be administered to children under five years of age. However, this is not the first time the WHO appears to have made efforts to use vaccination campaigns for depopulation.  A decade earlier, in 2004, the WHO, UNICIF and CDC launched a vaccination campaign to immunize 74 million African children during a polio outbreak. The initiative encountered a serious obstacle. In Nigeria, laboratory tests on the WHO's vaccine samples resulted in the presence of estrogen and other female hormones. And in the mid-1990s, a tetanus vaccine being administered to Nicaraguan and Filipino girls and women in their child-bearing years was discovered to contain HCG, which accounted for a large number of spontaneous abortions that were reported by Catholic health workers. Illegal Vaccine Experiments In 2014, The Economic Times of India published a report that provided details of a joint venture between the WHO and the Gates Foundation to test an experimental HPV vaccine on approximately 16,000 tribal girls between the ages of 9 and 15 unwittingly. The experiment was conducted in 2008, and the vaccine is now what we commonly know as Gardasil. Many of the girls, the report states, became ill and some died. The following year the WHO and Gates Foundation conducted a similar experiment on 14,000 girls with the HPV vaccine Cervarix. Again "scores of teenage girls were hospitalized."  Investigations led by Indian health officials uncovered gross violations in India's laws regarding medical safety. In numerous cases there was no consent and the children had no idea what they were being vaccinated for. The Indian Supreme Court has taken up a case against the duo for criminal charges. WHO's Double Standards of Vaccine Safety A more recent scandal erupted during the WHO's Global Vaccine Safety Summit convened in December 2019.  Days before the summit, one of the WHO's medical directors for vaccination, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, appeared in a public advertisement touting the unquestionable safety of vaccines and ridiculing parents who speak out against vaccination. She assured viewers that the WHO was in control of matters and monitored any potential adverse risks carefully. However, during the Summit, the same Dr. Swaminathan acknowledged vaccine health risks and stated, "We really don't have very good safety monitoring systems." Another Summit participant, Dr. Heidi Larson stated, "We have a very wobbly ‘health professional frontline' that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the frontline professionals are starting to question or they don't feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to the person asking the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you are lucky if you have half a day on vaccines.” And more noteworthy were the statements by Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator of the WHO's Initiative for Vaccine Research, "... I give courses every year on how do you develop vaccines, how do you make vaccines. And the first lesson is while you're making your vaccine if you can avoid using an adjuvant please do so. Lesson two is if you're going to use an adjuvant use one that has a history of safety. And lesson three is if you're not going to do that, think very carefully." In other words, what the WHO presents to the public contradicts what is discussed behind closed doors, another example of the veil of secrecy the organization operates within. Suppression of the Dangers of Depleted Uranium The use of depleted uranium pervades military missiles and bombs. Tons of depleted uranium were deployed during the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.  It is estimated that the US fired over 300,000 rounds of depleted uranium, or 1,000 tons, during the 2003 Iraq war. In both countries, the WHO has been very active in providing health needs to the populations affected.  However, in regions where bombing was most intense, such as in Fallujah Iraq, there has been a high prevalence of congenital birth defects. This was uncovered by an on-the-ground investigation conducted by the Brussels Tribunal.  According to a BBC documentary, there is no longer any doubt about depleted uranium's association with genetic damage and birth defects.  According to an article published in the British Medical Journal in 2013, the WHO intentionally suppressed the scientific evidence .  The question remains why?  Hans von Sponeck, a former Assistant Secretary General for the United Nations has suggested that "the US government sought to prevent WHO from surveying areas in southern Iraq where DU has been used and caused serious health and environmental dangers."  Here we find a likely case of the WHO doing the bidding of the US government and its military adventures in regime change. There are many other questionable activities that the WHO has been involved with over the years. However, the above provide sufficient evidence to argue the case that, at least within the upper echelons of the WHO, global health does not stand in high priority.  The organization employs over 7,000 people around the world and most of these have deep concern for improving the lives of populations in poor and developing nations. On the other hand, the WHO's leaders are there largely because the powers of Washington, London and the pharmaceutical industry benefit by the organization advancing its agendas. Of course, the WHO is not the only health entity with a legacy of corruption.  Corruption appears to be systemic throughout global health and national health agencies.  This topic was featured last year in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet. Author Dr. Patricia Garcia writes, "Corruption is embedded in health systems. Throughout my life—as a researcher, public health worker, and a Minister of Health—I have been able to see entrenched dishonesty and fraud. But despite being one of the most important barriers to implementing universal health coverage around the world, corruption is rarely openly discussed." Bear in mind, the WHO, along with Bill Gates and his Foundation, and Anthony Fauci at the National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Disease, are leading the efforts to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Do you believe we can trust their judgment and the intense public relations effort that will immediately follow after such a vaccine reaches the market?  

Nuevo episodio de VOLUMEN, un podcast de reseñas literarias. En esta emisión "Glaxo” de Hernán Ronsino, novela publicada por Eterna Cadencia (TW e IG @eternacadencia web: eternacadencia.com.ar) y “Mi ángel tiene alas negras” de Elliott Chaze (TW @labestiae IG @labestiaequilatera_editora web: labestiaequilatera.com.ar) Voz y realización Mariana Collante. TW e IG @mariancollante

The things that are often left unsaid in conversations about HIV from an HIV positive and negative perspective.

Peter Young is a Venture Partner at Pappas Capital, and brings to his investment approach thirty-five years of experience in the biopharma sector. The former Vice President and Therapy Head at Glaxo Wellcome in the mid-1990s, Peter led the global introduction of combination HIV therapies that revolutionized HIV treatment, quintupled Glaxo’s HIV sales, and maintained leadership on global treatment access. Peter has since served as CEO of two private start-ups, a vaccine company that raised over $80 million in NIH, HIV, and biodefense grants, and a specialty pharmaceutical company he led to a successful exit. In a podcast recorded at the BIO International conference, Peter discusses the ramifications of the Trump Administration’s proposals for international reference pricing in Medicare Part B, as well as how to balance the higher prices being driven by smaller, targeted indications and the need to support the natural movement of science in rare therapies. We also discuss the ‘hot-button’ issues around the orphan drug legislation and how we can constructively move forward without throwing the orphan baby out with the bathwater. This podcast is made possible with the support of EUCOPE.

Good afternoon everyone and welcome to another edition of The Avid Reader. Today our guest is Katherine Eban author of Bottle Of Lies, The Inside Story Of The Generic Drug Boom, published in May by Ecco. Katherine’s resume is too long to recite here, but I’ll give it a go. Katherine is an investigative journalist, a Fortune Magazine contributor and an Andrew Carnegie Fellow as well as a Rhodes scholar. She has also written for Vanity Fair, the NYT, The Nation, the Observer and many other publications. Her previous work, almost a preface to this one, and just as explosive was Dangerous Doses: A True Story of Cops, Counterfeiters, and the Contamination of America’s Drug Supply. She lectures frequently on the topic of pharmaceutical integrity—if there is such a thing. Bottle of Lies is a book that strikes at the heart of the generic drug industry, a behemoth that supplies us formulations that may or may not be equivalent to say Lipitor or Klonopin or Flomax. And these companies control about 90% of our drug supply. Almost all of these companies hail from China or India. This book is especially poignant for me, because for all of my adult life, when a pharmacist asks me if I would like to buy the generic rather than the branded drug, I always ask for the generic. Why? Because it is a lot cheaper!! What I didn’t know, and now sadly do, is that the generic pills I buy may be less effective than the ones made by Glaxo or Smith Kline, or weaker, or tainted or made with tiny slivers of metal inside. One of the many, actually the most egregious of these failures in ethical and FDA standards is Ranbaxy, a company that has failed its customers, has been admonished and fined and still follows nefarious practices. We learn about whistle blowers, inspections that are primarily useless…even learn about Rod Rosenstein..and more incredulously…Mahatma Ghandi! This book will change your life and also scare the crap out of you.

You’ve been great at the selling game.  So great that your company promoted you to Vice President of Sales.  But the joy of the announcement has given way to near panic as you realize you now have to step up to meet big company goals.  You’ll need to develop sales talent and put a structure in place to help your salespeople succeed.  Wouldn’t it be great to know how someone else faced this challenge and thrived?  ----more---- The upcoming Asher Sales Sense Podcast – “Adding Structure to a Sales Team and Department” – with Thorne Vice President for Sales Phil McDonald might be just what you need to hear.  Asher Senior Partner and Sales Facilitator Kyla O’Connell will guide the conversation including topics such as: understanding how to develop technical salespeople, adding structure and repeatable processes to a sales department, and lessons learned as a VP of Sales for a major vitamin and supplement manufacturer.  Tune in and find out how a newly-installed VP Phil McDonald, despite facing additional complications of a cross-country staff relocation and a hurricane, organized his sales team for success. About our guest: As Vice President of Sales for Thorne, Phil leads Thorne’s U.S. Sales Force to profitably grow sales and revenue for the company’s portfolio of nutritional supplements sold through healthcare practitioners.  Phil works closely with Thorne’s Marketing, Customer Service and Medical Affairs teams to ensure Thorne’s practitioner-customers receive best-in-class support from the Thorne Sales Force. Phil has over 35 years of experience in sales, sales management, and training, including 22 years in the nutritional supplement industry.  Prior to joining Thorne, he worked with the Perrigo Company, the nation’s largest supplier of store brand OTC products and nutritional supplements.  As a National Account Manager, Phil was responsible for sales at many of the nation’s largest retailers including CVS, Target, and Kmart.  Phil also spent 13 years in pharmaceutical sales including 4 years in sales management for SmithKline prior to their merger with Glaxo. Phil’s professional development includes certification as a trainer for Professional Selling Skills, Account Development Strategies, Investment in Excellence, and Advanced Communication Skills.  _____________________________________ Asher Sales Sense is sponsored by Asher Strategies  ASHER Strategies Has Improved Sales for Thousands of Companies.

In this episode, Marc interviews Dr. Joel Dobbs. Dr. Dobbs is an experienced life sciences executive, with over thirty years of experience in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. He has served in a variety of senior leadership roles in information technology, as well as general management, clinical research, regulatory affairs, post-marketing surveillance, academia, and consulting. Dr. Dobbs has served as a member of top-tier executive teams of dynamic organizations, in startup, rapid-growth, turn-around, merger, integration, and change phases.   He currently serves as the Executive-in-Residence at the University of Alabama Birmingham's Collat School of Business, where he also directs the school's office of innovation and entrepreneurship, teaches, and works with entrepreneurs within the UAB environment and the greater Birmingham business community to help them develop and grow their business. He is also the CEO of the Compass Talent Management Group, LLC, a consulting firm that assists organizations with the identification and development of key talent with designing organization strategies and structures to maximize their ability to compete in the business world of today and tomorrow. Marc and Joel discuss several topics, including Joel’s intentionally varied first half of his life, some of the triggers that started his pursuit of goals for the second half of his life, and how giving back through mentoring, from his extensive experience, is so gratifying.   Key Takeaways: [:54] Marc welcomes you to episode 75 of the Repurpose Your Career podcast. 75 episodes make a year-and-a-half. Marc invites you to share this episode with like-minded souls. Please subscribe wherever you listen to this podcast, share it on social media, and tell your neighbors and colleagues. [1:39] Next week, Marc will team up with Mark Anthony Dyson of The Voice of Jobseekers podcast for a Q&A episode to answer some listener questions. [1:52] This week’s episode is from the archives. It is an encore interview of Dr. Joel Dobbs. Dr. Dobbs was Marc’s first interview with a person who had made a career pivot in the second half of life. It was one of the best stories because Dr. Dobbs planned out his transition. Marc hopes you enjoy this episode! [2:15] Marc welcomes Dr. Joel Dobbs. [2:40] Joel majored in Chemistry, went to pharmacy school, and got a doctorate. He followed a purposefully varied career path, in three phases, until he retired five years ago. He was with GlaxoSmithKline when it was just Glaxo. In his time there it went from a startup to $3.5 billion a year. He helped the various business units develop.[6:34] Another company recruited him and he spent the last 15 years of his career as a CIO —  a completely unplanned path — until he retired five years ago. That was the first half of his career. Marc calls this a portfolio career or “a lot of different stuff.” [7:44] Today Joel is a business school professor at UAB Collat School of Business. He also runs a leadership consulting business, teaching from the multitude of mistakes he has made over the first half of his life. He finds it tremendously gratifying. [9:16] In his late 40s, Joel started considering his life’s impact. Around 50, he read Halftime: Moving from Success to Significance, by Bob Buford, and it set his path. [11:11] The halftime of your life is a period to ask: how do I turn the second half of my life into one that leverages my success, but focuses on significance? [11:42] Joel began really thinking about what did he want to do next? Was his ladder of success leaning against the wrong building? [13:52] Joel was very interested in his company’s offer of a voluntary retirement when they extended it to executives. He talks about consulting work he did, and other companies that recruited him. He wrote the job description for one of them. He also attended The Halftime Institute, which changed his view of life. [16:00] Joel put together in a notebook his plan for the second half of his life. He looked for opportunities to test concepts about working. [21:16] Marc comments on how Joel drove his career agenda. He knew when to move on and he left, always with the goal in mind. [22:03] If you know what you want to do, and you're able to answer that clearly, concisely, and decisively, you'd be surprised how often you get to do that. [22:19] Spend time thinking about the perfect life and writing it down. That very act sensitizes you to opportunity. [22:54] When Joel checked his ‘perfect life’ list after years, how much had he achieved? [24:45] Intentional achievement takes clarity. Usually, clarity does not come overnight. [26:50] Marc’s final thoughts: Dr. Dobbs was very purposeful in planning out his second half of life. [28:11] Marc invites you to check back next week when Mark Anthony Dyson and Marc answer listener questions.   Mentioned in This Episode: Careerpivot.com Mark Anthony Dyson The Voice of Jobseekers GlaxoSmithKline Stevens Institute of Technology UAB Collat School of Business. The Halftime Institute Joel H. Dobbs Joel.Dobbs@iCloud.com Personal Branding for Baby Boomers: What It Is, How to Manage It, and Why It's No Longer Optional, by Marc Miller. Halftime: Moving from Success to Significance, by Bob Buford Please pick up a copy of Repurpose Your Career: A Practical Guide for the 2nd Half of Life, by Marc Miller and Susan Lahey. The paperback, ebook, and audiobook formats are available now. When you have completed reading the book, Marc would very much appreciate your leaving an honest review on Amazon.com. The audio version of the book is available on iTunes app, Audible, and Amazon. Marc has the paid membership community running on the CareerPivot.com website. The website is alive and in production. Marc is contacting people on the waitlist. Sign up for the waitlist at CareerPivot.com/Community. Marc has three initial cohorts of 10 members in the second half of life and they are guiding him on what to build. He is looking for individuals for the fourth cohort who are motivated to take action and give Marc input on what he should produce next. He’s currently working on LinkedIn, blogging, and book publishing training. Marc is bringing someone in to guide members on how to write a book. The next topic will be business formation and there will be lots of other things. Ask to be put on the waiting list to join a cohort. This is a unique paid membership community where Marc will offer group coaching, special content, and a community where you can seek help. CareerPivot.com/Episode-75 Show Notes for this episode. Please subscribe at CareerPivot.com to get updates on all the other happenings at Career Pivot. Marc publishes a blog with Show Notes every Tuesday morning. If you subscribe to the Career Pivots blog, every Sunday you will receive the Career Pivot Insights email, which includes a link to this podcast. Please take a moment — go to iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, or Spotify through the Spotify app. Give this podcast an honest review and subscribe! If you’re not sure how to leave a review, please go to CareerPivot.com/review, and read the detailed instructions there. Email Marc at Podcast@CareerPivot.com. Contact Marc, and ask questions at Careerpivot.com/contact-me You can find Show Notes at Careerpivot.com/repurpose-career-podcast. To subscribe from an iPhone: CareerPivot.com/iTunes To subscribe from an Android: CareerPivot.com/Android Careerpivot.com

Robert Friedman, Senior Editor, Projects & Investigations for Bloomberg, on how Facebook helps shady advertisers. Jack Devine, former Acting Director of the CIA and founding partner and President of security firm The Arkin Group, discusses why he supports Trump's CIA director nominee, Gina Haspel.Bloomberg View columnist Jared Dillian, editor and publisher of "The Daily Dirtnap," discusses his column: "Private Equity? It's More Like Pirate Equity."Chris Hughes, deals columnist for Bloomberg Gadfly, discusses Akzo Nobel selling chemicals unit to PE firm Carlyle for $12.5 billion, and Glaxo buying Novartis' consumer health division for $13 billion.

A 'just me' podcast by Andy Arter on 5 steps to successful sales. Andy tells us about his 35 year industrial sales career selling to some of the worlds largest companies such as; Ford Motor Company, Glaxo, Coca Cola, CBRE and JLL as well as many more and discusses the techniques he uses to sell more products so that you can use them too.    --- Contact information: Website: www.transformyourwealthandhealth.com Email: transformyourwealthandhealth@gmail.com  Facebook Page: www.facebook.com/TransformYourWealthAndHealth Facebook Group: www.facebook.com/groups/612174222505842/ Online Magazine: www.issuu.com/transformyourwealthandhealth/docs/october   TRANSFORM YOUR WEALTH AND HEALTH NOW!

Hugh Johnson, chairman and CIO of Hugh Johnson Advisors, talks about his three-year market forecast. Bloomberg Intelligence's Sam Fazeli discusses big pharma earning as Merck, Eli Lilly and Glaxo report this week. Liam Denning, a Bloomberg Gadfly columnist covering energy, talks about Halliburton earnings and gives an overview of the oil services sector. Finally, Jaimin Patel, a senior credit strategist at Bloomberg Intelligence, tells Pimm Fox and Lisa Abramowicz how a default may be looming for Venezuela. 

Dr. Marquita M. Qualls has over 25 years of leadership experience in consulting, coaching, and motivating people who want to produce order out of their chaos. Though a scientist by training, she commands a masterful understanding of the human aspects needed to thrive in today’s fast-paced and competitive business environment. She founded Entropia Consulting, a small management consulting firm that focuses on helping individuals become more productive and effective leaders. Listen on iTunes, Stitcher Radio or TuneIn In this episode, I asked Dr. Qualls several questions, including: What was your dream growing up? What inspired you to pursue a degree in Chemistry? What are some of the biggest lessons you learned about yourself during your years with Glaxo? Tell us about your transition from Glaxo to starting your own consulting business? What is the exact problem your clients are having and how are you able to help provide a solution through your coaching services? Share one of your road blocks that caused you to have to take a major detour. What happened and how did you overcome it and get back on track?  How do you learn to love doing hard work you don't want to do? Why is learning a super power? What does successful leadership look like? What can we look forward to with you? Are there any big dreams and goals on your vision board for the next 5-10 years and beyond that you'd care to share with us? Links and resources mentioned: Marquita Qualls on Entropia Consuting Marquita Qualls on Twitter Marquita Qualls on LinkedIn Marquita's Fav Resources: Schedulista Marquita's Fav Book: Oh, The Places You'll Go!   Marquita M. Quall's Bio Marquita M. Qualls, Ph.D. has over 25 years of leadership experience in consulting, coaching, and motivating people who want to produce order out of their chaos. Dr. Qualls possesses the rare combination of strong technical ability and impressive soft skills. Though a scientist by training, she commands a masterful understanding of the human aspects needed to thrives in today’s fast-paced and competitive business environment. Her technical side drives an ability to gather perspectives and analyze feedback, while at the same time connecting with clients and guiding them towards achieving results. This has enabled her to function and make seamless transitions between the scientific and non-technical worlds. She has a gift for listening to what's not being said and asks the probing questions to help you arrive at a solution. Her style is often described by her clients as energetic, engaging, and empowering. She understands what it takes to be an extraordinary leader. She is a former National President of a professional technical organization and was a member of the team that created the Leadership Development System® for the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. She has also served on the editorial advisory board of Chemical & Engineering News, The Chemical Science Roundtable of the National Academies, and an Entrepreneur in Residence with Innovate Mississippi . Dr. Qualls has consulted with teams and coached professionals within governmental, educational, corporate, and nonprofit sectors including the Department of Homeland Security, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Jackson State University, P&G, Purdue University, The Dow Chemical Company, and American Chemical Society, Association of Women in Science, NOBCChE and SACNAS. Dr. Qualls’ professional career was rooted at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), one of the leading pharmaceutical companies in the world. During nearly a decade at GSK, she held roles of increased global responsibility spanning drug development, technology evaluation, program management, strategy development, and people development. She founded Entropia Consulting, a small management consulting firm that focuses on helping individuals become more productive and effective leade...

(Bloomberg) -- Taking Stock with Kathleen Hays and Pimm Fox. GUEST: Scott Rothbort, President and Founder of Lakeview Asset Management, on impact of Brexit on the markets, outlook for the 2nd quarter, and his Restaurant and Food report.

[intro music]   Host – Dan Keller Hello, and welcome to Episode Three of Multiple Sclerosis Discovery, the Podcast of the MS Discovery Forum. I’m your host, Dan Keller.   This week’s Podcast features an interview with investigators Daren Austin and Susan Van Meter of the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, who will discuss results from the MIRROR trial of ofatumumab, a human monoclonal antibody already FDA approved for leukemia. But to begin, here’s a brief summary of some of the topics we’ve been covering on the MS Discovery Forum at msdiscovery.org.   First, a complementary approach to treating MS. A new study lends support to the prevailing theory that the immune system’s ancient complement system drives persistent axon damage between MS relapses. The complement system consists of proteins that can activate innate and adaptive immune responses, but have a poorly understood role in autoimmune diseases. The new results suggest that anticomplement therapies might help prevent damage to axons. Clinical trials are in the early planning phases, but one of the study’s authors cautions that even if this approach proves valuable, it would be used in addition to and not in place of therapies targeting inflammatory T-cells.   In a second article, we report on a study suggesting that inhibiting a common cytokine called granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor – GM-CSF – might be a new therapeutic target to treat MS. Studies have shown an association between the cytokine and MS flares. A newly described class of T helper cells produce GM-CSF, and inhibiting that production might be helpful in preventing flares.   Finally, we’d like to call your attention to our blog series called “MS Patient, Ph.D.” There are numerous blogs and other websites where people with MS talk with other people with MS. And there are also a few, including our own MS Discovery Forum, where MS researchers and clinicians talk with other researchers and clinicians. But we can’t think of any sites where people with MS who have a scientific bent communicate directly with researchers and clinicians. That’s what MS Patient, Ph.D. is all about. It’s a place where two articulate people struggling with MS, both of them Ph.D. biologists, present their points of view about their disease and about the state of MS research. You’ll find some of their opinions provocative and controversial, and we hope you’ll join the discussion. In our two most recent posts, Griselda Zuccarino-Catania discussed the snake oil treatments touted as MS cures and relates that to the recent testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee by Dr. Mehmet Oz. And Emily Willingham discusses conflicting evidence on whether exercise is good or bad for people with MS.   [transition music]   Now, onto the interview. Here at the 2014 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, we caught up with Dr. Daren Austin of GSK in London. He’s presenting the MIRROR study, which is a randomized, placebo-controlled study doing dose-ranging on ofatumumab in subjects with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.   Interviewer – MSDF What led you to implicate B-cells? We often think of T-cells as a target in multiple sclerosis.   Dr. Austin Well, there’d been previous work using other anti-CD20 therapies in immune inflammation diseases that have shown efficacy. Most notably the first was rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis and subsequently rheumatoid looking at multiple sclerosis, so the precedence for anti-CD20 modulation as a target for inflammatory diseases was known before we came to design this study. What wasn’t known before we designed the MIRROR study was how much modulation of B-cells would generate what level of clinical benefit. The primary objective of this study really was to look at how best we could administer ofatumumab, which is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, to modulate B-cells and then modulate clinical disease.   MSDF How’d you go about it? Can you describe the study and also what you found?   Dr. Austin Well, the study was a randomized, double-blind, parallel group study looking at relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients who had to have evidence of disease activity, i.e., they they would be requiring therapy. What we did was we took what we knew about the pharmacology of ofatumumab – and we’d previously conducted both an intravenous study in in multiple sclerosis patients, so we knew the drug could be efficacious in suppressing MRI lesions, and we took what we knew about the clinical pharmacology of ofatumumab; and, namely, that it is an extremely potent depleter of B-cells. We began by by hypothesizing that there was a link between the level of B-cell suppression and the level of MRI lesion suppression. From that we produced some some predictions. And our predictions led us to suggest that extremely low doses given relatively infrequently could be beneficial. We produced a transimulation before we conducted the trial, and we proposed a range of doses and dosing frequencies. So the first dose level was was placebo, the next level was a 3 mg dose that was given once every 12 weeks. The next dose level was 30 mg given once every 12 weeks. The next dose level was 60 mg given once every 12 weeks. And, finally, because we knew that a dose of 200 mg was efficacious over 12 weeks, we gave 60 mg every 4 weeks to give a cumulative dose of 180 mg. So we explored a dose range, a cumulative dose range, of 3 mg to 180 mg, with the primary endpoint being evaluation of MRI lesions at 12 weeks. Placebo patients were then given a 3 mg active dose. All patients were then followed for a further 12 weeks, and we now have the 24-week data. And, again, treatment then ceased and patients were followed-up to see repletion of B-cells.   And what we found in the study was, yes, that ofatumumab is is extremely potent at depleting B-cells. That single 3 mg dose was capable of knocking out about 75% of circulating B-cells, and the 60 mg dose given every 4 weeks depleted almost all patients right down to the undetectable levels, which is had been seen in the past. What we were able to do then is to look at the dose response to dosing of ofatumumab at the 12-week endpoint, and what we found is that at the cumulative dose of 180 mg, we see over 90% suppression of lesions. But we found that there was no incremental benefit in going above doses of about 60 mg, and in fact the dose that generated the half maximum effect from an analysis of the data was predicted to be less than 3 mg; a single 3 mg dose generated half of the maximum benefit.   Having shown that we have got clinical suppression of MRI lesions, we then decided to relay the pharmacology of ofatumumab, which is suppression of B-cells, to the clinical benefit, which is suppression of MRI lesions. And that was the purpose of this abstract, that the analysis that we presented showed quite clearly that there was a very strong relationship between how much you suppress B-cells and how much you suppress MRI lesions. But the surprising thing from this data is that you don’t have to fully deplete all patients to below the limit of quantification to derive benefit. We showed using a variety of analyses that patients that have circulating B-cells of less than 32 to 64 cells per microliter on average over the course of the dosing interval would still derive maximal benefit, i.e., suppression of lesions, to 90%. And that’s intriguing. And the reason it’s intriguing is that the doses that we gave are only acting on peripheral B-cells. There’s been speculation as to where the drug needs to get to give clinical benefit, and that the doses that we give – up to 60 mg doses – the drug can’t penetrate the blood-brain barrier. And, therefore, we know that by modulating peripheral circulating B-cells, we are deriving the maximal benefit in suppression of MRI lesions.   MSDF Is the drug acting on mature B-cells, or in B-cell development which may then migrate into the CNS during development?   Dr. Austin So ofatumumab only binds to the cells that express CD20, so there is some consideration as to where those cells exist. Now it is entirely possible that immature cells maybe sort of enter the periphery not expressing CD20, move to across the blood-brain barrier where they subsequently develop. That is a possibility. And if that is the case, our drug is not capable of reaching those B-cells. Only cells that express CD20 are depleted, so plasmablasts, for example, are not depleted because they do not express CD20. It is just that that population of of of B-cells that are expressing CD20. There’s a lot of hypotheses about how B-cells are working, how they may be producing pathogenic antibodies that may be detrimental. In MS it could be anti-myelin antibodies, for example. But we don’t absolutely know that that is the sole pathogenic mechanism in MS, as in other diseases. It may well be that B-cells are modulating other, say, T-cell activity, which we do not yet know. What we do know from our trial is that modulation of peripheral B-cells gives you benefit, and that’s the principal finding, and that the doses that we modulate at are much, much lower than the oncology doses that have previously been given.   MSDF So you don’t yet know whether you have a direct antibody effect on B-cells, or whether it’s acting possibly through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity.   Dr. Austin We do know that the mechanism of B-cell depletion is through both ADCC and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. That is the primary pharmacology of ofatumumab on cells that express CD20. We do not and cannot say for certain what those B-cells were doing prior to being depleted and how they were driving the pathogenic process, but we have shown that by depleting them to levels of less than 32 cells per microliter, you see suppression of disease activity. One of the important things to say is that the regimens at the every 12-week dosing that we’d selected, there is some evidence that B-cells do start to grow back in at least half of patients, so dosing every 12 weeks pre-dose, there are some circulating B-cells. If we look at immature B-cells, there are lots of immature B-cells but they haven’t yet moved to the to express CD20. So what we see is that the regimens we’ve designed, there is some evidence of of repletion, i.e., that patients are seeing clinical benefit despite having circulating B-cells.   MSDF How does this fit in with the pathogenetic mechanisms of T-cells? Are there interactions in the pathologic process besides the regulatory effect of T-cells themselves?   Dr. Austin The truth is I don’t think we can say. All we can say is that modulation of B-cells circulating in the periphery gives clinical suppression of of MRI lesions, and by implication we believe at the clinical efficacy in multiple sclerosis, and possibly other diseases, although such low doses have not have yet to be tested in other diseases.   MSDF In terms of B-cell repletion, have you also followed new lesions after B-cells come back?   Dr. Austin We have the 24-week data and we have preliminary data out to 48 weeks, and that data won’t be reported yet because we’re still in the process of ana analyzing it. But in the trial we designed, we had individual follow-up to watch patients B-cell replete back up to the lower limit of normal or their baseline, and we are measuring their follow on MRI lesions.   MSDF Working along with Dr. Austin on this project is Dr. Susan Van Meter, the clinical physician involved in the project. Let me ask you, what sort of adverse effects did you see during the trial?   Dr. Van Meter The most common adverse effect that we saw was injection site reactions, and that can include things such as redness at the injection site, nausea, flu-like symptoms. That occurred in most of the patients receiving ofatumumab. It also, very interestingly, occurred in about 15% of patients who received placebo.   MSDF In terms of the more serious and chronic effects, did you see any opportunistic infections or especially progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy?   Dr. Van Meter So you would certainly worry about infections, especially serious infections. We did not see any cases of PML or other opportunistic infections, and, in fact, no serious infections. As typical for patients with MS, patients did have a variety of infections – urinary tract infections, respiratory infections – but this was seen in all patients including placebo patients, and there was really no evidence of an increased rate of infection in patients receiving ofatumumab.   MSDF What do you see as the potential clinical significance of these findings?   Dr. Van Meter Well, I think it offers another therapy option for patients with MS. Obviously, we have to do further development and show that the benefits that we saw on MRI translate into clinical benefit on relapse rates and disability progression. But we’re offering a subcutaneous dose as opposed to an intravenous dose of medication, and potentially offering a medication that doesn’t completely wipe out one part of your immune system.   MSDF Is there a reason for selecting ofatumumab over rituximab?   Dr. Van Meter Well, I think that would be a clinician choice, to be honest. Rituximab has certainly been studied for multiple sclerosis even though it’s not indicated for multiple sclerosis. There’s another B-cell therapy that will be on the market when we launch, ocrelizumab, and I think it will come down to physician and patient choice.   MSDF Is there anything we’ve missed or that’s important to add?   Dr. Van Meter Well, I think at Glaxo we are very excited about this data; this is new science. Obviously, we need to understand more about it, replicate it. But for the first time, we’ve shown that you don’t need to completely destroy all the B-cells to have effect in multiple sclerosis.   MSDF Very good, I appreciate it. Thank you.   [transition music]   Thank you for listening to Episode Three of Multiple Sclerosis Discovery. This Podcast was produced by the MS Discovery Forum, MSDF, the premier source of independent news and information on MS research. MSDF’s executive editor is Robert Finn. Msdiscovery.org is part of the nonprofit Accelerated Cure Project for Multiple Sclerosis. Robert McBurney is our President and CEO, and Hollie Schmidt is Vice President of Scientific Operations.   Msdiscovery.org aims to focus attention on what is known and not yet known about the causes of MS and related conditions, their pathological mechanisms, and potential ways to intervene. By communicating this information in a way that builds bridges among different disciplines, we hope to open new routes toward significant clinical advances.   We’re interested in your opinions. Please join the discussion on one of our online forums or send comments, criticisms, and suggestions to editor@msdiscovery.org.   [outro music]

--{ The Peter Pan Syndrome: "Standardized World with No Variety, Lifelong Children, Controlled Society, Past Regimes Can't Match in Knavery, This System Where Slaves Love Their Slavery, Toys are Cheap, Lavish Entertainment, We're All On Board, Technique Entrainment, No Need to Reason, Experts de Rigueur, Life's Mysterious to Those Who Can't Figure, Live for Fun, Leave Problems to Experts, Like Those of Kinsey, Weirdoes, Perverts, And While We're Playing, Time Passes, in Trance, We Follow Pied Pipers Living on Grants" © Alan Watt }-- Good Reasons, Real Reasons - 9-11, Fall of Towers, Totalitarian Measures Enacted - Hanging On to Your Sanity - Planned Revolutions, Ideology. Covert Marxists' Getting into Power, Lying to Get in - Pierre Trudeau (Comintern) of Canada - Use of Capitalism and Communism / Socialism - Academia - Levels of Doctrine. Darwinism - Thomas, Julian and Aldous Huxley - World of Servitude (Slavery) - Dumbed-down Happy Slaves, Drugging, Food Supply, Inoculations, IQ Drop. Greening / Environmentalism, Emotive Embedding, Visual Impact, Background Music, Imprinting - Obama's Oratory, Hypnotic Techniques - Music, Fight or Flight. History of Weather Warfare - Yellow Rain, Cadmium - Government-Military Experimentation over Towns - Verdict in Court of Law, Preponderance of Evidence. Destruction of Family Unit - Dependence on Experts - England, Parents Must Sign Behavioural Contracts for their Children - Services now Authorities. Police States - "Underground" Economy, Spying, Payment for Ratting on Neighbours - Confiscation then Splitting Loot - Govt. Encouraging Crime. Vaccination Profits of Pharmaceutical Companies. Ayn Rand, Individuality, Speaking on Behalf of Rulers ("Men of Genius") not Masses. (Articles: [Video: "CONFIRMED!! Chemtrails and Weather Warfare" (youtube.com).] [Video: "Poison Rains Infect Small Town" [U.S. Biowarfare on Oakville, Washington] (youtube.com) - May 8, 1997.] ["All parents to sign 'behaviour contracts' " by Graeme Paton (telegraph.co.uk) - July 22, 2009.] ["Cash rewards for neighbours who rat on the crooks next door" by James Slack (dailymail.co.uk) - May 25, 2007.] ["Glaxo profits soar as drug firm charges NHS £6 for swine flu vaccine that costs £1 to make" (dailymail.co.uk) - July 23, 2009.]) *Title/Poem and Dialogue Copyrighted Alan Watt - July 24, 2009 (Exempting Music, Literary Quotes, and Callers' Comments)

MicrobeWorld Video presents episode 33 of This Week in Virology. Hosts Vincent Racaniello, Alan Dove, Dick Despommier and guest Raul Andino recorded TWiV live at the ASM General Meeting in Philadelphia, where they discussed increased arterial blood pressure caused by cytomegalovirus infection, restriction of influenza replication at low temperature by the avian viral glycoproteins, first isolation of West Nile virus in Pennsylvania, and current status of influenza.Links for this episode: Cytomegalovirus infection causes an increase of arterial blood pressure Avian influenza virus glycoproteins restrict virus replication at low temperature First West Nile virus isolation of the year in PA CDC press release of 18 May 2009 Glaxoâs influenza vaccine with adjuvant NY Times article on Guillain-Barrà and a more scientific view Weekly Science Picks Dick - National Museum of the History of Science and Medicine, Leiden Alan - Beginning Mac OS X Programming Vincent - Vaccinated by Paul Offit Raul - HubbleSite Contact/Subscribe Please send your virology questions and comments to twiv [at] twiv [dot] tv. To listen, click the play button next to the title of this entry. You can subscribe for free to TWIV via iTunes, through the RSS feed with a podcast aggregator or feed reader, or by email. Thanks to Chris Condayan and ASM for making TWiV live possible. Recorded by Chris Condayan and Ray Ortega. Download  TWiV #33 (Audio Only) (51 MB .mp3, 74 minutes) Sponsor Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

MicrobeWorld Video presents episode 33 of This Week in Virology. Hosts Vincent Racaniello, Alan Dove, Dick Despommier and guest Raul Andino recorded TWiV live at the ASM General Meeting in Philadelphia, where they discussed increased arterial blood pressure caused by cytomegalovirus infection, restriction of influenza replication at low temperature by the avian viral glycoproteins, first isolation of West Nile virus in Pennsylvania, and current status of influenza.Links for this episode: Cytomegalovirus infection causes an increase of arterial blood pressure Avian influenza virus glycoproteins restrict virus replication at low temperature First West Nile virus isolation of the year in PA CDC press release of 18 May 2009 Glaxoâs influenza vaccine with adjuvant NY Times article on Guillain-Barrà and a more scientific view Weekly Science Picks Dick - National Museum of the History of Science and Medicine, Leiden Alan - Beginning Mac OS X Programming Vincent - Vaccinated by Paul Offit Raul - HubbleSite Contact/Subscribe Please send your virology questions and comments to twiv [at] twiv [dot] tv. To listen, click the play button next to the title of this entry. You can subscribe for free to TWIV via iTunes, through the RSS feed with a podcast aggregator or feed reader, or by email. Thanks to Chris Condayan and ASM for making TWiV live possible. Recorded by Chris Condayan and Ray Ortega. Download  TWiV #33 (Audio Only) (51 MB .mp3, 74 minutes) Sponsor Try GotoMyPC free for 30 days! For this special offer, visit www.gotomypc.com/podcast

Vincent, Alan, Dick, and Raul Andino live at ASM discussed cytomegalovirus infection and blood pressure, restriction of avian influenza viral replication at low temperature, first isolation of West Nile virus in PA, and current status of influenza. Hosts: Vincent Racaniello, Alan Dove, Dick Despommier, and Raul Andino Links for this episode: Cytomegalovirus infection causes an increase of arterial blood pressure Avian influenza virus glycoproteins restrict virus replication at low temperature First West Nile virus isolation of the year in PA CDC press release of 18 May 2009 Glaxo's influenza vaccine with adjuvant NY Times article on Guillain-Barré and a more scientific view Weekly Science Picks Dick - National Museum of the History of Science and Medicine, Leiden Alan - Beginning Mac OS X Programming Vincent - Vaccinated by Paul Offit Raul - HubbleSite

Spiriva HandiHaler had an elevated risk of heart attack, stroke, and cardiovascular death when compared to people taking the generic drug albuterol, salmeterol (marketed by GlaxoSmithKline Plcas Serevent), or the combination of fluticasone and salmeterol (marketed by Glaxo as Advair), or a placebo. If you or a loved one used the Spiriva HandiHaler and suffered a heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death, you may have rights. You should speak with a qualified lawyer from Mark & Associates, P.C. as quickly as possible to ensure that your legal rights are protected. Mark & Associates, P.C. represents people across the United States who have been injured by dangerous drugs. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to discuss your case. Contact us today by submitting the case inquiry form on our website or by calling 1-866-50- RIGHTS (1-866-507-4448).

Spiriva HandiHaler had an elevated risk of heart attack, stroke, and cardiovascular death when compared to people taking the generic drug albuterol, salmeterol (marketed by GlaxoSmithKline Plcas Serevent), or the combination of fluticasone and salmeterol (marketed by Glaxo as Advair), or a placebo. If you or a loved one used the Spiriva HandiHaler and suffered a heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death, you may have rights. You should speak with a qualified lawyer from Mark & Associates, P.C. as quickly as possible to ensure that your legal rights are protected. Mark & Associates, P.C. represents people across the United States who have been injured by dangerous drugs. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to discuss your case. Contact us today by submitting the case inquiry form on our website or by calling 1-866-50- RIGHTS (1-866-507-4448).