Riccardo Bosi Nothing But the Truth; Big Pharma Wants to Put an End to Vitamins and Supplements

Former Australian Army Special Forces Lt. Col. Riccardo Bosi and Leader of the Australia One Party discusses the plan to defeat the totalitarian globalism which is now threatening all nations of the world.  He details his plan of action with Australia One and gives advice for people around the world on what they can do.

Wake Up World, This Could Be You

Big Pharma Wants to Put an End to Vitamins and Supplements

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • One of the latest attempts to thwart your ability to access nutritional supplements comes in the form of draft legislation that would require premarket approval for dietary supplements. In short, it would require supplements — which are food — to undergo the same approval process as drugs
  • In the past, the drug industry and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has tried to ban certain supplements, including vitamin B6 and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), by reclassifying them as new drugs
  • Another strategy the drug industry has been using to gain a monopoly over the supplement industry is to buy up supplement brands. Just 14 mega corporations — many of them drug companies — now own more than 100 of the most popular supplement brands on the market
  • This monopoly over the supplement industry gives drug companies enormous regulatory influence, and that’s a way by which they could eliminate independent supplement makers who can’t afford to put their products through the drug approval process. Indeed, it seems that’s what the Durbin-Braun premarket approval proposal is trying to accomplish
  • Take action to protect widespread access to dietary supplements. Contact your Senators and urge them to oppose the Dietary Supplement Listing Act of 2022, and its inclusion in the FDA Safety Landmark Advancements Act

In the video below Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director for the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), interviews Gretchen DuBeau, the executive and legal director for the Alliance for Natural Health, who in addition to being a lawyer also has a master’s degree in applied healing arts, talk about Big Pharma’s efforts to eliminate one of its greatest competitors, namely nutritional supplements.

One of the latest attempts to thwart your ability to access nutritional supplements comes in the form of draft legislation that would require premarket approval for dietary supplements. In short, it would require supplements to undergo the same approval process as drugs.

The Durbin-Braun Premarket Approval Proposal

A discussion draft of the legislation was released by the United States Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP) in mid-May 2022. As reported by Vitamin Retailer:1

“On May 17 [2022], the United States Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (HELP) released a discussion draft of its legislation to reauthorize FDA user fees for drugs, biologics and medical devices package, which includes the controversial and divisive Durbin-Braun premarket approval concept and more that would be damaging to the industry, according to the Natural Products Association (NPA).2

‘The NPA is significantly concerned with Chair Murray and Republican Leader Burr who failed to reject the radical and dangerous legislation from Senators Durbin and Braun that would require premarket approval for dietary supplements and weaken key privacy protections of the Bioterrorism Act, which protects the dietary supplement supply chain,’ said Daniel Fabricant, Ph.D. president and CEO of the NPA.

‘Last time I checked, dietary supplements are not drugs, biologics or medical devices, so why Congress or anyone supporting nongermane legislation that will only add costs to consumers who are doing all they can to stay healthy is extremely troubling.

Groups who [sic] have supported this legislation, have stated there are protections for technical disagreements with the FDA like those with hemp, CBD, NAC, and several other products. However, if this legislation were to pass, it is abundantly clear these products would be eliminated from the market.'”

For years, the drug industry, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s support, has tried to get nutritional supplements off the market. One of the most often used tactics has been to try to reclassify them as drugs.

Usually, they would target specific nutrients that stood in their way of profits, but legislation such as the Durbin-Braun premarket proposal would allow the drug industry to monopolize the market in one fell swoop.

Big Pharma Tried to Ban Vitamin B6

The fight over vitamin B6 (pyroxidine) is one example of how Big Pharma tried to eliminate a natural substance that stood in the way of a drug patent. In 2007, Medicure Pharma submitted a citizen’s petition to the FDA in which it argued that any dietary supplement containing pyridoxal 5′-phosphate — vitamin B6 — were “adulterated” under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, article 402(f).3

In essence, Medicure wanted all vitamin B6 products banned, because they undermined the company’s incentive to continue development of it’s drug version of B6.

Medicure had gotten wise to vitamin B6’s effectiveness against ischemia (inadequate blood flow), and decided to make a drug out of it by simply renaming the vitamin “MC-1.” They entered it into the drug bank and then argued that B6 supplements contained “their” MC-1. The drug bank even admits the renamed vitamin B6, i.e., MC-1, is:4

“… a biologically active natural product which can be regarded as a chemical entity that has been evolutionarily selected and validated for binding to particular protein domains.”

The main reason why drug companies engage in this kind of sleight of hand is because once a substance is classified as a drug, you can jack up the price by 1,000% over the supplement’s typical retail.5

FDA Cracking Down on NAC

Perhaps the most recent example of the FDA trying to shut down easy access to nutritional supplements was its 2020 attack on N-acetylcysteine (NAC). NAC has been a widely-used dietary supplement for six decades, yet the FDA suddenly decided to crack down on it in late July 2020 — right after it was discovered how useful it was for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.6

According to the FDA, NAC was excluded from the definition of a dietary supplement because it had been approved as a new drug in 1963.7 But if that was the case, why did they wait until 2020 to take action?

As reported by NPI at the time,8 there were more than 1,170 NAC-containing products in the National Institutes of Health’s Dietary Supplement Label Database when the FDA started sending out warning letters9 to companies that marketed NAC as a remedy for hangovers.

Members of the Council for Responsible Nutrition also worried the FDA might start to target NAC more widely. So far, that hasn’t happened, but Amazon immediately stopped selling all NAC products after those warning letters went out, whether the sellers marketed it as a hangover remedy or not.

Also, the selection of “hangover” for those warning letters seemed arbitrary at best. The fact is that several scientists had called attention to NAC’s benefits against COVID, and shortly afterward, the FDA came up with this ridiculous excuse to limit the availability of it. It just smacked of conflict of interest.

Another Way Big Pharma Is Seeking to Take Over

Another strategy the drug industry has been using to gain a monopoly over the supplement industry is by simply buying up supplement brands. Nestlé Health Science, for example, has acquired Garden of Life, Vital Proteins, Nuun, Pure Encapsulations, Wobenzym, Douglas Laboratories, Persona Nutrition, Genestra, Orthica, Minami, AOV, Klean Athlete and Bountiful.10

Bountiful, in turn, owns brands like Solgar, Osteo Bi-Flex, Puritan’s Pride, Ester-C and Sundown, all of which are now under Nestlé’s control. The Bountiful brands alone generated net sales of $1.87 billion in the 12 months ending March 31, 2021, so the $5.75 billion agreement to acquire a majority stake, signed in August 2021, didn’t necessarily burn a big hole in Nestlé’s pocket. According to J.P. Morgan analyst Celine Pannuti, quoted by Natural Products Insider:11

“Through the acquisition of The Bountiful Co., Nestlé can build a ‘leading position’ in the ‘fragmented category’ for vitamins, minerals and supplements, which ‘has delivered the highest and most consistent growth in consumer health care over the past 10 years.'”

The ‘Free Market Competition’ Lie

In all, a mere 14 mega corporations — many of them drug companies — now own more than 100 of the most popular supplement brands on the market. The graphic below is from Neal Smoller, PharmD, the holistic pharmacist’s website.12

It doesn’t show the ownership of all available brands, but it gives you an idea of just how small the ownership circle has become. As noted by Smoller, many competing brands are even owned by the same corporation, rendering the notion of free market competition null and void.

14 mega corporations

Importantly, owning the lion’s share of supplement companies puts the drug industry in a unique position to get rid of them whenever they so desire. They could intentionally make the company tank simply by cutting advertising, for example. Cutting quality could have a similar effect, while simultaneously cheating customers who rely on dietary supplements for optimal nutrition and health.

Most important of all, however, this monopoly over the supplement industry gives drug companies enormous regulatory influence, and that’s a way by which they could eliminate independent supplement makers who can’t compete financially. Indeed, that seems to be what the Durbin-Braun proposal is all about.

Supplements Have Phenomenal Safety Profiles

This new proposed legislation would technically ban most supplements, as few supplement makers have the financial resources required to meet drug approval requirements. The only ones with pockets deep enough to do that would be the mega-corporations.

Putting vitamins and nutrients through the drug evaluation and approval process would automatically eliminate many supplements from the market and result in higher retail prices for whatever remains. It would also allow drug companies to rename basic nutrients, label them drugs, and jack up the price even further.

We cannot let this happen. Dietary supplements are FOOD, plain and simple. They should not be treated as drugs, which must undergo rigorous testing to evaluate effects and safety. Supplements have a long history of near-spotless safety and don’t need drug-style testing.

Supplements Are the Safest Foodstuffs Available

Deaths associated with use of dietary supplements are extremely rare compared to the death toll from prescription drugs, yet supplements are routinely singled out as being potentially dangerous,13,14 either due to lack of testing, lack of regulation or both. The thing is, supplements don’t need safety testing, as they are food, and they are, in fact, fully regulated.

In 2015, CBC News published a Marketplace report15 in which they claimed a number of supplement makers had ripped off customers by failing to live up to the claims on their labels. Two months later, they had to retract the report,16 when it was proven their tests were inaccurate. That’s just one example of how the pharma-owned media tries to give supplements a bad rap.

Meanwhile, in the real world, not a single death has ever been reported as a direct result of taking a supplement. On the contrary, data provided in a 2012 report by the UK-based Alliance for Natural Health International (ANHI), showed nutritional supplements are the safest foodstuffs available.

Your risk of dying from an herbal product or dietary supplement is less than 1 in 10 million, comparable to your risk of being killed by lighting. ANHI also calculated that adverse reactions to pharmaceutical drugs are 62,000 times more likely to kill you than nutritional supplements.17

So, the one thing that can be conclusively said about supplements is that they may be the safest category of any consumable product. On the whole, junk food and drugs are FAR more likely to harm or kill you.

What’s more, lack of human trials does not mean supplements are unregulated. They’re regulated by both the FDA18 and the Federal Trade Commission19 (FTC). The FDA regulates the finished product and individual ingredients, while the FTC regulates the advertising of supplements. So, while not regulated as drugs, but rather as a food, they are fully regulated.

Take Action NOW to Protect Your Supplements From Disappearing

As noted by NPA president and CEO, Daniel Fabricant:20

“The war is far from over. We need America’s health and wellness advocates to continue writing their members of Congress through the NPA Action Center. Grassroots involvement over the coming weeks is absolutely critical to defeating this radical and dangerous proposal.”

I join Fabricant in urging you to contact your senators and urge them to oppose the Dietary Supplement Listing Act of 2022, and its inclusion in the FDA Safety Landmark Advancements Act. A list of contact numbers can be found here. On that same page, the NPA also has a sample script with key talking points.

If you take supplements and you want to continue the freedom to take them in the future, it is VITAL that if you live in the U.S. that you let you representatives know. Not only would I email them in the link below (be sure to customize it and change it) but I would also call your representatives! It worked previously and will work now, but you need to be involved.

Alternatively, you can take action by sending an email. The Alliance for Natural Health makes it easy on SaveSupplements.com. Phone calls are more effective, but if for some reason you don’t want to call, Alliance for Natural Health has created a prewritten email that will be automatically sent to the U.S. president, senators and representatives.

 

 

 

May be an image of text that says 'THINKBIG BIG The day you plant the seed is not the day eat the fruit you Be patient Be hopeful'

 

The Law of One Search Results for ‘famine’

1 result found.

Search type: any match / exact term.

65.8 Questioner: Are you saying then that this possible condition of war would be much more greatly spread across the surface of the globe than anything we have experienced in the past and therefore touch a larger percentage of the population in this form of catalyst?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. There are those now experimenting with one of the major weapons of this scenario, that is the so-called psychotronic group of devices which are being experimentally used to cause such alterations in wind and weather as will result in eventual famine. If this program is not countered and proves experimentally satisfactory, the methods in this scenario would be made public. There would then be what those whom you call Russians hope to be a bloodless invasion of their personnel in this and every land deemed valuable. However, the peoples of your culture have little propensity for bloodless surrender.

We Are Fed Up; Hydrogen Peroxide Therapy; Tribulation to Soul Return; Why Three COVID Jabs Are Worse Than Two


Hydrogen Peroxide Therapy: Benefits and Side Effects


S. Mandelker PhD: Enduring Tribulation to Soul Return


logo

Why Three COVID Jabs Are Worse Than Two

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • COVID-19 is more than twice as prevalent among the boosted, compared to those who quit after the initial series. Those with a primary series plus one or two booster shots are catching the infection at a rate of 119.94 per 100,000, while those with the primary series only have an infection rate of 56.44 per 100,000
  • Pfizer’s pediatric trial reveals the shots raise, rather than lower, the risk of reinfection (meaning catching COVID more than once). In all, 12 of the children in Pfizer’s trial were diagnosed with COVID twice within the follow-up period (one to four months). Of those, 11 had received two or three jabs; only one unvaccinated child got COVID twice
  • Data from Moderna’s trial also suggest the shot makes adults more prone to repeat COVID infections, thanks to an inhibited antibody response
  • In Pfizer’s pediatric trial, six of the children, aged 2 to 4 years, in the vaccinated group were diagnosed with “severe COVID,” compared to just one in the placebo group. So, the shot may actually cause more severe infection in young children
  • In mid-June 2022, Israel experienced a sudden 70% spike in seriously ill COVID patients. The spike is being blamed on a new variant mutated from Omicron, referred to as BA.5., which is thought to be more resistant to vaccines than previous strains

Believe it or not, we’re now at the point where even mainstream media are reporting that COVID-19 is more prevalent among the boosted, compared to those who quit after the initial series. That doesn’t mean that sanity is returning; it’s just interesting that they’re not able to ignore it completely, even though their efforts to rationalize it teeter on the verge of lunacy. June 6, 2022, CBS News reported:1

“As COVID-19 cases began to accelerate again this spring, federal data suggests the rate of breakthrough COVID infections in April was worse in boosted Americans compared to unboosted Americans …

Meanwhile, federal officials are also preparing for key decisions on future COVID-19 vaccine shots … In the short term, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky recently told reporters that her agency was in talks with the Food and Drug Administration about extending the option for second boosters to more adults.”

If Walensky’s logic makes your brain feel like it’s been beat with a meat mallet, you’re not alone. It’s so beyond irrational as to be inexplicable. If boosters make you more prone to infection, is giving boosters to more people really the prudent answer?

Three Doses Makes You More Infection-Prone Than Two

Overall, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s new COVID dashboard2 show boosted Americans are catching COVID at nearly twice the rate of the unboosted — a statistic John Moore, professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medical College, attributes to the boosted feeling “more protected than they actually are,” and therefore taking fewer precautions.3

Considering we know that masks, social distancing and lockdowns don’t work to prevent infection spread, Moore’s explanation is flimsy at best. It’s far more reasonable to conclude that the COVID injections are the problem.

According to the CDC, the unvaccinated still account for a majority of positive COVID tests, at a rate of 188.2 per 100,000 as of April 23, 2022. Those with a primary series plus one or two booster shots are catching the infection at a rate of 119.94 per 100,000, while those with the primary series clock in at a rate of 56.44 per 100,000.

Of course, CBS is careful to note that “The new data do not mean booster shots are somehow increasing the risk” of COVID, but rather that “the shift underscores the growing complexity of measuring vaccine effectiveness at this stage of the pandemic.”4

CBS also misleadingly claims that while the boosted have more than double the rate of infections of the unboosted, it’s still “but a fraction of the levels among unvaccinated Americans.” However, 120 (rounded up from 119.94) is hardly “but a fraction” of 188. At 64% of the unvaccinated rate, using the term “a fraction of” seems like an intentional attempt to downplay just how common COVID is getting among the boosted.

COVID Jab Also Causes Repeat Reinfections

In related news, Pfizer’s pediatric trial reveals the shots raise rather than lower the risk of reinfection (meaning catching COVID more than once).

In his Substack article,5 “Finally Proven: Pfizer Vaccine Causes COVID Reinfection, Disables Natural Immunity,” Igor Chudov — a businessman and mathematician6 — points to the black-and-white data on page 38 of the documentation7 submitted to the FDA for its COVID jab Emergency Use Authorization request for use in children 6 months through 4 years of age. Here’s a screen shot with Chudov’s markings and notes:

Pfizer vaccine causes COVID reinfection

In all, 12 of the children in Pfizer’s trial were diagnosed with COVID twice within the follow-up period, which ranged from one to four months. Of those, 11 had received two or three jabs; only one child in the placebo (unvaccinated) group got COVID twice.

“So, what caused vaccinated children to develop a disproportionate amount of repeat infections? The vaccine, of course. It’s a randomized controlled trial, after all,” Chudov writes.8

“Thanks to Pfizer, we finally know that COVID reinfections are real and that their vaccine causes them by disabling natural immunity. A little caveat is that Pfizer made the trial purposely complicated (because it is a resuscitated FAILED trial where they added one more booster dose and more kids).

Pfizer vaccinated the control group. This complication somewhat affects the 6-23-month age category, but still shows obvious vaccine failure. The 2-4-year-old group is much less complicated: all reinfections happened in the vaccinated participants, five of six were from the first-vaccinated group.

‘All of these participants received 3 doses of assigned study intervention, except for one participant … who received two doses.’ We have a smoking gun that reinfections are vaccine driven.”

This post-jab reinfection anomaly has also been stressed by Dr. Clare Craig, a diagnostic pathologist,9 who reviewed some of the most damning data from Pfizer’s pediatric trial in a recent video (below).

Moderna Data Also Show Repeated Infections Are Likely

Data from Moderna’s trial also suggest the shot makes adults more prone to repeat infections, thanks to an inhibited antibody response. A preprint study10,11 posted on medRxiv April 19, 2022, found adult participants in Moderna’s trial who got the real injection, and later got a breakthrough infection, did not generate antibodies against the nucleocapsid — a key component of the virus — as frequently as did those in the placebo arm.

Placebo recipients produced anti-nucleocapsid antibodies twice as often as those who got the Moderna shot, and their anti-nucleocapsid response was larger regardless of the viral load. As a result of their inhibited antibody response, those who got the jab may be more prone to repeated COVID infections.

These findings are further corroborated by data from the U.K. Health Security Agency. It publishes weekly COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data, including anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels. The report12,13 for Week 13, issued March 31, 2022, shows that COVID-jabbed individuals with breakthrough infections indeed have lower levels of these antibodies.

Pfizer’s Data Do Not Support Use in Children

Another crucial piece of information that Craig highlights in her video is that of the 4,526 children enrolled in the trial, a whopping 3,000 dropped out. Pfizer does not explain this highly suspicious anomaly. Oftentimes, trial participants will drop out when side effects are too severe for them to continue.

Drug companies will also sometimes exclude participants who develop side effects they’d rather not divulge. This is one of those nasty loopholes that can skew results. Here, we don’t know why two-thirds of the participants were eliminated, and “on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void,” Craig says. Pfizer’s pediatric trial data also show that:

Six of the children, aged 2 to 4 years, in the vaccinated group were diagnosed with “severe COVID,” compared to just one in the placebo group. So, the likelihood the shot is causing severe COVID is higher than the likelihood that it’s preventing it.

The only child who required hospitalization for COVID was also in the “vaccinated” group.

In the three weeks following the first dose, 34 of the children in the vaccinated group and 13 of the unvaccinated children were diagnosed with COVID. That means the children’s risk of developing symptoms of COVID within the first three weeks of the first dose actually increased by 30%. These data were ignored.

Between doses two and three, there was an eight-week gap, and the vaccinated arm again experienced higher rates of COVID. This too was ignored. After the third dose, incidence of COVID was again raised in the vaccine group, and this was ignored as well.

In the end, they only counted three cases of COVID in the vaccine arm and seven cases in the placebo group. They literally ignored 97% of all the COVID cases that occurred during the trial to conclude that the shots were “effective” in preventing COVID.

More Evidence of Vaccine Failure

There’s really no shortage of evidence indicating the COVID shots are a complete failure and should be stopped immediately. One example I haven’t reviewed in previous articles is the difference between Portugal and Bulgaria.

In his article, Chudov14 presents the following graph from Our World in Data, which shows the rate of new COVID cases in these two countries. The vaccination rate in Portugal is 95%, whereas Bulgaria’s is 30%. Guess which country has the higher COVID case rate? The graph speaks for itself.

daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases per million people

In mid-June 2022, The Times of Israel also reported15 a sudden 70% spike in seriously ill COVID patients from one week to the next. According to Reuters’ COVID data tracker,16 Israel has administered enough doses to vaccinate 100.4% of its population with two doses, so it has one of the highest vaccine uptake rates in the world.

In mid-January 2022, Israel reported17 a fourth dose (second booster) was “only partially effective” against Omicron. Lead researcher, professor Gili Regev-Yochay, told reporters, “Despite a significant increase in antibodies after the fourth vaccine, this protection is only partially effective against the Omicron strain, which is relatively resistant to the vaccine.”

The latest spikes in both Israel and Portugal are being blamed on a new variant mutated from Omicron, referred to as BA.5.18 According to The Times of Israel,19 coronavirus czar Dr. Salman Zarka said “the new variant BA.5 is quickly gaining traction and is more resistant to vaccines than previous strains.” So, what’s Israel’s answer? More shots to encourage “herd immunity” and more mask wearing.

Natural Immunity Versus the COVID Jab

An analysis of the Omicron wave in Qatar is also illustrative of vaccine failure. June 21, 2022, The Epoch Times reported20 on the study,21 published the week before in the New England Journal of Medicine. In summary:

  • People with previous infection (natural immunity) and no COVID jab had 50.2% immunity against symptomatic BA.1 infection (a subvariant of Omicron) for at least 324 days. Against the BA.2 variant, natural immunity was 46.1%
  • People with no previous infection (no natural immunity) who got two doses of the Pfizer shot had immunity against BA.1 infection ranging from −16.4% on the low end to 5.4% on the high end on day 268 after the last dose. The average was -4.9%. Against the BA.2 variant, immunity was -1.1% on average. Most entered the negative ranges around the six-month mark
  • The effectiveness of three doses and no previous infection against BA.1 was 59.6%, which persisted for at least 42 days (the extent of the follow-up). Against BA.2, immunity topped out at 52.2%

Though the authors’ conclusion was that there were “No discernable differences in protection” between vaccination and natural immunity, ask yourself which you would rather have: 50% immunity for at least 10 months, or 50% immunity for about six months followed by an increased risk of infection (negative protection) thereafter?

Clearly, if your goal is to avoid infection, you would avoid anything that will — immediately or in the future — raise your risk. Yet, in the upside-down world we now find us in, the answer continues to be: “Get another shot.”

As discussed in “FDA and Pfizer Knew COVID Shot Caused Immunosuppression,” Pfizer’s trial data also reveal they’ve not ruled out the risk of antibody-dependent enhancement, and vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) is listed22 as an “Important Potential Risk.” (ADE and VAED are two terms that basically refer to the same thing — worsened disease post-injection.)

So, not only are you at increased risk of COVID infection, and repeated reinfections, if you get the jab — especially if you get boosted — but you may also experience more severe illness, which is the opposite of what anyone would want. U.K. government data show that, compared to the unvaccinated, those who have received two doses are:23

  • Up to three times more likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19
  • Twice more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19
  • Three times more likely to die of COVID-19

Final Thoughts

In closing, it’s clear there are no long-term benefits to the COVID jabs, only risk. How much more data do we need before our health agencies snap to and start protecting public health?

I don’t have an answer to that question, seeing how nothing works the way it’s supposed to anymore. Our health agencies have been captured by the drug industry and have basically gone rogue. They ignore even the most basic rules and ethics nowadays.

Something will clearly need to be done about that, but until then, the best advice I have is to take control of your own health and make decisions based on actual data rather than corporate press releases.

If you’ve already taken one or more COVID jabs and now regret it, first, the most important step you can take is to not take any more shots. Next, if you suspect your health may have been impacted, check out the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance’s (FLCCC) post-vaccine treatment protocol, I-RECOVER,24 which you can download from covid19criticalcare.com in several different languages.

Pentagon Biolaboratories – Investigative Documentary

Pentagon Biolaboratories – Investigative Documentary

The US Embassy to Tbilisi is involved in the trafficking of frozen human blood and pathogens as diplomatic cargo for a secret military program. Internal documents, leaked to Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva by Georgian insiders, implicate US scientists in the transportation of and experimenting on pathogens under diplomatic cover. According to these documents, Pentagon scientists have been deployed to the Republic of Georgia and have been given diplomatic immunity to research deadly diseases and biting insects at the Lugar Center – the Pentagon biolaboratory in Georgia’s capital Tbilisi. The military facility is just one of the many Pentagon biolaboratories in 25 countries across the world. This investigative documentary was originally broadcast by Al Mayadeen TV. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWyO9…


Has the US Funded Bioweapons Research in Ukraine?
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola


Victoria Nuland

%d bloggers like this: