Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex
Professors are apologizing for saying ‘male’ and ‘female.’ Students are policing teachers. This is what it looks like when activism takes over medicine.
Today we bring you another installment of Katie Herzog’s ongoing series about the spread of woke ideology in the field of medicine. Her first story focused on the ideological purge at the top medical schools and teaching hospitals in the country. “Wokeness,” as one doctor put it, “feels like an existential threat.”
Katie’s latest reporting illustrates some of the most urgent elements of that threat. It focuses on how biological sex is being denied by professors fearful of being smeared by their students as transphobic. And it shows how the true victims of that denial are not sensitive medical students but patients, perhaps most importantly, transgender ones.
Some of you may find Katie’s story shocking and disconcerting and perhaps even maddening. You might also ask yourself: How has it come to this? How has this radical ideology gone from the relatively obscure academic fringe to the mainstream in such a short time?
Those are among the questions that motivate this newsletter. We feel obligated to chronicle in detail and in primary accounts the takeover of our institutions by this ideology — and the consequences of it.
So far, it has taken root in some of our leading medical schools. Some. Not all. But I’m left thinking: What state will American medicine — or any other American institution — find itself in after being routed by this ideology?
During a recent endocrinology course at a top medical school in the University of California system, a professor stopped mid-lecture to apologize for something he’d said at the beginning of class.
“I don’t want you to think that I am in any way trying to imply anything, and if you can summon some generosity to forgive me, I would really appreciate it,” the physician says in a recording provided by a student in the class (whom I’ll call Lauren). “Again, I’m very sorry for that. It was certainly not my intention to offend anyone. The worst thing that I can do as a human being is be offensive.”
His offense: using the term “pregnant women.”
“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”
It wasn’t the first time Lauren had heard an instructor apologize for using language that, to most Americans, would seem utterly inoffensive. Words like “male” and “female.”
Why would medical school professors apologize for referring to a patient’s biological sex? Because, Lauren explains, in the context of her medical school “acknowledging biological sex can be considered transphobic.”
When sex is acknowledged by her instructors, it’s sometimes portrayed as a social construct, not a biological reality, she says. In a lecture on transgender health, an instructor declared: “Biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender are all constructs. These are all constructs that we have created.”
In other words, some of the country’s top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like all other mammals, a species comprising two sexes.
The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation.
The idea that sex is a social construct may be interesting debate fodder in an anthropology class. But in medicine, the material reality of sex really matters, in part because the refusal to acknowledge sex can have devastating effects on patient outcomes.
In 2019, the New England Journal of Medicine reported the case of a 32-year-old transgender man who went to an ER complaining of abdominal pain. While the patient disclosed he was transgender, his medical records did not. He was simply a man. The triage nurse determined that the patient, who was obese, was in pain because he’d stopped taking a medication meant to relieve hypertension.
This was no emergency, she decided. She was wrong: The patient was, in fact, pregnant and in labor. By the time hospital staff realized that, it was too late. The baby was dead. And the patient, despite his own shock at being pregnant, was shattered.
Professors Running Scared of Students
To Dana Beyer, a trans activist in Maryland who is also a retired surgeon, such stories illustrate how vital it is that sex, not just gender identity — how someone perceives their gender — is taken into consideration in medicine. “The practice of medicine is based in scientific reality, which includes sex, but not gender,” Beyer says. “The more honest a patient is with their physician, the better the odds for a positive outcome.”
The denial of sex doesn’t help anyone, perhaps least of all transgender patients who require special treatment. But, Lauren says, instructors who discuss sex risk complaints from their students — which is why, she thinks, many don’t. “I think there’s a small percentage of instructors who are true believers. But most of them are probably just scared of their students,” she says.
And for good reason. Her medical school hosts an online forum in which students correct their instructors for using terms like “male” and “female” or “breastfeed” instead of “chestfeed.”
Students can lodge their complaints in real time during lectures.
After one class, Lauren says, she heard that a professor was so upset by students calling her out for using “male” and “female” that she started crying.
Then there are the petitions. At the beginning of the year, students circulated a number of petitions designed to, as Lauren puts it, “name and shame” instructors for “wrongspeak.”
One was delivered after a lecture on chromosomal disorders in which the professor used the pronouns “she” and “her” as well as the terms “father” and “son,” all of which, according to the students, are “cisnormative.” After the petition was delivered, the instructor emailed the class, noting that while she had consulted with a member of the school’s LGBTQ Committee prior to the lecture, she was sorry for using such “binary” language.
Another petition was delivered after an instructor referred to “a man changing into a woman,” which, according to the students, incorrectly assumed that the trans woman wasn’t always a woman. But, as Lauren points out, “if trans women were born women, why would they need to transition?”
This phenomenon — of students policing teachers; of students being treated as the authorities over and above their teachers — has had consequences.
“Since the petitions were sent out, instructors have been far more proactive about ‘correcting’ their slides in advance or sending out emails to the school listserv if any upcoming material has ‘outdated’ terminology,” Lauren tells me. “At first, compliance is demanded from outside, and eventually the instructors become trained to police their own language proactively.”
In one point in the semester, a faculty member sent out a preemptive email warning students about forthcoming lectures containing language that doesn’t align with the school’s “approach to gender inclusivity and gender/sex antioppression.” That language included the term “premenopausal women.” In the future, the professor promised, this would be updated to “premenopausal people.”
Lauren also says young doctors are being taught to declare their pronouns upon meeting patients and ask for patients’ pronouns in return. This was echoed by a recent graduate of Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. “Everything was about pronouns,” the student said. The student objected to this, thinking most patients would be confused or offended by a doctor asking them what their pronouns were, but she never said so — at least not publicly. “It was impossible to push back without worrying about getting expelled,” she told me.
This hypersensitivity is undermining medical training. And many of these students are likely not even aware that their education is being informed by ideology.
“Take abdominal aortic aneurysms,” Lauren says. “These are four times as likely to occur in males than females, but this very significant difference wasn’t emphasized. I had to look it up, and I don’t have the time to look up the sex predominance for the hundreds of diseases I’m expected to know. I’m not even sure what I’m not being taught, and unless my classmates are as skeptical as I am, they probably aren’t aware either.”
Other conditions that present differently and at different rates in males and females include hernias, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and asthma, among many others. Males and females also have different normal ranges for kidney function, which impacts drug dosage. They have different symptoms during heart attacks: males complain of chest pain, while women experience fatigue, dizziness, and indigestion.
In other words: biological sex is a hugely important factor in knowing what ails patients and how to properly treat them.
Carole Hooven is the author of T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us and a professor at Harvard who focuses on behavioral endocrinology. I discussed Lauren’s story with her and Hooven found it deeply troubling. “Today’s students will go on to hold professional positions that give them a great deal of power over others’ bodies and minds. These young people are our future doctors, educators, researchers, statisticians, psychologists. To ignore or downplay the reality of sex and sex-based differences is to perversely handicap our understanding and our ability to increase human health and thriving.”
A former dean of a leading medical school agrees: “I don’t know the extent to which the stories you relate are now widespread in medical education, but to the extent that they are — and I hear some of this is popping up at my own institution — they are a serious departure from the expectation that medical education and practice should be based on science and be free from imposition of ideology and ideology-based intimidation.”
He added: “How male and female members of our species develop, how they differ genetically, anatomically, physiologically, and with respect to diseases and their treatment are foundational to clinical medicine and research. Efforts to erase or diminish these foundations should be unacceptable to responsible professional leaders.”
There is no doubt the rules are changing. According to the American Psychological Association, the terms “natal sex” and “birth sex,” for example, are now considered “disparaging”; the preferred term is “assigned sex at birth.” The National Institutes of Health, the CDC, and Harvard Medical School have all made efforts to divorce sex from medicine and emphasize gender identity.
When Asking Questions Can Destroy Your Career
While it’s unclear if this trend will remain limited to some medical schools, what is perfectly clear is that activism, specifically around issues of sex, gender, and race, is impacting scientific research and progress.
One of the most notorious examples is that of a physician and former associate professor at Brown University, Lisa Littman.
Around 2014, Littman began to notice a sudden uptick in female adolescents in her social network who were coming out as transgender boys. Until recently, the incidence of gender dysphoria was thought to be rare, affecting an estimated one in 10,000 people in the U.S.
While the exact number of trans-identifying adolescents (or adults, for that matter) is unknown, in the last decade or so, the number of youth seeking treatment for gender dysphoria has spiked by over 1,000 percent in the U.S.; in the U.K., it’s jumped by 4,000 percent. The largest youth gender clinic in Los Angeles reportedly saw 1,000 patients in 2019. That same clinic, in 2009, saw about 80.
Curious about what was happening, Littman surveyed about 250 parents whose adolescent children had announced they were transgender — after never before exhibiting the symptoms of gender dysphoria. Over 80 percent of cases involved girls; many were part of friend groups in which half or more of the members had come out as trans.
Littman coined the term “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” to describe this phenomenon. She posited that it might be a sort of social contagion, not unlike cutting or anorexia, both of which were endemic among teenage girls when I was in high school in the ’90s.
In August 2018, Littman published her results in a paper called “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Study of Parental Reports” in the journal PLOS One. Littman, the journal, and Brown University were pummeled with accusations of transphobia in the press and on social media. In response, the journal announced an investigation into Littman’s work.
Several hours later, Brown University issued a press release denouncing the professor’s paper.
Littman’s paper was republished in March 2019 with an amended title and other minor, mostly cosmetic changes. The journal has since confirmed that, while the paper was “corrected,” the original version contained no false information.
But Littman’s career was forever altered. She no longer teaches at Brown. And her contract at the Rhode Island State Health Department wasn’t renewed.
Littman is hardly alone. Trans activists have also targeted Ray Blanchard and Ken Zucker in Toronto, Michael Bailey at Northwestern, and Stephen Gliske at the University of Michigan for publishing findings they deemed transphobic. In a recent case, trans activists shut down research that was to be conducted by UCLA psychiatrist Jamie Feusner, who had hoped to explore the physiological underpinnings of gender dysphoria.
Nor is this limited to academia. Journalists who question the new ideological orthodoxy, like Abigail Shrier and Jesse Singal (with whom I co-host a podcast), have also been smeared for their work.
After the American Booksellers Association included Shrier’s book, Irreversible Damage, in a promotional mailing to bookstores, activists went ballistic, prompting the ABA’s CEO to apologize for having done “horrific harm” that “traumatized and endangered members of the trans community” and “caused violence and pain.”
This is taken from a very long article. Read the rest here: substack.com
Header image: Getty Images
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
sir_isO
| #
Riiiiiiiiiight…
There are enormous amounts of toxic, endocrine disrupting factors (sunlight, low iodine, fluorine, chlorine, BPAs, PFOAs, xenoestrogenic glyphosate, atrazine, etc).
ENORMOUS amounts.
That endocrine damage leads to developmental, mental and physiological issues.
So, because a lot of what causes that involves significant, common factors (like I mentioned)…rather than EVER addressing that, you normalize the results of it.
Why? Because “freemasonry” is faggotry.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
I’m sorry, but if you are a male and you tell me you are a woman I’m going to say you’re a confused male in denial, because of LOADS of toxic factors that those doing the toxification (and you) refuse to address.
Address your and their sickness. It’s most physiological, with a big dose of societal normalization of BULLSHIT, including brainwashing to avoid addressing the degenerate causes.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
I know a google engineer.
The guy reckons he’s a woman.
He’s simply souled out, a near robotic absolutely delusional and irrational, degenerated brainwashed moron in denial.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Aside from just “metrosexuality”…
That huge combination of endocrine disrupting effects makes people REALLY STUPID aside from chronically sick (which is also why chronic sickness, autism, metrosexuality and drone behaviour, zealous, religious sort of crap is predictably increases). And from birth they attack development.
I wouldn’t subject a child to this world, I know it far too well.
People are on average around 50 (if not more) IQ points more stupid than they should be.
Whatever is peddles progress by establishment is always exactly the opposite, and instead degeneration.
THAT IS THEIR MAIN GOAL, TO DEGENERATE YOU, BECAUSE IF YOU BELIEVE THEIR GARBAGE, IF YOU ARE SICKENED, YOU ARE MORE EASILY CONTROLLED.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Like, to describe that general religious degenerated brainwashed moron consensus zombiedronerobosheep mentality resulting from mainly endocrine disruption…in what sort of RETARD world do you think a guy like fauci is worth admiring or worth more than a small pile of shit?
Reply
sir_isO
| #
I just have to mention…
“Students are policing teachers. This is what it looks like when activism takes over medicine.”
Do you not see the ironic denialism from both aspects? The “medicine teacher”, resulted in the degeneration, which is used as coopted victims. To hilariously, blame the “teachers ” for not being degenerate enough.
Why? To promote worse degeneration.
What you know as “medicine”, has ALWAYS been about degeneration, as is plainly obvious. No “medicines” allowed seem to address individual, essential, health factors. All “medicines” are generalized attacks on results of unaddressed problems with non-specific, non-essential toxic shit, to perpetuate more degeneration.
I’m sorry, but those claiming to practise “medicine”, as a fraternity, abandoned physics. Virology is one of the most blatant examples, using high level abstract interpretations that TOTALLY avoids processes and derives their underlying ignorance from alterations (deviating from truth), projections and entirely fictitious, religious belief.
Reply
Moffin
| #
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
A quote often attributed to Joseph Goebbels.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Exactly what happens when I try have a discussion about the fundamental fraud of “viruses”, common toxins, common factors ignored.
I’m I don’t get rebuttals or arguments and instead, I get banned, ad hominem attacks or censored.
Btw, those actions, at the very least, confirming the religiosity of my opponents.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Excuse my typing/posting, that was meant as a reply to the post above it, minus the typing errors.
But essentially, the establishment, industrialist corporatism, state, political religion (such as “science) is at all times to degenerate you.
Think of the proxy wars between say, America and Russia. Neither attacked each other, but the rhetoric is dominant. And they have wars, as industrial, corporatist state (whether corporate statism like america, or state corporatism like china) “against” each other, in proxy locations. Because it’s super legit, right?
Now, just imagine, in their proxy war (“medicine”, for instance), as a citizen, those industrialist states are against you and vying for your belief, your spirit as YOU are the proxy territory in the war.
Why is it that when I speak with people about things they believe in, they know nothing about that?
Reply
Howdy
| #
But essentially, the establishment, industrialist corporatism, state, political religion (such as “science) is at all times to degenerate you.
Now, just imagine, in their proxy war (“medicine”, for instance), as a citizen, those industrialist states are against you and vying for your belief, your spirit as YOU are the proxy territory in the war.
Why is it that when I speak with people about things they believe in, they know nothing about that?”
Why are we, the resistance, and all others like us, different osiris?
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Mainly, homogenization.
Homogenization is redundancy. Essentially entropic. Borg, Qlippoth, Sheep, call it what you will.
The constant in nature, is change. Industry suppresses that, tries to slow it attack it, slow it down, because it’s as product that can’t keep pace.
https://luxsaturni.com/kabbalah/malkuth/nightside-of-malkuth
I mean, I’m just guessing, and it is only a conceptual thing (regardless of religion)…but “freemasonry” is the veil.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Mind my typing.
But it’s essentially the same concept that you can see in artificial scarcity.
The less there is of something, the easier it is to control. So if you homogenize people, there are, effectively, less people. If they all behaved the same, you only need to understand/manipulate one subject to be able to understand/manipulate the other subjects.
So it’s quite important to not go with “consensus”, imo.
Howdy
| #
What If these people were created for this purpose? A design of Nature. Or the Divine plan?
sir_isO
| #
Howdy,
If they were created for that purpose, it also means they have no will.
I dunno, I’m optimistic in the sense that I know people should be better than they are, but I canot explain why they are not better.
Perhaps it is a situation where that which is inferior and has been paraded as progress is destined to be annihilated to make space for progress.
After all, if you accept the concept of loving everything, you have no distinct contribution to anything and you will forever run in circles.
sir_isO
| #
There isn’t anyone who used to know me that knows me.
Btw, I think narcissism is a virtue. So is judgment. I could easily explain.
Howdy
| #
“If they were created for that purpose, it also means they have no will.”
Perhaps they have, but destiny is in control.
Something of a conundrum, but I firmly believe free will is there, but still constrained in choices
“paraded as progress is destined to be annihilated to make space for progress.”
I believe something similar is on the cards.
“There isn’t anyone who used to know me that knows me.”
Ditto.
Narcissism is a useful tool where it is serving a purpose in a life. Maybe a learning tool, otherwise I see it a detraction.
Judgement is an invaluable tool also, when used correctly.
sir_isO
| #
Howdy,
My reasoning regarding narcissism is based on observing any organism.
Noone can actually tell me why narcissism is intrinsically considered bad, even though they’re all hypocritely self-important.
If I say I’m the best and what you deem to be my opinion, is correct, that isn’t inherently wrong or bad. I might actually be the best and correct.
Otoh, I could be homogenized through scripture and inherit institutional self-importance and derive my narcissism from that, in denial. Almost like a surrogate, or delegated psychopathy.
Howdy
| #
“If I say I’m the best and what you deem to be my opinion, is correct, that isn’t inherently wrong or bad. I might actually be the best and correct.”
I believe we did agree osiris.
Howdy
| #
I believe it is far deeper than that. The “war” continues until harmony presides. Common sense will eventually reign, until next time.
Reply
Alan
| #
The lecturers need to stand up to the students and kick them off the courses.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Alan,
He should flunk them if they can’t distinguish between male and female. When my brother came down with cancer he was diagnosed with stage 4 ovarian cancer.
Herb
Reply
Charles Higley
| #
“students correct their instructors for using terms like “male” and “female” or “breastfeed” instead of “chestfeed.””
How about reducing them to animals and call this “mammary-gland feeding”? If you don’t have mammary glands you are not in this group, which is clearly not inclusive of all. How many men ry to have babies suckle from them? Yeah, none that are not perverts.
“One was delivered after a lecture on chromosomal disorders in which the professor used the pronouns “she” and “her” as well as the terms “father” and “son,” all of which, according to the students, are “cisnormative.” ”
Hey, the professor used his pronouns properly as he was taking about cisnormative people. How is that a problem? They are complaining about accuracy, no realizing that they are spending their time trying to find problems that do not exist, except in the victimhood view of the world. Do we call all young animals puppies, regardless if they are actually chicks, foals, fawns, kittens? NO!
I would flunk anyone who is that petty, as they should never become responsible for other people’s health. They actually are trying to count coup on higher authority through petty issues, which shows an evil side of them that should not be fostered or allowed in medicine. As a former rising university professor in biochemistry, I worked with a weight-challenged female professor who hated women and made our female students’ lives specifically hard in a course I co-taught with her. She was purposely misinforming the women of organic test results. They ended up coming to me and I figured out the scam. When I left the university, the Head of Biochemistry assured me that she would never get tenure, as we do not need people like that.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
A long time ago, I decided on a simple qualifier.
You are able to give birth, or not. If you are able to, naturally, I would probably reckon you’re legit. Until then, you’re disqualified from attempting to punch women in say, sports, or enter their bathrooms without their consent.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
I dunno hey, they are products of the industrial institutions, they are the representatives of the institutions. They are the “future” of the institutions. So it tells you a lot about the “progress” of institution.
Like I said, what is shit, does shit, the result is shit, and that shit, in denial attacks the other shit that caused it in the shit system and. So their teacher shits, along with them, perpetuating that system through cultist-like inheritance…worse shit. While neither recognizing they are fundamentally shit.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Let me ask you…
Which one of you morons think children should be taught (if at all) the same things, instead of choose??
How many retards, think that your bodily status is such, in the future, that you can “prevent” toxicity, by adding preemptive toxicity that cannot defend against that? What that means is that vaccines are by definition, physical assault. Whether you as a parent consented or not.
How many imbeciles, think an 80 year old and a 5 year old have the same health status and need the same elements?
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Let’s take antibodies, for instance.
Antibodies always result (if possible, assuming the body is capable of still filtering toxic shit), from toxic shit. Pretty much any toxic shit.
So antibodies are markers of toxicity. Now, let’s say your body has some toxic inputs, perhaps it breaks some proteins. Perhaps those proteins are then ejected from cells. Maybe, because physically, things tend to equillibrium…if there were for instance, good enough redox capacity, it would probably result in some lesser form of the toxic reaction, perhaps encapsulated to be filtered through sweat, urine, feces.
All of that would of course require effort/energy from the body, mitochondria to try and keep shit going. You know, effort it could’ve spent on say, I dunno…chromosomal progress.
These are pretty obvious physical results people are not noticing. If you didn’t understand that, it means that if you have antibodies against something, that simply means you were toxified by something and your body wasted some of its capacity to deal with that. Ideally, you would have basically no antibodies.
Everything they peddle is turned around like that, results as causes, bad as good, suffering is a virtue, slavery is freedom, fascism is liberty, religion is science, etc.
I dunno hey. If you ask people about the why, how, what about vaccines, viruses. Even virologists, when it gets to the real shit, they’re lost.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Let’s look at something like PQQ, for instance.
It’s a redox factor (among other potential uses, simply because they try quantize seamless physics as chemistry, so their process understanding is retarded)…
Anyway, as a redox factor, it has around 20000x cycle capacity, so it’s stable, it doesn’t break down easily. It happens to be prevalent in breastmilk, for instance, at fairly high amounts. Infants would of course also be quite small, so exacerbated effect.
Now, that PQQ, is related to what they call “immune system memory”. It’s pretty simple, that redox capacity, is the “memory”. Except it’s not a memory. It’s a capacitor. Morons.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Sorry, I was trying to rant about how remarkably consistent the ignorance in these institutions, society is regardless of the supposed issues, coz they’re connected.
Avoid addressing degenerate causes, reframe degenerate results as causes, use reframed results to push more degeneration.
You have “medical” establishment trying to normalize results from endocrine disruption, degeneration. The toxic causative factors are ignored (because “medical” establishment is VERY guilty of much of the degeneration). That is HUGE in every aspect of health, development, mental function, “immunity”.
That medical establishment, having been established by say, the likes of rockefeller industrial monopoly, for pushing degeneration. To sell toxins as “medicine”. That’s their only function. The understanding of “medicine” is almost nil, because those in “medicine” are taught generalized religious texts to support and enable industrial pharma motivations. Those in “medicine” are fundamentally undermined, subverted. And they are told to conform and be homogenized script-followers (just like any religion), never question.
Almost everything taught, as a result, is essentially worthless and based on fundamental fraud or at best, significant errors. And there are enormous amounts of clues for that, in almost any sort of essential nutrient or toxic factor you can think of.
So instead of recognizing rampant disease from endocrine disruption, the results of that is used to peddle more degenerate crap. Like for instance, selling toxified, confused people more synthetic estrogens and never addressing those causes.
Same with say, covid. It’s related to respiratory, oxygenation function to a large degree, so what they do is ignore all the causative degenerate factors…and introduce some more to compound that.
Masks, anxiety, EMF (oxidative stress), avoiding sunlight, using ventilators, drugs that worsen related and other function, vaccines that worsen that, etc.
When people even say shit like “Ivermectin kills covid” they have no fucking clue what they’re talking about. Firstly, “viruses” are dead.
Covid could be a guy that was stabbed, an opioid addict, or an 80 year old diabetic.
Covid is just a name, a collection of conflated (potential) symptoms AND it requires religious belief.
So you’re telling me Ivermectin kills something that is fundamentally fraudulent, interchangeable with a bunch of other things, and that something happens to be the result of huge amounts of essential and toxic factors.
Tell me how ivermectin functions as this broad spectrum faith killer. What does it do to improve your health? Why can’t people tell me that? Does it have antioxidant function? Does it suppress some important metabolic function, does it simply alter specimen signatures so it messes with worthless PCR “test” results and that makes it “disagreeable” to narrative? Who knows? I’m sure someone would’ve tested some of these things.
When I for instance know that say low, vitamin A, vitamin D is associated with RTIs, regardless of the name given to those RTIs…those symptoms of that deficiency are somewhat consistent and that those deficiencies are particularly common…how is it that you can address THOSE deficiencies with ivermectin?
I know the HCQ, ivermectin is marketing garbage. It’s subversive. Both are products from industrial pharma. Both are toxic, non-essential, involve messing with say, electrical function in the body. Chlorine, sodium, potassium, magnesium related. HCQ and ivermectin seem to be focused on the chlorine side of the metabolic equation, that alone tells me I’m gonna avoid it.
I honestly think they’re just marketing the crap out of HCQ and ivermectin, as they’re functional parts of the “let’s toxify you” narrative. Like hyping their products for future sales.
Imagine say, some people get sick and classified as having “covid” after being vaccinated. So now what are they gonna think?
“Fuck, vaccines didn’t give me immunity to vitamin D deficiency issues in winter every year, WTF.
I can’t trust that anymore, let’s trust ivermectin and HCQ which happens to be peddled by industrial pharma also, based on the same fraudulent principles.
Now that my body has been damaged more, the body’s electrical function is worsened and my BBB more compromised I’m sure it’ll address my exacerbated vitamin D deficiency as well as numerous other factors that would’ve become deficient due to damage from the vaccines”
But anyway, if you can understand why it is associated with the faith killing of the phantom conflation, it might give you clues about what you should actually be addressing and/or disrupting religious beliefs.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
In the mean time, the american DOJ and media is basically fomenting civil war.
Justice Department absurdly declares that mandatory coronavirus vaccinations are somehow LEGAL, claiming the government owns your body
https://science.news/2021-08-02-justice-department-mandatory-coronavirius-vaccinations-are-legal.html
I’m pretty sure they’re going to try and justify shit with UFOs and crap too.
There comes a time where you have to recognize countries are meaningless, and you have to recognize that when those countries are “united” it’s even more meaningless and merely a perpetuation, culmination of worse enslavement.
So when De Blasio says something about imposition, from his position of absolute existential insecurity…like this…
“”New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio responded to the DOJ’s July 26 opinion paper, calling it “important” and “helpful.” He also called on public sector entities to “move as quickly as possible” through the vaccine mandates. De Blasio told MSNBC: “It’s time for mandates because it’s the only way to protect our people.””
What do you identify as your people? Do you consider De Blasio as “your people” or that he considers you as part of “our people” (from his perspective)?
They are shitting their pants because they are incredibly guilty, massively indicted and have no way to address THEIR demise, so as a sort of spiteful act from that insecurity…try to degenerate/kill/force you.
Reply
sir_isO
| #
I really need to make a point about this “medical system”.
For the health of the medical system, you should perhaps go look at their fundamentals (and I’m not even talking about the fraudulent “science”). I mean, industry is about profit motive and exploitation.
So to sustain the medical system’s health (measured in profit units derived from exploiting you), requires you to be sick, it requires your belief that only toxins can fix you.
Because the medical system is sick, it requires constituent believers such as you, to sustain it. That sickened medical system, dies if you are healthy. So everything about that industry’s “narcissism” is reliant on you, because it’s parasitic.
But look at the reality, people generally DO believe that only industrial toxins can improve their health. Their disease rates keep on increasing, but the medical system’s health (easily measured in revenue) keeps on growing.
Sure, you could say people live longer, but then again…you could attribute to enormous amounts of other factors, including food availability, hygiene, conveniences…is it worth being 100 years old with 17 chronic diseases since infancy though?
Isn’t that kinda like torture? Like a parasite exploiting you for as long as possible, as long as you allow it to.
Reply