Health

2026-04-17

It's been a long time in gestation, ever since the UN became the political arm of the WEF and its Big Pharma "charitable foundations" contributors - by amazing coincidence just in time for the Covid-19 "pandemic"!

Now that everybody has been asleep for the last few years, tired of the brain-numbing pedantry of those who would remotely rule over us from the commanding heights of the United Nations global government without the least shred of accountability, the WHO has contrived to confirm the IHR Amendments and the Pandemic Treaty (not to mention the PABS deal) and thus to gain all necessary powers to impose another pandemic at the sole behest of their Director General, one ever-reliable 

Ignore the Evidence, Look at the Test

2026-04-15

The "precautionary principle" is supposed to be foundational in regulatory matters, yet even to the casual observer it would seem that it is honoured more in the breach than in the observance.

In matters medical, controversial assertions about the efficacy of treatments seem to have been going on for ever without any clear resolution in sight, and in matters concerning electrical / electronic radiation much the same comment applies.

In matters legal we might also observe a lack of effective regulation - how can it possibly be ethical to prosecute anybody for offering a cure for a deadly disease without first ascertaining whether that cure actually works?

So in the age of all things "smart" which invariably rely on devices

2026-04-15

Cause and effect. One follows the other, by definition. The effect cannot precede the cause, because at that point the cause did not exist.

Likewise a cause without an effect cannot be said to have caused anything. If the cause doesn't cause the effect then the link between cause and effect is... broken. So the cause doesn't cause the effect and it cannot be the cause.

All clear?

Perhaps this simple logic should be more widely applied... in multiple areas of life.

2026-04-12

Following on from "Are You a Suitable Case for Treatment?" we list the four psychological walls of human self-justification that the industry encourages us to build around the various possible bad circumstances to which the use of their products by individuals may lead.

Yes, it's all in the mind, all impossible to prove/disprove at the individual level, and all a result of the uncritical acceptance of a single proposition: that the industry has our well-being at heart...   

But doesn't the USA have RICO laws for a reason? (And should not the regulators be independently testing the validity of these notions at the population level, where it is provable? Likewise should not the media be reporting on how well the regulators are doing? And if neither of these are doing their job, how well are the public supporting those independent investigators who are trying to

2026-04-09

Following on from "Are You a Suitable Case for Treatment?" we list more Treatments that you might want to read up about...

• Feeling Better, Getting Worse: How Psychiatric Drugs Create the Illusion They Cure

• Escape form Psychiatry - if you can...
  "Every other door in the shift from conventional to terrain-based health opens from the inside. This one is locked, and the people who hold the key have no interest in turning it"
  
  

2026-04-06

This is one where medical bureaucrats maybe really do place a tick in a box.

But is there a vaccine for it? Tricky this - if it's spread by ticks then will a face-mask suffice in crowded pubs (as public spaces will come to be called in the absence of the real thing)?

Will the bureaucrats all be guilty of spreading the disease without knowing it? Will further pandemic measures have to be invented to stop them?

And how could we survive the agonising wait for a vaccine, even if developed at warp speed, in our modern bureaucracy-ridden society? 

Indeed, how could a properly-regulated vaccine ever be developed without a veritable orgy of box-ticking?

Something will have to give.

Sit down before you read

2026-04-04

This follows on from Questions for the Medic Who Claims that You are a Suitable Case for Treatment.

"Once you see how the vocabulary operates, you will start noticing it everywhere — in your doctor’s office, in news reports, in the diagnosis you or someone you love may have already received"

Truly the spells under which we labour are all in the words used - words that presuppose notions that "they' want us to believe but of which we should be very wary. 

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they're not out to get you!

Four more topic-specific notions of which to be

2026-04-02

Following on from our recent article Could You Put Assumed Authority in its Rightful Place? which might help to deal with an unlawful legal challenge, there is scope for some companion article along the lines of "Could You Challenge your Medical Treatment Plan?". Most people (myself included prior to 2000) simply assume that "doctor knows best", but is that true?

It has always been problematic to me that it is illegal for anybody (except our NHS of course) to claim that they can cure cancer. How then is a cure to be found? Only by contributing to cancer research charities, who have been researching fruitlessly for my entire lifetime - perhaps if they had started looking elsewhere than in our wallets they might have had more success.

Then I developed urticaria and subsequently asthma. To be met with prescriptions for steroids /  inhalers that suppressed

2026-03-31

Plenty, one might think, given the growing scepticism about "pandemics", their "partnership" with the WEF, their funding from Big Pharma (eg: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and their GAVI vaccine interests) and the cessation of funding from the United States of America.

Plus the odd lawsuit that seem to be proliferating in the USA and the Netherlands to call the industry to account.

The Brownstone Institute suspects that all things considered, the time is now right for a significant level of reform to be agreed upon so that its role for the future can be more in line with its original objectives, rather than the consolidation of medical control under a centralised global body that accepts too much funding (and associated conflicts of interest) from corporate bodies (and their affiliated "charitable foundations") and exerts too much authority over national medical issues whilst

2026-03-28

Del Bigtree has been at the forefront of the movement to call Big Pharma and the medical "regulators" to account, via his Highwire and ICAN journalist platforms.

Following in the footsteps of Dr Andrew Wakefield, who was the first high-profile doctor to challenge the prevailing vaccine orthodoxy that I recall (largely because my wife and I had discussions about vaccinating our own kids at the time) and was roundly vilified for it, Del was perhaps the first major journalist to mount an independent publicly funded challenge to one of the biggest industrial groupings of our time - one might describe it as the pharmaceutical-medico-industrial-regulatory complex. Or perhaps more accurately the pharmaceutical-medico-industrial-regulatory-BillandMelindaGatesFoundation complex.

Del was led by the Universe to appoint up-coming lawyer Aaron Siri to depose the "godfather of vaccination", Stanley Plotkin, in a

2026-03-26

Gallstones are not a major health issue (unless you have them).

But they have significance to the Covid measures because "Gallstones are not known to be caused by Covid-19, making it a good control case for estimating harm from policy".

So how did "our" NHS fare?

"The temporal relationship, magnitude of service disruption, and the known natural history of gallstone disease together suggest that healthcare disruption was a major contributing factor in these excess deaths"

Now a "temporal relationship" on its own proves nothing, so HART has done further analysis to try to get to the truth of it. 

Does a connection exist?

2026-03-25

** BAD TASTE WARNING

The Epstein files have brought us into the era of epic bad taste. It's upon us. Get used to it.
My attitude is that I will avoid bad taste except where it seems particularly appropriate. You don't have to agree, but be assured that I will minimise it overall whilst not always shying away from it.

As is as about as predictable as tomorrow morning, the powers that shouldn't be are working on the next BIG THING that they hope will scare the Bejasus out of us and have us begging for something - anything - even a lockdown - complete with panoply of confusing contradictory bureaucratic rules and meaningless moronic restrictions - to delight the compliant-to-a fault and the tell-me-what-to-dos who will in turn delight in shaming the rest of us into all-numbing limbo because otherwise "WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE!" because either there's another DEADLY but totally novel virus that nobody knows anything about (except that it's

2026-03-15

You may think that this has nothing to do with the UK - but if it's happening in the US of A then it's happening here too. Our regulators take their lead from the US regulators. Why? Because it absolves them of the need to do any work. And from justifying any disagreement with the said US regulators.

Oh, and they think that they are now "enablers" rather than those nasty "regulators" who might get in everybody's way by saying "no". So high-tail it down to the clinic and get those statins in!

Money talks?

See what you think.

I guess there's a reason for those intertwined serpents...

2026-03-01

And your cat's dinner for that matter, or any other pet, maybe even farm animal that you have cause to feed.

Recent "events" have shone a spotlight on Big Agriculture Big Chemistry and Big Food manufacturers, understandably with the emphasis on food for humans, so is it really any surprise that Big xyz have also been active in the provision ofanimal food?

Brownstone Institute is on the case.

2026-02-20

"The truth is indeed out there. but many, many more people apparently have to see it"

(11 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2026-02-18

The main message here is something that I wholeheartedly agree with, having spent years combatting health problems that one has been encouraged to put down to "aging".

In one respect that's correct - it is true that in one's youth one can get away with eating badly rather better than one can get away with it when older. Bad habits catch up with us over time. 

Cell voltages deteriorate as alkalinity declines and acidity advances. The immune system may eventually go into some sort of extreme overdrive because it can't cope any more. It flails about. And the symptom may have little to do with the underlying cause. The doctor will treat the symptom but not the underlying cause because they are not trained in nutrition. A drug may bring temporary relief but it's short-lived.

What to do?

I eventually succumbed to a modest "middle-age spread" and went down with random bouts of

2026-02-18

Our first responsibility is to look after ourselves, to stay healthy.

Whereas in rare circumstances that rule might be broken, in general it holds. If we don't look after ourselves, we may end up in no position to look after others, and become a burden on others.

This was embedded in military NBC (nuclear chemical biological) training - we were ordered to put on our own gas-masks before helping anybody else. Obvious really, but sometimes the obvious needs stating...

As it is for individuals, so it is for nations.

(8 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video

2026-02-18

Childrens' Health Defense has filed a RICO lawsuit alleging racketeering against the American Academy of Pediatrics.

In other words, they are setting out in Court to prove that the vaccine industry is all about profit for Big Pharma and its associates rather than childrens' health.

This site wishes them Godspeed.

2026-02-13

Fall in with the wrong crowd, fall in with the wrong peer pressure.

It's pretty much that simple.

So it is with drugs. Go to the NHS, get drugs.

Better still, fall in with the wrong group, get cannabis and/or other "recreational" drugs. Get schizophrenia (or other descriptive "diagnosis"), go to the NHS and get more drugs to offset the effects of your recreational usage. 

Yet we did not fall ill for want of a pharmaceutical product. 

You can see where this is going. It's so easy to follow the herd and get inappropriate intervention upon inappropriate intervention, and it doesn't end well.

Except for Big Pharma of course, who continue to get high prices for stuff that may not work and we pay through the nose in taxes for "free at the point of use".... it's a business model to die for, but it's not Big Pharma that does