Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
Mainstream medicine believes that virtually all illness is caused by germs or genetic hereditary weakness, as well as deformities and trauma injuries. Their solution and strategy is to have us believe that there are over 10,000 different diseases and that each of these diseases requires outside intervention from drugs and surgery. The truth is that most illness is due to cellular malfunction caused by cellular toxicities and cellular malnutrition, both of which can be avoided and overcome naturally.
It was Louis Pasteur, the so-called “father of modern germ theory” so widely revered by mainstream medicine, who was largely responsible for germ theory being a primary precept of today’s medical practice. Few people are aware of the controversy which surrounded Pasteur in his early days or of the work of a more esteemed contemporary whose works Pasteur plagiarized and distorted. That contemporary was fellow French Academy of Sciences member Antoine Bechamp, one of France’s most prominent and active researchers and biologists whose theories and research results stood in stark opposition to Pasteur’s germ theory.
Pasteur essentially dug up the germ theory of disease and put his name on it. It was not a new idea. The concept, which theorizes that many diseases are caused by germs, had actually been outlined by other people many years before. Pasteur nevertheless claimed to have “discovered” germs. Bechamp, on the other hand, proved through original research that most diseases are the result of diseased tissue and that bacteria and viruses are largely after-effects instead of causes of disease.
Antoine Bechamp was able to scientifically prove that germs are the chemical by-products and constituents of pleomorphic microorganisms enacting upon the unbalanced, malfunctioning cell metabolism and dead tissue that actually produces disease. Bechamp found that the diseased, acidic, low-oxygen cellular environment is created by a toxic/nutrient deficient diet, toxic emotions, and a toxic lifestyle. His findings demonstrate how cancer develops through the morbid changes of germs to bacteria, bacteria to viruses, viruses to fungal forms and fungal forms to cancer cells. After some initial controversy, Pasteur’s germ theory ended up winning the day with mainstream medicine – owing in large part to the fact that the theory enabled mainstream medicine to hugely profit from the patented drugs and treatments for fighting germs. After all, had Bechamp’s discoveries been incorporated into current medical curriculum, it would likely have meant a virtual elimination of disease and the end of the pharmaceutical industry.
The germ theory of medicine stands in stark contrast to thousands of years of man looking to nature to nourish and heal it, dating back to ancient Chinese medicine which treated the whole body instead of the symptoms of illness. As Hippocrates, “the father of medicine” observed 2400 years ago, “Nature is the physician of man.” Hippocrates also advised, “Leave your drugs in the chemist’s pots if you can cure your patient with food.”
Though mainstream medicine might have us believe otherwise, the simple truth is that no one ever became ill due to a deficiency in pharmaceutical drugs Lack of nutrition combined with exposure to toxins is what causes us to become ill.
Someday, germ theory and unnatural drugs will be relegated to the science junk pile where they belong and man will re-discover the value of eating a nutrient-dense organic diet, avoiding toxins and nutritional deficiencies and living a healthy lifestyle. When that happens, the words of Thomas Edison may prove to be a welcome prophesy:
“The doctor of the future will give no medicine but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet and in the cause and prevention of disease.”
Below is our list of twelve medical experts whose opinions on the Coronavirus outbreak contradict the official narratives of the MSM, and the memes so prevalent on social media.
Dr Sucharit Bhakdi is a specialist in microbiology. He was a professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz and head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene and one of the most cited research scientists in German history.
What he says:
We are afraid that 1 million infections with the new virus will lead to 30 deaths per day over the next 100 days. But we do not realise that 20, 30, 40 or 100 patients positive for normal coronaviruses are already dying every day.
[The government’s anti-COVID19 measures] are grotesque, absurd and very dangerous […] The life expectancy of millions is being shortened. The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless people.
The consequences on medical care are profound. Already services to patients in need are reduced, operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole society.
All these measures are leading to self-destruction and collective suicide based on nothing but a spook.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg is a German physician specialising in Pulmonology, politician and former chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
In 2009 he called for an inquiry into alleged conflicts of interest surrounding the EU response to the Swine Flu pandemic.
What he says:
Politicians are being courted by scientists… scientists who want to be important to get money for their institutions. Scientists who just swim along in the mainstream and want their part of it […] And what is missing right now is a rational way of looking at things.
We should be asking questions like “How did you find out this virus was dangerous?”, “How was it before?”, “Didn’t we have the same thing last year?”, “Is it even something new?”
Dr Joel Kettner is professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious Diseases.
I have never seen anything like this, anything anywhere near like this. I’m not talking about the pandemic, because I’ve seen 30 of them, one every year. It is called influenza. And other respiratory illness viruses, we don’t always know what they are. But I’ve never seen this reaction, and I’m trying to understand why.
I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related to that.
In Hubei, in the province of Hubei, where there has been the most cases and deaths by far, the actual number of cases reported is 1 per 1000 people and the actual rate of deaths reported is 1 per 20,000. So maybe that would help to put things into perspective.
Dr John Ioannidis Professor of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy and of Biomedical Data Science, at Stanford University School of Medicine and a Professor of Statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences.
He is director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS).
He is also the editor-in-chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. He was chairman at the Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine as well as adjunct professor at Tufts University School of Medicine.
As a physician, scientist and author he has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, data science and clinical research.
In addition, he pioneered the field of meta-research. He has shown that much of the published research does not meet good scientific standards of evidence.
Patients who have been tested for SARS-CoV-2 are disproportionately those with severe symptoms and bad outcomes. As most health systems have limited testing capacity, selection bias may even worsen in the near future.
The one situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher.
Could the Covid-19 case fatality rate be that low? No, some say, pointing to the high rate in elderly people.
However, even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses that have been known for decades can have case fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect elderly people in nursing homes.
If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of total deaths due to “influenza-like illness” would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average.
– “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data”, Stat News, 17th March 2020
Dr Yoram Lass is an Israeli physician, politician and former Director General of the Health Ministry. He also worked as Associate Dean of the Tel Aviv University Medical School and during the 1980s presented the science-based television show Tatzpit.
Italy is known for its enormous morbidity in respiratory problems, more than three times any other European country. In the US about 40,000 people die in a regular flu season and so far 40-50 people have died of the coronavirus, most of them in a nursing home in Kirkland, Washington.
In every country, more people die from regular flu compared with those who die from the coronavirus.
…there is a very good example that we all forget: the swine flu in 2009. That was a virus that reached the world from Mexico and until today there is no vaccination against it.
But what? At that time there was no Facebook or there maybe was but it was still in its infancy. The coronavirus, in contrast, is a virus with public relations.
Whoever thinks that governments end viruses is wrong.
– Interview in Globes, March 22nd 2020
Dr Pietro Vernazza is a Swiss physician specialising Infectious Diseases at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen and Professor of Health Policy.
What he says:
We have reliable figures from Italy and a work by epidemiologists, which has been published in the renowned science journal ‹Science›, which examined the spread in China.
This makes it clear that around 85 percent of all infections have occurred without anyone noticing the infection. 90 percent of the deceased patients are verifiably over 70 years old, 50 percent over 80 years.
If we close the schools, we will prevent the children from quickly becoming immune.
We should better integrate the scientific facts into the political decisions.
– Interview in St. Galler Tagblatt, 22nd March 2020
Frank Ulrich Montgomery is German radiologist, former President of the German Medical Association and Deputy Chairman of the World Medical Association.
I’m not a fan of lockdown. Anyone who imposes something like this must also say when and how to pick it up again. Since we have to assume that the virus will be with us for a long time, I wonder when we will return to normal?
You can’t keep schools and daycare centers closed until the end of the year. Because it will take at least that long until we have a vaccine. Italy has imposed a lockdown and has the opposite effect. They quickly reached their capacity limits, but did not slow down the virus spread within the lockdown.
– Interview in General Anzeiger, 18th March 2020
Prof. Hendrik Streeck is a German HIV researcher, epidemiologist and clinical trialist. He is professor of virology, and the director of the Institute of Virology and HIV Research, at Bonn University.
The new pathogen is not that dangerous, it is even less dangerous than Sars-1. The special thing is that Sars-CoV-2 replicates in the upper throat area and is therefore much more infectious because the virus jumps from throat to throat, so to speak.
But that is also an advantage: Because Sars-1 replicates in the deep lungs, it is not so infectious, but it definitely gets on the lungs, which makes it more dangerous.
You also have to take into account that the Sars-CoV-2 deaths in Germany were exclusively old people. In Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart failure, and that without Sars-2 lung involvement.
Since he was infected, he naturally appears in the Covid 19 statistics. But the question is whether he would not have died anyway, even without Sars-2.
– Interview in Frankfurter Allgemeine, 16th March 2020
Dr Yanis Roussel et. al. – A team of researchers from the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection, Marseille and the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, conducting a peer-reviewed study on Coronavirus mortality for the government of France under the ‘Investments for the Future’ programme.
The problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably overestimated, as 2.6 million people die of respiratory infections each year compared with less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.
This study compared the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 in OECD countries (1.3%) with the mortality rate of common coronaviruses identified in AP-HM patients (0.8%) from 1 January 2013 to 2 March 2020. Chi-squared test was performed, and the P-value was 0.11 (not significant).
…it should be noted that systematic studies of other coronaviruses (but not yet for SARS-CoV-2) have found that the percentage of asymptomatic carriers is equal to or even higher than the percentage of symptomatic patients.
The same data for SARS-CoV-2 may soon be available, which will further reduce the relative risk associated with this specific pathology.
– “SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data”, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 19th March 2020
Dr. David Katz is an American physician and founding director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center
I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near-total meltdown of normal life — schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned — will be long-lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself.
The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses never will. The unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of the first order.
– “Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?”, New York Times 20th March 2020
Michael T. Osterholm is regents professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.
Consider the effect of shutting down offices, schools, transportation systems, restaurants, hotels, stores, theaters, concert halls, sporting events and other venues indefinitely and leaving all of their workers unemployed and on the public dole.
The likely result would be not just a depression but a complete economic breakdown, with countless permanently lost jobs, long before a vaccine is ready or natural immunity takes hold.
[T]he best alternative will probably entail letting those at low risk for serious disease continue to work, keep business and manufacturing operating, and “run” society, while at the same time advising higher-risk individuals to protect themselves through physical distancing and ramping up our health-care capacity as aggressively as possible.
With this battle plan, we could gradually build up immunity without destroying the financial structure on which our lives are based.
– “Facing covid-19 reality: A national lockdown is no cure”, Washington Post 21st March 2020
Dr Peter Goetzsche is Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen and founder of the Cochrane Medical Collaboration. He has written several books on corruption in the field of medicine and the power of big pharmaceutical companies.
Our main problem is that no one will ever get in trouble for measures that are too draconian. They will only get in trouble if they do too little. So, our politicians and those working with public health do much more than they should do.
No such draconian measures were applied during the 2009 influenza pandemic, and they obviously cannot be applied every winter, which is all year round, as it is always winter somewhere. We cannot close down the whole world permanently.
Should it turn out that the epidemic wanes before long, there will be a queue of people wanting to take credit for this. And we can be damned sure draconian measures will be applied again next time.
But remember the joke about tigers. “Why do you blow the horn?” “To keep the tigers away.” “But there are no tigers here.” “There you see!”
– “Corona: an epidemic of mass panic”, blog post on Deadly Medicines 21st March 2020
Dr. Andrew Kaufman
Like these Doctors, there are many more trying to get the word out.
Companies in the food industry are experts of deception. They slap clever wording on their labels like “low fat,” “natural,” or “heart healthy” with the intention of making you believe their product is a healthy choice. But the sad truth is, many foods you find in the grocery store that are advertised as healthy are nothing of the sort.
This makes it exceptionally confusing and difficult for the average person to determine the difference between a true health food and a marketing gimmick.
To sort out fact from fiction, here are 10 popular “health foods” that are, in actuality, horrible for your health:
1. Diet Or Zero Calorie Soda
Diet sodas are a popular choice among people who want soda without gaining weight from all the sugar normal soft drinks contain. Unfortunately, zero calorie sodas are just another marketing trick—there’s nothing “diet” about them.
This could be due to the fact that artificial sweeteners encourage sugar cravings (2). They also trick the brain into expecting something sweet, causing a spike in insulin (3). Animal studies also suggest artificial sweeteners change the gut microbiome in a way that promotes obesity (4). These three effects create the perfect recipe for weight gain.
2. Refined Vegetable Oils
Processed vegetable oils like canola, soy, and corn oil are not healthy despite what Big Food companies tell you. Many are GMO, or genetically modified, to withstand multiple applications of the toxic weed killer glyphosate, and these chemicals leave residues that get carried into countless foods.
These vegetable oils also go through a caustic refining process using toxic hexane and other chemical additives. This results in an oil that will readily oxidize and go rancid. These oils are also high in omega-6 fats which can trigger inflammation in the body (5).
3. Fat-Free Or Low-Fat Foods
Unlike fruits and veggies which are naturally fat free, processed foods that claim to be low-fat or fat-free are typically modified to remove the fat. But when you take the fat out of food, it loses a significant amount of flavor.
To make up for this loss of flavor, companies add massive amounts of sugar and salt. This results in a product that’s substantially worse for you than the original full-fat food. According to Dr. Mark Hyman from the Cleveland Clinic, sugar is what makes you fat—not fat itself (6). You would be better off opting for something with natural fat content, so long as it’s not refined vegetable oil.
4. Processed Fruit Juice
Food companies want you to think that fruit juices are a healthy option. In reality, processed fruit juice is just as bad as soda. When fruit is stripped of its skin, pulp, and flesh, you’re essentially left with flavored sugar water.
Fruit juices like orange juice contain almost as much sugar as soda—around 5 to 8 teaspoons per cup. Moreover, research shows that fructose (fruit sugar) is the most problematic part of fruit with high doses raising triglycerides and increasing the risk for heart disease and diabetes (7).
If you don’t have access to fresh organic strawberries, you can usually find them in the frozen aisle, perfect to add to smoothies or make a healthy treat.
6. Most Protein Bars
Much like other processed foods, protein bars are typically loaded to the brim with questionable additives. They often contain ingredients like corn syrup, brown rice syrup, processed vegetable oils, artificial sweeteners, unknown “natural flavors” and synthetic vitamins.
The good news is, not all protein bars are unhealthy. When in doubt, pick the protein bar that has recognizable whole food sourcing, the least number of additives, and the lowest sugar content. Or, you can skip the processed protein bars altogether, and opt for a healthy delicious protein shake sourced from organic superfoods.
7. Gluten-Free Snacks
Avoiding gluten is a full-fledged health craze. And for good reason too since many people have sensitivity to gluten. However, food companies have taken advantage of the anti-gluten trend by making customers think products are healthy simply because they are gluten-free.
But taking the gluten out of wheat doesn’t change the fact that non-organic wheat is also usually contaminated with a toxic pesticide called glyphosate which is linked to cancer and gut-microbiome disruption.
Many gluten-free foods replace wheat with rice, which can have a higher level of toxic heavy metals such as arsenic. And gluten-free snacks may still be heavily processed and high in sugar, salt, and toxic additives. So, buyer beware on gluten-free food to always check the label for possible harmful ingredients.
8. Farm-Raised Fish
Oily fish can be an excellent source of anti-inflammatory omega-3 fatty acids. The important thing to realize, however, is that only wild-caught fish are healthy.
Farmed fish may be contaminated with pesticides, parasites and treated with antibiotics (8). Farm-raised salmon has been found to have significantly more environmental pollutants than wild salmon, including toxic dioxins (9).
However, overfishing of many species is a huge concern, and a reason to get your essential fatty acids from plant sources instead of endangered fish stocks. By eating plant-based omegas, you’ll also be saving many other marine species that get inadvertently killed through bycatch (10).
It used to be that butter was demonized by doctors and health “experts” alike. Instead, they recommended that margarine be used to butter your bread and make your mashed potatoes.
Only years later did research show that those who did switch from butter to margarine were much more likely to die from heart disease (11). Despite this fact, food companies still promote margarine as a healthy alternative.
The problem is that margarine is a highly processed food, typically made with the same refined GMO vegetable oils that trigger harmful inflammation. It’s far better to eat real grass-fed butter in moderation.
10. Non-Organic Yogurt
If you eat yogurt often, you may want to double check how much sugar is in your favorite brand. Most reduced-fat or flavored yogurts are full of various forms of sugar or artificial sweeteners. Some of these top brands contain up to half of your daily recommended added sugar intake.
Sugar isn’t the only issue either. Many types of yogurt have syrups derived from GMO corn, artificial colors or other unsavory additives. As with many foods, picking organic may be the best option to ensure a healthy yogurt.
If you were a woman with painful, cystic breasts who lived in the 1800’s — your doctor might have advised you to “paint your breasts” with iodine. Some doctors even injected iodine directly into the breasts or ovaries to heal cysts.
Your doctor may have heard about it by word of mouth from the women he treated. Imagine how difficult word of mouth was back then — long before fast transportation and instant messaging.
Yet — this was real evidenced based medicine — shared for free by women who cared about each other. And you can bet — if it didn’t work — those same women would have told you!
Iodine had a rich healing history, long before the 1800’s. Prior to that, seaweed was used in healing treatments, but no one knew it was the iodine in it that did the healing.
So why is it that most women today have never heard about painting cystic breasts or ovaries with iodine? How did this simple yet fundamentally proven, effective treatment get lost in the archives of ancient medicine?
And iodine wasn’t just used for cysts. In 1829, a Paris doctor named Jean Lugol, created Lugol’s Solution from 5% iodine and 10% potassium iodide combined with distilled water. This was formulated for lung diseases, which were prevalent in Europe at the time. Word of mouth spread quickly. Doctors of this era had a saying:
“If you know not where or why, use you then K and I.”
(KI = potassium iodide) from “The Iodine Crisis” book by Lynne Farrow.
Iodine was used for a multitude of documented disease treatments — from asthma and lung conditions — to infections, gout, ulcers, burns, inflammation, croup, etc..
From Civil War canteens to early nebulizers — iodine was popular and effective. Potassium Iodide was also widely used for tertiary (cerebral) syphilis. Vincent Van Gogh suggested iodine to his brother — both had tertiary syphilis.
By the early 1900’s — Iodine was listed in the Merck Manual (the best selling medical textbook) as the treatment most used for tumors.
Iodine suppositories were marketed for prostate issues and salves were created for breast cysts and other conditions. Salves – mixing iodine with a carrier oil – can reduce skin irritation and iodine evaporation for topical application.
In 1989 on a trip to rural China, Dr. G. Robert DeLong, a pediatric neurologist noticed some disturbing health issues among the children.
“The children in the Chinese village disturbed him most: One in 10 suffered from mental retardation, deafness and other problems that were preventable with a small dose of iodine,” writes Sarah Avery. (Article listed below in Resources)
Dr. DeLong used a simple 55-gallon oil drum filled with potassium iodate with an IV type tubing drip on top of a bridge that crossed an irrigation canal. It dripped into the water supply and was guarded by a villager day and night, and refilled when necessary. The result?
“As a result of Dr. DeLong’s work, “Infant mortality rates were cut in half. Goiters disappeared. The children grew taller and had an average IQ 16 points higher than children in nearby villages where the water wasn’t iodized.”
The cost per person was less than 6 cents. The profound changes were priceless. (The Iodine Crisis by Lynne Farrow)
In 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan was the first city in the U.S. to fluoridate its water. By the 1950’s, community water fluoridation was a standard American health policy — with the full support of dentists, government health agencies, and numerous others in the medical and scientific community.
Most people are surprised to learn that unlike the pharmaceutical grade fluoride in their toothpaste (still toxic and comes with a warning if ingested), the fluoride in our community water supply is an untreated industrial waste product.
Highly toxic hydrogen fluoride and silicon tetra fluoride gases are by-products of fertilizer production. Prior to the 1970s, these pollutants were vented into the atmosphere and caused some of the most noxious air pollution in the country.
The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) cautioned that FSA, an inorganic fluoride compound, had dire health consequences for any worker that came into contact with it.
Breathing its fumes caused severe lung damage or death. An accidental splash on bare skin would lead to burning and excruciating pain.
“Fluoridated water contains trace elements of arsenic and lead. Without the phosphate industry’s effluent, water fluoridation would be prohibitively expensive. And without fluoridation, the phosphate industry would be stuck with an expensive waste disposal problem.” (OSU resource below)
But ask most dentists — and it’s all about tooth decay prevention.
It is this fluorosilicic acid that has, since 1945, been transported from fertilizer factories to water reservoirs throughout the United States. Once there, it is drip fed into drinking water. (See OSU resource below for full history)
Healing With Iodine: Supplementation is Essential for Heart Disease, Diabetes, Cancer
Unbeknown to most, our major source of dietary iodine was removed from salt and flour in the 1970’s. Even today — most people think they get enough dietary iodine in salt and bread. Check the label on that bag of flour in your pantry. It most likely contains another poisonous Halogen—bromine.
Why would our “protective” government agencies remove a critical element like iodine and replace it with a toxic fire retardant like bromine? Why would they allow it to be consumed in products like Mountain Dew? Why would they allow it to off gas in infants clothing, mattresses, furniture upholstery, carpets, etc.?
Here is the problem with fluorine, bromine, and chlorine — these highly toxic halogens from the periodic table displace iodine.
When we inhale or ingest them — they compete with iodine at the receptors, displace it, and then sequester themselves in the tissues, disrupt our endocrine system and often lodge in the brain.
While iodine raises IQ, the other three lower it. Documented studies of fluoride also show increased risk of bone cancer, osteoporosis, hip fractures, Down’s syndrome and damage to our pineal gland.
Without the protective grace of iodine — fluids accumulate in the tissues, hormone disruption occurs, cysts develop to surround the toxins and prevent them from entering the bloodstream.
Mammograms often rupture these cysts in the breast — releasing toxins from their protective cell wall into the bloodstream. Like popping a balloon.
Iodine is an inexpensive, NATURAL element that can’t be patented. Iodine “reverses” benign breast, prostate and ovarian cysts before they become cancerous — very often within two weeks to three months.
But what would become of the cancer industry?
Finally — a recent study appeared in the medical journal of all medical journals — The JAMA (listed in resources below). In an age of natural health censorship — it is difficult to do your own research, which I always recommend. Look stuff up!
The article states what many of us in the natural medicine field have known for years, and been criticized for by our dentists — fluoride ingested by pregnant mothers lowers their children’s IQ.
This news is actually in a “prestigious” medical journal. Imagine that?
These poisonous toxins build up in our bodies and can lead to extremely dangerous medical conditions. Oftentimes, the effects start off small and seem unrelated to toxins.
Here are five signs that you might be experiencing toxic overload:
1. Stubborn weight gain. If you’ve gained weight or found it difficult to lose, toxins could be to blame. Many types of toxins store in your fat cells or increase the size of fat cells, making weight difficult to shed. 2. You feel like you can’t focus on anything. Most heavy metals are neurotoxins, meaning they have a major impact on cognitive function, leading to lack of focus, memory loss and overall brain fog. 3. It takes you twice as long to get over a cold. Toxins put an enormous strain on your immune system, ultimately weakening it and leaving you vulnerable to catching whatever is going around, and then making it even harder for you to shake it. 4. You’re lethargic yet have trouble sleeping. Toxins like pesticides and flame retardants disrupt your endocrine system which handles everything hormonal in the body. These disruptions can cause everything from poor sleep to fertility issues and worse! 5. You’re on a collision course with a deadly disease. Studies have shown that a large percentage of some of the most common fatal diseases like cancer and heart disease are a direct result of external factors, as opposed to genetic. Let that sink in. That means prevention can make a huge difference in the majority of these illnesses. There’s no escape. Toxins are everywhere. They are in the food you eat, water you drink and air you breathe.