Sunday, August 17, 2014

FDA, mainstream media denounce nano silver as 'bogus cure' for Ebola virus

by Mike Adams 

(NaturalNews) There's a very interesting showdown taking place right now in the realm of Ebola treatments and cures. At stake is billions of dollars in potential vaccine profits as well as potentially tens of millions of lives of an Ebola pandemic outbreak takes place.

Here's a summary of what's happening so far, as best I can tell:

• The world of conventional medicine currently has ZERO proven treatments, vaccines or cures for treating Ebola.

• The recent Ebola media panic resulted in tremendous FDA pressure to authorize Ebola vaccine trials run by a company called Tekmira, whose stock price skyrocketed nearly 100% after the announcement.

• As Ebola news continued to spread, some websites began to claim they had various cures or treatments that could treat or prevent Ebola. For example, this web page claims something called "Monolaurin" is the answer to Ebola.

• The New York Times published an article explaining that the FDA had "issued warnings over Ebola cures." This article specifically named Dr. Rima Laibow for asserting that nano silver can kill Ebola.

• At the same time, however, the New York Times also published this highly speculative article which ridiculously asserts that statin drugs might treat Ebola, even though there is no evidence of such a claim.

• Interestingly, the New York Times did not warn its readers about the New York Times promoting bogus ebola cures in the form of statin drugs. The pattern that's emerging from the NYT is quite predictable: All experimental pharmaceuticals from the world of western medicine are assumed to be of value, while all experimental treatments from the world of holistic medicine are assumed to be fraud. This stance is, of course, wholly unscientific from the outset.

It also brings up the question: "What's the difference between an unproven drug treatment and an unproven holistic treatment?" The answer is "faith." Western culture has faith in western medicine, so drug treatments and vaccines are assumed to always work. Who needs proof when irrational faith in western drugs is sufficient?

• As all this was happening, Dr. Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation published this page which asserts that a 2009 Dept. of Defense study "finds nano silver inhibits ebola virus." Since this page was published, Dr. Laibow has apparently sought to alert scientists and political leaders of many different countries about this treatment, explaining that an Ebola outbreak may be part of a population reduction plan.

Dr. Laibow's actions really set off alarm bells across the FDA and the mainstream media, both of which seem to be spinning up their torpedoes to fire away at anyone who claims anything other than a drug or a vaccine might treat Ebola.

So what's the real story on nano silver? Honestly I don't know yet

If you're wondering my take on all this, I simply haven't researched nano silver and Ebola enough to render my own view on the matter. Yes, I'm a scientifically trained food researcher who runs an atomic spectroscopy laboratory and has made numerous scientific breakthroughs in the realm of food contamination research. But I am not a virologist and the closest I've ever come to doing any lab work on pathogens is running the microbiology food testing lab that tests our raw materials for salmonella, e.coli, total plate counts and so on.

So I personally don't know whether nano silver can treat Ebola. I simply haven't done the research to render a well-informed opinion on this specific subject. Am I buying nano silver in the mean time? Yes I am, on a personal level, but I can't recommend everyone else do the same. I'm stocking up on it because I'm also a "prepper" with a just-in-case attitude about all sorts of things. I fully recognize that western medicine currently has zero treatments available, so there's no harm in me personally acquiring a few things that might turn out to be useful. Along those same lines, I'm also fully stocked on antiseptic liquids, povidone iodine, bleach, first aid medicine, herbal tinctures, antibiotics for my ranch animals and organic storable preparedness foods.

Besides, if it turns out that nano silver is useless against Ebola, I can always use it for a topical antiseptic liquid for scrapes or burns.

Western medicine has an extensive history of suppressing legitimate natural treatments

Like most Natural News readers, I'm also fully aware of the true history of western medicine suppressing all sorts of natural cures and holistic treatments, going back to the very formulation of the American Medical Association. In addition to waging a relentless attack on chiropractic medicine in first half of the 20th century, the western medical system has unquestionably and systematically sought to suppress nearly all truthful information about the disease prevention and treatment potential of foods, medicinal herbs, healing arts treatments, nutritional therapies and more.

For example, the truth about simple nutrients such as vitamin C and vitamin D has been deliberately oppressed for over 75 years. Vitamin D supplementation, in fact, may turn out to be the single most affordable and effective defense against all sorts of viral pandemics, yet vitamin D is so cheap to produce and distribute that there's no profit in it. So there's no one touting the astonishing science behind vitamin D. (See for some of the research that's already been published.

We also know that western medicine has indeed suppressed the truth about colloidal silver or nano silver for use in hospitals and burn wards. Silver-impregnated wound bandaging could be saving countless lives right now all across America, but the FDA's deliberate suppression of silver technology in emergency medicine has prevented many lifesaving products from ever making it to market. Topical nano silver is simply outstanding and preventing skin infections in burn victims. So why isn't nano silver a standard topical medicine at emergency rooms across America? The answer, of course, is because it isn't a high-profit drug.

So the idea put forth by Dr. Laibow claiming there is a deliberate cover-up of nano silver's ability to treat Ebola is not as zany as it might sound at first glance. The true history of medicine is steeped in the suppression of natural treatments. This doesn't automatically mean all natural cures work, of course, but it's at least a starting point for critical thinkers and skeptics of the FDA-Pharma moneymaking machine to begin asking legitimate questions about things we are not being told.

FDA routinely colludes with powerful corporations to keep Americans in the dark

We just learned recently, for example, that the FDA colluded with a large toothpaste manufacturer to hide the truth about triclosan from the public. As reported just last week (4), "The chemical triclosan has been linked to cancer-cell growth and disrupted development in animals... Colgate's Total application [to the FDA] included 35 pages summarizing toxicology studies on triclosan, which the FDA withheld from view. The agency released the pages earlier this year in response to a lawsuit over a Freedom of Information Act request."

This is just one small example of the FDA colluding with powerful corporations to withhold crucial information from the public -- information that holds huge implications for public health. If you want more examples of deliberate FDA censorship of critical information, look up the history of Vioxx and Rezulin drugs. The idea, then, that the FDA deliberately colludes with corporations to bury information they don't want the public to see isn't even debatable. It's a well-documented fact.

Again, all this doesn't automatically mean nano silver kills Ebola. But it's more than sufficient to get intelligent people thinking about what else the FDA might not be telling us that we really need to know.

There are bogus cures, and I've exposed many

All this being said, there really are bogus cures being sold on the internet, and in fact Natural News has been instrumental in exposing several of them.

I was the whistleblower to expose a bogus detox cure that duped the public into thinking they could remove heavy metals from their bodies by chugging an aluminum-laced liquid imported into the U.S. as battery acid.

In 2011, I was also instrumental in exposing the fake acai berry scam websites which the FTC later shut down.

I'm also the food researcher and whistleblower who discovered and exposed the heavy metal tungsten in organic rice protein "superfood" products sold everywhere.

I've also scientifically documented and announced findings of mercury in flu vaccines and toxic heavy metals in municipal fluoride materials. Those are two findings the mainstream media absolutely does not want the public to ever learn about, which is why they refuse to cover these findings.

The bottom line here is that Natural News has repeatedly blown the whistle on bogus cures as well as contaminated medicine. If I see someone hawking something that I think is dishonest or dangerous, I will call them out regardless of whether they operate in the world of pharmaceutical medicine or natural medicine. I despise hucksters, and I especially seek to stop anyone who is selling something truly dangerous to the public (such as contaminated products or mercury-laced vaccines given to pregnant women).

Why all experimental treatments should be available on a voluntary basis

With nano silver and Ebola, however, I think this needs to be urgently approved as an experimental treatment for Ebola victims in exactly the same way the experimental drug serum was recently approved. The fact that no one in a position of medical authority will even TRY nano silver on Ebola patients is highly suspect.

Remember, these are the same "authorities" who approved an experimental, unproven western medicine even though they had no idea of its efficacy and safety. Their argument was that since "people are dying," there's no harm in offering an experimental medicine.

And they are right. Except they are too limited in their thinking. Why not open up the experiments to a larger and more diverse array of voluntary experimental treatments, including nano silver?

Furthermore, if the medical industry really wanted to discredit nano silver once and for all, why wouldn't they allow it to be used in Ebola patients so that they could "prove" it to be a failure?

My guess -- and this is only a guess at this point -- is that they're afraid it just might somehow work. And then all their hoped-for vaccine profits would evaporate overnight.

Join my call for medical freedom of choice

That's why I join the call to demand freedom of medical choice for Ebola victims who want to try experimental medicines from all realms. If medical ethicists have declared it "ethical" to experiment on Ebola victims with an unproven pharmaceutical serum, then how can it be any less ethical to allow those same victims to volunteer for experimental treatments like nano silver?

It is irrational and contradictory to proclaim it is "ethical" for patients to be treated with an experimental, unproven drug serum while simultaneously claiming it is "unethical" for patients to be treated with an experimental, unproven natural substance. If western medicine is to be based on any science at all, it must apply scientific thinking with consistency, not with predetermined bias and "faith" in drugs.

What do YOU think is really happening?

I'm curious to find out what Natural News readers think about all this. If you want to review the information Dr. Rima Laibow has put together, click here to read it yourself.

As for myself, I'm too busy working on a breakthrough lifesaving technology to be announced in 2015, so I have zero time to really delve into this nano silver question. But as a journalist who has written hundreds of articles about the deceit and criminality of the pharmaceutical industry, I must remain extremely skeptical of any medical system which blocks the testing of nano silver as an experimental medicine while aggressively pushing experimental drugs and vaccines. If we really want to get to the truth about what works and what doesn't, why not test them all? Wouldn't that actually be the most scientific approach of all?

Sources for this story include:

No comments:

Post a Comment