This little boy has been on life support for some time. As before with Charlie Gard, the doctors want him to die rather than go somewhere else for treatment (for his own good, obviously – can’t have anything to do with pride, can it?). They have, along with the parents, been back and forth to court – the doctors to end his life support, the parents fighting for his life. The child’s rights, we can see clearly, have been separated from the child’s. This is morally abhorrent in cases like these!
But today I saw this headline –
The doctors removed his ventilator assuming he would die quickly, but he is breathing unaided – this is quite amazing. I hope you’ll take a moment to pray for this miracle which has left the doctors “gobsmacked” to be extended now that God alone is in control!
The courts have rejected the father’s attempt to take the child to Italy (in spite of having no treatment options available to him in the UK). I do not know what the Italian doctors think they can do – but we serve a God who can and does do miracles!
Please, Heavenly Father, heal this boy, in Yeshua’s Name we pray! Amen!
One of the most reviled companies in the United States recently gave Americans yet another reason to distrust their power: A recent Goldman Sachs report reveals the company questioning whether or not curing chronic illness is compatible with a sustainable business model.
In an internal report viewed by CNBC about the potential of the biotech industry and gene therapy titled “The Genome Revolution,” analysts asked: “Is curing patients a sustainable business model?”
“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing,” wrote analyst Salveen Richter. “However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies,” analyst Richter wrote in the April 10 report.
“While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.“
Richter cited a Hepatitis C drug manufactured by Gilead Sciences that achieved a 90% cure rate. As CNBC noted:
“The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.”
In light of the reduced profits as a result of the success of the drug, Richter wrote:
“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients. In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise.”
Indeed, cancer is a highly profitable disease. In 2015, the world spent $107 billion on cancer drugs, and according to 2016 projections, that number was expected to grow to $150 by 2020. Further, Gilead Sciences, which Richter singled out as a company losing profits due to cures, was still the second-most profitable pharmaceutical/biotech company in the world in 2017, earning over $12 billion in net income.
Richter, who did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment, offered several ideas to cope with the ‘problem’ of healing patients. He suggested targeting large markets, such as those suffering from hemophilia, because “Hemophilia is a $9-10bn WW market (hemophilia A, B), growing at ~6-7% annually.” in addition, he advised clients to target disorders with high incidences, such as spinal dystrophy, as well as focus on “[c]onstant innovation and portfolio expansion.”
Additionally, Ars Technica reported, the analysis “hints that, as such cures come to fruition, they could open up more investment opportunities in treatments for ‘disease of aging.’”
Goldman Sachs confirmed the authenticity of the report to Ars Technica but declined to comment on its contents.
You might want to make yourself a cup of tea (or fetch something stronger) before you read this. I had no idea, and I bet you didn’t either. In fact many doctors didn’t know this. Hidden from us by the (p)harmaceutical industry, the very definition of pregnancy was changed to ensure that these drugs could not be called abortifacients.
I have been blessed (oddly) to be someone who reacts rather badly to pharma drugs, so I have to be very careful and take few, and rarely, things which are necessary. I was never in a position to use the pill, although I took the morning after pill two or three times over the years (and reacted badly). After I became a believer, it dawned on me that perhaps I had been pregnant during those times, and I had to repent. It grieved me that I may have been responsible for that, although I didn’t know if I was.
That wasn’t on my mind however when I came across a random meme:
I counted up (34 was my score, by the way – 34!) and came across number 32, and immediately went to look up whether this could possibly be true. Oh absolute horrors, it is. I’ll quote from this excellent article, and I urge you to go and read it all. [Emphasis added]
In order to prevent pregnancy, birth control pills employ several mechanisms. First, the synthetic hormones may convince a woman’s body that she is pregnant. This can stop the ovaries from releasing an egg. The Pill also makes it difficult for the sperm to reach the egg, because the hormones thicken the cervical mucus, making it difficult for the sperm to live and move. The Pill also creates changes in the uterus and fallopian tubes that can interfere with the transport of sperm.
Despite the hormones’ ability to prevent the release of eggs, sometimes a “breakthrough ovulation” takes place. How often this happens depends upon several factors, such as which kind of pill the woman is taking, how consistently she takes her pills, and even how much she weighs. Even with correct and consistent use of the Pill, some formulas allow ovulation in less than 2 percent of cycles, while others allow a woman to ovulate during 65 percent of her cycles.
When a woman ovulates, she can become pregnant. However, the Pill has mechanisms that can cause an abortion before a woman knows that she has conceived.
These mechanisms include preventing the fertilised egg from implanting in the wall of the uterus. This causes it to starve and die.
Previously doctors had considered that life begins at conception (a view I’m sure you all share). In order to get around this issue, the definition was changed: [emphasis added]
Because many women would never have agreed to use a drug or device that could cause an early abortion, those in favor of such contraceptives knew that the issue had to be resolved. In 1964 a Planned Parenthood doctor speaking of another type of abortifacient birth control recommended that scientists not “disturb those people for whom this is a question of major importance.” He added that judges and theologians trust the medical community, and “if a medical consensus develops and is maintained that pregnancy, and therefore life, begins at implantation, eventually our brethren from the other faculties will listen.”
One year later the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) decided to redefine pregnancy. In its words, “conception is the implantation of a fertilized ovum.” Instead of defining conception as fertilization, ACOG decided that life begins nearly a week later, at implantation. At the time they said that this was because pregnancy could not be detected before then. Today science is able to detect pregnancy before implantation, but the ACOG still won’t correct its definition.
According to this article (Link) the number of chemical abortions these medications cause is really shocking:
Some researchers (using very conservative figures) have calculated that the birth prevention pill directly causes between 1.53 and 4.15 million chemical abortions per year in the United States — up to two and a half times the total number of surgical abortions committed every year!
Let me put that in perspective:
I’m sure you are as appalled as I am.
This issue applies to all hormonal birth control, from oral contraceptives to implantable types.
So what to do?
If you have taken or used hormonal contraceptives in the past, or are now, you need to find out the method of action in the brand or type you use. Once you know how it works, and whether this issue has affected you, it’s time to draw close to God and to declare yourself, as His child, grieved to have been duped, and repentant for the consequences of that. The medical profession has yet another “black mark” against them for lying to the public. Informed consent only works if you are informed.
To be sharing this with you all is both a source of grief but also I am somehow relieved too, in that we can now say we know and decide how to go forward with the facts out in the open.
When we are ignorant of the truth we can be manipulated to make bad choices. Now we know we can decide to do things differently. Be gentle on yourself – you didn’t know the truth, but you do now.
Is this an appropriate discussion for a blog that is supposed to talk about theology and the will of God? You’ll see why it is in a bit – this is a fairly long post!
We are being regaled with the story that the NHS is having a winter crisis due to flu. They are pushing the vaccine (yet they say it’s not effective – what it is is poisonous!). They (the media) are saying that we have an ageing population, and that we also have a problem with “health tourism” (that, for the uninitiated, is people coming here from foreign countries just to get free treatment on the NHS).
So let me give you some background.
Under the last socialist government, the NHS saw a large expansion of new hospitals. This was done under PFI – Private Finance Initiative. This brought in private money to (badly) build new buildings for medical staff to use. Health authorities have to pay for these buildings and have contracts in place to ensure that they are maintained at exorbitant cost. When the contract says that the administration must pay over £600 to get a lightbulb changed, you know something is wrong. I wish I could give you a reference for that figure, but it’s from an article from many years ago.
So indeed now it is shouted from the rooftops that the Tories (Conservatives) have made big increases in the NHS budget.
How interesting then that bed numbers have gone down! In fact the NHS runs at around 88% bed occupancy, which doesn’t allow for any kind of winter bug crisis, does it? The number of beds we have per 100,000 population is one of the lowest in Europe:
So funding has increased, yet bed numbers have fallen. Why is that? Because the increase in funding is presumably being paid into the pockets of the PFI fat cats who the so-called “socialist” government put our health service into the hands of.
To cap it all, the way that foreign visitors are treated when they need health treatment in the UK beggars belief! Let me tell you a story:
When a Canadian friend visited me in the UK and ended up with a diabetic foot infection some six weeks after arrival, he was triaged by our 111 telephone service to the local A&E department, and we were told to get him there within the hour. He had a red line on his foot indicating he was going septic. Diabetes and infections do not go well together! It could have been fatal, and so of course they kept him in and pumped him full of antibiotics. But here is where it gets interesting (and, frankly SILLY!).
The NHS has a “code” system. This is probably quite similar to the US system for medical treatments. The code for a diabetic foot infection meant that the hospital is paid £4,200 by the NHS for that patient and the bed is available for 21 days for that illness. This would be what he owed after treatment. He would be billed, and the finance department hounded him daily for it.
Of course, most patients are sent home much more quickly, and certainly in his case, as a former paramedic, he was perfectly capable of administering his own medication at home. Once the infection had shown it was responding to treatment his medical team was as keen as he was for him to come home and vacate that bed. This would be for another patient, equally bringing in £4,200 for the bed!
But instead of being sent back to me with his medication and visits from the district nurse to change the dressing, the consultant, pressured I believe by the finance department, decided that he must stay. The consultant said that it would be on her head if anything were to happen to him.
Then another excuse – you don’t have a GP! I tried to get him registered, but couldn’t do so without him there, and when we told the consultant we wanted to take him out to get him registered, she said that if he left the hospital, that he would be deemed to have discharged himself and would be charged a new fee (of £4,200, presumably) when he returned. He felt like a prisoner! Indeed he was a prisoner.
I managed to find a GP practise who were able to register him over the phone, but still, no he couldn’t leave, because he hadn’t been trained to administer his antibiotics. He said to them, “Right let’s do this now, just dummy up with some saline, and let’s get this done.”
“No, no you have to prove you can do it with the real medicine,” he was told. And so the next day when I arrived to visit he was fuming because the nurse had come to administer his medication and “whoops” she’d already mixed it, so it wouldn’t count for his training. We knew that he had to do this for three days in a row to prove competency. Oh yes. We also knew that the 21 days was fast coming to an end. 21 days in which he had sat, “blocking” a bed, fully dressed and receiving medication just once a day. ONCE. A. DAY. We could have driven him in daily, couldn’t we? But, no…
So I was ready, frankly, to punch someone at this point, (I thank God that I didn’t!!!!), and I came back the next day to find he had successfully completed the first of his three “test runs” – with only the next day to go until his “code” ran out. I wondered what they would do as they could bill him again for another £4,200!
The next day I got a call to say they were discharging him. Had he done his three days to prove competency? No – he’d done just two, and they were happy to let him go as his “code” was at an end. By hook or by crook, (by dishonesty) they kept that man in that bed, preventing someone else from using it, when you know anyone else would be sent home much sooner to free up that bed. Absolutely stupid – but how typical of the NHS.
But here is where it becomes farcical. Of course they wanted paying. They set both immigration on him, and also a debt collection agency. He, being Canadian, had a local government in British Columbia, which will pay such costs. You would have thought the NHS would have been willing to comply with their one condition to receive that payment, wouldn’t you? – that the bill be itemised. But no – the NHS won’t itemise bills. So in the end they never got paid.
And common sense tells me that if you are going to rely on foreigners having medical insurance (indeed, had he had medical insurance) they would have also required the bill to be itemised?! American friends, can you confirm that to me? I cannot imagine any insurance company paying out on a bill which was not itemised!
So with this kind of silliness going on in the NHS no wonder it’s in trouble. The government is happy to see it fail bit by bit so that more and more contracts (pieces of the system) can be run by private corporations for profit.
Indeed, the local district nurses who came out to change his dressings every day told us they were paid by SERCO (the biggest corporation you’ve never heard of). Other parts of the system are now run by Virgin Care. Ah that kindly figure, Richard Branson, eh? Who doesn’t pay, it seems, UK corporation tax on these businesses. And who sued the NHS when he lost an £82 million contract, and walked away with an “undisclosed settlement” (i.e. money we need for actual patients). The system has allowed, for a long time, companies to sue the NHS if they don’t get the contract they think they should have – what a shabby system! And then again the system is paying for people to produce documents and charts showing the Pantone colours for the NHS identity – money which could be better used, don’t you think?
So how does this come back to God – what’s the link here? We, as a people, have been beguiled by lying quacks (strong language, but if you read this link you’ll understand just what I’m saying here) into believing that health comes from the doctor, that we don’t need to take responsibility for our own health, and that indeed, pills are safe, and medical procedures are safe. This is not the case.
Our Great Physician is Yeshua! We must always go to God FIRST and not as an afterthought. Medicine is in fact dangerous, and diagnoses (dire-gnoses) are sometimes curses! Don’t let your doctor give you a badge, a label, a curse. Go to God with your health issues, and let Him guide your treatment. This doesn’t mean you won’t see the doctor, indeed last year I was told to go and see my GP for tests and this turned out to be such a blessing because it changed my view of my health and empowered me to make the changes I needed to improve my health further. It’s not all bad! And of course they saved my friend’s toe, foot, leg, life!
When we depend on God first, we stop over-burdening a system which indeed requires our dependency on it. The medical cartel is a satanic cartel which wants to get you dependent on it – and wants you to believe it has the answers for health, when in fact health is not an absence of symptoms, but is a vibrant state of well-being!
Finally, when considering the “funding” issues in the NHS I must also frankly state that while our government continues to pay for bombs to kill innocent people in foreign lands there really is no shortage of money – there is just a wrong priority in place. I am reminded of this quote:
And then yesterday I found this new one (assuming it is a genuine quote):
And here’s another quote:
“Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.” —-Bertrand Russell,1953
Creating fear in the wake of creating dependency on a system which kills a large number of people every year is a sure way to induce illness, compliance etc. Did you know that when you are stressed you don’t digest food properly? Just one thing which leads to illness. And then, when you realise that 25% of cancer patients die from chemo drugs, and chemo is ineffective for 97% of cancers you begin to wonder why on earth this system still administers it?!
The NHS will do just fine. People would do better to (mostly) keep away from it, and certainly from its pharmakeia.
Why does the press lie to us daily? Why are doctors lauded, when poisoning patients with chemotherapy? Why are stories showing an alternative approach to living always skewed to make the subjects seem irrational?
Social engineering requires a steady stream of lies. It’s hard to believe just how many things we’re lied to about every day, but in this world, which satan is the god of, is there anything we should trust? Our ignorance is very dangerous, but it’s also absolutely necessary for evil to flourish and succeed:
GMOs: Those who know how bad they are for the environment, and people, and the soil microbiome won’t eat them. Those who eat them don’t know.
Glyphosate soaked wheat: Those who know how dangerous this chemical is won’t eat it. Those who eat it don’t know.
Medicine: Those who know how many lives are lost to (and harmed by) the (p)harmaceutical and medical cartel every year try to avoid any contact with said cartel. Those taking drugs, and trusting doctors don’t know.
Cancer: Those with cancer who know how dangerous chemo is, won’t allow it to be administered. Those who do allow it, don’t know.
Electromagnetic radiation: Those who know how dangerous WiFi and smart meters are won’t have one. Those who will have one, don’t know.
Organ donation: Those who know the truth about organ donation would never agree to be on an organ donor register. Those who are on the organ donor register (and campaign for an opt-out system), don’t know.
Vaccines: Those who know how dangerous vaccines are won’t allow their children to have them. Those who allow their children to have them, don’t know.
I could go on, and on.
There’s a pattern – the state’s plans – in fact satan’s plans – rely on our ignorance. The media feeds our ignorance every day with carefully written confections of lies, mistruths, and misdirection. Like a conjurer, with sleight of hand, the truth is concealed under carefully worded heaps of opprobrium.
Ignorance is a multi-trillion dollar industry. It allows them to take our sons to war, to persuade us to allow children to change their gender, pushes ‘tolerance’ on those with strict morals, and allows those with lax morals to hate on us with impunity.
When we are ignorant, we are capable of a lot of sin, and we are capable of believing lies, and those lies can harm us greatly. The truth is scary when it’s so far from the mainstream media fodder we are fed every day.
There’s no conclusion here – I have no words of comfort. Doctors keep poisoning patients, and they keep consenting to it; our food and our skies are full of poison – most are ignorant, but even those who know can do little to change what satan is doing.
Oh yes, she wants to push coma patients to the point where they can be declared dead and their organs removed (vivisection). I quote: (source)
Hospital patients who are in a permanent coma should be given drugs to hasten their deaths so doctors can harvest their organs for transplants, a prominent hospital consultant said yesterday.
New laws should sweep aside the legal ban on euthanasia and allow the organs of those killed to be removed for transplant, Dr Zoe Fritz argued. […]
…Dr Fritz, a consultant physician at Cambridge University Hospitals, and a medical ethics academic at Warwick and Cambridge universities, said that where a patient is going to die ‘it could be in a patient’s best interests to actively end their life with a drug that would stop the heart both to minimise potential suffering and in order to be able to have vital organs donated.’
How, Dr Fritz, is it in the best interests of patients (in a coma, and therefore unable to CONSENT) to have any trace of hope removed that they might live, and oh by the way you’ll only die when we CUT OUT YOUR STILL BEATING HEART!?
Oh but it’s OK – she only wants to do this with patients who have expressed a previous desire to be an organ donor! From the same article I quote:
Dr Fritz said in her paper that instead of withdrawing nutrition and hydration, courts should be required to consider how a patient would have wished to die and their preferences on organ donation.
It added: ‘If the conclusion from this consideration – with appropriate safeguarding – is that they would wish their life to be actively ended facilitating the donation of their organs, then this should be respected.’
Well, phewee – I mean they’ve consented, right? No – consent requires INFORMED consent. No-one has ever given informed consent to be an organ donor.
Vital organs come from LIVING people, not dead bodies. What she is calling for is drugs to be used to cause a) brain death (a false definition of death), or b) cardiac death (another false definition of death, which can be declared in less than a minute in some US states). Then they intend to vivisect a LIVING human for their organs.
This is outrageous, and must never be allowed.
I commented, of course – let’s see if my comment gets published. This is what I said (while half asleep this morning!)