Move Over Dolly, They are Cloning Cows Now

Holy Cow! China clones three ‘Super Cows’ to produce milk by the gallons

China cloned three ‘Super Cows’Image credits- Unsplash
  • China achieves a cloning breakthrough with the creation of three ‘super cows.’
  • Animal cloning is mainly used to improve the quality and productivity of livestock, as well as for conducting research in the field of biotechnology.
  • Earlier, China cloned various species, including cattle, sheep, pigs, horses and even pets.

Chinese scientists have successfully cloned three cows that can produce an unusually high amount of milk, state media reported. According to researchers, these cloned cows are capable of producing 50% more milk than the average American cow.

Scientists sampled tissues from cows across China and used what’s called the somatic cell nuclear transfer method, which involves taking the nucleus from a body cell of the animal to be cloned and transferring it into a donated egg cell. Then embryos were placed inside surrogate cows.

The cloning experiment began last year at the Northwest University of Agricultural and Forestry Science and Technology in Shaanxi, China. The three calves, bred by scientists, were born in the Ningxia region in the weeks leading up to the Lunar New Year on January 23. These calves were cloned from highly productive cows from the Holstein Friesian breed, which originated in the Netherlands. According to Chinese state media, the chosen animals are capable of producing 18 tons of milk per year, which is nearly 1.7 times the amount of milk an average cow in the United States produces.

Jin Yaping, the lead scientist called this a birth of ‘super cows.’ Furthermore, he said, this breakthrough has great significance for China to concentrate and preserve in an economically feasible way the very best cows in the country, and ‘super cows’ are efforts to revitalize its agricultural sector with breeder animals.

For dairy cows, China is 70% reliant on overseas purchases. According to Global Times, China has roughly 6.6 million cows, however, only about 5 in 10,000 such cattle in China are highly productive.

According to Jin Yaping, this new cloning method means, that people can preserve the genes of these super cows in a timely manner and these cows can provide an excellent resource for future breeding.

Further, he said, “Using cloning technology alone won’t have any economic meaning, and the combination of tapping reproductive technology and using low-productive cows as surrogates allowed us to reproduce 20 more offspring compared with just using cloning for a given time period.”

Cloning in China — a game-changer for the agriculture industry?

China has made remarkable progress in the field of animal cloning in recent years, using advanced techniques to clone various species, including cattle, sheep, pigs, and even pets. The purpose of animal cloning in China is multifaceted and ranges from improving the quality and productivity of livestock to conducting scientific research in the field of biotechnology.

In terms of improving livestock, animal cloning has the potential to increase the efficiency of food production, as well as enhance the quality and taste of meat and dairy products. This has led to increased investment in the field of animal cloning in China, as the country seeks to meet the growing demand for food from its rapidly expanding population.

However, the use of animal cloning in China is not without its challenges and controversies. There are concerns about the health and welfare of cloned animals, as well as the potential impact of technology on the environment. Additionally, there are ongoing debates about the ethical considerations surrounding the use of cloning, including the long-term consequences and potential risks.

Despite these challenges, China continues to make significant strides in the field of animal cloning, investing in research and development to advance the technology. The future of animal cloning in China remains uncertain, but it is clear that the country is at the forefront of this rapidly evolving field and is poised to play a significant role in shaping its future.

(Check out the link for a photo of the ‘Super Cows”)

Hmmm, Seems The Nazis Saw Technocracy Coming

Albert Speer’s Warning to the West About The Rise of Technocracy

The term “technocracy” is nothing new to our political lexicon. It’s been around for decades and is commonly associated with totalitarian leftist regimes who appoint technical elitist “experts” to manage specialized sectors of their regime’s military, economy, and other civil sectors. A technocracy’s effect is to nullify the will of the people.

The first of such modern regimes was arguably the National Socialist German Workers Party (aka the Nazi Party). Minister of Armaments Albert Speer was among Hitler’s finest and most prized technocrats. In recent years, Speer’s role has been overshadowed by diabolical agents with more obvious blood on their hands, such as Adolf Eichman, Rudolph Hess, Hermann Goering, and others.

However, Speer was central to Hitler’s vision for Germany. He laid out grandiose architectural plans for the Third Reich’s capital and kept the bulk of the German armaments machine running, even as the lights dimmed around Hitler’s failed vision of a thousand-year reign of unopposed power. He was no less diabolical than his peers.

Since WWII, people have pondered and debated how it was possible for Germans, considered among the world’s most cultured and educated people, to fall in line with the Nazi agenda. After the war, Speer offered insights that are also warnings to Democrats’ technocratic aspirations.

When Germany surrendered, Speer was brought to the ancient German city of Nuremberg, where he was put on trial for crimes against humanity along with twenty-four others. After much deliberation between the tribunal, he was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment at Spandau prison in Berlin. It was a slap on the wrist sentence compared to other regime members who stood trial and received death sentences.

When Speer’s trial neared its conclusion, his final testimony included information explaining how the Nazi regime effectively won the hearts and minds of the bulk of the German population after the nation’s economic and cultural decline following WWI. He also issued a stern warning to the victorious democratic nations that were already building large bureaucratic departments that were overseen by the proto-technocrats of their day.

(Keep in mind that America had a head start on this project: During the 1930s, Roosevelt’s New Deal transformed the American federal government by adding nearly seventy megalithic bureaucracies to the Federal government, permanently transforming America’s governing system. This transformation began the process of convincing many well-meaning Americans that “the bigger the government, the better,” and conditioned Americans to embrace large bureaucratic agencies run by technocrats.)

Speer spoke the following:

Hitler’s dictatorship was the first dictatorship of an industrial state in this age of modern technology, a dictatorship which employed to perfection the instruments of technology to dominate its own people…

By means of such instruments of technology as the radio and public-address systems, eighty million persons could be made subject to the will of one individual. Telephone, teletype, and radio made it possible to transmit the commands of the highest levels directly to the lowest organs where because of their high authority they were executed uncritically.

Thus, many offices and squads received their evil commands in this direct manner. The instruments of technology made it possible to maintain a close watch over all citizens and to keep criminal operations shrouded in a high degree of secrecy.

To the outsider this state apparatus may look like the seemingly wild tangle of cables in a telephone exchange; but like such an exchange it could be directed by a single will. Dictatorships of the past needed assistants of high quality in the lower ranks of the leadership also-men who could think and act independently.

The authoritarian system in the age of technology can do without such men. The means of communication alone enable it to mechanize the work of the lower leadership. Thus, the type of uncritical receiver of orders is created.

Speer explained that, while Hitler was the first to employ the tools of authoritarian control to carry out his regime’s crimes, as technology developed after the war, other technocratic dictatorships would pose an even greater threat to humanity:

The more technological the world becomes, the greater is the danger…As the former minister in charge of a highly developed armaments economy it is my last duty to state: Every country in the world may be dominated by technology; but in a modern dictatorship this seems to me to be unavoidable. Therefore, the more technological the world becomes, the more essential will be the demand for individual freedom and the self-awareness of the individual human being as a counterpoise to technology.

In 2023, America is witnessing an ever-encroaching government composed of unelected and unrestricted technocrats who are increasingly running, or perhaps, ruining, ordinary Americans’ lives. Therefore, it pays to take a lesson from one of history’s most evil technocratic regimes and its chief architect.

Speers’ words from his final testimony should chill any reader who favors a free society. We already see how the dozens of huge bureaucracies routinely roll over Americans’ constitutional rights, imposing their collective wills upon the people without regard to our ostensibly representational government.

Moreover, this rogue bureaucracy is allied with Big Tech’s spiderweb. Both big tech and the Deep State are composed of radical leftist ideological factions who believe in their absolute right to censor any view or opinion that runs contrary to a far-left narrative. No wonder, then, that we are witnessing a government, press corps, and common culture run amok with the Marxist-Woke mind virus.

The big question is whether there are enough freedom-loving Americans left to defeat this anti-freedom system of governing. After all, the bureaucratic state about which the evil Speer warned has already successfully entrenched itself into the fabric of the American way of life.

It’s urgent that Americans understand that their liberties are being held hostage by technocratic elites. They must immediately begin the process of reclaiming their ancient rights before it’s too late. That means using all legal means possible to oppose the government and technological alliance that works to subvert the will of We, the People, America’s true rulers.

Reference: Speer, Albert. Inside the Third Reich, Memoirs. New York. 1970.


Arming the IRS, HHS, and SBA

Why is the IRS Buying .40-Caliber Submachine Guns?

The weaponization and militarization of the federal government continues unabated as Congress and the states sit back and do nothing

When the corporate media asked the IRS why it needed automatic weapons, millions of rounds of ammunition and heavily armed staffers trained in the “use of deadly force,” they said it was for “administrative reasons.”

But we now know that the globalists are not just arming the IRS, along with just about every other federal agency. They are militarizing these agencies to the hilt with military-grade weapons not available to American citizens.

Why, for instance, would the IRS need armored vehicles, flash-bang grenades loaded with tear gas, and .40-caliber submachine guns?

The IRS has been arming up for at least ten years. At the end of 2017, the IRS had 4,487 firearms and 5,062,006 rounds of ammunition in its weapons cache, according to an August 8, 2022, Forbes article, “Inflation Reduction Act Unleashes A Tougher IRS.” You can bet they’ve got a lot more than that stored up six years later in 2023.

Here’s an excerpt from the Forbes article:

“The Schumer-Manchin tax bill known as the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed the Senate on Sunday, raises taxes and will give the IRS billions to go into what the Wall Street Journal called ‘beast mode.’”

The video below by Mark Gifford, a pastor from Lee’s Summit, Missouri, who runs the God Family and Guns YouTube channel, explains why this militarization is taking place.


The IRS has been steppng up its purchases of guns and ammunition even more over the last two years, gobbling up nearly $700,000 in ammo in early 2022. That bulk purchase prompted Representatives Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and Jeff Duncan (R-SC) to introduce the “Disarm the IRS Act,” to prohibit the IRS from buying ammunition. Of course, this bill was dead on arrival because the Uniparty in Washington, which includes all Democrats and a solid majority of Republicans, are all for a militarized federal government. They hate Americans and do not represent Americans. They are globalists whose allegiance is to the military-industrial-biosecurity complex.

The IRS is not alone in this militarization.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has also purchased hundreds of .40-caliber submachine guns, presumably for making raids on independent food producers. They have a special hatred for the Amish (See Food Supply Attack: U.S. Government Raided and Shut Down Golden Valley Farms, an Independent Meat Producer)

The USDA raided the Fisher family’s farm in Farmville, Virginia, and seized their livestock and meat-processing facility as the state condemned and seized their property. They are Amish.

The Small Business Administration has also made bulk purchases of guns and ammo. Health and Human Services has done the same. (Emphasis added)

Is the federal government preparing for all-out war against Americans who push back against the government-media-approved messaging on pandemics, our involvement in perpetual foreign wars and other globalist policies?

You get the sense that maybe, just maybe, enough of us are waking up that the globalists are preparing to silence us once and for all, and the only way to complete that task is by force? All it would take is to make an example out of a few dozen, maybe a few hundred outspoken conservatives. The goal going forward would be to criminalize all speech that contradicts the messaging coming out of the government and its corporate partners. At that point, the globalists’ hope would be for conservatives to start turning on each other out of fear that they could be next. Cut a deal to turn in a fellow conservative, thereby saving your own skin from the reign of terror. This is how life goes down under fascist regimes like the one now in power, so don’t be surprised if they move in this direction. It would probably happen after they steal yet another election in November 2024. They monitor everyone’s online speech so it would be easy to pull off. They make some high-profile arrests and incentivize people to turn on each other. This would be especially effective in a time of economic hardship when people have hungry family members. Turn in a neighbor on false charges and get a month’s worth of food delivered to your door.

The indictments of Trump supporters in Georgia and Michigan have already sent a chilling message. But the deep state is moving on more than that one front. They’ve also been arresting pro-life protesters and throwing the book at them, prosecuting them under the corrupt FACE Act. Protesting abortion has been a mainstay of American life since the early 1970s. Now the government is cracking down and sending messages that things are different. Such protests will no longer be tolerated.

From LifeSite News in an article posted Tuesday, August 29:

A jury on Tuesday found five pro-life activists guilty of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act and conspiracy against rights. They were immediately incarcerated following the verdict and could face more than a decade in prison for their efforts to prevent women from killing their preborn babies.

Did you catch that? You can now get 10 years or more for peacefully praying with and counseling women outside of an abortion clinic. The article goes on to explain that these pro-life Americans were considered by the judge to have committed a “crime of violence” simply for holding pro-life views and being willing to share them publicly in proximity to a baby-butchering clinic. The irony is hard to miss.

In the month of August alone, four Americans had their homes broken into and invaded in pre-dawn raids by the FBI, which in each case executed the suspect in cold blood. One case involved a 100 percent disabled U.S. military veteran in Henderson, Tennessee, who was unarmed at the time he was shot on August 16. Another case involved a 74-year-old man in Provo, Utah, who was obese and unable to walk without a cane but he was shot dead by the FBI on August 9.

From what I can tell, none of these poor souls posed any sort of imminent threat to their families or communities. The Utah man posted threats against Biden on his Facebook page, but clearly lacked the ability to carry them out. The feds could have arrested the guy peacefully while he was pulling out of his driveway. But no, they needed to make a statement.

After enough Americans are executed in this fashion, and fear of speaking out becomes ingrained in society, I can see a day, perhaps sooner than we think, when political dissidents will simply disappear. No one will know what happened to them as they vanish into the gulag.

The situation is growing more serious with each new episode. The best way to stop this troubling trend from expanding is for more people to speak out even more boldly than ever. Stay peaceful but do not hold back your verbal opinions. They cannot kill or arrest us all. There is strength in numbers. Pray for peace and for more time before the inevitable societal collapse goes down. I sense that people aren’t ready for what’s coming. Even if they are waking up, they aren’t ready for a reality in which they are declared criminals simply for something they said or wrote.

from: runs on donations from you, my readers. Unlike the corporate media, I receive no advertisements from Big Pharma or any other corporation, nor do I receive any government grants or anything from nonprofit benefactors. If you appreciate my work, I could really use your support. You may send a contribution of any size c/o Leo Hohmann, P.O. Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264, or via credit card below. Thanks so much.

Time to Move to Texas

While California Aims to Reestablish COVID Policies, Texas Outlaws Masks, Lockdowns and Vaccine Mandates

California’s government has updated its Covid safety website with protocols that set the stage for pandemic-era restrictions on daily life. The website advised that “California’s COVID-19 State of Emergency is over, but COVID-19 has not gone away,” and admonished that we need to keep taking steps to prevent the spread. The document promotes self-isolation, mask-wearing, digital vaccine records, and more. The federal government took steps to enact Covid lockdowns that were to begin with incremental restrictions next month, but it has retreated due to push back.Texas: On September 1, local governments will be prohibited from requiring COVID-related masks, vaccines, or business shutdowns. However, Senate Bill 29 does not restrict private entities from enforcing their own rules.


.California’s government has updated its Covid safety website with protocols that set the stage for pandemic-era restrictions on daily life.

“California’s COVID-19 State of Emergency is over, but COVID-19 has not gone away,” reads the opening statement on the safety measures page. “To safely go about our daily lives, we need to keep taking steps to prevent the spread.”

The page goes on to promote self-isolation, mask-wearing & digital vaccine records, and more.

There’s even a “Do’s and don’ts for daily life.”

  • Save

This rush to normalize biometric tyranny comes alongside Alex Jones’ scoop that the feds are setting the stage for full Covid lockdowns that will begin with incremental restrictions next month.


Read full article here…

California Covid Safety document:

KENS TV San Antonio:


We Know Who you Are, Where You Live, and NOW We Can Control What You Buy

CBDCs As A Weapon To Debank The Banked

If implemented as planned, CBDCs will end federalism, crush the U.S. Constitution, destroy the existing banking/financial system and slam dunk Technocracy into place. You don’t want to go along with this? You will be debanked, defunded and thrown out of economic life until you decide to comply. It’s a roundabout way to say “inclusive”. ⁃ TN Editor

In March 2022, President Biden signed an Executive Order directing government agencies to urgently research and develop a potential US central bank digital currency (CBDC) “in a manner that protects Americans’ interests.” It also encouraged the Federal Reserve Bank to continue doing so. And it isn’t just the Biden Administration in the United States working in such a direction.

As of the time of writing, lists three countries or regions with retail CBDCs already “launched” (Bahamas, Jamaica and Nigeria), another five in “pilot” stage, and another twenty in “proof of concept” stage. Many more have at least researched wholesale CBDCs. (“Wholesale” CBDCs are intended for commercial and central bank use and the like, while “retail” CBDCs are intended for the rest of us). A report by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) released just this month summarizes the results of a survey of 86 central banks and concludes that “there could be 15 retail and nine wholesale CBDCs publicly circulating in 2030.”

When you read statements from high-level officials of the BIS, central banks, and governments, you get the impression that CBDCs are an exciting development in the evolution of money. The BIS, for example, calls them “a new tool in the financial inclusion toolkit.” An op-ed co-authored by BIS General Manager Agustín Carstens and Queen Máxima of the Netherlands frames them in the title as “CBDCs for the people.” An IMF working paper asserts that CBDCs can “bank large unbanked populations” in developing countries.

Unpopular and risky

But when a CBDC was thrust upon the Nigerian people, adoption rates were abysmal at best (below 0.5 percent even a year after its launch), and Nigerians took to the streets to demand access to cash. CBDCs are widely unpopular in the United States as well. A CATO Institute national survey published just in May found that only 16 percent of Americans support the idea, and over twice as many (34 percent) oppose it. 78 percent responded that if a CBDC were offered, they would be unlikely to use it altogether. As for partisanship, while Democrats were twice as likely to support a CBDC than Republicans (22 percent for Democrats, 11 percent for Republicans), just as many Democrats oppose it, and the remaining 56 percent respond that they “don’t know.”

Risks CBDCs present include the loss of settlement finality that comes with physical cash (as abandoning cash accompanies the push for CBDCs), loss of financial privacy, easy seizure of assets, loss of the ability to resolve problems at a local level with a commercial bank (as it would be doubtful that a central bank would come to be known for its customer service), outright prohibition on spending or purchase limits with certain merchants or on certain products, and (perhaps most importantly) the paradigm shift from money as an exercise of economic freedom to one of social engineering by central banks and their respective governments. The latter could manifest itself in various ways, including (to name just a few) negative interest rates (essentially a confiscation of one’s savings), the expiry of one’s money (with a date determined by the issuing central bank or its government) — or even discouraging the consumption of products like gasoline, plane tickets or red meat in order to enforce a climate agenda.

Another CATO resource dedicated to identifying the risks of CBDCs rightly points out that a CBDC could reduce credit availability, disintermediate banks, and challenge the rise of cryptocurrencies. And all this is to say nothing of how businesses operating legally under state law would be treated by central banks when those very same economic activities are illegal under federal law. Even at present (with no CBDC yet launched in the United States), businesses working in the cannabis industry struggle to obtain and maintain bank accounts as many of the commercial banks are federally regulated. Are we really supposed to believe that the Federal Reserve would be more accommodating for cannabis businesses? It is difficult to imagine how CBDCs would not radically undermine federalism.

Finally, the increased surveillance also has a chilling effect on the public – even for legal activities. Enjoy vice (gambling, pornography)? Want to buy a gun? Now maybe you avoid living your life as you presently do.

Hardly inclusive

A quick trip down memory lane demonstrates how the debanking of legally-operating banked businesses in action has historically manifested. An Obama-era Justice Department operation called ‘Operation Choke Point’ targeted gun retailers, payday lenders, and the like beginning in 2013 not by charging the employees or owners of those businesses with actual crimes, but by upping the cost for banks to provide banking services to them, reminding those banks of their obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering (BSA/AML) regulations and the penalties for non-compliance. The result was (not surprisingly) the debanking of banked people and companies.

More recently, crypto has entered into the crosshairs, with regulators shutting down commercial banks that provide financial services to crypto companies. This latter operation was appropriately coined ‘Operation Choke Point 2.0’ by Nic Carter who draws parallels to the first operation.

The timing of a global CBDC initiative is also suspicious given the present cultural and political climate of “canceling” people with dissenting opinions and of Big Tech’s alignment with government to orchestrate something that resembles more of a PsyOp than “public health” as we have traditionally known it (as evidence from a FOIA request revealed).

Even if you think that a CBDC is a good idea, consider that its power may be turned against you when the political pendulum shifts in your direction and your views or activities are suddenly considered taboo or illegal by those in power. Real financial inclusion requires an economic system where financial censorship is harder to accomplish in the first place. (Paper cash and Bitcoin help here).

Oh, and by the way, the BIS itself calls physical cash “the most inclusive form of money we currently have.” With all the talk of financial inclusion, the global push to phase it out is, well, ironic. SEC Chair Gary Gensler was right when he declared that “we already have digital currency. It’s called the US dollar.” We can address the many shortcomings of the traditional financial system without introducing another digital dollar in the form of a CBDC.

The vast power that a CBDC would place in the hands of a nation state or its central bank points in the direction of an unprecedented level of financial surveillance, censorship, and potentially debanking the banked whenever it may serve certain political objectives. Thus, it is hardly an understatement to say that we are at a crossroads for civilization.

We would also be wise to consider the words of FA Hayek, from The Road to Serfdom:

Economic control is not merely control of a sector of human life which can be separated from the rest; it is the control of the means for all our ends. And whoever has sole control of the means must also determine which ends are to be served, which values are to be rated higher and which lower—in short, what men should believe and strive for.

Read full story here…


Interested in Designer Stuff — Cheap?

Auction! You can buy these goods stolen from Nordstrom! They’re flash-mob certified classics!

by Jon Rappoport

August 31, 2023

They’re iconic cultural items! And they can be yours!

Why not? Let’s get real.

Recently, in a continuation of the ongoing LA crime wave, a flash mob of 50 independent reparations scholars liberated items worth 100K from the Topanga Mall Nordstrom.

Even dyed in the wool California liberals are piling on their former darling, LA County DA George Gascon, who’s never met a thief he didn’t love. As in: “We decline to file charges, you’re free to go, and best of luck in your future endeavors, young man.”

But in order to help these thieves further, why put them through the annoying details of fencing their loot?

Let’s go right to an auction. And who better to stand at the podium and handle the bidding than DA George Gascon himself?

The CA liberals can buy the high-end merch…with cultural enhancement attached.

Gascon: “I assure you, my office has verified these products as flash-mob yanked. Buyers will be provided with certificates I personally sign.”

Hell, we’ve got to put the auction on television. MSNBC desperately needs a hit.

Gascon on a studio set of an auction room: “I have here a Judith Leiber Cake Gala Crystal Clutch purse. Golden leather interior. The bid begins at nine thousand. Do I hear ten? Some day you can tell your grandchildren it was a reparation item!”

Which brings us to realize the auction house can simply cement ongoing partnerships with mobs of thieves.

To read the rest of this article and comment on it, click here.


Sooooo…. Ivermectin DOES Work -Safe AND Effective

Ivermectin Worked: New Peer-Reviewed Study Proves It

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
ivermectin worked peer reviewed study proves it


  • A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru convinced a group of doctors that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in October 2020
  • Because the paper wasn’t yet peer-reviewed, it was brushed off; ivermectin for COVID-19 was vilified, as were those who dared to prescribe it
  • Now, the study has been peer-reviewed and published in Cureus, vindicating ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19
  • Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 Peru states where it was used most intensively
  • There was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths when ivermectin was readily available and then a 13-fold increase in excess deaths in the two months after ivermectin use was restricted

As the COVID pandemic wore on, with potential treatments supposedly unknown, New York pulmonologist Dr. Pierre Kory and others tried to get the word out about ivermectin. A widely used antiparasitic drug that’s listed on the World Health Organization’s essential medicines list1 and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, ivermectin is widely available, inexpensive and has a long history of safe usage.

In fact, since 1987, 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been used among humans worldwide,2 but it was quickly vilified — as were those who dared to prescribe it. Now, the tables have turned. Not only did ivermectin work against COVID-19, it was remarkably effective, resulting in a 74% reduction in excess deaths in the 10 states where it was used most intensively.3

Ivermectin Dramatically Slashed COVID Deaths

Kory and other physicians with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC) had success early on treating patients with ivermectin and other therapies during the pandemic. His efforts to get the word out on this treatment protocol were stifled by censorship, ridicule and colleagues brainwashed by the official narrative and unwilling to accept the science.

A preprint paper showing ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID-19 in Peru “was the final piece of evidence which convinced me, Paul [Marik] and the FLCCC that widespread ivermectin distribution could end the pandemic in Oct of 2020,” Kory tweeted.4 “Took 2 years but now peer-reviewed & published in a major journal.”

That study, published in Cureus,5 vindicates ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. “Reductions in excess deaths over a period of 30 days after peak deaths averaged 74% in the 10 states with the most intensive IVM [ivermectin] use,” the study found.6 It used Peruvian national health data from Peru’s 25 states to evaluate ivermectin’s effects.

A natural experiment was set in motion in May 2020, when Peru authorized ivermectin for COVID-19. The significant reduction in excess deaths noted “correlated closely with the extent of IVM use,” the researchers noted.

Global Success Stories Highlight Ivermectin’s Potential

Few have heard about the astonishing success of ivermectin in Uttar Pradesh, India, which embraced large-scale prophylactic and therapeutic use of ivermectin for COVID-19 patients, close contacts of patients and health care workers.7

“The possibility of both preventative and treatment efficacies of IVM was raised by outcomes in another world region in which IVM was distributed to the population at risk for COVID-19 on a mass scale. This IVM distribution occurred in Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in India, having a population of 229 million,” the study added.8

There, widespread ivermectin distribution likely resulted in significantly lower COVID-19 deaths compared to areas not using the drug:9

“The cumulative total of COVID-19 deaths per million in population from July 7, 2021 through April 1, 2023 was 4.3 in Uttar Pradesh, as compared with 70.4 in all of India and 1,596.3 in the United States … The much lower number of COVID-19 deaths per population in all of India versus the United States in that period may reflect the use of these same home treatment kits containing IVM, doxycycline, and zinc in some other states of India.”

A similar series of events occurred in Itajai, Brazil, a city of 220,000 people. In June 2020, they implemented a prophylaxis program using ivermectin. The program was advertised throughout local media, and people were encouraged to participate and take ivermectin four times a month, on days 1, 2, 15 and 16.

On the appropriate days, they set up tents and centers where people could get the drug, and the entire program was carefully logged in an electronic database. In all, 159,000 Brazilians participated, of those 113,000 elected to take the ivermectin.

Kory and eight coauthors published a paper on the results, which showed “regular use of ivermectin as a prophylactic agent was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rates.”10

Those who used ivermectin had a 44% reduction in COVID-19 infection rate, a 68% reduction in COVID-19 mortality and a 56% reduction in hospitalization rate compared to those who did not.11

Meanwhile, a study from Japan demonstrated that just 12 days after doctors were allowed to legally prescribe ivermectin to their COVID-19 patients, cases dropped dramatically.12 The chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association13 noticed the low number of infections and deaths in Africa, where many use ivermectin prophylactically and as the core strategy to treat river blindness.14D.

Government’s Ivermectin Restrictions Increased Deaths

In a striking revelation, ivermectin was used against COVID-19 in Peru for four months, before the new president put restrictions on its use. During that time, “there was a 14-fold reduction in nationwide excess deaths and then a 13-fold increase in the two months following the restriction of IVM use.”15

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has towed the anti-ivermectin narrative all along, with its infamous tweet reading, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”16 While commanding the U.S. public and physicians not to use ivermectin for an off-label use, the irony stands that close to 40% of U.S. prescriptions are for off-label uses.17

But now, after years of vilification, it had no choice but to admit what’s been right all along — doctors have the authority to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19. Attorney Jared Kelson of Boyden Gray & Associates, who is representing physicians who have sued the FDA for interfering with their practice of medicine, including relating to ivermectin for COVID-19, explained:18

“The fundamental issue is straightforward. After the FDA approves a human drug for sale, does it then have the authority to influence or interfere with how that drug is used within the doctor-patient relationship? The answer is no.”

The FDA did just that, nonetheless, but finally admitted the truth on August 16, 2023, tweeting, “Health care professionals generally may choose to prescribe an approved human drug for an unapproved use when they judge that the unapproved use is medically appropriate for an individual patient.”19

In September 2021, the American Medical Association also told doctors to stop prescribing ivermectin for COVID-19. In a statement, AMA, along with the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), warned:20

“We are alarmed by reports that outpatient prescribing for and dispensing of ivermectin have increased 24-fold since before the pandemic and increased exponentially over the past few months. As such, we are calling for an immediate end to the prescribing, dispensing, and use of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 outside of a clinical trial.

In addition, we are urging physicians, pharmacists, and other prescribers — trusted health care professionals in their communities — to warn patients against the use of ivermectin outside of FDA-approved indications and guidance, whether intended for use in humans or animals, as well as purchasing ivermectin from online stores.”

How many died unnecessarily as a result of these commands? As noted by journalist Kim Iversen, even the FDA’s move advising doctors that they’re allowed to prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 is too little, too late. “Now, two, three years later, too little, too late… ultimately, we now get this study that has been officially peer reviewed and published, and it shows significant, significant, significant reduction [of mortality] in COVID-19.”21

How Does Ivermectin Work Against COVID?

Ivermectin binds to SARS-CoV-2’s spike protein, limiting the virus’ morbidity and infectivity.22 The drug, while best known for its antiparasitic effects, also has demonstrated antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. An in vitro study demonstrated that a single treatment with ivermectin effectively reduced viral load 5,000 times in 48 hours in cell culture.23

Studies have shown that ivermectin helps to lower the viral load by inhibiting replication.24 A single dose of ivermectin can kill 99.8% of the virus within 48 hours.25 A meta-analysis in the American Journal of Therapeutics also showed the drug reduced infection by an average of 86% when used preventively.26

Ivermectin has also been shown to speed recovery, in part by inhibiting inflammation and protecting against organ damage.27 This pathway also lowers the risk of hospitalization and death. Meta analyses have shown an average reduction in mortality that ranges from 75%28 to 83%.29,30

Additionally, the drug also prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure.31 As the Cureus study noted, the latest data only adds further evidence that ivermectin has an important place in COVID-19 treatment:32

“These encouraging results from IVM treatments in Peru and similar positive indications from Uttar Pradesh, India, which have populations of 33 million and 229 million, respectively, offer promising models for further mass deployments of IVM, as needs may arise, for both the treatment and prevention of COVID-19.”

It’s worth noting, too, that ivermectin has notable antitumor effects, which include inhibiting proliferation, metastasis and angiogenic activity in cancer cells.33 It appears to inhibit tumor cells by regulating multiple signaling pathways, which researchers explained in the Pharmacological Research journal, “suggests that ivermectin may be an anticancer drug with great potential.”34

Why Was Ivermectin Suppressed?

The average treatment cost for ivermectin is $58.35 Do you think this has anything to do with ivermectin’s vilification? The authors of the Cureus study certainly do:36

“The exceptional safety profile and low cost of IVM certainly support its use as in Peru’s operation MOT [Mega-Operación Tayta] and in Uttar Pradesh as an attractive national policy for COVID-19 mitigation. These significant reductions in mortality as achieved in Peru and Uttar Pradesh suggest that the impact of such a national IVM deployment would be observable within a relatively short period.

However, generic drugs have often fared poorly in competition with patented offerings in past decades, based upon the unfortunate vulnerability of science to commodification and regulatory capture … Such a potential bias against IVM was suggested by a February 4, 2021 press release from Merck, which was then developing its own patented COVID-19 therapeutic, claiming that there was ‘a concerning lack of safety data’ for IVM.

However, IVM is Merck’s own drug, found safe at doses considerably higher than its standard dose in several studies, as cited in the section on the background on IVM treatments of COVID-19, and the Nobel Prize committee specifically noted IVM’s safety record in honoring the discovery of this drug in its 2015 prize for medicine.”

If you’d like to learn more about ivermectin’s potential uses for COVID-19, FLCCC’s I-CARE protocol can be downloaded in full,37 giving you step-by-step instructions on how to prevent and treat the early symptoms of COVID-19.

Who’s (or WHAT’S) Writing Your News?

Google Tests A.I. Tool That Is Able to Write News Articles

Google is testing a product that uses artificial intelligence technology to produce news stories, pitching it to news organizations including The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal’s owner, News Corp, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The tool, known internally by the working title Genesis, can take in information — details of current events, for example — and generate news copy, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the product.

One of the three people familiar with the product said that Google believed it could serve as a kind of personal assistant for journalists, automating some tasks to free up time for others, and that the company saw it as responsible technology that could help steer the publishing industry away from the pitfalls of generative A.I.

Some executives who saw Google’s pitch described it as unsettling, asking not to be identified discussing a confidential matter. Two people said it seemed to take for granted the effort that went into producing accurate and artful news stories.

A Google spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Times and The Post declined to comment.

“We have an excellent relationship with Google, and we appreciate Sundar Pichai’s long-term commitment to journalism,” a News Corp spokesman said in a statement, referring to Google’s chief executive.

Jeff Jarvis, a journalism professor and media commentator, said Google’s new tool, as described, had potential upsides and downsides.

“If this technology can deliver factual information reliably, journalists should use the tool,” said Mr. Jarvis, director of the Tow-Knight Center for Entrepreneurial Journalism at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at the City University of New York.

“If, on the other hand, it is misused by journalists and news organizations on topics that require nuance and cultural understanding,” he continued, “then it could damage the credibility not only of the tool but of the news organizations that use it.”

News organizations around the world are grappling with whether to use artificial intelligence tools in their newsrooms. Many, including The Times, NPR and Insider, have notified employees that they intend to explore potential uses of A.I. to see how it might be responsibly applied to the high-stakes realm of news, where seconds count and accuracy is paramount.

But Google’s new tool is sure to spur anxiety, too, among journalists who have been writing their own articles for centuries. Some news organizations, including The Associated Press, have long used A.I. to generate stories about matters including corporate earnings reports, but they remain a small fraction of the service’s articles compared with those generated by journalists.

Artificial intelligence could change that, enabling users to generate articles on a wider scale that, if not edited and checked carefully, could spread misinformation and affect how traditionally written stories are perceived.

While Google has moved at a breakneck pace to develop and deploy generative A.I., the technology has also presented some challenges to the advertising juggernaut. While Google has traditionally played the role of curating information and sending users to publishers’ websites to read more, tools like its chatbot, Bard, present factual assertions that are sometimes incorrect and do not send traffic to more authoritative sources, such as news publishers.

The technology has been introduced as governments around the world have called on Google to give news outlets a larger slice of its advertising revenue. After the Australian government tried to force Google to negotiate with publishers over payments in 2021, the company forged more partnerships with news organizations in various countries, under its News Showcase program.

Publishers and other content creators have already criticized Google and other major A.I. companies for using decades of their articles and posts to help train these A.I. systems, without compensating the publishers. News organizations including NBC News and The Times have taken a position against A.I.’s sucking up their data without permission.

The post Google Tests A.I. Tool That Is Able to Write News Articles appeared first on New York Times.


More on Maui

What Really Happened in Maui?

Analysis by A Midwestern Doctor
what really happened in maui


  • Many competing narratives have emerged to explain what transpired in Lahaina (e.g., it was all due to “climate change”
  • Readers in Hawaii contacted me to share their experiences and I’ve done my best to put together a clear picture of what happened, who dropped the ball, how the local community truly came together to help each other, and the most helpful things I can share for the people there
  • What happened in Lahaina was horrific, much of it is still being concealed by the media, and many of the survivors will face physical, economical and psychological challenges for years to come
  • Ensuring that the truth about what happened in Lahaina becomes known will be vital for both the people of Maui and the world around them in the years to come

One of my main goals with this platform has been to help and support people who do not have the voice be heard (e.g., the forgotten victims of medicine). Since the Maui Wildfires started, I have received a lot of requests over email from readers in Hawaii to discuss what is happening there, so I’ve spent the last week trying to get a clear idea of that and what I can share which will be the most helpful to the people in Maui.

Video Reports

There have been a lot of videos going around describing differing narratives over what happened in Maui. Of the videos I have reviewed, these are the two I believe most accurately depict the current situation and provide the most useful information for those wishing to help. The first one is shorter (12 minutes) the second one is longer (58 minutes). Points from those videos will be referenced throughout this article.

Note: Colleagues I trust who know Bruce Douglas and Paul Deslauriers informed me that they hold both of these individuals in high regard. They also emphasized that both Paul and Bruce have repeatedly succeeded in making a large impact (which is rare for activists), and they have been consistent in their work for decades (which suggests they won’t be bought off).

How to Help

A few major issues are currently afflicting the victims of this disaster. The most immediate ones are medical complications for the survivors, a lack of shelter and a lack of necessary supplies. The organization everyone has told me is doing the most to directly help the people affected by this disaster (and did so from the very start) is the one mentioned in the previous video, Hungry Heroes Hawaii, so if you wish to support a group, I would encourage supporting them.

Note: People on the ground have told me that The Red Cross has also been helpful. Unfortunately, since it is a larger organization, a significant amount of the money donated to them goes towards administrative costs rather than directly helping people in need.

Regarding the medical issues, I believe the largest issue is the PTSD survivors of Lahaina experienced — what they went through was horrific and something guaranteed to leave many with nightmares for years to come.

I know that initially, many different local healers and therapists worked pro bono at the shelters to try and help the survivors psychologically recover, but as time went on, the shelters became much stricter with who was and was not allowed in. In short, the need for appropriate psychiatric care will likely be an unmet need for years to come (e.g., consider this account of how survivors from the California Paradise Fire are faring five years after the fact).

Note: I believe two of the most effective methods for resolving past trauma are EMDR and removing trapped emotions. Both of these were discussed in this article.

I also believe there will be issues with toxic smoke inhalation and burns. From the reports I’ve heard, smoke inhalation has not been as big an issue as it was in the larger wildfires and is primarily an issue for already sensitive patients (e.g., those with COVID-19 vaccine injuries and other chronic inflammatory disorders).

I believe the most helpful and easy to use approach for healing wildfire toxicity is nebulized glutathione (which was discussed in this previous article on the mechanisms of and treatments for wildfire toxicity).

Regarding burns, severe burns requiring hospitalization were initially an issue, leading to many burn victims being shipped to Oʻahu (as more medical care is available there), but that appears to now be over. More people were affected by less severe burns, which while extremely unpleasant, did not require hospitalization.

Burns (especially severe ones) have always been quite challenging to treat, and I believe this is due to the blood clumping burns create throughout the body (the forgotten research on zeta potential and blood sludging discovered this). Since this concept is not recognized within conventional medicine, it hence is only indirectly addressed. Presently, my preferred ways for working with burns are as follows:

Use aloe vera topically (beyond my own observation, there is real evidence this helps). The major issue with this approach is ensuring the quality of the aloe vera used.

Use Chinese burn cream (Ching Wan Hung). This readily available ointment is one of the most effective Chinese herbal formulas I have ever come across (the other being Yunnan Baiyao — which will be the subject of a future article).

Be around a negative ion generator. A lot of (sadly forgotten) research (detailed within this book) was done on patients in burn units and found it dramatically improved their recovery (much more so than any other available therapy).

I believe this worked because the negative ions, through imparting a negative charge on the surfaces they contact, directly restore the zeta potential of the burn site and antidote the blood sludging from the burn. Unfortunately, negative ion generators vary in quality and not all work for this function.

I have also heard of a lot of other approaches being used for burns (e.g., certain topical cold laser treatments reportedly were quite helpful for hospitalized burn victims). However, since I have no direct experience with these I cannot comment on them.

In addition to these immediate issues, there are also broader ones the people of Maui will have to deal with, such as:

Retaining employment — much of Maui’s economy is tourism based, so Hawaii’s governor encouraging people to stop coming to Maui was devastating for locals who are already stretched thin making ends meet (Maui has become prohibitively expensive for locals to live in since COVID).

For this reason, one of the most helpful things you can do for the people of Maui is to encourage those you know to resume vacationing there (most of the island was unaffected by the fires).

Which narrative ultimately becomes “truth” — that this disaster was the unpreventable result of climate change or that this disaster was a result of massive incompetence by Hawaii’s government (and the corporate interests that control it).

The great fear everyone I’ve spoken to holds is that the non-affluent natives who create the spirit and aloha of Hawaii will be economically displaced by affluent outsiders who only care about their own enjoyment and corporate interests primarily motivated by profit. If the state is able to escape its culpability for what happened, nothing will constrain it from following a path that leads to this occurring and there are already many signs that is the long term plan for Lahaina.

The Politics of Hawaii

Hawaii has a curious political situation — from the top down it has one of the worst state governments in the USA, but from the bottom up, it has one of the best grassroots movements in the country. For example, many of the most extreme and long lasting COVID power grabs were done by Hawaii’s government, while many of the most effective citizen actions against the COVID policies (e.g., the mandates) were also done in Hawaii.

Likewise, despite its relatively small population, a disproportionate number of my readers come from Hawaii.

While Substack doesn’t show me an island by island breakdown, based on the emails I receive, I believe many of them are in Maui. For example, I’ve received multiple requests to cover a concerning deployment of lab altered mosquitos (designed to control the existing mosquito population) being forced onto Maui and then the other islands despite it being currently challenged in court — which is discussed in this article and this article written by a coalition opposing it.

My best explanation for this contrast between the Hawaii’s grassroots networks and their state government is that island nations (due to the distance from a central authority) tend to have significantly more dysfunctional and corrupt governments. Conversely, something about the environment in Hawaii tends to make locals be much more connected to their hearts and communities, so they are more likely to go out of their way to make things better for everyone.

A recent illustration of this contrast can be seen in how these fires were handled. The state government, especially at the start, largely failed to meet the needs of those hurt by the fires, but the locals dropped everything they were doing to care for their fellow Hawaiians — and were remarkably effective in doing so.

The history of this contrast traces back to 1893. At that date, Hawaii’s government, against the wishes of both the native Hawaiians and America’s government, was overthrown by American corporate interests, before long becoming our territory and later still a state.

Because of this, those corporate interests (and their descendants) have both been able to exert significant influence over Hawaii with less than adequate oversight from the federal government and continually been at odds with the native Hawaiians.

Presently, a “Democrat” political machine controls the state government, where residents will overwhelming vote in favor of the Democrat candidate (e.g., 92% of the state senate are Democrats, 88% of the state house of representatives are Democrats, and 64% of Hawaii voted for Biden).

Because of this, the party bosses control the state legislature, and (I’ve heard this from insider sources) if elected Democrats do not comply with the wishes of those party bosses, they are effectively neutered and unable to do anything during their legislative tenure (e.g., their bills go nowhere and they do not end up on any committees).

At a local level (e.g., members of a city council), party preference has a much smaller impact, so those who are elected are much more able to create change in the system. Until recently, many of the key governmental positions in Maui were directly appointed by officials beholden to corporate interests.

That changed due to a 2018 citizen’s initiative, which until 2022, was able to elect a majority on the local town council who did not serve corporate interests and then set about reforming many longstanding issues (e.g., how key officials were appointed).

So, as best as I can tell, a similar tension to the one being seen throughout the world exists in Maui, where groups which for generations have held power over the people no longer can do so in the face of new tools for promoting Democracy. Since people never like to let go of power, the transition typically is quite turbulent.

Business on Hawaii

The primary factor which motivated overthrowing Hawaii’s government was the money to be made there — which at the time was through selling tropical crops such as sugar cane and pineapples (e.g., Sanford Dole was appointed as the new leader of Hawaii after the old government was overthrown and his cousin founded Dole Pineapple).

Over time, it became less and less profitable to produce tropical cash crops in Hawaii and tourism displaced agriculture as the predominate industry. For example, on Maui, there was a longstanding 41,000 acre sugar cane plantation residents frequently protested against (due to the pollution cane burning practices created).

That business gradually stopped being profitable (e.g., workers had to be paid more rather than being treated as indentured servants, subsidies and tariffs stopped being provided to protect its market and much cheaper sources of sugar were found). After 146 years of operation, in 2016, the plantation closed and was sold to California farm company and a Canadian investment firm for 246 million.

Note: In California, many believe the primary cause of its recurring wildfires are poor forestry management (e.g., not creating firebreaks in the forest, aggressively suppressing smaller fires and not conducting controlled burns) that has resulted from longstanding political forces (e.g., environmental lobbyists) preventing the appropriate forestry management from being implemented.

In Maui, a similar situation exists, as the sugar cane plantations replaced native (fire resistant) plants with easily combustible grasses. Many felt this was a fire risk and petitioned for it to be addressed, but neither the sugar cane plantation’s management nor its new owners were willing to do so.

As agriculture lost its profitability in Maui, luxury living replaced it. In turn, the economic force behind the island became the developers (many of whom I have been told are descended from the same families who originally took over Hawaii), and there has been a constant push and pull between the natives and the developers for land they can turn into lucrative property.

Lahaina has been at the center of this because it has extremely valuable land (it’s at the center of Maui’s tourism district) and until 1842 was the capitol of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Because of its historical ties to the native Hawaiians (e.g., they consider it to be a sacred site and many parts of their cultural heritage were located there) many Hawaiian families had lived there for generations and were not willing to give their land up to developers.

As a result, a variety of battles had been fought over what would be done with Lahaina’s land, and until the fires happened, the developers had been kept away from key districts of Lahaina. Many (especially those who had spent years fighting this) thus believe the fires were a backhanded way for the developers to gain access to that land.

Energy in Hawaii

One of the major challenges Hawaii faces is producing energy due to its isolation — making energy significantly more expensive there (e.g., in 2022, it was 2.47 times the national average). The typical way this challenge is addressed is through nuclear power, but in Hawaii’s case, no nuclear reactors exist on the island (presumably because Hawaii does not want the various environmental risks they entail) and instead fossil fuels are imported from far away to run their power plants.

For this reason (along with Hawaii’s wealth and liberal population) Hawaii is often at the top of the list for a transition to green energy (e.g., wind or solar). As a result, the share of energy in Hawaii produced by renewable resources has been rapidly increasing (e.g., in 2022 roughly 30% of its energy came from renewable resources) and a state law requires 100% of it to be from renewable sources by 2045.

Note: Although Hawaii has had a decent amount of success with traditional renewable options like solar or wind, I personally believe the best existing energy option for Hawaii would be geothermal plants on the island of Hawaii (since it has active volcanos), which is then stored as hydrogen and distributed to the other islands.

The pilot geothermal plant on Hawaii has successfully produced a lot of energy, but it has not been scaled up, yet alone has anyone consider how its energy could be transferred to the other islands.

On the surface, I strongly support the idea of adopting green energy technologies, but I simultaneously do not because (as discussed in this article) the ones that are ultimately chosen tend to be expensive and damaging to the environment rather than technologies that offer a significant improvement over existing fossil fuel systems.

Presently, I am not sure how much of the high cost of Hawaii’s electricity comes from the inherent cost of its situation and how much of it comes from their energy company overcharging the state (Hawaii Electric — which has a monopoly and produces 95% of the state’s electricity). Often, when you have private for-profit institutions controlling a public utility (e.g., electricity), costs are raised while necessary maintenance (which the increased costs should be paying for) is deferred.

One of the most notorious examples of this price gouging was what Enron did to California in 2000-2001. By taking advantage of recent deregulation of the state energy market, Enron was able to spike electricity costs by up to 20 times their normal amount, creating rolling blackouts and ultimately costing the state 40-45 billion dollars.

More recently, PG&E (California’s primary private utility) was successfully sued for its role in numerous wildfires, including the 2018 wildfire (which was one of the largest and most devastating ones in history). The lawsuits were successful, and due to the billions it owed, in January 2019, PG&E declared bankruptcy.

Note: Although the lawsuits were successful (e.g., there was a 13.5 billion dollar judgement) almost none of that money has gone to the victims of the 2018 fire and as a result, the less affluent were the largest victims of it. Unless Hawaiians unite, I suspect something similar will happen here.

Investigators with the California Public Utilities Commission found that there were systematic problems with PG&E’s oversight of the nearly 100-year-old power line that sparked the (2018) Camp fire.

The lawsuit filed by the trust sought to hold the former executives accountable for not properly maintaining vegetation around electrical equipment and for not installing power shutoff equipment at the time of the 2017 fire. The suit also argued that the utility company did not properly update 100-year-old equipment in connection with the Camp fire.”

Now consider the charges against Hawaii Electric:

“The lawsuit filed Wednesday contends that since 2017, as Maui’s fire risks increased, Hawaiian Electric nonetheless paid out tens of millions in increased payments to shareholders every year.

The plaintiffs accuse the utility company of years of inaction and negligence, and argue that it should have had plans in place to shut down power systems [so they can’t spark fires] before fierce winds blew across Hawaii.”

Note: Hawaii Electric had ample warning before the fires started that their power lines had a significant fire risk during the high winds and needed to be turned off.

“In explaining potential upgrades to its systems, Hawaiian Electric’s funding request last year specifies that California’s power shutoff plan is among electric industry strategies “used to mitigate wildfire risks until more robust preventive measures have been implemented in an area.”

Watts, who said his team has been approached by hundreds of potential plaintiffs, said his lawsuit is aimed at preventing the islands from ever experiencing fires like this again. He said similar litigation in California has led to safety improvements and processes that have limited recent wildfire fallout, and that Hawaiian Electric was aware of those efforts.

The lawsuit details multiple instances and documents [dating back years] in which Hawaiian Electric and public utility officials acknowledge the dangers of wildfires, and the potential for downed power lines and grid infrastructure to start them in areas where vegetation growth was not mitigated. The risks were outlined in Hawaiian Electric news releases, documents it filed to the state, and in its own expenditure plans.

In one instance, a 2022 funding request for $189.7 million from the Hawaii Public Utilities Commission to harden its power grid statewide, Hawaiian Electric said that the risk of its utility system “causing a wildfire ignition is significant.” Despite the request being approved, Hawaiian Electric did not act, the lawsuit alleges.

“Unfortunately, for the residents of Lahaina, these proposed grid hardening expenditures were deferred,” according to the lawsuit filed Wednesday. The suit states the company hadn’t spent any funding on power pole upgrades or wildfire prevention in 2021, 2022 or 2023, nor had spent anything on hazard tree removals in 2021 or 2022.”

Since everyone is aware of the precedent set by the California wildfires, Hawaii Electric’s stock has already dropped by two-thirds, and it is very possible that like PG&E it will have to declare bankruptcy. My hope is that this will result in it becoming a public utility (so its revenue is used to restore the power grid rather than just making as much money as possible), but given Hawaii’s political climate, I am doubtful this will happen.

Note: As you might have guessed, some degree of corruption appears to have impeded Hawaii Electric adopting a safer power grid (e.g., this article documents financial conflicts of interest between Hawaii Electric and Hawaii’s public regulators). This is similar to a longstanding problem in the medicine — the regulators responsible for approving or mandating dubious pharmaceuticals often have financial conflicts with the pharmaceutical manufacturer.

Previous Disasters

Large scale environmental disasters are often shown to be the result of a corporation being warned an existing practice had a high risk of causing the disaster, and the corporation then declining to spend the money (which was often not that much) needed to address the issue.

Greg Palast’s Vulture’s Picnic shows how this has happened with many major disasters including the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, the Fukishima nuclear meltdown, and BP’s “unprecedented” Deep Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, which was due to a risky drilling practice that had caused an identical blowout in Azerbaijan 17 months beforehand.

Like the recent wildfire, all of these examples illustrate a longstanding problem with our current economic model that we also see in other areas like unsafe but profitable pharmaceuticals (e.g., the COVID-19 vaccines) being pushed onto the market. Since corporations shield officers of the corporation from liability for their conduct, there is no incentive for them to avoid reckless practices that inevitably lead to disasters.

Furthermore, due to political lobbying, the corporations being “too big to fail” and bankruptcy protections being available, in the rare case where something catastrophic happens and the corporation is found liable, it can still continue to make money for its shareholders.

Hawaii Electric for instance was fully aware of the liability it faced for doing exactly what PG&E had done, but nonetheless completely ignored it. That proves the current penalties for this type of conduct are not sufficient to prevent it.

What Caused the Wildfires?

From looking at the available information, I feel certain the following are true:

  • Some of the wildfires were sparked by downed electrical power lines.
  • Fierce winds knocked the power lines over.
  • Fierce winds made the fires spread rapidly.

However there are two things, I am much less sure of. First, were those winds were due to the hurricane? In the interview with Dr. Malone at the start of this article, a very strong case is made that they could not have been due to the hurricane — something at least one mainstream outlet is now beginning to acknowledge.

If the winds were not due to the hurricane, this is important for people to be aware of, as the mainstream media will almost certainly try to argue that it was and hence that Hawaii’s government had no culpability in what happened. Instead, it will simply be argued that Lahaina proved it is critical to continue our War Against Climate Change (which as a lifelong environmentalist, I believe has been extremely detrimental to the environmental movement).

Second, I am unsure if all the fires were started by downed power lines, as numerous ones erupted over a very short time span, some started in areas without power lines, and I was told some of those locations were also far enough from the road that it is unlikely they were started by a cigarette being thrown out the window. For example, this video was recently shared with me by a reader:

Assuming that is the case, it means the most probable explanation for some of the fires was deliberate arson, which becomes even more probable given that (as discussed in Dowd’s interview) Maui has a longstanding arson issue.

It’s less clear who the arsonists were, as locals have told me that amongst other things, cars will periodically be stolen, stripped of parts, and then set alight in a field to hide the evidence but it is also possible something more nefarious occurred that was deliberately intended to burn Lahaina down.

When I looked further into this, I came across a report stating that a suspicious individual may have been seen in the same location where one of the fires later started, but since that witness was not confident in what they saw, I wasn’t sure what to make of it.

Note: Wildfires also broke out on two other Hawaiian islands and may also provide an important part of the picture for what happened.

What Turned the Fires Into a Disaster?

When disastrous events occur and root cause analyses are performed after the fact, a frequent observation is that numerous small errors compounded to form a catastrophe a situation analogous to that described by Murphy’s Law — “Anything that can go wrong will go wrong, and at the worst possible time.” Because of this, the normal goal of a root cause analysis to identify those errors and put policies and procedures in place so that they cannot happen again.

Sadly, they typically do not get adopted until a major disaster (or multiple similar ones like California and then Maui’s wildfires) occur that prove their necessity.

For example, in the infamous 1911 Triangle Shirt Waist Fire, 146 workers died because a variety of terrible policies were followed such as locking the exit door shut so workers would not attempt to take breaks during their shift (leading to them being trapped inside once the fire started and forcing many to jump to their deaths to flee the fire). Outrage at the disaster in turn led to fire codes and laws to protect laborers being implemented across the state of New York.

In addition to Hawaii Electric making catastrophic blunders, Maui’s government did as well. Some of these are difficult to believe, but I am relatively sure all are true:

Firefighters took a long time to respond to fires. I heard reports I deem to be credible that emergency services had to be repeatedly contacted (e.g., for over an hour) to respond to a fire that had started.

Likewise, many believe Maui’s firefighters left Lahaina prematurely after extinguishing the initial blaze, which many suspect allowed it to reignite into a much more devastating blaze. Both of these indicate Maui had a systemic shortage of necessary fire fighting resources.

No warnings were sent out to people in Lahaina — either over cell phones or with the sirens (which are regularly tested to warn Hawaiians of a potential tsunami).

Thus far, the government has not provided an acceptable explanation for this profound failure which killed a lot of people (currently it is being argued the sirens might have caused people to inappropriately flee to higher grounds). Because of these failures, many did not realize the fire was coming until their house was on fire.

In Lahaina, one witness reported that electrical power went out and cell phone service switched to emergency calls only prior to heavy winds hitting the area (which in turn preceded the fires hitting the area). I still am not sure what to make of this, but it helps to explain why residents were unable to warn each other of the impending fire.
The fire hydrants in Lahaina (and in Kula the other major fire site) stopped working. Exactly why this happened is still unknown (e.g., its theorized that houses combusting depressurized the water system — although that has not typically been observed in fires).
Maui’s deputy director for water resource management refused to release water to landowners near Lahaina after it was requested to the supply the firefighters. When the water was finally released 5 hours later, it was too late.
Police blocked the exits from Lahaina and refused to open them up when individuals attempted to flee the fires — as a result, only those who disobeyed the police officer, knew backroads to take, used a bicycle or fled on foot (e.g., to the ocean) survived. This is an incredible accusation, but multiple witnesses have attested to this on camera, and people I trust independently corroborated it.

Note: This closure may have been in part due to a minor fire earlier in the day, or a fear of a downed power lines further down the road. The police officer who blocked the road trapping everyone in the fire zone stated that he did so because he was ordered to, which has made many suspect the police leadership made a catastrophic blunder (or worse).

Schools were closed because of the early morning fire near Lahainaluna High School. Many children may have thus been home alone while their parents were at work and not prepared to flee their homes when the fires arrived.

If each of these is looked at in isolation, they could be explained by poor training or a general lack of competence. However, when viewed together, they become much more suspicious.

Note: I also suspect the older construction of Lahaina (which may not have not been up to code due to having been grandfathered in) likely made it more vulnerable to a fire engulfing it. Likewise, many residents had no real understanding of wildfires and thus were not prepared to react quickly to the risks they were facing (as Dr. Malone explained, being inside one can be terrifying and disorientating, especially if you have no prior familiarity with them).

Why Is Lahaina Being Hidden From the Public?

The fires started on the morning of August 8 and were essentially contained by the morning of August 10.

At the same time, heavy restrictions were placed on who could enter Lahaina (initially no one could and then only residents could) and after significant public protest (along with a recognition the restrictions were not feasible), those restrictions were lifted on August 13. In parallel to this happening, a no-fly zone was enacted above Lahaina, making it impossible for drones to be flown that could see what was happening below (their default software prevents this).

Note: In addition to it being confirmed in the above news report, contacts in Maui have also reported this to me.

Because the area was locked down, individuals attempting to bring supplies into Lahaina were blocked from entering, which resulted in many losing trust in the government and locals then bypassing the road blockade by bringing relief supplies in by boat.

Exactly why the road closures happened is more debatable. The least accusatory explanation is that the government’s standard operating procedure is to close disaster sites down since that may prevent further injuries from occurring (e.g., due to toxic fumes), prevent looting, prevent obstructions to the search and rescue operations and prevent hysteria from breaking out at the disaster site (e.g., from someone seeing their house burned down).

None of those appeared to be applicable in Lahaina’s case, but since the fire situation was overwhelming and confusing, the government may have just looked for the safety of following the SOP.

The more accusatory explanation is that they wanted to hide the extent of the devastation from the public — a hypothesis supported both by the no fly-zone above Lahaina and the fact that while the roads have been opened, barriers were placed around ground zero (including near the highway) that make it impossible to clearly see what is occurring at the disaster site.

As other commentators have noted in previous disasters (e.g., in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina) locking down the site appeared to have been done to prevent the public from learning about certain suspicious aspects of the disaster.

In the case of Lahaina, I believe the most plausible reason why the site is being locked down is because the carnage and devastation there is really bad publicity for both the government (which wants a blank check to decide what happens to Lahaina after these events) and the tourism industry (which the economy depends upon).

For example, after the exit roads were closed, many people realized their only option for survival was to run to the ocean and jump in (which according to some reports required jumping through a layer of ignited ash on the water’s surface).

Once there, they had to find an area that was not too hot (which required going far enough from the shore they could no longer stand and hence needed to tread water) but not too far away that they became hypothermic while simultaneously not suffocating from the smoke. At the same time this was happening, many had to watch their livelihoods burn down and help keep children from drowning.

Ultimately, people were trapped in this nightmarish situation for 3-8 hours, and an unspecified number died. Since this happened, I’ve begun to hear (still unconfirmed) reports of dead bodies washing up on far away shores, which seems plausible given what happened.

Likewise, it is almost certain a large number of children unnecessarily died (e.g., because they were sent home without their parents earlier in the day).

I suspect that because of how strongly their deaths will spur the public to action, there has essentially been radio silence on the issue — no estimate on the number of dead children has been announced and so far I’ve only seen one report viscerally discussing this (it mentioned that families were found inside their homes huddled together as the fires consumed them).

At this point, 115 deaths have been confirmed, and 1100 people have been reported missing (e.g., see this facebook group of individuals trying to locate lost loved ones and which hosts google spreadsheet compiling the missing individuals). Given that Hawaii has a longstanding homeless issue (many states fly their homeless population to Hawaii), I suspect additional deaths also occurred in that population which never may be reported.

What Needs To Be Done Now?

Typically when disasters like this happen, the media works very hard to establish a narrative that then becomes fact (e.g., this was all climate change rather than gross incompetence). However, as Paul Deslauriers pointed out, in the early days of the event when people still have strong feelings about it, that is the best time to get an alternative narrative out that can remains part of the discussion far into the future.

I believe the single most important thing to do is for a citizen’s commission to be established which independently investigates what actually caused the fires, what human errors led them to become devastating, and what policies need to be implemented so nothing similar happens in the future.

In order for this to work, there has to be an independent panel (as the government will inevitably try to cover things up) that is both competent to objectively conduct the investigation and fully trusted by the local population. Although this is a lot to ask for, I believe the grassroots network in Maui is uniquely suited for this task and may be able to accomplish it, especially if the alternative media and costly lawsuits help to promote the commission’s findings.

W. Edwards Deming is widely credited with rebuilding Japan after World War 2 into the economic power house it is today and hence is considered to be one of the most effective managers in history. A key point Deming made is that when things go wrong in industry, the error is typically not due to a specific person screwing up, but rather existing policies and procedures which made the screw up possible.

In looking at the Maui disaster, it’s easy to want to blame a specific person (like those mentioned earlier in the article). Yet, at the same time, so many errors happened, in total, it suggests a general lack of competency and preparation for something like this rather than a single person being at fault (assuming the disaster was not deliberate — which is possible but in my eyes the less likely possibility).

If that commission does ultimately come together, one idea I would like for them to seriously consider is adopting a resolution for part of the money from the inevitable lawsuits going towards funding the State of Hawaii buying a Canadair CL-415 “super scooper” aircraft.

Typically when wildfires happen, resources are mobilized from a large geographical area to contain the fire, something which is simply impossible due to Hawaii’s island geography (and why Maui’s fire department rapidly became overwhelmed by the fires).

Super scoopers fly over the water, filling a 1,400 gallon tank with water and then turning it into a fine mist which can be dropped on a fire and rapidly put it out (and given Hawaii’s proximity to the ocean do this at least a dozen times per hour).

super scoopers fly over the water

Although these aircrafts are expensive (around 30 million dollars) that is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions in damage from this fire and the billions which will come from lawsuits.

Furthermore, it is an aircraft that can reach all of Hawaii, a single adequately maintained one should be capable of meeting the fire suppression needs of all the Hawaiian islands. However, I am less sure what the maximum wind they can operate at is and it is possible that once the winds reached 60-80 miles an hour in Lahaina, it would not have been possible to fully utilize the aircraft.

More than anything else though, my hope is that these events remind the people of Hawaii of the importance of direct democracy and help to inspire a grassroots push to elect a local government the people can both trust and rely upon.

Note: Many people understandably are extremely upset with the mayor of Maui. Per my understanding, the local activist community supported his election because he had a reputation for being fair and honest in his dealings.

Given the difficulty of having candidates like that make it to office, my hope is that these fires can lead to a collaborative relationship where the mayor is pushed to stick his neck out to do the right thing with the recovery effort of these fires rather than an antagonistic one where the mayor serves as a lightning rod for understandable outrage over what happened.


A year ago, an article was written which encapsulates much of the mission of this Substack. It discussed the history of propaganda, and shared that at the same time the science of modern propaganda came into existence, a major problem was facing American leadership — technology had made society complex enough that the general population could no longer understand much of what was needed to make society smoothly operate and thus the citizenry could no longer be relied upon vote for policies that were in the nation’s best interests.

Two schools of thought then emerged. One argued that the educational system needed to be revamped so the population retained an understanding of how everything worked and thus the citizenry could be relied upon to vote for the best interests of society when accurate information was presented to them.

The other camp argued that a group of competent experts who could understand that complexity should make the decisions needed to run society and then have the emerging propaganda apparatus trick the society into supporting those decisions and unifying behind the public good.

Both sides had very strong feelings, but after the World Wars (especially the fear Hitler’s propaganda would conquer the world unless we beat it with better propaganda), the propaganda model “won.” Once that happened, a vertical model was developed where an effective (and manipulative) message would be concocted and then distributed to every media outlet in society.

This for instance is why local “independent” news stations around the country are often observed to disseminate the exact same message (this partisan montage is the clearest example I have seen but countless others exist too).

The internet put a major wrench in that model because it made mass decentralized horizontal messaging possible. For example, Robert Malone now has more viewers than CNN, and for a relatively small cost (a lot of his and his wife’s time, travel, putting a simple studio together in their house and the help of volunteers) he is arguably providing a greater impact on the public than the $882 million CNN spends on operating expenses each year.

Likewise, there are countless more people (e.g., me) who with no cost besides our time are periodically able to get highly impactful narratives out that change public opinion.

This means the existing propaganda model of governance is rapidly becoming obsolete — if people in charge lie, they do not have anywhere near enough money to counteract citizens across the globe exposing their lies. As a result, propaganda is now accomplishing the opposite of its intended effect — rather than creating trust in the government and social cohesion, its repeated deployment is creating increasing distrust and division.

In many ways, this mirrors the practice of medicine. Many doctors follow a paternalistic model where they decide (often by following corrupt guidelines) what’s best for a patient and then use their authority (or the guideline’s authority) to pressure the patient into following that plan.

Patients hate this, and especially since COVID and the interest in alternative medical narratives on the internet, patients are starting to demand physicians who work with them in a collaborative manner that explains what is going on in an understandable manner and then empower the patient to make the decision that best benefits them.

From my own observations, it appears a lot of doctors don’t have the capacity to follow the collaborative model, but at the same time, many do and many more are being forced to by the economic pressures of the public demanding this type of care.

Furthermore, no viable solution yet exists to overcome the internet facilitating horizontal communication that bypasses the vertical propaganda (be it medical or non-medical). Our leaders can’t cut off the internet entirely because too much of the economy now depends upon it, and any attempt to censor things online simply gets bypassed and increases interest in the censored message.

As a result, we are now in a tumultuous situation. Those in power don’t want to let go of their ability to make decisions in secret that many might not agree with and then enact those decisions through vertical propaganda. Instead they are doubling down and using more and more extreme methods to control the society (e.g., the massive coordinated fear and censorship we saw throughout COVID-19 which again ultimately backfired and increased distrust in the central authorities).

Like the authors of that article, I believe we instead need to seriously look at the second option; empowering our citizenry to understand the complexities facing us today and transparently presenting sensible options we can support in a mature and rational manner. My hope is that the world’s love for Maui and the egregious nature of the situation will force an honest conversation to be had on exactly what happened there.

In conclusion, I would like to thank each of you for your help in bringing awareness to Maui’s situation and sharing articles like this with those who can benefit from hearing that alternative narrative. The key weakness of the vertical propaganda model is that it cannot overcome people who are united and talk to each other with open hearts — something the people of Maui are well known for.

A Note From Dr. Mercola About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician in the Midwest and a longtime reader of I appreciate his exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and I’m grateful to share them. I also respect his desire to remain anonymous as he is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.