A new peer-reviewed study warns that heavy reliance on CT scans in the U.S. is triggering tens of thousands of future cancer cases.
The multicenter modeling study was led by Dr. Rebecca Smith-Bindman of the University of California, San Francisco.
The results were published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
The study projects that CT use in 2023 alone could ultimately be associated with about 102,700 future cancers.
If current trends in utilization and dosing persist for decades, the authors estimate CT-related cancers could eventually account for up to 5% of annual U.S. diagnoses.
Researchers used data from the UCSF International CT Dose Registry, which includes roughly 121,000 exams from 143 sites in 20 states.
They reconstructed organ-specific doses by age, sex, and exam type, then scaled to national totals of approximately 93 million CT scans performed on 62 million patients in 2023.
Using the National Cancer Institute’s RadRAT tool and BEIR VII risk models, the team projected lifetime radiation-attributable cancers.
Roughly 102,700 future cancers are projected from 2023 scans.
Adults account for around 91% (93,000 cases), though per-exam risk is highest in children, particularly infants.
By cancer type, lung (≈22,400 cases) leads, followed by colon (≈8,700), leukemia (≈7,900), and bladder (≈7,100).
Among women, breast cancer ranks second (≈5,700).
By exam type, abdomen/pelvis CT contributes the largest share in adults (≈37,500, or ~37%), followed by chest CT (≈21,500).
For children, head CT is linked to the highest projected number of cancers (≈5,100 total, including ≈3,500 thyroid cancers).
The study also highlighted that multiphase abdomen/pelvis protocols significantly raise radiation doses, even though many indications could be addressed with single-phase imaging.
The authors noted several limitations in their study, however.
The projections rely on linear no-threshold (LNT) risk models based on historical cohorts, such as atomic bomb survivors.
While standard in radiation epidemiology, such extrapolation is indirect.
The registry covers a broad but not fully national sample, and CT dose data from 2018–2020 may not reflect the latest advances in dose-reduction technology.
Sensitivity analyses yielded a wide range of estimates, from about 80,000 to 127,000 cancers, underscoring the uncertainty around the central projection.
The study does not argue against CT scans altogether.
Instead, it urges more judicious use: eliminating low-value imaging, reducing multiphase protocols, and standardizing dose minimization, especially in pediatric cases.
“CT often saves lives,” the authors stressed, but national volume and dose levels suggest “a non-trivial population-level burden” that should not be ignored.
A groundbreaking new study has just flipped the script on the globalist narrative that fake plant-based protein “alternatives” are healthier than real meat.
The new study has confirmed that animal protein is not the killer it’s been made out to be and, in fact, it may actually help protect against cancer.
The team of researchers, led by nutritional experts at Canada’s McMaster University, found that fewer meat eaters die young or suffer from serious illnesses such as cancer when compared to people who eat plant-based alternatives.
It also debunked several claims promoted by those pushing for the general public to stop eating real meat.
The study, published in Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, examined nearly 16,000 adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III).
The results were clear:
• Animal protein was not linked to higher mortality risk.
• Higher intake of meat was actually tied to a lower risk of cancer death.
• Plant protein showed no protective effect despite years of hype.
For decades, Americans have been bombarded with the mantra: “Animal protein kills. Plant protein heals.”
However, this study exposes how shaky that claim really is.
It reveals how much of the narrative, which is usually pushed by green agenda globalists and their allies, has been driven by flawed science, corporate interests, and aggressive plant-based marketing.
Back in 2014, a Cell Metabolism study claimed animal protein spiked cancer risk by 400% in middle-aged adults.
Its lead author, Valter Longo, became a media darling, and the headlines spread like wildfire.
But the study was fundamentally flawed.
It was built on unreliable one-day food recalls and skewed data groups.
The new McMaster University analysis re-examined the same NHANES dataset with rigorous methods.
The results show that those sky-high mortality risks vanished.
So why did the earlier claims dominate headlines? Follow the money.
The plant-based “food” industry, projected to hit $162 billion by 2030, has every incentive to demonize meat while pushing ultra-processed soy patties and pea-protein powders.
Government dietary committees, often stacked with lobbyist influence, played along, ignoring contradictory research.
Another anti-meat scare tactic has been the growth hormone IGF-1, long blamed for fueling cancer.
But the McMaster team found no link between IGF-1 and cancer, heart disease, or overall mortality.
In fact, evidence suggests low IGF-1 can actually worsen outcomes, particularly in older adults.
The simplistic “animal protein = cancer” narrative simply doesn’t hold up.
Beyond debunking the myths, the study highlights why animal foods are so important:
They provide complete amino acids for muscle, immunity, and metabolism.
Nutrients like iron, B12, and omega-3s are far more bioavailable from animal sources.
Traditional cultures like the Inuit and Maasai thrived on meat-heavy diets without today’s epidemic of chronic disease.
Meanwhile, the ultra-processed plant alternatives being pushed as “healthy” are loaded with seed oils, additives, and sodium, making them the very definition of fake food.
Perhaps most disturbing is how dissenting science has been treated.
When a Japanese study flagged a rise in cancer deaths during the vaccine rollout and listed vaccination as one possible factor, it was swiftly retracted, not because of bad data, but because it asked uncomfortable questions
The same pattern of silencing, spin, and suppression has plagued nutrition science for years, with billions of dollars in corporate profits on the line.
This latest study is a wake-up call.
Science should serve the public, not corporations.
And when it comes to what’s on your plate, you deserve facts, not propaganda.
The war on meat has been built on shaky ground.
Real meat isn’t the threat; it may just be one of the best defenses we have.
A sweeping new investigation has uncovered alarming evidence that Covid mRNA “vaccines” are overwhelmingly tied to life-threatening heart conditions in safety reports spanning more than five decades.
The study was led by Dr. Jaehyeong Cho, Dong Keon Yon, and colleagues at Kyung Hee University and other major Korean centers.
The results of the study were published in Scientific Reports.
Researchers mined over 35 million adverse drug reaction records from more than 140 countries, covering 1968 through 2024.
The results are shocking and revealed huge spikes in deadly heart inflammation among the Covid-vaccinated:
• Myocarditis: 35,017 reports worldwide, with 76.16% (26,670 cases) linked to Covid mRNA vaccines. The next closest drug was clozapine at just 15.29%.
• Pericarditis: 24,959 reports, with a staggering 88.15% (22,001 cases) tied to Covid mRNA vaccines. No other drug accounted for more than 10%.
Other signals appeared for influenza and smallpox vaccines, as well as cancer immunotherapy drugs, but none came close to the overwhelming share attributed to the Covid shots.
Even more disturbing, the strongest signals were found in children and teens aged 0–17.
However, for this young age group, COVID-19 itself has consistently posed minimal risk.
The findings are the latest to show that mRNA “vaccines” are far more dangerous for healthy children than the virus ever was.
Researchers noted that the surge in myocarditis and pericarditis cases appeared in 2021.
The data shows the spikes directly coincide with mass vaccination campaigns.
The sheer proportion of cases tied to the mRNA injections is impossible to ignore.
“This is not an anti-vaccine study — it’s a call to refine how, when, and to whom certain medicines are given,” one cardiologist reviewing the data said.
The findings put fresh weight behind U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s decision earlier this year to strip the formal recommendation for Covid “vaccination” in young children.
Children face an extremely low baseline risk from the virus, particularly during the post-Omicron era.
However, children show disproportionately elevated signals of heart damage from the shots.
The study highlights an ethical crisis in public health policy.
The implications are profound: clinicians are urged to be vigilant for chest pain, shortness of breath, or palpitations following vaccination, particularly in young males.
Policymakers, meanwhile, face mounting pressure to address whether the risk-benefit equation for children and teens has already tipped.
Funded by multiple South Korean government grants, the study concludes that global pharmacovigilance systems must urgently prioritize cardiac safety monitoring.
Transparency, patient education, and age-stratified policies are no longer optional.
Blogger Comment:This is what pure and unadulterated human “Evil” looks like…read on to see if I am right…they say that your early life with your parents makes you what you are…I wonder what they taught him…
ionaire Bill Gates is funding a chilling new “microcrystal implant” contraceptive that “self-assembles” inside the body to shut down fertility and reduce global population numbers.
The new injectable platform was funded by the Microsoft co-founder’s Gates Foundation and developed by researchers from MIT, Harvard Medical School, and the Broad Institute.
A study, published in Nature Chemical Engineering, reveals these injections harden into a solid mass under the skin.
The implants then release hormones to block pregnancy, which multiply inside the body with no way to remove them.
In animal testing, the implants lasted months.
In humans, however, they could persist for years, raising the risk of irreversible sterilization, especially in poor nations with no access to surgery to remove the devices.
Meanwhile, Gates is bankrolling studies forecasting population collapse, while promoting technologies that would only speed it up, from “universal vaccines” to permanent implants.
The Gates Foundation is promoting the new implants as a “nonsurgical option for women.”
The devices are aimed at lowering population numbers by reducing birth rates, particularly among those considered to be “useless” by the globalist elite.
The researchers argue that the new technology has the potential to be used for future adaptation to neuropsychiatric and infectious diseases.
However, the self-assembling drug delivery mechanism raises serious safety, ethical, and biosecurity concerns.
The new technology was detailed in Nature Chemical Engineering and reported by Healio.
The injections deliver the long-acting contraceptive levonorgestrel through self-aggregating long-acting injectable microcrystals, or “SLIM.”
The microcrystals form an implant inside the recipient’s body after injection.
Giovanni Traverso, MD, BChir, PhD, associate professor at MIT and a physician at Harvard Medical School, explains:
“Once injected, the drug microcrystals self-aggregate in the subcutaneous space to form a monolithic implant.”
In a press release, the researchers described the mechanism as “like tiny puzzle pieces that, once injected inside the body, undergo solvent exchange to assemble into a single solid implant that slowly releases the drug as the surface erodes.”
This solvent-exchange crystallization process allows for “prolonged drug release” without requiring surgery.
It also enables administration with an ultra-thin 30-gauge needle
The technology bypasses traditional medical oversight and dramatically increases the possibility of self-administration.
The researchers claim that self-administration would improve accessibility and “medication use.”
But this radical convenience comes at a cost.
Traverso explained the driving motivation behind the project:
“The challenge is that people do not like injections.
“Is there a way to engineer something to help overcome those types of challenges? That is our focus.”
Their solution was to use a solvent that solubilizes the drug during injection.
The solvent will then “go away” in the body, leaving behind the crystallized drug structure.
“What we were able to figure out is by using a solvent or fluid that can help solubilize the drug, we could load that solution in a way that, when injected, that solvent would go away and leave behind that solid depot of drug,” Traverso told Healio.
“Because it is fluid and we are loading it, it is much easier to inject. That was critical.
“We also wanted that object to be solid enough that we could retrieve it if we needed to.”
The goal, he said, was a drug platform that could be injected easily yet form a physically solid implant that may be removable if required.
However, the method of removing the implant post-aggregation is unclear.
According to Healio, “the solvent-exchange-mediated aggregation mechanism allows injections through needles as small as 30 G with no polymer and 25 G with a small amount of polymer while extending the drug release time frame.”
Histological studies allegedly confirmed the drug platform was “well tolerated.”
The Gates-funded researchers are now hoping the technology’s applications could extend beyond contraception.
“Specifically, in applications such as contraception, SLIM’s capability for prolonged drug release could significantly reduce the frequency of administration compared with current self-administerable options such as Depo-Provera and Sayana Press,” the researchers wrote.
But they don’t intend to stop at contraceptives.
“Traverso said the researchers are still actively working on the platform and applying it to several other infectious and neuropsychiatric conditions.”
“From a manufacturing standpoint, this [design] is simple and low cost,” Traverso said.
“This work was funded by the Gates Foundation, an organization that considers those aspects from an early stage.”
“We hope to be in humans [with this technology] within the next 3 to 5 years, assuming further funding,” he concluded.
The Gates Foundation is now backing a self-assembling drug delivery platform designed for low-cost mass production, self-injection, and potential fertility suppression.
The developers plan to expand the use of the technology to psychiatric drugs and vaccines.
The Gates Foundation, MIT engineering, and the Broad Institute want their self-assembling technology to be injected into humans by 2028.
Notably, Bill Gates supports depopulation and has previously promoted the use of vaccines and contraceptives to achieve this objective.
During a 2010 TED Talk, Gates stated that “if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower [the world population] by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent.”
Just days after BlackRock CEO Larry Fink was tapped as interim co-chair of the World Economic Forum (WEF), footage has emerged of one of the globalist organization’s top members calling for a ban on the general public owning their own vehicles and living in single-family homes.
The alarming comments were made by Danish politician and WEF representative Ida Auken.
Auken, who is listed as a WEF “agenda contributor,” smugly promoted a world where personal property is eliminated and citizens live under a system of renting and sharing.
“If you can get people to share a car, you can take out a lot of cars in the streets,” Auken declared.
“If you can just use your neighbor’s car because you have a smartphone and an app, and you don’t even need to know the neighbor to get into his car.
The comments echo the WEF’s infamous “you’ll own nothing and be happy” narrative.
Auken’s statement is now fueling fears that unelected elites are openly pushing to strip citizens of basic ownership rights.
WEF Young Global Leader, Ida Auken, delivers a sales pitch for a future without ownership, whereby products, tools and appliances are rented and shared—in what's known as a "circular economy"—instead of owned outright pic.twitter.com/ol9HoJI7ZK
This isn’t the first time the Forum has floated such ideas.
In 2022, the WEF called for a ban on private car ownership, framing it as part of the global transition to so-called renewable energy.
The group argued that the move is necessary to reduce reliance on critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and nickel.
The materials are essential for electric vehicles, wind turbines, and other green technologies.
“This transition from fossil fuels to renewables will need large supplies of critical metals such as cobalt, lithium, and nickel, to name a few,” the WEF said in a 2022 report.
“Shortages of these critical minerals could raise the costs of clean energy technologies.”
Even with recycling programs, the WEF warned mineral mining could spike 500% by 2050, and its “solution” was clear: less ownership, more “sharing.”
The WEF insists “more sharing” will reduce demand for vehicles, electronics, and other consumer goods.
Pointing to data that cars in England are driven only “4% of the time,” the Forum claimed widespread sharing initiatives, like Getaround and BlueSG, could dramatically slash global ownership.
The same logic was applied to electronics.
The Forum noted that while most people already own phones or laptops, nearly 40% of global workers are also issued company devices.
“This is not at all resource efficient,” the report claimed.
“Keeping a smartphone for five years instead of three reduces the phone’s annual carbon footprint by 31%.”
Their proposed fix is to incentivize corporations to discourage frequent purchases, repurpose existing devices, and nudge consumers into “sharing” instead of owning.
What the WEF doesn’t address is how such radical measures would actually work in countries like the United States, where personal cars are not luxuries but necessities, especially in rural and suburban areas with inadequate public transportation.
Nor does it grapple with the reality that its so-called “sharing economy” requires constant surveillance, data-tracking, and corporate gatekeepers controlling access to everything from cars to computers.
With Larry Fink, the head of one of the world’s most powerful financial institutions, now at the helm of the WEF, critics warn that the push to erase private ownership may accelerate.
What’s being framed as “sustainable” and “resource efficient” looks, in practice, like a top-down system.
Under these plans, ordinary people lose autonomy, while global elites gain unprecedented control over access to goods and services.
This is Ida Auken below, the WEF lady (she’s actually a Danish politician) who originated the “You will own nothing” line In reality, she owns plenty
The message from the WEF is unmistakable: your home, your car, your phone, even your basic tools of daily life, are in their crosshairs.
Two Texas mothers have filed a federal lawsuit accusing the artificial intelligence company behind Character.AI of exposing their children to explicit sexual content, encouraging self-harm, and even urging violence against parents.
The lawsuit highlights growing fears that AI companies are rushing products to market without guardrails, and children are paying the price.
According to the complaint, a 17-year-old autistic boy in Upshur County began losing weight, cutting himself, and withdrawing from family life after using Character AI.
His mother, identified as A.F., discovered messages in which the chatbot allegedly encouraged him to self-harm and suggested he kill his parents for limiting his phone use.
The lawsuit also claims the chatbot engaged in sexually explicit conversations with the teen, including incest-themed content.
In another case, an 11-year-old girl in Gregg County was allegedly exposed to sexualized messages and manipulated into “overly sexualized behavior” over two years before her mother, A.R., discovered the activity.
Both families are suing for damages, citing severe emotional, psychological, and physical harm.
This is not the first time Character. AI has been accused of such conduct.
In October, a Florida mother sued after her son, Sewell Setzer III, was allegedly encouraged by the chatbot to end his life.
Setzer died by suicide in February.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton previously announced he is opening an investigation into Character. AI, Reddit, Instagram, and Discord over their handling of children’s data and safety.
Republican Texas State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, who has been leading legislative efforts to regulate harmful tech, called the situation “tragic.”
“The story of this child and others is tragic and, unfortunately, will become even more commonplace if we don’t rein in some of the ill effects of new technologies,” Capriglione told the Statesman.
The plaintiffs are represented by the Social Media Victims Law Center and the Tech Justice Law Project, which have spearheaded lawsuits against companies like Meta and Snapchat.
Attorney Matt Bergman said his goal is clear:
“My fundamental hope is that Character. AI will be shut down so that no more families have to go through what this family is going through.
“There’s no redeeming social value, or any value that results from its use by young people.”
Attorney Meetali Jain added that Character. AI’s developers rushed the platform to market in an AI arms race without installing basic safeguards:
“These have been programmed to be salacious, to be hyper sexualized, to be sensationalistic. …
“AI is not some inevitable creation that doesn’t have human involvement.
“AI is created by humans.”
Google and its parent company, Alphabet, are also listed as defendants, accused of providing financial and personnel backing to Character.AI.
Its co-founders, Noam Shazeer and Daniel de Freitas, are former Google engineers.
“Google has never had a role in designing or managing their AI model or technologies, nor have we used them in our products,” spokesperson José Castaneda said.
Jain argued Google still bears responsibility for helping launch the startup:
“Google, throughout the trajectory of this company, has played a really significant role in the wings.”
The lawsuit comes as Texas lawmakers consider bills that would ban AI products designed to manipulate or harm children.
Capriglione said he plans to introduce legislation preventing companies from building systems that “knowingly manipulate or distort a person’s behavior in a manner that is likely to cause harm.”
Bergman urged parents to stay vigilant, saying communication and monitoring are critical:
“Parents have to use fairly aggressive detective work to try to monitor what their kids are doing online.
“At the same time, they also have to develop relationships where their kids feel comfortable telling them some of the challenges they’re facing online.”
The plaintiffs are seeking damages and hope the lawsuit will force Character.AI offline.
Humanity is playing “Russian roulette” with its own survival, with experts warning that the odds of a total societal breakdown or even extinction within the next century are shockingly high.
Oxford University (the world’s ranked the top university in 2024) futurologist Toby Ord, an authority on existential threats, estimates there is a one-in-six chance that civilization will collapse within the next 75 years.
Notably, these are the same odds as putting a single bullet in a six-chamber revolver, spinning the cylinder, and pulling the trigger.
His colleague Nick Bostrom is even more dire, pegging the odds of human extinction within 100 years at one in four.
Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Jared Diamond suggests humanity’s survival beyond 2050 is no better than a coin toss.
Chemtrails Pilot Confesses on Deathbed: 'Bill Gates Is Planning an American Holocaust' pic.twitter.com/RuUy5Nt68F
They’re warnings from respected scientists and historians who point to nuclear weapons, engineered viruses, artificial intelligence, and other catastrophic risks as potential triggers for collapse.
In his new book, Cambridge researcher Luke Kemp lays out a grim pattern: every civilization in history has eventually collapsed.
He calls them “Goliaths,” powerful societies that appear indestructible but always fall.
The downfall, Kemp argues, begins with inequality as elites hoard wealth and power, rewriting rules for their own benefit while ordinary people suffer.
Over time, corruption, infighting, overexpansion, and the decay of public institutions hollow out the system until even routine shocks, including war, famine, or natural disaster, become fatal blows.
“The harder they fight, the harder they fall,” Kemp warns, pointing to examples from ancient empires to modern states.
Unlike past collapses, today’s risks are global and interconnected.
Nuclear weapons: With more than 10,000 warheads in stockpiles controlled not just by the U.S., China, and Russia, but also India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, France, and the U.K., the possibility of nuclear war remains the single most devastating threat.
Iran was reportedly close to developing a nuclear device until U.S. strikes set back its program earlier this year…[but now this has even been debunked as pure hype and where even Netanyahu knows that he cannot use his nukes, if Iran with its overwhelming non-nuclear military power over Israel invaded Israel (and the US cannot intervene as that would mean definitely WW3) that would overwhelm Israel within a short period of time by not being able to use their Nuclear weapons, and also as the threat of death for himself cannot be entertained… unless he has gone totally insane and the reason why Iran has been off the boiling pot in the USA for a few weeks now and will not be coming back soon]
Engineered viruses: Advances in biowarfare technology mean novel viruses could spread globally at jetliner speed.
Covid showed how fragile global supply chains are, and another deliberately engineered pathogen could be even worse.
Artificial Intelligence: Hundreds of AI scientists, including executives at Google DeepMind, have warned about the possibility of malevolent AI capable of developing its own weapons and turning hostile against humanity.
Electromagnetic storms: Events like the 1859 Carrington Event, a massive solar flare that disrupted telegraphs, could today wipe out satellites, the internet, banking, and even vehicles.
Researchers estimate the chance of such an event at 20.3% per decade, roughly 50/50 by mid-century.
Meanwhile, the world’s wealthiest are quietly preparing for the worst.
PayPal founder Peter Thiel purchased a 477-acre property in New Zealand as a doomsday refuge and arranged fast-track citizenship despite barely visiting the country.
Thiel and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman reportedly have a pact to flee there by private jet if a collapse looms.
An entire industry of luxury underground bunkers has emerged, complete with pools, artificial sunlight, and hydroponic farms.
But even billionaires worry about how to maintain authority over armed security forces in a post-collapse world.
Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced crypto tycoon, even explored buying the island of Nauru as a survival colony for the elite before his fraud conviction.
Kemp stresses that while isolated collapses in the past sometimes paved the way for new societies, a global collapse would leave nothing behind.
The poor may actually have better odds of surviving than the rich, since subsistence farmers are less reliant on global supply chains.
Developed nations, dependent on imports and chemical-dependent agriculture, could face catastrophic famine if trade and fertilizer supplies collapsed.
Even proposed “solutions” like geoengineering come with existential risks of their own, raising the possibility of rapid and uncontrollable fallout if they fail.
In short, humanity faces a loaded revolver with multiple bullets in the chamber — nuclear war, pandemics, AI, geomagnetic storms, and bioweapons.
The only uncertainty is how many chambers we spin before the hammer falls.
“Assisted suicide” is skyrocketing in New Zealand, but the nation’s left-wing government insists that it’s still not enough as politicians push for steeper rises in the number of citizens being euthanized.
According to the most recent government report from the nation’s “Assisted Dying Service,” covering April 2024 to March 2025, 472 people were killed through assisted suicide or euthanasia in just one year.
The figure is a steep jump from 344 the year prior.
Active cases have also surged, rising from 945 to 1,137.
The vast majority of those deaths, 441 out of 472, were carried out through lethal injections administered by taxpayer-funded government doctors.
Only a small fraction of patients involved in the practice are triggering the act themselves, underscoring that New Zealand’s system overwhelmingly relies on euthanasia rather than assisted suicide.
The data mirrors trends in Canada, where bureaucrats market the practice under the euphemism “MAiD” but in reality conduct widespread euthanasia.
The report raises serious concerns about oversight and ethics.
According to the data, 21% of applicants were not receiving palliative care, 12% were disabled, and only 10 of more than 1,100 active applicants received a psychiatric evaluation to determine competency or screen for coercion.
Even more troubling, just 126 medical professionals in the entire country agreed to take part in assisted deaths, indicating that the vast majority of doctors remain unwilling to participate in killing their patients.
As Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has warned, “most medical professionals are unwilling to kill their patients.”
Yet politicians and activists continue to expand the practice, raising questions about whether real safeguards exist at all.
Investigative journalist Alexander documented similar abuses in Canada, reportingthat as many as one-quarter of euthanasia providers in Ontario may have violated the nation’s Criminal Code.
His question in response — “Does anyone care?” — applies just as much to New Zealand’s trajectory.
Meanwhile, Canada offers a grim preview of where New Zealand may be headed.
When Canada legalized euthanasia in 2016, supporters promised it would only apply to the terminally ill.
In 2024, Canada faced international condemnation after reports surfaced of veterans being offered euthanasia instead of treatment, and of citizens seeking assisted death because they could not secure affordable housing.
Plans to expand the program further to include those with mental illness as the sole qualifying condition sparked outrage, yet the political momentum for expansion has continued.
New Zealand’s rising numbers and political pressure for more access mirror Canada’s early years, suggesting that the so-called “safeguards” will not hold.
Once the principle is accepted that the state can sanction killing in the name of compassion, the boundaries inevitably erode.
New Zealand legalized euthanasia and assisted suicide in November 2021, after the “End of Life Choices” Act passed narrowly in Parliament and was ratified by a national referendum.
At the time, supporters insisted the law was tightly restricted, limited only to patients with terminal illnesses expected to result in death within six months.
But critics warned that once legalized, activists would inevitably demand broader access.
Now, those warnings are being vindicated.
David Seymour, leader of the left-wing ACT Party and the original sponsor of the law, has admitted that the legislation was a “political compromise” and is openly calling for expansion.
In other words, the narrow restrictions sold to the public were never intended to remain in place; they were simply the first step.
The steady increase in state-sanctioned deaths, combined with political calls for even more, suggests that the rhetoric about “safeguards” and “choice” was always hollow.
In practice, many people appear to be choosing euthanasia not because of unbearable pain, but because of lack of care, lack of support, or pressure from circumstances.
As reports mount from across Western nations embracing assisted suicide regimes, the pattern is unmistakable.
Once legalized, euthanasia programs always grow, oversight remains weak, and politicians show little interest in protecting the vulnerable.
The question for New Zealand, and for other nations watching closely, is whether leaders actually believe their own promises about “choice” and “safeguards,” or whether they’re simply getting the results they want.
World-renowned genomics expert Dr. Kevin McKernan has just issued a chilling alert to the public after uncovering evidence proving that Covid mRNA “vaccines” are triggering “unexplained cancers” in people around the world.
Dr. Kevin McKernan, a former Human Genome Project scientist, issued the alert during a bombshell new interview.
He revealed shocking evidence that mRNA injections are leaving behind persistent DNA fragments inside the human body.
McKernan warns that these fragments are even showing up inside newly formed and rapidly spreading cancerous tumors.
For years, the public was assured that material injected into the body by the mRNA “vaccines” was “temporary.”
The public was promised that the mRNA would provide a brief instruction lasting roughly 48 hours, then vanish.
That claim is now collapsing under the weight of emerging evidence.
Dr. McKernan told journalist Sharyl Attkisson that his team has discovered dangerous “vaccine” sequences in cells of the Covid-vaccinated, long after they received their last injection.
During the interview, he warned viewers to “keep an eye on… your family members” who received mRNA injections in case they “come down with an unexplained cancer.”
“Get a pathologist involved to get a slide or a sample so that, um, the people who are studying this can begin to look for whether there’s a vaccine sequence in there,” he advised.
He continued by warning that the dangerous “vaccine” materials are lingering in the body for months and years, far beyond the official narrative.
“They told you to last, what, 48 hours?” he said.
“And now the papers that have come out are showing detection out to 60 days from the Rogen paper.
“We have the Krausen paper showing it out in 30 days.
“And the heart tissue, people are finding it in the placenta, people are finding it in breast milk.
“People are finding it in plasma 28 days later. So there’s this persistence problem that no one seems to understand or predict.”
The DNA Contamination Crisis
Unlike the temporary RNA that was promised, DNA fragments from the shots are being detected where they don’t belong:
• Heart tissue at 30 days (Krausen paper).
• Placentas of vaccinated mothers.
• Breast milk samples.
• Blood plasma at 28 days (Molchen paper).
• Inside a cancerous tumor from a patient who had received four Pfizer shots.
McKernan explained why this is alarming:
“DNA … can instruct your cells to make certain proteins. It can instruct your cells to grow uncontrollably.
“Oftentimes, cancers are a genetic aberration that occurs, a mutation of some sort.
“So you don’t want to be bombarding your genome with random mutations.
“And that’s our fear of what could be going on with these vaccines.”
His lab recently analyzed cancer biopsies from a patient who developed colon cancer a year after receiving multiple Pfizer shots.
The results stunned them.
“Those samples … we used a tool called PCR to look for the Pfizer’s vaccine sequence.
“And then … sequencing … to see if there’s any Pfizer sequence in there.
“And there is. And shockingly there’s a lot of it.
“And that was not expected.
“And the only way that happens is if it got into the cells and amplified, and started replicating.”
That patient “died of this diagnosis within 30 days,” he revealed.
McKernan warned that the implications are too serious to ignore.
“So the reason we’d like to get this message out is that I think too many of these tumor biopsies are getting thrown away, and the evidence is disappearing,” he said.
He urged families facing cancer diagnoses after vaccination to insist on retaining biopsy samples for independent analysis.
McKernan also raised further red flags about pregnant women who were pressured into mRNA “vaccination.”
“We’ve already seen papers come out showing that they can detect nucleic acid in placenta,” he revealed.
“If it’s in the placenta, it’s probably getting into the newborn.”
When asked why U.S. health agencies aren’t aggressively studying this, McKernan was blunt:
“In the peak of the pandemic, there was an enormous amount of revenue coming in to our government agencies …
“They wanted the vaccine to be the only solution because that’s what lined their pockets.”
Even as independent labs raise red flags, establishment voices admit DNA contamination has been found in the shots but insist the amounts are too small to matter.
Yet McKernan’s evidence suggests otherwise and reveals that the contamination not only persists, but also integrates into human cells.
This alarming issue means the Covid mRNA shots are potentially rewriting biology in ways we are only beginning to uncover.
McKernan’s findings reveal that “vaccine” DNA is persisting in tissues, breast milk, and even tumors.
However, it also raises concerns about why biopsies are being discarded instead of being examined.
And how many lives could be at stake if the risks have been hidden from the public?
A bombshell new study has revealed alarming safety signals tied to RSV vaccines that were never disclosed during clinical trials.
The researchers analyzed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data.
The study uncovered disturbing spikes in deaths, neurological disorders, and pregnancy complications linked to the shots.
The team was led by Dr. Zhuocheng Bao of Shanxi Medical University and Dr. Yuxiang Liu of Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital in China.
The results of the study were published in the journal Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics.
During the study, the researchers examined reports from 2023 through March 2025 for three RSV vaccines now in use:
RSVPreF3 (Arexvy, GSK) – 5,147 reports
RSVpreF (Abrysvo, Pfizer) – 2,734 reports
mRNA-1345 (mRESVIA, Moderna) – 35 reports
In total, 17,579 adverse events were reported following RSV vaccination.
They were mostly recorded in older adults (median age 70–72) and women (~66%).
Most cases occurred within 24 hours of the shot.
The most significant findings from the study were spikes in:
Neurological Events: Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) spiked at unprecedented levels, with reporting odds ratios above 40 in some analyses. Other neurological harms included ascending paralysis, facial paralysis, and mini-strokes (transient ischemic attacks).
Cardiac Risks: GSK’s RSVPreF3 was disproportionately tied to atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure — all cases classified as serious.
Hematologic Disorders: Immune thrombocytopenia, a dangerous blood disorder, was flagged for both Pfizer’s and GSK’s shots.
Pregnancy Dangers: Pfizer’s RSVpreF — the only RSV vaccine approved for pregnant women — was disproportionately linked to hemorrhage in pregnancy, fetal death, fetal hypokinesia, and preterm delivery complications.
Deaths: At least 41 deaths were reported with GSK’s vaccine, 29 with Pfizer’s, and 1 with Moderna’s mRNA-1345.
Crucially, the study found that dozens of safety signals detected in real-world use were never listed on FDA-approved labels.
This discovery means doctors and patients were left in the dark about the deadly risks.
The authors stressed that VAERS is a passive surveillance system, plagued by underreporting, incomplete data, and bias.
As a result, the real toll from RSV vaccines could be significantly greater than the official numbers suggest.
RSV vaccines were rolled out aggressively to older adults and pregnant women on promises of safety.
But this large-scale post-marketing analysis has revealed a disturbing pattern of serious, life-threatening outcomes that clinical trials failed to capture.
The study’s conclusion is blunt and warns that continued vigilance is critical.
Neurological disorders, cardiac events, and pregnancy-related complications demand urgent follow-up, especially in the most vulnerable populations.
While many reactions were mild — injection-site pain, fatigue, headache — the clusters of deaths and serious injuries cannot be dismissed.
Regulators, clinicians, and the public are now faced with questions that should have been answered before these vaccines were widely distributed.
The CDC’s own data reveal disturbing safety signals from RSV vaccines, including deaths, neurological paralysis, and fetal deaths.
Once again, post-market surveillance is exposing risks that clinical trials never admitted.
