GLOBAL HEDGE FUND IVY LEAGUE MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS IN BALTIMORE.
We spent several shouting against these IMPLANTED MICROCHIP BIRTH CONTROL methods knowing global banking 1% had goals of using them for DE-POPULATION. We discussed PLANNED PARENTHOOD as being that AYN RAND EUGENICS far-right wing global banking 1%---NOT REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE. That is ONE of many reasons I was targeted for HITTING.
REMEMBER, THESE GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH ARE NOT RELIGIOUS. Please don't believe women are being targeted for MORAL reasons.
Effectiveness of the Birth Control Implant in Your Arm |
Planned Parenthood Video'
I was IMPLANTED in 2010 in my arm and in my UTERUS. These IMPLANTS were tied to GYN------FERTILITY with goals of GMO HUMANS and controlling REPRODUCTIVE process.
I am a POST-MENOPAUSAL woman so the BARBER SURGEONS involved in illegal STUDIES were 'USING' me to manipulate natural BLEEDING AND EGG RELEASE.
The goal MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD MASS DE-POPULATION is not to have women reproducing MORE----it is to kill the ability to reproduce and using that control to pick and choose what woman can reproduce.
“It is potentially quite exciting,” says Roger Sturmey at Hull York Medical School in the UK. “But it also opens up ethical questions over what the upper age limit of mothers should be.”
Hmmmm, seems to me almost all women are ready for menopause and taking a break from having BABIES in the NATURAL life span. So, this does not have ANYTHING to do with EMPOWERING WOMEN---or with EMPOWERING our 99% of WE THE MEN in having HAREMS of wives and children.
Mr Gschmeissner seems to have ordered ME to work for his wanting MORE EGGS.
'More eggs, please
Suddenly a post-menopausal ME started to BLEED after this 2010 LEG INJURY operation.
Menopause reversal restores periods and produces fertile eggs
Women who have already passed through the menopause may be able to have children following a blood treatment usually used to heal wounds
Health 20 July 2016 By Jessica Hamzelou
MENOPAUSE need not be the end of fertility. A team claims to have found a way to rejuvenate post-menopausal ovaries, enabling them to release fertile eggs, New Scientist can reveal.
The team says its technique has restarted periods in menopausal women, including one who had not menstruated in five years. If the results hold up to wider scrutiny, the technique may boost declining fertility in older women, allow women with early menopause to get pregnant, and help stave off the detrimental health effects of menopause.
“It offers a window of hope that menopausal women will be able to get pregnant using their own genetic material,” says Konstantinos Sfakianoudis, a gynaecologist at the Greek fertility clinic Genesis Athens.
“It is potentially quite exciting,” says Roger Sturmey at Hull York Medical School in the UK. “But it also opens up ethical questions over what the upper age limit of mothers should be.”
Women are thought to be born with all their eggs. Between puberty and the menopause, this number steadily dwindles, with fertility thought to peak in the early 20s. Around the age of 50, which is when menopause normally occurs, the ovaries stop releasing eggs – but most women are already largely infertile by this point, as ovulation becomes more infrequent in the run-up. The menopause comes all-too-soon for many women, says Sfakianoudis.
The age of motherhood is creeping up, and more women are having children in their 40s than ever before. But as more women delay pregnancy, many find themselves struggling to get pregnant. Women who hope to conceive later in life are increasingly turning to IVF and egg freezing, but neither are a reliable back-up option (see “The pregnancy pause“).
The menopause also comes early – before the age of 40 – for around 1 per cent of women, either because of a medical condition or certain cancer treatments, for example.
“It offers hope that menopausal women will be able to get pregnant using their own genetic material“
To turn back the fertility clock for women who have experienced early menopause, Sfakianoudis and his colleagues have turned to a blood treatment that is used to help wounds heal faster.
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is made by centrifuging a sample of a person’s blood to isolate growth factors – molecules that trigger the growth of tissue and blood vessels. It is widely used to speed the repair of damaged bones and muscles, although its effectiveness is unclear. The treatment may work by stimulating tissue regeneration.
Sfakianoudis’s team has found that PRP also seems to rejuvenate older ovaries, and presented some of their results at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology annual meeting in Helsinki, Finland, this month. When they injected PRP into the ovaries of menopausal women, they say it restarted their menstrual cycles, and enabled them to collect and fertilise the eggs that were released.
“I had a patient whose menopause had established five years ago, at the age of 40,” says Sfakianoudis. Six months after the team injected PRP into her ovaries, she experienced her first period since menopause.
Sfakianoudis’s team has since been able to collect three eggs from this woman. The researchers say they have successfully fertilised two using her husband’s sperm. These embryos are now on ice – the team is waiting until there are at least three before implanting some in her uterus.
The team isn’t sure how this technique works, but it may be that the PRP stimulates stem cells. Some research suggests a small number of stem cells continue making new eggs throughout a woman’s life, but we don’t know much about these yet. It’s possible that growth factors encourage such stem cells to regenerate tissue and produce ovulation hormones. “It’s biologically plausible,” says Sturmey.
Hmmmm, EVIDENCE-BASED SCIENCE-----
Sfakianoudis’s team says it has given PRP in this way to around 30 women between the ages of 46 and 49, all of whom want to have children. The researchers say they have managed to isolate and fertilise eggs from most of them
“It seems to work in about two-thirds of cases,” says Sfakianoudis. “We see changes in biochemical patterns, a restoration of menses, and egg recruitment and fertilisation.” His team has yet to implant any embryos in post-menopausal women, but hopes to do so in the coming months.
PRP has already been helpful for pregnancy in another group of women, says Sfakianoudis. Around 10 per cent of women who seek fertility treatment at his clinic have a uterus that embryos find difficult to attach to – whether due to cysts, scarring from miscarriages or having a thin uterine lining. “They are the most difficult to treat,” says Sfakianoudis.
But after injecting PRP into the uteruses of six women who had had multiple miscarriages and failed IVF attempts, three became pregnant through IVF. “They are now in their second trimester,” says Sfakianoudis.
Fertility aside, the technique could also be desirable for women who aren’t trying to conceive. The hormonal changes that trigger menopause can also make the heart, skin and bones more vulnerable to ageing and disease, while hot flushes can be very unpleasant. Many women are reluctant to take hormone replacement therapy to reduce these because of its link with breast cancer. Rejuvenating the ovaries with PRP could provide an alternative way to boost the supply of youthful hormones, delaying menopause symptoms.
More eggs, please
However, Sfakianoudis’s team hasn’t yet published any of its findings. “We need larger studies before we can know for sure how effective the treatment is,” says Sfakianoudis.
“One woman had been in menopause for 5 years. Six months after treatment, she had a period“
Some have raised concerns about the safety and efficacy of the procedure, saying the team should have tested the approach in animals first. “This experiment would not have been allowed to take place in the UK,” says Sturmey. “The researchers need to do some more work to make sure that the resulting eggs are OK,” says Adam Balen at the British Fertility Society.
To know if the technique really does improve fertility, the team will also need to carry out randomised trials, in which a control group isn’t given PRP.
Virginia Bolton, an embryologist at Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital in London, is also sceptical. “It is dangerous to get excited about something before you have sufficient evidence it works,” she says. New techniques often find their way into the fertility clinic without strong evidence, thanks to huge demand from people who are often willing to spend their life savings to have a child, she says.
If the technique does hold up under further investigation, it could raise ethical questions over the upper age limits of pregnancy – and whether there should be any. “I lay awake last night turning this over in my mind,” says Sturmey. “Where would the line be drawn?”
Health issues like gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia and miscarriage are all more common in older women. “It would require a big debate,” says Sturmey.
The research on genetic manipulation of EGG AND SPERM for decades has come from use of placental stem cells from ABORTIONS and EGG/SPERM bank donations both being INDIRECT ways of attaining EGG for manipulations. These experiments were largely done IN VITRO-----and the success rate lower than global banking 1% desired. The next stage was to go to IN VIVO getting freshly minted eggs from women's fallopian tubes ----the more produced the better. When studying EGG viability BLIND AMBITION places a need to KNOW just what condition are most favorable.
Why now with IN VIVO studies of GMO HUMAN manipulation of egg/sperm genes? MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY has advanced building tools to surgically modify genetic code INSIDE A WOMEN'S UTERUS-------creating an IN VIVO manipulation thought to bring about more SUCCESSFUL SURVIVAL RATES for GMO HUMANS.
The goal of being able to STIMULATE a certain WOMAN having a CERTAIN TRAIT-------adding to that phrase ----MILKING THESE WOMEN -----FOR EGGS.
Milbank Q. 2004 Mar; 82(1): 195–214.
Genetic Modification of Preimplantation Embryos: Toward Adequate Human Research Policies
Citing advances in transgenic animal research and setbacks in human trials of somatic cell genetic interventions, some scientists and others want to begin planning for research involving the genetic modification of human embryos. Because this form of genetic modification could affect later-born children and their offspring, the protection of human subjects should be a priority in decisions about whether to proceed with such research. Yet because of gaps in existing federal policies, embryo modification proposals might not receive adequate scientific and ethical scrutiny. This article describes current policy shortcomings and recommends policy actions designed to ensure that the investigational genetic modification of embryos meets accepted standards for research on human subjects.
No doubt MY CASE AGAINST HOSTING SERVER NOSY NEIGHBORS would include making my RETINA dysfunctional and saying-----
WE DON'T WANT YOUR CHILD TO BE BORN WITH THIS RETINAL DYSFUNCTION.
But I didn't have a RETINAL DYSFUNCTION. These are kinds of FAKE MEDICAL PROCEDURES which will hit our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE. Creating the conditions for ANY ORGAN failure or damage can then be followed by saying IT IS IN YOUR GENES----we MUST MANIPULATE that RETINAL DYSFUNCTION from your fetus.
Below we see IN VIVO GENOME EDITING-----the goal of these FERTILITY STUDIES.
Global banking 1% BARBER SURGEONS are simply eliminating the need for EGG/SPERM banks and all that costly IN VITRO experimentation.
In vivo genome editing as a potential treatment strategy for inherited retinal dystrophies
•In vivo genome editing in the retina has to challenge efficient gene transfer, DNA repair and absence of toxicity.
•CRISPR-Cas and TALEN represent highly specific tools for the induction of double strand breaks.
•Use of viral vectors, nanoparticals and direct protein transfer are potential ways to introduce items into photoreceptors.
•In depth knowledge about the DNA repair pathways in the retina is key to successful in vivo genome editing applications.
•Initial studies in mouse photoreceptors indicate that the DNA repair machinery is active albeit at comparably low levels.
In vivo genome editing represents an emerging field in the treatment of monogenic disorders, as it may constitute a solution to the current hurdles in classic gene addition therapy, which are the low levels and limited duration of transgene expression. Following the introduction of a double strand break (DSB) at the mutational site by highly specific endonucleases, such as TALENs (transcription activator like effector nucleases) or RNA based nucleases (clustered regulatory interspaced short palindromic repeats - CRISPR-Cas), the cell's own DNA repair machinery restores integrity to the DNA strand and corrects the mutant sequence, thus allowing the cell to produce protein levels as needed. The DNA repair happens either through the error prone non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) pathway or with high fidelity through homology directed repair (HDR) in the presence of a DNA donor template. A third pathway called microhomology mediated endjoining (MMEJ) has been recently discovered. In this review, the authors focus on the different DNA repair mechanisms, the current state of the art tools for genome editing and the particularities of the retina and photoreceptors with regard to in vivo therapeutic approaches. Finally, current attempts in the field of retinal in vivo genome editing are discussed and future directions of research identified.
We have been reading for a few decades a sudden increase in women becoming more and more susceptable to EARLY MENOPAUSE. Not reason----IT WAS IN THE WATER-------the age of women becoming EARLY MENOPAUSAL has been earlier and earlier and as diagnosed by HOSTING SERVER BARBER SURGEON-----that woman would be deemed to be at risk for having a CHILD with those EARLY MENOPAUSAL genes.
TIME FOR A FETAL GENE MANIPULATION-----WOW---THAT'S GATEWAY MEDICINE
- Early or premature menopause | womenshealth.govwww.womenshealth.gov/menopause/early-or... Early or premature menopause Menopause that happens before age 40 is called premature menopause. Menopause that happens between 40 and 45 is called early menopause. About 5% of women naturally go through early menopause. 1 Smoking and certain medicines or treatments can cause menopause to come earlier than usual.
- Predicting Your Menopause Age: What Factors Matterwww.webmd.com/menopause/features/menopause-age... Some women reach menopause at an unusually early age -- before 45 or so -- with no known cause, which could be the result of an inherited issue or a one-time genetic mutation.
- 5 Reasons Why Some Women Go Through Early Menopause - Healthwww.health.com/menopause/5-reasons-why-some... Normally we are born with enough primordial follicles (aka the tiny seeds that grow into follicles) to last us until the natural age of menopause, around 50. But exposure to harmful chemicals is...
- Early Menopause or Premature Menopause | Menopause Nowwww.menopausenow.com/early-menopause Women before 40 usually take some time to identify their symptoms as menopausal, since they appear at such an early age. Early menopause symptoms, like typical menopause symptoms, are due to hormone fluctuations. However, these symptoms can also be related to other health conditions.
FEEDBACK FROM HOSTING SERVER BARBER SURGEONS-----SHE IS NOT RELEASING EGGS ---THE UTERUS IMPLANTS IS NOT COUNTING ANY EGG RELEASE AFTER HITTING HER ENDOCRINE GLANDS.
OH DRAT------I failed as an illegally implanted UTERUS bearing post-menopausal woman-----to be stimulated to RELEASE EGGS. They thought I had GOOD LOOKING STUFF------and wanted those EGGS.
By Menopause Now Editorial Team | Updated: Apr 02, 2019
Menopause is a natural transition every woman will eventually experience. For most women, menopause typically occurs in their 40s or 50s. For some women, however, this change can occur much earlier. Because this transition happens much sooner than many anticipate, early menopause can be difficult. Fortunately, there are resources to help women better cope with the changes they are experiencing.
Unfortunately, many young women have to deal with the onset of early menopause, its symptoms, and the physiological and emotional consequences.
Learn more about early onset menopause, its causes, its symptoms, and the different treatment options available for decreasing symptom severity.
About Early Menopause
What is early menopause?
Early menopause is the unexpected beginning of menopause at a young age, specifically before women reach 40 years old.
While the terms early menopause and premature menopause are often used interchangeably, there is a distinct difference between the two. Affecting up to 4% of American women, early menopause is diagnosed when the menopause transition takes place before a woman is 45 years old. However, when the onset of menopause happens before their 40s, it is considered premature menopause. Premature menopause can even happen when women are in their teens or 20's.
Even though early menopause is sometimes confused with premenopause, the latter is completely different. Premenopause refers to a woman's fertile years, from her first period until she starts experiencing perimenopause symptoms.
If the signs of early menopause have been detected, there are some common tests that can be performed; these include a pregnancy test, thyroid disease test, estradiol level test, and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) test.
Breast Pain during Early MenopauseWomen with early menopause will generally suffer from the same menopause symptoms as women who experience it later in life. Breast pain during early menopause is a common symptom, but the good news is, it does not have to be inevitable.
Can I Prevent Early Menopause?
Early menopause is not uncommon, and can be caused by a variety of factors. It can be natural, or induced by certain types of surgeries, chemotherapy, or medicine. It can also be brought on by unhealthy lifestyle choices, such as being severely underweight or smoking heavily.
Early Menopause Causes
While pinpointing its exact causes are complex, there are some natural and medical factors that trigger the onset of early menopause.
Natural causes of early menopause
- Premature ovarian failure (POF). Also known as premature menopause, POF is diagnosed when a woman body's stops releasing eggs and ceases hormone production in the ovaries. It can be the result of many factors, from genetic predisposition to autoimmune disorders.
Medical causes of early menopause
- Infection. Certain diseases, such as tuberculosis or mumps, can negatively affect the functionality of ovaries, leading to premature menopause.
- Hysterectomy. The removal of the uterus, Fallopian tubes, and ovaries causes early menopause due to the interruption of hormone production.
- Tubal ligation. Women who have undergone a tubal ligation procedure may experience some menopause-like symptoms.
Other causes of early menopause
- Stress. While stress itself cannot cause early menopause, it can exasperate the severity of menopause symptoms.
4 Hidden Causes of Early Menopause
Early menopause has a variety of known causes, but because it is so rare, these causes are not widely known by the general public. This article lists some of the possible and hidden reasons for early menopause, some of which might seem strange and unexpected.
Causes of Early Menopause
It is not uncommon for women to experience early menopause, especially if they are predisposed to it because of genetics, have undergone a surgery that removes the ovaries, or have received medical treatment that damages the ovaries. Click here to read more about the causes of early menopause.
Early Menopause Symptoms
Women before 40 usually take some time to identify their symptoms as menopausal, since they appear at such an early age. Early menopause symptoms, like typical menopause symptoms, are due to hormone fluctuations. However, these symptoms can also be related to other health conditions. The following list mentions the most common symptoms of early menopause:
Common Signs and Symptoms of Early Menopause
- Vaginal dryness
- Bladder irritability
- Hot flashes
- Irregular periods
- Emotional changes
- Dry skin, eyes, or mouth
- Decreased libido
Symptoms of early menopause
Click on the following link for a complete list of early menopause signs and symptoms, or keep reading to learn about early menopause symptom treatments.
How to Manage Early Menopause Symptoms
Early menopause can come as a shock to many women, and can present some concerns to women about what they will experience in the upcoming years. Many women begin to experience menopause symptoms such as hot flashes and vaginal dryness. Click here to learn more about menopause symptoms in early menopause.
Early Menopause Treatments
When women are diagnosed with premature or early menopause, they have to deal with both physical and emotional changes. Fortunately, there are many ways to decrease the duration and severity of early menopause symptoms.
These early or premature menopause treatments are: including lifestyle changes, alternative medicine, and prescribed medications. Learn more about the different benefits and risks of each treatment option.
Early Menopause Tips
- Eat a balanced diet
- Get sufficient sleep
- Exercise regularly
The second approach, alternative medicine, entails the use of certain herbs to alleviate symptoms. Natural and alternative remedies have been widely recognized to relieve early menopause symptoms. This approach can be very effective for many women. For some women, however, they may need more powerful treatments to alleviate their symptoms. If this happens, medications will likely be their best option.
The third approach refers to the use of prescribed medications. Among the possibilities, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is the most popular one. Unfortunately, HRT has been linked to serious health conditions, such as an increased risk of developing different types of cancer and heart disease.
The goal of MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD with no 99% WE THE PEOPLE having children has already manifested in WOMEN UNABLE TO HAVE CHILDREN. Are women CHOOSING not to children? Are women being SUBLIMINALLY convinced not be bring a CHILD INTO A WORLD OF DYSTOPIA?
What happened to ME as a post-menopausal women illegally implanted and manipulated by BARBER SURGEONS----was happening to our YOUNG WOMEN as well. These HITS with implants IN ARM and UTERUS-----would completely THROUGH NORMAL MENSTRUAL CYCLES and egg release in DISTRESS.
If global banking 1% wants to MASS DE-POPULATE---they convince HUSBANDS AND WIVES the one or the other is in need of COUNSELING AND TREATMENT.
IT IS NOT THE FACT THAT THE WOMAN WAS ILLEGALLY AND UNKNOWINGLY IMPLANTED WITH A DEVICE WHICH ALLOWED FOR DISRUPTION OF HER NORMAL MENSTRUAL CYCLE.
IT IS NOT THE FACT THAT THE WOMAN WAS ILLEGALLY AND UNKNOWINGLY IMPLANTED WITH A DEVICE WHICH ALLOWED FOR DISRUPTION OF HER NORMAL MENSTRUAL CYCLE.
HOSTING SERVER NOSY NEIGHBORS really tried to help me with my LOW-LIBIDO -----AND EGG PRODUCTION ---while working hard to make me LACTATE all while being post-menopausal.
NO DOUBT I WAS RUINED BECAUSE NONE OF THOSE STUDY GOALS WERE ACHIEVED---LOTS OF TALK PRETENDED THINGS WERE HAPPENING----SORRY, NOT REAL INFORMATION.
The global banking 1% freemason STARS aren't having babies----why should those 99% WE THE WOMEN want to start families. Our 99% of WE THE MEN are also having their GONADAL GLANDS attacked----there is an IMPLANT for that.
04/09/2015 02:45 pm ET Updated Apr 09, 2015
A Record Percentage Of Women Don’t Have Kids. Here’s Why That Makes Sense.
By Emma Gray
Jennifer Aniston poses in the press room at the Oscars on Sunday, Feb. 22, 2015, at the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP)
Women without children are not anomalies, the latest census data shows.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey, in 2014, 47.6 percent of women between age 15 and 44 had never had children, up from 46.5 percent in 2012. This represents the highest percentage of childless women since the bureau started tracking that data in 1976.
REAL LIFE. REAL NEWS. REAL VOICES.
Help us tell more of the stories that matter from voices that too often remain unheard.
Time reported that this pattern is particularly pronounced for women between 25 and 29 — 49.6 percent of women in that age group don’t have kids. Unsurprisingly, after age 30 those numbers drop and more women become moms. The survey found that 28.9 percent of women ages 30-34 are childfree.
The census data is backed up by data from the National Center for Health Statistics. According to a recent report, in 2013 there were just 62.9 births for every 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44 in the U.S. — an all-time low.
These numbers confirm what most childfree women already know: greater numbers of women are waiting longer to have children, or not having children at all.
As Mic Senior Editor Elizabeth Plank argued, for many women, not having kids may simply be the most rational choice. Given the economic fallout of the 2008 recession, the gender wage gap that just won’t quit, the sheer cost of raising a child, and the double duty demands put on women both professionally and domestically, are we really surprised that greater numbers of women are simply opting out of childrearing?
“There has been a profound disconnect between the speed at which women have been asked to take full-time roles in the workplace and the rate at which we’ve adapted laws and social programs to support this drastic change in the lives of women,” writes Plank. “The reality is that if you’re both a mother and an employee, every day is a double-shift.”
Millennial women understand the challenges they will face if they choose to have children, including navigating the division of childcare with their partners. A March article in New York Magazine looked at straight couples in which the women are more unsure about whether they want kids than their male partners. Bryce R. Covert, the author of the article, wrote that the women he interviewed “were all acutely aware of how having a baby would significantly rearrange all of the pieces of their lives, many of which they worked hard to put in place.”
Many women still want to become moms, but others realize that life without kids can be just as fulfilling. As Sezin Koehler wrote for The Huffington Post in September: “I don’t need to push a child out of my vagina to be a real woman.”
We have shouted against these MASS DE-POPULATIONS goal of the global .00014% of people targeting BILL GATES for example because of his GLOBAL PHARMA AND MEDICAL corporation using his MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY for TELEMEDICINE.
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER---THEY ARE GOING TO GET YA GET YA GET YA!
Effectiveness of the Birth Control Implant in Your Arm | Planned Parenthood Video'
There are many ways global banking 1% are MOVING FORWARD these attacks against our SOCIETAL STRUCTURES OF FAMILY ---MARRIAGE----CHILDREN-----while I have shouted against FORCED MICROCHIP BIRTH CONTROL IMPLANTATION on ARM or HIP ------I failed to understand the BRAIN IMPLANT----UTERUS IMPLANTS working for the same goals.
Our US FAKE NEWS MEDIA tend to look at these studies INDIVIDUALLY-----we are not given the BIG PICTURE of how all these IMPLANTS and ENDOCTRINAL/LYMPH GLAND manipulations work together to achieve these goals.
FACT CHECK: Bill Gates Admits Vaccinations Are Designed So ...
The logic was crisp and Bill Gates-friendly. Health = resources ÷ people. And since resources, as Gates noted, are relatively fixed, the answer lay in population control.
Bill Gates on Population Control - YouTube
Why have Bill Gates and friends raised $4.3 BILLION to vaccinate 80 MILLION children in Third World Countries? Shouldn't sufficient food supply and clean drinking water be the first priority.
Bill Gates Admits Vaccines Are For Population Control - YouTube
Bill Gates Admits Vaccines Are For Population Control Jake Linden. ... Let's put birth control back on the agenda | Melinda Gates ... Bill Gates on Africa's population boom and the risk of the ...
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett spend billions to control ...
Bill Gates. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest private philanthropic foundation in the world and has dedicated itself to funding reproductive control in poor countries where citizens are in need of water, food, and access to basic health care.
Vaccination - to reduce population! (Bill Gates admits) - YouTube
Vaccination - to reduce population! (Bill Gates admits) Bill Gates on GM foods, vaccines and Monsanto Nwo Puppet.
Bill Gates’ New Population Control Microchip Due for Launch ...
Bill Gates is due to launch his new population control microchip in 2018. [image: Neon Nettle] Multi-billionaire Bill Gates has developed a new microchip, along with researchers at MIT, that will allow for adjustments to be made to a person’s hormone levels via remote control, in a bid to reduce the planet’s population.
Bill and Melinda Gates Will Push Population Control On 120 ...
Bill and Melinda Gates Will Push Population Control On 120 Million More Women by 2020. The Kansas City Star reports the Family Planning 2020 summit, which receives support from the Gates Foundation, is falling behind on its 2012 pledge to provide contraception to 120 million women in the next eight years. “As of the halfway point in July 2016,...
Bill Gates says vaccines can help reduce world population ...
Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number -- P (for People) -- might be reduced. He says: "The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion.
Bill Gates Admits Vaccines Are Used for Human Depopulation
Gates is stating that he considers vaccines to be useful in contributing to bring the projected population growth of 2.2 billion down to 1.3 billion, roughly one billion.
What does Bill Gates mean when he says that we can 'reduce ...
I have no problem with Patrick Kerns and Dave Pleb Murphy responses, but there is a problem with Bill Gates' thinking on this. There is some irony in this. The science that shows that global warming is real is good science, but the notion that vac...
OUR US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens ---MEN AND WOMEN----must stop allowing GROUP SPEAK to convince us that the world MOVING FORWARD is a DYSTOPIA ----NO CHILD SHOULD ENDURE.
My LAWSUIT against HOSTING SERVER NOSY NEIGHBORS will entail describing what were MEDICAL STUDIES having NO CONNECTION to SCIENTIFIC METHOD-----there were no RELIABLE DATA----OR RESULTS---only FALSE CLAIMS of success----of SOCIAL VALUE-----
So, when I read a comment from someone saying they are ROMAN CATHOLIC----saying he believes TRUTH is found in SCIENCE and doesn't want to question the GOALS OF MOVING FORWARD MASS DE-POPULATION under FALSE PRETENSE-----
GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----KNIGHTS OF MALTA---THE HOSPITALLERS----DRIVE THESE FAKE MEDICAL DATA---SELL DEADLY AND HARMFUL HEALTH CARE AS SOCIAL BENEFIT---JUST LIKE TRIBE OF JUDAH.
Healthy Volunteers | Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center
The goal of this study is to gain a better understanding of schizophrenia.…'
'Study of psychedelics use by clergy participants aims to induce mystical experiences
by Don Lattin
October 26, 2015
c. 2015 Religion News Service
(RNS) Researchers investigating beneficial new uses for psychedelic drugs have set their sights on what may seem an unlikely group of volunteer subjects—local clergy'.
Hmmmm, wonder if this is from where all those global banking 5% freemason/Greek player RELIGIOUS leaders came from! That's where all that 3000BC HINDI BRAHMIN is created.
What does Bill Gates mean when he says that we can "reduce" the world population through vaccines, healthcare, and reproductive health services?
I consider myself to be a conservative Roman Catholic who believes that truth is found in both genuine science and genuine Catholic teaching - and that because both are truth they will not contradict each other.
The Catholic church has a long history of setting up hospitals and schools, especially in developing countries. I don't think it controversial that the Catholic hospitals were in Africa long before the U.N. arrived with their programs. I also don't think it controversial that the Catholic bishops in Africa want vaccinations and better health care for the people of Africa in general and for the Catholics in their care in particular.
I also happen to think that the Catholic bishops of Africa do not think of Catholics in their care as stupid, sex-driven animals who need condoms because they just can't or won't control themselves. The same goes for "population control": the Catholic church has a long history of promoting (successfully) holy lives of virginity for the sake of service to others in the form of orders of brothers, monks and nuns. When these lives are lived according to the best of church teaching the results are some of the happiest people on earth, regardless of their physical circumstances. Oh, and they aren't "breeding like rabbits" either.
So when the Catholic bishops of Africa have suspicions concerning tetanus vaccines (by the U.N. in particular, not in their own hospitals) being a quiet U.N. mass population control exercise, I will not dismiss those suspicions lightly. These bishops are not poorly educated fools, nor are the doctors in their hospitals, and they genuinely want those they are responsible for to be vaccinated - against tetanus rather than child birth.
I fully expected the popularity of Patrick Kerns answer here from the "Quora" crowd, which is precisely why I am giving an opposing viewpoint anonymously. That is because I fully expect my opposing viewpoint to be met with emotional vindiction rather than cool reason.
I would like to believe that the U.N. thinks the same way Patrick Kerns does and the way he proposes Mr. Gates does. I would like some proof from a party I could consider trustworthy that the U.N. is not quietly using tetanus vaccines in a secretive eugenics program. I even looked at the snopes evidence, thinking that surely they would have good evidence from a trustworthy source. Alas, their "trustworthy sources" appear to be the anonymous author of the Snopes report itself and someone from Unicef - the very agency accused. While the arguments by the Snopes report could be plausible, so could the statements by those suspicious of the U.N. and Unicef be equally plausible.
So while I hope what Patrick Kerns thinks is true and that what snopes says is accurate, I find it hard to believe that long standing Catholic doctors and hospital staff are truly that incompetent that they would not know how to test the vaccine for HCG, purportedly an agent that causes women to be immunized against their own offspring - but only about 3 years after their 5 shots. I would like to see proof from either side of this question. So far I remain unconvinced either way, but leaning more toward the bishops. Why is simple: the bishops are the party that want the vaccines against tetanus, but not against child birth. To convince me otherwise, I will ask what Patrick Kerns recommends: extraordinary evidence that those who believe in population control aren't trying to do something about it directly.
When I hear on THE NETWORK I am mad because I was LEFT BEHIND----because I was a LOSER ----because I am 'THEM' not 'US' I repeat often------people who think of themselves as 'US' today will be 'THEM' tomorrow.
First, those able to access any POSITIVE medical technology coming from these studies will soon not be able to afford to access these research PRODUCTS/DEVICES. The cost of GLOBAL PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE combined with the constant lowering of access via MEDICARE AND MEDICAID----has already taken over HALF of US citizens out of the health market----and the goal is 99% OF WE THE PEOPLE under UNIVERSAL CARE-----MEDICARE FOR ALL------being TELEMEDICINE FOR ALL----to be subjected to these same EXPERIMENTAL IMPLANT DEVICE procedures.
Those global 5% freemason/Greek players THEY DON'T CARE IF EMPIRE ALICE DOESN'T CARE------will be under the bus----IMPLANTS and all.
Only the global 1% and their 2% will access any medical procedures which actually benefit. Soon that global 2% will be under the bus---implanted just as all LOSERS------THEM.
NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG are already great big IMPLANT LOSERS.
More than half of US says they can’t afford to pay over $100 per month for health insurance
Published Fri, Nov 18 20161:25 PM ESTUpdated Fri, Nov 18 20166:39 PM EST
A “Benjamin” is the limit for many people when it comes to Obamacare.
Most Americans say they can’t pay the monthly premiums that are routinely charged for Obamacare plans — unless they are eligible for federal financial assistance that lowers their price for that coverage.
That’s the finding of a HealthPocket survey, which asked people what was the most they could afford to pay for coverage in 2017. Many Obamacare plans are significantly increasing their prices next year.
A total of 52.5 percent of the 1,133 people surveyed said they could afford a plan up to $100 per month.
Another 15.9 percent said they could afford $200. And 11.6 percent said they could handle $300, according to HealthPocket, an insurance comparison site.
Just 20 percent of respondents said they would be able to afford a plan that costs more than $300.
HealthPocket’s head of data and research, Kev Coleman, noted that most Obamacare plans cost more than $300 per month, before subsidies are factored in.
The average price nationally in 2017 for a bronze plan — the cheapest Obamacare tier — is $311 per month for a 30-year-old nonsmoker who does not qualify for subsidies, Coleman said.
“That’s up 21 percent from last year’s average,” he noted. Bronze plans cover about 60 percent of their customers’ health costs.
And the average price nationally next year for the next tier — silver — will be almost $365 per month for a 30-year-old. That’s a 17 percent increase over 2016′s average.
Silver plans, which cover about 70 percent of their customers’ health costs, are the most popular plans sold on Obamacare marketplaces.
Coleman said there are no bronze plans available nationally that cost less than $100 per month for a 30-year-old nonsmoker without a subsidy.
And just 1.4 percent of bronze plans nationally cost less than $200 per month for that same unsubsidized person, he said.
Another troublesome finding for Coleman was that millennials ages 18 to 34 were more apt than other groups to say $100 was the most they could afford.
More than 60 percent of millennials cited that limit.
“The millennial group is highly attractive to insurers because they are statistically more likely to use fewer health care services than older age groups, thus helping to control premiums within a risk pool,” Coleman wrote in a report on the survey findings. If millennials steer clear of insurance, it could increase prices for others who do buy the plans.
Federal health officials have stressed that most people who buy coverage from a government-run insurance marketplace qualify for subsidies that significantly lower the premiums.
About 77 percent of the customers on HealthCare.gov, which serves 39 states, will be able to find plans that cost them less than $100 per month after subsidies, according to Sylvia Burwell, secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department.
Subsidies are available to people whose household incomes are 100 to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $24,300 to $97,200 for a family of four.
Burwell on Friday tweeted a television ad running nationally since last week that says “because the majority of people who sign up qualify for financial help, most don’t pay full price” and can find plans that will cost them $50 to $100.
But Coleman noted that not everyone qualifies for financial aid, or buys plans on the government-run exchanges, and therefore must pay full price for their individual health plans.
Coleman said that while subsidized customers “are highly motivated to enroll in coverage,” those who don’t get such aid may be less likely to sign up this year because of the double-digit percentage premium spikes that many plans are seeing.
Coleman said recent data suggest that higher premiums for 2017 could be slowing enrollment in Obamacare among new customers.
Earlier this week, the Health and Human Services Department said that more than 1 million people had selected a plan on HealthCare.gov during the first two weeks of open enrollment for 2017 coverage. The tally represented a slight uptick in the number of customers who had selected a plan in the first two weeks of 2016 open enrollment.
But Coleman noted that only about 24 percent of those sign-ups in the first two weeks of November came from new customers. Last year, 34 percent of the sign-ups in the first two weeks came from new customers.
Coleman called the drop in sign-ups “worrisome,” pointing out that the Obama administration has been “trying to increase enrollment, obviously, to stabilize these risk pools so that premiums don’t continue to spike.”
If a risk pool, or group of customers of insurance plans, contains too many people with health problems, insurers have to raise premiums to offset the costs of providing them health benefits. Insurers this year have blamed their price hikes on risk pools that have been less healthy than expected.
As we say DEAN BAKER is a raging global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----CLINTON neo-liberal pretending to be POPULIST for the 99% of WE THE PEOPLE. One of those FAKE LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES as too this CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND POLICY RESEARCH think tank.
'Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a progressive think tank focused on economic policy'.
No policy coming from this THINK TANK---like BROOKINGS ---like ASPEN----like ROOSEVELT INSTITUTES are REAL INFORMATION. It is all FAKE NEWS---FAKE DATA----and MOVES FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE.
The goals of ONE WORLD ONE TELEMEDICINE TECHNOLOGY GRID is to get rid of all medical costs extreme wealth extreme profits-----and what are today BARBER SURGEONS----those dastardly FRANK BURNS will be under the bus----LOSERS-----THEM as wages and status take US DOCTORS to being TECHNOLOGY TECHS being paid the same as those DOCTORS in third world FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
'In many areas of China, for example, doctors are paid about 2,524 Yuan–$406 a month (China.org.cn, 2015). To give that some perspective, a hotel receptionist in China can earn 2,507 Yuan, or about $403 USD per month'.
HOSTING SERVER NOSY NEIGHBORS BEING THAT CHINESE SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE GROUP ARE TRYING HARD TO 'HIT' THE MIDDLE-CLASS---FIRST WORLD QUALITY OF LIFE OUT OF OUR US 99% WE THE PEOPLE.
That dastardly AGENDA 21-----
The problem of doctors’ salaries
An economist argues that American doctors get paid too much—and offers some bold ideas on what to do about it.
By DEAN BAKER
10/25/2017 05:03 AM EDT
Updated 11/07/2017 07:05 PM EST
The United States pays more than twice as much per person for health care as other wealthy countries. We tend to blame the high prices on things like drugs and medical equipment, in part because the price tag for many life-saving drugs is less than half the U.S. price in Canada or Europe.
But an unavoidable part of the high cost of U.S. health care is how much we pay doctors — twice as much on average as physicians in other wealthy countries. Because our doctors are paid, on average, more than $250,000 a year (even after malpractice insurance and other expenses), and more than 900,000 doctors in the country, that means we pay an extra $100 billion a year in doctor salaries. That works out to more than $700 per U.S. household per year. We can think of this as a kind of doctors’ tax.
Doctors and other highly paid professionals stand out in this respect. Our autoworkers and retail clerks do not in general earn more than their counterparts in other wealthy countries.
Most Americans are likely to be sympathetic to the idea that doctors should be well paid. After all, it takes many years of education and training, including long hours as an intern and resident, to become a doctor. And people generally respect and trust their doctors. But they likely don’t realize how out of line our doctors’ pay is with doctors in other wealthy countries.
However, as an economist, I look for structural explanations for pay disparities like this. And when economists like me look at medicine in America – whether we lean left or right politically – we see something that looks an awful lot like a cartel.
The word “cartel” has some bad connotations; most people’s thoughts probably jump to OPEC and the 1970s crisis caused by its reduction in the supply of oil. But a cartel is not necessarily completely negative. It means that the suppliers of a good or service have control over the supply. This control can be used to ensure quality, as is the case with many agricultural cartels around the world. However, controlling supply also lets the cartel exert some control over price.
In the United States, the supply of doctors is tightly controlled by the number of medical school slots, and more importantly, the number of medical residencies. Those are both set by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, a body dominated by physicians’ organizations. The United States, unlike other countries, requires physicians to complete a U.S. residency program to practice. (Since 2011, graduates of Canadian programs have also been allowed to practice in the U.S., although there are still substantial obstacles.) This means that U.S. doctors get to legally limit their competition. As a result, U.S. doctors receive higher pay, and like anyone in a position to exploit a cartel, they also get patients to buy services (i.e., from specialists) that they don’t really need.
There are two parts to the high pay received by our doctors relative to doctors elsewhere, both connected to the same cause. The first is that our doctors get higher pay in every category of medical practice, including general practitioner. If we compare our cardiologists to cardiologists in Europe or Canada, our heart doctors earn a substantial premium. The same is true of our neurologists, surgeons, and every other category of medical specialization. Even family practitioners clock in as earning more than $200,000 a year, enough to put them at the edge of the top 1 percent of wage earners in the country.
The other reason that our physicians earn so much more is that roughly two-thirds are specialists. This contrasts with the situation in other countries, where roughly two-thirds of doctors are general practitioners. This means we are paying specialists’ wages for many tasks that elsewhere are performed by general practitioners. Since there is little evidence of systematically better outcomes in the United States, the increased use of specialists does not appear to be driven by medical necessity.
In recent years, the number of medical residents has become so restricted that even the American Medical Association is pushing to have the number of slots increased. The major obstacle at this point is funding. It costs a teaching hospital roughly $150,000 a year for a residency slot. Most of the money comes from Medicare, with a lesser amount from Medicaid and other government sources. The number of slots supported by Medicare has been frozen for two decades after Congress lowered it in 1997 at the request of the American Medical Association and other doctors’ organizations.
Furthermore, Medicare exerts little control over the fields of specialization in the residency slots it supports, largely leaving this up to the teaching hospitals, which have an incentive to offer residencies in specialties from which they can get the most revenue per resident. This means they are more likely to train someone in neurology or cardiology than as a family practitioner.
Policymakers have a number of tools to use to introduce more competition, weaken the doctors’ cartel and get their pay more in line with counterparts elsewhere. One would be simply to fund more residency slots. Medicare could also limit the slots for many areas of specialization and instead insist that more of its funding go to train people as family practitioners.
A second route would be to end the requirement that foreign doctors complete a U.S. residency program in order to practice medicine in the United States. This means setting up arrangements through which qualified foreign doctors could be licensed to practice in the United States after completing an equivalent residency program in another country. The admission of many more doctors would put downward pressure on the pay of doctors in the United States, as insurers would have a new pool of physicians to add to their networks who will accept somewhat lower compensation.
Another approach is to not only change the rules around who can practice, but to change the rules around what doctors do. There are many procedures now performed by doctors that can be performed by nurse practitioners and other lower-paid health professionals. For example, many states now allow nurse practitioners to prescribe medicine without the supervision of a doctor, and there is no evidence that this has resulted in worse outcomes for patients. (It does, however, reduce health care costs.) The scope of practice of nurse practitioners and other health professionals can be extended in this and other areas for which they are fully competent. This would both directly save money and further reduce the demand for doctors, putting more downward pressure on their pay.
Yet one more approach is being tested in Missouri: While a doctor can’t practice independently without completing a U.S. residency program, Missouri will now allow foreign-trained doctors to practice under the supervision of a U.S.-trained doctor. This should also help to increase the supply of doctors.
The other major policy tool in reducing the amount we spend on doctors would be to reduce the use of medical specialists by changing the standards of care, the legal baseline that doctors and hospitals are expected to meet to avoid malpractice liability. This is largely a legal concept. While any licensed doctor can in principle perform any medical procedure, a family practitioner could be exposing herself to considerable legal liability if, for example, she gave a patient a heart exam that was typically performed by a cardiologist.
To get around this, it should be possible for doctors, hospitals insurers, and other providers to refer to the standards of care in other countries as a legal defense in malpractice cases. This would not be a protection against genuine malpractice; it would just mean that the use of generalists would not be evidence, by itself, of improper care.
There are enormous obstacles to any effort to reduce the pay of doctors. The restrictions that limit competition and keep physicians’ pay high are mostly obscure and not even understood by many policy wonks. Any efforts to change them in ways that seriously threaten doctors’ pay will encounter massive opposition from a very powerful political lobby. Furthermore, doctors generally enjoy a great deal of respect in society, and Americans tend not to think of their high salaries as part of the health care cost problem.
But if we want to stop paying a $100 billion premium for health care that doesn’t make us healthier, we’re going to need to overcome those political barriers. Getting U.S. health care costs down is a herculean task; getting doctors’ pay in line is a big part of the solution. It’s time we broke up the doctor cartel.
The fact that most people like their doctors will make the effort harder. Most of us like our letter carriers too, but that doesn’t mean they should make $250,000 a year.
Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a progressive think tank focused on economic policy.