Monday, April 17, 2017

China Study Links Immune Activation By Vaccination & Autism

China Study Links Immune Activation By Vaccination & Autism

A study out of China is the first to test the effects of immune activation by vaccination (hep B/BCG) on brain development in rats.

By: Jeff Roberts/Collective Evolution  *This article is a summary of a larger article put together by J.B. Handley at Healthcare in America. It is a conglomeration of a wide body of recent research pieced together by a growing group of concerned scientists. For more information, please visit the website,
A study out of China is the first to test the effects of immune activation by vaccination (hep B/BCG) on brain development in rats. Results indicate vaccines containing an aluminum adjuvant (i.e., hep B) spike cytokine levels in the hippocampus region of the brain, in particular, the cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6), the key cytokine known for its dysregulating effect on neuronal circuitry and the key cytokine implicated in autism.
History of research into immune activation and autism
Before we get into the China study, it’s important to understand all of the previous research leading up to it.
In 2006, late Caltech scientist Dr. Paul Patterson and his colleagues were among the first to discover the implications of maternal immune activation and brain development in offspring.
In an article published in the Engineering & Science journal, titled “Pregnancy, Immunity, Schizophrenia, and Autism,” Patterson wrote that “brain-immune conversation actually starts during the development of the embryo, where the state of the mother’s immune system can alter the growth of cells in the fetal brain.”
Patterson and his team built on the work led by Carlos Pardo at Johns Hopkins, which discovered “neural inflammation” in postmortem examination of brains of patients with autism. Strangely, these autistic patients did not die due to any infections that would have caused the inflammation.
This research was the first to suggest “an ongoing, permanent immune-system activation in the brains of autistic people.” 
In 2007 Patterson took this research further, publishing a study that found the culprit of this chronic brain inflammation — cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6).
Cytokines are cell signaling molecules that aid cell to cell communication, stimulating the movement of cells toward sites of inflammation, infection, and trauma.
Cytokine interleukin-6
Patterson found that IL-6 was critical for mediating the behavioral and transcriptional changes in the neurology of the rat offspring.
This study was replicated by Patterson in 2012, which was more autism-specific, and reached the same conclusion“These results indicate that [maternal immune activation] MIA yields male offspring with deficient social and communicative behavior, as well as high levels of repetitive behaviors, all of which are hallmarks of autism.”
In 2014, the M.I.N.D. Institute at UC-Davis replicated Dr. Patterson’s work in rhesus monkeys and found the same results.
Another 2012 study from Neuroscience agreed with Patterson — Brain IL-6 elevation causes neuronal circuitry imbalances and mediates autism-like behaviors.
The next question, then, was what causes immune activation that would lead to increased levels of IL-6 in the brain?

Aluminum bioaccumulates in the brain

Aluminum compounds (Al hydroxide and Al phosphate) are currently used in the hepatitis A, hepatitis B, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTaP, Tdap), Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib), human papillomavirus (HPV), and pneumococcus (PCV) vaccines.
Aluminum adjuvant “activates” the immune system, which induces long-term immunity to antigens in the vaccine.
Dr. Chris Shaw at the University of British Columbia did extensive research on injected aluminum in 2007 and 2009 and found “the results reported mirror previous work that has clearly demonstrated that aluminum, in both oral and injected forms, can be neurotoxic. Potential toxic mechanisms of action for aluminum may include enhancement of inflammation.”
Concerns about the limited understanding of aluminum toxicity were further questioned by Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic in this 2012 paper.
It is somewhat surprising to find that in spite of over 80 years of use, the safety of Al adjuvants continues to rest on assumptions rather than scientific evidence. For example, nothing is known about the toxicology and pharmacokinetics of Al adjuvants in infants and children.9 On the other hand, in adult humans, long-term persistence of Al vaccine adjuvants can lead to cognitive dysfunction and autoimmunity.6,10 Yet, in spite of these observations children continue regularly to be exposed to much higher levels of Al adjuvants than adults, via routine childhood vaccination programmes.
In 2013, French scientists demonstrated that aluminum adjuvant, when injected into the body of a mouse, ended up in the brain one year later.
In 2015, another study from Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC) in France further supported this new view of aluminum adjuvant, showing that Al makes its way to the brain slowly, where it stays there, possibly forever.

Last fall, results published in the journal Toxicology sealed the deal on Al adjuvant, revealing that low, consistent doses of Al were most dangerous of all for neurotoxic effects. Larger doses produced granulomas at injection sites, which prevented the Al from spreading. Smaller doses did not produce this effect, causing changes in the brain and behavior.
The study authors stated that “the present study may suggest that aluminum adjuvant toxicokinetics and safety require reevaluation.”
And just last year, a study out of the Middle East looking at Alzheimer’s in rats found that aluminum produced a four-fold increase in IL-6 in the brain.
So we know that Al adjuvant causes on-going, increased levels of IL-6 in the brain. So what argument do the CDC and FDA use to justify aluminum being safe?

The difference between ingested Al and injected Al adjuvant

Currently, the FDA and CDC state that aluminum in vaccines is safe, based on this 2011 study.
This study erroneously concluded that aluminum from vaccines likely ends up in the body’s skeletal system. However, as the plethora of research previously mentioned shows, Al nanoparticles are not safely excreted or stored, they accumulate in the brain.
Another point to make here is that there is a difference between the aluminum discussed in the 2011 study (linked above) and the aluminum injected in vaccines. The CDC base their conclusions about Al safety on ingested, water-soluble aluminum salts, not the nanoparticle aluminum-hydroxide.
Most vaccines contain aluminum, and aluminum is a proven neurotoxin, in amounts received from vaccines. Vaccines in combination can result in toxic aluminum overload. Even the aluminum in a single vaccine can be harmful because the aluminum is in a form that is more dangerous than ingested aluminum. Specifically, vaccine aluminum is in nanoparticulate form, which is harder for the body to eliminate, and because it is transported around the body differently than ingested aluminum.
It is natural and normal to ingest small doses of aluminum from food and water. It’s not good for you, but the body has adequate defenses. Absorption of ingested Al is low, about 0.3%, so about 99.7% is eliminated in feces. Ingested aluminum is in ionic form (individual charged atoms), which is readily removed by the kidneys. Also, ionic aluminum is blocked from entering the brain by the blood-brain barrier. The low absorption, rapid elimination by the kidneys and barrier to brain entry adequately protects the brain from aluminum.
However, nanoparticulate aluminum from vaccines cannot be removed by the kidneys. The particles are far too large to be filtered out by the kidneys. The Al nanoparticles do dissolve slowly (converting to ionic aluminum). But long before they can dissolve completely, the Al nanoparticles are “eaten” by immune system cells called macrophages. In other words, the particles wind up inside the macrophages. Once loaded with the Al nanoparticles, the macrophages spread aluminum as they travel through the body. This is dangerous because the Al-loaded macrophages carry Al nanoparticles to tissues (e.g. the brain) that are damaged by very small amounts of aluminum.

China study links aluminum, IL-6, and autism

In 2015, Li et al. out of Sun Yat-Sen University published a groundbreaking study that tied all of the latter research together.
Li et al. were the first to test the effects of immune activation by vaccination on brain development. All other studies of immune activation before this had used pathological conditions to mimic infection and induce fever, and therefore concerns about the transferability of the data had been in question until this study came out.
The study looked at the effects of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine (for tuberculosis) and hepatitis B vaccine on brain development in infant rats.
J.B. Handley sums up the results:
“There were three different groups of rats:
  1. Rats receiving the BCG vaccine (not given in the U.S.)
  2. Rats receiving the Hepatitis B vaccine (given on day 1 of life in the U.S.)
  3. A control group with no vaccine.
The BCG vaccine does NOT contain aluminum adjuvant and the impact on the rat’s brains from BCG was actually positive!
The Hep B vaccine rats, however, showed the kind of immune activation event we are seeing in autism (high IL-6). This is biological proof of the link between a vaccine — given to a post-natal animal — inducing an immune activation event, including the cytokine marker for autism, IL-6. A scientific first.”
Vaccine Papers further detailed the implications of this study:
An important finding in the Li et al study is that some of the effects of hep B vaccine did not appear until age 8 weeks. This finding undermines claims of vaccine safety, which are almost always based on short-term outcomes of a few days or weeks. 8 weeks is a long time in rat development. 8 week old rats are almost fully mature adults.This suggests that adverse effects of vaccines may take years or decades to appear in humans, or can be life-long. This is consistent with what is known about immune activation and schizophrenia. Immune activation in the fetus can cause schizophrenia 20-30 years later.
The accumulating scientific evidence and the Li et al study in particular strongly suggest that early-life vaccination may cause mental illness. The mental illnesses would emerge years or decades after vaccination of an infant. Vaccines are likely contributing the rise of mental illnesses in the USA over the last 25 years. The rise in mental illnesses in the USA is coincident with the dramatic increase in vaccination that started in the 1980s.

Is this the proof we’ve been waiting for?

As you’ve just read, there is a growing body of research that paints an undeniable link between immune activation and autism.
Aluminum adjuvants, given early and continually, stimulate immune activation event after immune activation event, raising levels of IL-6 in pre- and post-natal brains, leading to chronic inflammation and dysregulation of neuronal circuitry and the symptoms associated with autism.
Chronic brain inflammation would also explain why many autistic children develop enlarged foreheads. It would perhaps explain why these children feel the need to bang their heads against walls, or why they become frustrated easily.
What about the gastrointestinal disorders autistic children frequently experience? If you guessed aluminum was the culprit, you are correct.
Here is a study from Nature that explains how aluminum causes inflammation in the gut and impairs gut function.
Auto-immune disorders? Here is a groundbreaking 2013 study that explains how aluminum adjuvant causes a wide spectrum of immune disorders.

What about the MMR vaccine?

Since the MMR vaccine does not contain aluminum, why then do parents talk about the MMR vaccine being a trigger for their child’s autism?
J.B. Handley puts it simply:
The MMR vaccine is the first live virus vaccine children receive (it’s typically given between age 12–18 months, most children have received 15–20 vaccines by then), and it’s a triple (measles, mumps, rubella) live virus.
For an immune system bathed in aluminum adjuvant and possibly already simmering with activation events, this triple dose might push a child right over the edge. This might explain the seizures (an extreme immune activation event) that sometimes follow the MMR appointment.
Only one ingredient (thimerosal) in one vaccine (MMR) has been studied in relation to autism in humans.

This picture sums the point up perfectly:
So where does all of this data leave us? Groundbreaking as all of this is, it is undeniable that there are many more questions waiting to be answered and more research needed.
Certainly, we are in for a wild ride these next few years as the body of research for vaccine safety grows and as more people wake up to the fact that they’ve been lied to (get your popcorn ready).
For now, though, our only ally is to find our public voice, to spread the information to our circles, to involve ourselves in the discussions taking place online and in public, to let go of the emotional attacks and let the science boldly speak for itself. That is our moral responsibility.
The rest, I say, we leave to the adage about truth. It may have taken centuries and millions of lives to get here, and somewhere along the way we probably lost hope that it would ever arrive, but in the end, the adage held true, that no matter how deep the lie or how ruthless the cover up, the truth always prevails.
*For more information concerning the science around vaccine safety, please visit

Trump Considering "Kinetic Military Action" On North Korea Including "Sudden Strike"

Trump Considering "Kinetic Military Action" On North Korea Including "Sudden Strike"

Tyler Durden's picture
Following Sunday's failed medium-range missile test by Kim Jong-Un, President Donald Trump has been evaluating his response options and according to Bloomberg, which cited a "person familiar with his thinking", is willing to consider ordering "kinetic" military action, including a sudden strike, to "counteract North Korea’s destabilizing actions in the region"
However, before launching another offensive campaign - or war as some would call it - Trump’s preference is for China to take the lead on dealing with North Korea, according to the source.
While still afforded the luxury of time, Trump may be forced to decide soon how to respond: on its take on the ongoing North Korea crisis, the New York Times said in a front-page article that "what is playing out, said Robert Litwak of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, ... is 'the Cuban missile crisis in slow motion,' but the slow-motion part appears to be speeding up."
That said, Trump’s reported strategy isn’t a radical departure from long-standing U.S. policy. As Bloomberg writes, "he isn’t particularly interested in toppling the regime of leader Kim Jong Un and isn’t looking to force a reunification of the two Koreas, the person said. He instead wants to push for their long-term cooperation."
Furthermore, Trump’s national security team had already thought through various scenarios that North Korea might take, and how the U.S. would react. So when the medium-range missile test failed right after launch early Sunday morning local time, Trump was informed immediately and decided to downplay it, according to the person. It was Trump’s decision that the administration’s initial response would come from Defense Secretary James Mattis, who issued a 22-word statement Saturday night.
This was followed by National Security Adviser General H.R. McMaster, who used familiar language Sunday to describe North Korea’s “provocative and destabilizing and threatening behavior,” while leaving all options on the table as his team helps develop plans of action for the region. In a previously reported interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” McMaster said Trump had directed the National Security Council to collaborate with the Defense and State Departments, and intelligence agencies to “provide options and have them ready for him if this pattern of destabilizing behavior continues.”
Hours after the failed test, McMaster emphasized Trump’s preference, as with this month’s airstrikes in Syria, for unannounced military action. He added that the North Korean leader’s unpredictability complicated U.S. strategy.
McMaster’s use of “provocative” and “destabilizing” to describe North Korea echoes administrations of both parties that have attempted to rally others on the global stage, including China, to help prevent fresh war on the peninsula. Trump used the language in his February visit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Meanwhile, China has refused to commit to any specific course of action and as discussed earlier, Beijing made a plea for a return to negotiations. Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Monday that tensions need to be eased on the Korean Peninsula to bring the escalating dispute there to a peaceful resolution. Lu said Beijing wants to resume the multi-party negotiations that ended in stalemate in 2009 and suggested that U.S. plans to deploy a missile defense system in South Korea were damaging its relations with China.
Ultimately, Trump may be in wait and see mode for the next week until all the available options are on the table: on April 25, the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier is expected to reach the South Korea east coast on April 25. If Trump is indeed pressed to make a swift decision, he will surely do so once air support is available next weekend, just as the first round of the French presidential election takes place.

Inside The World’s “Doomsday Vault”

Inside The World’s “Doomsday Vault”

Sunday, April 16, 2017 4:49

Imagine that the unthinkable has happened. A massive asteroid impact triggers a “nuclear winter” effect, or one of the world’s most dangerous supervolcanos erupts. Maybe Donald Trump gets in an epic Twitter feud with Kim Jong-Un that initiates World War 3. Either way, things are going sideways, and the fate of human civilization itself is at stake. Will everything be lost? Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardins explains…
Well, besides the fact that the world’s cities have been replaced by smoking craters, there is some good news for the humans that survive a potentially apocalyptic scenario.
On a remote island that is just 800 miles (1,300 km) from the North Pole, the Norwegian government has built a failsafe in the freezing cold that protects thousands of the most vital crops from extinction. Officially called the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, it already holds close to a million samples of crops around the world, with each sample holding about 500 seeds.
Today’s infographic, from Futurism, has more on this Doomsday Vault that could one day help to save civilization:
Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist


Trump’s North Korea dilemma

By Perry Diaz 

Trump’s North Korea dilemma

In the wake of the Tomahawk cruise missile strikes on a Syrian airbase and after dropping a 2,100-pound “Mother of all Bombs” – MOAB – in Afghanistan, North Korea had threatened to test another nuclear weapon, her sixth test.  In reaction, senior U.S. intelligence officials told the media that the U.S. is prepared to launch a preemptive strike with conventional weapons against North Korea if they’re convinced that North Korea is about to perform a nuclear weapons test.   

Now that Trump has shown that he has cojones and is willing to risk going to war with North Korea, the geopolitical chess game has changed direction.  What happened at the summit meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at Trump’s Mar-a-lago resort in Florida was one for the books.  Trump told Xi as they were having dessert, “Mr. President, let me explain something to you.  We have just fired 59 missiles, all of which hit by the way, unbelievable, from hundreds of miles away.”  Trump said the Xi paused for 10 seconds and then asked the interpreter to please say it again.  Then Xi told Trump, “Anybody that was so brutal and uses gases to do that to young children and babies - it's ok.”  In a chess game, that was a brilliant end game: Trump checked Xi and Xi resigned to avoid a checkmate.   

“We have a good chemistry,” Trump now said of Xi.  Not too long ago, when he was campaigning for the presidency, Trump accused China of being a currency manipulator and a thief of American jobs.  He said that China should no longer be allowed to “rape our country.”  If elected, he promised to impose heavy tariffs on China and take her to court for shady trade practices.

But, ever the consummate dealmaker – or I might say, a wily wheeler-dealer -- Trump flip-flops on the issues and went easy on Xi.  He must have taken note of what Xi said at the start of their meeting, to wit: “There are a thousand reasons to get China-US relations right, and not one reason to spoil it.”  Trump abandoned his position on U.S.-China trade, which gave Xi a sigh of relief.  He did not declare China as a currency manipulator and the South China Sea and Taiwan were not discussed, as they would surely have caused some friction.  Trump paid a heavy price for whatever concessions he got, if any.  But they agreed to form a working group with a “100-day plan” to bolster American exports and reduce the US bilateral deficit.

China’s burden

It’s interesting to note that on April 5, on the eve of the Trump-Xi summit, the Chinese government-owned Global Times published China’s “bottom line” on the situation on the Korean Peninsula. It said that China would not allow a “hostile government” in Pyongyang.  It also said that Beijing would “not tolerate a U.S. military push toward the Yalu River.” It did not then come as a surprise when Beijing deployed 150,000 People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops to the China-North Korea border at the Yalu River.  This reminds us when hordes of Chinese troops crossed the Yalu River in October 1950 during the Korean War to stop the northward push of the United Nations (UN) forces under the command of Gen Douglas MacArthur.  The Chinese intervention pushed the UN forces back and the war seesawed until it ended on July 27, 1953, when an armistice was signed.  Technically, the two Koreas are still at war today.

Indeed, China hasn’t changed her position since the time of Mao Zedong, which is to protect and preserve the communist regime in North Korea.  Let’s face it: Korean reunification under the existing South Korean government would not be palatable to the Chinese rulers.  The best thing that the U.S. could hope for would be a regime change that would usher in a friendlier communist government like Vietnam is today.  But would Xi agree to that?  I don’t think so.  Don’t be fooled by his affability and “soft power” approach to world economic dominance.  But deep inside him, he is a dogmatic and hard-line communist in the mold of Mao.

Putin scared stiff

In the case of Russian President Vladimir Putin, the Tomahawk cruise missile strikes in Syria must have scared the daylights out of him.  It caught him flat-footed and dealt a humiliating blow to his ego.  His inability to stop the strikes is a repudiation of Russia’s much-ballyhooed air defense system and proves that Putin is an unreliable ally.  Indeed, the Tomahawk strikes diminished Putin’s image as a fearsome bully who uses nuclear blackmail to get what he wants.  Not anymore.  The new bully in the neighborhood is Trump.   The difference between the two is: Putin is unpredictably predictable while Trump is predictably unpredictable.  That makes Trump more dangerous than Putin. 

And to show that Trump means business, he dropped the “Mother of all Bombs” – America’s most powerful non-nuclear bomb – on a network of fortified underground tunnels in Afghanistan that ISIS used to launch attacks on Afghan forces. The strike also killed at least 94 ISIS fighters.

On the European continent, Putin’s misadventures in Ukraine and Crimea might look like a geopolitical victory for him but are actually a big setback for him.  Prior to the Ukraine invasion, Russia’s relations with the Eastern European countries -- her former satellite states – were mutually economically beneficial.  Now, these Eastern European countries, fearful of Putin’s aggressive behavior, have turned to their NATO allies for protection.   The U.S. and several other NATO countries responded by sending thousands of troops and hundreds of tanks including heavy weapons to Poland and the three Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.  They formed a “wall of steel” along the border with Russia.

Kim Jong-un’s obsession

Trump’s slogan “Peace through strength” is finally put to a test.  A few days after the Trump-Xi summit meeting, Trump ordered the USS Carl Vinson carrier strike group to sail to the waters off North Korea in response to North Korea’s planned nuclear weapons test, which was scheduled to coincide with the 105th birth anniversary of North Korea’s founder and Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un’s grandfather Kim Il-Sung last April 15.  The occasion was celebrated with a parade showing a variety of offensive missiles.  During the parade Kim threatened to annihilate the U.S. with what he called “game-changing” missiles.  He vowed to “beat down enemies with the power of nuclear justice.”

Within hours after the parade, North Korea attempted to launch a ballistic missile and failed.  “It blew up almost immediately,” an observer said.  But the fact that North Korea tried to launch the missile in spite of warnings from South Korea and the U.S., is an indication that Kim is obsessed with making his country a nuclear power.  It is estimated that North Korea may already have at least a dozen nuclear weapons, which she can use against South Korea, particularly targeting the huge U.S. base near the DMZ. 

Some experts believe that North Korea could build a hundred nuclear weapons within five years.  North Korea could then become a very dangerous threat to the peace and stability in East Asia.  With that in mind, Japan and South Korea might decide to build their own nuclear capability.  In particular, Japan could produce nuclear weapons if she wanted to. She has 47 metric tons of weapons-usable plutonium, which is enough to make nearly 6,000 warheads like the one the U.S. dropped on Nagasaki. This huge cache was the by-product from reprocessing of spent uranium and plutonium used in Japan’s nuclear plants, which makes one wonder: Would Japan make nuclear warheads and use them if she were threatened with nuclear extinction by North Korea? Well, your guess is as good as mine. But I think your guess is: Yes, she would. Who wouldn’t?

The U.S. and China’s goal is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.  But for as long as Kim Jong-un is in power, that is not going to happen.  And with North Korea fast-tracking her production of nuclear weapons and the development of land-based and submarine-launched medium- and long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching as far as the U.S., she could become a nuclear superpower within a decade.  And this begs the question: Would the U.S. allow a rogue nuclear superpower to threaten not only the security of Japan and South Korea but the existence of America as well?  Trump’s dilemma is that there is no easy solution to the North Korean problem.  He might just bite the bullet to keep the peace in Asia-Pacific.

WikiLeaks: Afghan Tunnels The U.S. Just Bombed — “They Were Built By The CIA”

WikiLeaks: Afghan Tunnels The U.S. Just Bombed — “They Were Built By The CIA”

As the Trump administration is flexing its military muscle, having stood up to Syria and its ally Russia, and while it’s now relishing in the news it has dropped the nation’s largest most powerful non-nuclear bomb on a cave complex in eastern Afghanistan, one critic was quick to point out a little-known fact. WikiLeaks tweeted a simple but true statement concerning the origin of the cave complex the Americans are so proud to have reportedly destroyed.

By: Jack Burns/The Free Thought Project  As the Trump administration is flexing its military muscle, having stood up to Syria and its ally Russia, and while it’s now relishing in the news it has dropped the nation’s largest most powerful non-nuclear bomb on a cave complex in eastern Afghanistan, one critic was quick to point out a little-known fact. WikiLeaks tweeted a simple but true statement concerning the origin of the cave complex the Americans are so proud to have reportedly destroyed. “Those tunnels the U.S is bombing in Afghanistan? They were built by the CIA,” WikiLeaks tweeted.

Linked to the tweet was a New York Times article from 2005, which described a similar cave complex in detail, and added a few additional details worth noting. “Tora Bora” as it’s known, contains “fortified caves” which are reported to contain, “miles of tunnels, bunkers and base camps, dug deeply into the steep rock walls.” The tunnels were built by the “C.I.A.”, with the help of the Bin Laden family, who constructed the complex.
Also jumping in on the mockery of the Trump administration is Edward Snowden, who tweeted, “The bomb dropped today in the middle of nowhere, Afghanistan, cost $314,000,000.” And in a follow-up tweet, also said, “Those mujahedeen tunnel networks we’re bombing in Afghanistan? We paid for them.” He, too, linked his tweet to The NY Times article mentioned above. Apparently, the ant farm network of tunnels built by the CIA can now be destroyed by the American military in yet another pseudo-show-of-force meant to make the Trump administration seem tough on Syria, ISIS, and Al Qaeda.
It was said Bin Laden even helped to run the bulldozers at Tora Bora and knew the labyrinth of tunnels like the proverbial back of his hand. Financed by the intelligence agency to provide a headquarters and safe haven for the Mujahedeen, the Afghani fighting force was used to prevent the Russian takeover of Afghanistan during the Afghan War. After the Russians were defeated, the same Mujahedeen became known as Al-Qaeda, led by Osama Bin Laden.
After the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center, Bin Laden became the United States’ most wanted man. Not surprisingly, he took up refuge inside Tora Bora, within its miles and miles of complex, well-fortified tunnels. Times writer, Mary Anne Weaver,

One American military leader tasked with capturing or killing Bin Laden was General “Mad Dog” Mattis. Mattis is now the Trump Administration’s Secretary of Defense, and appears to have attempted to destroy at least a portion of Tora Bora’s system of tunnels with the drop of the MOAB bomb, known as the “Mother Of All Bombs.”
The aging general who’s now the nation’s most powerful military leader, with the exception of Trump as Commander-in-Chief, appears to be following through with a sixteen-year-old vendetta he may have been holding onto. The Times article from 2005 writes, “Brig. Gen. James N. Mattis…along with another officer with whom I spoke, was convinced that…he could have surrounded and sealed off bin Laden’s lair…He argued strongly that he should be permitted to proceed to the Tora Bora caves.”
However, according to Weaver, “The general was turned down,” and the decision not to take Bin Laden there at Tora Bora was one of the greatest military mistakes of the Bush Administration’s attempt to get him. Bin Laden escaped Tora Bora on December 16th, 2001.
It is also important to note that WikiLeaks’ tweet may or may not be 100 percent accurate. CNN reported the MOAB bomb was dropped on a tunnel complex about 12 miles from Tora Bora. However, those tunnels are likely all connected. CBS reported the airstrike destroyed several caves used by ISIS with its 11-ton ordnance. The news agency also interviewed a military expert who said the U.S. has at least 14 more MOAB missiles and may be prepared to lay waste to all such cave systems.
Meanwhile, on Thursday, the director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, targeted WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.” The recently appointed director has apparently had enough of WikiLeaks’ activities, such as the March release of the CIA’s Vault 7.

Will Nuclear Deterrent Keep North Korea EMP Threat At Bay?

WND has been reporting on the threat to America from EMP, the electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion high in the sky, since early in the 2000s when former CIA chief James Wooley, former Defense Department staffer F. Michael Maloof and former Congressional EMP Commission member Dr. Peter Vincent Pry were sounding the alarm.
It was only weeks later that North Korea as a possible aggressor was brought into the conversation.
Nothing has gotten better since then, according to Pry, who agreed to an interview with WND on Friday, and in fact, it's worse.
In fact, the sabre-rattling from North Korea dictator Kim Jong Un in recent days and weeks, the threats to destroy America, the warnings about "nuclear thunderbolts," and more, should be taken very seriously, he suggested.
It's not just that North Korea may have missiles that could reach the United States, and may have a nuclear warhead that could be fitted on the rockets, it could have already put in place the potential for a nuclear blast and EMP attack when it wants.
It's because, Pry explained, North Korea first launched one satellite, then a second, in oddly circuitous orbits that have them approach from the south of America, where there are no early warning systems, there are no interceptor missiles, or any defense.
And the satellites, in fact, could actually contain a nuclear weapon ready to detonate.
Get the inside story on the threat, and how the nation should defense itself, in "A Nation Forsaken. EMP: The Escalating Threat of an American Catastrophe," by F. Michael Maloof.
Pry, who is executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, and director of the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, and served on the Congressional EMP Commission, as well as the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission and more, says the alarm truly is serious.
"All of us," he said, referring to a team of experts in the field, "have written we think that the threat, the possibility of a super-EMP warhead is so great, the United States should take them [North Korea's satellites] down," he told WND.
"We ought not tolerate them orbiting," he said, because nobody knows for sure what's on the satellites, which are in that suspicious orbit which was identified years earlier as a possible route should the Soviet Union ever decide to mount an assault on the U.S., the south polar trajectory.
The problem is that a significant EMP attack properly carried out in the skies over the United States could take down the nation's electronic infrastructure.
Electronic systems. All of them. Computers, networks, communications, systems that provide fuel and electricity. Systems that provide fuel and food, banking, medical systems, everything.
The estimates range widely but there easily could be multiple tens of millions of fatalities across the U.S. following such an attack, because food wouldn't be available, as all the electronics allowing the shipping systems to operate all would be gone.
Pry said it would be, literally, a new stone age.
"The dark ages can come back... literally.... It's that stark: A cliff waiting for us to fall over," he said.
The EMP threat, he said, is the one way where a rogue nation like North Korea could inflict horrible damage on the U.S., possibly even neutralize it. After all, if the electronic controls were gone, would it even be possible for the nation to respond to an attack militarily?
The U.S., he said, would be "blind and defenseless."
He said the suspicions about why the satellites were put into an orbit that approaches the U.S. from a concealed direction, and fly directly overhead, are great.
"What does North Korea want to do, helps us with our problem with climate change?" he wondered. "It's so implausible.
Unless they are practicing for an attack.
The concept of a nuclear deterrent, the idea that an enemy would respond with nukes, is what kept the world away from nuclear conflict all during the Cold War and since. But Pry, who described North Korea's dictator as "Caligula with nuclear weapons," said that might not impact a decision from the closed kingdom.
Many people also consider that North Korea isn't capable of the technology required for such an attack, he said. But consider that North Korea, at times, has been close to both China and Russia, both of which are considered capable of most of the same technology that the U.S. uses.
North Korea has threatened another nuclear test as early as this weekend even as the politics seem to be turning against the regime.
WND reported Friday Kim Jong Un – described only last week by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., as the "crazy fat kid" – now is threatening a "big event" and "nuclear thunderbolts."
The close ally of China has become bolder in its rhetoric in recent years as Barack Obama's foreign policy has left American enemies wondering about Washington's willingness to defend itself.
North Korea has done several tests of nuclear devices in defiance of international bans and has issued multiple threats to kill Americans and destroy the U.S.
Get the inside story on the threat, and how the nation should defense itself, in "A Nation Forsaken. EMP: The Escalating Threat of an American Catastrophe," by F. Michael Maloof.
However, under President Trump, the U.S. has been clear about its intent to destroy ISIS, as was this week with the delivery of a gigantic, nearly 11-ton bomb on ISIS fortifications in Afghanistan.
Trump also has been pressuring China for fairer trade policies and to crack down on Pyongyang.
Something must have worked, as the North Korean news agency on Friday blasted its "long-standing ally China" and implied Beijing was "‘cooperating' with Washington for the collapse of North Korea."
The agency also reported Pyongyang's threats to deliver "nuclear thunderbolts."
North Korea's newest saber-rattling comes after there was word from unidentified U.S. intelligence officials, via NBC, that the U.S. is ready to launch a pre-emptive strike against North Korea – with conventional weapons – if it appears North Korea is going forward with more nuclear testing.
Kim Jong Un has said a "big event" is coming, and U.S. officials revealed the the U.S. has dispatched two destroyers to an area just 300 miles from North Korea's nuclear test site.
The U.S. also has bombers stationed in Guam, and the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group is moving into the region.
Only two months ago Maloof reported Pyongyang had been able to launch two satellites, even though nobody knows what they are doing.
At that time Jim Oberg, who is one of the few American scientists to visit North Korea's Sohae space launch site in the northwest corner of the country, expressed similar concerns about the content of North Korean satellites.
Oberg is a retired space shuttle Mission Control specialist with NASA and worked for U.S. Space Command.
"There have been fears expressed that North Korea might use a satellite to carry a small nuclear warhead into orbit and then detonate it over the United States for an EMP strike," Oberg said in a Space Review article. "These concerns seem extreme and require an astronomical scale of irrationality on the part of the regime.
"The most frightening aspect, I've come to realize," he said, "is that exactly such a scale of insanity is now evident in the rest of this ‘space program.'"
In making his visit to the Sohae site in 2012, Oberg said the North Koreans tried to assure him that the satellite launches were for peaceful purposes. However, he was not convinced.
"The charade that Pyongyang's satellite program was purely for peaceful space exploration and applications was pitifully transparent from the start," Oberg said. "The real mystery was what was the true unseen purpose of the enormous expense that the government was pouring into the program."
In 2014, WND reported that a "long-suppressed report" from the Department of Homeland Security concluded North Korea could, in fact, deliver on its threats to reach the U.S. with an EMP attack.
In the suppressed study, DHS said that if North Korea attempted to deploy the Unha-3 space launch vehicle or the Taepodong-2 intercontinental ballistic missile, the Defense Department should destroy the missile on its pad before launch.
At the time, however, President Obama and the White House "repeatedly asserted that North Korea did not yet have the capacity to attack the United States or U.S. allies with nuclear missiles."
A report from just last year said North Korea's satellites are fully capable of performing a surprise EMP attack at an altitude and trajectory that evade U.S. National Missile Defenses.
Get the inside story on the threat, and how the nation should defense itself, in "A Nation Forsaken. EMP: The Escalating Threat of an American Catastrophe," by F. Michael Maloof.

Saturday, April 15, 2017

Will The U.S. Be Drawn Into Fighting Two Major Wars Simultaneously

Will The U.S. Be Drawn Into Fighting Two Major Wars Simultaneously

News Image By Michael Snyder/End Of The American Dream April 10, 2017 Share this article:

According to CBS News, an astounding three-fourths of all Americans have to "scramble to cover their living costs" each month.  

In other words, most of the country is either living paycheck to paycheck or very close to it.  

But instead of tightening their belts and trying to put something away for the very hard times that are coming, most Americans are completely and utterly unprepared for what is ahead because the people that they trust on television keep telling them that everything is going to be okay.  

Unfortunately, everything is not going to be "okay", and when things start falling apart all around us there is going to be a lot of anger directed toward those that have been lulling everyone into a false sense of security.

One of the reasons why I am sounding the alarm so loudly is so that people will not be blindsided by the things that are about to happen to this country.  

As you will see below, we are on the precipice of two major wars, conditions are ripe for a devastating economic collapse, and if you were to throw in a major natural disaster or two you would have a recipe for the kind of "perfect storm" that many have been warning about.

Earlier today I focused on our looming economic problems, and in this article I want to address the potential for more military conflict in the very near future.  When Donald Trump hit Syria with 59 cruise missiles, millions of Americans greatly celebrated, but much of the rest of the world was deeply alarmed.
The Trump administration has said that more strikes are possible, but Russia and Iran are both pledging that "we will respond with force" if any more attacks are conducted...

Russia and Iran have said they will respond to further American military actions following the air strike in Syria last week.

In a joint statement, the command centre for the two countries and allied groups said "we will respond to any aggression".

The statement read: "What America waged in an aggression on Syria is a crossing of red lines. From now on we will respond with force to any aggressor or any breach of red lines from whoever it is and America knows our ability to respond well."

Do you understand what that means?

If Trump fires off any more cruise missiles at Syria, we will essentially be in a state of war with both Russia and Iran.

Previously, Russia had warned that our two nations were "one step from war" because of Trump's actions, but the Trump administration is showing no signs of backing down.  

In fact, UN Ambassador Nikki Haley says that regime change in Syria is now a top priority...

The US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, who has done a remarkable job of continuing the diplomatic tone set by her predecessor Samantha Power, said in an interview on CNN's "State of the Union" which will air in full on Sunday, that regime change in Syria as one of the Trump administration's top priorities in Syria.  

Her statement was a complete U-turn from what she said just over a week ago, when she told a group of reporters that the US was "no longer focused on getting Assad out."

Some members of the administration are apparently even advocating a full-blown invasion of Syria.  

For example, it is being reported that National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster has come up with a plan to send 150,000 U.S. ground troops into the country...

As NSA, McMaster's job is to synthesize intellience reports from all other agencies. President Trump is being given an inaccurate picture of the situation in Syria, as McMaster is seeking to involve the U.S. in a full scale war in Syria.

The McMaster-Petraeus plan calls for 150,000 American ground troops in Syria.

Many special operations veterans including General Joseph Votel have raised serious concerns about McMaster's plans for Syria.

I don't know if I have the words to describe how incredibly foolish that would be.

Do we really want to fight an extremely bloody ground war with the combined forces of Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah?

There is very little good that could come out of a war in Syria even in the most rosy scenarios possible, but if things go bad they could go really, really bad.

Meanwhile, NBC News is reporting that President Trump is considering various military options for North Korea, and one of those options includes "killing dictator Kim Jong-Un"...

The National Security Council has presented President Donald Trump with options to respond to North Korea's nuclear program -- including putting American nukes in South Korea or killing dictator Kim Jong-un, multiple top-ranking intelligence and military officials told NBC News.

After seeing what happened in Syria and hearing these threats openly discussed in the U.S. media, what do you think Kim Jong-Un is thinking at this point?

One member of Congress is warning that "millions can die" if a military strike against North Korea goes badly.  

Once U.S. missiles begin flying, North Korea can start firing off their nukes and their vast arsenal of chemical warheads almost instantly.
Could you imagine what would happen if large numbers of deadly nerve gas warheads started exploding in downtown Seoul, downtown Tokyo and at U.S. military bases in Japan?

The carnage would be off the charts, and this is a scenario that we want to avoid at all costs.

Unfortunately, it seems like we are coming closer to a conflict with North Korea with each passing day.  

In fact, today we learned that an aircraft carrier strike group headed by the USS Carl Vinson is sailing in the direction of North Korea right now...

Amid rising tensions with North Korea, an aircraft carrier strike group led by the USS Carl Vinson were heading toward the Korean peninsula.

The aircraft carrier and its accompanying ships had been scheduled to leave from Singapore for port visits to Australia on Saturday, but Adm. Harry Harris, head of U.S. Pacific Command, ordered the strike group to head north toward Korean waters instead.

So what happens if the U.S. starts fighting two major wars simultaneously, the biggest debt bubble in the history of the planet starts bursting, and the U.S. stock market crashes by 50 percent as some analysts are projecting?

Some Americans still have memories of living through the Great Depression and World War II, but most of us have been living in a bubble of peace and prosperity for so long that we don't think that anything could ever come along and threaten our way of life.

And since the election of Donald Trump, interest in "prepping" has dropped to the lowest level that I have ever seen.  

Most people have been lulled into a false sense of security, while the truth is that we have entered perhaps the most dangerous period of time in modern American history.

So you all can do whatever you want, but me and my house are going to get prepared for the tremendous storm that is about to hit this nation.

Those that are wise will do the same, but unfortunately most Americans are going to get absolutely blindsided by what is coming.

Will Donald Trump be impeached? What would it do to stocks? Bonds?

Will Donald Trump be impeached?
What would it do to stocks? Bonds?

Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. | Monday, April 10, 2017 at 7:30 am
Russiagate is casting a long, dark shadow over Washington.
It is darkening prospects for health care reform, tax reform, and the president’s $1 trillion plan for infrastructure … weakening the president’s hand in trade negotiations … dimming hopes for better relations with Russia … and raising some urgent questions for investors:
Could Donald Trump become the fourth U.S. president to face the real possibility of impeachment?
Will this crisis cast a similar shadow over Wall Street?
If so, will the Trump stock market rally come to a premature end? What about the bond market?
Ghosts of the Past
After the Civil War, President Andrew Johnson was impeached by a Congress unhappy with his vetoes of legislation to protect the rights of former slaves. Like today, the nation was suffering from the most extreme partisanship in its history. And he was ultimately acquitted in the Senate by just one vote.
Top: Andrew Johnson impeached after Civil War. Middle: Nixon resigning to avoid impeachment. Bottom: Clinton impeached over Lewinsky affair.
President Richard Nixon faced imminent impeachment over the Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up. Like today, a primary concern of Congress was interference with democratic elections. But, to avoid impeachment, he resigned from office.
President Bill Clinton was impeached on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in relation to his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. And like Johnson, he was acquitted in the Senate.
Will Donald Trump also be impeached?
You’d think the answer would depend entirely on the specific merits of any case against him. But the Constitution’s definition of “impeachable offenses” is so broad, it hands Congress a rich menu of choices to pick from.
According to Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, the president “shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Even if proven, would collusion with the Russian government to interfere with the U.S. election be considered “treason”? Or is that a stretch too far?
What about “high crimes and misdemeanors”? What assortment of behaviors might this soup-to-nuts category include? According to constitutional lawyers, it is not limited to actions that break the law. It can also include two other vague categories — abuses of power and violations of public trust.
“Well, then,” you say, “if we can’t find clarity in the Constitution, can we at least get some guidance from past impeachments?”
HALF the risk, DOUBLE the profit potential!
Paying 50% less for an investment position means you cut your risk by half. It also means you DOUBLE your profit potential. No wonder so many wealthy investors say this is the ONLY intelligent way to invest! Read more here …
Some, but not much. In the three cases I mentioned above — Johnson, Nixon and Clinton — Congress issued or drafted articles of impeachment that covered a very wide range of behaviors, including
  • exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office …
  • behavior grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office, plus …
  • employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.
What do they mean by “exceeding,” “grossly incompatible,” or “improper purpose”? Not clear.
So “an impeachable offense” is exactly WHAT? The only simple answer was provided by Gerald Ford in 1970, when he was still in the House of Representatives:
An impeachable offense can be “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”
In other words, impeachment is, first and foremost, a political phenomenon. The proceedings come with all the trappings of a court trial, except, that is, the most important one: The last thing anyone would possibly say about the “judge and jury” is that they’re impartial.
So if you’re wondering what the chances are that Trump might actually be impeached, the first questions you need to ask are also purely political:
Does the opposition party have enough votes in the House to impeach? Right now, no. Come January 2019, maybe. But long before then, you need to also ask …
Does the president have the full support of his own party? For health care reform and infrastructure development? No. To block impeachment, yes for now; later, uncertain.
Does the president have strong public support? Among Republicans, absolutely. Among Democrats, absolutely not.
The END of the Republican Party?
Could this shocking event give Democrats control of Congress and the White House for the next 100 years? Read more here …
Is the president launching into a new war? If so, could it discourage Democrats from launching a new political war in Congress? In the wake of President Trump’s air strikes against Syria, the answer right now is a possible “yes.”
Bottom line …
Whether you blame it on anti-Trump forces, on Trump himself, or on some combination of both, you cannot deny that …
  • Impeachment is possible. It has already happened three times in U.S. history, two of which occurred under some circumstances reminiscent of today’s.
  • Despite Syria, the chances of impeachment are rising. We have investigations by the FBI and the Senate moving forward full speed … House investigation stalled momentarily by partisan bickering but now back on track … establishment media shouting “scandal” every day and from every mountain top … and probably more of the same to come.
  • The consequences of impeachment, or even just talk of impeachment, could be far-reaching. Specifically …
Washington is already under a cloud. As I said at the outset, Russiagate is casting a shadow over nearly everything the president and Congress do or propose to do, including foreign relations, trade policy, health care, tax reform, infrastructure, and more.
Stock investors are happy (for now). They like the strength in the economy. They like the fact that corporate profits have not been directly impacted, yet. And they’re glad Russiagate has not gotten in the way of White House initiatives to lift regulatory burdens on business. However …
Bond investors have big reasons to be concerned. Regardless of political persuasion, leaders under siege and with waning public support often resort to overborrowing, overspending and binging with money printing.
Until recently, they were able to get away with it thanks to deflation. But if inflation returns, they will lose that cover. Throw in falling global confidence in the U.S. government, and over the long term, you’ve got double trouble for bonds, especially government bonds.
Good luck and God bless!
Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D.Dr. Weiss founded Weiss Research in 1971 and has dedicated his entire career to helping millions of average investors find truly safe havens and investments. He is Chairman of the Weiss Group, which includes Weiss Research and Weiss Ratings, the nation’s leading independent rating agency accepting no fees from rated companies. His last three books have all been New York Times Bestsellers and his most recent title is The Ultimate Money Guide for Bubbles, Busts, Recession and Depression.

Russia & Iran To US: We Will Respond With Force If Red Lines Are Crossed Again In Syria

Russia & Iran To US: We Will Respond With Force If Red Lines Are Crossed Again In Syria

Russia and Iran just laid down the gauntlet by warning the US that another attack on Syria will be met with a "forceful response."

By: Jay Syrmopoulus / The Free Thought Project  Geopolitical tensions have ratcheted up to a dangerous new level in the wake of the U.S. cruise missile strike on Syria, as Russia and Iran have warned the United States that they’ll “respond with force” if the US again crossed their “red lines” in Syria.
The joint statement made by the coalition backing the Assad government clearly noted that there would be a forceful response to any further attacks by the US, and, according to Reuters:
The strike on al Shayrat airbase, which the US claims Syrian forces used to conduct a chemical attack that killed over 70 people, was carried out unilaterally by the US, with President Donald Trump claiming that the strike was “representing the world.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin called the strikes a “violation of international law,” and called for an objective investigation into the chemical attack.
US politicians from both sides of the aisle, such as Senator Richard Black (R), Congresswoman Tusli Gabbard (D), and Congressman Thomas Massie (R) have strongly questioned the legitimacy of the ‘chemical attack by Assad’ narrative, noting that there is a strong likelihood the so-called “moderate rebels,” who are actually terrorists, were responsible for the deaths and blamed it on the Assad government.

Retired Col. Patrick Lang claims that “in the coming days the American people will learn that the Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib.”
According to his intelligence sources, this is what actually happened:

Col. Lang went on to say, “This attack was a violation of international law. Donald Trump authorized an unjustified attack on a sovereign country. What is even more disturbing is that people like Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, and NSA Director General McMaster went along with this charade. Frontline troops know the truth. These facts will eventually come out. Donald Trump will most likely not finish his term as President. He will be impeached, I believe, once Congress is presented with irrefutable proof that he ignored and rejected intelligence that did not support the myth that Syria attacked with chemical weapons.”
Additionally, the Russian Ministry of Defense stated that legitimate Syrian air strikes against terrorist targets hit a warehouse used to produce and store shells containing chemical gas, which were allegedly being sent to Iraq.
On Sunday, the joint command center reiterated that the US cruise missile strike would not deter it from “liberating” Syria and that the US military presence in the north of the country was essentially an illegal “occupation” of a sovereign country.
The establishment wants you to believe that Assad was so emboldened by Sec. of State Rex Tillerson saying this week Syrians should decide their own fate, that on the eve of major peace negotiations and while having the upper hand on the ground in the war, he decided it was time to start using banned chemical weapons in spite of the certain backlash and outcry that would come from the international community. One essentially has to believe that he threw all rational thought out the window.
The U.S. march to war, under the guise of humanitarian intervention — when there is no credible evidence of the Syrian military being behind the chemical gas deaths — is most certainly the mark of an imperial power looking to expand the empire’s geopolitical control.

NASA To Begin Human Testing For Age-Reversing Pill In Just A Few Months

NASA To Begin Human Testing For Age-Reversing Pill In Just A Few Months

This anti-aging pill could be the answer for everyone, even cancer survivors and astronauts.
Credit: PHX News
Anti-aging has been on the minds of humans for a long time, despite the fact that humans’ life expectancy has doubled that of our near-ancestors; or, perhaps, our interest in anti-aging has increased because we now live longer. As we age, our ever-replicating cells begin to die faster than they are being produced, resulting in our decreasing ability to recover from any wear and tear our body goes through. Depending on our DNA and how well we take care of our bodies, our cells can die sooner or later than the average person.
The University of New South Wales has been working on figuring out how to repair damaged cells that are a result of aging and radiation, which is a serious problem for both astronauts, people that undergo radiation treatments for cancer, and those that frequently travel or are subject to many x-rays because of some chronic illness.
In a nutshell, the ‘call signaling’ molecule is called NAD+ and its diminishing level in every cell of the body is what leads to mitochondrial deterioration. It possesses a key role in protein interactions, which control DNA repair, so researchers turned towards boosting NAD+ to repair cells. When treating mice with NMN, a NAD+ booster, the results showed an improvement in the cells’ ability to repair the damaged DNA, essentially reversing the effects of aging.
Credit: NASA

“This is the closest we are to a safe and effective anti-ageing drug that’s perhaps only three to five years away from being on the market if the trials go well. In the study,  cells of old mice were indistinguishable from the young mice after just one week of treatment,” said lead author Professor David Sinclair.
NASA’s interest was piqued when hearing about the positive results of these mice trials because their astronauts are exposed to cosmic radiation during even short trips into space. On their short missions, astronauts experience accelerated aging due to their exposure and return with muscle weakness, memory loss and other symptoms. On longer trips, such as those to Mars, these health problems would only worsen, causing 5 percent of their cells to die and increasing their risk of getting cancer to nearly 100 percent.
In NASA’s iTech competition at the end of last year, Professor Sinclair and his team won the entire competition out of 300 entries. With the success in treatment of mice, the human trials are set to begin within the next 5 months, which could mean that this could be on the market very soon.