Sally Fallon Morell takes on the Diet Dictocrats
THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS
The use of fossil fuels causes an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), which in turn contributes to a global warming crisis that will wipe out the human race. So say the promoters of climate change hysteria, who claim we must stop drilling for oil and gas, stop eating beef and dairy, stop driving internal combustion cars and freeze in the dark in order to save the planet. However, a new study published in Frontiers (August 11, 2025) reveals that “WV [water vapor] and clouds (for which WV is responsible) dominate the ARE [atmospheric radiative effect], while CO2 contributes only 4-5% to it. Also, anthropogenic CO2 emissions are only 4% of the total, with the vast majority (96%) being natural. Additionally, evidence suggests that changes in temperature precede those in CO2 concentration, thus challenging the assumption that CO2 drives temperature.” In a related study (Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, August 27, 2025), researchers found that the average sea level rise in 2020 was only about 1.6 mm per year or six inches per century, significantly lower than the three to four mm per year claimed by climate scientists. Nor are we going through a period of excessive heat. According to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data (ourworldindata.org/grapher/heat-wave-index-usa), the hottest period in recent memory was the 1930s, almost one hundred years ago. Meanwhile, rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere (now about 420 parts per million) are replenishing levels that were far higher during Earth’s most fertile epoch (naturalnews.com, July 4, 2025) and are contributing to current record crop yields. (Greenhouse growers have found that enriching greenhouse air to 1200 parts per million gives the greatest production.) All this good news hasn’t stopped wealthy “Green Antoinettes”— who think nothing of flying in fuel-hogging private jets to climate conferences in exotic places—from opposing oil and gas drilling needed for development in some of the poorest areas of the world, like parts of Africa, where electricity is absent. Even mainline churches have joined in, calling for policies that mainly hurt the poor (episcopalnewsservice.org, October 17, 2024). How do these actions differ from those of the rich man who refused to share his food with Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)? In modern times, the rich man enjoys blessings he says the poor cannot have—comfort, light, clean clothes, freedom from drudgery and back-breaking labor and a dependable food supply—because of climate change. Woe unto you, hypocrites!
MORE MADNESS
One of the craziest ideas to emerge from the climate change hoax is the drug Bovaer for cows, designed to reduce methane output from their flatulence and burps. U.S. government agencies have classified this drug as a feed additive in order to fast-track the approval process. In October, the government of Denmark decreed that Danish farmers must add Bovaer to their cattle feed. In the U.S., the Department of Agriculture awarded almost twenty-three million of your tax dollars to promote its use in California, Utah and Idaho; dairy farmers in Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, Vermont and New York are already using it. The problem is, Bovaer is hurting the cows—as would be expected from any drug that upsets basic digestive processes. Farmers across Denmark are reporting cows suffering from stomach cramps, fevers, miscarriages, sudden collapse and dramatic reduction in milk production. A New Zealand Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) study found that the product promoted tumor formation in female rats, documenting reproductive toxicity and widespread accumulation in the vital organs, such as the liver, adrenal glands and reproductive organs. And guess what! Almost 17 percent of the drug is excreted in the milk—the largest pathway of elimination—meaning that humans as well as cows will be consuming it. The FDA warns that Bovaer is “not for human use” because it “may damage male fertility and reproductive organs, is potentially harmful when inhaled, and is a skin and eye irritant” (jonfleetwood.substack.com). But not to worry, the climate change alarmists want to reduce the world’s population anyway.
INVESTING IN LONGEVITY
In the Golden Age, the ultrawealthy built libraries, museums and concert halls. Today’s billionaires are investing in longevity. In the past twenty-five years, tech giants like Peter Thiel, Yuri Milner and Marc Andreessen have put more than five billion dollars into biotech firms promising a longer life and youthfulness into great age. “At seventy, someone should feel like a forty-year-old,” says longevity investor Vinod Khosla (as most of us older WAPF-ers do). The biggest buzz in the longevity stakes is the quest for drugs (using artificial intelligence!) to “rejuvenate cells.” Another tactic is to develop a diet “designed to mimic the effects of fasting” (Wall Street Journal, September 8, 2025). You really have to feel kind of sorry for these guys, who don’t seem to have the sense to look into the diets of healthy primitive peoples and who are so afraid of death that they are willing to spend decades living in decrepit bodies. If only they realized that it would be a lot more fun (and less expensive) to stay young and live long by eating caviar and foie gras!
COVID FALLOUT
A November 2023 Rasmussen survey of more than one thousand American adults found that 24 percent said they knew someone who died from the side effects of the Covid-19 shots; an earlier Rasmussen poll (March 2023) found that 10 percent said a member of their household died from the side effects of the Covid-19 shots (rasmussenreports.com). Meanwhile, diagnoses of breast cancer have surged by over 1000 percent among American women, especially younger women, who received the Covid injection (slaynews.com February 4, 2025). From 2019 to 2021, about twenty-six thousand cases of breast cancer occurred each year, a number that surged to almost three hundred thousand in 2023, a 1042.3 percent spike. According to Wall Street data analyst Edward Dowd, the insurance industry is now seeing up to five thousand deaths linked to the Covid mRNA shots every week (slaynews.com, July 28, 2025). Says Dowd, “30-50-year-olds are dropping dead… The victims fear backlash or can’t accept they were misled.” In confirmation, several population cohort studies report increased cancer risks following Covid injection: in Italy, a study tracking nearly three hundred thousand residents for thirty months revealed that the shots significantly increased the risk of cancer, especially breast cancer, bladder cancer and colorectal cancer; and a larger study from South Korea linked significant increases in multiple major cancers among the vaccinated (jonrappoport.substack.com, October 5, 2025). Of course, you will never read about this in the major media, but health care workers are taking notice. The number of health care workers receiving the Covid and flu shots during the 2023-2024 cold and flu season greatly declined. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), only 15.3 percent of acute hospital workers and 10.5 percent of nursing home personnel received a Covid shot during the 2023-2024 season. Flu vaccine rates are higher at 80.7 percent for acute care hospital personnel and 45.4 percent for nursing home personnel, but still persistently below the levels prepandemic, when, for example, 91 percent of hospital workers received the flu vaccine. The reason: a tremendous erosion of trust in health agencies (childrenshealthdefense.org, November 4, 2024).
NO MORE BLACK BOX
In 2003, results from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study found that women taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT) had a greater risk of cardiovascular disease, thromboembolism, breast and endometrial cancer and probably dementia. As a result, the FDA stipulated a black box warning for HRT. The result was a steep decline in the use of HRT for pre- and postmenopausal women. But with uptake of vaccines waning, and more patients refusing statin drugs, the pharmaceutical industry needs another blockbuster—a category of drugs that millions of patients take every day for many years—at least this is the suspicion of what lies behind the FDA announcement that the agency has initiated removal of black box warnings from HRT products (www.hhs.gov, November 10. 2025). Citing research from 1996 through 2004—in other words, nothing new—the new recommendation is for all women to start taking HRT ten years before menopause. Says the agency: “The FDA is requesting that companies make changes to the labeling to provide current, accurate and balanced information about the benefits and risks of these drugs, so women, in consultation with their healthcare providers, can make the best decisions for their health.” With the black box warning removed, it’s not hard to guess what health care providers will recommend.
EVIDENCE OF HARM
A comprehensive analysis by the McCullough Foundation, “Determinants of Autism Spectrum Disorder” (bit.ly/determinantsofautism), looks at all the factors associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and concludes “Combination and early-timed routine childhood vaccination constitutes the most significant modifiable risk factor for ASD.” In other words, this heartbreaking condition usually occurs after a baby is given vaccines at an early age or more than one vaccination at a time. Another landmark study, “Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short- and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study,” by the Henry Ford Health System in Michigan (www.hsgac. senate.gov) found that compared to unvaccinated children, those who received one or more vaccines had 329 percent more asthma, 203 percent more atopic disease (rashes), 496 percent more autoimmune disease (like diabetes) and 453 percent more neurodevelopmental disorders, including 228 percent more developmental delays and 347 percent more speech disorders. The authors did not submit the study for publication, but the findings were revealed in attorney Aaron Siri’s book Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines. According to a spokesperson for Henry Ford Health, the report was not published because “it did not meet the rigorous scientific standards we demand as a premier medical research institution.” But according to Siri, “The only real problem with this study—and why it didn’t get submitted for publication—is that its findings did not fit the belief and the policy that ‘vaccines are safe.’”
RESPONSE OF THE AAP
A recent CDC survey found that about 60 percent of parents planned to delay, refuse or were undecided about one or more routine childhood vaccines (JAMA News Open, July 2025). The response of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)? A new policy statement calling for the complete elimination of all nonmedical vaccine exemptions for child care and school attendance. That means no religious exemptions, no philosophical exemptions, only medical exemptions granted under tightly controlled conditions (meaning often impossible to get). Most of the sixty-seven thousand pediatricians who belong to the AAP benefit financially from a high vaccine uptake among their patients.
AN OVERDUE RETRACTION
Critics of the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology call it a “vanity journal that publishes mercenary science created by polluters and producers of toxic chemicals to manufacture uncertainty about the science underlying public health and environmental protections.” Case in point is an April 2000 study, which concluded that glyphosate— the main ingredient in the herbicide Roundup—does not pose a health risk to humans at typical exposure levels. The study has served as a convenient tool as Bayer, the current producer of Roundup, argues that the company should have immunity from any harms the product may cause. On November 28, the journal quietly retracted the study over serious ethical issues, including secret authorship by employees of Monsanto, then owner of the product. It turns out—surprise, surprise—that some of the authors may have received financial compensation for the article and that the influential paper was ghostwritten by Monsanto employees who ignored many papers showing long-term toxicity and carcinogenicity. The retraction should help the plaintiffs currently engaged in lawsuits against Bayer and put the brakes on Bayer’s attempts to gain immunity from state legislators (childrenshealthdefense.org, December 4, 2025).
MORE FOREVER CHEMICALS
While controversy swirls around Bayer’s herbicide Roundup, the EPA has quietly approved ten products containing a chemical called isocycloseram, which kills pest insects by producing uncontrolled neuronal excitation leading to paralysis and death. It will be sprayed on dozens of common crops, including potatoes, tomatoes, almonds, broccoli, oats and citrus fruits. Animal studies cited by the agency itself document liver toxicity and serious reproductive harm, including reduced testicle size and lowered sperm counts. The pesticide is also highly toxic to bees, with potential exposure levels over fifteen hundred times the lethal dose. One more thing: isocycloseram is a “forever chemical,” meaning it persists in the environment (and in our bodies) without breaking down. Glyphosate, as bad as it is, at least degrades in the soil. The approval marks the fifth time the current administration has signed off on a forever-chemical pesticide ingredient. Heaven help us.
🖨️ Print post
Leave a Reply