חדשות וירוס TV - מהדורה 632 • דיקטטורה אקולוגית • 01-01-2023
- - - לא מוגה! - - -
We really want to achieve climate neutrality, we need to change our behavior in all these areas of life. That means that carbon prices will have to rise considerably in order to nudge people to change their behavior. And here's the kicker. I know that eco-dictatorship is a nasty word, but we may have to ask ourselves the question whether and to what extent we may be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship in the form of regulatory law in order to move towards climate neutrality. Eco-dictatorship.
Right there in black and white. That's them admitting it. Eco-dictatorship. I don't really have to tell you what the word dictatorship means, do I. Remember what סטנלי ג'ונסון said about נט-זירו?
And if that means, actually, some of us are told why you can't go on a plane,
that's my name. That's part of the national plan. Again, hidden in plain side, it's all a massive con. They just want absolute technוקרטית control over your every activity.
Shockingly, since people started drawing attention to this research paper. It's mysteriously crashed and no one can see it anymore. Just a coincidence, I'm sure. I'm sure that the guy who wrote this paper,
Eric היימן, has been sufficiently repרמנד.
Eric, don't tell them what we're actually planning to do.
People might start waking up quicker. They might begin to realize the agenda and start doing something to resist it. Eric!
We can't have that.
This right here is what's known as an ingrediention.
It's legally required to be printed on the packaging of food items.
And if you happen to be one of those people who stands in the aisles at the supermarket looking for the names of ingredients that you can't pronounce and therefore you don't want to ingest into your body,
well, then you've most likely come across the names of several ingredients that,
perhaps unbeknown to you,
are actually made using nanotechnology.
ספציפית,
they are made through a process which converts things like silver,
copper, gold,
aluminum,
silicon,
carbon,
as well as different metal oxides into tiny,
tiny,
tiny,
atom size particles that are quite literally one billionth of a meter in size.
If you want a visual for how small that is,
up on screen is a graph from the national center for electron microscopy and it shows you how a strand of DNA, which is about 2 nanometers in diameter,
is about a thousand times smaller than a bacteria organism and about a million times smaller than a rain drop.
That is to say, these nanoparticles in our food are very very small.
עכשיו, כמה שעוד מיני ה-nano-sized ingredients that you might be able to find in your cupboard right now,
אם אתה תראה,
include things like titanium dioxide,
which is used to increase the whiteness of things like milk, yogurt and sugar,
you might find silicon oxide, which is added as an anti-cacking agent,
you might find iron and zinc dioxide, which are added to increase in the nutritional value,
you might find different silver derivatives, which are added for sterililizing properties,
and you might find a host of other ingredients,
like calcium carbonate,
tri-calcium phosphates, and so on and so forth.
The list is right along.
אגב,
לפעמים,
כדי להסביר את הנושא הזה במיוחד פה,
למי להתחיל אותך עכשיו ולהסביר לכם מה זה עושה כל הזמן.
מתחילים ב-1990,
אז בעד 34 שנים לפעמים,
נאנוטכנולוגיה התקבלה גדולה בפרודקציה של הפרודפרפס.
זאת אומרת,
לציינת ישראלים שמחירים את הקמפוננטים האלה הם יכולים לקבל את החיים הרבה יותר,
הם יכולים לקבל את החיים הרבה יותר,
קרימי הרבה יותר,
והם אפילו יכולים להשתמש בזה יותר גדול.
ובסגרת שקל להשתמש בזה לתאכול עצמו,
כשישהו כמה מנופקציות גם נעלמו את הננו-פרטיקלים לתאכולת החיים הרבה יותר.
רק לאחרונה,
על ספקטן,
אתה יכול לראות מלחמת קרן שתוצאה נאנוטכנולוגיה לציינת,
אסצליחו כאילו להשתמש במלחמה של המלח שיש בו.
וכפי שאתה רואה,
הקולר של המבחמת בעבודה של המלחמה שיש בו.
For the more, different researchers also found that adding these nanotized additives to some medicines made them more effective.
However,
according to more and more consumer protection groups, as well as different health experts,
well, there appears to be a catch,
which is that while these nanotitels can provide a myriad of benefits,
they might come at a price.
And that price is our health.
כן, אתה רואה,
these particles are so small,
so tiny,
that studies,
כמו שהם כאן, שאתם יכולים לראות על סקרן כצוי,
show that they can actually bridge the blood-brain barrier.
And the ironic part is that the researchers in that study,
they were actually looking into this function of nanotices in order to treat neurology diseases.
Because in order to treat them,
they actually need medication that can breach the blood-brain barrier.
אבל כשזה יעבור לאדם,
למשל, כשזה יעבור לאדם לרחובה של רגישה של רגישה,
זה לא יעבור לאחרונה של האנגרידים שמישהו חייב עליהם.
אחרבה יותר מלחובה לבריאות בלוד-ברן,
other studies have shown that these particles are also able to circulate throughout the body,
to get into and get absorbed by the bloodstream in different organs.
They have the potential to penetrate our cell walls,
and then they might also,
at least,
potentially, create inflammation and disease.
Here is, for instance, what Dr. Geerge Pירגיאו-טאקיס,
who is a researcher with the Harvard school for public health,
here is what he said regarding this matter.
They may pass through the lining of the gut and enter the bloodstream,
which may trigger an inflammatory or an immune response.
They may also build up in various parts of the body,
including the lungs,
the heart and reproductive organs.
כמו כן, דוקטור רולף הלדן,
who is the director of the center for environmental health engineering over at Arizona State University,
he was quoted in a recent article as saying this,
we really don't know what the impact of these particles is.
Human exposure is increasing and we lack the tools to even measure what is arriving in our bodies,
where it is deposited and what it does there.
אז הוא actually went on to compare this unknown impact of nanoparticles to Asbestos.
אסבסטוס itself is relatively בניין.
It's an inorganic material,
what makes it toxic and makes it kill 90,000 people a year,
is that it has particles that lodges in human tissue.
פורתרומה,
there was a study published in July 2020 by researchers over at the University of Massachusetts in A�הרס.
And in the study,
they were specifically researching the effects of titanium dioxide,
which is one of the most well-known additives.
It's commonly added to things like gum,
candy,
drinks, milk, desserts, and so on.
And what these researchers did,
was that they gave titanium dioxide to two different groups של מייס.
And in order to isolate the effect,
ספציפית לננו-פרטיקל,
one גבוה של מייס היה גדול מלחמת דיאטה,
והאחר גבוה של מייס היה גדול מלחמת דיאטה.
ומה שהיינו עכשיו,
שבין הגבוהות שהיו גבוהות התחיימו את הבקטיריה שלהם,
גם בהצלחה של קולן,
שיכול להיות לאבדמיאנל פן וגם דייריה.
ואילו שבין גבוה של מייס יימנו את אימפלומה,
שהמייס הווישה גבוהה גבוהה גבוהה גבוהה היו סימפלומים יותר גדולים.
עכשיו, אתה יכול לראות את הסטודנטים ואתה יכול לומר,
היי, רומן, זה טוב,
אבל אם הטוברטיקלים האלה היו מתחילים בפרודקציה של הפרודקציה ה-1990 והם נמצאים בכל כך יותר מ-2,000 אימפלגים אחרים,
אז למה אתם קיימים סטודנטים על מייס?
מה עם סטודנטים על הומנים?
אוקיי, זו השאלה מיליון-דולר.
כי כשתראי על הסיטואציה,
אתה חושב שבאנגלית המדינה לא יכולה להעלות את הסיטואציה החודשית להכניס את הדרכים האלה לתוכניות שאנחנו מכירים על המקומות שלנו בלי להכניס את הטוברט הזה.
ואם אתה חושב שזה, אז אתה תהיה רק נכון.
כי כשזה יחד,
ה-FDA,
שכמובן שהאנגלית המחירה עם המחירות האלה,
הם עצמם להמשיך את הטכנולוגיה הזאת,
והם בעצם משתמשים בלחובות בין הבחירותים הפוטנטיים
ומתגונות את הריסקים שהננו-פרטיקים האלה בעצם עושים.
וכפי שעומדים עכשיו,
ה-FDA מכירים ננו-פרטיקלים בין אדם עם איזו דזכנית שנקרא גראס,
שכוונת ג'נרלית למחירות האנגלית.
כפי שהמנופקציה כבר עושה את הטכנולוגיה הזאת במצב הראשון,
אז הם יכולים לעשות את זה במצב הראשון שלנו.
זאת אומרת, אם נדמה לי שהמנופקציה שלאנגלית טיטניום דיוקסיד כאנגלית במצב הראשון,
אז הם יכולים גם לקבל טיטניום דיוקסיד ננו-פרטיקלים בסריאל שלהם וגם ה-FDA ינדלו את הסריאל כהיה גראס.
Here's specifically what a-guidance document from the FDA said in this matter.
And just for a reference, this document was released all the way back in 2007.
The FDA's Nanotechnology Task Force concluded that the agencies authorities are generally comprehensive for products subject to pre-market authorization requirements,
such as drugs,
ביולוגייקל products,
devices and food and color additives,
and that these authorities give the FDA the ability to obtain
detailed scientific information needed to review the safety and as appropriate the effectiveness of the products.
For products not subject to pre-market authorization requirements,
such as dietary supplements,
cosmetics and food ingredients that are generally recognized as safe, otherwise known as GRAS,
manufacturers are generally not required to submit data to the FDA prior to marketing,
and the agency's oversight capacity is less comprehensive.
meaning,
again, that the FDA's requirement for reviewing and confirming the safety and efficacy of nanotכנולוגי ingredients
only applies to a certain subset of food related products.
And so, if something is already recognized as being generally safe,
then the nanoparticle derivative of that same substance is also generally assumed to be safe.
However, the reason that this is so troubling is,
quite frankly, rather obvious,
given the fact that the sole purpose of using these nanotכנולוגיות
is because it's known that certain substances behave radically different at the nanovable than they do at the much larger levels.
And so,
for the FDA to admit that ingredients that have previously received the grass label are exempt from
screening is concerning to say the least.
Because if they're not going to look into the safety and the potential dangers of ingesting these nanoparticles,
well, then, who will?
And the answer appears to be the manufacturers themselves.
Because further down in this document from the FDA,
ספציפית,
על פייש 33,
יש איזה סאב-סקציה שקוראים,
פרויקטים אינם סובייקטים בפריא-מרקט אופריזיישם.
ובאיזו סאב-סקציה היא אומרת כך,
אבל
המנפקציות עדיין חשובים להשיג שהפרויקטים שהם מרקטים הם סייחים.
For example,
cosmetic manufacturers are required to ensure the safety of their products,
but are not required to provide safety data to the FDA.
In light of the evolving state of the science,
the task force believes an appropriate course of action at this time would be for the agency to work with manufacturers of these products
and assist them in identifying data to substantiate the safety of products containing nanos-scale materials,
including chronic toxicity and other long-term toxicity data as appropriate.
And so you see,
the FDA appears to recognize the potential dangers of these nanoparticles,
but then they go on to suggest that it is still the manufacturers own responsibility to ensure that their products are safe.
And so what the FDA's plan appears to be,
at least according to their own guidance,
is to establish some sort of ad-hoc relationships with the different product manufacturers
in order to pull together the right data to demonstrate product safety,
which appears to rely heavily on the good nature of these different companies to be responsible,
which is actually evidence further in another document that the FDA released
back in 2018 called,
The FDA is approach to regulation of nanotכנולוגי products,
and in that document there is a subsection which reads this,
where a statutory authority does not provide for pre-marker review,
the consultation is encouraged to reduce the risk of unintended harm to human or animal health.
In these cases,
FDA relies on publicly available information or voluntarily submitted information,
adverse event reporting, where applicable,
and on post-מרקת surveillance activities to provide oversight,
where nanotכנולוגי applications are involved,
the FDA encourages manufacturers to consult with the agency before taking their products to market.
Such consultation can help the FDA to advise companies to review safety information and design any necessary post-מרקטים סביבות.
עוד פעם,
אני בעצם,
כמובן, אני הניסיון של האנשים שיש את המחירה הראשונה לצערי הרבה אנשים,
אך זה קצר לא לקבל את המחירה שזו נראה שזו ניסיון של הבחירה של הFox לביטחון בוועדה,
כאשר ה-FDA בעצם מתייחס על המחירה של פרופת-דריבות
companies to use this new technology, which fundamentally alter the state of food items with no long-term health studies to support its use.
קודם כול,
one of the main reasons that you likely don't know about these nanot particle ingredients is because of the fact that the FDA's guidance
explicitly states that companies do not have to place nanotכנולוגי ingredients on the labels of their food products.
here specifically what it says in this guidance document,
again,
that came from the FDA in 2007,
quote. Because the current science does not support a-fining that classes of products with nano-scale materials necessarily present greater safety concerns than classes of products without nano-scale materials,
the FDA nanotכנולוגי task force does not believe there is a basis for saying that,
as a general matter,
a product containing nano-scale materials must be labeled as such.
therefore,
the task force is not recommending that the agency requires such labeling at this time.
instead,
the task force recommends that the agency take the following
action address on a case by case basis whether labeling must or may contain information on the use of nanot
scale materials. That is, quite frankly, rather cool. The recommendation is that, since the science doesn't suggest that these food products with nanotek
present a greater safety risk, well, then they don't need a label, even though the same science has no long term studies on the impacts של nanotek.
וכן, אנחנו,
כנראים,
אנחנו,
כנראים,
נפתחים בוודאומים,
which is,
בוודאי,
לא נכון,
the first time that such a thing has happened in recent memory.
For instance,
it took the USDA,
quite literally,
over six full years in order to finally give in and force food companies to label their products if they are genetically modified.
And that came, quite literally, after years of public outcry.
אבל,
at this moment, well,
most people don't even know about this nanotech food technology,
and so there is no real public outcry,
at least not here in America.
רגענטלס,
אם אתם נכנסים עכשיו ל-FDA's website,
ואתם תיכנסו לספציפי לסבסטרציונות הננו-טכנולוגי
programs you will find that after 2007 it took another 13 years for the task force to release another report,
which came out of the year 2020. And in that report,
there is a chart showing that the number of products using nanotechnology submitted to the FDA for approval has increased dramatically over the past 10 and 20 years.
And of course, not all that is food,
it also includes things like cosmetics,
medicine as well as vaccines,
which we will get to it in a moment.
אבל, in regards ל-food,
while the exact number is not exactly known,
experts in this field estimate that somewhere between 1900 and 2500
food products are currently on the market using this nanotechnology.
And this has created kind of an interesting juxtaposition between America and some other countries in the world.
Because despite the fact that there is scant research on the long term effects of ingesting nanoparticles,
as we mentioned earlier, the FDA does not require any food items produced with nanoparticles to be labeled as such.
And instead,
the guidelines that they do have recommend oversight on a case by case basis.
However, other nations are not as open-minded,
you can say, as the FDA.
In fact,
many countries have taken steps to either limit or outright ban either all or some nanotechnology in their nation's food.
For instance,
in the year 2010,
Canada moved to ban the use of all nanotechnology in their organic food production.
Then, in 2011,
the European Union Union began requiringing that all food to be labeled if it contains engineered nanomaterials.
And then going even further,
in 2015, the EU began to require additional testing to ensure proper health safety.
Then, in the year 2020,
France,
which is of course a member of the EU,
they went a step further and they outright banned any foods containing titanium dioxide.
In the summer of 2022,
all of the EU will actually join France and no longer allow titanium dioxide.
The reasoning stems from a quote,
potential concern over accumulation of titanium dioxide particles in the body and possible gino-toxicity.
gino-toxicity is the ability for a substance to damage DNA,
which may lead to cancer.
meaning, if you want that sweet titanium dioxide,
well, you'll have to come all the way here to the U.S. to get it.
And for your reference, titanium dioxide gives the food a nice white color,
and so you can find it in things like milk,
coffee cream, toothpaste, cakes,
pastries, and so on.
עוד פעם, אני לא אומר שזה באמת חשוב,
או אני לא אומר שזה באמת חשוב,
אבל עד היום הזה הוא לא 100% מכיר בכל זאת.
אגב,
מה שמכיר הוא שהFDA עומד עכשיו לתת
these nanoparticles these nanoparticles to be included in our food items without requiring the actual manufacturing companies themselves to place them on the ingredients label?
So take that out for what you will.
אבל השאלה גדולה עומדת,
מה הם ה-Long-Torm האחקטים של these nanoparticles these?
ומכיוון שהם היו ברגעים להקשיבה של קרוצת גבולות-הברית,
הם היו אפקטים על גבולות ה-Long-Torm הראשונה לפני שהם אינגדו אלפים,
או אפילו יותר קצינות,
אלא יותר קצינות, אלפי שהקונסטיאנסטיאנס הוא ש-Nano-Bartarticles
are safe and there are nothing to worry about.
Well, I believe it's worth reminding you that at one time, not too long ago,
LED was used in gasoline.
אסבסטוס was used as a building material,
and 20,000 doctors said that Lucky-Strikes were better than the alternatives.
עכשיו, אני לא קומד לרגע נאנותק וחבוד לדברים כמו LED and אסבסטוס,
אבל לפחות,
אני חושב שאנחנו כאמריקאים יש הבדלות לבין מה שבכבוד של מה שבכבוד של מה שבכבודים האלה הם מנדטוריים לנסות.
אם אתם רוצים ללכת ללכת כלום מהמחקטים שאנחנו דיברנו בדיוק בפרוטוקציה
האפייסוד אני אראה את כל אלה שהם ללכת בדיוק הבדלות לדיון בוודאי הקריאה הזאת.
וגם אני רוצה להודות גדולה למיסטור אריק שומאקר,
שהוא אחד המחקרים פה בפרוטוקציה האחרונה,
והוא מנסה להביא את זה ועושה את כל אלפי הלכות האלה.
ולאחר כך, אם אתם רואים משהו מהמחקר הזה,
אני מקווה שאתם תחזור את הדיוק עם חברי הכנסת שלכם וגם עם חברי הכנסת שלכם,
כדי שהם יוכלו לדעת גם על הפרטיקים האלה שהם
Very likely, Unwittingly Eating
![חדשות וירוס TV - מהדורה 7 • במי פוגעת הקורונה?! לא תאמינו!!! [13.05.2020]](https://shofar.tv/storage/thumb/videos/V012125_150.jpg)
![מיקס קליפים [2024]](/storage/thumb/videos/V018106_150.jpg)
![מיקס קליפים [2023]](/storage/thumb/videos/V017157_150.jpg)
![מיקס קליפים [2020] - עם כתוביות באנגלית](/storage/thumb/videos/V016615_150.jpg)
![חוזרים בעבר - מיקס - חלק 2 [3:30 שעות!]](/storage/thumb/videos/V015619_150.jpg)
![מיקס קליפים [2022] 3 שעות!](/storage/thumb/videos/V015525_150.jpg)
![מיקס קליפים [2021] - עם כתוביות באנגלית](/storage/thumb/videos/V014960_150.jpg)
![הכל יודוך | הרב אמנון יצחק [שיר]](/storage/thumb/videos/V015560_150.jpg)
![ושמחת בימיך | הרב אמנון יצחק [שיר]](/storage/thumb/videos/V015558_150.jpg)
![מחרוזת שירי קפ"ז | הרב אמנון יצחק [שיר]](/storage/thumb/videos/V014860_150.jpg)
![[שיר] נאד נפוח • ביצוע: הרב אמנון יצחק](/storage/thumb/videos/V014415_150.jpg)
