Nervous Asian battery makers are turning to early-stage cobalt projects in Australia and Canada to lock in supplies of the critical battery ingredient ahead of expected shortages as demand for electric vehicles revs up.
Mine developers say interest from Japanese and Korean firms is particularly strong as they compete with rivals from China, which has built deep supply chain ties with the Democratic Republic of Congo, the worldâ€™s top producer.
The central African country accounts for nearly two-thirds of global cobalt output and production is set to rise despite concerns over the use of child miners and rising royalties.
â€œWe are starting to see the first signs of an arms race to secure long term cobalt supplies,â€� said Joe Kaderavek, chief executive of Australiaâ€™s Cobalt Blue.
â€œWith over 85 percent of new global cobalt supply over the next decade coming from Africa, in a region where the Chinese have entrenched relationships, the Korean and Japanese cobalt processing industries are very focused upon Australian and Canadian projects.â€�
Australia is one of the most oppressive medical police state regimes in the world. The medical tyranny in Australia has even led to the government denying entitlement checks to parents who refuse to have their children subjected to an endless battery of dangerous vaccine injections. Deranged pharma trolls in Australia have been pushing hard to outlaw herbal medicine and force all the citizens of Australia to use toxic, overpriced chemical prescription medications to treat everything.
Jon Rappoport from NoMoreFakeNews.com cites Crazz Files, reporting that the Australian government has rejected the pharma-funded attempt to outlaw natural medicine, reaffirming the efficacy of traditional remedies. This is a surprising and important win for health freedom in Australia, and it reveals that even the “Greens” party in Australia has someone become anti-natural medicine.
Shocking victory for proponents of alternative medicine
by Jon Rappoport
March 8, 2018
Breaking: In Australia, an effort to label all alternative (traditional, complementary) medicine products as “based on pseudoscience” has failed.
Traditional remedies (much older than mainstream medicines) are defended as appropriate, and can include health claims.
The Crazz Files, a major defender of health freedom in Australia, reports: “In a major win, the Federal Government has ignored the Australian Greens and anti-complementary medicine activists like Doctor Ken Harvey…and passed a reform package that protects traditional medicine.”
“The Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill, which passed Parliament on February 15, supports positive claims for complementary medicines based on traditional evidence, and abolishes the current complaints system.”
“Greens voters were shocked to learn Greens Leader and General Practitioner, Senator Dr Richard Di Natale was aligned with skeptics, whose platform is: ‘There is no alternative to [modern] Medicine’.”
“One of his [Dr. Di Natale’s] ‘concerns’ was that people were being ‘misled’ by traditional claims about the effectiveness of complementary medicine. He, and the skeptics, wanted labels on complementary and traditional medicines to state: ’this traditional indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and there is no scientific evidence that this product is effective’.”
“The Minister for Rural Health, Senator Bridget McKenzie, told Di Natale: ‘I think it is offensive and disrespectful to those who practice traditional medicine’.”
“’For some, particularly those using Chinese medicine, the history of practising in that traditional medicine paradigm goes back thousands of years. It’s been extensively refined, practised and documented and in many cases incorporated into mainstream medicine. So, a statement required by the Australian Government that the indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and that there is no scientific evidence will be seen as arrogant and insensitive to those practising and using traditional Chinese medicines,’ Senator McKenzie said.”
All right. Now I want to treat readers to a brief analysis of “modern medicine,” the so-called scientific system that is the “only valid system.” It is the system employed in Australia, America, and virtually all countries in the world.
People who watch the news or read mainstream news have the impression that “scientific” medical research is remarkably valid and always progressing.
Doctors and medical bureaucrats line up to confirm and ceaselessly push this view.
But they are concealing a dark truth.
Let’s go to the record. Here are two editors of two of the most prestigious and respected medical journals in the world. During their long careers, they have read and scrutinized more studies than any doctor, researcher, bureaucrat, or so-called medical blogger. And this is what they have written:
ONE: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
There are many ominous implications in these two statements. I will point out one.
Incompetent, error-filled, and fraudulent studies of medical drugs—for example, published reports on clinical trials of those drugs—would lead one to expect chaos in the field of medical treatment. And by chaos, I mean: the drugs cause widespread death and severe injury.
Again, if a person obtains his news from mainstream sources, he will say, “But I see no evidence of such a vast scandal.”
That is a conspiracy of silence. Because this widespread death and grievous harm HAS been reported. Where? In open-source medical literature.
For example: On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:
Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.
On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.
All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.
On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.
Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?
A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.
Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?
A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).
Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?
Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?
A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.
Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?
A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!
—end of interview excerpt—
Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.
If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.
At least 200 nonwhite invaders whose “asylum” claims were so bogus they were rejected by Australia, have already been “resettled” in the US and at least 1,000 more will soon be on their way, it has emerged.
According to an AP report printed in the Seattle Times, Australia’s prime minister Malcolm Turnbull told reporters that his country “will not consider options” for resettling the fake “refugees” detained on two Pacific Island outposts “until the United States fulfills its promise to take up to 1,250 of them.”
The report went on to say that a year after President Donald Trump agreed to honor an Obama administration deal to take in the bogus “refugees” whose claims had been rejected by Australia, “around 200 had so far found new homes in the United States.”
At a meeting with New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern in Sydney, Turnbull again rejected a longstanding New Zealand offer to accept 150 of the fake refugees.
“We are focused on completing the much larger arrangements with the U.S.,” Turnbull said. “We’ll take that process through to its completion and then we can consider other options.”
The nonwhites are all being moved to the US with the assistance of the United Nations’ “International Organization for Migration” (IOM).
Australia has a policy of not allowing any refugees who try to arrive by boat to settle in the country. It pays neighboring Papua New Guinea and the tiny atoll nation of Nauru to hold around 2,000 nonwhites from Africa, the Middle East and Asia who have attempted to reach Australian shores since 2013.
Ardern replied that: “From New Zealand’s perspective, the status quo remains, the offer remains.”
The Australian government is convinced that the nonwhites will use the New Zealand offer as a back door into Australia, since New Zealand citizens are free to travel to and live in Australia.
This would undermine Australia’s message that refugees who arrive by boat will never be allowed to stay.
Meanwhile, other reports revealed that another 35 of the fake “refugees” left for the US on Sunday, the third group to depart Australia’s offshore immigration centres over the past seven days.
Almost all are single Afghan, Pakistani or Rohingya men, along with one Sri Lankan family and one Bangladeshi.
In exchange for the US considering to “resettle” 1,250 of the invaders, Australia has agreed to take nonwhites from US-run camps in Costa Rica, who have all come from the crime and violence plagued states of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
Something scary is happening down under. Within the next 15 years, an estimated 3 million hectares of untouched forest will be bulldozed. The reason? To make room for the booming livestock industry. In addition to displacing wildlife, this move will exacerbate climate change.
Australia may have large deserts, but it also boasts a rich biodiversity. The Guardian reports that nearly 8 percent of all Earth’s plant and animal species live on the continent. Furthermore, about 85 percent of the country’s plants, 84 percent of its mammals, and 45 percent of its birds are found nowhere else.
Most of the land clearing will occur in Queensland. Already, trees there are being bulldozed at an astonishing rate. Approximately 395,000 hectares of native vegetation was cleared there in 2015-2016 — 33 percent more than the previous year. Experts believe the rate will only increase in coming years.
Every year, Queensland clears more land than the rest of Australia put together. In fact, the rate at which it is eradicating vegetationis comparable with the deforestation that occurs in the Brazilian Amazon. Queensland clears about 0.45 percent of its remaining wooded areas, whereas Brazil bulldozes 0.25 percent of its part of the Amazon each year.
Blame is being placed on the government, which has failed to introduce restrictions or apply existing restrictions. The recently re-elected Queensland Labor government has promised to change the laws, but in the meantime, other states have already begun to follow in Queensland’s footsteps. For instance, some of Australia’s oldest trees are being cut down for timber by a state-owned company in Victoria. And, Tasmania just signed up to allow more logging in its national parks, at least until 2037. Reportedly, both NSW and Victoria are considering the same.
Eastern Australia is now considered a global deforestation hotspot — the only one in the developed world. As a result, Australia is likely to lose 3 million hectares (or over 7.4 million acres) of trees by 2030, says WWF’s Martin Taylor. This will put everything Australians love at risk.
“If you care about the Great Barrier Reef, then that’s what you care about,” said Taylor. He warned that the amount of land clearing, combined with climate change, will increase the amount of sediment that flows into rivers. This will eventually impact the coral by starving them of light and decreasing their resilience to other harms.
According to WWF, 45 million animals are killed each year in Queensland from the bulldozing of their habitat. “People have very strong feelings about cruelty and mistreatment of animals,” Taylor said. “So what must they think of that then? That we’re bulldozing 45 million animals to death every year?”
“If you care about koalas, and if you care about Australian wildlife – if you want your kids to see them – then that’s what you care about,” he added.
What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!
Once again we risk our natural acquired immunity as we introduce another vaccine to young babies.
On February 2, the Australian government announced that the new meningococcal vaccine (Nimenrix) which covers A, C, W and Y strains (MenACWY) will be added to the National Immunization Program ahead of the next peak meningococcal season. This addition of yet another vaccine to Australia’s increasingly busy vaccination schedule reinforces the Australian government’s non-negotiable commitment to the vaccination of all Australian children.
What is meningococcal disease?
Meningococcal disease is a very scary disease that can cause death within hours if not recognized and treated in time by antibiotic therapy. It is caused by a number of different strains of the bacterium Neisseria meningitidis most commonly by the serogroups A, B, C, W and Y.
There are two different forms of the disease: Meningitis which is inflammation of the membranes around the brain and spinal cord, and Septicaemia, a serious bloodstream infection. Although it is a serious disease, it is rare. The number of cases of meningococcal disease in Australia in 2016 were 252. Of those who suffer invasive meningococcal disease up to one in 10 die and among those who survive 20% will have permanent disabilities which include loss of limbs, sight and hearing problems and severe brain damage. The mainstream media is renown for treating the fearful public with stories of toddlers struck down with the ‘deadly disease’ told by understandably emotional parents anxious to raise awareness and who urge the government to act and put the meningococcal vaccine on the immunization schedule.
The parents of a Tasmanian toddler who recently contracted the deadly meningococcal W disease are sickened their son could have been immunized but they did not realize a vaccination existed.
How is meningococcal disease spread?
The bacterium Neisseria meningitidisis spread through coughing, sneezing or close contact with infected people.
Who is at risk of this disease?
The highest incidence of meningococcal disease occurs in children less than 5 years and adolescents aged 15–19 years. Other risk factors include genetic factors, smoking, living in crowded conditions such as the military and prisons, a recent respiratory illness, alcohol use and underlying chronic medical conditions such as immune deficiency.
Symptoms include headache, rash, fever ,vomiting, stiff neck , extreme fatigue, convulsions and irritability.
Meningococcal disease is an awful disease but does it warrant another vaccine added to the already aggressive vaccination program. By the time a child is five, s/he will have received a total of 44 vaccine doses. This rises to 49 vaccine doses when the recommended yearly influenza vaccines are included.
Inspiration and all our best content, straight to your inbox.
At any given time, about 20 to 40 percent of Americans are asymptomatically colonizing meningococcal organisms in their nasal passages and throats, which throughout life boosts innate immunity to invasive meningococcal infection. Mothers, who have innate immunity, transfer maternal antibodies to their newborns to protect them in the first few months of life until babies can make their own antibodies. By the time American children enter adolescence, the vast majority have asymptomatically developed immunity that protects them.
Humans have been in contact with meningococcal bacteria for thousands of years. It is rare that they cause illness. But there is no discussion about the need for this new vaccine. Stories about the latest victim to the disease are distributed widely followed by empathetic voices who call for a new vaccine to prevent any future deaths.
The meningococcal vaccine should be available for anyone who wants to use it but it should not be compulsory. However whenever a vaccine is added to the schedule it becomes compulsory in order to access financial benefits, and admittance to childcare and pre-school, as is already the case for childhood vaccinations in Australia.
There must be other ways to find those who are more vulnerable to the disease such as those who smoke and others who are under nourished and attempts made to mitigate the risks that they face from the disease.
According to Barbara Loe Fisher from the National Vaccine Information Centre. Meningococcal vaccines have been found to be at best only about 58% effective within 2-5 years after the adolescent had got the shot.
So what this means is that boosters will be given if vaccine immunity is to be maintained. Or we could go back to naturally acquired immunity which lasts a lifetime.
As more vaccines are rapidly added to the vaccination schedule what is happening to natural immunity? In Vaccination Illusion: How vaccination compromises our natural immunity and what we can do to regain our health, Tetyana Obukhanych, Ph.D. discusses how
Vaccination does not lead to permanent immunity
She explains how before the practice of vaccination:
Infants were protected from these diseases by maternal immunity, whereas adults were protected by their own life-long immunity, which they had acquired in the childhood. The use of vaccines changed this
Today, mothers who are vaccinated are unable to pass valuable protective antibodies on to their babies. Take the case of the MMR vaccine which has been available since the 1960s. Prior to this time, babies had maternal protection from measles via their unvaccinated mothers. They were protected from such infectious diseases by the maternal influence until they were older and able to cope with a case of the wild measles which would give them life long immunity. This sadly is no longer the case and new young mothers who were vaccinated with the MMR and everything else on the schedule are unable to pass on natural immunity.
The situation is grave and benefits no-one but those who profit from the vaccine industry. Vaccination has only been around for over 200 years. It is time to admit the mistake that it is.
Sustainability isn’t the future — it is now. On Tuesday, a Qantas plane became the first in the world to be partly powered by mustard seeds. After taking off from the United States, the aircraft landed in Melbourne, Australia in Tuesday.
The Guardian reports that the Boeing Dreamliner 787-9 used a blended fuel that was 10 percent derived from the brassica carinata, an industrial type of mustard seed that can function as a fallow crop. This reduced carbon emissions by 7 percent compared with the airline’s usual flight over the typical LA to Melbourne route. When compared pound for pound with jet fuel, the mustard seed biogas reduces emissions by 80 percent over the fuel’s entire life cycle.
“Almost within a day after harvesting, they can press the oil out in their own shed and use it straight into their tractors,” said Daniel Tan of the University of Sydney. The agriculture expert added that mustard seed can double as a valuable crops and a source of fuel for farmers who seek to cultivate crops in a more sustainable fashion.
“Basically it’s good for growing, and also farmers can also use it. If they grow wheat every year it’s not good for the soil. They can grow mustard seed in between the wheat crops, every second or third year, press the oil and use it locally or export it for use in aviation fuel,” added Tan.
“A lot of the biodiesel now being processed is actually from waste oil from places like fish and chip shops. A lot of these oils can be processed, but the problem is that they can’t get consistent supply. The big problem with the biodisel industry in Australia is mainly the continuity of supply.”
One hectare, or approximately 2.5 miles, can be used to produce an astonishing 400 liters of aviation fuel or 1,400 liters of renewable diesel, reports The Guardian.
This isn’t the first progressive move made by Qantas. In 2012, the airline partnered with Jetstar to trial Australia’s first domestic biofuel flights with a blend comprised of 50 percent cooking oil. It successfully flew from Sydney to Adelaide and from Melbourne to Hobart. By 2020, Qantas aims to use a renewable fuel for all Los Angeles-based flights, supplied by US company SG Preston. Qantas says the fuel does not necessarily need to be derived from mustard seeds.
In the near future, Qantas will set up an Australian biorefinery in partnership with Agrisoma BIosciences. The Canadian company extracted the carinate-derived fuel for this latest flight. According to a Qantas spokesperson, biofuel blends are capped at 50 percent. However, new specifications could permit 100 percent biofuel flights in the future.
In 2017, air travel accounted for2.5% of all carbon dioxide emissions. By 2050, the total emissions are expected to quadruple. By relying on biofuels, airlines are helping to reduce carbon emissions and, as a result, air pollution.
What are your thoughts?Please comment below and share this news!
In addition to 90-percent regular jet fuel, the airplane burned 10 percent of blended fuel, which has been derived from brassica carinata, an industrial type of mustard seed that functions as a fallow crop. The seed can be grown by farmers in between regular crop cycles. One hectare of seeds yields 400 liters of biofuel and 1400 liters of renewable diesel.
Right now, over the Pacific Ocean, a Qantas 787 is on its way to Melbourne from LA.
Why are we telling you this? The Boeing jet is being partially fueled by 24,000 kg of mustard seed. It’s the first ever U.S.-Australia biofuel flight.
The process has been developed by Canadian agricultural-technology company Agrisoma Biosciences. According to its CEO Steve Fabijanski, mustard seeds are not only easily converted into jet fuel, but there are other advantages including producing animal meal after the oil extraction.
“It’s a tough crop. It grows where other crops won’t grow. It doesn’t need much water and it’s well understood by farmers,” he said as cited by the Australian website Traveller. “They can grow it and do well with it.”
Carinata-derived fuel reportedly offers more than 80 percent reduction in carbon emissions compared with traditional jet fuel.
Qantas’ historic flight comes as the airline was named the least efficient carrier in the region. The International Council on Clean Transportation reported this month that the airline burnt the most carbon of major airlines that fly across the Pacific.
The CEO of Qantas International, Alison Webster, said that despite the unusual fuel, Monday’s flight would be routine.
“The biofuel goes through exactly the same certification and tests as standard aviation,” which includes engineering, safety and performance checks.
The company aims to have flights running regularly on biofuel (not necessarily carinata-derived fuel) by 2020. According to its spokeswoman, Qantas plans setting up an Australian biorefinery in the near future in partnership with Agrisoma Biosciences.