Formula Based Asset Allocation***
STOCKS *** BONDS *** GOLD *** CASH................................
GeoPolitics/Economics...Removing Theory from Conspiracies
Since the
year 2000 stocks (S&P 500) total return - dividends reinvested - is up 493%.
Gold since the same time period is up 1,046%!
The Dow
to Gold Ratio is at a mid point at 12 to 1.
The mean is 10 to 1 with a high probability going to 3 to 1 and even
possibility of 1 to 1. At those levels
gold will be soaring with stocks across the board with prices (valuations) so
low they will be at the give-away-table.
From High to Low - Since Year 2000
+ 1046.1% Gold
+ 358.1% Transports
+ 328.7% Nasdaq
+ 279.0% S&P 500
+ 264.5% Utilities + 253.7% Dow + 127.4% Oil
+ 90.7%Swiss Franc
+ 27.8% 30yr Treasury Bonds December 1999 Shiller PE10 was 44.19 August 2000 S&P 500 dividend yield was 1.11% Shiller PE10 5-1-25 is 34.47 100% above its mean (17.21) since 1871.
S&P 500 dividend yield 3-1-25 is 1.35% 68% below its mean (4.23%) since 1871.
[Shiller PE10 & dividend yield is reported using data from the beginning or end of the month when I update. It may or may not exactly be the first or last trading day of the month.]
Stock-earnings yield/bond yield = 54% of present bond yield.
Dividend yield/bond yield = 25% of the present bond yield.
*Measured by valuations. Year 2000 Shiller PE peaked at 44.19 with a scant S&P 500 dividend yield at 1.11%. These high Shiller PE or low dividend yield has not been surpassed since 1871.
Stock-earnings yield (December 1999) was 2.26%. High grade corporate bonds were in the 7% range in abundance. This would push my EYC ratio - [see Ben Graham's Corner] - at 0.36! Anything below 0.50 is in crash alert range.
***************************
It is easily seen in the year 2000 the Nasdaq was horribly overvalued and gold was on the give away table, such lopsided returns 20+ years later!
Active Allocation Bands (excluding cash) 0% to 50%
46% - Cash -Short Term Bond Index - VBIRX
32% -Gold- Global Capital Cycles Fund - VGPMX **
22% -Lt. Bonds- Long Term Bond Index - VBLTX
0% -Stocks- Total Stock Market Index - VTSAX
[See Disclaimer]
** Vanguard's Global Capital Cycles Fund maintains 25%+ in precious metal equities the remainder are domestic or international companies they believe will perform well during times of world wide stress or economic declines.
Margin of Safety!
Central Concept of Investment for the purchase of Common Stocks.
"The danger to investors lies in concentrating their purchases in the upper levels of the market..."
Lump Sum is any dollar amount greater than one year salary.
Over a ten-year period the typical excess of stock earnings power over bond interest may aggregate 4/3 of the price paid. This figure is sufficient to provide a very real margin of safety--which, under favorable conditions, will prevent or minimize a loss...If the purchases are made at the average level of the market over a span of years, the prices paid should carry with them assurance of an adequate margin of safety. The danger to investors lies in concentrating their purchases in the upper levels of the market.....
Common Sense Investing: The Papers of Benjamin Graham Benjamin Graham
%Stock Allocation 0%(rounded) % Bond Allocation 100% (rounded)
Current Asset: Vanguard Long-Term Investment Grade Bond Fund
Logic behind this approach:
--As the stock market becomes more expensive, a conservative investor's stock allocation should go down. The rationale recognizes the reduced expected future returns for stocks, and the increasing risk.
--The formula acknowledges the increased likelihood of the market falling from current levels based on historical valuation levels and regression to the mean, rather than from volatility. Many agree this is the key to value investing.
Please note there is controversy regarding the divisor (Avg. PE10). The average since 1881 as reported by Multpl.com is 16.70. However, Larry Swedroe and others believe that using a revised Shiller P/E mean of 19.6 , the number since 1960 ( a 53-year period), reflects more modern accounting procedures.
DYI adheres to the long view where over time the legacy (prior 1959) values will be absorbed into the average. Also it can be said with just as much vigor the last 25 years corporate America has been noted for accounting irregularities. So....If you use the higher or lower number, or average them, you'll be within the guide posts of value. Please note: I changed the formula when the Shiller PE10 is trading at it's mean - stocks and bonds will be at 50% - 50% representing Ben Graham's Defensive investor starting point; only deviating from that norm as valuations rise or fall.
Current Allocation:
Vanguard Long Term Investment Grade Bond Fund
Possible Allocations to Bonds vs Stocks:
Bonds %
100%+ Vanguard Short Term Investment Grade Bond Fund
99% to 65% Wellesley Income Fund
64% to 35% 1/2 Wellesley Income Fund - 1/2 Wellington Fund
34% to 0% Equity Income Fund
DYI
This blog site is not a registered financial advisor, broker or securities dealer and The Dividend Yield Investor is not responsible for what you do with your money.
This site strives for the highest standards of accuracy; however ERRORS AND OMISSIONS ARE ACCEPTED!
The Dividend Yield Investor is a blog site for entertainment and educational purposes ONLY.
The Dividend Yield Investor shall not be held liable for any loss and/or damages from the information herein.
Use this site at your own risk.
PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS.
A 50% decline
the market would remain over valued. A
65% Decline Stocks will only be marginally undervalued!
Monday, April 28, 2025
There are
five stages of the squeeze out.
The U.S.
and EU are beginning stage 3.
The U.K
has begun stage 4.
Stage one:
The rich starts to accumulate money and drive asset prices up; out-compete
the working class for resources, and they drive the working class into
debt.
Stage two:
The working class runs out of resources.
They can no longer borrow anymore.
They can no longer spend anymore.
You get an economic depression and a crisis.
That's when the government has to step in.
Stage
three:
Stage three, the government increasingly runs out of resources as well.
The government becomes massively in debt to the rich.
Stage
four:
The government has no choice but to slowly eviscerate the middle class.
Eventually, there is no wealth left other than that held by the rich;
and the physical structure of your society changes such that it only supports
consumption for rich people.At this
point, almost everybody in the country lives in desperate poverty.
Stage
five:
There are no weak hands left to be squeezed out.
The rich own everything, and the only way they can try to grow their
wealth is by sending you to fight in their wars against each other.
Saturday, April 26, 2025
Are You
Prepared
For Over
a 50% Decline!??
John P. Hussman, Ph.D. President, Hussman Investment Trust
If you’re a passive investor, my intent is not to encourage you to abandon your discipline. What I do believe, however, is that this is an extraordinarily good moment to examine your risk exposures and to take them seriously.
If your notion of passive investing doesn’t allow for a realistic possibility of a market loss well in excess of 50%, or a decade ormore in which the S&P 500 lags Treasury bills, you’ve not only decided to be a passive investor, you’ve decided to ignore history. So, whatever your discipline, examine your risk exposures.
J. Paul Getty
"For as long as I can remember, veteran businessmen and investors -
I among them - have been warning about the dangers of irrational stock
speculation and hammering away at the theme that stock certificates are deeds
of ownership and not betting slips.
The professional investor has no choice but to sit by quietly while the
mob has its day, until enthusiasm or panic of the speculators and
non-professionals has been spent. He is not impatient, nor is he even in a very
great hurry, for he is an investor, not a gambler or a speculator. There are no
safeguards that can protect the emotional investor from himself."
Wednesday, April 23, 2025
Fraudulent
Playbook
Medical
Industrial Complex!
Article below just substitute your country of choice and you will see the same fraudulent pattern from the
medical establishment and the main stream media outlets!
Exposing the Truth: New Zealand Medical Council, Pharmaceutical Industry, and Government Complicity in the COVID-19 narrative
The New Zealand Medical Council’s (NZMC) relentless pursuit of Dr. Samantha Bailey is a stark reminder of the militant tactics employed by those who seek to maintain the crumbling narrative surrounding COVID-19. The NZMC, in tandem with the pharmaceutical industry and the New Zealand government, have peddled and profited from this fraud, leaving a trail of death, destruction, and devastation in their wake.
The charges brought against Dr. Bailey, including “Covid-19 (Established)” and “Public safety compromised (Established),” are nothing short of farcical. With no evidence of harm caused by her actions, the NZMC has relied on the tainted opinions of government-aligned experts like Helen Petoussis-Harris and Dr. Michelle Balm. Both “experts” simply asserted that public safety could be compromised without providing a single case.
The NZMC’s actions are a clear case of selective enforcement, designed to silence dissenting voices and maintain the illusion of a pandemic. Dr. Bailey’s views on COVID-19 have been portrayed as a risk to public safety, while her books, such as “The Final Pandemic,” which meticulously dismantle the COVID narrative, have been conveniently ignored.
The mainstream media’s (MSM) complicity in this charade is equally appalling. Their silence on Dr. Bailey’s wider publications and the NZMC’s actions raise serious questions about their independence and commitment to truth. Why haven’t government experts refuted the Bailey’s work, particularly Dr. Mark Bailey’s treatise “A Farewell to Virology”? The MSM’s failure to report on this matter is a stark reminder of their role in perpetuating the SARS-CoV-2 myth.
The imposition of unprecedented costs, exceeding $148,000, on Dr. Bailey, for a show trial she did not participate in, is a blatant example of the NZMC’s corruption and collusion with the pharmaceutical industry. This money has lined the pockets of beneficiaries in the legal system, further highlighting the entrenched interests at play.
The New Zealand government’s role in this debacle can not be overstated. Their militant application of the SARS-CoV-2 narrative has led to untold suffering, financial ruin, and loss of life. It is imperative that the government, NZMC, and pharmaceutical industry be held accountable for their actions.
The people of New Zealand deserve answers. They deserve to know the truth about the SARS-CoV-2 myth and the motivations behind NZMC’s actions. It is time for transparency, accountability, and justice.
Furthermore, it is essential to acknowledge that the Wuhan Lab Leak narrative, [the back up story] is merely another means to perpetuate the already discredited virus myth. This narrative shift aims to maintain the illusion of a deadly virus while deflecting attention from the actual culprits behind the pandemic: those who pushed unnecessary lockdowns, mask mandates, and experimental injections. With the MSM peddling this new narrative,
the powers that be seek to salvage their credibility and maintain control over the narrative while continuing to line their pockets with profits from this and future ‘pandemics.’
Sunday, April 20, 2025
Recession
Led
Housing
Oversupply
Here We
Go Again!
Recession yes; however I don’t see another Great Financial Crises in the
cards. Obviously those who do become
unemployed no talk as to how mild this recession is will never take away their
pain. This is why DYI always advocates
in the most strenuous terms an emergency fund of at least one year. Six months is simply too small and three
months when you find yourself unemployed could easily run out before finding a replacement
job.
3 months checking
3 months High Yielding Saving
6 months Short Term Bond Fund (DYI’s favorite Vanguard)
Is less
Affordable than the Sub Prime Housing Catastrophe!
Saturday, April 12, 2025
Fame or
Shame
Dollar
Cost Averaging
As with all investment methods they have their benefits and
their drawbacks as well.Dollar Cost
Averaging (DCA) is no different despite what you’ve heard believers extolling its virtues.Nonperformance is under achieving a nominal
average annual return of 9.24% (or real 6.96%) since 1871.
Three elements come into play.They are time, dividend yield and price to
earnings multiple.Longer the time you
have will lift your rate of return (or lower) closer to the mean return.Dividend yield is your investment return so
important in compounding returns.Higher
the yield closer you’ll be to the mean.Price to earning multiple (PE) is the speculative element that all
depends on the animal spirits either driving returns higher or lower.
Today despite this minor dip the current (4-11-2025) dividend
of the S&P 500 is 1.40% significantly below its average (since 1871) of
4.23% along with the Shiller PE at a lofty PE at 33.15!
So…That PE ratio of today is greater than the 1929 top of
27.08. Aggressive animal spirits has the appearance
of normalization since this valuation metric has been above the 1929 level
since 2017! Thus luring in more and more market participants into believing we
have entered a new permanent high plateau.Nothing is further from the truth as markets will regressive either back
down or back up to their respective mean as the economy can only grow so fast
supporting dividend growth.
Using 1929 as our comparison even though their dividend
(3.67%) and Shiller PE (27.08) is far better than TODAY!So despite this unfairness we’ll use this
time period as our proxy for very possible outcomes for your money 20 years
out.
Here we go!
$1,000 invested 1929 and then $2,000 per month for the next
20 years.Here is our return for our DCA
investor a nominal return of 7.68% and after inflation 3.60%.However our ardent saver doesn’t start with
1k but instead its 10k along with the same $2,000 per month.Results??Nominal 7.52% and real at 3.53%.Let’s continue starting with 100k here is the ending numbers.Nominal 6.42% and real return 3.03%
Here is a real possibility our hard charger has his 100k at
1929 levels but says to himself. “I can back off my savings to $1,000 per month
as I saved so much prior.”Drum roll
please.Nominal 5.75% and real at
2.73%.Please note if your 401k funds
charge a 2% expense ratio then all returns is lowered by that amount.In this case a 0.73% a real return that’s retirement
on rice and beans along with helpings of ALPO dog food!
The moral of the story is to avoid investing in stocks when
price to earnings are elevated way beyond their historical average.At levels greater than 30 Shiller PE
alternative investments such as bonds or even gold/silver is recommended.
Where to find Shiller PE and dividend yield click HERE.
Whether or not we’re at a market peak, we were already defensive based
on extreme valuations, unfavorable internals, and overextended conditions. If
you’re a passive investor, my intent is not to encourage you to abandon your
discipline. What I do believe, however, is that this is an extraordinarily good
moment to examine your risk exposures and to take them seriously.
If your
notion of passive investing doesn’t allow for a realistic possibility of a market
loss well in excess of 50%;
Or a
decade or more in which the S&P 500 lags Treasury bills, you’ve not only
decided to be a passive investor, you’ve decided to ignore History.
So,
whatever your discipline, examine your risk exposures.
Lump Sum is any dollar amount greater than one year salary.
Over a ten-year period the typical excess of stock earnings power over bond interest may aggregate 4/3 of the price paid. This figure is sufficient to provide a very real margin of safety--which, under favorable conditions, will prevent or minimize a loss...If the purchases are made at the average level of the market over a span of years, the prices paid should carry with them assurance of an adequate margin of safety. The danger to investors lies in concentrating their purchases in the upper levels of the market.....
Common Sense Investing: The Papers of Benjamin Graham Benjamin Graham
In January I was provided evidence that the CDC has been willfully deceiving people about the past prevalence of cervical cancer, claiming that “Cervical cancer was once a leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States” - when in fact they never had evidence to support this claim and it was contradicted by vital statistics.
Below is a current screenshot from a CDC webpage where they still make this false claim, while fear-mongering over the never-shown-to-exist human papillomavirus and promoting fraudulent screening tests and deadly injections.
The evidence that follows was supplied to me by a lady named Ann who is part of a freelance research group focusing on women's health, specifically cervical cancer and pap smears.
Ann explained that in 2022 a colleague filed a FOIA order with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (pgs 1 - 2), challenging the institutions to provide evidence to support the above claim. Ann’s colleague noted is his FOIA order that (emphasis added):
“I can find no historical evidence to support the claim that cervical cancer was ever a greater cause of death than breast cancer. The only citation given on this is to an article which states that "Worldwide, cervical cancer is second only to breast cancer as the most common malignancy in both incidence and mortality."…
… As my emailed requests to both the CDC and NIH were never responded to, I am requesting the historical prevalence data and historical death rate data for those forms of cervical cancer which are detected by pap smears going back to the approximate time of the widespread adoption of that test: about 1950.
For some reason I am unable to find any prevalence or death rate information relating to this topic before 1980 for the US. I was able to find historical prevalence data for both Canada and Austria, both of which indicate that cervical cancer was never the leading cancer related cause of death in either of those countries. It seems extremely odd that the precise historical incidence and death rates for cervical cancer in the US before the 1980s don't seem to be available, given that medicine considers the introduction of the pap smear a medical triumph in reduction of both death and incidence rates for this disease. On receipt I will widely disseminate this information and make it publicly available.”
[Note that Ann’s colleague’s FOIA order cited another CDC webpage, different from the one that I cited above, where the false claim had also been published. That webpage now re-directs to another page; the archived version containing the false claim is here.]
On November 21, 2022, Roger Andoh acting as FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer responded (pg 3), confessing that:
“A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request.”
After this confession, Roger went on to state that subject matter experts within the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion and the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) had provided detailed responses and “responsive” links. Below is an extract from the response of the NCHS expert (pg 4) (emphasis added):
“…With regard to cervical cancer, unfortunately, the statement “cervical cancer used to be the leading cause of cancer death for women in the United States” that appears on the CDC Cervical Cancer Statistics website is not accurate, nor does the Cancer article referenced below (on which I am a co-author) support this statement. From 1930 to 1945, it was not possible to separate cancer of the uterine corpus and cervix… The separation of corpus and cervix only becomes possible beginning with 1946 data… In 1946, there were 17,205 uterine cancer deaths, 7,396 of these were due to cervical cancer. There were 17,516 breast cancer deaths in that year. So, given that cervical cancer deaths account for less than half of all uterine cancer deaths in 1946, I think it unlikely that the number of cervical cancer deaths was ever higher than that for breast cancer…”
[The NCHS expert indicated that he had referenced a Cancer article but the reference was not provided in the FOIA response from Roger Andoh, nor were any links provided as suggested in Roger’s letter and the other expert’s response.]
Therefore, on August 11, 2024 Ann emailed the FOIA confession, along with links to vital statistics that contradict the CDC’s claim, to several people at the CDC including Mandy Cohen who was then acting as Director, Debra Houry who acts as Chief Medical Officer and Kate Wolff who was then acting as Chief of Staff.
The text of Ann’s powerful email is below (and on pages 5 - 7). She tells me that it has been completely ignored.
“To the CDC,
My name is Ann, and I am part of a freelance research group currently focusing on the history of the pap smear, its efficacy, and its usage throughout women's health worldwide. During our research, I happened across the CDC's 'Cancers Caused by HPV' webpage (https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/about/cancers-caused-by-hpv.html?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/cancer.html) which claims that "cervical cancer was once the leading cause of cancer deaths among women in the United States." This is not the first time we've encountered this exact statement. Unfortunately, it is incorrect. Before the pap smear became widely distributed in the 1940's, cervical cancer was not its own entity. Meaning, death by cancer of the cervix had not been distinguished from other types of gynecological cancers, such as uterine. Mortality from uterine and cervical cancer was combined, inflating overall mortality rates.
We know the CDC is directly responsible for this false claim and is the reason many other health organizations cite it on their webpages. For reference, look at page 27, right-hand side of the CDC's Vital Statistics concerning mortality rates in 1925.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsushistorical/mortstatsh_1925.pdf, we see 'Cancer of the female genital organs'. Underneath, there are subtypes of gynecological cancers. Cancer of the Uterus with 12,377 deaths. There is no separate distinction for cervical cancer, as it has been joined with cancer of the uterus. In another Vital Statistics report from 1938 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/VSUS_1938_1.pdf), page 24 and the right-hand side also make no such clarification between uterine and cervical cancer; 'Cancer and other malignant tumors of the uterus' at 16,291 deaths. No mention of cervical cancer. It was not until 1939 that there was separation of uterine cancer and cancer of the cervix. Page 24, right-hand side of the Vital Statistics from 1939 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/VSUS_1939_1.pdf), shows that cancer of the cervix has its own category: 6,194 deaths. If we look a bit further down, cancer of the breast had 14,868 deaths.
A colleague of mine has also inquired about this particular statement and sent an FOIA request to the CDC. He received a response from FOIA Officer Roger Andoh. This FOIA request further reiterates what I previously mentioned as a false claim: "cervical cancer used to be the leading cause of death for women in the US," which Mr. Andoh confirms is inaccurate. I will attach said FOIA response at the bottom of this email. This also means that you all at the CDC are intentionally lying to the public, considering the FOIA Officer's response that confirms cervical cancer being the leading cause of death for women in the US is inaccurate. Yet, the CDC continues to support this false statement on its website.
Not only does this disprove the claim that cervical cancer was the leading cause of cancer death for women before pap smears, but this information reveals the claim itself is completely fabricated. Cervical cancer wasn't even in the top 5 causes of death for women in the US, and frankly, many other parts of the developed world. My request of the CDC is to remove this false claim from the aforementioned webpage and any subsequent sources on the CDC website where this claim is stated. There is no citation anywhere in the literature to support that assertion.
I also request that this false claim be removed: "This cancer is now rare in the United States. The old screening model of annual Pap smears prevented many cervical cancer deaths." As we saw in the Vital Statistics, cervical cancer was always rare. The pap smear has done little to decrease deaths from cervix cancer. If cancer of the cervix caused 6,194 deaths in 1939 and in 2024 caused about 4,360 deaths (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/cervical-cancer/about/key-statistics.html),
I am skeptical of how effective the pap smear is. Especially considering there is no literature, no randomized trials, tests, or studies to prove the pap smear works. It was just assumed to work.
Claiming the pap smear works with no direct evidence is another lie from the CDC.
Now, looking at the Vital Statistics for 1970, Section 1-General Mortality at Table 1-23 on page 1-102 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/mort70_2a.pdf), I saw that cervical cancer had 6,549 deaths. Let us now look at the stats for 1975, Section 1: General Mortality at Table 1-23 on page 1-104 (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/mort75_2a.pdf). Cervix cancer deaths were 5,551. Remember, hysterectomies were at an all-time high between 1970 and 1980. This is reflected in the significant decrease of cervical cancer deaths between those years. We have not seen such a decrease since. The CDC cannot reasonably claim any deaths prevented were due to just the pap smear.
Feigning ignorance as if the CDC was not aware of these false claims will not work, given we have the FOIA response, which proves members of the CDC are aware of such misinformation. I and my colleagues will pursue legal matters if we must. Therefore, I am also requesting that the CDC publicly broadcast and announce the previously mentioned claims are false. I request that the CDC publicly admit that the pap smear has never been scientifically tested nor proven to work, and that cervical cancer was never a leading cause of death for women (always rare). Simply silently deleting (which I'm aware the CDC temporarily deleted their Vital Statistics when this information was previously outed) or ignoring my requests will also result in the pursuit of legal matters. We are attacking your eligibility as a public health organization. It is quite obvious the CDC cannot be completely trusted.
The CDC is corrupt. Information concerning women's healthcare is purposely being withheld and confined for the profit of this organization. Women are fed up with the lies and fearmongering of our bodies. Human health is not and should not be a for-profit business. Enough is enough. Babylon is falling, and the truth shall be known.
Luke 8: 16-17: “No one lights a lamp and hides it in a clay jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, they put it on a stand, so that those who come in can see the light. 17 For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open."
Highlighted screenshot from VITAL STATISTICS OF THE UNITED STATES 1939, PART 1.
Life in prison.
(Note: this information has been sent to ~200 people who work for “the state”, lamestream media, etc. at Canada, Isle of Man, England and the U.S., so that they cannot claim later that they did not know. It will also be sent to people who act in the Canadian “justice” system… that has falsely prosecuted people in relation to “germs”.)
“HPV” Freedom of Information responses
FDA lawyer admits: 'HPV' & all other 'virus'-related authorizations are based on ZERO scientific evidence. No evidence that the alleged viruses even exist. Life in prison.
NIAID fails formal challenges to cite scientific evidence of HPV or monkeypox virus existence. Life in prison.
CDC confesses: no scientific basis for "HPV" narrative... no virus, no contagion, no genome... just bogus tests. Life in prison.
Public Health Agency of Canada confirmed they have no record describing purification of alleged “HPV”, by anyone, anywhere. Life in prison.
Danish "Health Authority" Sundhedsstyrelsen has no scientific evidence showing "HPV" even exists. Life in prison.
more Danish "experts" with no scientific evidence that "HPV" exists let alone causes cancer: Statens Serum Institut. Life in prison.
Hvidovre Hospital & test-pusher Jesper Bonde, Denmark have no scientific evidence showing "HPV" exists let alone causes cancer. Life in prison.
“Region of Peel” (Ontario, Canada) confirmed they have no records showing scientific evidence of “HPV”, or even records describing particles that are thought to be HPV being found in and purified from bodily fluid/tissue of a so-called “host”, or scientific evidence of contagion of symptoms allegedly caused by the alleged HPV, or even a record of the purported “genome” of the alleged HPV ever being found intact. Life in prison.
Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit (Ontario) unable to provide any record of "HPV" or "Hepatitis B virus" being found in and purified from anyone, anywhere, ever... or of any alleged "virus" addressed by any so-called "vaccine" on either the childhood or adult Canadian "immunization" schedule. Life in prison.
One dozen local health units in England confessed to having zero records of any alleged HPV being found and purified from bodily fluid/tissue, by anyone, anywhere, ever… and hence zero scientific evidence that HPV actually exists. Life in prison.
Exposing Hypocrisy in the Health Freedom Movement - my recent discussion with Caroline Chang. Caroline is the mother of a daughter killed by the MMR quackcine and she knows that viruses have never been shown to exist. She is challenging Del Bigtree, who appeared on her show several years ago, to have another conversation with her. Caroline is especially appalled by Del's recent demonstrably-false statements during Highwire Epidode 414 wherein he insisted that the fraud-based MMR quackcine must be continuedfor the sake of babies because they “lack antibodies” to imagined viruses - while also claiming to "follow the science". Caroline is also asking people to join her in a daily campaign of sending letters, emails, etc. to RFK Jr.
