Study Findings on Sauna Health Benefits

Frequent sauna use is associated with reductions in all-cause mortality, stroke risk and dementia risk, according to multiple epidemiologic studies. Research published in JAMA Internal Medicine, Neurology and Age and Ageing has reported that men who used a sauna four to seven times per week had a 37% lower risk of all-cause mortality, a 61% lower risk of stroke and a 66% lower risk of dementia compared with those who used a sauna once per week, according to reports.

Dr. Jari Laukkanen, a Finnish cardiologist and researcher, told the Epoch Times that sauna bathing may trigger adaptive responses that improve cardiovascular, nervous, and immune system function. Sauna use has been linked to reductions in respiratory disease as well. One study cited in a book by James DiNicolantonio and Siim Land found that Finnish men who took two to three sauna sessions per week had a 27% lower incidence of respiratory infections, and those with four or more sessions per week had a 41% lower incidence ^[1].

Longevity and Cardiovascular Mechanisms

The cardiovascular effects of sauna use appear to mimic some of the benefits of moderate exercise. According to a review published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, frequent sauna bathing is associated with lower blood pressure and improved left ventricular function. A single session can raise heart rate to approximately 150 beats per minute and increase cardiac output by 60% to 70% – similar to the effect of moderate-intensity physical activity, as noted in reports by Mercola.com ^[2].

Laukkanen said that improved vascular function and reduced systemic inflammation may contribute to lower cardiovascular risk. He explained that heat exposure acts as a mild stressor that triggers adaptive responses, including widening of blood vessels, increased circulation, and activation of anti-inflammatory cascades. These hormonal effects are detailed in the book “The Immunity Fix,” which notes that fluctuating temperatures, such as those encountered in sauna bathing, can facilitate improvements in immune function and stress resilience ^[1].

Brain Health and Depression Outcomes

Regular sauna use may also protect brain health. A study published in Age and Ageing found that men who used a sauna four to seven times weekly had a 66% lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease, according to reports.

Researchers suggest that heat shock proteins, which are activated by elevated body temperature, may help repair misfolded proteins associated with neurodegenerative diseases. Kayla Barnes-Lentz, a health optimization advocate, told the Epoch Times that she uses daily sauna sessions partly because of research showing potential dementia prevention, noting that two-thirds of Alzheimer’s diagnoses occur in women.

Heat therapy has also been linked to reductions in depression symptoms. A meta-analysis in the Journal of Affective Disorders Reports indicated that heat therapies, including saunas, were correlated with improvements in depression scores, likely due to pain reduction, improved sleep and enhanced stress resilience, according to the report. General wellness resources highlight that saunas may support mental health through improved circulation and relaxation ^[3].

Metabolic Effects and Detoxification Claims

Some research suggests that heat exposure can improve metabolic markers. A small study in Acta Physiologica found that after 10 days of mild prolonged heat exposure, participants showed better blood sugar regulation by the liver and reduced cholesterol levels, possibly due to decreased liver fat. The authors speculated that the liver shifted to burning fat as fuel, according to the report.

The concept of sweating out toxins is widely promoted, but the evidence remains limited. Studies have found that sweat after sauna use contains heavy metals and chemicals such as bisphenol-A (BPA), though it is unclear whether this meaningfully reduces total body burden, according to reports.

Barnes-Lentz reported that after three months without sauna, her measured environmental toxin levels rose, although she acknowledged the evidence is not definitive. Sauna use has been employed for detoxification in many cultures, with far-infrared saunas sometimes used to eliminate toxins ^[4].

Caveats and Expert Guidance

Experts caution that sauna use is not a cure-all and should be approached with proper precautions. Laukkanen said that benefits come from repeated, tolerable, controlled exposure rather than extreme heat, and emphasized that sauna is not a replacement for exercise or a healthy lifestyle.

The strongest evidence comes from Finnish sauna use, with temperatures of 158 F to 212 F for 10 to 20 minutes per session, four to seven times per week, according to the report. Adequate hydration and cooling are essential.

Individuals with unstable cardiovascular disease or acute illness should consult a physician before starting heat therapy, Laukkanen said. While sauna use can simulate some effects of exercise, it does not provide the mechanical loading on muscles and bones that physical activity does. As noted in the book “The Immunity Fix,” the stress of temperature fluctuations can be beneficial in controlled doses, but excessive exposure may be harmful ^[1].

References

1. James DiNicolantonio and Siim Land. “The Immunity Fix-Strengthen Your Immune System”.
2. Mercola.com. “Cuts Your Stroke Risk by 61 a Blood Pressur”. Mercola.com. February 23, 2023.
3. Laura Harris. “9 Science backed benefits of sauna”. NaturalNews.com. February 23, 2026.
4. Mercola.com. “Some Like It Hot The Many Health Benefits o”. Mercola.com. September 09, 2016.
5. Dr. Mercola. “Spending Time in a Sauna Can Reduce Your Risk for a Stroke”. Mercola.com. May 18, 2018.

Explainer Infographic

The post Frequent Sauna Use Linked to Lower Mortality, Stroke and Dementia Risk, Studies Find appeared first on Activist Post.

An executive order and a $100 billion Kentucky data center project mark the latest steps in the Trump administration’s plan to accelerate the construction of AI infrastructure by opening federal land and shortening permitting timelines. Environmental groups have already launched legal challenges.

The Trump administration signaled plans to aggressively accelerate construction of artificial intelligence (AI) data centers by opening federal lands to massive technology campuses and fast-tracking environmental approvals.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) last week announced it will convert the former Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Kentucky into a $100 billion AI data center campus powered by 2 gigawatts of natural gas generation and 2.6 gigawatts of battery storage.

The project is the third former Cold War nuclear site the administration has targeted for AI development this year.

“The U.S. government is leveraging its assets — like our federal lands — to add power generation, create jobs, and ensure the United States wins the AI race,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in announcing the Kentucky project.

In July 2025, President Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order to dramatically accelerate federal permitting for AI data centers and the energy infrastructure needed to support them.

According to the fact sheet released with the order, the U.S. must remove regulatory barriers if it wants to remain globally competitive in the AI race and protect U.S. economic and national security.

Environmental groups launch legal challenges

This is the second executive order promoting AI Trump has signed. The first was in 2019.

“My Administration has inaugurated a golden age for American manufacturing and technological dominance,” Trump said in the order, which includes substantial reductions in environmental regulations and makes federal land and resources available for data center construction.

But the administration’s approach is already facing legal challenges from environmental organizations and local governments. They argue that federal agencies are bypassing environmental review and limiting opportunities for public input.

A lawsuit over a proposed AI data center on public land near Boulder City, Nevada, is expected to become a test of how far the administration can go in accelerating AI development without violating longstanding environmental laws, Newsweek reported.

A recent Gallup poll found that 7 in 10 Americans oppose constructing AI data centers in their local area and nearly half would “strongly oppose” a new data center in their neighborhood. Noise, pollution, energy and water usage, and higher costs of living top their list of concerns.

In the first quarter of 2026, at least 75 data center projects worth about $130 billion were delayed or shot down by local opposition — “the largest single-quarter concentration” of disrupted projects — according to Data Center Watch, a project by the AI research firm 10a Labs.

Trump administration repurposing DOE land for data centers

Rather than approve privately owned developments, the Trump administration is increasingly repurposing DOE-owned federal properties with existing electrical infrastructure into AI campuses capable of supporting the enormous computing demands of artificial intelligence.

Last year’s executive order also calls for the creation of an interagency initiative to identify federal lands suitable for data center development and supporting energy infrastructure. Federal agencies are instructed to identify sites that could accommodate large-scale AI facilities.

Placing data centers on DOE land may be a workaround for growing resistance to the facilities because, historically, military bases have been exempted from many environmental regulations under the legal doctrine of “sovereign immunity,” Mother Jones reported.

The DOE has identified 16 possible sites that have existing energy infrastructure and the ability to fast-track permitting for new energy, including nuclear energy.

The Kentucky Paducah campus will be built on portions of a retired uranium enrichment facility that ceased operations in 2013 and has been undergoing environmental cleanup.

According to the DOE, the project will be privately financed through a partnership involving NextEra Energy, Brookfield and regional utilities, with construction expected to be completed in 2031.

The Kentucky development follows two similar federal initiatives announced earlier this year.

The DOE previously unveiled plans to convert portions of the former Portsmouth uranium enrichment complex in Piketon, Ohio, into a proposed 10-gigawatt AI campus, while the National Nuclear Security Administration is exploring a 1-gigawatt data center at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.

One gigawatt of gas provides enough power for approximately 750,000 homes, according to Reuters.

Trump orders federal agencies to streamline, accelerate environmental reviews

Last year’s executive order directed federal agencies to streamline environmental reviews and prioritize permits for qualifying data center projects and associated infrastructure, which includes electric transmission lines, substations, natural gas pipelines, water systems and telecommunications facilities.

The White House said the initiative is intended to reduce construction delays for large-scale computing facilities needed for AI development.

Agencies were instructed to coordinate reviews and identify ways to accelerate approvals while remaining consistent with existing law.

Under the directive, the White House Council on Environmental Quality must work with agencies to identify or create categorical exclusions under the country’s foundational environmental protection legislation, the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, for certain data center-related activities.

A categorical exclusion occurs when the government decides that a project that would typically be subject to NEPA review won’t have significant environmental impacts and therefore doesn’t need to be reviewed.

Agencies were also instructed to make greater use of existing expedited permitting authorities and establish a coordinated federal process for qualifying projects.

The administration said that lengthy permitting timelines have become a major obstacle to investment and innovation.

The executive order didn’t eliminate environmental review requirements or amend federal environmental laws. Instead, it directed agencies to use existing legal authorities more aggressively, improve coordination and identify opportunities to shorten review timelines while remaining within statutory requirements.

That would likely involve using strategies already flagged by environmental advocates that allow projects to streamline water pollution permits and exploit air pollution permitting loopholes.

For example, rather than having site-specific reviews, many data centers can now apply for a “nationwide permit” for projects regulated by the Clean Water Act. These types of permits are typically awarded to projects anticipated to have “minimal” impacts on waterways.

The Trump administration opened AI data centers to this type of permitting earlier this year.

A Politico investigation found at least 26 data centers in the U.S. using streamlined water pollution permits for projects being built in sensitive streams and wetlands.

Dozens of others have been exempted from regulation because of changes the U.S. Supreme Court made limiting the Clean Water Act in 2023.

A separate investigation by Floodlight News found that data centers in Texas are exploiting loopholes in air pollution laws to avoid having to undergo the extensive environmental review required for permits for large-scale building.

These strategies also exempt the developers from the public consultation process required by the more stringent environmental regulations they are avoiding.

Related articles in The Defender

• Cheating the System: How AI Data Centers Bypass Water and Air Pollution Laws and Permits
• Watch: AI Data Centers ‘Spreading Like an Aggressive Cancer’
• Survey: Rural America More Concerned About Data Centers Than People Who Live in Cities or Suburbia
• ‘The New Enemy’: Noise Pollution From AI Data Centers Causing Nausea, Insomnia
• Will Maine Become First State to Block Data Centers?
• Noise, Heat, Depleted Water Reserves — How to Protect Your Town From Unwanted AI Data Centers

The post Trump Calls for Rapid Expansion of AI Data Centers, Including on Federal Lands appeared first on Activist Post.

Story at-a-glance

• Google-owned Debug has proposed releasing 32 million Wolbachia-infected male mosquitoes in California and Florida to suppress populations of Aedes aegypti, the invasive mosquito that spreads dengue fever, yellow fever, and Zika virus
• The released males don’t bite humans and are designed to mate with wild females whose eggs then fail to hatch, preventing more than 100 offspring from being produced from a single mating
• Public concern centers on the possibility of unintended environmental consequences, the difficulty of reversing large-scale biological releases and questions about the role of private corporations in ecosystem management
• Researchers reviewing Wolbachia-based mosquito-control programs found that they can reduce disease transmission, but success depends heavily on local conditions and often requires ongoing releases, specialized infrastructure and long-term monitoring
• Regardless of whether the proposal moves forward, you can reduce your exposure to mosquito-borne diseases by eliminating standing water around your home, using physical barriers such as screens and reducing mosquito breeding sites in your community

Releasing millions of laboratory-raised insects into populated neighborhoods, on purpose, sounds like the premise of a science-fiction film. It is instead a real proposal from a company owned by Google, now sitting before federal regulators, and the response it has drawn says as much about public trust as about public health.

The target is Aedes aegypti, the mosquito that spreads dengue fever, yellow fever, and Zika virus. Dengue alone can cause high fever, severe headaches, muscle and joint pain, nausea, and, in its most severe form, life-threatening bleeding and shock. As these diseases reach regions that once rarely encountered them, the tactics used to fight them have grown more aggressive and more contested.

What sets this plan apart is that it sidesteps the chemical spraying many people associate with mosquito control. Instead, it enlists a quiet ally already found in nature, turning the insects’ own biology against them. To some, that represents an elegant alternative to dousing whole communities in insecticide. To others, it raises an uneasy question about handing a private corporation the power to alter a local ecosystem at all.

That tension sits at the heart of the debate. To understand why the proposal has stirred both enthusiasm and alarm, it helps to look closely at how the strategy actually works, what researchers expect it to accomplish, and where it could fall short.

Why Google’s Mosquito Plan Faces Resistance

Google-owned Debug is seeking approval to release 32 million Wolbachia-infected male mosquitoes across parts of California and Florida as part of an effort to suppress populations of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. The company plans to release millions of male mosquitoes infected with a bacterium called Wolbachia.

These males mate with wild female Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, but the eggs don’t hatch because the Wolbachia bacteria create reproductive incompatibility between infected males and uninfected females.

Because female mosquitoes typically mate only once in their lives, a single mating with one of Debug’s males means the more than 100 eggs she would otherwise lay never hatch. Because only males are released, the program doesn’t increase the number of biting mosquitoes. The goal is to shrink the invasive Aedes aegypti population generation after generation by preventing new mosquitoes from being born rather than killing existing ones with insecticides.¹

However, a June 2026 report published by Futurism highlighted the growing public backlash surrounding the idea of a technology company carrying out a large-scale environmental intervention.² Many residents expressed concern about allowing a private corporation to release millions of insects into open ecosystems, especially when the long-term consequences remain uncertain.

•Public concern extends beyond mosquitoes themselves — One of the strongest themes in the report involved questions about corporate influence. Futurism highlighted comments submitted during the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) public review process, where citizens questioned who ultimately benefits from the project. One commenter asked, “Ask yourself who is to benefit most from this, and why is it being done?” while another argued that “we are not experimental rats.”

These responses reveal a deeper concern that goes far beyond insect control. For many people, the issue is trust. If you live in an area targeted for release, you’re not simply evaluating a mosquito-control program; you’re evaluating whether you feel comfortable with a private company making changes to your local environment.

•The biggest fear involves unintended consequences — Futurism pointed to a separate mosquito-control project conducted in Brazil in 2019 that produced unexpected results. In that case, genetically modified mosquitoes introduced laboratory DNA into wild mosquito populations after some reproduction still occurred.³ Debug’s approach is different because it relies on Wolbachia rather than genetic modification.

Even so, the Brazil experience serves as a reminder that biological interventions don’t always unfold exactly as planned. Once millions of insects are released into the wild, reversing course becomes difficult or impossible. That reality helps explain why many residents remain cautious despite the stated public-health goals.

•Technical obstacles remain significant — Success depends on releasing enormous numbers of male mosquitoes while preventing females from entering the release population. That sounds simple until you look at the scale involved.

Researchers cited in the article explained that mosquito migration from surrounding untreated areas can quickly undermine suppression efforts. As a result, programs often require continuous weekly releases to maintain results. For communities affected by the project, that means mosquito control becomes an ongoing operation rather than a one-time fix.

•Even small mistakes could weaken the strategy — Researchers warned that accidental release of Wolbachia-infected females could reduce the effectiveness of the suppression program. To address this challenge, Debug reportedly uses artificial intelligence and computer-vision systems to separate males from females before release. However, the technology remains relatively new.

The World Health Organization’s Vector Control Advisory Group had not endorsed a specific mosquito-sorting system as of 2024, and standard sorting methods still produced female contamination rates as high as 0.3%. That percentage sounds tiny, but when millions of mosquitoes are involved, even a fraction of a percent represents thousands of insects.

•The debate ultimately centers on risk versus uncertainty — Futurism acknowledged that Wolbachia-based mosquito control has produced encouraging results in disease-control efforts. At the same time, environmental interventions are difficult to predict with complete certainty.

The discussion is no longer about whether scientists have found a way to suppress mosquito populations. The real question is whether the benefits outweigh the environmental, technical, and societal risks associated with releasing tens of millions of laboratory-raised insects into the wild.

Researchers Warn the Risks Extend Beyond Mosquito Control

Beyond the public’s concerns, the peer-reviewed literature raises its own cautions. A review published in Acta Tropica examined Wolbachia-based mosquito-control programs deployed around the world and compared them with other mosquito-control strategies.⁴

While the researchers found evidence that these programs can reduce disease transmission, they also emphasized that large-scale mosquito releases introduce environmental and logistical uncertainties that are difficult to fully predict in advance. The review identified concerns ranging from the possibility of unintended genetic effects in the environment to the substantial resources and long-term oversight required to keep such programs functioning as intended.

•Success depends heavily on local conditions — Results from one city or country don’t automatically translate to another. According to the researchers, disease transmission depends on factors such as climate, rainfall, temperature, human movement patterns, and mosquito behavior. If you hear that a mosquito-control program worked in one region, that doesn’t guarantee identical results where you live.

The researchers emphasized that dengue outbreaks fluctuate dramatically from year to year because environmental conditions constantly change.

•These programs require a long-term commitment — Conventional mosquito-control campaigns often focus on immediate population reduction through spraying or other rapid interventions. In contrast, the Acta Tropica review found that Wolbachia-based suppression programs frequently require repeated releases and continuous maintenance.

The researchers described them as “much more complex and cost-intensive operations” that demand substantial infrastructure, trained personnel, coordination between agencies, and strong community participation. For taxpayers and local communities, that means success depends on sustained effort rather than a quick fix.

•Researchers identified environmental questions that deserve attention — Researchers noted evidence that Wolbachia genetic material appears to move between species more often than previously believed. As a result, they concluded that releases carry a “moderate potential risk of spreading potentially dangerous genes in the environment.” The review didn’t describe this outcome as inevitable, but it did identify it as an issue that requires continued monitoring as programs expand.

•The biological effects extend beyond reproduction — The review also examined a separate Wolbachia strategy, population replacement, in which infected females are released so the bacterium spreads through the population. This approach works through a different mechanism: Wolbachia interferes with viruses inside the mosquito itself.

According to the researchers, the bacterium disrupts the internal structures viruses use to reproduce. It also alters fat metabolism inside mosquito cells, making important materials less available for viral replication. The mosquito becomes a less efficient carrier of disease. Researchers also reported that Wolbachia stimulates parts of the mosquito’s natural immune defenses, creating additional barriers that limit viral growth.

Take Control of Mosquito Exposure Where You Live

The debate over Google’s mosquito-release proposal highlights a larger issue that affects you regardless of whether the project moves forward: mosquito-borne disease continues to expand into new areas, and reducing your exposure starts at home. While large-scale mosquito-control programs attract headlines, the most reliable protection begins with practical steps that address mosquito breeding and human exposure directly.

1.Eliminate standing water around your property — Mosquitoes depend on standing water to reproduce. Walk around your home once a week and empty buckets, flowerpot saucers, birdbaths, clogged gutters, children’s toys, and any other containers that collect water. Even a small amount of water provides a breeding site. Think of this as a simple weekly challenge: find and eliminate every source of stagnant water before mosquitoes find it first.

2.Create physical barriers between yourself and mosquitoes — Window screens, door screens, and outdoor fans reduce mosquito contact without introducing chemicals into your environment. If you spend time outdoors during peak mosquito activity, wear long sleeves and pants when practical. Every mosquito bite you prevent lowers your exposure to the viruses these insects spread.

3.Support local source-reduction efforts — The Acta Tropica review identified source reduction — removing mosquito breeding sites — as one of the most effective mosquito-control strategies. Pay attention to neglected areas in your neighborhood where water accumulates. Community participation often produces better long-term results than relying entirely on government agencies or corporate programs to solve the problem.

4.Reduce dependence on broad-spectrum insecticides whenever possible — Many insecticides kill beneficial insects along with mosquitoes. Pollinators, aquatic organisms, and other wildlife often pay the price. Whenever practical, focus first on habitat management, breeding-site elimination, and targeted mosquito control methods rather than chemical spraying. Addressing the source of the problem produces longer-lasting results.

5.Pay attention to environmental changes in your area — The researchers found that temperature, rainfall, humidity, and human movement strongly influence disease transmission. After periods of heavy rain, flooding, or unusually warm weather, increase your natural mosquito-prevention efforts. If you treat mosquito control as a seasonal habit rather than a one-time task, you stay one step ahead of the conditions that allow mosquito populations to explode.

6.Stay informed and participate in local decision-making — Whether the issue involves Wolbachia mosquitoes, genetically modified insects, insecticide spraying, or another mosquito-control program, your community benefits when residents understand both the benefits and the risks. Read public notices, attend local meetings, and submit comments when agencies request public input. The choices made today shape the environment where you and your family live tomorrow.

FAQs About Google’s Sterilized Mosquitoes

Q: What is Google’s mosquito-release program trying to accomplish?

A: Google-owned Debug wants to release millions of male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes infected with the Wolbachia bacterium. When these males mate with wild females, the eggs don’t hatch, reducing the mosquito population over time. The goal is to lower the spread of diseases such as dengue fever, yellow fever, and Zika without relying primarily on chemical insecticides.

Q: Why are some people concerned about the proposal?

A: Many critics are less concerned about mosquitoes themselves and more concerned about the long-term environmental consequences of releasing millions of laboratory-raised insects into the wild. Others question whether a private corporation should play such a large role in altering local ecosystems and managing public-health interventions.

Q: Has this type of mosquito-control approach worked before?

A: Research reviewed in Acta Tropica found that Wolbachia-based mosquito-control programs have successfully reduced disease transmission in multiple locations around the world.⁵ However, researchers also noted that results vary depending on local climate, mosquito populations, human movement patterns, and other environmental factors.

Q: What risks have researchers identified?

A: Scientists highlighted several concerns, including the need for continuous releases, the possibility of mosquitoes migrating from untreated areas, and evidence suggesting that Wolbachia-related genetic material may move between species more often than previously believed. Researchers concluded that ongoing monitoring is necessary as these programs expand.

Q: What can I do to reduce my own risk from mosquito-borne diseases?

A: The most effective steps begin at home. Remove standing water where mosquitoes breed, maintain window and door screens, wear protective clothing when mosquito activity is high, support community mosquito-control efforts, and stay alert after periods of heavy rain or unusually warm weather, which often increase mosquito populations.

The post Google Wants to Release 32 Million Sterilized Mosquitoes in California and Florida appeared first on Activist Post.

The United States has resumed its bombing of Iran after a “surprise attack” on American forces. US President Donald Trump had warned earlier on Wednesday that Iran was about to face a harsh response, reportedly telling Fox News: “We’re going to beat the f***ing s**t out of them.”

The renewed strikes marked the first US attacks inside Iran since Trump paused the bombing campaign Friday. The halting of attacks came after 13 consecutive nights to allow diplomacy another chance; however, Iran continued to say that negotiations were not underway.

Trump: US And Iran Engaged In “Very Friendly” Talks

During the pause in fighting, reports started to surface saying that the US was low on missile defense systems and other weapons it would need to finish off this war it started with Iran. The ruling class allegedly halted weapons shipments to Ukraine, as its own military stockpile plummeted.

US Halting Some Weapons Shipments To Ukraine As Own Military Stockpiles Plummet

Iran’s missile launch was said to be the reason that a brief pause was ended and both countries have now returned to fighting, with direct exchanges occurring between Washington and Tehran.

CENTCOM described Tuesday’s missile launch against the US as an attempted “surprise attack,” claiming that all the incoming projectiles had been intercepted. The command did not initially mention Jordan, saying only that the missiles had targeted US forces “based in the Middle East.”

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps later claimed responsibility for the attack. The IRGC said it was responding to “aggressive actions” by the US military and warned that its operations would continue as long as Washington persisted with what it called “illegal and malicious actions” against Iranian interests. -RT

Speaking later at the White House, Trump confirmed that Iran had fired five missiles at American forces and credited US Patriot air-defense systems with intercepting all of them. “We’re going to be hitting them very hard because it’s our turn to hit them,” he added.

America Has Lost the War: We’re Now in a Fighting Retreat — Here’s Why It Matters

The post Quick Return To WAR: US Responds To Iran’s “Surprise Attack” With Bombings appeared first on Activist Post.

A small clinical trial presented at the American Society for Nutrition’s NUTRITION 2026 meeting suggests that limiting daily food intake to an eight- to nine-hour window may modestly improve cognitive function in older women with overweight or obesity, beyond effects from weight loss alone.

The pilot study – presented July 26 in National Harbor, Maryland – followed 47 women aged 50 to 79 over six months. Lead researcher Dr. Sue Shapses, a professor at Rutgers University and Rutgers-RWJ Medical Center, reported that participants who ate within a restricted daily window showed greater improvement on tests of spatial planning and problem-solving skills compared to those who ate over a longer period.

Trial Design and Methods

All participants received guidance to cut 500 calories per day. Twenty-six women were assigned to a time-restricted eating group, consuming all food within an average of 8.2 hours per day, typically between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. The remaining 21 women served as a control group, eating across an average of 12.3 hours per day.

Both groups lost an average of about 15 pounds over six months, with no significant difference in total weight loss. According to Shapses, the trial was designed to isolate the cognitive effects of meal timing independent of the amount of weight lost.

The study adds to a growing body of research on intermittent fasting, which prior work has linked to improved metabolic health and cellular repair. Research by Satchidananda Panda, Ph.D., suggests that 90% of people eat for more than 12 hours a day, a habit that may contribute to metabolic dysfunction ^[1].

Cognitive Performance Outcomes

Women in the time-restricted group showed significantly greater improvement on tests measuring spatial planning and problem-solving compared to the control group. The restricted-eating group also made fewer errors on memory and learning tests, though that difference did not reach statistical significance. No significant differences were found between groups on tests of reaction time or multitasking.

Shapses stated: “There was a modest effect of time-restricted eating to improve spatial planning and problem-solving and on reducing errors related to memory and learning.” She added that “these outcomes suggest a better ability to remember information during everyday tasks and reducing mistakes related to memory, attention and problem-solving.” Prior research in animal models indicates that intermittent fasting can enhance neuroplasticity and protect brain cells ^[2].

Potential Mechanisms and Caveats

Researchers suggested that meal timing may interact with circadian rhythms, inflammation and metabolic pathways to influence brain function. The authors noted that the pilot trial was small and that results should be considered preliminary; larger studies are needed for confirmation. The findings were presented at a scientific conference and have not undergone full peer review for publication.

“These data suggest that there may be additional benefits if you stop eating 4 hours prior to going to sleep and reduce food intake to 8-9 hours per day, compared to the usual eating window of 12 hours per day,” Shapses said. Previous work has shown that time-restricted eating can help reduce inflammation and improve metabolic markers, which may in turn support brain health ^[3].

Implications for Aging and Dementia Prevention

With Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias becoming more common as the population ages – and with women and those with overweight or obesity at elevated risk – lifestyle interventions such as time-restricted eating are of increasing interest. According to Shapses, “losing weight alone will ward off some of the aging-related cognitive decline,” but the trial data suggest that restricting the eating window may provide additional benefits beyond weight loss.

Emerging evidence indicates that meal timing may influence long-term cognitive health by affecting sleep quality and metabolic processes. Experts now recommend that adults finish their last meal at least two to three hours before bedtime ^[4]. The study adds to a growing body of evidence on intermittent fasting and brain health, though definitive conclusions await further research.

References

1. Mercola.com. “Delay Aging and Disease With Science Backed.” Mercola.com. August 9, 2019.
2. Dr. Joseph Mercola. “KetoFast.”
3. Mercola.com. “Best Time to Eat Your Last Meal of the Day.” Mercola.com. December 16, 2022.
4. NaturalNews.com. “Evening meals and brain health: Why dinner timing matters more than you think.” June 25, 2026.

Explainer Infographic

The post Study: Time-Restricted Eating Linked to Cognitive Benefits in Older Women appeared first on Activist Post.

Trump Warns of Spain-Style Migrant Influx

President Donald Trump warned Friday, July 31, that the migrant surge in Spain is an example of what the United States could face if Democrats regain power, according to a report.

In a Truth Social post, Trump wrote: “What’s happening with Spain, with tens of thousands of Illegal Immigrants invading it, happened in the United States during the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, and it will happen again, only worse, if the Dumocrats ever again gain power.” The president urged Americans to vote Republican in the November midterm elections, the report stated.

The remarks came as Trump faces slipping approval ratings ahead of the midterm elections. A recent poll cited in the report found that most U.S. adults believe Trump has not focused enough on the everyday concerns of ordinary Americans, that his economic policies worsened conditions and that his military decisions in Iran harmed the United States. Earlier polling by the Public Religion Research Institute found 57% of Americans believed migrants had imposed undue burdens on their local communities [1].

Trump has repeatedly attacked his political opponents over immigration, blaming his predecessor Joe Biden for illegal border crossings. According to a NaturalNews report citing the National Pulse, illegal migration under Biden was approaching the total of all legal migration processed at Ellis Island from 1892 to 1954, with an influx of at least 9.4 million people [2].

Ceuta Migrant Surge

Earlier in the week, an estimated 50,000 migrants, mostly young men, swam from Morocco and crossed into the Spanish exclave of Ceuta, according to the report. The Spanish Ministry of the Interior said around 48,000 had voluntarily returned by Friday evening, the report stated. Other reports described the influx as a “weaponized migration” of military-aged men, with riots erupting in Ceuta after tens of thousands crossed without supplies [3].

France and Italy tightened border controls in response, and Italy suspended the Schengen arrangement with Spain, according to the BBC [4][5]. Spain’s interior minister, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, said the death toll had risen to 67 [5]. The U.S. Embassy in Spain issued a security alert, warning that the arrival of thousands of migrants from Morocco to Ceuta and hundreds to Melilla “may lead to unpredictable and dangerous situations” [6].

White House Response and Midterm Politics

White House principal deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said on Friday that Trump “has long warned Europe what would happen if they continue to implement far-left, globalist policies, including enabling mass migration,” according to the report. White House immigration adviser Stephen Miller also issued a warning, saying Democrats had pursued similar policies in the United States before Trump returned to office, according to a report [7].

The president’s Truth Social post included the phrases “Sleepy Joe Biden Administration” and “Dumocrats.” The report said Trump has repeatedly attacked opponents over immigration and used the Spanish crisis to frame the midterm election as a choice between enforcement and open borders.

Trump Administration Immigration Record and Spain Ties

Since returning to office in January 2025, Trump has launched a sweeping enforcement campaign involving mass deportations and expanded detention, pledging to carry out the largest migrant removal operation in U.S. history, according to the report. A May 2026 report said voluntary departures had surged as illegal migrants abandoned asylum claims under the enforcement crackdown [8].

Trump’s latest remarks came amid strained ties with Madrid. The two countries clashed during the recent conflict with Iran after Spain refused to allow the U.S. to use its bases for strikes, while Trump has criticized Spain over defense spending, according to the report. A U.S. National Security Strategy document also raised concerns that European North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies could become “majority non-European” and less reliable partners because of migration [9].

EU Migration Debate and Spanish Policy

Migration has remained one of the EU’s defining political issues since the 2015 refugee crisis. Author Sonia Shah wrote in “The Next Great Migration” that the flow of migrants from Syria into Europe, joined by a second flow through Libya, soon turned into an international spectacle dominating headlines [10]. Brussels recently agreed on a sweeping overhaul of its migration system aimed at speeding up deportations, while many member states tightened national immigration laws, according to the report.

Madrid has taken a different approach. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has argued immigration is essential to address labor shortages and demographic decline, while his government has expanded pathways for undocumented migrants to obtain legal status and work permits, according to the report.

Critics of such policies have described the movements as intentional. David Icke’s The Answer states that wars and economic destabilization are manipulated to create conditions in which large numbers of people flee toward Europe and the United States [11].

Outlook

The report presents Trump’s warning and the Spanish influx without endorsing either side. U.S. and Spanish officials quoted in the report attributed the crisis to border policy decisions, while European governments responded with tightened controls and mutual criticism [4][5]. The Spanish government deployed its military, and the U.S. embassy warned of unpredictable conditions [6].

Most of those who entered Ceuta had returned by Friday evening, according to the report [4]. No further details about upcoming midterm campaigning or migration policy were provided in the report.

References

1. NaturalNews.com. “POLL Americans are becoming increasingly pessimistic about the migrant crisis”. NaturalNews.com. November 6, 2024.
2. NaturalNews.com. “ILLEGAL MIGRATION under Biden nears aggregate total of LEGAL MIGRATION processed at Ellis Island in New York for…”. NaturalNews.com. April 11, 2024.
3. Zero Hedge. “Weaponized Migration? 50,000 Military-Aged Men Invade Spanish Enclave Without Supplies As Chaos And Riots Erupt”. July 31, 2026.
4. The Times of Israel. “France and Italy tighten border controls amid Spanish migrant crisis”. August 1, 2026.
5. BBC News. “Spain attacks ‘selfish’ response of some EU countries to Ceuta migrant crossings”. August 1, 2026.
6. The Epoch Times. “US Embassy Issues Security Alert After Thousands of Illegal Immigrants Cross Into Spain”. July 31, 2026.
7. 100percentfedup.com. “Stephen Miller Issues Stark Warning For America As Illegal Immigrants Swarm Into Spain”. July 31, 2026.
8. NaturalNews.com. “Voluntary departures surge as illegal migrants abandon asylum claims under Trump enforcement crackdown”. May 12, 2026.
9. The National Pulse. “Trump Admin Fears NATO Allies Will Become Disloyal Partners as Mass Migration Turns Them ‘Majority Non-European.’”. December 5, 2025.
10. Sonia Shah. “The Next Great Migration”.
11. David Icke. “The Answer”.

The post Trump Warns: U.S. Faces Spain-Style Migrant Influx if Democrats Return appeared first on Activist Post.

Today, the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA) announces the launch of seven refined research opportunities aimed at hacking humans, nature, and the climate. 

ARIA has been busy refining its approach to research opportuntities by consolidating 14 spaces into seven.

Secure brain-to-brain communications and memory sharing, flying suits programmed from living systems, sensors that can smell like dogs, cloud brightening for weather manipulation, and a whole lot more are all on ARIA’s agenda.

“We are announcing seven new opportunity spaces that represent a bringing together of the previous 14 opportunity spaces that we had before. We have identified patterns that were running through those opportunity spaces and we are consolidating those into seven opportunity spaces that we think represent really key long-term investments for the UK and the world”Kathleen Fisher, ARIA, August 2026

The seven research opportunity spaces now include:

• Programmable Physiology
• Scalable Neural Interfaces
• Trust Everything, Everywhere
• Nature-Inspired Computation
• Adaptive Machines
• Resilient Climate and Ecosystems
• Abundant Manufacturing

ARIA CEO Kathleen Fisher, who took over the role from Ilan Gur in February, said that if these research opportunities were to come to fruition they “would represent really transformative changes for society.” 

Fisher is a former program manager at the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) where she developed and led the High-Assurance Cyber Military Systems (HACMS) program that ran from 2012 to 2017.

During a demonstration of the HACMS program’s capabilities in 2017, the Pentagon staged a cyberattack on an unmanned Boeing helicopter called Little Bird, and the software developed at DARPA was able to successfully stop the hackers in mid-air.

For Fisher, ARIA’s Trust Everything, Everywhere opportunity sits near-and-dear to her heart.

“If I were coming in as a program director, I would situate a program in the ‘Trust Everything, Everywhere’ opportunity space because that is my personal area of expertise,” she said.

And with that, let’s take a look at the seven refined opportunity spaces, starting with Fisher’s favorite.

Trust Everything, Everywhere

Trust Everything, Everywhere consolidates three previous research spaces: Mathematics for Safe AI, Collective Flourishing, and another that shares the same name of the current space.

Now, the Trust Everything, Everywhere opportunity sees humans working with AI in ways that would allow for a diversity of ideas in safe and trusted environments. 

BiologicalSciences

For example, ARIA program managers “seek to build the structures and tools that let a plurality of minds coexist and thrive, and resist the slide toward monoculture, centralised control or conflict.”

Some structures and tools that ARIA is exploring involve “verifiable neuro-privacy” such as “secure brain to brain” communications” and “one-time memory sharing,” along with a type of “verifiable CRISPR” that would take  bio samples for authentication.

According to the Trust Everything, Everywhere description, “Many of today’s hard trade-offs – security vs. freedom, speed vs. accountability, openness vs. control – are caused by constraints in our technological and institutional stack → the right building blocks can solve these tensions and increase our options.”

Now let’s go from programming machines to programming human  biology with the next opportunity space. 

BiologicalSciences

Programmable Physiology

The Programmable Physiology research space combines two previous opportunities: Scultping Innate Immunity and Bioenergetic Engineering.

With Programmable Physiology, ARIA is looking to “revolutionize medicine by developing technologies that allow us to read, model, and modulate human biology at systems scale, spanning molecular networks, cell states, tissues, and whole-body physiology.”

The idea here is to not just throw a drug at one particular part of the body, but rather to consistently monitor what’s happening inside the body across all  biological functions in order to intervene when there is a disruption or imbalance. 

As the program description puts it, “Modern medicine has largely learned to drug individual targets, not steer systems → programmable physiology requires matching the sophistication of our interventions to the complexity of human biology, moving from single-node perturbations to combinatorial, state-shifting control.”

In this way, ARIA is looking at states of being — taking complex disease states and turning them into healthy ones.

Next up on the refined opportunities spaces is all about brain-computer interfaces.

Scalable Neural Interfaces

Scalable Neural Interfaces is one of ARIA’s original opportunity spaces and still bears the same name.

This program looks to treat neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders by using minimally invasive technologies, such as brain modulation through electrical and acoustic fields.

These are non-invasive technologies that don’t require brain implants or surgery.

For this space, the belief is that “Targeted interaction with the human nervous system can improve the human condition across an incredibly wide range of disease states and cognitive domains.”

“To fully understand and treat disorders of the brain,” according to the opportunity, “we’ll need neural technologies that simultaneously offer chemical, temporal, and spatial specificity → this is achievable only by connecting the frontiers of engineered hardware with the frontiers of engineered biology.“ 

Now, let’s move on to the next opportunity space that looks to nature for inspiration.

Nature-Inspired Computation

ARIA’s Nature-Inspired Computation space is pretty self-explanatory, and it consolidates two previous opportunities: Nature Computes Better, and Extending our Perception.

Nature is extremely efficient in just about every sense of the word — it can sense, organize, self-replicate, heal, compute, store data, conserve energy, and transform light into food, just to name a few examples.

According to the ARIA description, “Living systems have co-evolved sensing and intelligence – they compress a rich, high-dimensional world into efficient, compact representations from multimodal inputs that capture physical, chemical, acoustic, magnetic and thermal properties today’s computers miss.”

Imagine being able to harness the olfactory systems of dogs that can “smell” seizures before they happen, or using reptile genes to be able to see in infrared.

With this space, ARIA believes that understanding nature “could open up entirely new frontiers of engineered biology, computation, and algorithms.” 

From there, “engineered systems could perceive and infer far beyond human range, as well as adapt, generalise and gain enormous efficiencies in data, compute and energy use.“

Moving from hacking humans, machines, and nature, the next controversial thing to hack is the climate.

Resilient Climate and Ecosystems

ARIA’s Resilient Climate and Ecosystems space is a consolidation of three others: Future Proofing Our Climate and Weather, Scoping our Planet, and Engineering Ecosystem Resilience.

The belief behind this opportunity is that “Living systems and a stable climate underpin our food, health, materials, and security, and both are under growing strain.”

The idea is to monitor and analyze everything that affects the weather, and then once that’s understood, to intervene and control the weather directly.

In December 2023, ARIA published an opportunity space document entitled, “Managing our climate and weather through responsible engineering,” which was authored by ARIA program director Mark Symes. 

Under the “core beliefs” section, Symes wrote:

“Through carefully-considered engineering solutions it may eventually be possible to actively and responsibly control the climate and weather at regional and global scale.”

As far as methods into controlling the weather go, Symes cited studies involving:

• Blocking the sun as a potential means to cool global land temperatures.
• Solar Radiation Management (SRM) techniques, which “reflect a small percentage of the sun’s light and heat back into space.”
• “Cirrus Cloud Thinning,” which theoretically would “allow more longwave radiation to escape to space.”

Next up on the newly revised opportunity spaces involves programming matter like software for manufacturing.

Abundant Manufacturing

ARIA’s Abundant Manufacturing space combines its previous Programmable Plants and Manufacturing Abundance opportunities.

Programmable plants was exploring how to make edible vaccines, as well as designing plants that could create a rain-proof shelter from a single seed.

With Abundant Manufacturing, ARIA envisions a future “where anyone, anywhere, at any time can program matter like software to assemble what we need, ranging from molecules to skyscrapers.”  

Suits that can make you fly, trees that become living lamposts, and living architectures that can harvest and store energy while self-regulating temperature are all on the table.

These ideas, in part, stem from the belief that living systems “represent an ideal platform to realize a future of sustainable abundance as our food and material systems struggle with unsustainable supply and a volatile climate.” 

And to round off the seventh refined research opportunity space announced today, we have machines that can sense, think, and act in any given environment.

Adaptive Machines

ARIA’s Adaptive Machines opportunity consolidates the Smarter Robot Bodies and Scoping Our Planet spaces.

For this space, ARIA is working under the assumption that “intelligent machines that adapt to unpredictable environments can help humanity thrive.”

Therefore, “We need adaptable machines designed with a systems approach that can sense, think, and act seamlessly in the physical world.“

Adaptive Machines is another nature-inspired approach to technology that goes beyond the computional side and into the hardware and robotics realm.

One example given is designing a machine that can operate just like an insect or even surpass its natural abilities.

Inspired by DARPA and launched in 2023, ARIA is a non-departmental public body, sponsored by the UK Department for  Science, Innovation and Technology. 

Image source: AI generated with ChatGPT

The post UK ARIA announces 7 research opportunities to hack humans, nature & climate appeared first on Activist Post.

The Genetic Kill Switch Introduction

We are living through the final act of a planned global genocide. According to my research findings, Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci are not adversaries — they are tag-team partners in a depopulation agenda that uses a binary weapon to trigger a genetic meltdown of the human race. (I’ll explain more below…)

The first component of this weapon is the spike protein contamination from mRNA injections, which Fauci orchestrated through gain-of-function bioweapons research at the Wuhan lab and laundered into so-called vaccines via Operation Warp Speed (pushed by Trump).

The second component is nuclear war, which Trump is likely to invoke to “finish the job” in Iran. The fallout of radioisotopes causes double-strand DNA breaks in human cells, and the spike protein has already suppressed DNA repair by 85–90%. Together, they form a kill switch that will melt down the genetic integrity of billions of humans and end humanity as we know it.

Here is how this unspeakable plan was set in motion, why the government lies about radiation risks, and what you can do to survive.

The Spike Protein Bio-Weapon: Fauci’s Contribution to Mass Genetic Contamination

Let’s trace the chain of command. Fauci, through the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology via Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance. Newly released documents show Fauci actively protected Daszak from federal scrutiny while suppressing evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was a lab leak ^[1]. The result was a gain-of-function spike protein toxin.

As I have previously reported, the spike protein’s modified cleavage site was engineered into the mRNA, and that same synthetic spike is now being produced inside billions of human bodies via the so-called vaccines ^[2].

The genetic damage from these mRNA injections is catastrophic. A ground-breaking Swedish-Chinese study showed that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein impairs DNA damage repair and inhibits the BRCA1 and 53BP1 pathways ^[3]. In plain English, this means the spike protein suppresses the cell’s ability to fix broken DNA by 85 to 90 percent.

The result is turbo cancers, immune failure, and accelerated aging. On top of that, the mRNA shots are contaminated with bacterial DNA plasmids that can integrate into the human genome and trigger cancer ^[4][5]. This is not a vaccine, in other words — it’s a genetic bioweapon designed to contaminate the entire population and prepare every injected person for the nuclear “genetic meltdown” kill switch.

Trump’s Complicity: From Operation Warp Speed to Nuclear War

Trump cannot pretend to be innocent. He authorized emergency use of the mRNA injections, bragged about Operation Warp Speed, and repeatedly protected Fauci from prosecution. Emails have now revealed that Fauci and then-NIH director Francis Collins agreed to suppress the lab-leak theory for political reasons, and Trump’s administration did nothing to stop it ^[6]. In fact, Trump’s own FDA commissioner, Marty Makary, recently stated that Fauci was “100% involved” in a “massive” COVID origins cover-up ^[7]. Yet Trump never held Fauci accountable. Why?

Because they are co-conspirators. They answer to the same boss.

Now Trump is set to launch nuclear weapons in his desperate escalation of war with Iran or Russia. As of early 2026, Trump has escalated rhetoric against Russia, shortening a “50-day” warning to “10 to 12 days” and threatening strikes deep into Russian territory. This is a deliberate provocation designed to trigger a nuclear response that could kill up to 200 million Americans from the initial strikes alone.

The radiation from those bombs will circulate globally and cause double-strand DNA breaks, but the spike protein has already disabled the body’s repair machinery in billions of people. That means billions of human beings will die from genetic damage that could have otherwise been self-repaired if not for the presence of the spike protein, an engineered toxic and part of a binary weapon system targeting human genetic integrity.

The Government’s Radiation Lies: Why You Cannot Trust the ICRP Model

After a nuclear detonation, the government will parrot the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) model to claim that low-dose radiation is safe. Do not believe a word of it. The ICRP model deliberately ignores the effects of internal alpha emitters like plutonium and uranium. When you inhale a single hot particle, that particle lodges in your lung tissue and delivers a concentrated dose of radiation to a tiny cluster of cells, causing catastrophic DNA damage that the spike-suppressed repair system cannot fix. The same government that locked you inside during COVID will now tell you to go outside and breathe the poisoned air. Do not obey, or you will likely die.

The truth is that the ICRP model was designed by the nuclear industry to minimize liability, not to protect human health. As I have documented in my reporting, the establishment has lied about radiation risks for decades ^[8][9]. They know that alpha emitters inside the body are far more dangerous than external gamma exposure, but they hide this fact to greenlight nuclear war while pushing expensive pharma treatments. The endgame is to finish what the mRNA jabs started: complete genetic destruction of the human race.

Defending Yourself: Knowledge, Clean Living, and Natural Remedies

Survival requires action. You must detox the spike protein from your body using nutritional therapies and proper detox protocols. You must support DNA repair with nutrients that enhance homologous recombination and non-homologous end joining, including zinc, magnesium, resveratrol, and turmeric. I have discussed these protocols at length in my special reports on reversing mRNA damage ^[10]. Equally critical: eliminate toxic personal care products, stop consuming processed foods laced with MSG and glyphosate, and switch to clean, organic whole foods.

My upcoming free genetic survival course will detail specific foods, molecules, and practices to repair double-strand breaks, mismatched base pairs, and other genetic lesions. Clean blood, clean (fertility) eggs, and clean sperm will be the new gold in a world filled with DNA mutations and widespread infertility. Those who are informed and prepared will be the remnant that rebuilds humanity. The time to start preparing for genetic survival is now — before the bombs fall and the radiation clouds spread.

Conclusion: The Remnant Will Survive

Fauci and Trump are, in my opinion, agents of a satanic death cult intent on the genetic destruction of humanity. Fauci unleashed the spike protein bioweapon; Trump enabled it and is now provoking nuclear war to finish the job.

But we can stop them by refusing to comply and by arming ourselves with knowledge. Genetic integrity will become the most valuable asset on a ruined planet. Stay tuned to my work for the free survival course that will teach you how to protect yourself and your family. The human race can survive this if we reject the lies and stand for truth, health, and freedom. I will not stop exposing these criminals until the final whistle is blown.

Prepare your body, your mind, and your soul. The remnant will prevail.

References

1. Fauci Protected Key U.S. Collaborator With Wuhan Lab From Federal Scrutiny – Children’s Health Defense. Emily Kopp.
2. Mike Adams interview with Dr Michael Nehls – February 29 2024.
3. SARS-CoV-2 spike impairs DNA damage repair and inhibits the BRCA1 and 53BP1 pathways – Brighteon Broadcast News. Mike Adams.
4. Probably the Most Important Topic of Our Time: DNA Contaminants in COVID Shots Can Trigger Cancer, Alter Human Genome – Children’s Health Defense. Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. January 21, 2024.
5. Probably the Most Important Topic of Our Time – Children’s Health Defense. Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. January 21, 2024.
6. Did Fauci, Collins Suppress Evidence of COVID Lab Leak for Political Reasons? – Children’s Health Defense.
7. FDA Chief: Fauci ‘100% Involved” In “Massive” COVID-19 Origins Cover-Up – Infowars.
8. Geoengineered Transhumanism – Elana Freeland.
9. Brighteon Broadcast News – Mike Adams – Brighteon.com.
10. Special Report on Reversing mRNA Vaccine Damage – Health Ranger Report. Mike Adams.
11. Twelve undeniable signs globalists are engineering the end of humanity – NaturalNews.com. July 30, 2023.
12. The Indoctrinated Brain How to Successfully Fend Off the Global Attack on Your Mental Freedom – Michael Nehls MD.

Explainer Infographic

The post Trump and Fauci: The Nefarious Tag Team Executing the Genetic Kill Switch on Humanity appeared first on Activist Post.

School-based routine or universal mental health screening “often functions as an entry point into a therapeutic culture that pathologizes normal childhood distress, erodes resilience and funnels children toward psychiatric labels, therapy, and medication,” according to Gretchen Watson, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist and researcher.

An increasing number of children are likely to face mental health screening when they return to school this fall. But experts warned those screenings pose more risk than benefit — and urged parents to opt out their child.

“While early identification sounds responsible, in practice it risks doing more harm than good,” Gretchen Watson, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist and researcher, told The Defender.

School-based routine or universal mental health screening “often functions as an entry point into a therapeutic culture that pathologizes normal childhood distress, erodes resilience and funnels children toward psychiatric labels, therapy, and medication,” Watson said.

Nearly one-third of U.S. schools now conduct some form of mental health screening — and that number is likely to increase, as more states work to pass mental health screening mandates.

Last year, Illinois became the first state to require students in grades three through 12 to undergo a mental health screening each year.

In January, lawmakers in South Carolina proposed a bill that would create a statewide mental health screening program for students in grades six through 12. The bill is in committee.

It’s a trend that has experts like Watson worried.

Watson is one of the foremost authorities in the U.S. on the overmedicalization of children with psychiatric drugs. She is also the author of the forthcoming book, “The Prescription Affliction: Why We Overmedicate Young Minds with Psychiatric Drugs ― and How to Stop It.”

Mental health screening tools flag many false positives, Watson said. For example, a child grieving the loss of a grandparent, or who is simply more intense or imaginative than the average student, can easily be flagged as needing further evaluation.

“That evaluation can start a cascade: a label, a treatment plan and, in many cases, medication,” she said.

Parents need to be on the lookout for consent forms as they send their kids back to school, Watson said.

The forms may be buried in back-to-school packets. And they may portray mental health screening using language crafted to make parents who decline the screening seem uncooperative, she said.

Beware passive consent forms, experts warn

Some schools may use a passive consent system that presumes consent unless the parent actively opts out, said Jan Eastgate, president of Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a mental health industry watchdog.

That’s why CCHR created a printable parent’s exemption form that parents can proactively give to their school leaders. The form states that school staff may not subject the child to any form of mental health, psychological, social service, or counseling screening or tests without the parent’s written consent.

Watson — who said she is not affiliated with CCHR, the Church of Scientology, which founded CCHR, or any of its activities — and Eastgate are far from alone in criticizing school-based mental health screening.

In a January 2026 report for the Manhattan Institute, policy analyst Carolyn D. Gorman concluded such screenings were both ineffective and harmful.

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon argued in a September 2025 Washington Post op-ed that schools should avoid subjecting kids to yearly mental screening.

Instead, “schools should engage and rely on parents to raise their children with nutritious family meals and family interaction, outdoor play and role-modeling,” Kennedy and McMahon wrote.

Power of suggestion: Could screenings cause depression and anxiety?

A key criticism of mental health screenings is that they may paradoxically cause harm by using confusing and suggestive language.

Watson pointed out that pediatric depression and anxiety questionnaires commonly include leading questions, including:

1. In the past few weeks, have you wished you were dead?
2. Have you felt that you or your family would be better off if you were dead?
3. Have you been having thoughts about killing yourself?
4. Have you ever tried to kill yourself?
5. Are you having thoughts of killing yourself right now?
6. How often have you felt overwhelmed in the past month?
7. Are you sad much of the time?

Some screening tools even ask children how often they have felt that they have something important to contribute to society, and what strategies they have found helpful in managing their mental health.

Watson said:

“Now, I ask, how would you have answered those questions at 8? At 13? As a K-12 student, I was definitely not thinking about my contribution to society or managing my mental health. Were you?

“Is it even healthy to encourage children to think about such matters? Worse, could these questions plant confusing ideas in the minds of our youth?”

These types of questions can convince healthy children they are “troubled,” Eastgate said.

Watson agreed, noting that a child who is repeatedly asked if they are depressed might just decide they are.

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), all children, toddlers and babies as young as 6 months old should undergo regular mental health and developmental issue screenings.

In an August 2025 clinical report, the AAP claimed that rates of mental, emotional and behavioral problems in the U.S. are rising, and early detection will lead to intervention.

However, an August 2022 study in Preventive Medicine concluded that screening adolescents for depression does not reduce their treatment for suicidal behaviors.

And a 2017 systematic review found no evidence that screening children improves mental health outcomes, but instead raises the risk of potential harm and wasted resources.

‘Labels often erode self-efficacy and create self-fulfilling prophecies’

Screenings also carry privacy and stigma risks, Eastgate said.

Watson urged parents to ask lots of questions, including what instrument will be used, what happens to the data, who sees the results, and what follow-up looks like if a child is flagged.

A child who is inaccurately flagged as having a mental health issue can end up with a psychiatric label that follows the child for years, Watson said.

“These labels often erode self-efficacy and create self-fulfilling prophecies: peers may exclude or stigmatize diagnosed children as ‘different,’ while adults lower their expectations for them.”

Who really profits from school-based mental health screenings?

Watson said good intentions may partly explain the push toward school-based mental health screenings.

After the 1999 Columbine school shooting and subsequent school shootings, many school administrators and parents have sought ways to prevent school violence perpetrated by mentally unwell students.

But there is no track record showing that mental health screenings prevent school shootings, Watson said.

She explained:

“The characteristics most often associated with school shooters — such as loneliness, social isolation and emotional distress — are extremely common among children and adolescents. While nearly all school shooters have struggled with these issues, the vast majority of lonely, isolated or emotionally distressed youth will never commit an act of violence.

“Because these risk factors are so widespread and school shootings are so rare, universal screening has very poor predictive value for identifying who will actually become a shooter.”

In other words, mental health screenings produce many false positives, while failing to identify truly high-risk individuals.

But that hasn’t stopped companies from profiting off the trend toward school-based mental health screenings.

Maro, a mental health screening digital platform for K-12 schools and districts, touts itself as “the single most efficient tool for screening youth (ages 7-17) at school for depression, anxiety, suicide and/or ADHD [attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder] & getting families to matched care.”

Eastgate said she has yet to find any independent evidence to back up Maro’s claim. Even if the claim were true, efficiency is not the same as benefit, Watson said. “Making a flawed process more efficient does not make the process sound.”

Pharma behind some school mental health screening tools

Parents aren’t warned about pharmaceutical companies’ conflicts of interest in mental health screenings, Eastgate said.

For example, Pfizer — which sells the anxiety and depression drug Zoloft — funded the development of a widely used youth depression screening tool, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).

In 2023, STAT published an investigative report on the PHQ-9’s origins under the headline, “How a depression test devised by a Zoloft marketer became a crutch for a failing mental health system.”

“In addition, many of the screening tools used are explicitly aligned with the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] diagnostic criteria. This means the tools are designed to look for the same symptom clusters used to assign psychiatric diagnoses,” Watson said.

A 2024 special report in The BMJ revealed that 55 of the U.S. doctors who helped decide what diagnoses and treatments were included in the DSM, now in its fifth edition, DSM-5-TR, received more than $14 million in undisclosed industry funding.

Often referred to as the “bible” of psychiatric disorders, the DSM is the American Psychiatric Association’s main diagnostic manual, ABC News reported.

The BMJ found that the doctors who received the most money — often in the form of food, beverages, travel and consulting reimbursements — were those working in diagnostic areas, such as depressive disorders, neurocognitive disorders and drug-induced movement disorders, “where drug interventions are often the standard treatment.”

Maro did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Related articles in The Defender

• Exclusive: How ADHD Became ‘Gateway Diagnosis’ That Led to Drug Cocktails for Millions of Children
• ‘Nobody Told Me’: Former Mental Health Patient Calls Out Dangerous Side Effects of Psychiatric Drugs
• ‘Medically Reckless’: AAP Pushes Mental Health Screenings for Kids as Young as 6 Months Old
• Hidden Epidemic’: She Was 7 When Doctors Prescribed Ritalin — By Age 20, She’d Taken 14 Different Psychotropic Drugs
• 55 U.S. Doctors Behind Psychiatric Diagnosis Manual Took $14M From Drug Companies
• Big Money for Pharma, Big Risk for Kids: When Doctors Prescribe Antipsychotics and SSRIs for Children With Autism

The post Schools Are Pushing Mental Health Screening. Research Shows It Does More Harm Than Good appeared first on Activist Post.

Ranked: America’s Most AI-Resistant Jobs

This was originally posted on our Voronoi app. Download the app for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources.

Key Takeaways:

• Registered nurses rank first with an AI resilience score of 82.2, followed by home health aides (72.7) and elementary school teachers (70.0).
• Healthcare, education, and skilled-trade occupations generally rank higher than management, logistics, and sales roles.
• Only four of the 20 occupations score above 60, showing how rare strong AI resilience is among today’s largest in-demand jobs.

As artificial intelligence transforms the workplace, one question is becoming increasingly important: which jobs are the hardest to automate?

Occupations that depend on human interaction, physical adaptability, and real-world judgment tend to be more resilient than those centered on routine information processing.

This visualization, created by Julie R. Peasley, ranks 20 of America’s largest in-demand occupations by their AI resilience using data from JobZone Risk alongside employment outlook information from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Which In-Demand U.S. Jobs Are Most Resistant to AI?

The ranking combines labor demand with AI resilience to highlight occupations that may be better positioned as AI capabilities continue to improve.

Explore the complete ranking below.

The results show a clear divide. Healthcare occupations dominate the top of the ranking, while several management, transportation, logistics, and sales roles score much lower.

Healthcare Leads the Rankings

Registered nurses earn the highest AI resilience score at 82.2, followed by home health aides at 72.7 and nursing assistants/CNAs at 67.4. These occupations depend on hands-on patient care, emotional intelligence, clinical judgment, and adaptability, all of which remain difficult for AI systems to replicate consistently.

The BLS projects continued strong demand for many healthcare occupations as the U.S. population ages and healthcare needs grow. At the same time, AI is increasingly being used to support clinicians by automating administrative tasks rather than replacing patient-facing care.

Teaching and Skilled Trades Also Score Well

Education also performs well, with elementary school teachers scoring 70.0 and teaching assistants scoring 51.2. Effective teaching extends far beyond delivering information and includes classroom management, mentoring, creativity, and responding to students’ individual needs.

Skilled trades also remain relatively resilient because physical work in unpredictable environments is difficult to automate. General maintenance and repair workers score 53.9, while construction laborers follow closely at 53.2.

Research on AI resilience increasingly emphasizes diversity of skills and adaptability as important characteristics for organizations and workers navigating rapid technological change.

Demand Doesn’t Always Mean AI Resistance

Some occupations that employ millions of Americans receive much lower resilience scores. General and operations managers score 37.5, long-haul truck drivers score 36.0, laborers and freight movers score 29.9, and wholesale and manufacturing sales representatives rank last at 26.1.

Many of these jobs include information-processing tasks that generative AI can increasingly support. However, few occupations are expected to disappear entirely. AI is more likely to automate specific tasks and reshape how people work.

For workers, resilience increasingly comes from combining technical expertise with human skills that remain difficult to automate, including empathy, leadership, creativity, and problem-solving.

The post Ranked: America’s Most AI-Resistant Jobs appeared first on Activist Post.