Since asking this parliamentary question linking GLOBAL EXCESS DEATH to VACCINE rollout, Tory @ABridgen MP has conveniently been SUSPENDED from sitting in parliament for 5 days, apparently due to a conflict in “lobbying” interests.
In the wake of President Trump’s victory in the 2016 election, views of the United States deteriorated around the world and today, they remain at historic lows in many countries, particularly among key U.S. partners and allies. With the second anniversary of election night approaching, Pew Research conducted a survey into views of the U.S. and the president in different parts of the world. While on balance, 50 percent of people polled in 25 countries have a favorable view of the U.S., frustration is evident among America’s neighbors, key allies and most important trading partners.
The following infographic uses Pew data to show how views of the U.S. have changed between the end of Obama’s presidency and 2018 across 12 countries from the survey. Even though Russia has the least favorable views of the U.S. out of all countries, favorability is going up, increasing by 11 percent by 2018. Israel is another country where views of the U.S. are improving and since the Obama presidency, favorability has gone from 81 to 83 percent.
Unsurprisingly favorability is down both north and south of the U.S. border. 66 percent of Mexicans had a favorable view of the U.S. towards the end of Obama’s presidency and over 600 days into Trump’s first term, that has fallen to just 32 percent. Trump has labeled illegal immigrants from Mexico “rapists” and has pledged to build a wall on America’s southern border. He has also opened a trade dispute with Canada and U.S. favorability has fallen there from 65 to 39 percent. The situation is similar in Europe where favorability among key allies such as Germany, France and Spain has evaporated. Views of the U.S. are slightly better in Asia, however, with declines evident but far less pronounced in Japan and South Korea.
Description
This chart shows the share with a favorable view of the U.S. in selected countries.
One of the key traits that make human beings unique on planet Earth is that we’re aware of our own mortality.
But, as Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley notes, scientific advances have given us insight into which behaviors may prolong life, and which activities carry the greatest risk of death. Naturally, there have been some unique attempts to create a unified structure around risk and benefit, and to quantify every aspect of the human lifespan.
As today’s graphic from TitleMax demonstrates, even when we’re thinking about death, the human desire to codify the world around us is alive and well.
Certain events – such as a parachute failing to open or being hit by a meteor – have an easily quantifiable effect on life, but how do we measure the riskiness of day-to-day habits and situations? This is where a unique unit of measurement, micromorts, comes into play.
This concept, invented by renowned decision analyst Ronald A. Howard, helps compare any number of potentially lethal risks. One micromort equals a one in a million chance of sudden death. Here’s the riskiness of various activities measured in micromorts:
LIFE UNITS
The average person, by the time they reach adulthood, will live approximately one million half-hours. Those 30 minute units are known as microlives.
The microlife concept was invented by professor David Spiegelhalter as a way to measure the consequences of various behaviors. For example, 20 minutes of physical activity earns us two microlives, while watching TV for two hours subtracts one microlife.
This measurement extends beyond nutrition and eating habits. Simply living in a modern era earns us an additional 15 microlives per day compared to those who lived a century earlier.
CASTING THE DIE ON HOW WE’LL DIE
How will the estimated 353,000 humans that will be born today eventually meet their end? This was the thought experiment conducted by Reddit user, Presneeze.
While our focus is often drawn to people who meet their end in spectacular and tragic ways, the vast majority of humanity will succumb to conditions such as heart disease and cancer.
Geography can play a big role in shifting these odds:
In the United States, which is grappling with an opioid addiction crisis, there is a 1-in-96 chance of dying from a drug overdose.
Diarrheal diseases may not be on the radar of most people living in first world countries, but in developing regions, they remain a leading cause of preventable death – particularly for children.
In Russia, the odds are 1-in-4 that a man will not live beyond 55 years. The main culprit? Vodka.
“On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”
The age-standardised rate for all cancers (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) for men and women combined was 182 per 100,000 in 2012. The rate was higher for men (205 per 100,000) than women (165 per 100,000).
Both sexes
The highest cancer rate for men and women together was found in Denmark with 338 people per 100,000 being diagnosed in 2012.
The age-standardised rate was at least 300 per 100,000 for nine countries (Denmark, France, Australia, Belgium, Norway, US, Ireland, South Korea and the Netherlands).
The countries in the top ten come from Europe, Oceania, Northern America and Asia.
Rank
Country
Age-standardised rate per 100,000 (world)
1
Denmark
338.1
2
France (metropolitan)
324.6
3
Australia
323.0
4
Belgium
321.1
5
Norway
318.3
6
US
318.0
7
Ireland
307.9
8
South Korea
307.8
9
The Netherlands
304.8
10
New Caledonia
297.9
11
Slovenia
296.3
12
Canada
295.7
13
New Zealand
295.0
14
Czech Republic
293.8
15
Switzerland
287.0
16
Hungary
285.4
17
Iceland
284.3
18
Germany
283.8
19
Israel
283.2
20
Luxembourg
280.3
21
Italy
278.6
22
Slovakia
276.9
23
UK
272.9
24
Sweden
270.0
25
Serbia
269.7
26
Croatia
266.9
27
Barbados
263.1
28
Armenia
257.0
29
Finland
256.8
30
French Polynesia
255.0
31
Austria
254.1
32
Lithuania
251.9
33
Uruguay
251.0
34
Spain
249.0
35
Latvia
246.8
36
Portugal
246.2
37
France, Martinique
245.0
38
Malta
242.9
39
Estonia
242.8
40
Macedonia
239.3
41
Montenegro
238.3
42
Kazakhstan
236.5
43
Bulgaria
234.8
44
Poland
229.6
45
Romania
224.2
46
Belarus
218.7
47
Cuba
218.0
48
Japan
217.1
49
Argentina
216.7
50
Puerto Rico
211.1
Source: Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray, F.
GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.1, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2014. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr, accessed on 16/01/2015.
Men
The highest cancer rate was found in France with 385 men per 100,000 being diagnosed in 2012.
The age-standardised rate was at least 350 per 100,000 in eight countries (France, Australia, Norway, Belgium, Martinique, Slovenia, Hungary and Denmark).
The countries in the top ten come from Europe, Oceania and the Americas.
Rank
Country
Age-standardised rate per 100,000 (world)
1
France (metropolitan)
385.3
2
Australia
373.9
3
Norway
368.7
4
Belgium
364.8
5
France, Martinique
358.4
6
Slovenia
358.2
7
Hungary
356.1
8
Denmark
354.3
9
US
347.0
10
Czech Republic
345.9
11
Ireland
343.3
12
South Korea
340.0
13
Slovakia
338.2
14
Switzerland
337.9
15
New Caledonia
330.7
16
The Netherlands
327.8
17
Latvia
325.0
18
Germany
323.7
19
Estonia
321.9
20
Canada
320.8
21
New Zealand
320.1
22
Croatia
319.9
23
Israel
318.0
24
Italy
312.9
25
Spain
312.8
26
Lithuania
311.8
27
Luxembourg
309.1
28
Portugal
306.3
29
Armenia
305.6
30
Iceland
299.5
31
Serbia
299.2
32
Uruguay
297.5
33
Sweden
296.8
34
Austria
295.2
35
Finland
290.1
36
French Polynesia
287.4
37
UK
284.0
38
Kazakhstan
282.2
39
Barbados
277.2
40
Belarus
275.5
41
Trinidad and Tobago
273.5
42
Romania
271.0
43
Poland
269.2
44
Malta
267.7
45
Macedonia
265.5
46
Montenegro
262.7
47
France, Guadeloupe
260.9
48
Bulgaria
260.5
49
Japan
260.4
50
Turkey
257.8
Source: Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray, F.
GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.1, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2014. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr, accessed on 16/01/2015.
Women
The highest cancer rate was found in Denmark with 329 women per 100,000 being diagnosed in 2012.
The age-standardised rate was at least 280 per 100,000 for Denmark, US, South Korea, the Netherlands and Belgium.
The countries in the top ten come from Europe, Oceania, Asia and Northern America.
Rank
Country
Age-standardised rate per 100,000 (world)
1
Denmark
328.8
2
US
297.4
3
South Korea
293.6
4
The Netherlands
289.6
5
Belgium
288.9
6
Ireland
278.9
7
Australia
278.6
8
Canada
277.4
9
Norway
277.1
10
France (metropolitan)
267.7
11
New Zealand
274.3
12
Iceland
274.2
13
New Caledonia
269.3
14
UK
267.3
15
Luxembourg
259.6
16
Czech Republic
258.9
17
Israel
258.7
18
Barbados
258.1
19
Italy
255.2
20
Germany
252.5
21
Slovenia
251.5
22
Sweden
248.7
23
Serbia
247.6
24
Switzerland
245.9
25
Slovakia
238.0
26
Hungary
236.5
27
Finland
234.2
28
Croatia
231.6
29
Malta
228.9
30
French Polynesia
227.3
31
Armenia
226.4
32
Lithuania
224.0
33
Bahamas
223.4
34
Austria
222.7
35
Uruguay
220.9
36
Macedonia
220.8
37
Bulgaria
220.1
38
Montenegro
219.7
39
Kazakhstan
216.7
40
Argentina
211.8
41
Zimbabwe
209.1
42
Latvia
206.5
43
Poland
205.6
44
Estonia
202.7
45
Singapore
198.7
46
Cyprus
198.2
47
Spain
198.1
48
Portugal
198.1
49
Kenya
196.6
50
Mauritius
193.9
Source: Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray, F.
GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.1, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2014. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr, accessed on 16/01/2015.
— Though right-wing commentators continue to decry the ‘war on cops,’ the latest data released by the country’s top law enforcement undermines that alarmist narrative.
According to the FBI’s annual Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted report, released this week, there were fewer police deaths in 2017 than in 2016. In 2016, 118 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty while in 2017, that number was 93.
More telling is the type of death the officers suffered. Last year, 46 officers were killed “feloniously” on the job while 47 died in accidents. As the FBI’s press release noted, “Both numbers have decreased from 2016, during which 66 officers were feloniously killed and 52 were accidentally killed, for a total of 118 line-of-duty deaths.”
The data is collected from “local, state, tribal, campus, and federal law enforcement agencies from around the country, as well as organizations that track officer deaths.”
A closer look at the statistics reveals further just how nonexistent the war on cops actually is. Of the 46 officers feloniously killed on the job, five were ambushed (defined as “entrapment/premeditation” by the FBI) and 3 were victims of unprovoked attacks. Twenty-one died during “investigative or enforcement activities,” which include traffic stops, investigating suspicious persons, or tactical situations.
In other words, they were killed doing the jobs they signed up to do (consider the popular refrain that ‘cops risk their lives’ — that’s part of the job description), though police officer does not even crack the top ten most dangerous jobs in the United States.
The takeaway here is that while some officers die on the job — and that is unfortunate — the deliberate sentiment to kill officers simply because they are police officers is not on the rise.
Thirty-five officers died in car accidents — more than four times the number killed by ambushes and unprovoked attacks (eight) — and according to the FBI, “of the 29 officers killed in automobile accidents, 12 were wearing seatbelts, and 15 were not,” though two of the officers not wearing seatbelts were sitting in parked cars. Regardless, more officers died in car accidents while not wearing seatbelts (a violation of the laws they enforce, as it happens) than died as a result of flagrant attacks on their lives isolated from situational circumstances.
Further, the total number of officers killed by accident far dwarfs the number killed in ambushes or unprovoked attacks, and the total is still greater than all law enforcement deaths recorded in the annual report.
Further still, the number of cops killed feloniously was higher in 2016, 2014, 2012, 2011, 2010, and 2009 than it was last year, suggesting the rate of cop murders is subject to fluctuation and not consistently on the rise.
In another relevant detail, zero federal law enforcement agents were killed in 2017. In 2016, one was killed.
Despite the ongoing claims that police are under assault (as they continue to assault the public) — and despite congressional action to designate killing police officers a hate crime — for yet another year, this war on cops notion is proving to be nothing more than a myth.
“Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington DC (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.”
We have to question deaths by gun and vaccines—one illegal and the other definitely legal. When the statistics are matched up, does this make sense?
Please be forewarned. I’m going to go where no one probably has gone before or probably will attempt to go again. However, after reading statistics about gun deaths in the USA and how they are spun in order to gain gun control and negate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, I feel perhaps something’s just not quite cricket, so I’d like to know if readers think the same.
Furthermore, if one Constitutional Amendment is negated, that sets the stage that all can be lost! Ever think of that? Do we want that?
Recently a reader emailed me the Rense.com article “Gun Control Facts You’ll Never Hear.” Knowing how statistics are spun in general, I began to appreciate there’s an agenda for controlling the population’s perception and also what’s been called “problem-reaction-solution”—the apparent solution being a preprogrammed end result impacting special interests’ agendas, e.g., total gun control.
According to Rense, these are how U.S. gun deaths break down:
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms. That is not disputed.
What is never shown, though, is a breakdown of those deaths to put them in perspective, as compared to other causes of death. [CJF emphasis]
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and mostly justified • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons • 3% are accidental discharge deathsSo technically, “gun violence” is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100 (0.17 x 30,000).
Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington DC (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation or about 75 per state. That is an average because some states have much higher rates than others. [50 states + DC]
So who are responsible for the majority of gun deaths?
Suicides claim 65 percent; law enforcement 15 percent; accidental gun discharges 3 percent. That leaves 17 percent of gun deaths from criminal type activity or mentally ill persons with four large cities accounting for most of those criminal deaths: Chicago 9.4 percent; Baltimore 6.7 percent; Detroit 6.5 percent; and Washington, DC 2.3 percent. Interesting?
However, there are no classifications for “false flag event” [4] and terrorism deaths, which really should become specific forensic categories, I think.
Now, let’s take a look at deaths from vaccines!
No correlation, you say. I beg to differ and here’s why.
One type of death—gun—is targeted to be dealt with publicly, while the other—vaccine deaths—are totally disregarded and apparently considered ‘normal collateral damage’ necessary to protect ‘herd immunity’.
What’s wrong with such mental perceptions? Innocent lives are impacted by both types of deaths! What happens when it’s your child?
According to Page 5 of the HRSA Vaccine Payout Schedule [1], we see that 1,197 deaths from vaccines have been reported since October 1, 1988 to July 1, 2016. Granted, it’s not 30,000 per year but, if people are concerned about deaths perpetrated by others, shouldn’t there be more concern about vaccinees’ lives too?
And yet, seemingly, there’s no one in HHS, CDC, FDA or federal bureaucrats doing anything to expose the problems of vaccines causing deaths or even the fraudulent science that goes on in those agencies, especially at the CDC [2]. Something is tragically wrong!
Not only do vaccines cause deaths, they also cause horrendous adverse health effects that can last a lifetime [5]. Pages 8 and 9 of the HRSA Vaccine Payout Schedule [1] document the scope of vaccine health damages, which probably represents less than 5 to 10 percent of what’s reported by doctors, according to former FDA Commissioner David Kessler, MD [3].
A point of reference—and rightfully so—is that “Black Lives Matter” regarding young black boys who receive vaccines. During interviews with African-American mothers about their vaccine-damaged children, you can begin to grasp the scope of vaccine damage, which sometimes can be a lifetime of suffering for the family, something possibly even more traumatic than experiencing a death.
Very courageous mothers, who care for vaccine-damaged children, speak out here.
Families have to pay the costs for vaccine adverse events healthcare in many, if not all, instances. Furthermore, families are abandoned by the medical profession, which incorrectly mandates infants and children receive vaccinations or be dismissed from a healthcare facility’s practice if they question vaccine safety or refuse vaccinations. Isn’t a physician’s credo, “First, do no harm”? Can a vaccination hypodermic needle also be considered a lethal weapon?
Consequently, we have to question deaths by gun and vaccine syringe—one illegal and the other definitely legal. How can a profession harm and/or kill [6] innocent children and still get away with it?
So why aren’t people enraged about vaccine deaths like they are about guns?
Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.
Welfare is the organized public or private social services for the assistance of disadvantaged groups. Aid could include general Welfare payments, health care through Medicaid, food stamps, special payments for pregnant women and young mothers, and federal and state housing benefits. The Welfare system in the United States began in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. Opponents of Welfare argue that it affects work incentives.
Welfare in the United States commonly refers to the federal government welfare programs that have been put in place to assist the unemployed or underemployed.
State financed public assistance programs were often inadequate to meet the challenges of large-scale unemployment and urban poverty that often afflicted states and urban areas. But it was the Great Depression of the 1930’s that led to the collapse of state financed public relief programs. Conditions were so grave it became necessary for the federal government to step in and help with the costs of public relief.
A number of government agencies were created to oversee the welfare programs. Some of the agencies that deal with welfare in the United States are the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Department of Labor, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Education.
Welfare can take a variety of forms, such as monetary payments, subsidies and vouchers, or housing assistance. Welfare systems differ from country to country, but welfare is commonly provided to individuals who are unemployed, those with illness or disability, the elderly, those with dependent children, and veterans.
Statistic Verification
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Commerce, CATO Institute
Research Date: January 23rd, 2016
Questions: How many people are on welfare? Welfare demographics? How long does the average person stay on welfare?
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone
Tales from the Conspiratum 