Commercials Can Guide You!
Commercials Can Guide You!
And they can take many forms.
Sounds like the authorities at work? That’s because they are.
You probably know that I don’t even have a TV, but that isn’t preventing me from writing about commercials. More specifically, I am addressing what one can learn from them.
The US is one of the few countries, where pharmaceuticals are allowed to use actors in TV commercials, and viewers with some hypochondriac traits or dangerous levels of empathy can easily become clients by asking for the advertised remedies from their “doctors.”
Recently, I’ve learnt that pharmaceuticals are advertising for “HIV infection,” Chrohn’s, and IBD (inflammatory bowel disease). I have also learnt from other sources that IBD (“Inflammatory Bowel Disease”) became enormously common:
As simple as it sounds, probably hardly anyone notices that commercials also fit a larger picture. This time, the old ruse, “Create a crisis that you offer to solve,” manifests itself in the most mundane and predictable manner: the victims of various types of poisoning are paying for their own “care.” Of course, in an even larger picture, their care is meant to keep them sick and, eventually, finish them off, but that doesn’t matter, because they are going extinct in the process of global depopulation, anyway.
Commercials can also be infomercials. Some of them are on Substack, too. Look at the following:
The article collects statistics (you can prove anything with statistics), but the following statement is taking the cake. You don’t even have to read the article because it’s in the title:
“Hydroxychloroquine Does Save Lives.”
The title, while posing as “opposition,” borrows the following from the title of its source:
“Efficacy and safety of in-hospital treatment of Covid-19 infection with low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in hospitalized patients.”
As I pointed out about ivermectin before, if the hospital used ANYTHING else but the official Remdesivir/ventilator/sedative protocol, it “saved lives,” even if they only brushed the patients’ teeth with a sanitary toilet brush that, in this case, also passes for a “lifesaver.” Well, sanitizers and toothpastes are also bad for you, but they are rarely as deadly as the injections or the “treatment” protocols were.
As an instant antidote, let me direct you to PM’s classic on misleading players:
It only adds insults to injury that often the “medical” paradigm itself causes failures:
Or alternatively,
I hope, you also find this more than entertaining. My point is that when something is advertised, it’s likely to be part of the current forms of public poisoning, which can be a relief, if you have the means and the time to prepare. Suspicion can rise higher, when something that was previously banned becomes legit again:
As Matt’s Microscopy has already shown it a number of times, common household consumer products can also poison you further. You can find numerous related articles on Matt’s site:
Please, expand the above collection by posting other currently-fashionable means of advertising that also give away some of the toxins.
The following site peculiarly advertises expensive or harmful products, while showing photos of appetizing meals:
Using misleading terminologies can give away culprits, as PM points out:
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/protons-last-theorem
Sometimes toxic sites are using respectable references in order to gain their audience’s confidence.
On other occasions, facts about damages are acknowledged for the same reason, but only to the extent to which they cannot be denied much longer:
While I was focusing on examining human blood, Ana Maria Mihalcea’s findings matched my expectations. However, she hasn’t addressed the problem in full: red blood cells are produced by the bone marrow, and it must be examined as well. Is Ana publishing only limited hangouts?
It’s usually a giveaway, when someone uses questionably sources. Karen Kingston seems the be a revered object of such a case, albeit not exactly earning the laurels allotted to her:
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/karen-kingston-substack-banns-proton
By association, Karen is not exactly who she means to appear. Sadly, I have similar reservations with quite a few authors whom I used to respect (well, my respect for Karen lasted for two or three of her articles at the time).
How can you clean up this mess? Try the method I have described before:
My method has enabled me to get as far as this, and the process doesn’t end here:
TV ads and commercials as well as other forms of advertising are marketing us to death. Yes, they will guide you to a quicker and more painful death. I thank the Heavens that remotes still have a mute button.
In Australia, I don't think pharma companies can advertise direct to the public, but there are ways around this. Shortly after the 'Interim Solution' (ie 'vaccines') began here - but well after other countries had begun and after certain 'side effects' had been listed by those who were awake - I noticed certain medical clinics advertising for patients in the treatment of 'shingles' on large tv screens in large retail businesses. Apart from the fact that I was unaware of any 'shingles epidemic' and certainly before side effects became an issue here, I don't recall ever seeing such narrowly-focused adverts by doctors. Maybe this is simply because I tend to ignore mainstream channels but, without foreknowledge of coming illnesses, it's hard to see how such specific advertising could ever hope to exist within any rational cost-benefit universe.