(5) Form of Motion and Responsive Pleadings. (A) Notice of Court Date. A Notice of Court Date shall be filed with the motion. The Notice shall identify the moving party, the names and service addresses of all parties requiring notice, the title of the motion, the name of the hearing judge, the trial date, the date for hearing, and the time of the hearing if it is a motion for which oral argument will be held. A Notice of Court Date form is available from the clerk’s office and online: www.kingcounty.gov/courts/clerk/forms. (B) Form of Motions and of Responsive Pleadings. The motion shall be combined with the memorandum of authorities into a single document, and shall conform to the following format: (i) Relief Requested. The specific relief the court is requested to grant or deny. (ii) Statement of Facts. A succinct statement of the facts contended to be material. (iii) Statement of Issues. A concise statement of the issue or issues of law upon which the Court is requested to rule. (iv) Evidence Relied Upon. The evidence on which the motion or opposition is based must be specified with particularity. Deposition testimony, discovery pleadings, and documentary evidence relied upon must be quoted verbatim or a photocopy of relevant pages must be attached to a declaration identifying the documents. Parties should highlight those parts upon which they place substantial reliance. Copies of cases shall not be attached to original pleadings. Responsive pleadings shall conform to this format. (v) Authority. Any legal authority relied upon must be cited. Copies of all cited non-Washington authorities upon which parties place substantial reliance shall be provided to the hearing judicial officer and to counsel or parties, but shall not be filed with the clerk. See LCR 5(k). (vi) Word Limits. Absent prior authorization from the court, the initial motion and opposing memorandum shall not exceed 4,200 words; and reply memoranda shall not exceed 1,750 words. The word count includes all portions of the motion/memorandum, including headings and footnotes, except 1) the caption; 2) tables of contents and/or authorities, if any; and 3) the signature block. The signature block shall include the certification of the signer as to the number of words, substantially as follows: “I certify that this memorandum contains _____ words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules.” (vii) Consecutive Page Numbering for Attachments. Attachments or exhibits to any filed document, in excess of 25 pages, including motions, oppositions, replies, briefs, declarations, and affidavits, whether in paper or electronic form, shall be numbered consecutively on the bottom center or right-hand corner of each document to aid the court and the parties in navigating through the document. The number shall not restart for each attachment but shall run consecutively through all the attachments to the document. All motions, oppositions, replies, and briefs shall cite to these page numbers. A party may include other citation information, such as exhibit numbers, corresponding exhibit pages or paragraph numbers, in addition to the consecutive page cite. (C) Form of Proposed Orders; E-mail Addresses. The moving party and any party opposing the motion shall include with their submissions a proposed order. The original of each proposed order shall be submitted to the hearing judge along with any working copies. If the motion is to be considered without oral argument, the moving party shall at the time of filing the motion provide to the court e-mail addresses for the court’s use in providing courtesy copies of entered orders. Where working copies are provided via the clerk’s eWorking Copies application, the parties shall request courtesy copies of entered order(s) through the clerk’s application.
A New York mom resorted to ending her life last week after fighting long and hard for custody—and failing.
Catherine Kassenoff had recently been diagnosed with terminal cancer and said she no longer had the endurance to continue to battle both cancer and custody. She completed an assisted suicide in Switzerland in what she described as an “idyllic setting”.
Catherine characterized her years in Family Court as a complete nightmare.
In the last four years of my life I have woken up every day to a nightmare like no other.
Last month Catherine was barred from seeing her girls at all, not even in the supervised visits she had endured for many years. She was not allowed to say goodbye to her children and tell them she loved them. That may have been the breaking point.
But she was a strong, outspoken woman and would not remain silent about the unjust treatment of herself and so many mothers like her in family courts.
NOT GOING OUT QUIETLY
Catherine was not about to go out quietly. She wanted her suicide to bring light to the Custody Crisis and make a difference for women struggling to keep and protect their children in Family Court.
Catherine wanted her story to serve as a warning to all women that they will likely face oppression and devastation if the father decides he wants custody. If she—federal prosecutor, counsel to a governor, with plenty of money, education, connections and resources (at least in the beginning)—could lose her children and everything she had, any woman could.
If this could happen to me, it could happen to any woman.
Saying she did not want “her demise to be in vain”, Catherine made a last poston Facebook just moments before her assisted suicide, exposing how her life had been completely destroyed by Family Court.
I have…endured the emotional devastation of being without my children for so long, homeless from…repeated ex parte evictions…from the homes I own and rented, deprivation of my property and obliteration of my life savings, the loss of my two dogs, the loss of my career and reputation, and the concomitant humiliation and ostracism from all this.
She linked a dropbox fileto her post with legal documents and other evidence, including videos of her ex verbally abusing her children and her.
You will find police testimony about his abuse, medical records of his abuse, affidavits about his abuse, and more in the link.
A series of 3 Tiktokposts by @therobbieharvey have gone viral going on 30 million views! [Click on the playlist.] The third one [below], is a 7 minute update with a compilation of video clips of her ex verbally abusing and berating Catherine. It also exposes some of the complicit family court minions.
Although it feels good to expose all the immoral minions, keep in mind judges are the only ones with the power to deprive mothers of their children. They don’t really believe what evaluators, children’s attorneys, et. al. say about mothers lying, alienating, or being mentally ill; they just use their reports to hang their hat on when switching custody to the father. The buck stops with the judge(s).
It’s also not good to focus on the exes, as abusers are a dime a dozen and they cannot take children away from mothers without judicial enabling. But it is nice to know that so many people have complained to Catherine’s ex’s law firm that he has been pressured into taking a leave of absence while they supposedly investigate (as if they didn’t know).
The father has become quite the public pariah thanks to the internet and social media. Thus, in death, if not in life or Family Court, Catherine was able to hold him somewhat accountable for taking her children away and alienating them from her.
CATHERINE’S STORY
Catherine was a wonderful mother and an accomplished woman.
She was a graduate of Dartmouth and NYU and some of her jobs included: federal prosecutor, law professor, and senior counsel for a number of corporations. Her most recent job was as Special Counsel to NY Governor Kathy Hokul on the Energy & Finance Cabinet.
But none of that mattered. Catherine, an attorney herself, was never provided due process in Family Court.
Despite her stellar background, clean record, intelligence, legal knowledge, documented evidence of abuse by the father, and her children’s desire to live with her and not with him, it was he who got custody and she who was placed on supervised visits. Bogus Protective Orders against her were issued, but she was denied truly needed Protective Orders against him.
Catherine’s case followed the Custody Crisis Playbook. She was falsely accused of alienating the children and then her ex was allowed to truly alienate them from her. The children were ordered into “therapy” ostensibly to “deprogram” them from her alienation. But it was actually to brainwash them into thinking their mother was the problem—the goal being to silence them about the father’s abuse and facilitate the implementation of court orders to live with him.
All this to Accomplish the Agenda: Get the Kids under the Father’s Control.
Judge Lewis Lubell was one of four judges involved with Catherine’s case. In 2019, he gave the father sole custody and evicted her from the marital home, despite the fact she had always been the kids’ primary nurturer. He restricted her to supervised visits. Catherine eventually got him recused for having a conflict of interest with the evaluator who had recommended the custody switch.
Judge Nancy Quinn Koba (left); Judge Lewis Lubell (right)
Judge Nancy Quinn Koba was another judge who went along with the cover up of abuse and empowering of the father. She was also involved with Lizzie’s case, granting the father’s Restraining Order against her.
Judge Quinn continued to torment Catherine with infrequent, supervised contact with her children. In the end, just last month, she ordered (or allowed) no contact at all.
WHAT’S MONEY GOT TO DO WITH IT?
Much of the media and many activists are placing a gender neutral cause on the horrors inflicted on Catherine in Family Court: it must be the money…
Although it is implausible to blame lack of training or child safety laws in her case, many are placing blame on the Family Court “cottage industry”, the money being made by various court-appointees. After all, her ex spent millions and ambulance chasers made a ton in the process.
But Catherine had plenty of money before she was financially devastated via Family Court. By 2021, she had already spent $600K on the custody battle, however, she, a mere woman, was not able to keep even the supposedly presumptive joint custody—or just unsupervised visits. And in the end, she was prohibited from any contact at all.
This cannot be explained by the money hypothesis. The only plausible explanation is that the driving factor for Catherine’s—and millions of other mothers around the world—is the entrenched agenda to keep men entitled and empowered in the family, being overseen and enforced by the OBN (old boy network). [See “Down the Money Rabbit Hole” for a more in-depth discussion of this gender neutral diversion.]
UNBEARABLE PAIN
The pain Catherine endured from the loss of her children was unbearable.
I would long for the girls…I imagined who their friends were, where they went, who they spent time with, what their dreams were. I had nothing more than my own imagination to work with because for the last 3 years, I was excised from being their mother.
I could not tuck them into bed at night, take them to school, host their sleepovers, make their breakfasts, or take them on vacations. Allan wouldn’t allow any of that; the court gave him everything he wanted. I often shook from the pain of it.
Catherine asked that we share her story so her life was not in vain, so please share this post and let the public know there is an epidemic of mothers losing custody!
I hope that in death I can achieve what I could not in life…I hope that the public will stand up and say enough is enough.
Rest in Peace Catherine…
Condolences to Family & Friends…
May her Children Heal, Know their Mother Fought for them & Be Treated Well…
REMEMBERING MOTHERS
Catherine joins the long list of mothers who did not make it out of Family Court alive. Following are some of the cases The Women’s Coalition has covered over the last few years. They do not include the many cases in which the mother is murdered by her ex due to having to co-parent with him.
It would be great for as many mothers as possible to be there supporting them. It is such an outrage that they are being prosecuted. We will continue to update…
07-2-01035-0 | STATE OF WA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT VS SHAWN W DAY, ET UX
Case Number 07-2-01035-0
Court Lewis
File Date 08/20/2007
Case Type Tax Warrants
Case Status Completed/Re-Completed
Party
Taxpayer (Participant) DAY, JANE DOE
Taxpayer (Participant) DAY, SHAWN W
Plaintiff STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT
Disposition Events
08/20/2007 Judgment
Judgment Type Tax Warrant
Monetary/Property Award
Creditors: STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT
Debtors: DAY, JANE DOE, DAY, SHAWN W
Signed Date: 08/13/2007
Filed Date: 08/20/2007
Effective Date: 08/20/2007
Current Judgment Status:
Status: Vacated
Status Date: 11/09/2007
Comment: Judgments this case: 1 2007-08-20 WOBES WARRANT OVERPAID BENEFITS EMPLY SEC JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT AND AGAINST SHAWN W DAY, 118 WALLACE RD, MOSSYROCK, WA 98564-9613 AND THE MARITAL COMMUNITY OF SHAWN W DAY IN THE AMOUNT OF 550.88. PLUS INTEREST @ 1% PER MONTH 2007-11-19 TWV TAX WARRANT VACATED
School of Thought did an amazing job describing some of the most common logical fallacies in plain English. Study them and improve your thinking.
Logical fallacies are mistakes and flaws in reasoning.
Whenever I’m reviewing a decision memo, strategy proposal, experiment report, an investment thesis, or some other document which might have significant impact on the firm’s performance, I’m checking if the argument makes sense logically.
In other words, I’m examining if the conclusion is supported by the statements and premises preceding it. Any disconnects are explored further.
Studying logical fallacies is a good way to improve your thinking and reasoning.
School of Thought did an amazing job describing some of the most common logical fallacies in plain English. You can study them on their interactive website, or below, reproduced on a single page.
If you’d like to become better at overcoming these fallacies I suggest the following guide:
Strawman
By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone’s argument, it’s much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate.
Example: After Will said that we should put more money into health and education, Warren responded by saying that he was surprised that Will hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenceless by cutting military spending.
False cause
Many people confuse correlation (things happening together or in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.
Example: Pointing to a fancy chart, Roger shows how temperatures have been rising over the past few centuries, whilst at the same time the numbers of pirates have been decreasing; thus pirates cool the world and global warming is a hoax.
Appeal to emotion
Appeals to emotion include appeals to fear, envy, hatred, pity, pride, and more. It’s important to note that sometimes a logically coherent argument may inspire emotion or have an emotional aspect, but the problem and fallacy occurs when emotion is used instead of a logical argument, or to obscure the fact that no compelling rational reason exists for one’s position. Everyone, bar sociopaths, is affected by emotion, and so appeals to emotion are a very common and effective argument tactic, but they’re ultimately flawed, dishonest, and tend to make one’s opponents justifiably emotional.
Example: Luke didn’t want to eat his sheep’s brains with chopped liver and brussel sprouts, but his father told him to think about the poor, starving children in a third world country who weren’t fortunate enough to have any food at all.
The fallacy fallacy
It is entirely possible to make a claim that is false yet argue with logical coherency for that claim, just as it is possible to make a claim that is true and justify it with various fallacies and poor arguments.
Example: Recognising that Amanda had committed a fallacy in arguing that we should eat healthy food because a nutritionist said it was popular, Alyse said we should therefore eat bacon double cheeseburgers every day.
Slippery slope
The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture.
Example: Colin Closet asserts that if we allow same-sex couples to marry, then the next thing we know we’ll be allowing people to marry their parents, their cars and even monkeys.
Ad hominem
Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone’s case without actually having to engage with it.
Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn’t married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.
Tu quoque
Pronounced too-kwo-kwee. Literally translating as ‘you too’ this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.
Example: Nicole identified that Hannah had committed a logical fallacy, but instead of addressing the substance of her claim, Hannah accused Nicole of committing a fallacy earlier on in the conversation.
Personal incredulity
Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.
Example: Kirk drew a picture of a fish and a human and with effusive disdain asked Richard if he really thought we were stupid enough to believe that a fish somehow turned into a human through just, like, random things happening over time.
Special pleading
Humans are funny creatures and have a foolish aversion to being wrong. Rather than appreciate the benefits of being able to change one’s mind through better understanding, many will invent ways to cling to old beliefs. One of the most common ways that people do this is to post-rationalize a reason why what they thought to be true must remain to be true. It’s usually very easy to find a reason to believe something that suits us, and it requires integrity and genuine honesty with oneself to examine one’s own beliefs and motivations without falling into the trap of justifying our existing ways of seeing ourselves and the world around us.
Example: Edward Johns claimed to be psychic, but when his ‘abilities’ were tested under proper scientific conditions, they magically disappeared. Edward explained this saying that one had to have faith in his abilities for them to work.
Loaded question
Loaded question fallacies are particularly effective at derailing rational debates because of their inflammatory nature – the recipient of the loaded question is compelled to defend themselves and may appear flustered or on the back foot.
Example: Grace and Helen were both romantically interested in Brad. One day, with Brad sitting within earshot, Grace asked in an inquisitive tone whether Helen was still having problems with her drug habit.
Burden of proof
The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove. The inability, or disinclination, to disprove a claim does not render that claim valid, nor give it any credence whatsoever. However it is important to note that we can never be certain of anything, and so we must assign value to any claim based on the available evidence, and to dismiss something on the basis that it hasn’t been proven beyond all doubt is also fallacious reasoning.
Example: Bertrand declares that a teapot is, at this very moment, in orbit around the Sun between the Earth and Mars, and that because no one canprove him wrong, his claim is therefore a valid one.
AMBIGUITY
Politicians are often guilty of using ambiguity to mislead and will later point to how they were technically not outright lying if they come under scrutiny. The reason that it qualifies as a fallacy is that it is intrinsically misleading.
Example: When the judge asked the defendant why he hadn’t paid his parking fines, he said that he shouldn’t have to pay them because the sign said ‘Fine for parking here’ and so he naturally presumed that it would be fine to park there.
The gambler’s fallacy
This commonly believed fallacy can be said to have helped create an entire city in the desert of Nevada USA. Though the overall odds of a ‘big run’ happening may be low, each spin of the wheel is itself entirely independent from the last. So whilst there may be a very small chance that heads will come up 20 times in a row if you flip a coin, the chances of heads coming up on each individual flip remain 50/50, and aren’t influenced by what happened before.
Example: Red had come up six times in a row on the roulette wheel, so Greg knew that it was close to certain that black would be next up. Suffering an economic form of natural selection with this thinking, he soon lost all of his savings.
Bandwagon
The flaw in this argument is that the popularity of an idea has absolutely no bearing on its validity. If it did, then the Earth would have made itself flat for most of history to accommodate this popular belief.
Example: Shamus pointed a drunken finger at Sean and asked him to explain how so many people could believe in leprechauns if they’re only a silly old superstition. Sean, however, had had a few too many Guinness himself and fell off his chair.
Appeal to authority
It’s important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence. However, it is entirely possible that the opinion of a person or institution of authority is wrong; therefore the authority that such a person or institution holds does not have any intrinsic bearing upon whether their claims are true or not.
Example: Not able to defend his position that evolution ‘isn’t true’ Bob says that he knows a scientist who also questions evolution (and presumably isn’t a primate).
Composition/division
Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, or vice versa, but the crucial difference is whether there exists good evidence to show that this is the case. Because we observe consistencies in things, our thinking can become biased so that we presume consistency to exist where it does not.
Example: Daniel was a precocious child and had a liking for logic. He reasoned that atoms are invisible, and that he was made of atoms and therefore invisible too. Unfortunately, despite his thinking skills, he lost the game of hide and go seek.
No true Scotsman
In this form of faulty reasoning one’s belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn’t apply to a supposedly ‘true’ example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one’s argument.
Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.
Genetic
This fallacy avoids the argument by shifting focus onto something’s or someone’s origins. It’s similar to an ad hominem fallacy in that it leverages existing negative perceptions to make someone’s argument look bad, without actually presenting a case for why the argument itself lacks merit.
Example: Accused on the 6 o’clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be.
Black-or-white
Also known as the false dilemma, this insidious tactic has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented. Binary, black-or-white thinking doesn’t allow for the many different variables, conditions, and contexts in which there would exist more than just the two possibilities put forth. It frames the argument misleadingly and obscures rational, honest debate.
Example: Whilst rallying support for his plan to fundamentally undermine citizens’ rights, the Supreme Leader told the people they were either on his side, or they were on the side of the enemy.
Begging the question
This logically incoherent argument often arises in situations where people have an assumption that is very ingrained, and therefore taken in their minds as a given. Circular reasoning is bad mostly because it’s not very good.
Example: The word of Zorbo the Great is flawless and perfect. We know this because it says so in The Great and Infallible Book of Zorbo’s Best and Most Truest Things that are Definitely True and Should Not Ever Be Questioned.
Appeal to nature
Many ‘natural’ things are also considered ‘good’, and this can bias our thinking; but naturalness itself doesn’t make something good or bad. For instance murder could be seen as very natural, but that doesn’t mean it’s good or justifiable.
Example: The medicine man rolled into town on his bandwagon offering various natural remedies, such as very special plain water. He said that it was only natural that people should be wary of ‘artificial’ medicines such as antibiotics.
Anecdotal
It’s often much easier for people to believe someone’s testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more ‘abstract’ statistical reality.
Example: Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked, like, 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97 – so don’t believe everything you read about meta analyses of methodologically sound studies showing proven causal relationships.
The Texas sharpshooter
This ‘false cause’ fallacy is coined after a marksman shooting randomly at barns and then painting bullseye targets around the spot where the most bullet holes appear, making it appear as if he’s a really good shot. Clusters naturally appear by chance, but don’t necessarily indicate that there is a causal relationship.
Example: The makers of Sugarette Candy Drinks point to research showing that of the five countries where Sugarette drinks sell the most units, three of them are in the top ten healthiest countries on Earth, therefore Sugarette drinks are healthy.
Middle ground
Much of the time the truth does indeed lie between two extreme points, but this can bias our thinking: sometimes a thing is simply untrue and a compromise of it is also untrue. Half way between truth and a lie, is still a lie.
Example: Holly said that vaccinations caused autism in children, but her scientifically well-read friend Caleb said that this claim had been debunked and proven false. Their friend Alice offered a compromise that vaccinations must cause some autism, just not all autism.
The Archimedean Solids cousins to the Platonic Solids as all of them are composed of regular polygons meeting in identical vertices with the Platonic Solid’s faces being composed of only one type of polygon…
3 04/27/2023 Temporary Order for Protection View Document Temporary Order for Protection Judicial Officer Sauerlender, Robert D Comment AND HEARING NOTICE
5 05/03/2023 Return of Service View Document Return of Service
6 05/11/2023 Protection Order Original Type Protection Order View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer Butler, Tirsa C Hearing Time 9:00 AM Result Held Comment Ms. Ramos and Counsel appearing via zoom. Adam Pierce appearing via zoom Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): RAMOS, NICOLE LITKIE Respondent (WIP): PIERCE, ADAM
The following article suggests they can. However, readers should do their due diligence in evaluating this claim as it sounds like a scam–especially the hurry up and buy this before they’re gone sales tactic.
Any fact based feedback derived from verifiable sources will be appreciated when left in comments.
Here’s what the AI bot, ChatGPT has to say:
No, CBD gummies cannot cure diabetes. While there is some evidence to suggest that CBD may help manage certain symptoms associated with diabetes, such as pain and inflammation, it is not a cure for the disease.
Diabetes is a chronic condition in which the body is unable to produce or properly use insulin, a hormone that regulates blood sugar levels. While there is no cure for diabetes, it can be managed through lifestyle changes, medication, and insulin therapy.
Some studies suggest that CBD may help improve insulin sensitivity and reduce inflammation, which are both important factors in managing diabetes. However, more research is needed to fully understand the potential benefits and risks of using CBD for diabetes management.
It is also important to note that CBD may interact with certain medications commonly used to treat diabetes, such as insulin and metformin. Therefore, if you are considering using CBD to manage your diabetes symptoms, you should speak with your healthcare provider first to ensure it is safe for you to do so.
15 March 2023 10:16
Diabetics can have sweets! 93-year-old chemist wows everyone with his way of controlling blood sugar
United States of America is the birthplace of many famous scientists who have made great contributions to modern science and medicine and who have changed the perception of wrong processes. It is science that opens up new possibilities, including in the treatment of dangerous diseases.
Today, diabetes is one of the most severe and common pathologies in the world. However, despite this, humanity still knows very little about this disease.
However, world-renowned scientists know much more about this pathology! And some of them use their knowledge to heal themselves.
One of these scientists is Johnson Alsopp, a American chemist known far beyond the borders of the country for his discoveries. In 2002, Johnson Alsopp was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery of phosphoanhydride bonds in ATP molecules (together with scientists Bruce Kessler and Garrett Johnson).
Notably, Johnson is now 93 years old. He feels great, conducts active research activities, writes scientific papers and articles.
Johnson has a very busy schedule and we are very happy that he agreed to make time for us to come to the studio and do a little interview.
Diabetes mellitus can be cured, but only under one condition….
– Johnson, hello. Thank you for being agreed to an interview. It’s not every day that you get to ask questions to an expert of this level.
– Hello. Always glad to interesting and productive communication. Moreover, this information, which we will talk about today, can be useful to people.
– Johnson, you are already 93 years old. How are you feeling? As far as we know, you are now doing research work as much as before? Do you get tired of such loads?
– I never get tired of work. Especially from the one I love with all my heart. I’m getting tired of idleness! Of course, I’m not 20 years old, but I don’t complain about my health. Being healthy at 93 is a reward for any person. But even when I’m not in the laboratory, I still try to do something, and not just sit in front of the TV. I can take a walk with my grandchildren or take care of my garden.
– It is amazing! Are you not sick at all? For many people, old age is a series of diseases that appear in a chain one after another. And for you not?
Now he is healthy, but he used to be sick. I just broke the chain at the right time. I had health problems at 60, and now I feel even better than in those years.
– What kind of health problems did you have?
– Sugar was rising. The first was prediabetes. There was increased glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glycemia. And then diabetes. That is the official diagnosis.
– Do you have diabetes? So you are a diabetic? And you can’t tell…
– Well, what’s so amazing! After all, I am also a person, although all my life I have been engaged in a sphere that is almost in contact with metabolic processes. The years then took their toll. Yes, and bad habits were, what is there to hide. He liked to eat spicy fried foods. I’m also a big fan of sweets. Very straight forward. Even now. I love buns and pies that my wife bakes.
– Do diabetics live up to 93 years?
– Unfortunately no! It’s unrealistic. Most diabetics do not live past 70, and living to 80 is generally a great success. It’s not even worth talking about 100 – no one survives. Neither the heart nor blood vessels can function for a long time with constant jumps in sugar, they wear out very quickly. A heart attack or stroke is what eventually happens to a diabetic and in 99% of cases this happens before the age of 70!
Look at this chart, this is the official data on deaths from diabetes in the USA
– So you cured diabetes?
– Quite right. The diabetes mellitus was and has passed or has taken place. Every year I go through examinations – sugar has not risen for several decades.
How exactly did you beat diabetes? Can this pathology be cured?
– Can! Most diseases can be cured if you try hard! My knowledge helped me cope with the pathology. At first, like everyone else, I relied on medicine and doctors. But they failed to cure me. Then I cured myself. As you can see, I did much better.
– How exactly did you treat yourself? Tell me your secret? Can other people be cured in the same way?
– There really is no secret. Only scientific knowledge.
See What is diabetes? THIS IS A PATHOLOGICAL PROCESS IN THE ORGANISM WHEN THE INTERACTION OF THREE COMPONENTS – INSULIN, GLUCOSE AND CELL AMINO ACIDS IS DISTURBED. As a result, glucose is not completely broken down and remains in the blood.
The very reaction of splitting and assimilation of glucose (glycolysis) occurs in 9 stages. Diabetics have errors in the 7th reaction of glycolysis. At this stage, two molecules of pyruvic acid are formed from one glucose molecule, which then penetrate into the cells. So in diabetics this does not happen or does not happen to the full extent. Why?
The fact is that this reaction occurs with the obligatory presence of insulin. However, in people with diabetes, insulin is no longer used effectively. This is due to a general decrease in metabolic reactions, as a result of which insulin loses some of its properties and becomes, as it were, “low quality”. Of course, I’m exaggerating everything very much, I just want you to understand what and how happens in the body.
With “low-quality” insulin, glycolysis does not occur to its full potential. The response is weak. As a result, not all glucose is converted into energy; sugar in a person’s blood rises.
– Every doctor knows that the metabolic process slows down after 40 years. Why does diabetes appear in people with age?
– Quite right! These processes are interrelated. Rarely, type 2 diabetes appears in youth, but if it does, it is also associated with a weakened metabolism. And now look, the most interesting. What do doctors suggest for the treatment of diabetes?
Basically, 2 treatment options are used. The first is the use of drugs based on metformin. This substance increases the production of insulin by the pancreas. The logic seems to be correct – the more insulin, albeit low quality, the more glucose will be processed.
HOWEVER, INSULIN IN ITSELF AT A HIGH CONCENTRATION IS AN EXTREMELY HARMFUL SUBSTANCE WHICH IS WORSE THAN BIL! It can destroy muscle and connective tissue. It is metformin that causes kidney failure in diabetics (and not diabetes!). Metformin acts aggressively on the beta cells of the pancreas, leading to their rapid wear, which contributes to the appearance of cysts and oncology. Of course, a person will die from diabetes earlier than from metformin, which is why it is used.
The second treatment option is taking drugs based on sulfonylurea. Here the meaning is different – to remove excess glucose from the body away. The solution is also not the best, since in this case the excretory system of a person has to work in an enhanced mode. Sugar is harmful to the liver and kidney tissue, with all the attendant.
And what is the worst, because neither the first nor the second methods of treatment relieve a person of diabetes! They are not capable of this, because they do not fight the causes of diabetes! All they do is STABILIZE SUGAR BUT NOT CURE DIABETES ITSELF!
– Have you gone your own way in the treatment of diabetes?
– I had to go, because dying early, or becoming disabled, was definitely not in my plans. At first I thought, if insulin is getting “bad”, maybe there is a way to improve it? Unfortunately I didn’t find a way. The knowledge of mankind and chemists today does not allow this to be done.
However, you can do something else! Namely, to enhance the very reaction of glycolysis! THAT IS TO HELP INSULIN IN PROCESSING GLUCOSE. There are special substances that are called catalysts for biochemical processes. They are able to enhance and accelerate the course of various reactions.
As it turned out, the 7th reaction of glycolysis can be catalyzed by substances of the hydroxyl group. Among this group of substances there is one truly unique, not only harmless, but even beneficial for the body, since it is a special form of vitamin D. This substance is called stigmahydrocalciferol. Its chemical formula is C29H46O. It is an easily digestible vitamin D.
This substance was not discovered by me. It was first synthesized by the famous Italian scientist Marino Borgetti back in 1952. But in those years, its development did not go anywhere. The substance itself and its effect on metabolic processes have not been particularly studied.
I decided to synthesize this substance and try it for the treatment of diabetes. I knew it couldn’t get worse. Vitamin D , in whatever form it is, is good for the body. Initially, I just wanted to replace the metformin pills with stigmahydrocalciferol. But this substance turned out to be even better than I imagined!
HE DISCOVERED ANOTHER REMARKABLE PROPERTY – AS SOME OTHER FORMS OF VITAMIN D , STIGMAHYDROCALCIFEROL CAN ACCUMULATE IN MUSCLE TISSUE!
– Why is it so good?
– This is good because there is no need to take stigmahydrocalciferol constantly, as many, for example, take the same metformin. You can accumulate this substance as a result of a course intake for 3-4 years in advance and forget about all the symptoms of diabetes for this time.
– That is, during this period, diabetes will completely disappear?
– Not only this one! 3-4 years is a long time. During this time, in the absence of sugar surges, the pancreas, blood vessels, heart will completely improve, and metabolism itself improves. Diabetes will completely go away not for 3-4 years, but for 20 or even more. I still do not have increased sugar, but how much time has already passed. True, I completed 2 courses of stigmahydrocalciferol. First one, and then after 5 years the second.
– It’s amazing! And why didn’t this development go into antidiabetic drugs for mass consumption?
– Do you think pharmaceutical corporations are strongly interested in creating such drugs? Or maybe they are interested in people becoming healthy?
In fact, this is far from true! I will say even more – they are interested in the opposite, in the fact that there are only more diabetics around the world. After all, they are their potential customers! To whom they sell drugs that give only temporary relief. The same drugs based on metformin and sulfonylurea derivatives.
Pharmaceutical giants, no doubt, know about stigmahydrocalciferol, but do not produce such drugs. Such a mess and outright fascism occurs not only in the field of antidiabetic drugs, but also in the field of drugs for hypertension. There is still no drug to treat this disease. And this is despite the fact that humanity will soon fly to Mars, and in general, it has made serious progress in almost all areas of science …
But I also have good news for diabetics. Especially for the aged. In the USA today there is a drug that contains stigmahydrocalciferol. It is produced in limited quantities by the American Institute of Metabolic Processes. It’s called BioScience CBD Gummies.
– That is, today any person can cure diabetes with the help of stigmahydrocalciferol?
– Quite right. If I had not taken stigmahydrocalciferol, I would not be talking to you now, and I would have died from complications of diabetes before I was 70. He gave me a few dozen more lives! But to be treated or not, of course, each person chooses for himself.
Is Stigmahydrocalciferol available in the USA?
We contacted the staff of the American Institute of Metabolic Processes, and they confirmed this information. BioScience CBD Gummies has been produced for 2 years already and during this time about 5000 American diabetics received it from the Institute. All those who took BioScience CBD Gummies are asked by the Institute staff to take part in a survey and answer just one question – “Did BioScience CBD Gummies help them cure diabetes.” People’s responses are encouraging!
TYPE 2 DIABETES CAN REALLY BE CURED!
Poll result so far
Has the new drug BioScience CBD Gummies helped you cure your diabetes?
Diabetes is completely gone – 92.3% of respondents
Diabetes has not completely gone, but it has become noticeably better – 5.2% of respondents
The drug did not help – 2.1% of respondents
Difficult to answer – 0.4% of respondents
How much does BioScience CBD Gummies cost and how can I prescribe it in the USA with delivery?
The Institute of Metabolic Processes clarified that BioScience CBD Gummies is distributed at a minimal price, since the Institute is not engaged in commercial activities. That is, BioScience CBD Gummies is distributed without any extra charges!
How to order BioScience CBD Gummies in USA?
To order BioScience CBD Gummies at the minimum price, you must:
Be in USA. The American Institute of Metabolic Processes does not ship the supplement outside the country.
Leave a request on the official website The request will be sent directly to the institute staff. They will coordinate with you the delivery.
After 2-3 days, you must receive the supplement and pay for the parcel
We were also warned at the Institute that there has been an explosive demand for BioScience CBD Gummies lately, as this drug is being ordered more and more often. Probably, more and more people from acquaintances will learn about what a good drug it is. At the same time, the Institute has only a limited batch of BioScience CBD Gummies. All this will lead to the fact that BioScience CBD Gummies is gradually ending.
Attention! Especially for our readers, we post a direct link to the official website
Johnson Alsopp recommends that all men submit a request for BioScience CBD Gummies on the website while it is still available.
