Opinion
Exciting that Red Deer may take the lead in Solar Power discussions on March 6 2017
I am excited to hear that the city of Red Deer is considering a plan to retrofit homes to solar energy. To fully outfit a home with solar energy would cost 25,000 dollars and at 3% interest it would cost $242 per month for 10 years. The city would consider loaning the money, putting a lien on your home, and collect it back through property taxes, for example. The debt stays with the home. Your electric bills go down, your property value goes up.
The city puts in utilities sidewalks etc. that we all pay for through our property taxes. New builds would be less expensive and would be easier and the city should consider the option at all times.
Another benefit to the city as a whole would be eco-friendly, would create jobs and could take advantage of economy of scale. Taking the lead in this could push other levels of governments to participate. I am glad to see the city addressing this issue on March 6 2017. I would suggest everyone offer communication to our city. You could e-mail legislative [email protected]
Past blogs are included;
May I ask a stupid question or 2 or 3 or 11?
I hear a lot about solar panels, solar power, solar heating, and passive solar heating.
Solar panels produce electricity and could charge batteries for later use or to keep batteries charged. Electric cars and busses run on batteries that get recharged, after use, when they are plugged in. Why do we not see solar panels on electric cars and busses? You plug them in power supplies that are often times coal generated to charge up your batteries. Would the solar panels on the cars and busses lessen the time and power requirements? A bus can be 40 feet long and over 8 feet wide, offering a large roof area for solar panels.
We talk about solar panels being less efficient in the cold, under snow and ice. Why not incorporate solar heating panels to keep your solar panels warm, and ice and snow free?
Could we put a magnifying glass or lens in front of a solar panel to increase light intensity?
What about a mirror behind the solar panel?
How about a parabolic mirror?
What is that, you ask?
A parabolic mirror is a curved mirror, like a satellite dish.
According to Wikipedia;
“The parabolic reflector functions due to the geometric properties of the paraboloidal shape: any incoming ray that is parallel to the axis of the dish will be reflected to a central point, or “focus”. Because many types of energy can be reflected in this way, parabolic reflectors can be used to collect and concentrate energy entering the reflector at a particular angle.”
We have all seen satellite dishes being used for tv signals focused on receiver so why not use a polished reflective satellite dish to focus sunlight on a solar receiver, possibly a solar panel or a solar sphere? Like the TV dishes they started huge and got smaller and more efficient.
Could we not place a magnifying lens in front, and also incorporate passive solar heating for year round use? Could we not use a portion of the power created to ensure optimal aiming?
Solar panels are getting more powerful, more efficient and less expensive. Instead of spending billions on big projects could we not focus on smaller ones?
These may be stupid questions, but I just had to ask.
Is it time to have or implement a National Electrical Strategy?
I live in Red Deer, a small city in Central Alberta. My electrical bill last month was $95.
The average household, according to Google, in Canada uses 972 KWHs monthly, but I used 848 KWHs last month, so if I had been an average user then my bill would have been $109.
My electrical bill shows that my electrical use cost only $32.40 while administration cost $6.99, distribution cost $25.90 transmission fees cost $23.86, include access fees, rate riders and balancing pool allocations and GST and my bill came to $95.
Talk of carbon taxes, green energy would increase my energy costs. Fine, increasing my energy costs by 10% would mean an increase of only $3.24 because all the other charges should not go up. Changing fuel or supply should not affect administrators, power lines, poles or switches.
I started requesting electric bills from homes in other parts of Alberta and the costs varied from 3.75/ kwh to 5.99/kwh and the other costs varied in name and amount for varying total costs per kwh from 11.7 to 15.75/kwh. So at 848 kwh my bill would go from $95 up to $133.56 depending on location.
Alberta is deregulated and you have options of providers. Floating and fixed rates, but the other fees are always added.
A home in Vancouver showed an average 11.37/kwh so my bill would be $96.50, very similar to my Alberta bill. Vancouver is vastly different and denser market. Vancouver has 5,249 people per km. or 2100 homes per square km.
Alberta has a population of 4,252,879 people in 640,081.87 sq. kms. For a density of 6.7 people per square km. or 2.7 homes per square km. So you would think that the costs would be astronomically higher to compensate for the vast distances, and the increased wiring, poles, and installation of such, but apparently not.
So I thought about Ontario. Population of 13,982.984 in 908,607 square kms of land. 15.4 people or 6.2 homes per square kms. More than twice the density of Alberta. The transmission and distribution costs should be equal to or less than sparsely populated Alberta. I started requesting power bills from home owners in Ontario, especially in rural Ontario.
The first bill came from Winchester, 40 kms. from Ottawa. It showed a monthly usage of 661.24 KWHs. Energy costs varied from 8.7/kwh of low peak to 18/kwh during high peak for energy cost of $79.06. Add in delivery charge of $65.41, regulatory fees and HST and the bill comes to $164.96. Or 25/kwh. My current bill would now be $211.55 if I lived in Winchester.
The second bill came from a family outside Chesterville. It showed higher usage, perhaps because of location, age of appliances or lifestyle. Energy use of 1281 KWHs for a bill of $278.93 or 22/kwh. My bill would then be $184.65 if I lived outside Chesterville.
Albertans get their power from natural gas (44%), coal (39%) and even hydro (6%) while Ontario get their power from Nuclear, (66%) and Hydro (22%) But in Alberta, we are expecting increases in our power bills due to carbon taxes, green initiatives and the new power lines being built to the southern border. Paid for by current users to provide power south of the border. Ontario has some similar changes and challenges ahead to incur expectations of increased costs. Is this proper?
Alberta is only 70% the size of Ontario, our population is only 30% of Ontario, yet Alberta power bills are substantially lower. Capitalists will tell you that larger markets like Ontario, means lower costs, as one would also expect with increased density as in this case, Ontario.
Alberta deregulated the electrical sector increasing competition. Would that help or exasperate the problem in Ontario? Should the vast majority of urban homes subsidize the rural users? Should a standard rate be applied to all in Ontario?
To recap with averages of 972 KWHs per home per month it would cost $110.61 in Vancouver B.C., $108.90 in Red Deer Ab., $242.48 in Winchester Ont. And $211.65 in Chesterville Ont. Definitely not a level playing field, is it?
Is it time for the Federal Government to create a National Electrical Strategy? We could at least study on it.
What do you think?
Opinion
A Nation of Announcements: Canada’s Government of Empty Promises
Mark Carney vowed to strengthen Canada’s economy. Instead, he’s perfected the art of saying everything and doing nothing
Carney was at another presser this week, this time preaching to university students about “strengthening Canada’s economy” and warning that “challenges and sacrifices” are coming. Sacrifices? From who exactly? Because if you’re under 40 in this country, you’ve already sacrificed everything. You can’t buy a house, can’t save a dollar, can’t find stable work because half the job market’s been outsourced to temporary foreign workers. But sure, the problem is that you haven’t sacrificed enough.
This is the same tired sermon from the couch government, the one that never gets up, never follows through, never builds anything. They announce. They emote. They lecture. And then they go right back to the couch to film another round of “we’re taking bold action” clips for social media.
Carney stood there and talked about “shared responsibility” as if Canadians haven’t been carrying this government’s failures on their backs for a decade. The housing crisis didn’t appear out of thin air. It’s the direct result of political paralysis, endless announcements, no construction. The job market isn’t collapsing because of fate; it’s collapsing because they replaced permanent employment with government-approved temp work and called it “labour flexibility.”
And now they’re adding insult to injury with a trillion-dollar deficit, spending money they don’t have while telling Canadians to brace for “sacrifice.” It’s almost performance art: the man responsible for Canada’s fiscal implosion lecturing broke students about tightening their belts.
This government lives for the podium moment, the slow walk up, the soft lighting, the “historic” headline. But when the lights go off, nothing happens. No cranes, no hires, no policy. Just empty rhetoric echoing across a country that can’t afford to believe it anymore.
They call it leadership. It’s not. I call it couch potato politics, a government that loves to announce but refuses to move, content to watch the country sink from the comfort of its own self-importance.
Building Bureaucracy Instead of Buildings
Take housing. They promised half a million homes this year. Half a million. Sounds bold, sounds heroic. It’s also mathematically impossible—and everyone in the business knows it.
Here are the facts. The government’s official housing plan claims it will “double the pace of construction to almost 500,000 new homes a year.” That would be wonderful if it weren’t pure fiction. Canada has never come close to that number. The highest housing completion level in our history was around 260,000 units, and that was back in 1974. Even now, we average between 250,000 and 300,000 housing starts a year. Not completions—starts. That means the government is promising to more than double our output, with no new workforce, no new supply of materials, and no regulatory reform to make it possible.
You can’t conjure skilled tradesmen, drywall, and concrete out of thin air. The country is already short on plumbers, electricians, and framers. TD Economics called the goal “an extremely daunting task” because of these same labour and material bottlenecks. Municipal zoning rules remain slow and restrictive. Lumber prices fluctuate wildly. Every construction company in Canada will tell you: it’s hard enough just keeping up with demand now, let alone doubling it.
So what did Ottawa do? They launched Build Canada Homes, a brand-new federal agency. Sounds impressive—until you realize it doesn’t build anything. It’s another layer of bureaucracy designed to issue reports, press releases, and feel-good targets. The government says this new entity will “put Canada back in the business of building homes.” Translation: another round of announcements about how “building will one day be easier.”
The reality: instead of cranes, we got committees. Instead of nails and lumber, we got hashtags and slogans.
If you’re keeping score, this is the same pattern we’ve seen across the board. Big press conferences. Lofty goals. No follow-through. Housing is the perfect example. It’s like that friend who swears this is the year he’s finally getting in shape. He buys the gym membership, posts the motivational quote, and then sits back down on the couch with a bag of chips. That’s Ottawa today—bragging about progress it hasn’t made, measuring success in microphones, not foundations.
You want to fix the housing crisis? Get the government out of its own way. Cut red tape, open land for development, speed up permits, and let builders build. But that’s hard work. Much easier to just call another press conference and promise the moon.
Announce, Repeat, Forget: Ottawa’s Border Policy in a Nutshell
They’ve announced “1,000 new border agents” so many times, you start to wonder if these people even realize we can Google things. First, it was the campaign promise, all swagger, no schedule. Then, a few months later, same line, different backdrop, more flags. Last month in Niagara Falls? Boom, “1,000 new CBSA officers!” again. This is the Liberal version of Groundhog Day: every six weeks, they see their shadow and re-announce the same press release.
The “Fentanyl Czar” announcement? Same script, same actors. They even dusted off the same number. “We’re hiring 1,000 new border officers.” Fantastic. Except… we were told that already. Twice. And still, there’s no hiring blitz, no graduation ceremonies, no deployments. Just slogans. The thousand officers exist only in PowerPoint slides and talking points — a ghost army armed with bullet-points instead of badges.
And then there’s the $617 million “costing.” That’s supposed to make it sound serious, except it’s spread over five years and doesn’t guarantee a single new officer will be patrolling the border before the next election. Imagine bragging about building an army, then admitting you haven’t bought the boots yet.
Meanwhile, fentanyl is killing record numbers of Canadians, auto-theft rings are shipping stolen SUVs through our ports like Amazon Prime, and border seizures are flat. The real smugglers must love this government, every few months Ottawa holds another press conference instead of another patrol.
This is what they do: they announce law enforcement, they don’t actually do law enforcement. They act like a press conference is a policy.
If words could stop fentanyl, the border would be sealed. If photo-ops could catch smugglers, we’d be the safest country on Earth. But you can’t police with promises, and you can’t protect a nation by recycling last year’s press release.
Trade: The Best Dumpster Fire in the G7
Mark Craney and the Liberals literally campaigned on being the guy who could handle Trump. That was his entire pitch, the calm, worldly banker who would stare down the big, bad American and come home with a deal. Remember that? “Steady hands on the economy,” “global respect,” “serious leadership.” And now? His big achievement is bragging that Canada has “the best dumpster fire in the G7.” That’s his defense. “Sure, everything’s burning, but look — our fire is slightly smaller than Germany’s!”
This is the man who said he’d stand up to Washington, negotiate from strength, restore respect. Instead, the U.S. slapped on fresh lumber duties, kept auto tariffs hanging over our heads, and poached our manufacturing jobs. Stellantis took billions in Canadian subsidies and then packed up to Illinois, and Carney’s response was to shrug and write another cheque.
It’s stunning. The guy who promised economic mastery can’t even keep factories in his own country. The “deal-maker” hasn’t signed a single new trade pact with the United States. The so-called fiscal genius has driven the deficit to a trillion dollars. And when challenged, he hides behind meaningless comparisons, “Well, we’re doing better than Italy.” Great. That’s like saying your house is half on fire, but at least the neighbors’ burned down completely.
This isn’t leadership; it’s self-congratulation in a crisis. Every sector is bleeding, autos, lumber, steel, and the man who swore he’d protect Canadian workers is giving lectures about “sacrifice” and “patience.” Canadians didn’t vote for a therapist; they voted for a leader. What they got instead is a spokesman for managed decline, a government that celebrates losing more slowly than everyone else.
Final thoughts
At some point, the slogans stop working. The podium lights dim, the cameras pack up, and what’s left is a country that’s been talked to death. You can’t run a nation on hashtags and hope. You can’t lecture people about “sacrifice” when they’ve been priced out of their own lives. You can’t promise half a million homes, a thousand border agents, or a balanced budget when every promise evaporates the moment the applause fades.
Canada doesn’t need another press release; it needs results. Real homes built. Real jobs created. Real trade deals signed. Real borders defended. But that takes conviction, not choreography. It takes a government willing to get off the couch, roll up its sleeves, and work for the people it’s been talking at for far too long.
Until then, we’ll keep getting the same show every week, the same headlines, the same stage-managed sincerity, the same “bold new vision.” Meanwhile, Canadians will keep doing what their government won’t: getting up every morning, working hard, paying the bills, and wondering when the people running this country will finally do the same.
We need change, real, measurable, grown-up change. We need leaders who treat the country like a responsibility, not a stage. We need accountability that doesn’t vanish when the cameras turn off. And most of all, we need voters who care about results, not vibes — who stop rewarding the performance and start demanding the proof. Because until that happens, the couch government will keep sitting exactly where it’s most comfortable: doing nothing, announcing everything, and calling it progress.
Health
DMSO Heals the Eyes and Transforms Ophthalmology
DMSO’s unique therapeutic properties reveal the unifying thread between many different “incurable” eye diseases.
Story at a Glance:
• DMSO is an “umbrella remedy” capable of treating a wide range of challenging ailments due to its combination of therapeutic properties (e.g., reducing inflammation, improving circulation, and reviving dying cells).
• DMSO has a unique affinity for the eyes, resulting in it (often spontaneously) treating a wide range of visual disorders that frequently cannot be treated with conventional therapeutic options.
• DMSO’s ability to restore circulation, revive dying cells, and stabilize misfolded proteins allows it to treat a variety of retinal diseases (e.g., macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy or retinitis pigmentosa—in some cases reversing permanent blindness), eliminate visual obstructions (e.g., floaters and cataracts), reverse glaucoma or Fuchs’ dystrophy, and restore normal focus (frequently eliminating the need for glasses).
• DMSO’s anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties allow it to treat dry eyes, inflammatory diseases around the eye (e.g., blepharitis, styes, and psoriasis) or within the eye (e.g., iritis, uveitis, conjunctivitis, keratitis), along with bacterial, fungal, parasitic, or viral eye infections such as shingles.
•DMSO’s healing properties also allow it to heal a variety of eye injuries (including severe ones which would otherwise require eye removal), skin issues around the eye (e.g., burns, skin tags, and under-eye bags), and eliminate eye muscle spasms.
•This article will review the extensive data demonstrating DMSO’s efficacy for eye diseases, along with an examination of the most common protocols used for them and other natural approaches that also aid in the treatment of common eye disorders.
Since 2024, I have been working diligently to present the extensive data that DMSO is a remarkable therapeutic that is uniquely suited to treat many highly challenging medical conditions due to its counteracting many root causes of disease (whereas, in contrast, vaccines cause a myriad of health issues by inducing those key drivers of illness). From this, I’ve compiled a series of articles synthesizing thousands of studies that have shown DMSO effectively treats:
- Strokes, paralysis, a wide range of neurological disorders (e.g., Down Syndrome and dementia), and many circulatory disorders (e.g., Raynaud’s, varicose veins, hemorrhoids), which I discussed here.
- A wide range of tissue injuries, such as sprains, concussions, burns, surgical incisions, and spinal cord injuries (discussed here).
- Chronic pain (e.g., from a bad disc, bursitis, arthritis, or complex regional pain syndrome), which I discussed here.
- A wide range of autoimmune, protein, and contractile disorders, such as scleroderma, amyloidosis, and interstitial cystitis (discussed here).
- A variety of head conditions, such as tinnitus, vision loss, dental problems, and sinusitis (discussed here).
- A wide range of internal organ diseases (discussed here).
- Many different respiratory disorders, including asthma and COPD (discussed here)
- Many different gastrointestinal disorders, such as bowel inflammation, cirrhosis, and pancreatitis (discussed here)
- A wide range of skin conditions, such as burns, varicose veins, acne, hair loss, ulcers, skin cancer, and many autoimmune dermatologic diseases (discussed here).
- Many challenging infectious conditions, including chronic bacterial infections, herpes, and shingles (discussed here).
- Many aspects of cancer (e.g., many of cancer’s debilitating symptoms, making cancer treatments more potent, greatly reducing the toxicity of conventional therapies, and turning cancer cells back into normal cells), which I discussed here.
Since the evidence in those articles (along with one on how DMSO can be synergistically combined with pharmaceuticals and another on how DMSO combines with natural therapies) made a compelling case for the use of DMSO, many readers opted to start using it. Many of them, in turn, had remarkable improvements which caused them to recommend DMSO to their peers, and because of all those successes, a widespread interest in DMSO has now emerged.
On one hand, this has been quite surprising to me as the information I publicized has been widely available for decades, but (possibly due to it being impossible to profit off DMSO because of how little it costs) most of the people exposed to this series were not even aware this therapy existed, let alone what DMSO could do. Conversely, the groundswell of interest is not surprising as it’s nearly identical to what happened when DMSO was first discovered in the 1960s and it rapidly became the most popular drug in America—particularly since relatively minimal progress has been made on most of the “incurable” conditions it cured back then. Consider for example this 1980 segment 60 minutes created, which showed the remarkable results generated from the therapeutic use of DMSO and more importantly, the exact same stonewalling and suppression of DMSO from the FDA that we saw throughout COVID-19:
User DMSO Reports
Because of DMSO’s high degree of efficacy, the moment I began the series, I started being flooded with testimonials from readers of the remarkable improvements DMSO had created for them. Before long, I realized I was in a similar situation to what I’d been in throughout COVID-19.
I have long believed one of the core strategies the ruling class always follows is to establish rigid hierarchical systems that have dominion over critical facets of society and then buy out the top of the pyramid, as that provides a relatively low-cost way to control the entire society. In the case of medicine, this has translated to having pharmaceutical compliant individuals (through industry funding and media complicity) be anointed as experts who reinforce the profitable orthodoxy alongside having medical journals only publish things which cater to the existing vested interests.
Because of this, things that are “controversial” (threatening vested interests) are rarely published in a “credible” medium, and as a result, anyone who tries to advocate for them is not listened to; instead, they are chastised for endorsing “unproven” and unscientific beliefs.
When the COVID vaccines hit the market, I had expected they would cause a significant number of chronic issues that would take years to be recognized—so I was quite shocked to be immediately flooded with reports across the country of severe reactions of all types from the vaccine. Because of this, I felt I needed to log them as I knew injuries like these would never get published in medical journals and I wanted to have some type of proof that vaccine injuries were real, so in the future I could present accurate information to skeptical parties. I hence spent an inordinate amount of time interviewing those involved and compiling all of them and after unexpectedly gaining a Substack audience, I published that log, and it went viral because my small sample accurately represented the pattern of vaccine injuries everyone was seeing around them and because more than a year into the COVID vaccine rollout, no one had done anything similar—despite the massive demand for this type of information.
In the process of doing that, I had also received a lot of reports of individuals who appeared to be being injured by COVID vaccine shedding—despite this being “impossible” based on the purported design of the vaccines. As the reports, like those for the COVID-19 vaccine injuries, were consistent in character (and like the vaccines many affected by shedding were understandably desperate for information on the topic) I decided to spend a year compiling thousands of those reports as I knew there would never be a journal willing to touch the subject. Following this, I then produced a synthesis of that data which showed there were clear repeating patterns to mRNA shedding and provided the critical mechanisms to explain this seemingly inexplicable phenomenon. That, in turn, was an inordinate amount of work to do, but succeeded and made many realize shedding is a real risk of the mRNA technology—something which will be critical for opposing future attempts to inject the population with experimental gene therapies.
In the case of DMSO, as I started receiving all of these reports (at a time when I had essentially finished the shedding project), I realized that I had access to a unique dataset that had not previously been available. More importantly, because there were so many different things that DMSO could treat, a dataset like this would likely be the only place much of that therapeutic data could ever be compiled (as no one would ever get around to conducting studies on many of those uses—particularly since the current academic publishing climate is much more hostile to publishing unorthodox research now than it was fifty years ago).
So, over the last 13 months, one of my primary projects has been to compile all the reports I’ve received (which I did in the comments here), and I presently have 4,721 comments—of which I think roughly 3,000 are unique stories of therapeutic benefit people have experienced. In turn, my plan is to eventually compile and synthesize all of that, but as doing that will take at least a month, I’ve held off until the end of the series (so I wouldn’t have to redo it with new data that was subsequently received).
Note: my general sense from all the testimonials I’ve received is that between 80-90% of users have a positive response to using DMSO (which is frankly extraordinary), with lower rates (50%) being seen for certain issues which are harder to correctly treat with DMSO, and give or take 0% success rates being seen for issues DMSO is not thought to treat (suggesting the sample I’m observing is representative of real life data).
Within those comments, while most of the reports I’ve received are consistent with what DMSO is recognized to do (e.g., rapidly eliminating debilitating pain that nothing else had worked on), some were quite extraordinary and not what I’d expected to come across. For example, after I learned a 75 year old reader who’d been blind since birth had regained their sight after using DMSO to treat a sinus issue, I realized his story needed to be shared:
Note: as fate had it, Murray lived about 3 hours away from Rebecca Cunningham, the Texas-based documentary film maker who cured her neighbor’s terminal COPD with nebulized DMSO, after which millions saw Dan’s COPD story.1,2 As DMSO changed her life, she is currently collecting other DMSO testimonials on her Rumble channel and kindly agreed to travel to Murray to film this. If you have a story to share and are ever passing through Wimberley or visiting the hill country in Texas, please reach out to her.
In compiling these reports, I was struck by how many were for the eyes, by how well DMSO worked across an extensive range of eye conditions, and by the fact that, in the majority of cases, it provided better results than could be expected from existing ophthalmology options.
Note: the only well-recognized ophthalmologic conditions I did not receive reports on were amblyopia, strabismus, diabetic retinopathy, keratitis, optic neuritis, retinal detachment, retinopathy of prematurity, chalazions, central retinal vein occlusion (although a reader’s branched retinal vein occlusion responded to DMSO), and eye cancers—many of which, as I will show in this article, existing data sources suggest do respond to DMSO.
Later, while translating the discoveries of the German community, I learned their data matched that of the readers here:
One of the first new adopters of DMSO (circa 2012), began successfully using highly diluted DMSO for eye treatments in his practice. This led to a network of practitioners using DMSO for eye health, accumulating substantial experience, and, in many cases, treating eye issues where the cause could not be determined.
In general, there are a surprising number of successful reports using DMSO eye drops for a wide variety of eye symptoms and diseases. So many, in fact, that I now consider the DMSO eye solution an exceptional “eye care.”
Many users (especially those with heavy screen time) apply DMSO preventively to maintain eye freshness, improve tear quality, and reduce night glare. Positive effects, including improved vision, better tear film, fresher eyes, and reduced night glare, are often reported after the first few applications, enhancing overall eye comfort and function—including in people whom ophthalmologists did not diagnose with any eye conditions.
The positive effects are often reported after the first few applications, but I consider [low dose eye drops] a longer-term option. Due to the excellent diagnostic results and the complete absence of adverse effects from low dose drops (including results from ophthalmologists for a wide range of eye disorders) I increasingly view DMSO eye drops as a preventative measure, eye care for those with (still) healthy eyes, since modern life, particularly excessive screen time, places significant demands on our eyes.
Note: the above was extracted from an AI-generated summary of hundreds of hours of non-English lectures, then further condensed by me and hence not a direct quote (but one that accurately represents the author’s statements).
While this might be difficult to believe, consider a parallel situation. Another umbrella remedy I have been deeply impressed by, ultraviolet blood irradiation (which has many similar therapeutic properties to DMSO), has a vast volume of literature demonstrating its clinical value—including for numerous immensely challenging to treat diseases. Yet, virtually none of the medical profession even knows this therapy exists.
For this reason, we are currently sorting through thousands of UVBI studies, including dozens of studies (many of which were conducted with hundreds of patients) which show UVBI treats a myriad of challenging ophthalmologic conditions such as:
blepharitis,1 keratitis,1 corneal inflammation,1 herpes zoster ophthalmicus,1 traumatic eye infection,1 uveitis,1,2,3,4,5 iridocyclitis,1,2 choroiditis,1 chorioretinopathy,1,2,3,4 choroidal and chorioretinal dystrophy,1,2 macular degeneration,1 retinitis pigmentosa,1,2 retinal contusion,1 retinal ischemia,1,2 retinal and fundus hemorrhages,1,2,3,4 retinal artery and vein occlusions,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1
0,11,12,13,14,15 diabetic retinopathy,1 ischemic optic neuropathy,1,2,3,4,5 optic neuritis,1,2,3 optic nerve atrophy (traumatic or inflammatory),1,2,3 encephalopathic vision loss1
Note: in this article, each superscipt number links to either a reader’s story or an applicable study—like the many I listed above (which the ophthalmology profession does not realize exists).
As such, the purpose of this article will be to highlight exactly how DMSO is transforming ophthalmology, along with the supporting data.
The Forgotten Side of Medicine is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
To learn more about this newsletter and how others have benefitted from it, click here!
Note: the best review paper on DMSO’s uses in ophthalmology (which is an excellent resource to provide to physicians who are skeptical of using DMSO for the eyes) can be read here.
-
MAiD3 hours agoDisabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
-
Alberta5 hours agoPetition threatens independent school funding in Alberta
-
Alberta1 day agoBusting five myths about the Alberta oil sands
-
Courageous Discourse23 hours agoNo Exit Wound – EITHER there was a very public “miracle” OR Charlie Kirk’s murder is not as it appears
-
Business1 day agoQuebecers want feds to focus on illegal gun smuggling not gun confiscation
-
Business4 hours agoCanada Revenue Agency found a way to hit “Worse Than Rock Bottom”
-
Health1 day agoNew report warns WHO health rules erode Canada’s democracy and Charter rights
-
Energy1 day agoMinus Forty and the Myth of Easy Energy






