Bill Gates' 'Green Revolution' has caused a 30% surge in 'severe hunger' across Africa.

The Peoples Voice - TV

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The article from The People's Voice claims that Bill Gates' 'Green Revolution' has led to a 30% increase in severe hunger across Africa. This claim is based on statements from African leaders and a study by Timothy A. Wise from Tufts University. However, a thorough examination of the evidence reveals a more nuanced picture.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>The 'Green Revolution' refers to a set of research technology transfer initiatives occurring between 1950 and the late 1960s, led by Norman Borlaug, the 'Father of the Green Revolution.' The initiatives resulted in the adoption of modern methods and technologies, including the use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and commercial seeds. The Gates Foundation has been a significant proponent of these methods in Africa.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The article asserts that the Gates Foundation's agricultural model has driven 30% more people into severe hunger while undermining traditional farming practices and food security. This claim is primarily supported by a study by Timothy A. Wise and statements from African leaders.</p>
<h2>Evidence</h2>
<p>The study by Timothy A. Wise, titled 'Failed Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA),' does indeed point to a 30% increase in severe hunger in AGRA's countries since 2018. However, the study also notes that this increase is not solely attributable to AGRA's interventions but is also due to other factors such as climate change, conflict, and economic downturns.</p>
<p>A report by the Global Hunger Index (GHI) also notes that hunger is on the rise in Africa, but it attributes this to a complex interplay of factors, including those mentioned above. The GHI report does not single out the Gates Foundation's interventions as a primary driver of this trend.</p>
<h2>Critique</h2>
<p>The claim oversimplifies a complex issue by placing the blame solely on the Gates Foundation's agricultural model. While there are valid criticisms of this model, such as the creation of dependency on synthetic fertilizers and the criminalization of traditional practices, the claim that it has caused a 30% surge in severe hunger is not supported by comprehensive data.</p>
<p>Moreover, the article fails to acknowledge the potential benefits of the 'Green Revolution,' such as increased crop yields and improved food security in some regions. A balanced assessment of the Gates Foundation's interventions should consider both the positives and the negatives.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that Bill Gates' 'Green Revolution' has caused a 30% surge in 'severe hunger' across Africa is largely unsupported by comprehensive data. While there are valid criticisms of the Gates Foundation's agricultural model, the claim oversimplifies a complex issue and fails to acknowledge the potential benefits of the 'Green Revolution.'</p>
<p>For further reading, please refer to the following studies:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://afsafrica.org/false-promises-the-alliance-for-a-green-revolution-in-africa-agra/">Failed Promises: The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)</a> &nbsp;by Timothy A. Wise</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.globalhungerindex.org/results.html">Global Hunger Index (GHI) Report</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Bill Gates' 'Green Revolution' and Severe Hunger in Africa

<p>The claim that Covid mRNA vaccines caused a 112,000% surge in brain clots, as reported by Slay News, is based on a study published in the International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science (IJIRMS). The study alleges that Covid mRNA injections carry a risk of brain clots that is 1,119.6 times higher than the flu shot.</p>
<p>However, several issues need to be addressed to evaluate the credibility of this claim:</p>
<h3>Methodological Concerns</h3>
<p>The study analyzed reports of cerebral thromboembolism from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). While VAERS is a valuable tool for monitoring vaccine safety, it is important to note that VAERS data are subject to reporting biases and do not establish causality. The CDC itself acknowledges that VAERS reports are not verified and may include incomplete or inaccurate information.</p>
<h3>Scientific Consensus</h3>
<p>The scientific community has not widely accepted or verified the findings of the study cited in the Slay News article. Peer-reviewed studies published in reputable journals, such as the New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet, have not reported such a dramatic increase in brain clots associated with Covid mRNA vaccines.</p>
<h3>Expert Opinions</h3>
<p>Leading medical experts and organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC, have consistently maintained that the benefits of Covid mRNA vaccines far outweigh the risks. While rare adverse events, including blood clots, have been reported, these occurrences are extremely rare and do not support the claim of a 112,000% surge in brain clots.</p>
<h3>Reliable Sources</h3>
<p>For a more balanced perspective, it is essential to refer to reliable scientific sources. A study published in the journal Vaccine, which analyzed data from 99 million people across eight countries, observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following mRNA-based Covid injections but did not report a dramatic increase in brain clots. The study also warned of potential safety signals that require further investigation.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that Covid mRNA vaccines caused a 112,000% surge in brain clots is misleading and lacks credible scientific support. The study cited has not been widely accepted or verified by the scientific community, and the methodological concerns associated with VAERS data further undermine the claim's credibility.</p>

Claim Review: Covid mRNA Vaccines Caused 112,000% Surge in Brain Clots

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that the Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability has been circulating in various media outlets. This claim review will examine the evidence and provide a thorough analysis of the situation.</p>
<h2>The Role of the Rockefeller Foundation in Agriculture</h2>
<p>The Rockefeller Foundation has indeed played a significant role in shaping modern agriculture. In the 1950s, the foundation funded the development of vertical integration, leading to the creation of agribusiness. This model prioritized corporate interests over those of farmers, contributing to the decline of family farms.</p>
<p>The foundation also supported the Green Revolution in Mexico and India in the 1960s, which introduced high-yielding varieties of seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides. While this increased agricultural productivity, it also led to environmental degradation and the displacement of traditional farming practices.</p>
<h2>The Push for Sustainability</h2>
<p>The Rockefeller Foundation's recent report, 'True Cost of Food: Measuring What Matters to Transform the US Food System', advocates for a radical change in the food system to make it more sustainable. The report argues that the current system has hidden costs, such as environmental degradation and health impacts, that need to be addressed.</p>
<p>However, the report has been criticized for its vague language and the lack of farmer representation in its creation. Some have interpreted this as an attempt to blame farmers for the problems in the food system, rather than the corporate interests that have driven its development.</p>
<h2>The Role of Other Actors</h2>
<p>It is important to note that the Rockefeller Foundation is not the only actor involved in the push for sustainability in agriculture. The World Economic Forum, the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, and the United Nations have all been involved in initiatives aimed at transforming the food system.</p>
<p>For example, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), a project funded by the Rockefeller and Gates Foundations, has been criticized for promoting GMO seeds and pesticides at the expense of traditional farming practices. However, the failure of AGRA cannot be attributed solely to the Rockefeller Foundation.</p>
<h2>The Complexity of the Food System</h2>
<p>The food system is complex and influenced by a multitude of factors, including economic policies, trade agreements, and consumer demand. Blaming a single actor, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, for its problems is an oversimplification.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the push for sustainability is not inherently malicious. While there are valid concerns about the implementation of certain policies, the goal of creating a more sustainable and equitable food system is a worthy one.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that the Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability is exaggerated and misleading. While the foundation has played a significant role in shaping modern agriculture, the blame for its negative impacts is shared among multiple actors. The push for sustainability, while potentially problematic in its implementation, is not inherently malicious.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5795250/">The Green Revolution and its impact on agriculture, food production and security</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921830154X">The role of the Rockefeller Foundation in the Green Revolution</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/the-great-reset-food-systems-summit/">The Great Reset and the Food Systems Summit</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jul/30/bill-gates-agra-africa-green-revolution">Bill Gates and the push for a new Green Revolution in Africa</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: The Rockefeller Foundation and the Destruction of Global Agriculture

<p>The claim that Bill Gates donated $50 million to Kamala Harris to avoid standing trial in the US for his crimes, as stated by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has been circulating widely. However, a thorough investigation reveals that this claim is unfounded and lacks credible evidence.</p>
<p>Firstly, there is no verifiable record of Bill Gates donating $50 million to any political action committee (PAC) backing Kamala Harris. Political donations, especially of such magnitude, are subject to public disclosure laws in the United States. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) maintains a database of all political contributions, and no such donation from Bill Gates is recorded.</p>
<p>Secondly, the assertion that Bill Gates has been indicted in the Netherlands for lying about the COVID vaccine is also unsubstantiated. There are no official records or credible news reports corroborating this claim. The Dutch judicial system is transparent, and any high-profile indictment would be widely reported by reputable news outlets.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the suggestion that Bill Gates is attempting to avoid trial in the US by making political donations is speculative and not supported by any concrete evidence. Bill Gates has been a prominent figure in philanthropy and has been involved in various global health initiatives, but there is no evidence to suggest that he has committed any crimes that would warrant a trial.</p>
<p>It is important to note that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been a vocal critic of vaccines and has made several unfounded claims in the past. His statements should be approached with caution and verified against reliable sources.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that Bill Gates donated $50 million to Kamala Harris to avoid standing trial in the US is false. There is no credible evidence to support this assertion, and it should be regarded as misinformation.</p>
<p>For further reading on the transparency of political donations, refer to the <a href="https://www.fec.gov/">Federal Election Commission</a>. For information on the Dutch judicial system, visit the <a href="https://www.rechtspraak.nl/">Official Website of the Judiciary of the Netherlands</a>.</p>

Fact Check: Did Bill Gates Donate $50 Million to Democrats to Avoid Trial?

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Bill Gates' 'Green Revolution' has caused a 30% surge in 'severe hunger' across Africa." is Mostly False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: