CV NEWS FEED // Sen. Joe Manchin, D-WV, announced Thursday that he will not seek re-election to the Senate in 2024.
“I believe in my heart of hearts that I have accomplished what I set out to do for West Virginia,” said the senator in a video statement.
“I have made one of the toughest decisions of my life and decided that I will not be running for re-election to the United States Senate,” he continued, ending months of speculation over his political future.
“But what I will be doing is traveling the country and speaking out to see if there is an interest in creating a movement to mobilize the middle and bring Americans together,” he said.
In his statement, the senator thanked his constituents and described how he was first inspired to run for political office. He also criticized the present state of partisan politics in the country.
“Every incentive in Washington is designed to make our politics extreme,” he said. “The growing divide between Democrats and Republicans is paralyzing Congress and worsening our nation’s problems. The majority of Americans are just plain worn out.”
Manchin was first elected to the Senate in 2010 following his victory in a special election. He served as Governor of West Virginia from 2005 to 2010.
The Associated Press (AP) reported that his “decision to retire severely hampers Democratic hopes of holding on to the coal country seat.”
“For the last few years, Manchin has been the only Democrat elected to statewide office in West Virginia,” the AP added.
Al Weaver of The Hillpointed out that the senator “had long been considered the most vulnerable Senate Democrat on the map heading into 2024 and was, until Thursday, the lone Democratic incumbent who hadn’t made his 2024 plans public.”
West Virginia is one of the most Republican states in the country. President Donald Trump carried it by a whopping 39% in 2020 and 42% in 2016.
With Manchin out of the running, Republicans are essentially a lock to pick up his Senate seat. Popular West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice is currently the front-runner to win the Republican nomination, but he first has to win a primary contest against Rep. Alex Mooney, R-WV.
Upon announcing his retirement from the Senate, Manchin did not appear to confirm nor deny speculation that he was planning to enter the 2024 Presidential Election.
Some of his recent statements indicate that he may still entertain the possibility.
“The people haven’t been able to speak yet,” he said regarding the state of the race for president in a Thursday interview with CNBC. “The parties, basically the Democratic and Republican parties, might be set on where they’re going, and who they think is going to be the representative, but the people haven’t spoken up yet.”
In the past few months, reports have circulated that the senator may be considering a bid for the White House under the centrist “No Labels” banner.
“I’ve never been in any race I’ve ever spoiled,” Manchin said in July at a New Hampshire forum for political moderates. “I’ve been in races to win. And if I get in a race, I’m going to win.”
The following month, Manchin said that he would “think very seriously” about leaving the Democratic Party and registering as an Independent.
However, as of Thursday evening, he remains a Democrat.
Manchin is considered by many political observers to be one of the few true moderates or centrists in either house of Congress. In recent years, he has often been viewed as a crucial swing vote in the Senate.
A 2021 op-ed in a West Virginia newspaper stated that the senator is “something of a wild card, and there’s a sense that he enjoys it.”
In August, CatholicVote reported on Manchin’s unorthodox Senate tenure:
A self-professed Catholic, Manchin is currently the only person in the one-and-a-half-year history of CatholicVote’s Heroes and Zeroes to be named both a “hero” and a “zero.” On top of this, he received this distinction within a three-month span last year as a “hero” of February 2022 and a “zero” of May 2022.
The senator holds a “C” rating from the Catholic Accountability Project, indicating his truly mixed voting record.
While he voted for the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, the right for churches to stay open during COVID restrictions, no men in women’s sports, and penalties for late-term abortions, he also voted for the confirmation of Secretary Xavier Becerra, the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act” (widely called the “Disrespect for Marriage Act” by its critics), and to revive the pro-abortion “Equal Rights Amendment.”
The mainstream media is sounding alarm bells about the demise of their news sites, as younger generations in particular transition to obtaining their news directly from their favorite personalities. MSM journalist Charlie Warzel, writing for MSN (ever notice how similar the acronyms are — maybe MSN stands for MainStream News) whined on Friday about this shift taking place as a result of social media.
Warzel acts like people going directly to their favorite influencers and journalists for news as “trusted sources of news” while “[l]ocal-news outlets have died a slow death” is heart wrenching, but fails to admit that people tuned in to the news for years to hear from their favorite “trusted” news personalities like Dan Rather of CBS and Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes. That was actually worse, because those personalities were subject to the biases of the networks they worked for. Those who watched Rather over the years saw his increasingly left-wing views come out, as the major networks lurched to the left. 60 Minutes is now a full bastion of left-wing hit pieces.
In contrast, independent journalists posting directly to platforms like X and Substack, where they can make a living directly from subscribers, are beholden to no one. Under X owner Elon Musk, there is very little prohibition on what they can post; most conservatives have few problems with its minimal censorship which generally prohibits truly offensive behavior. X rules prohibit abuse or harassment, encouraging terrorism and hateful conduct based on anti-discrimination categories. Granted, it’s not perfect, there are still a few conservatives who remain shadowbanned on the platform which has not been fixed.
Tucker Carlson is a perfect example of this shift. While one of the most stalwart and popular conservatives today, he was increasingly suppressed at Fox News. To be fair, Fox News was under intense pressure from the left, in particular after it was sued by Dominion Voting Systems in a lawsuit that could have driven it to bankruptcy. Unlike the MSM, which is full of true left-wing believers, conservative media outlets like Fox News usually drift to the left due to threats, which don’t just come from the left but occasionally come from RINOs concerned about their pocketbooks.
Since Carlson was fired over six months ago, his popularity has increased. Musk said in September that Carlson’s Fox News show had under 10 million viewers — it was at 3.3 million viewers last year — whereas his show on X gets more viewers than the population of the U.S., which is over 340 million. Granted, the stats have come under criticism as somewhat inflated since not all viewers watch the entire show.
Meanwhile, Fox News has lost viewership since he left. From October 2022 to October 2023, it declined from 8% to 16% in various categories of viewers. The station may still lead most of the other cable news networks, but people are starting to flee cable news.
Other high-profile Fox News hosts have moved on and found success outside of traditional TV, including Megyn Kelly, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly. Kelly first tried a stint at NBC, but said in September, “I’m done with TV.”
According to Edison Research, 42% of Americans age 12 and up have listened to a podcast in the last month, up from 37% in 2020. Young adults in the UK spend more time watching TikTok than broadcast television, and one in five adults under age 24 use TikTok as a source of news. In contrast, only 17% of Americans now pay for news subscriptions.
Even left-leaning online news sites that are more edgier than traditional media sites aren’t faring so well. Buzzfeed shut down in April, Vice filed for bankruptcy and Gawker shut down again in February.
This shift is here to stay, because the media is so overwhelmingly biased against conservatives. With one study — from a left-leaning organization, The Center for Public Integrity — showing that over 97% of journalists donate to Democrats, conservatives have no choice but to turn to X if they want unfiltered news. One of the most popular political topics in the country is election fraud, and it’s just going to become even more popular as the 2024 election arrives. With a blackout by even much of mainstream conservative media on the topic, as well as the rest of the big left-leaning social media giants, half the population that leans to the right will be looking to X.
Left-wing journalist Megan Taros whined on X on Saturday about being unable to find a decent job with a newsroom anymore, even though she’d been looking for a job since February. The former Arizona Republic reporter who specializes in race and equity issues was willing to settle for a mere $50,000 annually, even though she has “tremendous debt” from a master’s degree. She refuses to accept freelancing and fellowships, not grasping that the media world is evolving away from traditional newsroom jobs. Instead of focusing on building up her piddly 5,278 followers on X so she could become an influencer, making money from X ads and subscribers, she concluded, “This is my final call before giving up.”
More users on Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat get their news from influencers than from traditional journalists on the platforms, according to a new report conducted for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, part of Britain’s University of Oxford. Taros can ignore this shift at her peril.
Conservative journalists have adapted to this shift far better, having been blacklisted from most media jobs for years. New and younger half-influencer, half-journalists like the Hodge Twins, Benny Johnson, Zuby, Rogan O’Handley and Dom Lucre have built up hundreds of thousands or even millions of followers without much of any traditional news outlet, and can easily make a living on X. Musk has made X into the most powerful media platform in the world, decimating the longtime stranglehold of the MSM. The MSM can ignore him and X and whine, but unless they adapt, conservative media personalities will leave them in the dust.
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.” William Shakespeare from Macbeth
Miss Constitution has been providing background regarding the modern Middle East crisis that can be said to have begun with a letter written (by British PM Lloyd George) in 1917 to Baron Rothschild, with the approval of American President Woodrow Wilson and other allies, proposing a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. The proposal was finally supported by the United Nations in 1948, after the devastation to European Jews in WWII, and immediately all hell broke out in Palestine. To stem the panic of the Palestinians the UN immediately appointed Swedish Count Folke Bernadotte to mediate the crisis. He was assassinated in Jerusalem by a Jewish militia opposed to his ideas. The beginnings, one might say, of hell-broth boil and bubble.
While even the most conscientious scholar has difficulty factually following subsequent events in this saga, protesters from all over the world seem to know all the twists and turns, all the national motives, all the attempts at peace, all the eyes of newt and toes of frog included in the bubbling caldron, and have come to the conclusion that the answer lies in exterminating one of the sides in the conflict. With lightening speed, after Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, thousands of signs were printed, Palestinian flags and scarves produced, and marches organized. Former President Obama opined that one has to be comfortable with the complicated to have an intelligent opinion. Okay; here are the complications the demonstrators purport to know:
They know that the original UN Resolution created a two-state solution as did the proposal by Count Bernadotte that added provisions for an open seaport, shared airports, and special provisions for historic Jerusalem. Palestine was to include part of Galilee, Samaria, Gaza, and the West Bank; Israel was to include a large portion of the desert in the south. Count Bernadotte proposed a “right of return” for Palestinians who fled in panic and also a United Nations Commission on Refugees.
They know that modern Israel was immediately unsuccessfully attacked by its Arab neighbors. Attacks on Jews and retaliatory attacks on Arabs continued for years. They must know of Egypt’s hostility regarding the Suez; of the 1967 Six-Day War in which Israel was completely surrounded by hostile actors and had to take preemptive action; of the 1969 War of Attrition in which the Soviet Union participated; and of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the role America played in it. With each victory Israel acquired more land.
They know that the UN in 1975 declared that Zionism is equivalent to Racism, though they rescinded the Resolution in 1991. They know that Arab Oil sanctions in the 1970s devastated Israel’s economy and they turned, in the 1980s, from Marxism to capitalism to thrive. They know of the 1978 Camp David Accords for comprehensive peace that failed; of Israel’s necessary preemptive strike on Iraq’s nuclear reactor that the UN condemned; of the Arab Summit rejecting any Arab-Israeli peace; of the bombing of a UN peace-keeping force in Beirut; of a 1983 belligerence pact between Lebanon and Israel that the Syrians forced Lebanon to renounce; of the 1988 US recognition of the PLO; of the 1993 Oslo Accords for peace opposed by Hamas; of the Hebron Agreement to limit settlements near Jerusalem; of the Wye River Memorandums that were not honored; of Hamas taking over Gaza in 2007; of endless rocket attacks on Israel and subsequent cease-fires; and of Palestine declaring an Islamic Jihad against Israel. Finally, they know that Hamas attacked Israeli settlers on October 7, 2023 with such brutality and inhumanity that pictures of it cannot be shown to the public. Two-hundred plus hostages were also taken and are still in captivity awaiting rescue.
Here’s what the demonstrators might not know:
They might not know the United States, by current policy, does not support Israel’s existence. The United States, by current policy, supports an Iranian regime that funds the terrorist groups that have attacked Israel and will do so again. All rhetoric to the contrary by the State Department is disingenuous. The protesters, on behalf of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, are supporting a hell-broth in the Middle East.
They might not know Israel herself has changed. When formed she had no Constitution or Bill of Rights. Her religious matters were controlled by the extreme orthodox. She was a Marxist-Zionist state. But Israel made a decision to become more entrepreneurial, more free market, less socialistic and she began to thrive. When the Soviet Union fell in 1991 professional Russian Jews emigrated to Israel to her benefit. Israel’s Zionist beginnings, the boil and bubble of lizard’s leg and howlet’s wing, her rejection by the Arab world, the assassinations of her leaders, countless massacres and revenge massacres, all have taken their toll on the Israeli people and her Arab neighbors, and while she will defend herself from attack, seems ready to share prosperity with her neighbors.
They might not know the entire world-wide Evangelical Christian community is deeply attached to the Holy Land, Ancient Israel, and the precious history discovered there. Archaeological digs have confirmed many historic aspects of the Bible. Scientists and scholars of all religions find the region priceless.
What can we conclude?
Factually, we can conclude that what the UN created in 1948 has been mostly abandoned by that international body. We can conclude that at the present time the government of the US has also abandoned Israel, although the US official position is the opposite. It is also possible that many Arab states are weary of the 75-year old religious battle and are ready to support a new path.
Miss Constitution would suggest that the programmed demonstrations against Israel are partly a product of flash mob social media, particularly Communist China’s tic tok. America has also slipped from the rational and empirical to an elevation of the meritless. Our entire system of education, from once-great universities to K-12, needs to be re-examined. “Double, double toil and trouble. . .like a hell-broth boil and bubble.” It is possible to cool this hell-broth – all it takes is honesty, savvy, and strength – all qualities America has traditionally had, and a willingness to turn the ship of state around and return to a moral path. Let’s hope Israel and Palestine can find that path, as well, as shared stewards, along with the entire international community, of a very important part of the world.
CANDIDATE PETITION ALERTIt’s candidate petition season in Illinois, and as a courtesy to statewide candidates, Illinois Review is distributing candidate petition information.
In accordance with Illinois Review policy, Illinois Review does not make political endorsements and the distribution of candidate petition information should not be construed as an endorsement.
If you are a statewide candidate and would like to have your candidate petition information distributed by Illinois Review, please contact us at articles@illinoisreview.com.Petitions for Donald Trump, President of the United StatesFollowing is candidate petition information for Donald Trump, seeking the Republican nomination for President of the United States:2024 Donald J. Trump Campaign Statewide Candidate Petition;
It may be that incorrupt bodies are proof of the possibility that spiritual practice has physical effects. When we understand how the mind and body work together, we may also start to understand why some saintly characters wind up being both dead as a doornail and fresh as a daisy.
On All Saints Day we will have on display in our church over twenty first class relics for the faithful to venerate. The most famous relics are those of saints whose mortal remains have not suffered the ordinary process of decomposition.
The People’s Pope Preserved
In March 2001 they dug up the body of Pope John XXIII. He’d been dead for thirty seven years. The present Pope decided John XXIII needed a new resting place since there were so many people who wanted to reverence his tomb in the crypt of St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Furthermore, Pope John XXIII, son of peasants and known as ‘the peoples’ Pope’ is on the road to being declared a saint. One of the steps in the process is for the potential saint’s body to be exhumed for suitable identification.
Although Popes’ bodies are not fully embalmed they are ‘preserved’ with formalin to help keep the body for the few days of public viewing. Funeral director Joseph Watts commented to the New York Daily News, ‘He was embalmed right away, it was done by doctors, nothing but the best, and he was placed in the perfect place, the Catacombs.’ According to Watts, who has visited the tomb, the preservation of the pope’s body was probably the result of a number of factors. ‘The embalming fluid was formaldehyde-based with other chemicals…he was also in a triple-sealed casket—–a casket, an outer case, another outer case of cypress wood—–and that was in a marble crypt… There was no water or anything that could disintegrate [the body].’ Vincenzo Pascali, from the University of Rome said he doesn’t think Pope John’s preservation is very unusual. ‘It’s more common than you might think. The body of the Holy Father was well protected. Oxygen couldn’t get into the coffin and any in there would have been used up very quickly…[in the caskets] they used materials like lead and zinc which oxidise and slow the decomposition process,’ he added.
With her usual reserve, the Catholic Church denied that there was anything miraculous about the preservation of the Pope’s remains. The Vatican Information Service never used the words ‘miraculous’ or ‘incorrupt’ regarding the body of John XXIII. After the exhumation the Vatican Information Service headlined its story with great caution, simply saying, “Body of Blessed John XXIII is Remarkably Well Preserved.” This is in keeping with the usual Catholic official policy which does not rule out supernatural occurrences, but also does not declare an event miraculous until every natural explanation is exhausted.
Preservation Precedents
Because of the stories of incorruptibility people presumed to be saints were often exhumed and re-interred. The custom soon developed for exhumation to be part of the process for a person to be declared a saint by the Catholic Church. Throughout the Middle Ages various saints’ bodies were considered to be incorrupt and the presence of an incorrupt body could be a magnet for many pilgrims with their offerings and donations to the church. Despite the damp climate, medieval Britain was especially liable to nurture saintly characters whose bodies didn’t decay. Among the English saints with incorrupt bodies were Cuthbert, Werburgh, Waltheof and Guthlac. Amongst them were two royal sisters, Etheldreda and Withburga, a king– Edward the Confessor, a bishop– Hugh of Lincoln and an Archbishop of Canterbury, Alphege. At the Reformation all their shrines were destroyed and the incorrupt bits of body dispersed. In a quirk of history however, when her shrine at Ely Cathedral was destroyed, the saintly Queen Etheldreda’s hand was preserved by a devout Catholic family. The still incorrupt hand was enshrined some four hundred years later when a little Catholic Church was re-established in Ely.
The accounts of saints’ bodies not decaying despite being buried for years continues right through to the present day. In a fascinating book Joan Carroll Cruz chronicles the stories with the kind of believing ‘objectivity’ which Catholics are famous for. In the book she relates some of the more amazing and gruesome details surrounding the incorruptible bodies of saints. The book abounds in details of preserved hearts, severed limbs, corpses that sit up and wink and healing perfumes that seep from holy bones. She tells how the body of St Teresa of Avila didn’t rot even though it was buried in wet mud; and how the bodies of St Paschal Baylon, St Francis Xavier and St John of the Cross all remained fresh and intact despite being covered in sacks of quicklime for months. Cruz tells of Blessed Peter of Gubbio, a fourteenth century monk, and Venerable Maria Vela, a sevententh century nun, whose voices were heard chanting with their brothers and sisters long after they were dead. St Clare of Montefalco was a holy nun from the thirteenth century who said to her sisters, ‘If you seek the cross of Christ, take my heart; there you will find the suffering Lord.’ After her death not only did her body remain incorrupt, but the sisters removed her heart and they found clearly imprinted on the cardiac tissue were figures representing a tiny crucifix complete with the five wounds of crucifixion.
Another extraordinary saint is Blessed Margaret of Metola. Margaret was blind, dwarfed, hunchbacked and lame, but that didn’t stop her from living a life of heroic service to the poor. She died in 1330, but in 1558 her remains had to be transferred because her coffin was rotting away. At the exhumation the witnesses were amazed to find that like the coffin, the clothes had rotted, but Margaret’s crippled body hadn’t. With typical understatement, Cruz reports, ‘The body of Blessed Margaret, which has never been embalmed, is dressed in a Dominican habit, and lies under the high altar of the Church of St Domenico at Citta-di-Castello, Italy. The arms of the body are still flexible, the eyelashes are present, and the nails are in place on the hands and feet. The colouring of the body has darkened slightly and the skin is dry and somewhat hardened, but by all standards the preservation can be considered a remarkable condition having endured for over six hundred and fifty years.’
Incredible Incorruptibles
It is easy enough to dismiss such stories as medieval miraculous nonsense, but two things make this untenable. First of all, the phenomena are among the most well-documented of any so-called miraculous occurrences. Among paranormal ephemera these prodigies are not only still visible, but the exhumations were witnessed with oaths and affidavits by ordinary working people as well as respectable professionals. Secondly, the accounts of incorruptible bodies are not a medieval phenomenon. They are a kooky part of Christian history from the first century right through to the twenty first.
The two most amazing modern accounts are of St Bernadette and St Charbel Makhlouf. St Bernadette was the shepherd girl who saw the Blessed Virgin Mary at Lourdes. She went into a convent and died in 1879. She was buried in the crypt of the convent chapel. In 1909 a commission investigating her saintliness exhumed her body. The bishop and two doctors were the official witnesses. They were joined by two stonemasons and two carpenters. All of them swore beforehand to tell the truth of their findings. They found that the saint’s body was incorrupt. A nun who had witnessed the burial thirty years before noted that the only change was that the dead nun’s habit was damp.
Bernadette was re-buried and exhumed again in 1919. As before, both civil and religious witnesses were gathered under oath. The doctors who examined the body wrote, ‘when the coffin was opened the body appeared to be absolutely intact and odourless…there was no smell of putrefaction and none of those present experienced any discomfort.’ On a third exhumation in 1923 the body was still found in the same condition. At that point the body was opened and the internal organs were found to be supple. After forty six years, the doctor reported, ‘the liver was soft and almost normal in consistency.’
St Charbel Makhlouf was a Maronite monk from Lebanon. He died in 1898. In his life he seemed unremarkable except for his quiet and intense devotion to Christ. After his death for forty five nights strange lights appeared over his grave. Because forty five days is the traditional length of time for a body’s decomposition, the monastic authorities called for his exhumation. His body was found perfectly fresh despite the fact that recent rains had reduced the cemetery to a quagmire and the body was found floating in a muddy pool. Charbel’s body was re-clothed and transferred to a wooden coffin, but a strange blood-like oil kept exuding from his body—so much so that the clothes had to be changed twice a week. In 1927—twenty nine years after his death his still incorrupt body was examined, found to be totally flexible and incorrupt. It was then re-buried in a niche in the ancient abbey church. In 1950 pilgrims to the shrine noticed liquid seeping from the tomb. The coffin was opened again and the body was still incorrupt and exuding the sweat like substance which was collected and from which many miraculous cures were reported. The body remained incorrupt for sixty seven years, finally decaying in 1965.
Preposterous Preservations
Cruz reports no less than 102 stories of incorrupt bodies of Catholic saints. With so many supposedly incorrupt saints it is no wonder the devotees of Pope John XXIII suspected that the preservation of his remains might be a sign from heaven. Although the Catholic authorities do not deny the possibility of miraculous preservation of bodies, neither do they place much stock in it. According to Rome, the strange phenomena may confirm holiness, but on its own the un-natural preservation of bodies does not prove holiness. The authorities quite sensibly look to see what the person’s life was like.
Indeed, the phenomenon of un-naturally preserved bodies raises as many questions as it answers. If un-natural preservation is a sign of saintliness why aren’t all saints supernaturally preserved? Compare two very similar saints: Bernadette and Thérèse of Lisieux were both nineteenth century French girls who went into a convent and died of consumption at an early age. Bernadette’s body was incorrupt. Thérèse’s body, at her exhumation, was reduced to a skeleton in the normal way. Why should one saint be incorrupt and not the other?
The Catholic authorities are right to be cautious in equating incorruptibility with holiness. Indeed, the Catholic authorities were embarrassed when, in 1985, Cardinal Shuster’s body was discovered to be incorrupt after thirty one years in the grave. Many think Shuster was anything but a saint since he was a friend of Mussolini and supported fascism and Italy’s war with Abyssinia. Neither does the phenomenon of incorrupt bodies necessarily prove the claims of Catholicism. A famous yogi in California called Paramahansa Yogananda died in 1952 and his unembalmed body didn’t decay and emitted a beautiful fragrance. Maybe there are many incorrupt bodies of holy Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists, but we’ll never know because these religions don’t have the unusual custom of digging up their suspected saints.
There are other quirky problems surrounding the phenomenon of incorrupt bodies of saints. While there is definitely something weird happening it is also true that the faithful have perpetuated the miracle stories and have sometimes helped the miracles along. In her defining book, Cruz is very honest in admitting that some of the incorrupt bodies were later embalmed. Some have been incorrupt for hundreds of years only to decay once they were moved—making one suspicious that the airtight original container may have helped preserve the body. Other incorrupt bodies have been spliced together with bits of string and wire. In some cases the darkened faces and hands are covered with silver or wax, ostensibly for cosmetic purposes, but could it be that they are really covering a skeleton?
Despite the irrational elements and the faithful ‘helping’ the miracle along there is enough evidence of remarkable occurrences surrounding the incorruptibles. St Isidore and St John of the Cross are two final examples which illustrate the unsettling events and show that despite all other explanations the incorruptibles are probably one of the best documented examples of the miraculous. St Isidore was a farm labourer who died in the year 1130. He was buried directly in the earth without tomb or coffin. Forty years later, prompted by a dream, they exhumed his body to move it to a more worthy tomb. An eyewitness recorded that Isidore’s body ‘looked like it had just died although it had been lying in the earth for forty years.’ In 1622 the body was exhumed a second time before many witnesses. Once again it was perfectly fresh and emitted ‘a heavenly odour’. One of the witnesses was the King’s minister who signed the document attesting what they had all seen.
When St John of the Cross died in 1591 he was buried in a vault beneath the floor of the church. When the tomb was opened nine months later the body was fresh and intact, and when a finger was amputated to use as a relic the body bled as it would from a normal person. When the tomb was opened for a second time nine months later the body was still fresh despite the fact that it had been covered with a layer of quicklime. In 1859 and 1909 the body was exhumed again and still found to be fresh and incorrupt. The last exhumation of the relic was in 1955 when St John of the Cross’s human body, after nearly four hundred years was still ‘moist and flexible’ although the skin ‘was slightly discoloured.’
As with most paranormal phenomena, the existence of incorrupt bodies has not been studied seriously by the scientific community. As the phenomena exists outside Catholicism it may be that the incorrupt bodies are proof of the possibility that spiritual practice has physical effects. In a devoutly religious person the spiritual practice of prayer and meditation is merged with the physical discipline of asceticism and abstinence. As a result the physical and the spiritual become inter-mingled. Perhaps in some cases this inter-penetration of the spiritual with the physical so overwhelms the person’s body as to preserve it from natural corruption. If we take seriously the possibility of the psycho-physical relationship we may begin to explain why some bodies do not decay despite the fact that the individual has died of a noxious disease, was not embalmed and was buried for decades in damp conditions with other corpses that rotted naturally. When we understand how the mind and body work together we may also start to understand why some saintly characters wind up being both dead as a doornail and fresh as a daisy.
This essay was first published by the Fortean Times.
One warm, early-1980s weekday afternoon, I was walking east on Delancey Street in New York City’s Lower East Side. At that time, as were many areas of the city, Delancey was kind of rundown. I don’t remember what brought me to that out-of-the-way part of town. I was probably going to visit one of the kids who had been in my group at a Fresh Air Fund summer camp, at which I was a counselor.
Unlike today’s post-modern times, in which, aided by the Net and phones, relabeled “sex workers” ply their trade more discreetly, prostitutes of that era were commonly visible at outdoor locations. On Delancey that day, an attractive, late-20s Puerto Rican woman with mid-length hair, snug slacks and a colorful, short-sleeved blouse matched my sidewalk stride and grasped my right elbow with her soft hand. Sounding vaguely like Rosie Perez would later sound, she said, “You and me should go on a date.”
We walked a few steps together before I said, “I can’t. I’m already late.” I could have added that I was broke, which was also true. But saying so might have been perceived as disrespectful. Sometimes you don’t owe the world a full explanation. And sometimes the world doesn’t want to hear one.
As I moved forward without her, I looked back over my right shoulder. Giving me a final chance, she implored, “Let’s just talk about it. Let’s discuss it!”
I suspect that this woman’s life presented serious challenges. But she didn’t seem depressed and she wasn’t drunk or drugged. Her irrepressible response made me chuckle; in particular, her use of, and emphasis on, “discuss” struck me as deliberately incongruous. I briefly wondered how such a discussion would go. What might we say to each other regarding the proposed “date?”
The discussion might have been more interesting than the date itself.
Be that as it may, decades later, when I want to go somewhere or do something that my wife doesn’t, I say, “Let’s just talk about it. Let’s discuss it!”
I’ve often thought about what makes people friends. Friendships are commonly based on physical characteristics; people tend to fall in with people who look roughly like them. Much of the time, friendships arise from enjoying the same activities, e.g., listening to the same music, wearing the same clothes, rooting for the same sports team or abusing the same substances. Sometimes, people become friends because they’ve shared an experience, e.g, school time or working or playing sports together. People often like each other because they find the same things funny. Especially strong friendships can develop from some show of support during a time of need.
But no matter what their basis or origin, friendships—and close relationships with selected kin—entail exchanging perceptions of the world and life. In so doing, friends influence each other’s thinking, even without trying to. Listening to friends or favored family members, or listening to ourselves talk to them, can also help us to figure out what’s true. Or at least what feels good to believe or say.
I’ve spent countless hours swapping ideas with close family members or people I considered friends: on walks, riding trains or buses, under day or night skies, at bars, all-night diners or the dashboard confessional, et al. Most of these discussions were one-to-one. Others involved three or, at most, four people. Beyond four people—and not just any four people—serious discussions don’t get traction.
These rap sessions have encompassed a very wide range of topics; almost nothing was out-of-bounds. You’ve had these talks. You know.
As have many of you, over the past 43 months I’ve lost and/or abandoned a series of friendships and spent less time with some relatives due to disagreements regarding the Covid “mitigation.” This isn’t unprecedented. In life, relationships begin, grow and thrive. But inevitably, over time, people leave schools or jobs, relocate, develop new interests, or just find people they like better. One must continually make new friends to replace the old. So again here.
Yet, Coronamania presented a new reason for friendships to end. The majority, who bought into the overreaction, decided that if you didn’t support lockdowns, school closures, masks, shots, and massive government giveaways, you were evil and not worth talking to. They wouldn’t discuss, in any depth, the proper response to a respiratory virus or the social, economic, and psychological effects of such responses. Instead, they firmly believed and naively obeyed the media and government.
They were also driven by peer pressure. They adopted what they perceived to be the majority view among those whom they knew. In so doing, they conflated the emotional protection of the herd with reason and truth. Feeling empowered by the mob around them, they peremptorily supported the senseless, destructive mitigation. They haughtily refused to consider the perspectives of those who, like me, disagreed with the crisis narrative or the mitigation dogma.
They didn’t even want to discuss it.
Those who know me know that I read a lot, did well in school, ask a lot of questions, like to weigh ideas comprehensively and without bias, listen well, very seldom get loud or insult anyone, and can make people laugh. Pre-March, 2020, people initiated and participated for hours in countless one-to-ones with me about themes large and small. And medium.
Nonetheless, almost none of my friends were willing to engage in serious dialogue with me about “The Pandemic.” Many recipients of my emails told me to stop sending essays I had written, or they just blocked me entirely. Mistakenly thinking it would make me feel guilty and change my mind, atheists called me “selfish” and “a bad/phony Christian.” The latter characterization was, to them, triply satisfying: it felt good to simultaneously denigrate me, my faith, and others who shared it.
Those who canceled me ruled out the possibility that I might present some unknown facts or previously unconsidered ideas that might have shown that the Corona response was a massive overreaction. In life, multiple people have told me that I think outside the box. Perhaps some who canceled me thought that I might create some cognitive dissonance.
But most who aggressively dismissed what I had to say told me I wasn’t an “expert.” They embraced the hysteria, ignored what they saw in daily life, suspended common sense and either didn’t know, or forgot, basic Biology. They also ignored all of the damage that the lockdowns, closures, masks, shots, and spending were causing. They trusted their TVs more than they trusted reason.
Instead of talking about the Covid response as they had spoken with me about the broad range of topics that friends and family members normally discuss, e.g.: personal problems, philosophical issues, or whether or not they liked a given celebrity, vacation spot or cuisine, friends and family avoided dialogue of any depth about the biggest, bizarrest disruption of lives that any of us had ever seen. While the Covid elephant loomed in the room, I lost interest in small talk.
The unwillingness to talk about the Covid response contravened contemporary norms. Our society has always purportedly valued the free exchange of ideas. And for the past few decades, our society has purportedly embraced “diversity.” Colleges select students and governments, corporations and NGOs deliberately choose employees from different demographic groups. Ostensibly, doing so facilitates the exchange of different perspectives on topics affecting the public interest. Considering diverse viewpoints is supposed to enable those with culture-bound blind spots to see the world differently and, consequently, to appropriately modify mistaken and damaging perceptions and practices.
But while our culture exalts free expression and apparent ethnic, racial, religious and sexual-identity diversity, it strongly discourages diversity of opinion. In place of open-minded inquiry, facts and logic, schools, politicians and news commentators recited fake stats and PC tropes and canceled those who dared to question those notions. Coronamania dissenters, including many who were public health PhDs or MDs, were widely censored by governments and were shouted down—often electronically—by friends and family members.
Could thoughtful discussions between friends and family regarding Covid policies have changed minds? Probably not. Until they perceive that popular sentiment is moving in a different direction, people seldom alter their views; egos get in the way. And fear is hard to allay. Many people feared “the virus.” I think that many of the Coronamanic actually liked being scared; they found “The Pandemdic(!)” exciting or a good excuse to skip their commutes. But more than the virus, they feared being in the minority and having others dislike them.
Regardless of low persuasive yield, it would have been interesting to hear more people answer such questions as:
What makes this virus “novel?”
At what other time(s) in human history have healthy people been quarantined?
Of all the people you know, how many under 75 and not sick or obese have died from Covid-19?
How many old, sick people normally die each day?
Did hospitals extend or, instead, shorten lives?
Were hospitals really being overrun by Covid patients?
Why did the two-week lockdown “to flatten the curve” last much longer?
Won’t spending $10 trillion on the Corona response ultimately impoverish most Americans?
Why do the most locked-down, masked-up states have the highest Covid death rates?
Did it make sense that people had to wear masks to enter restaurants but could remove these while they ate and chatted for an hour?
How many other restrictions, such as travel bans and quarantines, made no sense?
Why did most American public schools close for in-person learning for over a year while European and African public schools, and many American private schools, were open since September 2020 without causing harm?
Why didn’t death tolls increase sharply after BLM protests, the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, the Trump rallies, and during the college football season, as the media and various “experts” had predicted?
What has Fauci said since January 2020 that has demonstrated useful knowledge about Covid and how to react to it in an effective, socially constructive manner?
Do you know what a 40-cycle threshold PCR test is and how using it has inflated ostensible Coronavirus infection and death tolls?
Why should someone with a 99.9 percent —or greater—chance of surviving a Coronavirus infection without treatment take an experimental injection that has failed on a mass scale and killed or injured hundreds of thousands of people?
Why do governments and colleges still mandate vaxxes when these shots have clearly failed, as promised, to stop infection and spread?
If masks are effective, why are lockdowns and vaxxes needed and if the vaxxes are effective, why do we need masks?
What evidence shows that Coronavirus vaxxes won’t cause long-term harm?
Is the harm done, via lockdowns and closures, to those under 50, who were never at risk and who lost formative, memorable life experiences, worth it?
Neither friends, family members, nor public health bureaucrats were willing to answer such questions or to justify the plainly silly and destructive Covid mitigation policies. I was willing to answer any questions they had for me. But the few who questioned me ghosted me after I responded.
Unsurprisingly, it turned out that I knew more about the ineffectiveness, and harms, of the NPIs and shots than did the experts. It wasn’t hard. I sought the truth and the public’s welfare, not power, fame, political advantage, or money.
Those who avoided dialogue were so sure they were right about the Covid response that they saw themselves as above any fray surrounding that subject. But by running with the Corona-crazed mob, they’ve been wrong about everything.
And by being wrong, they’ve created a Hell of a mess. Because they were unwilling to discuss it.
The following is an excerpt from Chapter 1 of Fear of a Microbial Planet: How a Germophobic Safety Culture Makes Us Less Safe.
When my sister goes into a hotel room for the first time, she takes a container of disinfecting wipes with her, and wipes down every surface that could have conceivably come into contact with a human being in the recent past. She doesn’t do anything else before this happens. No sitting down, no unpacking. Nothing.
“Why do you do that?” I asked her.
“You never know what or who’s been in there,” she answered.
That’s true of anywhere you go, I thought, but I didn’t press it further at that time. My sister is a germophobe, and I knew she wouldn’t be convinced by anything else her little brother might have to say, even if I was an infectious disease researcher. But maybe you will.
Germophobes Are Living in Denial
Germophobes (which could also be spelled germaphobes) live in denial because microbes are everywhere, and they cannot be avoided. There are an estimated 6×10^30 bacterial cells on Earth at any given time. By any standard, this is a huge amount of biomass, second only to plants, and exceeding that of all animals by more than 30-fold. Microbes make up to 90 percent of the ocean’s biomass, with 10^30 cells, equivalent to the weight of 240 billion African elephants. The very air you breathe contains a significant amount of organic particulate matter that includes over 1,800 species of bacteria and hundreds of species of fungi airborne in the form of spores and hyphal fragments. Some microbes can stay airborne for days to weeks, usually by hitching a ride on dust or soil particles. The sheer density in the air we breathe means we inhale thousands of microbial particles for every hour spent outdoors. Going inside isn’t much different, as indoor air is generally associated with the immediate outdoor environment, with differences due to ventilation and occupancy. It’s almost impossible to find any place, indoor or outdoor, that is completely sterile, although some places are dirtier than others.
If you are working in a musty, water-damaged basement without a protective respirator, stripping moldy drywall might expose you to hundreds of millions of aerosolized fungal spores very easily, irritating your throat, sinuses, and lungs. The leaves you raked in the fall, the ones you ignored for a while until they became a wet, brown mess until the weather finally became dry and warm, could have released a cloud of bacteria and fungi when you finally got around to raking or blowing them. And later, when you were relaxing in your hammock, you might have had a little cough. That was your lungs trying to get rid of all those microbes you stirred up and inhaled. But you probably got over it. Lungs are pretty good at clearing out most particles, even living ones.
Earlier, in the summer, when you went swimming in a lake, you were exposed to trillions of microbes the moment you hit the water. Bacteria and other single celled organisms had already bloomed in the warm, nutrient-rich water to astronomical levels for the summer season. Even if you thought you kept your mouth closed, you didn’t keep them completely out. No problem, you say, I’ll just swim in swimming pools, and avoid all of those germs. Yet swimming pools, despite containing antimicrobial levels of chlorine, may still contain fecal E. coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Don’t even get me started on the kiddie pool. Did you think swim diapers stop much? Um, no. Poop, and the microbes that come with it, find a way.
All that bacteria in the lake and pool doesn’t just naturally live and multiply in the water. A significant amount originated in animals, including humans. We harbor trillions of bacteria on our skin, in our mouth, and in our guts. The pool doesn’t have microbes in it because the chemical treatments didn’t work, it has microbes in it because it has people in it. We are literally germ factories. It is all over us, inside us, and on everything we touch.
When I was in college, one local fraternity held a hot tub marathon fundraiser, where participants were sponsored to sit in hot tubs for as long as possible. Some did so for hours. In the next few days, many of them developed itchy, red, bumpy rashes with blisters surrounding hair follicles. Not surprisingly, all that time in the hot tubs turned them into large bacterial broth cultures, inoculated by fraternity guys and sorority girls in close proximity. The hot water, even chemically treated, couldn’t suppress the growth forever, and the bacteria, likely the skin-colonizing and rash-inducing Pseudomonas aeruginosa, grew exponentially. There wasn’t any sinister outside contamination. The source of all that Pseudomonas, without a doubt, was the people themselves.
Humans as Microbial Bioreactors
Our bodies are colonized by so many microbes that our cells (about 10 trillion total) are outnumbered by our microbial inhabitants by a factor of ten (about 100 trillion total). The microbiota of our bodies is incredibly diverse, with thousands of species of bacteria and fungi that collectively express 4.4 million genes, compared to our meager 21,000-gene genome. As science writer and ecologist Alanna Collen noted in her excellent primer to the human microbiota 10% Human, genetically we aren’t even 10 percent human, it’s actually more like 0.5 percent.
When and where do we get all of those microbes?
For anyone who’s witnessed a natural birth, it’s obvious the baby isn’t born in a completely clean environment. First of all, the mother’s vagina is loaded with bacteria, predominately of the genus Lactobacillus. You might recognize Lactobacillus from looking at the ingredient list of yogurt products, because it is often a major component. That’s why some crunchy midwifes tell pregnant women to rub yogurt on their vaginas if they think they might be getting a yeast infection. So, babies are exposed to yogurt bacteria? Nothing wrong with that! But that’s not all. Another common occurrence—women in labor might defecate. Because of intense lower abdominal and pelvic pressure, a woman in labor often starts to lose control and can sometimes push out everything. And as a result, the baby may be exposed to the mother’s fecal bacteria in addition to vaginal bacteria. If this exposure doesn’t happen at birth, it could also happen later in the hospital or household, as fecal bacteria are easily aerosolized/airborne and inhaled or swallowed. Either way, every health baby will ultimately be colonized by E. coli, Bacteroides, Clostridium, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus species, just to name a few. If a mother is breastfeeding, the baby will also be exposed to additional Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria.
Once a baby starts eating solid foods, her gut microbiota will adapt to the new sources of fiber, sugars, protein, and fats with increased diversity and a more “adult-like” microbiome. The adult microbiome is less dynamic as an infant in the first year of life, but adult microbiomes can still be disrupted by changes in diet, overall health, antibiotics exposure, or infection. I’ll get into more detail in Chapter 2 about how these changes can disrupt microbiomes and how they can be associated with modern health problems. But even with these disruptions, people are loaded with microbes, and are daily exposed to huge numbers of additional microbes at home, school, the office, or pretty much anywhere else on Earth.
Home is Where the Germs Are
When sequencing technology was also used to determine the microbial diversity in the air and dust of households and offices, the results were fascinating. Indoor microbes can be on surfaces or in the air as bioaerosols. Not surprisingly, the major source of indoor microbes and bioaerosols is the local outdoor environment. However, bioaerosols also come from animal and human occupants, due to breathing, shedding of skin cells, or using the toilet. Particles on surfaces can be resuspended in the air as bioaerosols by walking, vacuuming, cleaning, and even sleeping, since your bed is full of dead skin cells, fungi, and bacteria.
In any home or building with human occupants, species of human-colonizing bacteria are abundant. In fact, it is possible to predict whether a home is occupied by predominately males or females by their microbial profile, as higher percentages of males were associated with greater abundance of Corynebacterium, Dermabacter, and Roseburia species, whereas females were associated with increased Lactobacillus species. Whether a family had a cat or dog could also be determined by 16S rRNA sequencing. Dogs bring a higher diversity of bacteria, with 56 different types of bacteria compared to 24 from cats. Cats at least clean themselves, and spend much less time sniffing each other’s rear ends, so maybe that explains the difference.
What’s even more impressive is that, as the microbiota of more individuals were sequenced, it became obvious that each individual possesses a unique colony of microbes, as unique as a fingerprint. Although more or less stable through adulthood, these distinct microbiomes can be altered by factors such as diet, age, and hormones. Furthermore, genetically-related and cohabiting individuals tend to also have more similar microbial cohabitants. One study determined that when a family left a home, their microbes lingered for a few days, gradually decreasing to undetectable levels. This loss of microbial fingerprint could be used in the future by forensic scientists to help recreate a timeline of when a suspect vacated their home or hideout.
Unsurprisingly, the bathroom is the best place in a home or building to encounter microbes on surfaces or in the air. In a bathroom, something as simple as a toilet flush can generate bioaerosols containing billions of bacteria, some staying airborne for hours, long enough to travel to every nearby surface. Closing the lid can reduce the bacterial plume, but not as much as you might think. Even repeated flushing can’t completely eliminate the generation of fecal-bacteria-laden bioaerosols. As a result, when you walk into a restroom, you are going to inhale bacteria, and anything you touch will be covered with it. This does not bode well for your toothbrush. Yet somehow, you are still alive.
Aside from microbial exposures we get from our mothers and our immediate environment during and after birth, the most prominent sources of microbes that colonize our guts are determined by the food we eat. In newborn babies that are breastfed, breastmilk is both a source of bacteria and a food that those bacteria will love. Some bacteria in breastmilk may originate from the gut and are transported to the mammary glands by circulating immune cells, in addition to microbes that colonize the skin around the areola.
Also, when the baby drinks milk directly from the breast, some oral bacteria also join the milk-associated microbes on their journey to the gut. The types of bacteria transferred in this way are determined by the mother’s diet and the mode of feeding (e.g. either directly through the breast or indirectly through pumping). The infant microbiome changes when solid foods are introduced, until it begins to resemble a more-or-less stable adult microbiome around 2 ½ years of age. The results of numerous studies have shown that stages of early life are the most critical for the development of adult microbiomes.
Two Hours and Five Seconds to Gastrointestinal Doom
We all know people who are obsessed with the idea of keeping their food “clean.” Throwing any food away that sits out on a table longer than the time it takes to eat a meal or anything that falls on the floor have become pretty common first-world practices. There are few heuristics or shortcut rules that have become popular as a result, such as a the “two-hour rule” for leaving out food, and the “five-second rule” for eating food that has touched the floor. In my opinion the five-second rule is most advantageous for helping parents feel less guilty when their toddlers toss perfectly good food from their high chairs onto the floor. My toddler doesn’t give a rip about food hygiene, so why should I? Same goes for the two-hour rule—sometimes we get busy and forget the chili was on the cold stove all evening. Does that mean it’s still OK if we heat it up again? How did anyone survive before refrigeration?
If you are a food safety scientist or microbiologist, your job is to identify potential hazards in food storage and preparation that could lead to contamination and illness. This is mostly for industrial and commercial food production and preparation. It’s clear from anyone that inspects restaurants that they have a wide variety of procedures and some of them are better than others. Once a local inspector told me which restaurants she avoided (didn’t stop me, though, because I like one of the places too much). In her case, and in the case of food microbiologists, even the potential for a contamination is problematic. Of much less concern is relative risk, which is the likelihood that certain practices will lead to contamination and illness. Therefore, even the slightest risk might be considered a violation. To put it another way, even the slightest risk of inspectors looking like they aren’t doing their job could be a problem for them.
Over the years, this zero-risk thinking regarding food prep and storage has made it into the household. The two-hour rule is a good example. Most people wouldn’t even wait that long to throw food out. Yet, much of the worry over growth of pathogens in food left out for two hours is the result of some major assumptions. This includes assumptions that you start with a viable colony of one or more pathogenic microbes, that the food contains low amounts of salt and preservatives, a neutral pH, and that it is sitting at optimal temperatures above 80 degrees Fahrenheit (~27°C). The classic case of food poisoning used in microbiology classes is grandma making potato salad for the summer picnic, using her hands to mix it and thus inoculating it with skin-colonizing Staphylococcus aureus. Then it sits out on the picnic table all afternoon (way longer than two hours), and BAM, everybody gets food poisoning. That is certainly a good way to increase the chances of a family outbreak, but that’s the perfect storm, and a lot of things had to happen in that scenario in order to make everyone sick.
Cross-contamination can be a problem, especially if you are preparing something that will be eaten raw in the same place where you just cut up chicken. Even being clean with chicken has its limitations–the CDC cautions against washing it before you cook it, lest you create a bunch of bacteria-laden droplets around your sink. In reality, most food that is reasonably cooked is pretty safe, and four hours is a reasonable time to leave out most food at room temperature. As with everything, people are usually fine if they use common sense and clean up the messes they make in the kitchen.
Common sense also works for evaluating the five second-rule. The five second-rule states that if you pick up food before five seconds on the floor, it is OK to eat. Some studies and media reports have actually taken this seriously in order to point out that bacteria does in fact stick to your food no matter how long it is on the floor. But how useful is that? You will eat bacteria when your food touches anything that has come in contact with a non-sterile surface. More importantly, what are the chances the bacteria on that piece of food will be a pathogenic strain of bacteria or virus or deliver a sufficient dose to cause illness?
As I mentioned earlier, the microbes in an indoor environment more or less mimic those of the outdoor environment plus the microbiomes of its inhabitants, so chances are you are already swallowing or inhaling in much of that bacteria. Sure, if you use that piece of food dropped on the floor to prepare potato salad, and then leave it out in 100-degree heat all day, that might not be the best idea. Or, if you cut chicken the day before, and refused to clean up all of the juices that dropped on the floor, you might get a bigger dose of Campylobacter jejuni or Salmonella enteriditis than your body is going to be comfortable with. Otherwise, the chances you are going to die or even get sick from eating food that fell on the floor are pretty remote. Not zero, but closer to it than most people seem to think. Just don’t tell anyone I told you, and don’t let anyone see you do it.
The Theory of Bad Germs
The concept of a “healthy” microbiome has only been around for a few decades, but the concept of the “deadly germ that wants to kill us” has been around a lot longer. As a consequence of that historical imbalance, we still spend a lot of time on pathogenic microbes and less time on our how our normal microbial environment might keep out troublemaking bugs. As I have discussed, the technology that scientists use to study microbial ecology is fairly new. In contrast, the ability to isolate and culture a single disease-causing microorganism has been around for more than a century.
The concept of disease caused by microorganisms, known as germ theory, had to overcome several other competing theories. Some of the most popular were the miasma and filth theories. The miasma theory explained that diseases were caused by noxious gases in the atmosphere, released by rotting of organic matter. The very similar filth theory focused on contamination of water and air by human waste. Although these sound primitive by modern standards, they were championed by many mainstream scientists, even up until the 1930s. Even some terms we use today have origins in these theories, like malaria, which essentially means ‘bad air.’
It wasn’t until the late 19th century that Robert Koch presented his criteria, now known as Koch’s postulates, for demonstrating that a disease is caused by a specific, filterable microorganism. Like most scientific advances, Koch didn’t develop these ideas from scratch. Others were thinking along the same lines. But he succeeded where others failed with his clear explanation of how to reproduce his work and apply it to many different infectious diseases. Koch’s postulates state that you must be able to isolate an organism from an infected individual, grow it in culture, reintroduce it into a healthy animal, and reisolate and identify the microbe as identical to the originally isolated and suspected agent. He formed these postulates based on his work with anthrax, and further generated supporting data with tuberculosis and cholera.
Although the work done by Koch and others in isolating disease-causing bacteria set off an explosion in deadly germ-identification, other disease-causing agents like viruses remained hidden and unknown. They were too small to be visualized by light microscopes, and couldn’t be grown in culture without host cells to infect. One can imagine the scientists’ frustration when they observed diseases that were obviously infectious, but weren’t able to isolate the causative organism. A perfect example is the Spanish flu of 1918. Many researchers were eager to apply Koch’s postulates to discover the infectious agent from the lungs of flu patients. To complicate matters, flu patients with severe disease often develop pneumonia due to secondary bacterial infections. As a result, these organisms were initially believed to be causative organisms for influenza. More importantly, the same microbe couldn’t always be isolated from the lungs of flu patients. The result was a hot mess of conflicting evidence, and by the time a virus was identified as the causative agent of influenza, the pandemic was long over. I will get much more into influenza and other viruses in Chapter 3.
Once researchers understood the germ theory of disease, they could isolate many different disease-causing microorganisms and reintroduce them into experimental animals. But one thing that happened was that animals tended to be resistant to further challenges, due to an active immune response. By using experimental animals, the mechanisms of acquired immunity could be studied and applied to improve patient care through the development of antisera and vaccines that protect people from infection or reinfection. And that brings me to my favorite topic!
Immunology 101
I walked out of that my first undergraduate immunology class in 1994 sure that I was going to be an immunologist. That was over twenty-five years ago, and since that time I’ve introduced the immune system to many others as a teacher and mentor. The way I have often done it, using a classic example, goes something like this: the scenario starts when someone steps on a nail. My wife stepped on a protruding carpet nail in 2009 when we were staying at a less-than-perfect hotel while on a visit with her father in China. She was not happy about it because she was worried the nail might have introduced the bacterium Clostridium tetani into the soft tissue of her foot. If that happened, and the bacteria survived to multiply to sufficient levels, it would produce a nasty neuromuscular activity-enhancing toxin called tetanus toxin that would cause uncontrollable muscle contractions, most frequently presented as lockjaw.
Being an immunologist, I asked her something like, “But you’re vaccinated aren’t you? You were in the Peace Corps. They vaccinate you for everything.” She conceded that was true. “Then don’t worry about it. You’ll be fine,” I said confidently.
I could be confident because I understood the concept of immunological memory. The immune system is capable of activating cells that are specific to every conceivable pathogen, and once the infection has been cleared, some of those cells remain as memory cells, cells that are much more quickly and easily activated upon reinfection with the same or a similar bug. That’s the whole principle behind vaccination—we try to fool the immune system into thinking the body has been infected using parts of pathogens or a weakened pathogen to stimulate the same reaction and development of specific memory cells, without the risk of a serious primary infection.
If the early inflammatory response doesn’t prevent an infection, nearby tissue resident immune cells called macrophages will sense trouble. These cells hang out in our tissues waiting for a danger signal from an encounter with bacteria like C. tetani. Once activated, macrophages become very adept at phagocytosis (i.e. engulfing and degrading germs in intracellular bubbles called phagolysosomes), and are able to kill many invading microbes and remove host cells that die as a result of the infection.
In some cases, the early immune response won’t be enough to get rid of the small but significant amount of C. tetani or the toxin it makes after a person steps on a nail. That’s when the adaptive immune response kicks in. This starts about 4 days after the infection and peaks at about 10 days. The adaptive response starts when tissue-resident cells called dendritic cells (DCs) get activated with the same signals that activate other innate immune cells. Like macrophages, DCs phagocytose and break down pathogens into their component parts. However, once they become activated, they leave the infected tissue and migrate to a lymph node, where they directly interact with adaptive immune cells called T cells.
Since T cells are so diverse, only a few are activated during any given infection, and those activated cells frantically divide to produce millions of clones of themselves, dividing every 4-6 hours. They do this for several days in order to generate huge numbers of identical cells (that’s why an adaptive immune response takes time to get going). Many of the T cells that are activated in this way leave the lymph node and migrate to a site of infection, following chemical signals just like other immune cells.
At the same time, some T cells interact with other cells in the lymph node called B cells. B cells come from the bone marrow and can recognize parts of proteins outside the with receptors on their surface. B cells secrete a soluble form or their surface receptor that we call antibodies. Antibodies bind pathogens or proteins and promote their killing, uptake and degradation by macrophages. If a T cell recognizes the same part of pathogen, or “antigen,” then the T cell provides “help” to the B cell so that the B cell can make even stronger binding antibodies. Other T cells can kill infected cells, preventing the spread of an infection. Through these processes, the adaptive immune response generates a highly pathogen-specific response that is much more targeted, less damaging, and more regulated than the early innate inflammatory response.
Eventually, as the invading microbes and the toxins they produce are cleared by the adaptive immune response, the immune cells at the site of infection stop getting activation signals and start getting “cease and desist” signals. Most of those cells die and are picked up and degraded by macrophages who clean up the mess. Eventually, the tissue heals, dead skin and muscle cells are replaced, and things go back to normal.
But that’s not all that happens. In the lymph nodes and spleen, some of the activated T cells become memory cells. Memory cells can be activated and divide much more quickly if they ever see the same antigen again. In this way we have a memory of every infection we’ve had throughout our lives. Since vaccines mimic this response; we also have a memory of every vaccination we’ve ever had. Sometimes this memory wanes a bit, and we need to get another shot, or we would become susceptible to a mild(er) infection, but the help we get from memory cells during a reinfection or from a booster vaccination is better than starting from scratch. And that’s how the immune system keeps us alive in a world full of potentially deadly bacteria, fungi, and viruses.
If the immune system is so good at attacking bacteria, fungi, and viruses, why isn’t it always attacking the ridiculous numbers of microbes living around us, on us, and within us? Why doesn’t our immune system explode from all of the microbe-detection signals in our skin, lungs, mouth and gut?
It doesn’t do that because the immune system also has a property called immunologic tolerance, in which immune mechanisms are suppressed in order to avoid unnecessary collateral damage. Immune tolerance doesn’t just extend to our own self-proteins, it also extends to our non-threatening microbial environment. Tissues that have constant microbial exposure, like in our gut, are loaded with tolerance-inducing cells (called T regulatory cells) that help the immune system put a check on itself and prevent autoimmune disease.
But sometimes the immune system isn’t tolerant of what it should be, and people do get autoimmune diseases, or allergies, or have an inappropriate response to an infection. Interestingly, the incidence of these conditions is increasing everywhere in the developed world, because despite being surrounded by microbes, we are actually getting better at being “clean” than we realize.
Bad news for fans of cheaper electric vehicles: The planned collaboration between Honda and General Motors on a range of cheaper EVs has been canceled. The joint project, which was announced in April 2022, was supposed to develop a new platform for use in lower-cost EVs for North America, South America, and China, with cars appearing in 2027. But on Thursday, the two companies revealed that the plan is no more.
“After extensive studies and analysis, we have come to a mutual decision to discontinue the program. Each company remains committed to affordability in the EV market,” Honda and GM said in a joint statement.
“After studying this for a year, we decided that this would be difficult as a business, so at the moment we are ending development of an affordable EV,” said Honda CEO Toshihiro Mibe in an interview with Bloomberg. “GM and Honda will search for a solution separately. This project itself has been canceled,” Mibe said.
Cell problems?
The now-canceled platform was supposed to use GM’s Ultium batteries. GM debuted Ultium in 2020 as its third-generation lithium-ion cell, developed together with LG Chem. At the time, GM CEO Mary Barra said that Ultium cells would drop below the $100/kWh barrier “early in the platform’s life.” In 2022, the first Ultium-based EVs went into production—the GMC Hummer EV, the Cadillac Lyriq, and the BrightDrop Zevo 600.
Ultium cells were supposedly ready for mass production, but GM and LG Chem are struggling to make that a reality. In July, GM had to idle BrightDrop’s production line in Canada due to a shortage of battery cells, and Kelly Blue Book’s sales data for the first three quarters of 2023 show that just 6,920 Ultium-based EVs (which include the Chevrolet Blazer and Silverado EV, as well as the Hummer, Lyriq, and BrightDrop van) were delivered to customers.Advertisement
(GM Authority has reported that Hummer production has been as high as 2,750 units in June 2023, which is a little puzzling to this author.)
By contrast, Chevrolet sold 49,494 Bolts, which use an older and more expensive battery chemistry, during the same nine months. GM had said it was ending Bolt production this year at its plant in Orion Township, Michigan, so that it could retool and start building electric trucks beginning in 2024. Last week, though, it emerged that EV truck production has been pushed back to late 2025. (Before anyone gets their hopes up, Ars does not believe this signals a reprieve for the Bolt.)
Honda and GM are still working together on other joint projects, though. The Honda Prologue and Acura ZDX are a pair of electric crossovers that use the same platform as the Cadillac Lyriq and Chevrolet Blazer, and both are still happening. They’ll even feature Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, which GM has controversially chosen to eliminate from its cars from model year 2024 onward.
GM and Honda are also partners—together with BMW, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz, and Stellantis—in a new North American fast-charging network. The seven OEMs plan to deploy 30,000 fast chargers in the US and Canada starting in 2024.
And Honda even announced another collaboration with GM earlier today—in 2026, it wants to start operating a robotaxi service in Japan using the Cruise Origin, an autonomous electric vehicle developed by the GM-backed AV company. Honda may regret the timing of this latest development after news that California has suspended Cruise’s permission to operate AVs after a horrific incident where a pedestrian, having already been hit by another car, was run over and dragged by a Cruise AV in San Francisco.
Latin patriarch of Jerusalem reconsecrates Holy Land to Our Lady, Queen of Palestine
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, delivers his homily at a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
A nun makes a gesture of devotion toward the statue of Our Lady at the end of the procession that followed a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Pilgrims participate in a traditional procession with a statue of Our Lady following a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Pilgrims participate in a traditional procession around the shrine with the statue of Our Lady following a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa incenses the altar during a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Father Gabriel Romanelli (center), the Latin parish priest of Gaza, is among the celebrants at a Mass to celebrate the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
The opening procession of the Mass on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023, at the celebration by the Catholic Church in the Holy Land of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, center, waves during the procession of a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. In front of Pizzaballa is Monsignor William Shomali, general vicar and patriarchal vicar for Jerusalem and Palestine. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Pilgrims from the Catholic Church in the Holy Land prepare for the celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the entrance to the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
A man carries his daughter on his shoulders at a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Pilgrims and clergy participate in a traditional procession with a statue of Our Lady following a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
A nun prays the Our Father during a Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa celebrates Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa celebrates Mass in celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, listens to an altar boy before presiding over a Mass on Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023, for the celebration of the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to her at Deir Rafat. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
On Sunday, Oct. 29, 2023, the Catholic Church in the Holy Land celebrated the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land at the shrine dedicated to Her at Deir Rafat. Above the shrine stands a large bronze statue of Our Lady with her right hand extended over Palestine, her homeland, as a sign of protection. | Credit: Marinella Bandini
For the first time since the outbreak of the war between Israel and Hamas on Oct. 7, the Catholic Church of the Holy Land gathered around its patriarch on the feast day of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and the Holy Land and reconsecrated the local Church and the entire land to her.
On Sunday, Oct. 29, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, presided over a Mass at the shrine dedicated to the Blessed Mother in Deir Rafat in the presence of a few hundred faithful.
The attendance was relatively small compared with the thousands of faithful who usually join the celebration from all the communities scattered throughout Israel and the Palestinian territories. However, the circumstances right now prevented a large gathering.
The Mass also took place inside the church instead of the courtyard where large crowds usually gather. The mood among those present was one of celebration, but not without somber undertones: Too many brothers and sisters are missing, and many are experiencing trauma on both sides of the war front.
The shrine of Deir Rafat is located halfway between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem in one of the most characteristic regions of ancient Palestine on the border of biblical Philistine, the scene of Samson’s famous exploits. A few kilometers away is Beit Shemesh, where the Ark of the Covenant was returned by the Philistines to the Jewish people (1 Sm 6:1-15). The shrine was built beginning in 1925 and was inaugurated on March 21, 1928, by the then-patriarch of Jerusalem, Monsignor Luigi Barlassina (1920–1947). Above the shrine stands a large bronze statue of Our Lady with her right hand extended over Palestine, her homeland, as a sign of protection.
It was Barlassina who, on the day of the solemn entry into the Basilica of the Holy Sepulcher on July 15, 1920, consecrated the Diocese of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem to Mary at a time marked by strong tensions. The Second World War had just ended, and Palestine was being contested by the Ottoman Empire and the Triple Entente powers (the United Kingdom, France, and Russia).
Eventually, it came under the governance of the United Kingdom (the period between 1920 and 1948 and is known as the “British Mandate”). On that occasion, for the first time, Barlassina invoked Our Lady as “Queen of Palestine.” The Sacred Congregation of Rites approved the title in 1933. The name refers to the entire Holy Land, which was called “Palestine” under the British Mandate.
The feast in honor of Our Lady, Queen of Palestine and patroness of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, was first celebrated on Aug. 15, 1928. Since 1971, following the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council, the feast was moved to Oct. 25, and since then, it has been celebrated on the last Sunday of the month.
“Today, we consecrate once again our Church, our diocese, our land to Our Lady, Queen of Palestine,” Pizzaballa said in his homily. “We have done this several times in moments of need for our community, and this is one of the most difficult in our recent history. It is an act of entrustment and therefore of trust. In this moment when everything seems to be overwhelming us, we need to entrust and deliver to God and the Virgin Mary all that we hold in our hearts.”
At the end of the Mass, the Act of Consecration of the Holy Land to the Immaculate Heart of Mary was read.
The patriarch emphasized the significance of the day’s readings, especially the passage from the Magnificat, which, he said, “overturns our perspective: The powerful are humbled, and the humble are lifted up. We think the world belongs to the powerful, but in the Magnificat, we hear the voice of the humble. The Gospel tells us that the meek shall inherit the earth, not those who destroy. What awaits us is a challenge. I’m not referring to physical destruction but rebuilding trust. That’s why we need meek people; through them, we can rebuild and offer the next generations a land full of beauty.”
Just after the Mass, the traditional procession around the shrine with the statue of Our Lady took place.
Among the celebrants was also the Latin parish priest of Gaza, Father Gabriel Romanelli. When the war broke out, he was in Bethlehem; now he is in Jerusalem. However, he still cannot reunite with his people.
“Why did the Lord want and allow me to be away since the beginning of this war?” he said to CNA. “Perhaps because from the outside, I can respond differently to many people… but for me, it is a great pain. The greatest pain is not being close to those who are suffering.”
Communication comes and goes, but Romanelli manages to stay in almost daily contact with his vicar, Father Yusuf, and other parishioners. Tears fill his eyes as he describes the situation.
Currently, about 700 people — almost all of Gaza’s Christians — have found refuge in the premises of the Latin parish and the adjacent school, “but everything around is destroyed,” he said.
More than 8,000 people are reported to have died in the Gaza Strip since the beginning of the conflict, and about 20,000 have been injured. After the recent bombings, “many people are under the rubble,” Romanelli said. “For hundreds, it’s not even possible to recognize the bodies.”