How To Ignore The Gaslighting!

& How We Can Really Help Others.

Firstly, thank you all for your patience during the hiatus in my writings whilst I have been in the process of creating, recording and publishing my podcast.

Although I am still in the learning phase, and will continue to refine my podcasting skills, I now feel I have the bandwidth to return to writing articles.

Before diving into specifics, let me explain what I mean by ‘gaslighting’.

According to an article entitled Gaslighting on the website of Psychology Today,

“Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control.”

The term ‘gaslighting’ is commonly used in reference to circumstances that involve personal or professional relationships and a direct form of manipulation.

However, it seems to me that the media, both mainstream and ‘alternative’, engages in a great deal of ‘manipulation and psychological control’; the stories they report often encourage people to believe things that have never been proven to be true. This indicates that they engage in a form of gaslighting, even if unwittingly.

I’ve chosen 3 recent stories to showcase what I mean.

Story 1 - HIV

10th July BBC article South Africans fear spike in HIV infections as US aid cuts bite.

There are multiple issues with this article. The first is the suggestion that ‘South Africans’ are afraid, all of them. Yes, I know generalisations are a linguistic tool; they are nevertheless unhelpful and, as in this case, misleading.

The main issue I wish to focus on, however, is the reference to ‘HIV infections’.

The BBC article mentions Gugu, a 54-year-old South African woman said to be ‘HIV-positive’ who,

“…used to collect her antiretrovirals from a USAID-funded clinic in central Johannesburg.”

It continues,

“But when President Trump's cuts to aid funding were announced earlier this year, she and thousands of other HIV-positive patients across South Africa suddenly faced an uncertain future.”

The fact that USAID had been funding clinics may sound like philanthropy, but it isn’t.

The BBC article refers to a UNAIDS (Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS) press release, Launch of UNAIDS Global AIDS Update 2025 that refers to reductions in ‘new HIV infections’. Citing that press release, the BBC then ‘warns’ that,

“…if the world does not act, there could be an extra six million new HIV infections and four million Aids-related deaths by 2029.”

This is pure fear-mongering.

According to the BBC article, Prof Lynn Morris, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Johannesburg's Wits University makes the comment that,

“The cuts have also affected research aimed at finding an HIV vaccine and a cure for Aids.”

Many people may be of the opinion that this concern is to bolster promotion of research that will help Big Pharma perpetuate its bloated profits. Although this may be true to some extent, it is only one aspect, and not necessarily the main one.

The real problem is - and I make no apologies for sounding like a broken record - there is no evidence, and never has been, for the existence of any virus that has the ability to ‘infect’ people and make them ill or even cause their death; and this includes ‘HIV’.

Story 2 - Malaria

8th July BBC article First malaria treatment for babies approved for use.

The reason this is reported as ‘news’ is because,

“Until now there have been no approved malaria drugs specifically for babies.”

Currently, babies are treated with the same drugs as those used for older children, yet they are said to ‘process medicines differently’, which ‘presents a risk of overdose’. The ‘new’ drug is claimed to be able protect ‘the smallest and most vulnerable’, a highly dubious claim, which is putting it mildly!

The article provides details,

“The drug, known as Coartem Baby or Riamet Baby in some countries, was developed by Novartis in collaboration with the Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV), a Swiss-based not-for-profit organisation initially backed by the British, Swiss and Dutch Governments, as well as the Gates Foundation and other bodies.”

The scale of the ‘problem’ with malaria is that, according to the BBC article, it was linked to over half a million deaths in 2023. The source of this information is the WHO Malaria fact sheet dated December 2024 that provides the same statistics and also states,

“The WHO African Region continues to carry a disproportionately high share of the global malaria burden. In 2023 the Region was home to about 94% of all malaria cases and 95% of deaths. Children under 5 years of age accounted for about 76% of all malaria deaths in the Region.”

The fact sheet claims that,

“Malaria is a life-threatening disease spread to humans by some types of mosquitoes. It is mostly found in tropical countries. It is preventable and curable.”

The problem is that this has never been proven to be true; malaria has never been proven to be caused by parasites transmitted by mosquitoes.

The problems with the mainstream view of malaria are many, way too many to discuss in any detail here. Malaria is, however, discussed in detail in chapter 8 of What Really Makes You Ill?

NOTE: I will make an updated version of the malaria section of the book available to value exchange subscribers in a separate post.

Story 3 - Vaccines

11th July BBC article Vaccine roll-outs cut deaths by 60% - study.

This article begins,

“Emergency vaccination programmes – rolled out in response to outbreaks of five major diseases – are believed to have reduced deaths by around 60% over a period of 23 years, according to a new study.”

Are we to accept their ‘beliefs’ as a ‘scientific fact’?

The words ‘new study’ are linked to a BMJ paper Estimating the historical impact of outbreak response immunisation programmes across 210 outbreaks in low and middle-income countries, the Abstract of which begins with a statement about ‘vaccine-preventable diseases’ and states, in the Introduction,

“Even diseases with routine childhood immunisation programmes (eg, measles and yellow fever in endemic countries) still have frequent outbreaks and a high health burden due to gaps in vaccine coverage.”

In other words, routine childhood immunisation programmes cannot be claimed to ‘prevent disease’, despite the rescue device of claiming ‘gaps in vaccine coverage’.

The BMJ study was funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, so it’s hardly surprising that it’s fully supportive of vaccination programmes, as can be seen in the Conclusion,

“For diseases with routine vaccination programmes, maintaining high levels of population immunity is vital for preventing large outbreaks, and when outbreaks do occur a rapid vaccine response often provides the greatest protective impact for the population at-risk.”

The key point to note is highlighted by the BBC article,

“Gavi is currently trying to secure a fresh round of funding in the face of global cuts to foreign aid.”

The gaslighting in this story is the notion of ‘vaccine-preventable diseases’, for which there is no evidence because there is no evidence that any disease is caused by an ‘infectious agent’, which is the foundation on which the practice of vaccination rests.

No wonder ‘they’ don’t like people who expose this issue.

---

One very clear common thread between these 3 stories is the focus on Africa.

Which raises the question: Why?

One reason relates to the removal of funding by USAID, because this agency has now been completely shutdown and their operations merged with the US State Department. This move by the Trump administration has received a huge amount of criticism.

USAID refers to United States Agency for International Development, which raises the question of why the US needs - or needed - to be responsible for ‘international development’. To put this in context, there is a Development Programme within the UN, called UNDP.

N.B. For the record, I am neither a supporter nor a critic of ‘President Trump’ or any other ‘president’. My aim is to highlight the issues, not the people or political parties.

One critic of the shutdown of USAID is Bill Gates, according to an 11th July CNBC article entitled Bill Gates says Trump’s cuts to USAID are devastating: ‘It’s not too late to reverse them’

His idea for reversing them can be seen on the Gates Foundation website.

This is not simply to benefit Bill Gates, but to continue and increase the rollout of vaccination programmes throughout the world, and especially in Africa.

This is why it is important that we know what is being planned - because the governments of ‘wealthy nations’ are being asked to help fund vaccine programmes using stories about ‘poor African babies and children’ who die from these dreadful ‘diseases’.

Please note that I am NOT denying the importance of showing our humanity in helping others who are ‘in need’.

The point I’m making here is that supporting vaccine programmes will not help people in Africa, whether babies, children or adults.

During my research for WRMYI, I looked into the work of USAID and found the following statement on their web page What We Do,

“USAID’s work advances US national security and economic prosperity…”

On their web page entitled Where We Work was the statement that,

“Through our assistance programs, USAID plays an active and critical role in the promotion of US foreign policy interests.”

N.B. These web pages are no longer available because the website is no longer functional.

It’s abundantly clear from the above extracts that USAID was not working for the benefit of the ‘poor people in Africa’.

So how did intervention in Africa to implement vaccination programmes support US foreign interests?

Good question!!

One likely reason is that the continent of Africa is rich in natural resources, so the promise of ‘aid’ could be used to leverage access to those resources.

One way to achieve this is through claims about ‘deadly diseases’ that require the attendance of teams of ‘experts’ in situ to assess the situation. These teams may include other personnel with a slightly different agenda that involves negotiations to achieve access to those resources. Although this may sound far-fetched, it isn’t.

The NSSM200 (National Security Study Memorandum), aka Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Threats is a 1974 report originally accessible from the USAID website. This report states that US efforts should focus only on certain key countries and that,

“Assistance for population moderation should give primary emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is special US political and strategic interest.”

This ‘assistance’ was to be provided through USAID programmes.

Enter the EIS, as described on the CDC web page About the Epidemic Intelligence Service,

“EIS officers are CDC's disease detectives who learn from and work alongside subject matter experts while providing service to domestic and international partners. EIS maintains its core focus on training disease detectives to practice consequential epidemiology, which is the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data for evidence-based public health action.”

Why is this significant? Because these ‘disease detectives’ are trained in the ‘germ theory’ paradigm; a paradigm that has never been proven to be true - and can be shown to be detrimental to health, not supportive of it.

There is a great deal more detail on all of these reports and plans in WRMYI.

Please be aware that I am not citing these reports for the purposes of increasing the level of fear. On the contrary, the purpose of my writing is always to share information so we can all make informed decisions, not decisions based on fear-mongering/gaslighting.

As I often say: Just because ‘they’ have a plan, that does not mean it will happen!

In Summary

Ignoring the gaslighting does not mean ignoring what is actually happening. On the contrary, we need to be aware of what is happening and, at the same time, apply discernment to the stories being reported, and to the narrative within those stories about the causes and the people involved.

Let’s not allow our innate human compassion for others to be used against us in support of agendas that do not have our best interests - nor the best interests of the people who are allegedly being ‘assisted’ - in mind.

How can we really help others? By sharing information in a kind and compassionate manner with those who are willing to listen.

Dawn 🌹

Thank you for your interest in my work. 🙏