Exposing the Dirt on "A Midwestern Doctor" and Sharing Undeniable Evidence that He/She is a Plagiarist and a Fraud

Dear readers and subscribers – I want to thank you for taking the time to read this post. I appreciate your willingness to explore the information below and I would be so, so grateful if you would consider sharing this post with as many people as possible to help spread the word.

Below is evidence of plagiarism and copyright infringement by a person calling him/herself “A Midwestern Doctor” on Substack. This person has changed his/her Substack address to make it look like a normal website address but nonetheless, the articles in question are appearing on Substack.

This person has stolen ALOT of information from my ultrasound book(and some from my birth trauma book as well). He/she has refused to admit what they’ve done, allowing lies to roll off their tongue with great ease in an attempt to claim my work as their own. The article in question is:

“The Forgotten Dangers of Ultrasound”
Link: https://substack.com/home/post/p-152694224

Please keep in mind that this person does not publicly reveal his/her identity but rather hides behind both a paywall and a wall of anonymity so that nobody can identify him/her. Alarm bells should immediately go off in the minds of intelligent people regarding A Midwestern Doctor’s creepy secrecy.

Because of the secrecy, I have not been able to find out this person’s real name nor file a proper lawsuit for copyright infringement and the theft of my intellectual property. I am hopeful that after Substack has had a chance to review the plagiarism evidence, they will be forced to reveal this person’s identity so that “A Midwestern Doctor” can be held legally accountable for fraud, plagiarism and copyright infringement.

Since I do not know this person’s identity, for purposes of this write-up I am going to refer to this entity as a “she” and a “her”. I will also refer to her as “MWD” which is short for Midwestern Doctor.

I want to begin by asking you to forgive me for the length of this article. I know it’s very long. I hope you will read it anyway as I’ve spent the last three months trying to pull all this all information together, going back and forth between my ultrasound book and MWD’s ultrasound article until my eyes glazed over and my brain felt like mush. This creature has stolen my ideas and A LOT of information from my book without giving me proper credit. Since I began examining just how she did this, I’ve also discovered some interesting facts about MWD that need to be exposed. So I regret that this article has turned into a mini-book but I could not think of a less cumbersome way to share this evidence.

If you do not want to read “the dirt” on MWD, simply scroll down to the place in this article where I state in large bold letters: WHAT FOLLOWS IS EVIDENCE OF THE THEFT OF INFORMATION TAKEN FROM MY ULTRASOUND BOOK.

=================================================

To begin the exploration, and especially for those who doubt that MWD might be guilty of plagiarism, I invite my readers to consider whether it does not seem odd that MWD would “spontaneously” decide to write an article about the dangers of ultrasound and then follow it up with another article about the dangers of hospital birth (she refers to these two articles as a “series”).

Of course, these are the very same topics I extensively cover and document in my first two books pictured below and it certainly appears that MWD has deliberately tried to replicate my work.

Please keep in mind that nobody else that I am aware of has ever written a lengthy and extremely well cited paperback book about the dangers of prenatal ultrasound (my book is 500 pages long and contains over 1800 citations to back up the information I share). Moreover, nobody that I am aware of has ever written a book about the dark agenda behind the protocols of “prenatal care” and hospital birth, nor the long-term impacts of medically induced prenatal and birth trauma. And so it interesting indeed that MWD would “spontaneously” decide to write about these very topics as part of her “series” and then claim that she did not steal my work. When I called her out on the theft of my work, she also claimed that she’s been working with the issue of birth trauma “for decades”. Since precious few people were talking about birth trauma prior to the publication of my book in 2014, I know MWD is not telling the truth and I also know she is not an expert on birth trauma, nor prenatal and hospital birth protocols, nor the facts regarding ultrasonic technology. She’s simply an intellectual thief working as part of a disinformation group that is following a specific agenda to lead the public astray.

Below is a screenshot of MWD’s response to me when I called her out on her plan to steal information from my birth trauma book right after she stole information from my ultrasound book.

As you can see from the screenshot above, MWD claimed that she was not going to read my birth trauma book prior to writing her hospital birth article and that any similarities between my book and her article would be “purely coincidental”.

Despite MWD’s assurance that my book would have nothing to do with her article, after a quick glance, it does appear there are parallels between MWD’s hospital birth article and my birth trauma book. One such parallel is shown below.

I sadly do not have time to comparatively analyze MWD’s entire hospital birth article as I have been working very hard to determine how much information she stole from my ultrasound book and find a way to demonstrate to others that she is indeed an intellectual thief. Nevertheless, I hope what follows will confirm that MWD is a plagiarist and a fraud and that the powerpoint slides I have created will successfully demonstrate that the “purely coincidental” similarities between her articles and my books are not coincidental at all.

To begin, I’d like to point out that MWD appears to obsessed with attempting to mimic my work. This copycat energy can be clearly seen in MWD’s bold and shameless mimicry of the cover of my book.

Similar mimicry can be seen throughout MWD’s ultrasound article and on her social media sites where she talks about ultrasound and hospital birth.

As will be shown below, almost everything MWD wrote in the post above came directly out of my ultrasound book save for the industry lie that ultrasound damage is “dose- dependent”. I debunk this lie in great detail in my ultrasound book while MWD is eager to promote it as part of her service to the disinfo group she works for and with (more on this shortly).

MWD’s comment about the “century of evidence” regarding ultrasound toxicity was taken directly from my book which actually contains the century of evidence in detailed form with citations to back up the info.

MWD claims that ultrasound has a “dose dependent toxicity”. This is an industry lie that MWD promotes ad nauseam through her article. The truth is…

A single exposure to ultrasound can and does cause irreversible genetic damage. This happens whether the radiation levels are considered “low level” or “high level”.

Every dose is harmful. Every exposure is potentially deadly. Many babies have been murdered and/or severely injured while they are in the womb thanks to the medical establishment’s use of prenatal ultrasonic technologies. I’ll talk more about this shortly.

MWD’s comment about the FDA “spiking the ultrasound dose” also came right out of my book within which I discuss the FDA’s decision to raise output levels on obstetrical ultrasound machines 8-15 fold in 1991. The FDA did this almost immediately after they discovered that ultrasound was causing low birth weight (i.e., fetal growth retardation) in children. MWD switched the date of this FDA decision to 1992 for reasons that are not clear but perhaps to avoid plagiarism detection.

MWD’s next comment about the medical radiation industry shifting away from x-rays and moving to ultrasound in 1975 also came straight out of my book. However, MWD made a mistake while attempting to copy the information in my book. Indeed, the medical establishment did begin using ultrasound in obstetrics during the early to mid-1970s (around 1975) but they stopped using x-rays much earlier — i.e., in the 1960s — after Alice Stewart blew the whistle on x-rays causing childhood cancers like leukemia. Hence MWD is not correct in saying that x-rays continued until 1975. She is in error because she honestly does not know what she is talking about. She simply copied information from my book.

I believe the mimicry and stunted replication of my work (especially my book cover) is an attempt on the part of MWD and her co-conspirators to create confusion about who the original author is regarding the potent ultrasound research that can be found in my book. This type of mimicry is not an accident. MWD is attempting to copy my work in order to claim it as her own and thereby lead people away from finding the real facts that can only be found in my book.

Keep in mind that the entities that MWD works with and serves have, for over a decade, sought to silence my work through intense censorship of my books and online presence. Since the publication of my first book, Birth Trauma and the Dark Side of Modern Medicine in 2014, I have endured repeated public attacks against my character while this shadowy group worked feverishly behind the scenes to block almost all my social media accounts including deleting 3 facebook accounts, 2 accounts with twitter/X, two youtube channels, my vimeo channel, my paypal account, my google account, my patreon account, my blogspot blog of 10 years, and much, much more!!! My books have been banned on Amazon and all other publishing platforms. Paperback copies can only be purchased through my website here. Portions of my deleted blog can still be found here.

Clearly these creatures DO NOT want people to find my work. That is because I tell the whole, unfiltered TRUTH about what members of the medical establishment have been up to for the past several decades. I also boldly point out the information they have been hiding about ultrasound for more than 100+ years. These creatures are engaged in a deliberate assault against us and our babies. They do this by electroshock torturing and genetically mutating our babies with ultrasound. They also inflict immense pain and trauma on all of us during the process of hospital birth.

I wish to also point out that with the publication of MWD’s copycat articles, MWD and those she works for and with are attempting to bind and/or curse my work. These creatures DO NOT want the information in my books to spread (without a doubt, censorship is part of this).

I use the word “bind” here because I recently learned that the symbol MWD uses for her substack is called the “hamsa” symbol.

According to “MyJewishLearning.com”, the hamsa symbol is used in Jewish “sympathetic magic” to bind enemies. And as you can see, the symbol itself is similar to a “stop” sign that is subliminally intended to stop her readers from researching any further than where she wants to take them with the bogus information she shares.

Those involved with this dark form of “sympathetic magic” use the power of demons in their attempt to control reality.

Source

Source

Please watch the following short videos where you can see the Satanic/Judaic hamsa symbol that MWD uses placed boldly on these satanic scrolls (not sure why the thumbnails are not visible).

Below is a clear and honest representation of the Judaic/Kabbalistic occult hamsa symbol. Notice the Luciferian all-seeing-eye in the center of the symbol as well as the entwined serpents at the base of the hand. Serpent worship is a fundamental part of Jewish/Kabbalistic sorcery. See here. I recommend reading “Holy Serpent of the Jews”, by Texe Marrs to learn more. See here and here.

---

Although there are people who claim that the hamsa symbol is used to deflect “the evil eye”, in fact, the center of this symbol IS the evil eye throwing Luciferian curses upon all those who view it.

Moreover, the medical establishment uses serpent imagery to represent itself. This is because “medicine” today is nothing other than Judaic/Kabbalistic sorcery and the serpent is an important Kabbalistic symbol.

Through the use of the serpent symbol, medical entities are subliminally letting us know who they are and who they serve. These creatures have been involved in an attack against God and Creation for centuries and their main tool of attack is black magic and the deliberate poisoning and traumatizing of innocent beings through their so-called “medicine”. They have also placed Mankind under a spell so that most cannot see that when they walk into a hospital to give birth, they are walking into a Luciferian temple of the occult, replete with sadistic rituals and vile symbolism all designed to attack those foolish enough enter their lair. Medical protocols are 100% based on trauma-based mind control and this begins with abusing babies while they are still in the womb (otherwise called “prenatal care”), and continues with the torturous protocols of hospital birth including, but not limited to, induction of labor, amniotomy, pitocin, epidural, episiotomy, c‑section, cord clamping, circumcision and trapping millions of babies in “neonatal intensive care” (which I refer to in my birth trauma book as the bowels of the Luciferian underworld). The suffering inflicted on the most vulnerable babies is deliberate and methodical and done under the guise of “helping” these children. In fact, the medical establishment is inflicting horrific abuse on innocent babies on a daily, repetitive basis for purposes of getting the children to dissociate to make them more susceptible to mind control. Most of these babies are kept on paralysis drugs 24/7 for days or weeks at a time so they cannot move or cry during painful procedures but they can still FEEL everything that is being done to them. It is extreme and outrageous child abuse and it must come to an end.

MWD is a major player in this satanic network and that is exactly why her substack has become high profile. Her job in this particular case involves (a) covering up the true, extensive and irreversible harm of prenatal ultrasound by lying and claiming there is a “safe” amount of exposure which there absolutely is not (more on this shortly); (b) revealing a very small amount of truth about the dangers of ultrasound and hospital birth for consumption by the gullible public while simultaneously parading lies that the medical establishment wishes to promote; and (c) attempting to bind my work by mimicking and replicating some of the information in my books and simultaneously distorting it for the benefit of the control system.

There is absolutely no doubt that MWD is working for the dark side and she is working as part of group. She openly admits her group affiliation.

As I shared in an earlier article here

Something is definitely up if there is a whole group of people working together to parasite my work while twisting it around and never revealing the whole truth. It is possible MWD does not even write the articles that she posts but that a whole team of people are working behind the scenes to put the articles together in order to disseminate certain information they want people to learn about, while leading people away from the real facts and promoting industry lies.

The possibility that MWD does not write her own articles is very high considering the amount of information this entity puts out on a monthly basis. Since I am a true researcher, I can say without a doubt that one person could not possibly do the research necessary to put all of that information together so quickly. I’ve also noted that the “interviews” MWD does are written transcripts rather than live interviews. Again, this indicates that not only is this entity very committed to hiding behind a veil, but there’s likely a group of people behind that veil with her putting the transcripts together for public consumption.

In fact, there is a plethora of evidence to indicate that MWD is working with a group and does not write her own articles. Here are some of the things “she” said in the ultrasound article indicating that “she” is a “we”:

Since it is common for members of “controlled opposition” to operate as part of a group AND use Satanic/Judaic/Kabballistic hand gestures (see here) to let their fellow evildoers know who they are and who they work for, we can be sure MWD is working for the dark side.

I’m quite certain MWD is part of a dark-force operation commonly referred to as “controlled opposition” and it appears that billionaire Steve Kirsch, substacker “Vigilant Fox”, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Joseph Mercola and members of Bobby Kennedy’s Children’s Health Defense/MAHA (hereinafter “CHD”) are all on MWD’s team. These are the people who promote MWD’s work and I could not help but notice that Steve Kirsch recently published a substack article promoting “breaking news” from Children’s Health Defense about the fake child measles death in Texas which “news” included “expert testimony” from Dr. Pierre Kory (who, by the way, is a huge proponent of ultrasound).

---

I’m sure that if we look hard enough, we will see these people promoting each other’s work again and again because they are all part of the same controlled opposition team working toward the same end.

Dr. Joseph Mercola went ahead and published MWD’s article about ultrasound on his website despite being notified by me that the article was plagiarized. Like MWD, Joe Mercola is also one of those doctors who promotes the bogus lie of a “covid virus” which does not now, and never has existed. People are becoming sick with radiation poisoning from exposure to wireless devices and infrastructure, all of which are EMITTING ULTRASOUND and making people sick (think about the ultrasonic apps on your phone). Every single symptom of “covid” is a symptom of radiation sickness. Please read here and here to learn more about this.

So these people are getting everyone to turn in the direction of a non-existent virus to explain the myriad health issues listed above, and they are doing this so that people will not see that it is RADIATION from wireless and ultrasonic devices that is the true cause of all the illness and death that now plagues our world (including that of insects, birds, animals, plants, trees, etc.).

I need to also point out that the people at Children’s Health Defense (hereafter “CHD”) are well aware that ultrasound is a HUGE issue with respect to myriad childhood illnesses like autism and cancer. Polly Tommey actually interviewed me about ultrasound in 2023.

There is no way for me to embed the video on substack but you can watch the video here.

CHD has also published several articles about ultrasound on their website, but similar to the way MWD referred to me as “this researcher” (having never mentioned my name or the title of my book from which she took a HUGE amount of information), CHD also took information right out of my book for this article without ever stating my name or the title of my book.

In fact, it’s quite possible that the article just mentioned was written by MWD herself as it has the same style of writing involving changing around the wording of my book ever so slightly to avoid plagiarism detection but never mentioning my name or the title of my book. Although CHD did provide a link to my book, they linked to a pirate website that was selling my book illegally rather than linking to where people can buy the book on my website. I called them out on this and finally got a healthy response. So kudos to them for mentioning my name in this article and linking to my website rather than trying to prevent people from finding my work.

In any event, it is clear that CHD has more than enough information to understand the very real connection between autism, cancer, and ultrasound exposure in utero. But both CHD and MWD continue to do everything they can to keep people focused on vaccines. Why is that?

Even more bizarre is the fact that Bobby Kennedy himself recently stated that he believes parents should follow the CDC vaccine schedule!!! This involves jabbing the children with almost 100 vaccines by the time they reach the age of 18 (see Peggy Hall’s article here for more info about this).

Bobby Kennedy also recently promoted the measles vaccine in response to the fake measles “outbreak” in Texas (see more info here).

Contradictions ABOUND with these people and that is one way to recognize that we are dealing with controlled opposition. These people are all working together to get everyone focused on vaccines as if they are THE problem when, in fact, there is a MUCH more serious threat to the well-being of our children and our bloodlines in the form of prenatal exposure to ultrasonic and wireless radiation.

---

Controlled opposition figures often do tell the truth, but only aspects of the truth that the establishment tolerates. It is truth that does not actually threaten their power... The truths that the establishment wants the masses to ignore or remain ignorant of are omitted or spoken of as half-truths. Source

“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”– Communist Vladimir Lenin - Source

---

So why, if they want everyone focused on vaccines, did MWD write an article about ultrasound? Because the truth about ultrasound is spreading and MWD and the people she works for are engaged in damage control. They are incredibly threatened by the well documented information I reveal in my books and they DO NOT want people to understand the extreme danger of ultrasound. Therefore, they feel an urgency to prevent the public from learning about my books and that is why they are putting MWD forward as the “expert” in these areas so that members of the general population will accept the misinformation MWD doles out and not bother seeking out the real, undiluted, fully cited facts that I share in detail in my books.

Below is a summation of the purpose of controlled opposition.

Indeed, I believe that is the main purpose of MWD’s articles and especially the articles she wrote about the dangers of ultrasound and hospital birth. She and her team are attempting to redirect and neutralize my work because it threatens to destabilize their well-designed finger pointing at vaccines. They do this as a way to get people to avoid seeing an even more serious threat – i.e., radiation exposure in the womb and during childbirth through the use of ultrasound scans, doppler fetal heart monitors, ultrasonic fetal heart monitors during labor, and the ubiquitous use of wireless devices and infrastructure that threaten to destroy all life on earth.

===============================================================

WHAT FOLLOWS IS EVIDENCE OF PLAGIARISM AND THE THEFT OF INFORMATION AND IDEAS TAKEN FROM MY ULTRASOUND BOOK

From the very first paragraph of MWDs ultrasound article, the theft and replication of my work begins. MWD states:

“After decades of work to stop routine x-raying of fetuses, the ‘safe and effective’ practice of prenatal ultrasound (US) was adopted in its place.”

MWD took this information from page 101 of my book where I discuss the fact that, after pregnancy x-rays were shown to be causing cancer in children, the medical establishment still did not want to give up their ability to peer inside the womb. Along these lines, I share a quote from an old video interview with Dr. Robert Mendelsohn in which he mentions an ultrasound study done by Dr. Alice Stewart that found that developing babies exposed to ultrasound have an excess incidence of leukemia. Dr. Mendelsohn then states that ultrasound has replaced x-rays in terms of the damage it is doing in creating childhood cancers. MWD changed the wording in my book slightly to avoid plagiarism detection and as we shall soon see, MWD does this again and again throughout his/her article.

MWD also repeats the mantra that ultrasound is “safe and effective” throughout her article. This phrase is completely out of place and is simply a regurgitated phrase taken from the vaccination industry. It does not apply to ultrasound. We never hear the medical establishment claiming that ultrasound is “effective”. We only hear them repeatedly claim that ultrasound is “safe”. Below are some examples of the medical repetition about ultrasound being safe, as quoted on pages 72 and 125 of my ultrasound book.

So, if we never hear the medical establishment claim that ultrasound is “effective”, the question arises as to why MWD repeatedly uses the vaccine mantra “safe and effective”. The reason is, I believe, that MWD is subtly trying to mimic a phrase that I use repeatedly throughout my book regarding the medical lie that ultrasound is “perfectly safe” for use during pregnancy. Here are a few screenshots from my book.

MWD is simply trying to mimic the way I present my evidence with a slight adjustment in the phrase.

In MWD’s fourth paragraph, she mentions a CNN “program” (actually it’s a youtube video) that I quote and cite several times in my book. After mentioning this “program”, MWD also “spontaneously” decides to mention the FDA’s choice to raise output levels on ultrasound machines 8-fold AND that this might be connected to a rise in childhood illnesses. Below is a screenshot of where MWD got the “spontaneous” idea to put all of this in one paragraph. Information on the left is from my book, pages 143-144.

MWD also asserts in her fourth paragraph that ultrasound damage is “dose dependent”.

This lie is repeated ad nauseum throughout MWD’s article and I believe it is a big part of why MWD actually wrote the ultrasound article – i.e., to promote this industry lie while simultaneously attempting to counteract the documented facts I present in my book. What she is trying to do is get people to believe that so-called “low dose” radiation from noxious medical devices like ultrasound is perfectly safe as long and as we are not exposed to “too much”, all will be well. This is not true and I go into great detail in my book to debunk this lie. My research clearly indicates that even a single exposure to ultrasound – no matter whether it is “low level” or “high level”, can cause irreversible genetic damage that persists for 10 generations and beyond (see pages 79-85 of my book for more on this topic).

Below are some very important facts from my book about the genetic damage being caused by ultrasound exposure. Keep in mind the following studies were done in the 1980s, years before the FDA raised the output levels on obstetrical ultrasound machines 8‑15 fold. Also keep in mind that autistic children have, on average, 72 “de novo” genetic mutations!!! “De novo” means “new”. It means these genetic mutations have not existed in the family line before and are showing up for the first time in the children who have them. THE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT TELLS US THESE DE NOVO GENETIC MUTATIONS ARE “SPONTANEOUS”. IN FACT, THEY ARE RADIATION INDUCED AND ULTRASOUND IS A MAJOR PLAYER IN THE INDUCTION OF THESE GENETIC MUTATIONS.

From pp 81-82 of my book:

From page 84:

From page 79:

From pp. 89-90 of my book:

Nonetheless, despite all the overwhelming evidence I present in my book, MWD persistently uses the phrase “dose dependent” to describe ultrasound harm. She is working overtime to feed the public misinformation and get them to believe this medical industry lie. She is using a dark force technique called “psychic driving” which involves pouring the constant repetition of lies into people’s minds so they can be conned into believing things that are absolutely not true.

Below are a few screenshots from MWD’s article.

Through the repetition of this phrase, people are being programmed through suggestion to believe there are “safe levels” of ultrasound exposure which there are not. But with MWD’s help, the medical establishment can continue its ruse and go on murdering and irreversibly harming our babies knowing full well that ultrasound is causing miscarriage, fetal death, premature birth, fetal growth retardation, low birth weight, neurological and brain damage including autism, genetic damage of all kinds, infertility, sterility and much, much more.

If MWD is not parroting the “dose dependent” lie, she is repeating the words “safety threshold” implying that there is a “safe” level of exposure to ultrasound which there is not. She is attempting to get people to believe that if we do not surpass this non-existent “safe” level of exposure, all will be well. Again, this is an insidious industry lie.

Below are a few excerpts from my ultrasound book concerning the “low dose” radiation issue. The top quote is from me and the last two quotes are from Rosalie Bertell, a 1960s scientist who worked tirelessly to expose the dangers of so-called “low level” radiation. I’m sharing this information with my readers so that people can get a sense of the dangerous distortions and lies that MWD enthusiastically promotes.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

After setting the tone for her entire article by firmly stating at the very beginning that ultrasound damage is “dose dependent”, MWD then goes on to claim that “the benefits of ultrasound are vastly overstated”. Here again, we see a clever and deliberate distortion of facts. In Truth, THERE ARE NO BENEFITS TO PRENATAL ULTRASOUND (OR DOPPLER FETAL HEART MONITORING) for the outcome of a pregnancy. This is very well documented in my book. See an excerpt from pages 28-29 of my book below.

Study after study has shown that these technologies do nothing to improve the outcome of a pregnancy and are only causing radiation-induced harm. Moreover, ultrasound scans often create false-positive results that lead to increased stress for mom and dad and low birth weight in the babies (from both the ultrasonic radiation and the stress hormones coming from mom). These scans also lead to unnecessary abortions for alleged birth defects that do not even exist! All of this is documented in my book.

Perhaps the “benefits of ultrasound” that MWD refers to concerns the billions of dollars that the medical establishment rakes in annually through the use of these noxious medical devices? In Truth, ultrasound scans and ultrasonic fetal heart monitors create a HUGE uptick in money-making medical interventions like the induction of labor and ce$arean $ection, both of which have long-term, harmful impacts for the baby and interfere with mother/child bonding. I document these facts in my birth trauma book which MWD has also plagiarized.

Two paragraphs after MWD falsely alludes to the non-existent “benefits” of ultrasound scans, she then states the following:

Although MWD links to the work of other people in this paragraph, her comment actually comes from the information I present in my birth trauma book. Within this book, I explicitly address the significance of traumatic prenatal and birth memories that millions of people are unconsciously holding in their bodies. These unresolved preverbal memories are called “imprints” and can negatively influence us throughout life, affecting our life experience including our health, thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, behavior and the way we create reality. I have been educating and writing about these unconscious early life memories (such as being in a womb where we are not wanted or being the result of a loveless union or being born by c-section) in an attempt to help people heal these damaging wounds. If we do not or cannot heal the unresolved memories, the trauma can repeat itself when we become pregnant and/or give birth to our children (this is called traumatic repetition). The trauma then gets passed on to our children and grandchildren – a process is known as intergenerational trauma. For more information about this, please read my birth trauma book.

Also in her ultrasound article, MWD states the following:

Of course, my birth trauma book extensively documents the dangers of hospital birth and, in fact, that is the main purpose of the book as described in the subtitle shown below.

My birth trauma book also contains information about why home birthing is a better option than hospital birth. Below is an excerpt from pages 162-163 of my birth trauma book.

So here again, MWD copied my work and my ideas.

Of course, I also cover the topic of fetal heart monitoring in my ultrasound book (as mentioned above) because these heart monitors are ultrasonic and extremely harmful. Below is a brief excerpt from page 95 of my ultrasound book.

MWD then goes on to state the following:

From this comment it is clear MWD is trying to emulate my work but she does not understand the information she is trying to convey. People do not develop lifelong chronic issues “due to an emotional shock to the mother”.

People develop lifelong chronic issues because they, themselves, experience deep shock and trauma from what happens to them while they are in the womb and also due to what medical staff inflict on them during the deliberately traumatizing process of hospital birth.

MWD is trying to replicate my work and present herself as an expert on these topics yet she does not even have the most basic understanding of prenatal and/or birth trauma and its impact on our lives. She’s a total fraud.

Interestingly, MWD also decided to include a section in her ultrasound article entitled “EMFs and Childbirth”. The fact that my ultrasound book contains a 100+ page chapter on this very topic is what MWD might call “purely coincidental”. Of course, there is nothing coincidental about her copying my ideas. Keep in mind that no one else that I am aware of has ever made the connection between EMFs, ultrasound and childbirth, so again, MWD has copied my work and presented it as her own. In my book, I linked ultrasound and EMFs together because they are both considered “non-ionizing” radiation and they both cause extreme harm to children. Below are screenshots of a partial list of items I cover in this very important chapter from the table of contents in my ultrasound book.

In the “EMFs and Childbirth” section of her article, MWD makes a comment about Russian research that confirms harm from EMF radiation. She took this information from pages 190 and 191 of my ultrasound book.

MWD then goes on to mention a study by Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt that confirmed a connection between EMF exposure in the womb and the development of neurological disorders like autism. This information, too, was taken from my book - page 216.

In a section entitled “Medical Imaging”, MWD decided to mention what she calls “a forgotten interview” with Dr. Robert Mendelsohn. She “spontaneously” remembered this interview after reading my book.

This is an interview that I quote several times in my book.

It is not clear why MWD even brought up this interview as I don’t see any analysis of this interview at all. I presume she mentioned it in her article as a way of pretending that she had some type of previous connection with Mendelsohn’s work prior to heisting this interview from my book. Here is one of the things she said to me while I was calling her out on the theft of my work.

Next MWD creates a section in her article entitled “’Safe’ levels of ultrasound” (actually, there are no safe levels of ultrasound but I digress). In this section, MWD runs cover for the medical establishment claiming that most physicians are simply unaware of the “extensive debate” that has taken place over the safety of ultrasound. In fact, after five years of examining thousands of ultrasound studies, I have never read anything about this “debate”. And in fact, the evidence has been clear for more than 100 years. Ultrasound causes EXTREME biological damage in many life forms, including humans, and the medical radiation industry has known this from the very beginning. Yet they repeatedly lie claiming ultrasonic technology is safe. Below is a screenshot of medical quotes that I shared in my book, from pages 72 and 125.

MWD then goes on to link to a 1991 article that I cite numerous times in my book but that MWD claims was written in 1980. MWD trips up like this with the reorganization of dates several times throughout her article. It could be she is doing this deliberately to avoid plagiarism detection or it could be that she simply does not know what she’s talking about.

MWD then mentions a “1979 quote” from the same article, which is actually a 1980 quote by researcher I. Donald. Again, there is a twisting of dates and with this quote, MWD promotes the suggestion that diagnostic ultrasound machines use “small levels of energy”. This is a HUGE distortion of fact and, because MWD has access to the true information in my book, it would be better described as a bold-faced lie.

As I document early on in my book, prenatal ultrasound machines are known to utilize between 3 and 9 MILLION hertz and at least one MD claimed to use millimeter waves (BILLIONS of hertz) for diagnostic ultrasound (see pages 17-19 of my book).

Keep in my mind that the human body is designed to receive and transmit frequencies between 3 and 30 hertz. When our bodies are hit with these alien, trauma-based, lab-created frequencies that do not belong on the Earth, OF COURSE biological damage will ensue.

FETAL REACTIVITY

In this section of MWD’s article, she states the following:

MWD did not have to read too far into my book to “notice” that babies react negatively to ultrasound. On pages 10-11 of my book I speak directly to this fact. See the screenshots below.

Please note that all of the information in the “fetal reactivity” section of MWD’s article that is highlighted in blue below was taken directly from my book.

MWD did not have to do too much “digging” in order to hijack years of my research and then present it as if it were her own.

The “scientific research” MWD links to here is the 2001 Fatemi studythat I quote on page 7 of my book and share as citation #73.

Please note that the article describing this study can no longer be accessed at the original link (because the dark ones do so love to “disappear” critically important information). Nevertheless, the article can still be viewed at web.archive. org here: https://web.archive.org/web/20210506013327/acfnewsource.org.s60463.gridserver.com/science/ultra_hearing_fetus.html

Next MWD links to an article discussing a study involving placing a hydrophone in the uterus of a pregnant woman to see how loud ultrasound is. MWD got this link from page 9 of my book where I reference the 2001 New Scientist article entitled “Fetuses can hear ultrasound examinations”. This reference is citation #94 in my book.

From the very same paragraph in which the last link was found (on page 9), MWD then copied the information regarding decibel levels and the fact that the noise is as loud as being in a subway station when the trains are coming. See below. All links and information in that sentence came from my book.

MWD then refers to “OSHA limits” and links to a 2005 literature review by C.Q. Howard on the effects of airborne ultrasound to the ears. This paper is referenced in my book as citation #89 and can also be found on page 9 of my book.

Next MWD links to a 1999 study by Garaj-Vrhovac that addresses occupational exposure to ultrasound leading to genome damage. MWD’s link to this study also came straight out of my book. I cite this study several times, but in this case, it appears MWD lifted the link from page 5 of my book (citation number is 28) and as you will see below, MWD lifted many of the studies I referenced on page 5 of my book.

Next MWD creates a link to “one researcher” (see below) and finally provides a link to my book without ever mentioning my name or the title of my book. This is the only link in the first edition of her entire article where she referenced my book, and this despite the fact that my book is the source for the overwhelming majority of information in her article.

Please note the subtle reorganization of the sentences in the above transcript which was likely to avoid plagiarism detection. Please also note that MWD has rewritten her original article and subsequently removed this section for reasons that are not clear. The comparative analysis below is with the original edition of MWD’s article (of which I can provide a copy if necessary). Sadly, I do not have time to cross-analyze any changes MWD has made since the original publication of her article but I would venture a guess that any changes she made were done to avoid plagiarism detection. NOTE: MWD recently published another, much shorter article about ultrasound on March 6 (see here) for reasons that are not clear but I would guess she has done this in case her longer article is removed for plagiarism.

I want to also point out that, although MWD had no problems prominently naming Jim West as a source for her article, she had ENORMOUS resistance to using my name and/or mentioning the title of my book. I spent hours going and back and forth with this creature demanding that she simply put my name and the title of my book prominently at the top of her article letting people know my book was a primary source for her article. She steadfastly refused to do this. Obviously, she and the people she works for do not, in any way, want to lead people to my work. On the contrary, these creatures have done everything they can to prevent people from finding the information I share by deleting all of my social media accounts and censoring my books on Amazon and elsewhere.

FETAL DEMISE

In a section of MWD’s article entitled “Fetal Demise”, MWD claims to have “come across” reports of ultrasound causing fetal demise. She states:

What MWD fails to mention is that she “came across” the information about fetal demise in my book. Below is a screenshot from the table of contents showing a few places where I talk about miscarriages and fetal death. There are many more instances throughout my book.

Notice that, in the sentence above regarding “sporadic other reports of mothers” whose babies were killed by ultrasound, MWD links to a video that is quoted on pages 109 and 110 of my book as citation #s 683 and 686. As can be seen in the screenshot below, this particular citation contains multiple other references concerning fetal death from ultrasound exposure. Below is a screenshot of the full citation with the video that MWD linked to highlighted in blue.

After first linking to that particular youtube video, MWD then goes on to take several more studies from that same citation and link to them in her article one right after the other.

After harvesting the information from citation #686 of my book, MWD then goes on to steal another observation I made just two paragraphs later – i.e., that women who operate ultrasound machines (otherwise called “physiotherapists” or ultrasound technicians) are also having miscarriages. In the screenshot below, please note that both citation #686 and #688 are located on page 110 of my book so it did not take much for MWD to “come across” this information since she simply had to read a single page of my book.

RESEARCH ON ULTRASOUND DANGERS

In the section of MWD’s article entitled “Research on Ultrasound Dangers”, almost every single link is taken directly from my book. Please keep in mind that these studies were not, and are not, easy to obtain so there is no way MWD could simply have “come across” them “in other places”, as she claimed in the screenshot below.

Many of the studies in question are not available on the internet. Dozens (perhaps hundreds) are behind expensive paywalls. The only reason I was able to obtain all of these studies and hold them in my hands to read them is because I worked tirelessly exploring THOUSANDS of potential studies for my book and met with a local librarian who was willing to support the writing of my book and who had the credentials to gain access to the otherwise unattainable studies that I asked for. This research took me five years to put together and would not have been possible without the help of the librarian.

Further, MWD claims to be “a very fast researcher”, able to “put things together in a few weeks that are equivalent to detailed books”.

This begs the question -- is MWD able to do this because she does not do the research at all but simply “compiles” the work of those who have actually done the research, presenting it as if it were her own?

YOU BETCHA!!!

As I will show below, it does appear that MWD became a “very fast researcher” by simply purchasing the PDF version of my book (or getting it for free from a pirate website) and then clicking on the links of interest to her, copying the URL, and transferring the URL into her own article. Presto!!! MWD created an ultrasound article that involved no sweat, no hassle and no research on her part whatsoever! Very clever indeed but utterly lacking in moral and intellectual integrity.

Please note that my ultrasound book contains over 1800 meticulously documented citations to back up the information I share and give credit to the researchers who came before me. The search for, and documentation of, the scientific evidence regarding ultrasound involved many thousands of hours of tedious work on my part while MWD simply plucked the references out of my book and posted them in her own article. She then repeatedly and boldly lied, claiming she found them on her own or elsewhere.

Below are several links that MWD provided under the category “Animal and Plant Studies”. All the studies highlighted in blue are taken from my book.

Out of the 10 studies listed above, only one is unique. All the other studies are cited in my book and as will be shown below, the brief synopsis MWD offers regarding these studies often mimics my analysis or is quoted almost verbatim directly from my book.

The 1929 study regarding the heart muscle is the Harvey study listed as citation #648 in my book and referenced in the main text of my book on page 103.

The 1949 study about chromosomal and nuclear aberrations is the Newcomer study that I cite numerous times in my book but in this case, I believe MWD lifted it from citation #553 which was referenced on page 89 of my book.

The 1973 study that MWD links to next is the Cataldo study, which is citation #542 in my book and, like the Newcomer study above, is also referenced on page 89.

Is it just a coincidence that the last two studies from page 89 of my book also happen to be linked back-to-back in MWD’s article in the very same paragraph?

The 1966 study re fruit flies is the Kato study which is citation #490 in my book referenced on page 80 (and elsewhere).

The 1972 study about chick embryos is the Stewart study, citation #45 in my book, referenced on page 5 (and elsewhere).

The 1975 study about DNA fragmentation is the Galperin study, citation #27, also referenced on page 5 (and page 85 and 92).

The 1973 study regarding genetic damage is the Thacker study, citation #32 also referenced on page 5 (and 85 and 92).

The 1978 study regarding rat embryos and fruit flies is the Pizzarello study, citation #44 also referenced on page 5.

The 1979 study about fetal malformations and brain defects in rats is the Sikov study, citation #53 in my book also referenced on page 5 (and elsewhere).

We are beginning to see a very clear pattern here with MWD citing five studies in a row all of which were referenced on my book on page 5. Obviously, this is not a coincidence, especially in light of the fact that this happens several times throughout MWDs article as will be shown below. MWD simply goes to a small section of my book, grabs the study links that interest her and then places them directly into her article often copying my analysis.

Regarding the 1979 Sikov study just mentioned, MWD plagiarized a portion of my text almost verbatim as can be seen below. The info is from page 80 of my book.

Please note the slight modification of the text that is no doubt designed to prevent plagiarism detection. This type of plagiarism is clearly done with premeditated intent so that the theft can go undetected unless someone like me is willing to put in hours of analysis to determine what, exactly, this creature took from my book.

After MWD links to the 1979 article, she then goes on to state the following, which is again copied almost verbatim straight out of my book from pp 103-104.

Please note once again the slight modification of my text which was done to avoid plagiarism detection.

MWD then goes on to state the following, which again is plagiarized straight from page 103 of my book.

MWD then simply turned to the next page of my book and subsequently took the following graph and commentary directly from my book on page 104. She then lied, pretending she got the graph from the study that I cited as my source.

MWD states the following with respect to this graph:

Note, all three links in this small section of MWDs article are taken directly from my book (on pages 5 and 104). The first paragraph is totally plagiarized (as shown above) while the second paragraph mimics my analysis, as shown below.

MWD then goes on to write a single paragraph that she actually created on her own (truly amazing). She put this paragraph in italics as if to separate it out from the rest of the information which was taken from my book. She then rapidly proceeds to once again copy information from my book and present it has her own. As you can see in the screenshot below, MWD lifted several more studies/citations from my book which are highlighted in blue below.

The 1987 study at the top of the list is the Ellisman study which involved the deliberate torture and paralysis of rats through exposure to ultrasonic irradiation. This study is citation #959 in my book and referenced on page 158.

Next, MWD links to the 1993 Tarantal monkey study which can be found in several places of my book, but in this case, the citation numbers are #940-942 taken from page 155 of my book.

Here again, we can see where MWD has copied my work.

Next MWD links to a 1995 mice study by MP Hande which is citation #937 in my book, referenced on page 154.

The citation for this mouse study is located in my book just two paragraphs above the citation for the Tarantal monkey study (on pages 154 and 155 of my book). Here again we can see that MWD simply picked a section of my book that she wanted to copy and then went right in, grabbed the citations and placed them one right after the other into her article while simultaneously copying portions my analysis.

Next MWD links to a 1999 study regarding hemorrhage in mice which is the Dalecki study, included in citation #740 and referenced on page 121 of my book.

Here again you can see how MWD has mimicked my work.

It is important to point out that citation #740 includes multiple studies including the Dalecki study, all of which confirm that ultrasound causes hemorrhage in animals (amongst other issues). MWD heisted almost every single study from this one citation in my book and linked to them, one right after the other, in her article. Below are screenshots of the myriad studies MWD linked to, all coming from a single citation in my book.

- The 2011 Shankar review that MWD cites numerous times in her article.

- The 2001 Stanton study regarding apoptotic small intestine cells in mice which also came from the same citation.

- The 2007 Bigelow study regarding pulsed ultrasound causing hemorrhage near bone which also came from the same citation.

Again, the last several studies that MWD linked to came from a single citation in my book. This is not a coincidence. Although MWD claims to have “come across” these studies in “other places”, it is clear this is not the case.

MWD also claimed in a twitter post that she had “compiled” a list of 200+ studies. See the last sentence of the following twitter post, the entire content of which came from my book.

I’m not going to cross-analyze the above post since it was not included in MWD’s article but all the information in the post came from my ultrasound book. I also think it is fair to demand that MWD provide a copy of this “compiled” list of studies as I am 100% certain the overwhelming majority of these studies came from my book.

Moving on to the 2012 study that MWD links to next in her article (regarding the alteration of genes in fetal rats), this is the Hocevar studylisted as citation #493 in my book and discussed on page 81. Here again, we can see that MWD has just copied the information straight out of my book.

Regarding this last citation, #493 in my book… as the screenshot below shows, when I find a study through someone else’s previous research (in this case, the work of Jim West), I MAKE A NOTE OF IT AS A WAY OF HONORING THE ORIGINAL RESEARCHER AND LEADING MY READERS TO HIS/HER WORK.

MWD has no such professional integrity and totally avoided using my name in the first printing of her article, referring to me as “this researcher” in the only link she originally provided to my book throughout her entire article. Although MWD took the overwhelming majority of what is presented in her article directly from my book(s), it is clear MWD did NOT want people to find my books as this would surely have exposed her as a fraud and a plagiarist and would have led people to the whole truth about this technology, which MWD obviously does not want people to access.

Moving on through MWD’s article, she next creates a section entitled “Cell Studies”. Once again, almost all of the studies in this section are taken straight from my book. These studies are highlighted in blue below.

Please note that the links MWD provided for both the 1939 study and the 1949 study are the same so it appears MWD made a mistake while lifting the links out of my book and copy/pasting them directly into her article. Both of her links lead to the same 1949 Newcomer study, which is citation #489 in my book and discussed on page 80. Page 80 is also the same page on which I reference the 1966 Kato study and the 1979 Sikov study that MWD also heisted (as discussed above). As you can see, MWD has taken a very small portion of my book and copied out what is of interest to her, placing the info directly into her article. She changed the info ever so slightly to avoid plagiarism detection.

Next, MWD links to a 1970 study regarding chromosomal aberrations. This is the Macintosh study, citation #566, which I discuss on page 93 of my book.

Again we see that MWD lifted her “synopsis” right out of my book.

The next study MWD links to is another Macintosh study (1972) regarding chromosome aberrations being induced through ultrasonic irradiation. This study is citation #558 in my book discussed on page 91. Interestingly, MWD makes an error here and offers a synopsis based on a totally different Macintosh study – i.e., the 1970 Macintosh study just mentioned above. Despite her error (representing a clear indication that she has no idea what these studies actually say), her synopsis offers us yet another example of plagiarized text from my book.

Next MWD links to a 1979 study by Dr. Doreen Liebeskind who exposed the heritable genetic harm being caused by a single exposure to ultrasound. This particular study is referenced numerous times in my book, but in the case of this theft, the information was stolen from citation #527 discussed on pages 86-87 of my book.

Note, where I reference this study in my book, I also reference several other studies (see below - citations #s 525-528) that address ultrasonically induced sister chromatid exchange. MWD simply clicked on these other citations, copied the links, and then placed them in her article in the same paragraph.

MWD then links to another 1979 Liebeskind study showing that ultrasonic irradiation is causing cells to become tumorous. This study is citation #509 referenced on page 84-85 of my book.

Again, please note the parallels between my work and MWDs synopsis.

Below are more links MWD offered in the “cell studies” section of her article. All of the links highlighted in blue were taken from my book.

The 1981 study that MWD links to next is another Liebeskind study cited several times in my book and in this case, I believe it is citation #497 that I referenced on page 81 (she took so many other citations from this page).

MWD next links to an alleged 1987 study regarding the effects of amniotic fluid being exposed to ultrasound. Interestingly, MWD made another error here since the link she provided leads to the same 1981 Liebeskind study just discussed above. It appears MWD’s true intention was to link to the 1987 amniotic fluid study that I reference in my book on page 93. Below is the study citation I believe MWD meant to link to which she, of course, found in my book.

Next, MWD links to an article by Jim West that I cite several times in my book.

The 1982 study MWD links to next is another Liebeskind study that is citation #508 in my book and quoted on page 84.

Again, we can see how MWD has mimicked my work.

The 1984 study that MWD links to next is the Stella study about sister chromatid exchange DNA damage which part of citation #528 in my book that I referenced on page 86.

The 2007 study MWD links to next is the Milowska study about ultrasonically induced DNA damage and reactive oxygen species.

I reference the Milowska study several times in my book as citations #484 (on page 79) and #546 (on page 89). MWD states that this study “showed that US created free radicals”. However, free radicals are not the same as reactive oxygen species and MWD is therefore giving false information about this study. MWD also fails to note one of the most important findings of this study, to wit:

MWD did not mention this finding because it does not conform to the “dose dependent”/ “safety threshold” nonsense that she is committed to promoting.

The 2011 study that MWD links to next is the Wang study that I reference several times in my book showing severe mitochondrial damage after exposure to ultrasound. This study is referenced on page 159 of my book (citation #965) in regard to fetal growth retardation and placental insufficiency as a result of ultrasonically-induced mitochondrial damage. The study is also referenced on page 5 as citation #34.

The 2010 study MWD links to next is the Feng study showing again ultrasonically induced mitochondrial dysfunction as well as disturbances with calcium signaling in the cells. This study is quoted on page 86 as citation #521.

Please note that, if you scroll up you will see that many of the studies just discussed came from a very small, 12-page section of my book, pages 80-92. MWD simply took this small section of my book, heisted numerous study references from therein and placed them directly into her article (in many cases copying my summation as well).

Nerve, Eye, Ovary and Testicle Damage

In a section entitled “Nerve, Eye, Ovary and Testical Damage”, MWD took the following studies from my book that are highlighted in blue below.

The “numerous studies” MWD links to at the top of this list is the Shankar review that I reference numerous times including as citation #955 referenced on page 161.

The 1958 study is the Dunn study, citation #957 in my book and quoted on page 158.

Again, MWDs synopsis was taken straight out of my book.

MWD next links to a 1980 study which is the Stolzenberg torture studythat created paralysis in mouse pups. This study is citation #930 in my book, referenced on page 153. In this case, MWD was not interested to share the information about ultrasound causing paralysis with her readers so instead of copying what I wrote in my book, she copied the study abstract almost verbatim.

Please note the last few links are taken from a small, 8-page section of my book.

The 1982 Testart study that MWD links to next (regarding ultrasound causing premature ovulation) was also referenced in my book on page 128 as part of citation #795.

It is important to point out that my book contains an entire chapter regarding ultrasound’s effects on human (and animal) fertility. See the table of contents for this chapter below. MWD stole many links from this chapter of my book including the link just discussed plus several more which I will describe below.

The 2006 study regarding ultrasound opening the blood brain barrier is the Reinhard study that is listed as citation #738 and quoted on page 121.

The 2017 study T. Sun study regarding opening the blood brain barrier with ultrasound to deliver a payload of chemotherapy into the brain is listed as part of citation #739 in my book and referenced on page 121.

Is it just a coincidence that the last two studies, citations #738 and 739, are both found on page 121 of my book and are both listed in MWD’s article in the very same paragraph?

The 2014 study MWD links to next is the Wen-Yen study that I quote and reference several times in my book, including on page 124, citation #763. Despite its title, this study is not really about opening the blood brain barrier with ultrasound but rather deliberately using ultrasound to destroy structures of the brain and central nervous system of animals. Rather than read the entire article, MWD must have simply noticed the title of the study and decided to include in the blood brain barrier discussion, but this is not what the study is really about. Of course, MWD does not know this since she never laid hands on the study but simply grabbed the link from my book.

In the screenshot below, you will see the last paragraph of the “nerve, eye, ovary and testicle damage” section of MWD’s article. Please note that almost the entire paragraph was taken from my book. All the links highlighted in blue were lifted from a small, 4-page segment of the infertility chapter in my book.

The first link is to the 1979 O’Brien study referenced in the first paragraph of the infertility chapter of my book on page 127.

The second link is to the 2012 VanderVoot study that is quoted on page 128 of my book.

The third link is the exact same link just discussed – the 2012 VanderVoot study.

The fourth link highlighted in blue is the 2012 Park study that is quoted on page 128 of my book.

Please note that the Vandervoot and Park studies just mentioned are located back to back in my book.

The fifth link is to a BBC article that I quote on pages 131 and 132 of my book, citation #s 812 and 813.

I am going to end the comparative analysis here as I do not have time to go through the rest of MWD’s article which is extremely long. But there is no doubt the rest of MWD’s article contains information from my book. See the two screenshots below showing studies from my book highlighted in blue.

Hopefully, the evidence of plagiarism that I have put together is plenty to determine that this person has engaged in the theft of intellectual property.

Please spread this information far and wide to help expose this creature who is not only stealing information from others and claiming it as her own, but is also lying to the public unashamedly to prevent them from understanding the facts.

Thank you!

If you’ve read this far and would like to read another interesting article about jewish mimicry, this is a really good one.

Mimicry