The Value of Honor

Right now, right at this moment, I am watching a ceremony on television that I watched as a child when I visited Washington, DC.

I am at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and soldiers are walking through the ceremony.

The soldiers are immaculately dressed, and they perform admirably.

It is a beautiful ceremony, but I must guard myself to not take the wrong lessons away from it.

Washington can seduce you when you visit there.

There are many memorials and monuments worth seeing.

They represent the history of our country, and it is a country that we can be proud of.

But these monuments also have the power to destroy.

Many of these monuments were built by Americans of a different generation who did not think the way we now think.

Our country has drifted far from its religious underpinnings.

When our antecedents built memorials, God, and all the good that God represents, was foremost in their minds.

The power of Caesar was not.

And yet, the white marble, the vastness of the buildings, their sheer weight and size, can so be easily misconstrued as to what these monuments represent.

Lincoln was a godly man who was not so much concerned as to whether God was on his side but whether he was on God’s side.

His memorial must convey that.

As must the others.

But we are not of Lincoln’s era.

Nor that of the Founding Fathers.

And so these monuments have taken on a different meaning.

They are now a catalogue of sites that Americans check off as part of an indoctrination program into America’s might and power.

Our news media forever crows about America as the most powerful nation on earth.

As do our leaders.

The President of the United States is regularly feted as the most powerful man on the face of the earth.

Did Lincoln shower himself with such illusions?

The monuments are now part of the supporting cast to justify our Presidents’ decisions on waging war around the globe.

The monuments sanctify us, purify us, justify us.

But that was not their intent when they were first constructed.

Monuments and memorials do not exist for war. Nor do they exist to create heroes.

Nor do they serve as a pretext for vengeance or domination.

They exist to deliver a message.

Those men who sacrificed their lives as in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier are talking to us.

They want to tell us something.

They are asking us to dedicate our lives to forging a better world than the one that took their life.

As Lincoln said in the Gettysburg address:

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Charles Munger: OMG, What is the World Coming To

Let’s talk about Charles Munger. I think everybody knows who he is.

He is a modern day robber baron, the right hand man of Warren Buffett, robber baron extraordinaire.

Charles Munger of course is also a Harvard graduate. You’d be disappointed in me if I didn’t bring that up.

Let’s see what Charles Munger has to say about cryptocurrency. And here it is from the Sydney Morning Herald:

“I’m never going to buy a cryptocurrency. I wish they’d never been invented,” he said.

I have no doubt about that. Of course he’s never going to buy one. At least overtly. He’s part of the machine, and the machine is opposed to cryptocurrency because cryptocurrency is a threat to the machine’s government printing enrichment scheme that makes people like Charles Munger fabulously wealthy.

“I think the Chinese made the correct decision, which is to simply ban them. My country – English-speaking civilisation – has made the wrong decision,” he said.

Let’s be fair: Time will tell, and no one can predict the future.

That aside, China can ban them because they are a more authoritarian regime – at least that’s what we’ve been led to believe.

Banning cryptocurrency in the United States may not be politically acceptable because so many people in the United States have so much money tied up in it. Banning cryptocurrency would cause a huge devaluation in the cryptocurrency market, and the owners of that cryptocurrency do vote.

In that respect the genie is most definitely out of the bottle.

Additionally, banning cryptocurrency in the United States may be functionally impossible given the worldwide access of the web and people’s propensity to protect their wealth.

“I just can’t stand participating in these insane booms, one way or the other. It seems to be working; everybody wants to pile in, and I have a different attitude.

Who is he kidding? Munger and his buddy Buffett made a fortune off the recent stock 15 year stock market boom that was caused by the insane printing of money. He didn’t have any problem with that insane boom.

“I want to make my money by selling people things that are good for them, not things that are bad for them,” he said.

Either he doesn’t understand cryptocurrency, or he does and he’s being disingenuous.

Cryptocurrency, if done correctly, with proper controls, will be one of the best things to ever happen to regular people. That’s why it was invented. Nobody except for the elites and the corporate parasites sits around and says: “Hey, let’s be novel, let’s invent something bad that nobody needs.”

No, cryptocurrency was invented by rebels because our governments and their crony capitalist friends, who have hijacked the government, began printing money in order to enrich themselves.

If we have a net societal value of $100, and Charles Munger and Warren Buffett own $50, and the rest of us own the other $50, then we each own equal shares of society. If Buffett and Munger than rig the system, as they have, and print up another $100 in society and give all of it to themselves, then they will own $150 and we will own $50. Our share will decrease.

Cryptocurrency was invented to prevent that dilution of our share of society.

“Believe me, the people who are creating cryptocurrencies are not thinking about the customer, they are thinking about themselves.”

Well, here he may be on more certain ground. It’s true, you can find a con man in any field. And there is no doubt in my mind, that certain cryptocurrencies are scams. But who is creating the scams, otherwise known as shit coins?

What I see on a daily basis are people like Elon Musk and Mark Cuban touting their favorite coins such as Dogecoin and Shiba Inu.

Both of these guys are part of the machine. So who’s behind the scamming in cryptocurrency?

Is it just possible that the machine is creating and promoting the shit coins in order to create uncertainty and instability in the cryptocurrency markets?

I think so.

In fact, I think that the detractors of cryptocurrency are the selfish ones. They are the ones who are preventing us from living productive, inflation-free lives.

Now it just may be that Mr. Munger, having gotten up in years, may honestly not understand what cryptocurrency is really about.

It is possible that you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, but I will try.

I don’t think you need a degree from MIT in order to understand what cryptocurrency is about. In fact, it probably helps to not attend MIT, or Harvard.

They ladle out the stupid juice pretty freely up there in Cambridge.

Cryptocurrency is a ledger, nothing more. It’s a giant QuickBooks accounting program spread out over the world that keeps track of everybody’s transactions forever.

It’s nothing to be afraid of. You and I agree to exchange our cash for units of cryptocurrency. Those transactions are registered on the ledger. As long as the rulers of the ledger don’t inflate the units or the exchanges don’t blow the cash on a bender in Vegas, what’s the problem?

That this ledger is spread out and is “fact checked” on a constant basis is a good thing. This creates reliability and prevents a few people from corrupting the system.

It also allows for easy access without the need of a broker-middleman.

This ledger will be able to record any type of transaction that we desire to create. It can be used for finance; it can be used for healthcare records; it can be used for art and memorabilia. It has no limitations.

You know what, it can even be used for the stock market to allow point-to-point sale of stock without the need of a broker. Wouldn’t that be a hoot?

No wonder Charles Munger is against cryptocurrency. Can you imagine an IPO that doesn’t involve Wall Street? No longer would the elites possess the ability to hand out free shares to their loser friends.

Currently, cryptocurrency is in a growth and “what are we about” phase. It’s growing. It hasn’t reached adolescence and adulthood yet. In many respects it’s a solution in search of a problem. Not all cryptocurrencies have found their identity.

And it will come to pass that different cryptocurrencies will move into different niches. Some will be used as a store of value; some will be used for healthcare records; some will be used for art; some will be used for day-to-day transactions.

It’s a bold, new, exciting world, if we choose to go there, if people like Charles Munger will not stop us.

Well, of course they will. That’s why Charles Munger is speaking out.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

OMG, Iran is Going to Nuke Us

Why does the Israel-Iran conflict exist?

It only exists to justify the military industrial complex and the building up of more arms so that contractors and corporations can get wealthier.

It also exists for the next generation of parasites, the grandchildren of the current day robber barons, so that they can have their war where they can make a lot of money ripping off the American public.

“Wahhhhhhh, where is my war, mommy?”

Plus it keeps the people distracted, occupied, emotionally labile, and pliable.

Distracted, emotional people don’t think straight. They are putty in the hands of the elites.

In that respect, our leaders are no different than those useless pharaohs who built pyramids that appeared to have little functional value other than providing jobs, and of course glory to pharaoh.

That’s why our aircraft carriers exist, don’t you know? They exist so politicians can climb on board and look like the big man that they aren’t.

And of course, there’s the money. How are big corporations going to get fabulously wealthy unless we create a conflict in which they can get fabulously wealthy?

That’s the purpose of the conflict in the Middle East.

It will never end.

And if Jesus returned to end it, our corporate leaders would get together and ask the CIA to kill Jesus.

And you can bet your ass that the CIA would do it.

Honestly now, how long has Iran been only three months away from developing a nuclear weapon?

This charade has been going on at least a decade, possibly even twenty years.

Why don’t we just cut to the chase and let the Iranians have a nuclear weapon?

Why shouldn’t they have nuclear capability?

Why are they not entitled to have what we have?

We sell them Nike shoes and Samsung televisions at the Palladium Mall in Tehran. Why should we stop there?

Moreover, they can’t possibly have shown any greater irresponsibility than we have.

After all, we are the only country that’s detonated a nuclear weapon upon people.

It’s true.

And it was so unnecessary.

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking that the dropping of the nuclear weapon stopped the war with Japan.

That’s not how the Russians see it.

The Russians believe that it was their invasion of northern Japan that forced the Japanese to surrender.

They may be right.

But even if the Russians had not planned to invade, it’s totally arguable that a nuclear weapon detonation was unnecessary.

But that’s not the point of this article.

The point of this article is to illustrate the joke that our leaders are playing on us.

It’s not just the leaders of the United States that are participating in this charade, it’s the leaders of Iran also.

They make a fortune off the threat of war also.

Plus the threat of war keeps them in power.

They play the same game with their people that our leaders play with us.

In reality, the leaders of Iran are cut out of the same cloth as our leaders. There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them.

Iran’s leaders hold their people hostage just as our leaders hold us hostage.

Both leaders straitjacket us through the threat of war.

It’s a charade.

The wars that you see, the wars that you know, the wars that you fought in, the wars that you have lived through were unnecessary and preventable.

So are the wars our leaders are now planning to wage.

In truth, there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell that Iran will drop a nuclear weapon on Israel or the United States.

Why would they risk that knowing it would be their last move on this Earth?

They won’t.

Iran’s leaders need Israel.

Iran’s leaders need the United States.

Without your enemies, the war racket stops.

Family Interventions

Are you planning an intervention for a family member?

An intervention is a family meeting of sorts where family members get together to confront another member who is seriously off the rails in their life.

The idea is to wake the person up.

Back in the day, we just called it a family meeting.

Today it’s called an intervention.

So are you planning one?


Don’t do it.

While it seems like a good idea, I think it’s a terrible idea.

I understand your good intentions. I really do.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

What you will achieve is a beating up on a person who doesn’t need any more beating up in life.

Back in the day, our new combined family consisting of my sisters, my mom, my step-dad and my step-brother thought it would be a good idea to have a family meeting, an intervention, for my other step-brother, Stevie.

At the time, I was in adolescence and didn’t know what the hell was going on.

I was simply told that we were going to have a family meeting, which we did.

I vaguely recall the meeting. I don’t think Stevie was aware what we were doing until the meeting began.

I’m not sure I did either.

I knew Stevie was doing drugs, so it makes sense to me now that his drug use was probably why we were having the meeting.

As I look back now on Stevie’s life I can see that the meeting was a mistake.

Stevie was suffering for sure.

His parents had gotten a divorce, and it had affected him severely.

It didn’t help matters that his father married my mom a few years later.

What seems like a good move for the parents – remarriage and stability in the parents lives – can often bring more turmoil to the children.

Stevie was a smart boy. He had a lot of intelligence. He was also a good person at heart according to my mom.

But those skills aren’t often enough when you’re going through psychological turmoil.

Ultimately, Steve became unable to cope in life. He became functionally disabled and had to live in halfway houses, that could provide structured living, until he died just a few years ago. He was a few years older than I was.

As I look back on his life, I can see now that the family meeting that we had for him was a huge mistake.

Instead of helping him at that meeting, what we were doing was ganging up on him.

He was in a weakened state psychologically, and what he needed was someone to lift him up, not burden him down.

I’ve often thought about him and why he was unable to function in a world in which the rest of us are so easily able to function.

He had lost his confidence in life.

His problem-solving skills were shot.

The divorce of his parents had devastated him.

It had shattered his ability to cope. He would become frustrated at the tiny obstacles in life.

His dad’s remarriage to my mother only created more turmoil in a life that needed stability.

I can sense this because I suffered the same feelings in my life. While Stevie was undergoing the trauma of divorce in his family, I was undergoing the trauma of death (my father) in my family.

Our parent’s remarriage amplified that trauma and disruption.

I walked around in a daze during my high school years.

I’m sure Stevie was feeling the same.

He needed psychological help, as did I, in an age that didn’t commonly recognize or embrace the need for such services.

In those days, psychologists and psychiatrists were for the wealthy, or neurotic people like one of Woody Allen’s characters.

In many respects, the 1960s was truly an age of ignorance.

It was an era in which crackpot ideas like family meetings were considered a good idea.

They’re not.

The reason they aren’t a good idea is because the person who you are intending to fix is in a weakened state and is unable to shoulder what they will perceive to be the pain you are inflicting upon them.

You won’t make them better with the intervention, you will make them worse.

Stevie must’ve been crushed by that meeting that we had for him.

I know I would’ve been.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Another Lockdown

Europe is on lockdown again.

Its incredibly sad to watch one government after another screw up the management of this COVID-19 crisis and then once again commit the same mistakes only to have their citizens overwhelmingly support their leaders.

This can only happen when people are indoctrinated to believe that their leaders are smarter than they are.

That’s why the Founding Fathers set up the United States the way they did, to put power in the hands of the people.

Unfortunately, over the centuries doofus schools like Harvard have infiltrated and dominated all our major institutions.

They have accomplished this through propaganda and indoctrination.

That’s not what the Founding Fathers desired.

If they had desired such a system, they would have instituted such a system in the first place.

They didn’t because they knew they would be replacing one tyrant with another.

And that’s what Harvard and the Ivy League have become – a tyrant.

They have cozied themselves up to the flawed system that exists in the United Kingdom where another tyrannical school called Oxford dominates their political system.

Oxford is the school that promoted and perpetuated Queen Victoria’s murderous, imperialist regime which killed millions around the globe.

Oxford wrote the book on oppression.

Oxford accelerated the famines in India.

Oxford enslaved the citizens of India with a thumbprint during the 1800s and shipped them off to British slave plantations in Guyana.

Oxford starved out the people of Ireland in the 1840s while stating that the Irish had brought their calamity upon themselves by overpopulating. They called it the hidden hand of God.

Oxford said the same to the people of Bengal a a century later. Winston Fuckhill was on the scene for that mass murder.

Oxford enslaved the people of China through opium in the 1850s.

Australia exists because Oxford-trained tyrants shipped Irish and British undesirables down under to Van Dieman’s land where they wouldn’t be causing much trouble.

Oxford is the school of the Rhodes Scholarship, named for the bigot and oppressor, Cecil Rhodes.

Africa is where Cecil Rhodes made his mark and fortune. He and Oxford exploited the people of Africa.

Oxford attempted to create the British caste system here in America prior to the American revolution. Thankfully the more egalitarian Native American population helped put a stop to that.

It’s fair to say that Oxford is the Queen’s school.

And the King’s as well.

This is where British nobility is trained, just as Harvard is where American aristocracy is schooled.

The majority of American institutions are dominated by Harvard.

Harvard also trains leaders of many other countries around the globe.

Harvard and Oxford are partners in dominating and controlling the world.

The result is an ossification of society that produces poor policies like lockdowns, masks, and the avoidance of natural immunity.

Of course, the policies are intentionally poor.

One goal is to enable Big Pharma to reap a bonanza.

The other goals are to promote conformity and de-individualization.

Compliant people are more likely to obey useless Harvard/Ivy League buffoons who fight useless wars to benefit themselves – the owners of Corporate America.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Baker Mayfield

Is Baker Mayfield a lousy quarterback?

I don’t think so.

I think he’s a good quarterback.

I think he’s good enough to win a Super Bowl.

Let me ask you a question: Is Baker Mayfield worse than Nickie Foles?

How about Carson Wentz?

It’s important to ask these questions because both of these quarterbacks were trashed last season.

Moreover, both of these quarterbacks won a Super Bowl.

In fact, there are plenty of quarterbacks of Baker Mayfield‘s caliber who have won Super Bowls.

You don’t have to be Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees to win a Super Bowl.

You can be a good quarterback and win a Super Bowl.

The Cleveland Brown’s fans should STFU and be thankful that they have Baker Mayfield.

Let’s not forget that he’s playing hurt.

Let’s also not forget that he’s playing in the toughest division in the NFL.

There isn’t one lousy team in the Brown’s division.

The Ravens lead the division at 7-3. The Browns are in last place at 6-5.

OMG! Call out the fire department.

Newsflash: The other teams want to win also.

It’s not their job to lay down and die before Baker Mayfield. They’re going to go all out to beat him and the Browns.

So let’s give the guy a break.

Let’s also not hold it against him because he flips off the media.

He’s a young guy.

Those of us who are older forget what we were like when we were young.

We’re old now.

We don’t even blink now when someone trashes us.

But we were much different forty years ago.

Speaking for myself, I was ten times worse than Baker Mayfield at his current age.

If Baker Mayfield has a chip on his shoulder, I had a fucking sequoia.

I still do.

So I am willing to give Baker Mayfield a chance.

I don’t think Cleveland should trade him at all.

I think they should nurture him and allow him to grow.

That’s one of the big problems in the NFL.

Teams no longer want to give quarterbacks the time to grow. They give them a window of three years (maybe) and then throw them under the bus if they’re not the second coming of Aaron Rodgers

At the same time though, I think the Browns should give Case Keenum more playing time.

I think the days are gone when you can afford to have one quarterback play every minute of every game.

I think teams need better redundancy at the quarterback position. They need two good quarterbacks in case one of them goes down.

It’s not workable to sit a quarterback for the entire season and then ask him to come in and play when the primary quarterback gets hurt.

This should not be interpreted as an indictment of Baker Mayfield.

He’s a good quarterback who should be part of the final solution in delivering a Super Bowl to Cleveland.

The media of course will interpret this as a benching.

So be it.

The media is a front runner and has no use for anything short of what they perceive to be perfection.

Baker Mayfield isn’t the first quarterback who has had to walk into the wilderness, and he won’t be the last.

He’s a good quarterback, as was Kurt Warner, as was Jim Plunkett.

Let’s not forget that the football elites had given up on those two guys. And they proved the football elites wrong.

Baker Mayfield can do the same.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Carry on, Aaron Rodgers

While I did choose to get the COVID-19 vaccine, I fully support Aaron Rodgers, Carson Wentz, and their choice to not get vaccinated.

Those players and people who choose to not get vaccinated have every right to make that choice.

They are right to be wary of our government.

Governments have killed in the past, and they will kill in the future.

Men like Dr. Fauci and Dr. Gottlieb are arrogant beyond comprehension.

They and their cheering, fascist press-puppets are ignorant of a basic truth in science and healthcare: Our interpretation of the human body changes with each generation.

Most honest clinicians and academics will communicate this basic truth freely and openly.

Our knowledge changes. Our interpretations change.

What we thought to be the truth twenty years ago is not necessarily the truth today, and will not necessarily be the truth twenty years hence.

Compounding this is the reality that politicians often bend the truth to fit their political aims.

This has never been more obvious than in the age of COVID-19.

Most honest clinicians have come to the conclusion that our government has desired to push us into getting this vaccine to fight COVID-19.

Why not? Big Pharma stands to make a lot of money off this.

Unfortunately, this has caused many agents of the government to bend the truth.

And so they in turn have put pressure upon their academics to develop studies which support their aims and goals.

Careful questions and thinking however are in order.

One of the big black boxes in medicine today is our immune system. We are scratching the surface when it comes to understanding how our immune systems fully work, what causes people to be immune, and how this immune memory is stored and brought back to life to combat future infections.

Yet you will hear articulators from the Daily Beast, and Vox, fascist puppets, speak about such science as if it is settled.

Settled science? There is no such thing.

The government, in its effort to convince you to get the vaccine, is trying to sell you on the idea that their vaccine is better than natural immunity.

They say that there are studies that show that natural immunity does not always produce antibodies. This seems possible.

In the same breath, they want you to believe that their corporate vaccine always produces antibodies.

On the surface, this seems possible but unlikely.

It’s also important to remember that their vaccine only produces antibodies against one particular protein – the spike protein.

On the other hand, only natural immunity has the potential to produce antibodies against all the proteins that the virus might produce.

Therefore it seems much more likely that natural immunity will produce a better immune response.

And, if we do not see the antibodies in people who have contracted the natural infection, it may very well be that the body doesn’t work that way and that we have an imprecise understanding of how the immune system works.

Just because antibodies are not produced and circulating does it mean that the immune system has not memorized the proteins of the natural virus.

As I say, there is no such thing as settled science.

When it comes to COVID-19, we should be wary of those who believe that there is.

Carry-on, Aaron Rodgers. Carry-on, Carson Wentz.

Do the right thing, and exercise your fundamental right as an American.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved


To the people of Waukesha.

I’m sure you would like to punish the people responsible for this Christmas parade calamity.

It would be good to start with Darrell Brooks.

But don’t stop there.

Don’t forget to punish the people who are responsible for creating people like Darrell Brooks.

Naturally, of course, if you have read anything I have written, you know I’m talking about Harvard University.

They are the real people behind the destruction of the black community.

The media, that Harvard controls, has gone out of its way to not suggest that this killing in Waukesha is payback in any way for the Rittenhouse verdict.

Oh, but it is.

It is a direct result of the Rittenhouse verdict.

This is what you get when you dumb down the population.

You get a huge segment of the population making decisions based upon false beliefs.

Darrell Brooks clearly felt he was atoning for Kyle Rittenhouse’s white supremacy. That’s why he zigzagged down the road attempting to kill as many people as possible.

Both political parties that Harvard controls and dominates are complicit in this dog and pony show.

Both Democratic and Republican parties keep the political sporting match going so as to distract you.

This is just Chapter Three of the Floyd-Rittenhouse race war saga.

Harvard who controls Corporate America who in turn controls both Democratic and Republican parties needs this race war to continue so that the black community is focused on rage.

A community focused on rage is less productive and more likely to provide prisoners for the corporate prison racket.

To that end both Fox and CNN are also complicit in this dog and pony show.

Both networks are ultimately controlled by the same people, the same Harvard-Ivy League crowd.

CNN is complicit because they focus on race.

Fox is complicit because they focus on rage.

Forget about rage. Rage is a solution that will not work.

What then can be done?

Sure, you have to take care of Darrell Brooks first through the court system.

But as that is being carried out, you need to be dispassionately resolute in changing your attitudes toward your elites, toward Harvard University.

You must make a concerted effort to not send your children to Harvard and other Ivy League schools.

Why would you want your children to be co-opted into a power cult? It doesn’t do us any good.

You must also make a concerted effort to not put your faith in people who graduate from these schools.

This is the shortest, most long-term way to deal with the evil power of Harvard University.

You must walk away from this school.

Will it make a difference?

It will make a great deal of difference.

You don’t need Harvard; Harvard needs you.

That’s why Harvard and its puppets spend so much effort programming you through media, movies, books, magazines into thinking that they are the smartest guys in the room.

They’re not.

The incident in Waukesha proves it.

This kind of nonsense didn’t go on in America seventy-five years ago – before Harvard accelerated its death grip upon the nation.

If you want to take your country back, you’ll have to defeat this odious institution called Harvard University.

There’s no difference between a tyrant called King Louis, and a tyrant call Harvard University.

Thank you.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Antimicrobial Resistance

What causes antimicrobial resistance?

Resistance is related to total antibiotic pressure upon available bacteria.

What contributes to total antibiotic pressure?

1.  Antibiotics used in farming and agriculture.

2.  Waste antibiotics released into rivers by Big Pharma.  

3.  Total antibiotics being prescribed by healthcare providers.

4.  Antibiotics that are being sold legally or illegally on the open market without prescription.

In summary, the greater the antibiotic pressure, the greater chance of resistance.

How do resistant bacteria form and propagate?

They mutate.

Once they mutate they can either reproduce or spread the mutated genetic material through plasmid exchange.

A plasmid is a small DNA molecule within a cell that is separated from chromosomal DNA and can replicate independently.

The bacteria come together and form a joining point like a handshake. Then the genetic information is exchanged.

How important is sanitation to Antibiotic Resistance?

There is a doctor from Australia named Peter Calignon, Ph. D. from the Australian National University Medical School.

He and his colleagues feel that contagion is an important factor in spreading antimicrobial resistance.

I agree.

He feels that poor sanitation and overcrowding plays a real and vital role in the spread of resistance.

If we examine where much of the antimicrobial resistance comes from – India, China and others – we can see that he may have a point.

These countries do not have the best sanitation services available for all their people.

It makes sense that if you have more available bacteria for antibiotics to be exposed to, you should get more resistance, especially if the bacteria are more prone to come from infected people.

Of course there are people who do not agree with him.  They feel that overuse of antibiotics is the main cause of resistance.

I am not so sure of that, and I will explain why.


Most of the deaths that arise from antimicrobial resistance come from Asia and Africa.

Is this because healthcare is sub-standard there?

Or is it because there are more resistant bacteria being generated there?

There are maps available.

I can go all day with these maps, but you can play with them yourselves by searching the web for CDDEP Resistance Map.

You will see that MOST of resistance is coming from India, China, Russia, Mexico, Argentina and Venezuela.  

Most of the resistance is NOT coming from the United States.

Assuming that antimicrobial resistance is coming primarily from these parts of the world, why would that be?

Here are some potential reasons.

1.  Poor oversight of Big Pharma allowing corporations to dump effluent into the rivers.

2.  Poor sanitation and overcrowding.

3.  Open pharmacy whereby antibiotics can be obtained without a prescription.


Let’s turn the question upside down.

Why do we see less resistance coming from the more developed countries?

The United States and the West.

Here are some potential factors.

1.  Better oversight of Big Pharma.

2.  Better sanitation.

3.  Closed pharmacy.  You can not buy antibiotics at the supermarket.


This is my opinion.

Maybe we are being too hard on ourselves in thinking that over-prescription of antibiotics is a major cause of antimicrobial resistance.

Maybe we are doing more harm by overly cutting back on our prescription of antibiotics.

If we can nip an infection in the bud, we can prevent much morbidity.  Morbidity is like a forest fire – catch it early and you can prevent a massive conflagration.

A massive conflagration of bacterial infection can paradoxically cause more antibiotic use.

Maybe what we should be more aggressive with antibiotics.

Some people argue that doctors prescribe too many antibiotics.

But it isn’t as if doctors are handing out antibiotics on the street corner.

We have a controlled process in the United States.

We have a closed pharmacy.

We are already doing enough to control resistance.

But by cutting back on antibiotic use for people WHO ARE SICK, we are effectively increasing contagion by allowing more people to get sick.

Let us define contagion in the following way:

Contagion = Number of Sick People x Overcrowding x Poor Sanitation.


By badgering doctors to stop prescribing antibiotics we will increase the number of sick people and cause more antimicrobial resistance.

Thus we will validate the contagion theory that this doctor from Australia, Peter Colignon, was talking about.


The solution is to develop new classes of antibiotics.

There are many areas worth investigating.

If we think we have developed all the ways to kill a bacteria, that is surely a testament to our arrogance.

Indeed, there are many exciting areas to explore.

Why, just the other day, I was cuddling up next to the fireplace with the latest issue of Molecular Cell, a lively, witty magazine.

I was looking at this article: Inhibiting the Evolution of Antibiotic Resistance. Molecular Cell. Volume 73.  Issue 1.

Surely this made the NY Times bestseller list.

In this particular article the authors, Ragheb, et. al, discuss a mutagenesis factor in the bacteria which if shut down could inhibit bacteria from mutating.

Now, this is an avenue, among many, that should be explored.

Yes, it may be a blind alley. Or, it may not even be advisable to shut down the mutability of bacteria.

That’s not the point.

The point is that Big Pharma should be aggressively investigating these avenues.

Are they?

Many say they are not.

Why not?


They don’t have to care anymore.

They’re too big to care.

There has simply been too much consolidation within the healthcare industry.

Big Pharma is too big.

Their only concern now is profits.

The leaders of their firms are financial guys, not pharmaceutical guys.

One of their false gods is precise cost accounting.

They believe that every single drug must be justified on its own merits.

If they can’t see the profits in it, they don’t go down that road.

This isn’t like the old days where the leader of the firm would take a chance on an idea.

Furthermore, the antibiotics that they have currently are already making them enough money.

They are not thinking ahead to the day when the new antibiotics might be necessary.

There are no profits in that.

They are not statesman; they are profiteers.

But that is not the only reason why they do not innovate.

There is an even darker reason.


Do you believe in the New World Order?

You better.

Although Big Pharma loves nothing more than profits, sometimes their profits have to take a back seat to a larger concern.


Big Pharma is now controlled fully by the elites.

The elites look at medicines as a weapon they can you use to control you.

Antibiotics are a major part of that arsenal.

By depriving you of antibiotics, the elites can keep you a little more sick and dependent upon them.

You see, the elites view antibiotics as medicines for them, not you.

Why, what would happen if the commoners kept using antibiotics, they ask themselves.

Pretty soon, they answer, we won’t have useful antibiotics for ourselves.

That just won’t do, they conclude.

So rather than spend money that can be better used for their new yacht, they convince you that antibiotics don’t work.

They enlist their academics to convince you.

But you know better.

You know that antibiotics work.

Antibiotics put out fires and keep you out of the hospital.

That is precisely the point.

If you get sick as an outpatient and can’t get timely medicines, you are more likely to enter the hospital.

This is a bad thing for you.

But it is a good thing for Corporate America.

They make more money this way.

That improves their bottom line.

Is this too dark for you?

Think again, Pollyanna.

In Pennsylvania not too long ago, a judge was sent to prison because he was sending children to juvenile detention in exchange for kickbacks.

Men are evil and will game the system any way they can.

The days are gone when Big Pharma engages in innovation unless there is an extreme profit motive.  They don’t have to care.

Big Pharma is a quasi governmental entity], entrenched with elites.  They are ossified.

We won’t see innovation like we used to.

Their CEOs aren’t emotionally invested in their company.

This is a bd thing because we need new antibiotics.

Antibiotics work.

I know it with my patients and with me.

Patients have figured it out also.

That’s why bodegas sell antibiotics over the counter.

People in the 3rd World have figured it out.

And we need antibiotics even though the academics say we have don’t.

Academics don’t understand how infections begin.

How do infections begin?

Most respiratory infections begin as viral infections.

After a few days, the bacteria set in and what you get as a mixed infection.

By the time you visit your doctor, you probably have a mixed infection. There are probably bacteria in there.

This is why antibiotics work. The antibiotics work against the bacteria that are in the mixed infection., Now, your academic will tell you that your infection is either pure viral or pure bacterial. This is not true.

The majority of infections are mixed.

By aggressively treating with antibiotics we can get people better faster.

Not only will we be decreasing morbidity and mortality, we will also be decreasing contagiousness.

Not prescribing antibiotics aggressively will cause increased contagiousness which in turn will cause more infections which will paradoxically cause more antibiotics to be prescribed.

The road to hell will be paved with good intentions.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved