Connect with us

International

Living with MND: how a form of ‘acceptance therapy’ is helping me make one difficult choice at a time

A professor of psychology offers an extraordinary insight into what it is like to be diagnosed with this frightening condition, and how she is dealing…

Shutterstock/Vectorium

As a new drug offers a glimmer of hope for a small percentage of people with motor neurone disease, Professor of Psychology Eva Sundin offers an extraordinary insight into what it is like to be diagnosed with this frightening condition – and how a form of psychological therapy is helping her cope with her rapidly changing life.

The breakthrough came when my therapist showed me photographs of the impact dams can have on the surrounding landscape when they fail. Their purpose is to defend and protect. But if cracks appear in the wall, the dam will burst, causing a flood that can destroy everything in its path.

The photos showed me what I am doing to myself and my relationships with family and friends when I bottle up my feelings. I was already aware that stifling my painful anger and sadness did not make those feelings go away, but this was different. Like lightning, it hit me that I had a choice. I could continue to turn away from the difficult feelings, knowing full well that they would only flood other parts of myself. Or I could learn to live with them. It felt like it should be an easy choice. But for someone like me the next question was, how long will I be able to work on removing those barriers?

That’s because I have motor neurone disease (MND). At least, that’s what the doctors tell me. There is, in fact, no diagnostic test for MND, instead clinical examination and electrophysiological tests are carried out to exclude the presence of other neurological conditions. There is currently no cure, and typical survival is two to three years following symptom onset. This news was broken to me rather abruptly two years ago in 2020.

But I am lucky in some ways. As a practising clinical psychologist, I was already aware of something called Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), a relatively new type of psychological therapy that helps people find new ways of adjusting their behaviour – something that can be necessary after trauma (in my case, a life-altering diagnosis).


This story is part of Conversation Insights
The Insights team generates long-form journalism and is working with academics from different backgrounds who have been engaged in projects to tackle societal and scientific challenges.


ACT helps me to accept myself even when I cannot stand some of the things that MND has done to me. For example, lately it has become too painful for me to watch myself in a video call. This is because I do not recognise this person with weakened muscles around her mouth and throat. ACT has helped me realise that I can choose – I don’t have to force myself to engage with losses that feel unbearable.

Instead, I have learnt to comfort myself when the mere thought of watching myself in motion makes me weep. We have only limited understanding of the psychological impact that MND has on people in its various stages, and we know little about what psychological interventions might be useful. For the time remaining, I am using my personal experiences and professional background to help shine a light on these gaps for the benefit of those afflicted by MND in the future.

Losing my voice was just the start

I am a perfect example of someone who downplays ailments until medical support is urgent. In early spring 2019 I noticed that my voice had gone significantly weaker. This was not entirely new. In the previous year I had also had a few problems speaking up. It could happen all of a sudden, and often in the middle of lectures to my psychology students. I knew my voice was becoming a real problem when my students seemed to lose interest in hearing about things like traumatic experiences in children and young people. I put my voice problems down to my existing progressive neurological illness, multiple sclerosis (MS), asked my boss to change my workload so I could work with smaller student groups only, and I did voice training on my computer in an attempt to address it.

3D illustration of neuronal synapses
Research has suggested that the death of motor neurons in MND might be due to disruptions in the connections between synapses. Shutterstock/Kateryna Kon

I finally contacted a speech and language therapist at the MS clinic where I was a patient. She informed me that the waiting list was very long so when I was still waiting after a few months I decided to look up alternative support and found a voice coach in London. Full of anticipation, I arrived for my first session. I was sitting in my wheelchair outside something that looked like a piano store. “This doesn’t seem right”, I thought. But a friendly man opened the door and showed me to a lift on the other side of a large showroom with lots of upright and grand pianos. I took the lift to the second floor and there my voice coach gave me a warm welcome. She showed the way to a small room with a few chairs and a grand piano and explained why a good posture is key for a healthy voice, before we got going with voice exercises.


Read more: Unlocking new clues to how dementia and Alzheimer's work in the brain – Uncharted Brain podcast series


At the end of that first session, I felt this training was going to be useful, and we agreed that I would have monthly face-to-face sessions. It went on for a couple of months but when the first COVID-19 lockdown was announced my voice training was interrupted. At the time I thought it was a temporary break and I would soon pick it back up again.

That – as we all know – didn’t happen. Time went quickly, and my speech difficulties worsened. I became more eager to understand what was going on. I often discussed the problem with my family, and we wondered if it could be due to Lyme disease and not MS. I contacted my GP who said it sounded like I had acid reflux because lots of reflux can cause enough inflammation to the vocal cords and change the voice, and so he prescribed medication. At the time I was happy to try it although I didn’t have the typical symptoms of acid reflux (heartburn and indigestion).

Despite weeks on the medication and continued voice training on my computer, my voice did not improve. I sent voice messages to the nurses at the MS clinic but when I didn’t hear back from them I called my GP again and asked if it could be silent reflux – I had read online that this reflux doesn’t cause heartburn and indigestion but it can damage the voice box. He said it was possible and arranged referrals to both a gastroenterologist and a speech and throat specialist, which only resulted in a different medication for reflux.

Armed with the new medication I, once again, pinned my hopes on the diagnosis, but it was a difficult time. Every morning when I woke up, I was scared that I had lost my voice completely. Every morning it took a while until I dared to speak to my cocker spaniel, Billy, since I could not imagine what I would do if I did not have a voice anymore. I was also worried about my leg muscles: it felt like they were getting weaker.

“This problem is a no-brainer”, I said to myself. I had chosen to pause my physical training during the pandemic and although it was a sensible decision, it came with a cost. For years that training had been an effective way of managing some of my MS symptoms. “Okay”, I thought, “I just have to clench my teeth and carry on. When the pandemic is over the nightmare with my voice and sedentary lifestyle will be history”.

But behind the tough talk, fear was creeping in. The spectre of MND had entered my life.

MND is the label for a group of neurological illnesses with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) being the most common. In 2016, the worldwide all-age prevalence was 4.5 per 100,000 people. MND affects motor neuron cells in the brain and spinal cord. Motor neurons allow us to move, talk, swallow, and breathe by sending commands to the muscles that carry out these functions. With MND, the motor neurons progressively die, which ultimately leads to the loss of the functions.

At the end of the summer, I saw my MS neurologist and he referred me to a colleague to find what neurological illness was causing my voice problems. I had very mixed feelings. After more than a year of trying to get help from health professionals I was afraid of what I might hear from the neurologist.

Day of diagnosis

After a few weeks I went back to the hospital to see him. Throughout the physical examination, both the neurologist and his nurse seemed to know what it meant when he said that he observed that “she has a weak sniff”. I did not know what it pointed to and I could not find it within me to ask. But I knew that I felt exhausted – my body sank into the wheelchair as if I was getting ready to go to sleep. I was not. I was trying to make sense of what was happening to me. It didn’t work. At the end of the appointment, it all became clear; I was informed that I had MND. I had finally found out why my voice was weakening. I came out into the waiting room and looked at rows of empty chairs but within minutes my friend was there, ready to take me home. On our way out to the car-park I tried to appraise what the appointment and diagnosis meant to me and select ways of coping. But instead I started crying as if there were no tomorrow. My friend asked me again and again “What’s wrong Eva?” but I didn’t know where to begin.

Luckily I wasn’t alone, I spoke every day with my daughter and very often with my son, who supported me in coming to terms with the diagnosis, finding a way forward personally, and laying a plan for my future. My children also helped me formulate questions around the MND diagnosis that I had not asked during the appointment: what were the signs that led to a definite diagnosis? And, since there is no diagnostic test, how were other neurological conditions ruled out? With my children’s support I requested a second opinion, and this time I asked both a friend and my daughter and her family to come with me.

In one way, the second appointment was similar to the first. It included a thorough physical examination and an analysis of my medical history. But from a humane perspective, it was very different. Throughout the appointment, the neurologist talked to me about the clinical meaning of her observations and invited me to ask questions. And she explained that the examination had led to a provisional MND diagnosis which could not be confirmed until results from further tests were available. When the appointment was over and I was wheeled out to my waiting family I cried, this time with relief. Although I had learned that I probably did have MND, I had been listened to. I had been talked through the diagnostic procedures and findings. And I was around my loved ones.

New choices

After eight weeks, I received the official confirmation of the diagnosis. It would take months for the news to sink in. During that time I was also aware that MND provided me with opportunity to make new choices. But I needed time before I could benefit from them. The question constantly in the back of my mind was: will I have enough time?

I made one big choice early on: to move in with my daughter, her husband, and my one-year-old granddaughter. This step was difficult and disruptive for all of us, not least because we decided that it had to be taken urgently. The reason for the urgency was that it was impossible to say how quickly my condition would progress and therefore it was impossible to predict for how long I would be able to live on my own. But more importantly, for me, moving together with my daughter and her family gave me the opportunity to engage in close interactions with myself and my close ones during a difficult time.

Before we moved in together over Christmas 2020, it was clear to me that I would have continued to ignore myself and distance myself from others if I had continued living on my own. I felt like I was on a different planet and I could only find a way back if I was around the people I loved.

It was a good choice, every morning when I wake up I see lots of photos of my four grandchildren on my picture wall. I now have two granddaughters whom I live with and I have two grandsons. Although my grandsons live far away and so I don’t see them very often in person, I watch how they grow in the family’s online photo album.

Accept the losses

It soon became evident that making that choice was just the first step. Important choices were also linked to loss of functions such as swallowing, speaking, standing and walking as my muscles weakened. In order to make such choices I needed to take onboard my new life circumstances. One of the first signs that I was learning to accept the losses was related to my weakened swallowing which had resulted in frequent coughing when eating or drinking. I agreed to have a feeding tube inserted before it was a medical necessity. I felt proud of that decision. It seemed to tell me that I didn’t shy away from the fact that I would soon need to replace eating and drinking.

My new life situation also prompted me to consider whether I wanted to pursue the career change that I had initiated some 15 years earlier when I moved from Sweden to take up a position at Nottingham Trent University (NTU). I had originally studied to become a practising clinical psychologist and then became accredited as a cognitive behavioural therapist.

During that time, I was focused on developing my research alongside the work I was doing with my clients and other clinicians. This integration of clinical practice and research follows a strong tradition in North America, with internationally renowned experts such as the founding father of CBT, Aaron Beck, who died in 2021 at the age of 100 after having spent most of his life integrating cognitive science and clinical observations into his cognitive therapy.

I moved to Nottingham, driven by my desire to work in a more research-productive community than I was used to and to change the way I was working as an academic. My aim was to contribute new knowledge that could enhance social development. My new research strand was to examine everyday stress and psychological resources (such as emotion regulation and resilience) in people with vulnerabilities other than mental health problems; for example socio-economical deprivation.

Looking back, I immediately reaped the benefits of the move. I enjoyed a meaningful and creative work atmosphere at my university and I lived closer to my children in London and New York, respectively. But although I worked on developing my new research, I suffered increasingly severe health problems that interfered with my work. For example, in 2015, the progressive nature of MS resulted in weakened eyesight which stopped me driving my car. Three years later, the onset of MND included pronounced voice problems. During this time, I kept feeling that my research over the years was disjointed, and the completion of the career change would continue to linger in the distance. When we had moved together I wasn’t happy with what seemed like a failure to progress with my career change. But then my daughter said:

I don’t know what it is to be critical about really. You did what you wanted to do when you did it. Even if you now feel that it would be fun if you had made other choices, I think that you were quite happy with your choices at the time.

I knew that she was right and it became possible for me to be less hard on myself. A year after getting the MND diagnosis, I decided to file an application for promotion to professor, generously supported to do so by my university and my colleagues. My application was successful and I thought it didn’t make sense to retire just yet. My family gave me their full support. My son said:

Of course. You’re a bulldog. Keep bulldogging and don’t let go. Ever. Until you’re forced to … it’s good for you and your spirit.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

I had useful support from my daughter and son-in-law in making another important decision; to start Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, or ACT. ACT helps people find new ways to adjust behaviour which can result from some sort of trauma. The therapy helps people keep a hold on their personal values while at the same time accept those unwanted thoughts, feelings and bodily sensations. It may be particularly well suited to people with MND due to its principal notion that suffering is an inevitable and essential part of being human and can be a source of fulfilment when we don’t flee from what scares us.

ACT’s principal aim is to help people clarify what really matters to them and identify the type of person they want to be. For example, somebody who is acting caringly as a parent or creatively as a gardener. Different people have different barriers to a meaningful or, in ACT language, a values-consistent life. It also provides people with a variety of techniques that target the different barriers. For example, techniques to defuse unwanted thoughts, feelings and bodily sensations, or see them for what they are (streams of words and passing sensations), not what they “say” they are as they fly around your head (solid facts). The goal is to help people find new ways of interacting with and accepting these feelings as they can interfere with the things that really matter to them.

Researchers have found that ACT can help improve quality of life, mood states and functioning in people with various physical health conditions. Although it seems reasonable that ACT can be helpful for improving psychological wellbeing in people living with MND, no empirical study to examine this has been done yet. I asked Rebecca Gould, Professor of Psychological Therapies at University College London, to briefly explain what her and her team’s unique clinical trial of ACT for MND is about.

The COMMEND project is the largest clinical trial of any psychological treatment for people with MND to date. In the project’s first phase, ACT was adapted so that it would address the needs of people with MND. In the ongoing second phase, 191 people with MND have been chosen at random to either have the therapy plus usual care, or usual care only. The trial is exploring whether it can improve quality of life in people living with MND and whether it is good value for money (all psychotherapies are expensive with sessions costing £60 or more if delivered by private therapists, while ACT is available only in some NHS trusts). The results of the trial will be available in autumn 2023.

How ACT helps me

It is impossible for me to grade the importance of what I have learnt so far in my therapy. But it has been hugely important for me to realise that the person I used to think about as myself is still there. I might have fewer opportunities to let her talk, but I can choose to behave in ways that welcomes this part of me. The inner critic, the part of me that is turning against myself in anger is also present and has been feeding from the many losses that have come with MND.

In my therapy I have learned that self-acceptance can go a long way and I also learned how I can accept myself in my current everyday life with MND. My therapist and I have had many discussions about my values – in particular, I cherish acting in a caring way towards myself and others. I have also come to realise that it is next to impossible to engage in close, emotional interactions unless I can acknowledge my anger and at the same time keep my self-criticism at bay. I can do this by using the bus metaphor, where I picture myself as driving a bus. On the journey many passengers come onboard including the inner critic who keeps scolding me. When they get too loud I ask them to quiet down and this helps me keep them under control.

Many people with MND need psychological support or therapy to manage the challenges and to adhere to treatment that can prolong life expectancy and improve psychological wellbeing.

ACT is a promising treatment that I believe can help more people like me. This is supported by feedback from one of the participants in the COMMEND project, Jennie Starkey. After she had received ACT for MND, she told the trial: “ACT has helped me so much. Mainly to accept the way I feel – acknowledge it, but not get hooked and caught up in my emotions. It is enabling me to mainly live without the future ruining the present”.

Of course, the more research projects like COMMEND can do, the more we will understand. For now though, Jennie and I are using ACT to make one difficult choice at a time with the help of our family and friends. We may not be able to eradicate those feelings of anger and despair that can sometimes flood our minds, but now we know they don’t have to overtake our present or in-the-moment experience. We have found ways to live with them.

For help with some of the issues raised in this article, visit: www.mndassociation.org


For you: more from our Insights series:

To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Emily Richardson from MND Association has provided support for this article. The COMMEND project is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (grant number 16/81/01) and the Motor Neurone Disease Association (grant number Gould/Jul17/936-794). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Rebecca Gould does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

on

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People who recovered from COVID-19 and received a COVID-19 shot were more likely to suffer adverse reactions, researchers in Europe are reporting.

A medical worker administers a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to a patient at a vaccination center in Ancenis-Saint-Gereon, France, on Nov. 17, 2021. (Stephane Mahe//Reuters)

Participants in the study were more likely to experience an adverse reaction after vaccination regardless of the type of shot, with one exception, the researchers found.

Across all vaccine brands, people with prior COVID-19 were 2.6 times as likely after dose one to suffer an adverse reaction, according to the new study. Such people are commonly known as having a type of protection known as natural immunity after recovery.

People with previous COVID-19 were also 1.25 times as likely after dose 2 to experience an adverse reaction.

The findings held true across all vaccine types following dose one.

Of the female participants who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, for instance, 82 percent who had COVID-19 previously experienced an adverse reaction after their first dose, compared to 59 percent of females who did not have prior COVID-19.

The only exception to the trend was among males who received a second AstraZeneca dose. The percentage of males who suffered an adverse reaction was higher, 33 percent to 24 percent, among those without a COVID-19 history.

Participants who had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed with a positive test) experienced at least one adverse reaction more often after the 1st dose compared to participants who did not have prior COVID-19. This pattern was observed in both men and women and across vaccine brands,” Florence van Hunsel, an epidemiologist with the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, and her co-authors wrote.

There were only slightly higher odds of the naturally immune suffering an adverse reaction following receipt of a Pfizer or Moderna booster, the researchers also found.

The researchers performed what’s known as a cohort event monitoring study, following 29,387 participants as they received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The participants live in a European country such as Belgium, France, or Slovakia.

Overall, three-quarters of the participants reported at least one adverse reaction, although some were minor such as injection site pain.

Adverse reactions described as serious were reported by 0.24 percent of people who received a first or second dose and 0.26 percent for people who received a booster. Different examples of serious reactions were not listed in the study.

Participants were only specifically asked to record a range of minor adverse reactions (ADRs). They could provide details of other reactions in free text form.

“The unsolicited events were manually assessed and coded, and the seriousness was classified based on international criteria,” researchers said.

The free text answers were not provided by researchers in the paper.

The authors note, ‘In this manuscript, the focus was not on serious ADRs and adverse events of special interest.’” Yet, in their highlights section they state, “The percentage of serious ADRs in the study is low for 1st and 2nd vaccination and booster.”

Dr. Joel Wallskog, co-chair of the group React19, which advocates for people who were injured by vaccines, told The Epoch Times: “It is intellectually dishonest to set out to study minor adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination then make conclusions about the frequency of serious adverse events. They also fail to provide the free text data.” He added that the paper showed “yet another study that is in my opinion, deficient by design.”

Ms. Hunsel did not respond to a request for comment.

She and other researchers listed limitations in the paper, including how they did not provide data broken down by country.

The paper was published by the journal Vaccine on March 6.

The study was funded by the European Medicines Agency and the Dutch government.

No authors declared conflicts of interest.

Some previous papers have also found that people with prior COVID-19 infection had more adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including a 2021 paper from French researchers. A U.S. study identified prior COVID-19 as a predictor of the severity of side effects.

Some other studies have determined COVID-19 vaccines confer little or no benefit to people with a history of infection, including those who had received a primary series.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still recommends people who recovered from COVID-19 receive a COVID-19 vaccine, although a number of other health authorities have stopped recommending the shot for people who have prior COVID-19.

Another New Study

In another new paper, South Korean researchers outlined how they found people were more likely to report certain adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination than after receipt of another vaccine.

The reporting of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, or pericarditis, a related condition, was nearly 20 times as high among children as the reporting odds following receipt of all other vaccines, the researchers found.

The reporting odds were also much higher for multisystem inflammatory syndrome or Kawasaki disease among adolescent COVID-19 recipients.

Researchers analyzed reports made to VigiBase, which is run by the World Health Organization.

Based on our results, close monitoring for these rare but serious inflammatory reactions after COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents until definitive causal relationship can be established,” the researchers wrote.

The study was published by the Journal of Korean Medical Science in its March edition.

Limitations include VigiBase receiving reports of problems, with some reports going unconfirmed.

Funding came from the South Korean government. One author reported receiving grants from pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/15/2024 - 05:00

Read More

Continue Reading

International

‘Excess Mortality Skyrocketed’: Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack ‘Criminal’ COVID Response

‘Excess Mortality Skyrocketed’: Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack ‘Criminal’ COVID Response

As the global pandemic unfolded, government-funded…

Published

on

'Excess Mortality Skyrocketed': Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack 'Criminal' COVID Response

As the global pandemic unfolded, government-funded experimental vaccines were hastily developed for a virus which primarily killed the old and fat (and those with other obvious comorbidities), and an aggressive, global campaign to coerce billions into injecting them ensued.

Then there were the lockdowns - with some countries (New Zealand, for example) building internment camps for those who tested positive for Covid-19, and others such as China welding entire apartment buildings shut to trap people inside.

It was an egregious and unnecessary response to a virus that, while highly virulent, was survivable by the vast majority of the general population.

Oh, and the vaccines, which governments are still pushing, didn't work as advertised to the point where health officials changed the definition of "vaccine" multiple times.

Tucker Carlson recently sat down with Dr. Pierre Kory, a critical care specialist and vocal critic of vaccines. The two had a wide-ranging discussion, which included vaccine safety and efficacy, excess mortality, demographic impacts of the virus, big pharma, and the professional price Kory has paid for speaking out.

Keep reading below, or if you have roughly 50 minutes, watch it in its entirety for free on X:

"Do we have any real sense of what the cost, the physical cost to the country and world has been of those vaccines?" Carlson asked, kicking off the interview.

"I do think we have some understanding of the cost. I mean, I think, you know, you're aware of the work of of Ed Dowd, who's put together a team and looked, analytically at a lot of the epidemiologic data," Kory replied. "I mean, time with that vaccination rollout is when all of the numbers started going sideways, the excess mortality started to skyrocket."

When asked "what kind of death toll are we looking at?", Kory responded "...in 2023 alone, in the first nine months, we had what's called an excess mortality of 158,000 Americans," adding "But this is in 2023. I mean, we've  had Omicron now for two years, which is a mild variant. Not that many go to the hospital."

'Safe and Effective'

Tucker also asked Kory why the people who claimed the vaccine were "safe and effective" aren't being held criminally liable for abetting the "killing of all these Americans," to which Kory replied: "It’s my kind of belief, looking back, that [safe and effective] was a predetermined conclusion. There was no data to support that, but it was agreed upon that it would be presented as safe and effective."

Carlson and Kory then discussed the different segments of the population that experienced vaccine side effects, with Kory noting an "explosion in dying in the youngest and healthiest sectors of society," adding "And why did the employed fare far worse than those that weren't? And this particularly white collar, white collar, more than gray collar, more than blue collar."

Kory also said that Big Pharma is 'terrified' of Vitamin D because it "threatens the disease model." As journalist The Vigilant Fox notes on X, "Vitamin D showed about a 60% effectiveness against the incidence of COVID-19 in randomized control trials," and "showed about 40-50% effectiveness in reducing the incidence of COVID-19 in observational studies."

Professional costs

Kory - while risking professional suicide by speaking out, has undoubtedly helped save countless lives by advocating for alternate treatments such as Ivermectin.

Kory shared his own experiences of job loss and censorship, highlighting the challenges of advocating for a more nuanced understanding of vaccine safety in an environment often resistant to dissenting voices.

"I wrote a book called The War on Ivermectin and the the genesis of that book," he said, adding "Not only is my expertise on Ivermectin and my vast clinical experience, but and I tell the story before, but I got an email, during this journey from a guy named William B Grant, who's a professor out in California, and he wrote to me this email just one day, my life was going totally sideways because our protocols focused on Ivermectin. I was using a lot in my practice, as were tens of thousands of doctors around the world, to really good benefits. And I was getting attacked, hit jobs in the media, and he wrote me this email on and he said, Dear Dr. Kory, what they're doing to Ivermectin, they've been doing to vitamin D for decades..."

"And it's got five tactics. And these are the five tactics that all industries employ when science emerges, that's inconvenient to their interests. And so I'm just going to give you an example. Ivermectin science was extremely inconvenient to the interests of the pharmaceutical industrial complex. I mean, it threatened the vaccine campaign. It threatened vaccine hesitancy, which was public enemy number one. We know that, that everything, all the propaganda censorship was literally going after something called vaccine hesitancy."

Money makes the world go 'round

Carlson then hit on perhaps the most devious aspect of the relationship between drug companies and the medical establishment, and how special interests completely taint science to the point where public distrust of institutions has spiked in recent years.

"I think all of it starts at the level the medical journals," said Kory. "Because once you have something established in the medical journals as a, let's say, a proven fact or a generally accepted consensus, consensus comes out of the journals."

"I have dozens of rejection letters from investigators around the world who did good trials on ivermectin, tried to publish it. No thank you, no thank you, no thank you. And then the ones that do get in all purportedly prove that ivermectin didn't work," Kory continued.

"So and then when you look at the ones that actually got in and this is where like probably my biggest estrangement and why I don't recognize science and don't trust it anymore, is the trials that flew to publication in the top journals in the world were so brazenly manipulated and corrupted in the design and conduct in, many of us wrote about it. But they flew to publication, and then every time they were published, you saw these huge PR campaigns in the media. New York Times, Boston Globe, L.A. times, ivermectin doesn't work. Latest high quality, rigorous study says. I'm sitting here in my office watching these lies just ripple throughout the media sphere based on fraudulent studies published in the top journals. And that's that's that has changed. Now that's why I say I'm estranged and I don't know what to trust anymore."

Vaccine Injuries

Carlson asked Kory about his clinical experience with vaccine injuries.

"So how this is how I divide, this is just kind of my perception of vaccine injury is that when I use the term vaccine injury, I'm usually referring to what I call a single organ problem, like pericarditis, myocarditis, stroke, something like that. An autoimmune disease," he replied.

"What I specialize in my practice, is I treat patients with what we call a long Covid long vaxx. It's the same disease, just different triggers, right? One is triggered by Covid, the other one is triggered by the spike protein from the vaccine. Much more common is long vax. The only real differences between the two conditions is that the vaccinated are, on average, sicker and more disabled than the long Covids, with some pretty prominent exceptions to that."

Watch the entire interview above, and you can support Tucker Carlson's endeavors by joining the Tucker Carlson Network here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/14/2024 - 16:20

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Shakira’s net worth

After 12 albums, a tax evasion case, and now a towering bronze idol sculpted in her image, how much is Shakira worth more than 4 decades into her care…

Published

on

Shakira’s considerable net worth is no surprise, given her massive popularity in Latin America, the U.S., and elsewhere. 

In fact, the belly-dancing contralto queen is the second-wealthiest Latin-America-born pop singer of all time after Gloria Estefan. (Interestingly, Estefan actually helped a young Shakira translate her breakout album “Laundry Service” into English, hugely propelling her stateside success.)

Since releasing her first record at age 13, Shakira has spent decades recording albums in both Spanish and English and performing all over the world. Over the course of her 40+ year career, she helped thrust Latin pop music into the American mainstream, paving the way for the subsequent success of massively popular modern acts like Karol G and Bad Bunny.

In late 2023, a 21-foot-tall bronze sculpture of Shakira, the barefoot belly dancer of Barranquilla, was unveiled at the city's waterfront. The statue was commissioned by the city's former mayor and other leadership.

Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images

In December 2023, a 21-foot-tall beachside bronze statue of the “Hips Don’t Lie” singer was unveiled in her Colombian hometown of Barranquilla, making her a permanent fixture in the city’s skyline and cementing her legacy as one of Latin America’s most influential entertainers.

After 12 albums, a plethora of film and television appearances, a highly publicized tax evasion case, and now a towering bronze idol sculpted in her image, how much is Shakira worth? What does her income look like? And how does she spend her money?

Related: Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's net worth: How the new TKO Board Member built his wealth from $7

How much is Shakira worth?

In late 2023, Spanish sports and lifestyle publication Marca reported Shakira’s net worth at $400 million, citing Forbes as the figure’s source (although Forbes’ profile page for Shakira does not list a net worth — and didn’t when that article was published).

Most other sources list the singer’s wealth at an estimated $300 million, and almost all of these point to Celebrity Net Worth — a popular but dubious celebrity wealth estimation site — as the source for the figure.

A $300 million net worth would make Shakira the third-richest Latina pop star after Gloria Estefan ($500 million) and Jennifer Lopez ($400 million), and the second-richest Latin-America-born pop singer after Estefan (JLo is Puerto Rican but was born in New York).

Shakira’s income: How much does she make annually?

Entertainers like Shakira don’t have predictable paychecks like ordinary salaried professionals. Instead, annual take-home earnings vary quite a bit depending on each year’s album sales, royalties, film and television appearances, streaming revenue, and other sources of income. As one might expect, Shakira’s earnings have fluctuated quite a bit over the years.

From June 2018 to June 2019, for instance, Shakira was the 10th highest-earning female musician, grossing $35 million, according to Forbes. This wasn’t her first time gracing the top 10, though — back in 2012, she also landed the #10 spot, bringing in $20 million, according to Billboard.

In 2023, Billboard listed Shakira as the 16th-highest-grossing Latin artist of all time.

Shakira performed alongside producer Bizarrap during the 2023 Latin Grammy Awards Gala in Seville.

Photo By Maria Jose Lopez/Europa Press via Getty Images

How much does Shakira make from her concerts and tours?

A large part of Shakira’s wealth comes from her world tours, during which she sometimes sells out massive stadiums and arenas full of passionate fans eager to see her dance and sing live.

According to a 2020 report by Pollstar, she sold over 2.7 million tickets across 190 shows that grossed over $189 million between 2000 and 2020. This landed her the 19th spot on a list of female musicians ranked by touring revenue during that period. In 2023, Billboard reported a more modest touring revenue figure of $108.1 million across 120 shows.

In 2003, Shakira reportedly generated over $4 million from a single show on Valentine’s Day at Foro Sol in Mexico City. 15 years later, in 2018, Shakira grossed around $76.5 million from her El Dorado World Tour, according to Touring Data.

Related: RuPaul's net worth: Everything to know about the cultural icon and force behind 'Drag Race'

How much has Shakira made from her album sales?

According to a 2023 profile in Variety, Shakira has sold over 100 million records throughout her career. “Laundry Service,” the pop icon’s fifth studio album, was her most successful, selling over 13 million copies worldwide, according to TheRichest.

Exactly how much money Shakira has taken home from her album sales is unclear, but in 2008, it was widely reported that she signed a 10-year contract with LiveNation to the tune of between $70 and $100 million to release her subsequent albums and manage her tours.

Shakira and JLo co-headlined the 2020 Super Bowl Halftime Show in Florida.

Photo by Kevin Winter/Getty Images)

How much did Shakira make from her Super Bowl and World Cup performances?

Shakira co-wrote one of her biggest hits, “Waka Waka (This Time for Africa),” after FIFA selected her to create the official anthem for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. She performed the song, along with several of her existing fan-favorite tracks, during the event’s opening ceremonies. TheThings reported in 2023 that the song generated $1.4 million in revenue, citing Popnable for the figure.

A decade later, 2020’s Superbowl halftime show featured Shakira and Jennifer Lopez as co-headliners with guest performances by Bad Bunny and J Balvin. The 14-minute performance was widely praised as a high-energy celebration of Latin music and dance, but as is typical for Super Bowl shows, neither Shakira nor JLo was compensated beyond expenses and production costs.

The exposure value that comes with performing in the Super Bowl Halftime Show, though, is significant. It is typically the most-watched television event in the U.S. each year, and in 2020, a 30-second Super Bowl ad spot cost between $5 and $6 million.

How much did Shakira make as a coach on “The Voice?”

Shakira served as a team coach on the popular singing competition program “The Voice” during the show’s fourth and sixth seasons. On the show, celebrity musicians coach up-and-coming amateurs in a team-based competition that eventually results in a single winner. In 2012, The Hollywood Reporter wrote that Shakira’s salary as a coach on “The Voice” was $12 million.

Related: John Cena's net worth: The wrestler-turned-actor's investments, businesses, and more

How does Shakira spend her money?

Shakira doesn’t just make a lot of money — she spends it, too. Like many wealthy entertainers, she’s purchased her share of luxuries, but Barranquilla’s barefoot belly dancer is also a prolific philanthropist, having donated tens of millions to charitable causes throughout her career.

Private island

Back in 2006, she teamed up with Roger Waters of Pink Floyd fame and Spanish singer Alejandro Sanz to purchase Bonds Cay, a 550-acre island in the Bahamas, which was listed for $16 million at the time.

Along with her two partners in the purchase, Shakira planned to develop the island to feature housing, hotels, and an artists’ retreat designed to host a revolving cast of artists-in-residence. This plan didn’t come to fruition, though, and as of this article’s last update, the island was once again for sale on Vladi Private Islands.

Real estate and vehicles

Like most wealthy celebs, Shakira’s portfolio of high-end playthings also features an array of luxury properties and vehicles, including a home in Barcelona, a villa in Cyprus, a Miami mansion, and a rotating cast of Mercedes-Benz vehicles.

Philanthropy and charity

Shakira doesn’t just spend her massive wealth on herself; the “Queen of Latin Music” is also a dedicated philanthropist and regularly donates portions of her earnings to the Fundación Pies Descalzos, or “Barefoot Foundation,” a charity she founded in 1997 to “improve the education and social development of children in Colombia, which has suffered decades of conflict.” The foundation focuses on providing meals for children and building and improving educational infrastructure in Shakira’s hometown of Barranquilla as well as four other Colombian communities.

In addition to her efforts with the Fundación Pies Descalzos, Shakira has made a number of other notable donations over the years. In 2007, she diverted a whopping $40 million of her wealth to help rebuild community infrastructure in Peru and Nicaragua in the wake of a devastating 8.0 magnitude earthquake. Later, during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Shakira donated a large supply of N95 masks for healthcare workers and ventilators for hospital patients to her hometown of Barranquilla.

Back in 2010, the UN honored Shakira with a medal to recognize her dedication to social justice, at which time the Director General of the International Labour Organization described her as a “true ambassador for children and young people.”

On November 20, 2023 (which was supposed to be her first day of trial), Shakira reached a deal with the prosecution that resulted in a three-year suspended sentence and around $8 million in fines.

Photo by Adria Puig/Anadolu via Getty Images

Shakira’s tax fraud scandal: How much did she pay?

In 2018, prosecutors in Spain initiated a tax evasion case against Shakira, alleging she lived primarily in Spain from 2012 to 2014 and therefore failed to pay around $14.4 million in taxes to the Spanish government. Spanish law requires anyone who is “domiciled” (i.e., living primarily) in Spain for more than half of the year to pay income taxes.

During the period in question, Shakira listed the Bahamas as her primary residence but did spend some time in Spain, as she was dating Gerard Piqué, a professional footballer and Spanish citizen. The couple’s first son, Milan, was also born in Barcelona during this period. 

Shakira maintained that she spent far fewer than 183 days per year in Spain during each of the years in question. In an interview with Elle Magazine, the pop star opined that “Spanish tax authorities saw that I was dating a Spanish citizen and started to salivate. It's clear they wanted to go after that money no matter what."

Prosecutors in the case sought a fine of almost $26 million and a possible eight-year prison stint, but in November of 2023, Shakira took a deal to close the case, accepting a fine of around $8 million and a three-year suspended sentence to avoid going to trial. In reference to her decision to take the deal, Shakira stated, "While I was determined to defend my innocence in a trial that my lawyers were confident would have ruled in my favour [had the trial proceeded], I have made the decision to finally resolve this matter with the best interest of my kids at heart who do not want to see their mom sacrifice her personal well-being in this fight."

How much did the Shakira statue in Barranquilla cost?

In late 2023, a 21-foot-tall bronze likeness of Shakira was unveiled on a waterfront promenade in Barranquilla. The city’s then-mayor, Jaime Pumarejo, commissioned Colombian sculptor Yino Márquez to create the statue of the city’s treasured pop icon, along with a sculpture of the city’s coat of arms.

According to the New York Times, the two sculptures cost the city the equivalent of around $180,000. A plaque at the statue’s base reads, “A heart that composes, hips that don’t lie, an unmatched talent, a voice that moves the masses and bare feet that march for the good of children and humanity.” 

Related: Taylor Swift net worth: The most successful entertainer joins the billionaire's club

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending