Connect with us

Research: Lulelemon’s Sweating It Out

Published

on

logo_coronastocks
logo-lululemon

COVID-19 Initial Impact Report​

Lululemon Athletica Inc.

NASDAQ: LULU

logo_nxtanalytic

Analyst Note
Updated May 25, 2020

COVID-19 Net Benefit Score: -5.25

Financial Stress Test Ratings:

Free Cash Flow: C-

Interest Coverage: A++

Summary

LULU is principally a designer, distributor, and retailer of healthy lifestyle inspired athletic apparel and accessories. LULU competes in the athletic apparel industry, an emerging market that has an estimated growth rate of 6.8%. LULU is the most recognizable brand in the athleisure segment. LULU competes on premium brand image and technical product innovation. Its distribution channel includes 460 company-operated stores in 17 countries and direct-to-consumer. Due to the spread of COVID-19, many of the stores are currently closed, having a significant impact on its business. However, there is a shift in consumer purchase preferences towards e-commerce, with 20.4% of total apparel purchases in the USA coming from online sales.

Market Data

Share
Price

225.86

Market
Capitalization

29,450.56

Net

Debt

353.54

Total

Debt

739.96

Cash &

Equivalents

1,093.50

Enterprise

Value

29,097.01

Basic Shares

O/S

130.39

Market

Beta

0.91

Stock Chart

lululemon-chart

Lulelemon’s Investment Thesis

We are underweight on Lululemon Athletica Inc. (LULU). We think LULU is unlikely to benefit or emerge as a stronger player, from the impact of COVID-19 and the post-Pandemic world order.

 

While LULU has witnessed substantial growth in its top line in recent years, we do not think this is likely to continue given that discretionary consumer spending will likely decline (because of reduced income and high unemployment) and disruption in supply chain (as the focus will shift away from global supply chain towards local production; this will also squeeze margins, given high cost of production in the US).

 

The existing investment thesis of LULU also suffers from significant execution risks. LULU’s current investment thesis is based on (1) large untapped international opportunity (especially in Asian markets), (2) ongoing growth in the ecommerce business, and (3) a substantial opportunity to increase its square footage by opening more stores. However, we think all these opportunities have a substantial execution risk especially in a post-pandemic world order.

 

➤ Key Factors: Our review of key pandemic impact factors shows that LULU will be affected by two negative factors (closed physical stores and disruption in supply chain) and one positive factor (its growing presence in ecommerce business).

 

➤ Financial Stress Test: In recent years, LULU has witnessed strong growth in both its top line and bottom line. It has strong debt ratios – leverage ratio and interest coverage ratio – given its low debt. However, cashflows are an area of concern.

Lululemon Pandemic Impact Factors Review

NXTanalytic considers 7 factors and 30 specific indications that we believe will impact companies during and after the Covid-19 pandemic. These factors include: Online Business Profiles, Dealing with Consumers In Person, Effect of Increased Health Regulations, Supply Chain Risks, Travel, Changes and Disruption in Tourism, Travel and Hospitality, Increased Demand for Health Care and Health Safety, WFH and SAH.

COVID-19 Factor Analysis

Net

Benefit

NO

Total Regression

Score

-1.514

Covid-19

Risk Rate

-5.25

Covid-19

Benefit Rate

3.736

Pandemic Impact Factor Analysis

Our analysis suggest that LULU faces significant risks. Our model gives it a total score of -1.514 (attributable to -5.25 COVID-19 risk rate and 3.736 COVID-19 benefit rate). Risks emanate from both the supply side and the demand side. On the supply side, given the emphasis on social distancing, majority of LULU’s 460 physical stores across the Globe are shut, causing significantly impacting its top line. In addition, increased variability in supply chains and the emphasis on local production (instead of global supply chains) is squeezing margins (given that the cost of production in North America is higher, than in the US) thus impacting LULU’s bottom line.

 

On the demand side, lower discretionary consumer spending (as a result of lost incomes and high unemployment levels) and the lack of physical activity (because of closed gymnasiums as well as restrictions on outside movement of people) is impacting the demand for LULU’s product line. Encouragingly, LULU has been focusing on increasing its online presence and has launched marketing campaigns specifically designed for indoor activities (Sweatlife Workout Challenge, is an example) which will support LULU’s online sales. However, they are unlikely to completely offset the decline in sales caused by the closure of physical stores.

Relevant Factors

➤ Online Presence: LULU has been trying to augment its presence in ecommerce, which has resulted in a sharp growth in its online sales. In fact, direct to customer sales increased by 35% y/y in 2019. During the pandemic a strong digital presence is undoubtedly beneficial. LULU can leverage its strong brand value to attract existing and new customers looking to purchase athleisure clothing or accessory purchase.

 

➤ In Person Businesses, Crowds & Groups: Physical stores still account for a bulk of LULU’s revenues; as of September 2019, LULU had 460 stores across the Globe. Given the nature of LULU’s business, where customers prefer to try a product before purchasing. A temporary closure of stores has had a significant impact on its sales.

 

➤ Supply Chain Risk: LULU depends heavily on international suppliers for its products. In fact LULU’s five major suppliers account for 56% of its products. Its suppliers are mainly located in Vietnam, Cambodia, Sri Lanka and China. We think in a post-Pandemic world order the emphasis would be on local supply chains rather than global production. Given that the cost of production tends to be higher in North America, it would squeeze LULU’s margins. Moreover, the fact that LULU does not have long-term contracts with its existing suppliers, does not help either. As a result, we believe LULU has at a high risk of supply chain disruption.

Pandemic Factor Screening and Scoring

NXTanalytic research is based on the thesis that consumer and business behaviour and practices will be changed significantly as a result of the pandemic and its aftermath. We have developed a group of seven major factors that we believe indicate whether a company has an increased risk or reward profile.

 

We approach our analysis in the context of three time periods:

 

1. Near term effect of the pandemic

2. A Resulting Recession/Bear Market

3. Longer Term Psychological Effects: Changes in consumer and business behavior and practices as a result of the pandemic.

Scoring and Rating for Factor Exposure

We objectively score businesses based on positive and negative factors and how significantly they may be affected by each applicable factor. Our model generates a total regression score by generating a coefficient of the risk and reward scores given to the company by an experienced analyst.

 

We generate a Total Regression Score, a Covid-19 Risk Rate and a Covid-19 Benefit Rate.

➤ Online Businesses: Due to social distancing and lockdowns and Work From Home, businesses that operate online, or produce the tools for companies to adapt to more demand for online services should experience a surge in demand due to the coronavirus, Covid-19 outbreak. Consumers will more rapidly move online across many categories. Trends already in place will accelerate. Companies whose businesses are online or are rapidly moving online are better prepared to serve the market while those based on bricks and mortar are more likely to be challenged. 

➤ Dealing with Consumers In Person: Businesses that deal with large numbers of people in close proximity to each other will be negatively affected long term. Regardless of how long the pandemic will continue, its psychological, economic and financial effects, have inevitably altered the perception of risk from exposure to large group settings. Consumers are going to avoid gathering in large groups – particularly individuals over 60. We believe consumers will be fearful of the virus and we are assuming that even when the rate of infection has slowed through social distancing and other “curve flattening” efforts, the virus will be a threat for more than a year or until widespread vaccination has taken place. Even after vaccination efforts minimize the immediate threat consumer behavior will be changed long term and concern over future pandemics will be heightened for many years.

➤ Increased Health Regulations and Restrictions: Restrictions on travel and trade as a result of the pandemic are likely to remain in place for months or years and public health regulations will become stricter and more widespread. It’s highly probable that enhanced screening, permit and visa requirements, reductions in ease of travel and transport of goods will be impacted or implemented. Governments, in an effort to restore consumer confidence, will enforce new regulations designed to protect consumers from the current pandemic and future pandemics will overshoot and result in impairing businesses who rely on international supply chains, movement of large numbers of people, or are otherwise perceived as presenting a high risk of infection to consumers.

➤ Supply Chain and Cross Border Risks: The fact the virus can remain alive for many days on inanimate objects and surfaces is a good example of a pending supply chain issue. Perishable product supply chains designed to move items from producer to consumer in days could be significantly impacted. Overall we believe that businesses that ship goods internationally or rely on global supply chains are at risk of business interruption as the pandemic circulates globally. Further, companies with long international supply chains in countries with poor healthcare systems will likely be pressured to replace suppliers and build new supply chains closer to home markets in order to avoid new border restrictions and the potential of localized lockdowns put in place to handle future outbreaks.

➤ Travel, Tourism, Hospitality and Entertainment: The most obviously impacted sectors are businesses on the front line of day to day consumer interaction. Restaurants, coffee shops, event venues, bars, pubs, hotels, resorts, etc could experience a prolonged or permanent change in consumer demand or be required to spend significantly on technologies and services designed to mitigate consumer concerns over health risks. Consumers will likely continue to avoid contact with crowds or reduce visits to brick and mortar hospitality and entertainment focused businesses. Companies in these sectors will need to change business practices and deploy technologies and systems designed to protect customers – many of these do not exist yet or are expensive.

➤ Work From Home and Stay At Home: The most obvious winners are companies who enable consumer cocooning or Work From Home (WFH) and Stay at Home (SAH) behaviour. As these social and business trends become entrenched, demand for a range of new solutions for managing a distributed workforce will provide existing platform companies and new entrants with opportunities to grow market share and fill demand. Companies not offering WFH opportunities will suffer, compromising their ability to attract the best employees. The delivery economy, pioneered by the likes of Amazon.com and any company that focuses on in home exercise, consumer electronics, home entertainment and ecommerce are well positioned to profit from a long term trend towards SAH behaviour. The trend towards non-brick and mortar retail, will accelerate.

➤ Health, Medicine & Safety: Companies focused on the health and safety of consumers and crowds will be positioned to assist businesses who will require new and robust health security solutions in order to attract customers. Heightened focus on health and virus risks will likely spur expenditures on antiviral medications and treatments, vaccines, screening systems and devices, rapid testing, containment and quarantine solutions and services, and telemedicine. Demand for antimicrobial or antiviral materials or other “bio tech materials” and products is likely to be strong in a post pandemic world.

Financial Stress Test

FINANCIAL RATIOS RATINGS
letter_grade_1

Excellent
Strong
Satisfactory
Poor
Low Quality
High Risk

Free Cash Flow: C-

FINANCIAL RATIOS RATINGS
letter_grade_2

Excellent
Strong
Satisfactory
Poor
Low Quality
High Risk

Interest Coverage: A++

Financial Ratios

FYE –

Feb. 2nd

2020 A

Financial

Leverage

1.68 X

Debt-to-

Capital

0.27 X

Debt-to-

Assets

0.23 X

Debt-to-

Equity

0.38 X

EV/

FCF

43.90 X

Average

Leverage

Multiple

0.52 X

Multiple

Score

1.44

NXTanalytic reviews a series of financial measures designed to provide a snapshot of the company’s financial health and ability to deal with the challenges or opportunities created by the pandemic, the recession and post pandemic economic environment.

Conclusion

Although LULU had a strong financial position in the past, we do not think this trend is likely to continue in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and even in the post-Pandemic world order. With the existing supply chain expected to be disrupted and the physical stores likely to witness limited sales (as a result of ongoing social distancing and an expected decline in discreet consumer spending), we expect LULU’s margins to remain under pressure, particularly if the overall macroeconomic environment remains volatile.

Stress Test Highlights

➤ Leverage Ratio: LULU does not have long term debt in this fiscal year. Even though it still has capitalized leases, the leverage ratio remains low. However, this might not be the optimal capital structure.

 

➤ Interest Coverage Ratio: LULU does not have any interest expense because of absence of any debt. This gives LULU a A++ rating in terms of interest coverage ratio. LULU will be able to pay interests if it decides to take additional debt in the next few years. It also gives LULU flexibility when funding future capital expenditure.

 

➤ Free Cash Flow: The EV/FCF ratio is high, leading to a C- rating in free cash flow. This indicates that LULU is relatively slow to generate cash flow. Since sales are very likely to go down due to the pandemic, this could be an even more concerning issue in the future.

Financial Stress Test Analysis

NXTanalytic completes a financial analysis of each company using data taken from the most recently audited financial statements. Our goal is to provide a snapshot of a company’s financial condition and ability to survive a prolonged period of reduced growth, and/or finance growth or restructuring to take advantage of new opportunities.

Cash Flows as a Focus of Screening

Debt Servicing

➤ Interest Coverage Ratio = EBIT / Interest Expense: A powerful measurement of the ‘survivability’ of a corporation. It reflects the ability of a company to pay interest on the outstanding debt and is thus an important assessment of short-term solvency. If the ratio is underneath 1.0 X, this means that the company cannot currently cover interest charges on its debt from current operational income. This could mean that the company is funding itself through the sale of assets or further financing; which are unsustainable. The higher the ratio, the higher probability to survive in the future financial hardship.

Free Cash Flow Valuation

➤ Interest Coverage Ratio = EBIT / Interest Expense: A powerful measurement of the ‘survivability’ of a corporation. It reflects the ability of a company to pay interest on its outstanding debt and is thus an important assessment of short-term solvency. If the ratio is underneath 1.0 X, it indicates the company cannot currently cover interest charges on its debt from operational income. This could mean that the company is funding itself through the sale of assets or further financing; which are unsustainable measures. The higher the ratio, the higher the company’s ability to survive financial hardship.

➤ EV/FCF Ratio = Enterprise Value / Free Cash Flow: Based on our debt servicing thesis we primarily value companies based on their cash flows. We rely on the EV/FCF ratio to assess the total valuation of the company in relation to its ability to generate cash flows. Enterprise Value is the value of the entire company, both its debt and traded equity. When this is divided by its Free Cash Flow we see how much we are paying to buy that cash flow. The lower the ratio the cheaper it is to “buy” the cash flows of the company.

Leverage Ratios

Debt ratios are classic balance sheet health measuring tools used to indicate potential risks to future financing ability (ie. violating debt covenants) or as a barometer of the defensive position of the company if cash flows are ever an issue. They are long-term solvency metrics and reflect the degree to which the company is financing its operation through debt versus equity. If a company has poor leverage ratios (too much debt), it might need to aggressively finance its growth through debt and as a result require more and more cash flow from operations to adequately service its debt. Our view is that companies with less debt are more likely to be able to withstand challenges or fund opportunities created by the pandemic.

➤ Financial Leverage Ratio = Total Debt / Total Equity: The Financial Leverage Ratio is a measure of the degree to which a company is financing its operations through debt. More specifically, it reflects the ability of shareholder equity to cover all outstanding debts in the event of a business downturn.

➤ Debt-to-Capital Ratio = Total Debt / (Total Debt + Total Shareholder’s Equity): The Debt-to-Capital ratio measures the amount of financial leverage in a company. This tells us whether a company is prone to using debt financing or equity financing. A company with a high Debt-to-Capital ratio, compared to a general or industry average, may be impared due to the cost of servicing debt and therefore increasing its default risk.

➤ Debt-to-Equity Ratio = Total Debt / Total Shareholder’s Equity: A high Debt-to-Equity ratio generally indicates that a company has been aggressive in financing its growth with debt. This can result in volatile earnings as a result of additional interest expense. If the company’s interest expense grows too high, it may increase the company’s chances of a default or bankruptcy.

➤ Debt-to-Assets Ratio = Total Debt / Total Assets: The Debt-to-Assets ratio shows the degree to which a company has used debt to finance its assets. This ratio can be used to evaluate whether a company has enough assets to meet its debt obligations. A ratio greater than 1 indicates that the entire company’s assets are worth less than its debt.

CONFLICT OWNERSHIP RELATED DISCLOSURES

Does the Analyst or any member of the Analyst’s household have a financial interest in the securities of the subject issuer?

No

Does the Analyst or household member serve as a Director or Officer or Advisory Board Member of the issuer?

No

Does NXTanalytic or the Analyst have any actual material conflicts of interest with the issuer?

No

Does NXTanalytic and/or one or more entities affiliated with NXTanalytic beneficially own common shares (or any other class of common equity securities) of this issuer which constitutes more than 1% of the presently issued and outstanding shares of the issuer?

No

Has the Analyst had an onsite visit with the Issuer within the last 12 months?

No

Has the Analyst been compensated for travel expenses incurred as a result of an onsite visit with the Issuer within the last 12 months?

No

Has the Analyst received any compensation from the subject company in the past 12 months?

No

U.K. DISCLOSURES

This research report was prepared by NXTanalytic Inc., which is not a member of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada and the Canadian Investor Protection Fund. NXTANALYTIC IS NOT SUBJECT TO U.K. RULES WITH REGARD TO THE PREPARATION OF RESEARCH REPORTS AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF ANALYSTS. The contents hereof are intended solely for the use of, and may only be issued or passed onto persons with which NXTanalytic has given consent. This report does not constitute advice, an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any of the securities discussed herein.

CANADIAN & U.S. DISCLOSURES

This research report was prepared by NXTanalytic, which is not a registrant nor is it a member of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada. This report does not constitute advice, an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any of the securities discussed herein. NXTanalytic is not a registered broker-dealer in the United States or any country. The firm that prepared this report may not be subject to U.S. rules regarding the preparation of research reports and the independence of research analysts.

INFORMATION & INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

All information used in the publication of this report has been compiled from publicly available sources that NXTanalytic believes to be reliable. The opinions, estimates, and projections contained in this report are those of NXTanalytic Inc. (“NXT”) as of the date hereof and are subject to change without notice. NXT makes every effort to ensure that the contents have been compiled or derived from sources believed to be reliable and that contain information and opinions that are accurate and complete; however, NXT makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, in respect thereof, takes no responsibility for any errors and omissions which may be contained herein and accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from any use of or reliance on this report or its contents. Information may be available to NXT that is not herein. This report is provided, for informational purposes only and does not constitute advice, an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities discussed herein in any jurisdiction. Its research is not an offer to sell or solicitation to buy any securities at any time now, or in the future. Neither NXT nor any person employed by NXTanalytic accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or indirect loss resulting from any use of its research or information it contains. This report may not be reproduced, distributed, or published without any the written expressed permission of NXTanalytic Inc. and/or its principals.

 

©2020, NXTanalytic. All rights reserved.

 
Continue Reading

International

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC’s…

Published

on

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever... And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC's Brian Sullivan took a horse dose of Red Pills when, about six months after our readers, he learned that the US is issuing $1 trillion in debt every 100 days, which prompted him to rage tweet, (or rageX, not sure what the proper term is here) the following:

We’ve added 60% to national debt since 2018. Germany - a country with major economic woes - added ‘just’ 32%.   

Maybe it will never matter.   Maybe MMT is real.   Maybe we just cancel or inflate it out. Maybe career real estate borrowers or career politicians aren’t the answer.

I have no idea.  Only time will tell.   But it’s going to be fascinating to watch it play out.

He is right: it will be fascinating, and the latest budget deficit data simply confirmed that the day of reckoning will come very soon, certainly sooner than the two years that One River's Eric Peters predicted this weekend for the coming "US debt sustainability crisis."

According to the US Treasury, in February, the US collected $271 billion in various tax receipts, and spent $567 billion, more than double what it collected.

The two charts below show the divergence in US tax receipts which have flatlined (on a trailing 6M basis) since the covid pandemic in 2020 (with occasional stimmy-driven surges)...

... and spending which is about 50% higher compared to where it was in 2020.

The end result is that in February, the budget deficit rose to $296.3 billion, up 12.9% from a year prior, and the second highest February deficit on record.

And the punchline: on a cumulative basis, the budget deficit in fiscal 2024 which began on October 1, 2023 is now $828 billion, the second largest cumulative deficit through February on record, surpassed only by the peak covid year of 2021.

But wait there's more: because in a world where the US is spending more than twice what it is collecting, the endgame is clear: debt collapse, and while it won't be tomorrow, or the week after, it is coming... and it's also why the US is now selling $1 trillion in debt every 100 days just to keep operating (and absorbing all those millions of illegal immigrants who will keep voting democrat to preserve the socialist system of the US, so beloved by the Soros clan).

And it gets even worse, because we are now in the ponzi finance stage of the Minsky cycle, with total interest on the debt annualizing well above $1 trillion, and rising every day

... having already surpassed total US defense spending and soon to surpass total health spending and, finally all social security spending, the largest spending category of all, which means that US debt will now rise exponentially higher until the inevitable moment when the US dollar loses its reserve status and it all comes crashing down.

We conclude with another observation by CNBC's Brian Sullivan, who quotes an email by a DC strategist...

.. which lays out the proposed Biden budget as follows:

The budget deficit will growth another $16 TRILLION over next 10 years. Thats *with* the proposed massive tax hikes.

Without them the deficit will grow $19 trillion.

That's why you will hear the "deficit is being reduced by $3 trillion" over the decade.

No family budget or business could exist with this kind of math.

Of course, in the long run, neither can the US... and since neither party will ever cut the spending which everyone by now is so addicted to, the best anyone can do is start planning for the endgame.

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 18:40

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former…

Published

on

Buried Project Veritas Recording Shows Top Pfizer Scientists Suppressed Concerns Over COVID-19 Boosters, MRNA Tech

Submitted by Liam Cosgrove

Former Project Veritas & O’Keefe Media Group operative and Pfizer formulation analyst scientist Justin Leslie revealed previously unpublished recordings showing Pfizer’s top vaccine researchers discussing major concerns surrounding COVID-19 vaccines. Leslie delivered these recordings to Veritas in late 2021, but they were never published:

Featured in Leslie’s footage is Kanwal Gill, a principal scientist at Pfizer. Gill was weary of MRNA technology given its long research history yet lack of approved commercial products. She called the vaccines “sneaky,” suggesting latent side effects could emerge in time.

Gill goes on to illustrate how the vaccine formulation process was dramatically rushed under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization and adds that profit incentives likely played a role:

"It’s going to affect my heart, and I’m going to die. And nobody’s talking about that."

Leslie recorded another colleague, Pfizer’s pharmaceutical formulation scientist Ramin Darvari, who raised the since-validated concern that repeat booster intake could damage the cardiovascular system:

None of these claims will be shocking to hear in 2024, but it is telling that high-level Pfizer researchers were discussing these topics in private while the company assured the public of “no serious safety concerns” upon the jab’s release:

Vaccine for Children is a Different Formulation

Leslie sent me a little-known FDA-Pfizer conference — a 7-hour Zoom meeting published in tandem with the approval of the vaccine for 5 – 11 year-olds — during which Pfizer’s vice presidents of vaccine research and development, Nicholas Warne and William Gruber, discussed a last-minute change to the vaccine’s “buffer” — from “PBS” to “Tris” — to improve its shelf life. For about 30 seconds of these 7 hours, Gruber acknowledged that the new formula was NOT the one used in clinical trials (emphasis mine):


“The studies were done using the same volume… but contained the PBS buffer. We obviously had extensive consultations with the FDA and it was determined that the clinical studies were not required because, again, the LNP and the MRNA are the same and the behavior — in terms of reactogenicity and efficacy — are expected to be the same.

According to Leslie, the tweaked “buffer” dramatically changed the temperature needed for storage: “Before they changed this last step of the formulation, the formula was to be kept at -80 degrees Celsius. After they changed the last step, we kept them at 2 to 8 degrees celsius,” Leslie told me.

The claims are backed up in the referenced video presentation:

I’m no vaccinologist but an 80-degree temperature delta — and a 5x shelf-life in a warmer climate — seems like a significant change that might warrant clinical trials before commercial release.

Despite this information technically being public, there has been virtually no media scrutiny or even coverage — and in fact, most were told the vaccine for children was the same formula but just a smaller dose — which is perhaps due to a combination of the information being buried within a 7-hour jargon-filled presentation and our media being totally dysfunctional.

Bohemian Grove?

Leslie’s 2-hour long documentary on his experience at both Pfizer and O’Keefe’s companies concludes on an interesting note: James O’Keefe attended an outing at the Bohemian Grove.

Leslie offers this photo of James’ Bohemian Grove “GATE” slip as evidence, left on his work desk atop a copy of his book, “American Muckraker”:

My thoughts on the Bohemian Grove: my good friend’s dad was its general manager for several decades. From what I have gathered through that connection, the Bohemian Grove is not some version of the Illuminati, at least not in the institutional sense.

Do powerful elites hangout there? Absolutely. Do they discuss their plans for the world while hanging out there? I’m sure it has happened. Do they have a weird ritual with a giant owl? Yep, Alex Jones showed that to the world.

My perspective is based on conversations with my friend and my belief that his father is not lying to him. I could be wrong and am open to evidence — like if boxer Ryan Garcia decides to produce evidence regarding his rape claims — and I do find it a bit strange the club would invite O’Keefe who is notorious for covertly filming, but Occam’s razor would lead me to believe the club is — as it was under my friend’s dad — run by boomer conservatives the extent of whose politics include disliking wokeness, immigration, and Biden (common subjects of O’Keefe’s work).

Therefore, I don’t find O’Keefe’s visit to the club indicative that he is some sort of Operation Mockingbird asset as Leslie tries to depict (however Mockingbird is a 100% legitimate conspiracy). I have also met James several times and even came close to joining OMG. While I disagreed with James on the significance of many of his stories — finding some to be overhyped and showy — I never doubted his conviction in them.

As for why Leslie’s story was squashed… all my sources told me it was to avoid jail time for Veritas executives.

Feel free to watch Leslie’s full documentary here and decide for yourself.

Fun fact — Justin Leslie was also the operative behind this mega-viral Project Veritas story where Pfizer’s director of R&D claimed the company was privately mutating COVID-19 behind closed doors:

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 13:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Association of prenatal vitamins and metals with epigenetic aging at birth and in childhood

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging…

Published

on

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

Credit: 2024 Bozack et al.

“[…] our findings support the hypothesis that the intrauterine environment, particularly essential and non-essential metals, affect epigenetic aging biomarkers across the life course.”

BUFFALO, NY- March 12, 2024 – A new research paper was published in Aging (listed by MEDLINE/PubMed as “Aging (Albany NY)” and “Aging-US” by Web of Science) Volume 16, Issue 4, entitled, “Associations of prenatal one-carbon metabolism nutrients and metals with epigenetic aging biomarkers at birth and in childhood in a US cohort.”

Epigenetic gestational age acceleration (EGAA) at birth and epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) in childhood may be biomarkers of the intrauterine environment. In this new study, researchers Anne K. Bozack, Sheryl L. Rifas-Shiman, Andrea A. Baccarelli, Robert O. Wright, Diane R. Gold, Emily Oken, Marie-France Hivert, and Andres Cardenas from Stanford University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Columbia University, and Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai investigated the extent to which first-trimester folate, B12, 5 essential and 7 non-essential metals in maternal circulation are associated with EGAA and EAA in early life. 

“[…] we hypothesized that OCM [one-carbon metabolism] nutrients and essential metals would be positively associated with EGAA and non-essential metals would be negatively associated with EGAA. We also investigated nonlinear associations and associations with mixtures of micronutrients and metals.”

Bohlin EGAA and Horvath pan-tissue and skin and blood EAA were calculated using DNA methylation measured in cord blood (N=351) and mid-childhood blood (N=326; median age = 7.7 years) in the Project Viva pre-birth cohort. A one standard deviation increase in individual essential metals (copper, manganese, and zinc) was associated with 0.94-1.2 weeks lower Horvath EAA at birth, and patterns of exposures identified by exploratory factor analysis suggested that a common source of essential metals was associated with Horvath EAA. The researchers also observed evidence of nonlinear associations of zinc with Bohlin EGAA, magnesium and lead with Horvath EAA, and cesium with skin and blood EAA at birth. Overall, associations at birth did not persist in mid-childhood; however, arsenic was associated with greater EAA at birth and in childhood. 

“Prenatal metals, including essential metals and arsenic, are associated with epigenetic aging in early life, which might be associated with future health.”

 

Read the full paper: DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.205602 

Corresponding Author: Andres Cardenas

Corresponding Email: andres.cardenas@stanford.edu 

Keywords: epigenetic age acceleration, metals, folate, B12, prenatal exposures

Click here to sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article.

 

About Aging:

Launched in 2009, Aging publishes papers of general interest and biological significance in all fields of aging research and age-related diseases, including cancer—and now, with a special focus on COVID-19 vulnerability as an age-dependent syndrome. Topics in Aging go beyond traditional gerontology, including, but not limited to, cellular and molecular biology, human age-related diseases, pathology in model organisms, signal transduction pathways (e.g., p53, sirtuins, and PI-3K/AKT/mTOR, among others), and approaches to modulating these signaling pathways.

Please visit our website at www.Aging-US.com​​ and connect with us:

  • Facebook
  • X, formerly Twitter
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest
  • Spotify, and available wherever you listen to podcasts

 

Click here to subscribe to Aging publication updates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@impactjournals.com.

 

Aging (Aging-US) Journal Office

6666 E. Quaker Str., Suite 1B

Orchard Park, NY 14127

Phone: 1-800-922-0957, option 1

###


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending