Welcome to My Site

If this is your first visit, welcome! This site is devoted to my life experiences as a Filipino-American who immigrated from the Philippines to the United States in 1960. I came to the US as a graduate student when I was 26 years old. I am now in my mid-80's and thanks God for his blessings, I have four successful and professional children and six grandchildren here in the US. My wife and I had been enjoying the snow bird lifestyle between US and Philippines after my retirement from USFDA in 2002. Macrine(RIP),Me and my oldest son are the Intellectual migrants. Were were born in the Philippines, came to the US in 1960 and later became US citizens in 1972. Some of the photos and videos in this site, I do not own. However, I have no intention on infringing on your copyrights. Cheers!

Thursday, November 12, 2026

Tarot Readings from Psychics on Trump's Health


That image above is a viral repost -the same graphic has been circulating on Facebook this week from pages like Lost In History and VT, but the claim itself traces back to one specific psychic.


Who it is Trevor, from the YouTube channel Scrying Out Loud

The mug in the inset photo in your image even says “NO SCRYING BEFORE COFFEE,” which is his branding. He was interviewed by IGV on Oct. 13, 2026, and earlier covered by UNILAD on Sept. 27, 2026 for a nearly hour-long tarot video where he lays out the prediction. 


What he actually claims

  • Cause: Death from natural causes, specifically a neurological issue in the brain - not cardiac. He lists possibilities like a severe headache, a fall, or a sudden event like a stroke, and says he thinks Trump will die in a hotel or resort. 

  • Timing: He does not give an exact date. In the UNILAD piece he says, “When exactly, I don't know.” In the IGV interview he narrows it to before the end of 2027, and says he does not see Trump leaving office voluntarily before that.

  • Successor: Vice President JD Vance would become president. Trevor says Vance would then try to stay president by winning in 2028, would “work with Democrats if he thinks it suits him,” and calls that period “calm chaos.” 

  • Backstory he claims: He says the vision started years ago, and retroactively links it to a claimed dementia diagnosis in 2017-2018, the November 2019 Walter Reed visit (which he claims was a stroke caught in time), lasting cardiac damage from his October 2020 COVID hospitalization, a second stroke in September 2025, and a seizure disorder afterward. 

  • None of those medical claims are verified they’re his tarot interpretation. He also predicts the 2026 midterms will be a “massive rebuke” of Trump and MAGA, leading to a competitive Republican primary in 2028 and the rise of a Democratic candidate compared to Obama for oratory.


The important caveats

  1. Trevor himself disclaims it: “These are tarot readings for entertainment purposes only. I could be right, I could be wrong.”

  2. Don’t confuse him with the other viral psychic: A separate British psychic named Selina (soul_voyance), dubbed the “new Baba Vanga” in other UNILAD stories, is also predicting a Trump health scare and Vance gradually taking over duties, but she frames it as a health crisis within about 12 months, not necessarily death. The two stories are getting mixed together online.
  3. What’s on the record about Trump’s health: The IGV article notes a White House medical summary from May 29, 2026, after an exam on May 26 at Walter Reed, attributed hand bruising to aspirin use and frequent handshaking, and ankle swelling to chronic venous insufficiency. The White House described him as in excellent health. Trump himself posted “Everything checked out PERFECTLY.” The article also stresses there is no verified evidence of a secret medical emergency. 

  4. Trump turned 80 in June 2026, born June 14, 1946 which is part of why health speculation keeps circulating. 
  5. So the headline in your screenshot is accurate about what Trevor says, but it’s not a news report of an actual event. It’s a psychic prediction, repackaged as clickbait, and even Trevor won’t pin down a specific date.



  1. My Reel of the Day: Will Trump Abandon the US?


Meanwhile, Have You Heard of the Word- MetaCognition?

Knowing what you know, and knowing when you might be wrong, is a rare and powerful skill. Scientists call it metacognition: the ability to step back and judge your own thinking. In a study published in Science, researchers at University College London found that people who were better at judging whether their own decisions were right had more gray matter in the anterior prefrontal cortex, the area right behind your eyes. That region is one of the few parts of the brain that is fundamentally different in humans compared to our closest relatives, the great apes. The good news: like most skills, metacognition can likely be trained. Try journaling about your decisions, asking "How sure am I, and why?" before answering, and reviewing your mistakes without judgment.

Finally, 

They teach Pilgrims 1620 in every school. They never teach Morro Bay 1587.
Filipinos stepped on California soil 33 years before the Mayflower then built the first Asian town in America in Saint Malo, Louisiana. They even fought with Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans.
Why were we erased from American history? Share this so they can’t erase us again.

The Movie, Artificial-A Biographical Comedy-Drama. 2026

Artificial is a 2026 biographical comedy-drama directed by Luca Guadagnino and written by Simon Rich. (see trailer at bottom of page)💚
What the Movie Is About
  • The Rise of OpenAI: The film spans two decades of machine learning research, tracing the journey from early academic labs in 2003—where computer scientist Ilya Sutskever studies under AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton—to the creation and explosive commercialization of ChatGPT.
  • The Core Conflict: It centers on the ideological clash between the idealistic co-founder Ilya Sutskever (played by Yura Borisov) and the commercially driven CEO Sam Altman (played by Andrew Garfield) as generative AI shifts from abstract theory to high-stakes corporate power.
  • The 2023 Boardroom Crisis: The narrative builds up to the dramatic November 2023 internal crisis at OpenAI, focusing on the high-tension friction over safety, ethics, and corporate control.
  • Key Figures: Alongside Altman and Sutskever, the movie features dramatized portrayals of figures like Mira Murati (Monica Barbaro) and Elon Musk (Ike Barinholtz).
The film is distributed by Neon. 

The plot of is heavily grounded in the rapid transformation of OpenAI from a small academic non-profit into a corporate juggernaut, culminating in one of the most chaotic weeks in Silicon Valley history.
The primary real-life events that inspired the film include:
1. The Ideological Rift: Safety vs. Commercialization
At the heart of the film is a real philosophical divide that split the company's founders:
  • The Non-Profit Mission: OpenAI was founded in 2015 as a non-profit research lab dedicated to creating safe Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) that benefits all of humanity.
  • The Commercial Pivot: To fund the massive computing power required for deep learning, Sam Altman restructured the company to introduce a "capped-profit" commercial subsidiary. This shift created deep friction with original board members and Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever, who feared that commercial pressures were overshadowing crucial AI safety protocols. 
2. The November 2023 Boardroom Coup
The narrative peak of the film mirrors the multi-day corporate thriller that began on Friday, November 17, 2023: 
  • The Surprise Firing: The non-profit board, spearheaded by Sutskever and board members like Helen Toner, abruptly fired CEO Sam Altman via a surprise Google Meet call. The board publicly stated that Altman was "not consistently candid in his communications," hindering their ability to govern.
  • The Executive Fallout: Co-founder and President Greg Brockman resigned immediately in protest. CTO Mira Murati was briefly installed as interim CEO before the board bypassed her to appoint former Twitch CEO Emmett Shear. 
3. The 95% Employee Mutiny
The resolution of the crisis came down to an unprecedented level of employee solidarity:
  • The Microsoft Play: Over the weekend, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella announced he was hiring Altman and Brockman to lead a brand-new internal AI division, stripping the OpenAI board of its leverage.
  • The Ultimatum: In response, roughly 745 out of OpenAI’s 770 employees signed a joint letter demanding the board resign and reinstate Altman, threatening to quit and move to Microsoft if their demands weren’t met. 
4. The U-Turn and Reinstatement
Faced with the total destruction of the company, Ilya Sutskever publicly expressed regret on social media for his role in the ouster. By Wednesday, November 22, Altman made a triumphant return to the headquarters as CEO. The original board members who pushed him out were dismantled and replaced by a new corporate-friendly interim board. 
Subsequent Real-Life Fallout
The film's exploration of "technological isolation" captures the real-world aftermath of this coup. In May 2024, Ilya Sutskever officially left OpenAI to form a competing venture, Safe Superintelligence Inc. (SSI), explicitly focusing on building AI aligned entirely with safety rather than immediate commercial scale. The Trailer: 
Meanwhile, Can Aging Be Reversed?
Research linked to Harvard scientist David Sinclair has shown promising results in animals using a process called partial epigenetic reprogramming. Now, Life Biosciences, a company Sinclair co-founded, has received FDA clearance to begin human testing of its experimental gene therapy, ER-100.
The treatment activates three genes known as OCT4, SOX2, and KLF4. These genes are designed to help reset certain age-related changes in cells while preserving their original identity. Earlier animal research reported dramatic improvements in biological aging markers, but whether similar results can occur safely in humans remains unknown.
The first human trial will focus on serious eye conditions, including glaucoma and non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). Both conditions can damage retinal ganglion cells, which carry visual information from the eyes to the brain.
Currently, no established treatment can reliably regenerate these lost nerve cells. ER-100 aims to investigate whether cellular reprogramming could help restore their function.

Finally, My Photo of the Day:

Wednesday, November 11, 2026

A $478,000 Cancer Pill: Happy Veterans Day

I read a remarkable story last month about a new cancer drug that was just approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The drug is called daraxonrasib, marketed under the brand name Rasonque, and it was developed by Revolution Medicines.

What caught my attention was not only what this new medicine can do for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, but also what it costs.

Rasonque has a wholesale list price of approximately $39,800 for a 30-day supply, or roughly $478,000 for a year of treatment. That works out to more than $1,300 per day.

When I first read this, my reaction was one of amazement and then concern.

How can a pill that may give a person precious additional months of life cost nearly half a million dollars a year?

But before criticizing the price, we should first understand why this particular drug is attracting so much attention.

A New Hope for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer has long been one of the most difficult cancers to treat. It is frequently discovered only after it has advanced, and treatment options for patients whose disease has progressed after chemotherapy have historically been limited.

That is why the FDA's approval of Rasonque is so significant.

Rasonque is the first approved therapy that broadly targets RAS in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. RAS is a family of proteins involved in controlling cell growth, and abnormal RAS signaling plays a major role in most pancreatic cancers.

The clinical results are impressive. In a Phase 3 clinical trial involving 500 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, those receiving Rasonque had a median overall survival of 13.2 months, compared with 6.7 months for patients receiving standard chemotherapy.

In other words, the new treatment nearly doubled median survival.

For a healthy person, an additional six months may not sound like a very long time.

For someone with advanced cancer and for that person's family, six additional months can mean something entirely different.

Six more months of birthdays. Six more months of conversations with children and grandchildren.

Six more months to see a family wedding. Six more months to say goodbye.

Sometimes, we cannot measure the value of life in dollars.

The Miracle Has a Price

This is where the story becomes complicated. Scientific progress has never been inexpensive.

Behind a successful drug are years of laboratory research, failed experiments, clinical trials, scientists, physicians, regulatory reviews, manufacturing facilities and enormous financial investments. Many experimental drugs never reach the market.

As someone who spent much of my professional career in pharmaceutical chemistry and later worked at the FDA reviewing drug products, I understand that bringing a new medicine from the laboratory to patients is an extraordinarily complicated process.

I also understand the importance of rewarding scientific innovation.

But I have always believed that there is another side to the equation.

A medicine can be scientifically revolutionary and still be financially difficult for society to afford. That is the dilemma we face today.

Who Pays $478,000?

The $478,000 annual figure is the list price, not necessarily what every patient or insurer ultimately pays.

Insurance coverage, negotiated discounts, government programs and pharmaceutical assistance can reduce the actual amount paid.

Nevertheless, the list price tells us something important about the direction in which modern cancer treatment is moving.

Specialty cancer medicines are becoming increasingly expensive.

We are entering an era in which some of the most sophisticated medicines are designed to target a specific genetic mutation or molecular pathway inside a cancer cell.

This is wonderful science. Instead of simply attacking rapidly dividing cells, as many older chemotherapy drugs do, targeted therapies attempt to interfere with the biological machinery that allows cancer to grow.

This is the future of medicine. But the future of medicine must also be the future of affordable medicine.

Can We Put a Price on More Life?

This question is particularly difficult for me because I have lived long enough to see how dramatically medicine has changed.

When I was growing up in the Philippines, many diseases that are routinely treated today could be life-threatening.

When I came to the United States in 1960, medical technology was already advancing rapidly. Over the decades I have watched antibiotics, vaccines, imaging technologies, cancer treatments, transplantation, biotechnology and molecular medicine transform the practice of medicine.

Today, scientists can look inside a cancer cell and identify the molecular signals that make it grow. That is almost unimaginable compared with the medicine of my childhood.

And yet, I sometimes wonder whether our scientific ability is advancing faster than our ability to make these discoveries accessible to everyone.

A revolutionary medicine that only wealthy patients can realistically obtain creates another kind of inequality.

The Global Question

This issue is especially important to me because my blog has readers around the world.

The United States is fortunate to have one of the world's most advanced biomedical research systems. Many of the world's breakthrough medicines originate here.

But the American system also produces some of the highest drug prices in the world.

What happens to a patient in the Philippines? What about a cancer patient in India, Indonesia, Vietnam or Africa?

What about a retired person living on a fixed income?

What happens when the medicine that might extend someone's life costs more in one year than many families earn in a lifetime?

These are not merely American questions. They are global questions.

Medical science belongs, in some sense, to all humanity. But the economics of medical science often determine who gets to benefit from it.

I Am Not Against Pharmaceutical Companies

I want to make one thing clear. I am not opposed to pharmaceutical companies making a profit.

Quite the opposite. I spent many years working in pharmaceutical research and regulation, and I know firsthand how much scientific knowledge, investment and human effort are required to develop new medicines.

Without financial incentives, much of the research that produces tomorrow's cures might never happen.

The question is not whether pharmaceutical companies should make money.

The question is how much is enough and how do we balance a company's investment and reward with society's responsibility to make life-saving medicines accessible?

That is a much more difficult question.

A Remarkable Beginning

For now, I prefer to celebrate the scientific achievement behind Rasonque.

The FDA's approval represents an important milestone in cancer treatment. For patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who have already received treatment or who cannot tolerate intensive combination chemotherapy, this drug offers another option.

And that is something worth celebrating. Perhaps Rasonque will be the beginning of a new generation of treatments that can do even more.

Perhaps today's 13.2 months of median survival will eventually become several years.

Perhaps another generation of scientists will discover ways to turn pancreatic cancer from a devastating disease into a manageable one.

That is how medical progress works. One discovery builds upon another.

But We Must Ask the Hard Questions

At the same time, I believe we should continue asking difficult questions about the cost of these discoveries.

Can we develop breakthrough medicines without making them financially out of reach?

Can governments, pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies find a better balance between innovation and affordability?

Can the world's wealthier nations help make revolutionary treatments available to patients in poorer countries?

And perhaps the most important question: What is the value of an additional year of life?

There is no simple answer. For a pharmaceutical company, it may be measured in research costs, manufacturing expenses and return on investment.

For an insurance company, it may be measured in actuarial calculations.

For a government, it may become a question of health-care budgets.

But for a husband, wife, father, mother, grandfather or grandmother facing terminal cancer, an additional year may be priceless.

That is the paradox of modern medicine. Science is learning how to give us more time.

Our challenge as a society is to make sure that the price of that additional time does not become so high that only a fortunate few and the rich can afford it.

For me, that is the real story behind this remarkable new cancer pill.

AI Impressions on this Posting:

This is an especially strong topic for your blog because it brings together medical science, pharmaceutical innovation, the economics of health care, and a very human question: How much should a life-saving medicine cost?

I checked the story against the FDA and recent reporting. One important correction to the article you read: the FDA says Rasonque is a once-daily tablet, and Revolution Medicines lists the wholesale acquisition cost at $39,800 for a 30-day supply, or about $478,000 a year before insurance and other discounts. The FDA approved it on August 26, 2026, for certain adults with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. 

The clinical results are remarkable: in the Phase 3 RASolute 302 trial, median overall survival was 13.2 months with Rasonque versus 6.7 months with standard chemotherapy. 

Finally, I believe this topic fits your worldwide readership particularly well because it moves beyond “a new cancer drug was approved” into the much larger question of what medical progress means when life-saving innovation becomes extraordinarily expensive.

AI Overview

Meanwhile, FDA approved over 60 new oncology therapies and indications in 2024, with dozens more following through 2025 and 2026. List prices for these specialized drugs typically range from $12,000 to over $30,000 per month ($150,000 to $500,000+ per year) before insurance. Actual patient out-of-pocket costs vary widely based on specific insurance plans, but financial assistance is widely accessible.
Notable Recent Anti-Cancer Drug Approvals (2024–Present)
  • Inavolisib (Itovebi) (Approved late 2024): Oral PI3K inhibitor for advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. 
  • Revumenib (Revuforj) (Approved late 2024): First-in-class menin inhibitor for relapsed or refractory acute leukemia.
  • Zanidatamab (Ziihera) (Approved late 2024/expanded 2026): For HER2-positive biliary tract and gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas. 
  • Vepdegestrant (Approved mid-2026): First-in-class PROTAC degrader therapy for advanced breast cancer. 
Understanding Drug Costs and Insurance
  • Without Insurance: Specialty oncology drugs generally cost $150,000 to $300,000+ annually; complex infused biologics or CAR-T therapies can exceed $500,000. 
  • With Commercial Insurance: Out-of-pocket expenses depend on your deductible, coinsurance, or copay tiers. Most commercial plans cap annual in-network out-of-pocket maximums.
  • With Medicare: Beneficiaries utilizing Part D or Part B specialty oncology drugs have out-of-pocket spending limits under modern Medicare provisions, though co-pays prior to caps can still present barriers.
Finding Financial and Insurance Help
  • Manufacturer Co-Pay Cards: Most pharmaceutical companies (such as Genentech, Merck, and Novartis) offer co-pay assistance cards for commercially insured patients to sharply reduce monthly out-of-pocket costs.
  • Patient Assistance Programs (PAP): If you are uninsured or your insurance denies coverage, drug makers often supply medications at no charge to qualifying low-to-middle-income individuals.
  • Independent Co-Pay Foundations: Nonprofits can assist eligible patients with co-pays, deductibles, and insurance premiums. You can reach out to the CancerCare Co-Payment Assistance Foundation or explore resources via the American Cancer Society. 
  • Meanwhile,  What changes most with age?
    As people age, several things change, including:
    1. Values: Things that once seemed important start feeling small, while simple things become priceless.
    2. Priorities: Time becomes more valuable, and people become less willing to waste hours on arguments, drama, and things that disturb their peace.
    3. Perspective on relationships: A few genuine relationships become more valuable than a large social circle.
    4. Self-care: Taking care of oneself becomes less about appearance and more about staying capable.
    5. Appreciation for life: People appreciate ordinary moments more and understand that life is fleeting.
    These changes reflect a shift in focus towards what truly matters in life, such as health, relationships, and personal growth.
    Finally, Beacon Shines for Veterans Day
    The Mount Diablo Beacon will shine Wednesday night, November 11, to honor the veterans who have served our country. Watch for the blinking light atop Mount Diablo from sunset until just after sunrise on Thursday.
    Originally the beacon guided air traffic, first from a 75-foot tower and then from the top of the Summit Visitor Center. It was turned off in 1940 when the nation entered World War II and not used for navigation again. Since1964 the beacon has been lit every Pearl Harbor Day to honor war veterans.
    Thanks to a joint proclamation, the Mount Diablo Beacon now also shines on Memorial Day and Veterans Day to honor all veterans. This Veterans Day volunteers from Save Mount Diablo will light the beacon, and the public is invited to join town leaders and local veterans for a ceremony at 4:40pm in front of the Veterans Memorial Building in Danville.
    Happy Veterans Day!
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...