Coronavirus

If you are interested in any of the stories listed below, go to the link below where you find hyperlinks to each story.




Vaccine Failure Is Not a Reason to Celebrate!

Prenatal Care, American Style — A Trojan Horse for Harmful Interventions?


Global Walkout Campaign Calls for ‘Unified Pushback Against Globalist Agenda’


FDA Refuses to Release Autopsy Results on People Who Died After COVID Vaccines


Fauci’s Net Worth Soared to $12.6 Million During Pandemic


How to Avoid Toxic Disposable Diapers


Big Pharma Is Chasing a $55 Billion Prize of Safer Blood Thinners + More


Amazon Dominates the $113 Billion Smart Home Market — Here’s How It Uses the Data It Collects + More

https://www.americaoutloud.com/too-m...r-just-biased/

Too Many Physicians are Ignorant, Cowards or Just Biased

by Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn | Sep 29, 2022 | Health, Politics

https://www.americaoutloud.com/wp-co...Physicians.png

After truth-telling in my writings for about two years, I remain saddened that the vast majority of the public remains victimized by propaganda in favor of vaccines and boosters while ignoring the many truths I and others have been shouting.

It now seems essential for all of us who know the truth to put much of the blame on regular doctors that people ordinarily see. The unfortunate fact is that nearly all of them are a combination of being ignorant (about COVID, vaccines, and their alternatives), cowards for being unwilling to risk their jobs and prestige, and just plain biased ⏤ in supporting what government agencies and medical establishment forces have hit the public with.

We need a public uprising against prevalent physician beliefs and behaviors.

When doctors are all wrong about COVID, it is rational to doubt their overall performance in keeping their patients healthy by using the best medicines, tests, and medical knowledge. Are they following medical research on many, many topics other than COVID?

Here are a series of questions (just examples) to ask your doctor. Their willingness to take the time to listen to your questions and seriously answer them tells a lot about them.

They are structured to allow a simple answer so that minimal time is needed:

> Do you still think COVID vaccines and boosters are safe for everyone and effective against getting all the variations of the virus?

> Do you believe that the benefits outweigh the risks for most people, mainly me?

> Are you aware that considerable data shows that many people die about five months after being vaccinated?

> Have you stayed informed about proven alternatives to the vaccines that some doctors have been using with great success since the pandemic began?

> Do you favor taking high enough daily doses of vitamin D to get a blood level of at least 50 ng/ml that research has found effective for preventing COVID?

> Do you order a blood test for vitamin D for your patients?

> Are you aware of high rates of excess mortality (that has only happened after wide vaccine use) all over the world; that cannot be explained by COVID infection and that many believe results from COVID vaccines damaging immune systems and blood?

> Many millions of people are suffering from long COVID; do you have some ways of helping those with multiple symptoms like bad physical fatigue and brain fog, reducing their quality of life?

> If I tested positive for COVID and asked you for a prescription for ivermectin, would you provide it?

If you are truly well informed about the pandemic and COVID, then you should know what really good or bad answers are for these questions.

Similarly, suppose you had the opportunity to have time with one of the great doctors, like Dr. Peter McCullough in Texas and Dr. George Fareed in California. In that case, you can imagine how they would answer these questions.

Here is a letter sent by an excellent doctor to explain why most doctors do not speak out:

_____

Electronic medical records (EMRs) are a ball and chain to physicians. We are tracked through them. When I wrote a prescription for Ivermectin for a patient, with informed consent (she was vaccinated), I received five letters threatening my medical license, my hospital privileges, and my insurance contracts. I would not have received five letters if I killed someone in negligence or malpractice. If I have my license pulled, I will no longer be able to help my patients.

I speak to patients on a one-on-one basis, but speaking out would destroy my family. I have children. Quite frankly, I have seen that patients want me to risk myself for them, but are wholly unwilling to support their physician. The population is lazy.

I can save your life, but I get paid less for my work than some hairdressers. My education is not valued by society, as supported by the rise of the “advanced practice provider.” I am almost done with my profession. I hope to retire in the next 1-3 years, decades before I had planned. I love what I do, but cannot take this toxic and broken system any longer. This is why so many have retired in the past couple years, and this trend will continue.

I am attaching the latest California bill to throttle physicians. I hear no outcry. I told patients over a year ago that the vax would not prevent them from getting COVID. It was never studied to do so. I actually read the studies. This of course was disinformation, but has now been proven to be true.

Who will be the truth czar for healthcare? How am I to keep up? I am left to assume that the population wants the government to guide their healthcare. That is, in fact, the plan. The healthcare system will be socialized within the next 5 years I predict. And the population will be shocked. No one is paying attention.

_____

Conclusion

If you find this topic of great importance, then share all this with those you know who still are brainwashed by the propaganda from the many authoritarian forces pushing all the wrong information about COVID. Think of Fauci as the leader of those awful forces. Tell those people what the correct answers are to the above questions and you’ll be helping your fellow man.

___________

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles and podcasts on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades, and his Pandemic Blunder Newsletter is on Substack. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine.

Dr. Hirschhorn worked on public policy for the US Congress for many years. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...tudy-patients/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...to-1157466.jpg



Are They Planning on ‘Vaccinating’ the Masses Against Our Will? Why Did The NIH Use a Box Of Genetically Modified Mosquitoes to Vaccinate Study Patients?


A hive of genetically modified mosquitoes effectively vaccinated a human against malaria in a National Institute of Health-funded trial of the insects’ ability to innoculate.

Scientists conducting the study held approximately 200 hungry, gene-altered mosquitoes captive in a box.

Human participants placed their arms over the box of mosquitoes, allowing the blood-thirsty insects to feast on their flesh.

Mosquitoes can easily replace traditional injections, contends Dr. Sean Murphy, a researcher who conducted the study.

“We use the mosquitoes like they’re 1,000 small flying syringes,” Murphy told NPR.

The mosquitoes transmitted live malaria-inducing Plasmodium parasites to the twenty-six participants of the study, who each received $4.100 to undergo the experiment.

The American Red Cross and "the doctor"
"ROTTEN SCUM"



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-transfusion/

Mother Blames “Vaccinated Blood” for the Death of Her One-Month-Old Baby Who Died from Blood Clot Following Blood Transfusion

By Jim Hoft
Published September 27, 2022 at 10:15am
644 Comments

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...3B-scaled.jpeg


Losing a child is the most painful trauma any parent will ever experience.

Cornelia Hertzler of Hot Springs, Montana, gave birth to Alexander on January 3, 2022. Unfortunately, Alexander died on February 17, 2022.

Mrs. Hertzler told The Gateway Pundit that her one-month-old baby died from a blood clot caused by receiving “COVID-vaccinated blood” during a blood transfusion.

“He died after getting a blood transfusion of vaccinated blood,” Hertzler claimed. “He got a blood clot instantly after receiving his transfusion. A blood clot that no blood thinner could resolve.”

“It got steadily worse until it went from his knee to his heart and his organs shut down. That’s why his body swelled up and his veins looked like they were exploding,” she added.

Alexander was born with a throat problem that can only be treated with surgery. Hertzler claimed that her son was given the blood by the doctor at Sacred Heart in Spokane, Washington, without her or her husband’s permission.

“He had an operation to fix an issue in his throat he was born with. He did not need a blood transfusion during the operation. Most babies do not.”

“Later on, after our authorization had expired (we only authorized a blood transfusion in case of an emergency during an operation). The doctor gave him a blood transfusion because his hemoglobin levels were a little low. We had not given permission for this and the doctor knew we did not want vaccinated blood because we were worried about blood clots. The next day after the transfusion, they discovered a blood clot,” Hertzler said.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...A6FFBB07E.jpeg

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...A6FFBB07E.jpeg

Hertzler stated the doctor had ruled out the possibility that the incident was caused by the blood transfusion.

“They would not even consider it was the blood transfusion that killed him. They did admit it was the blood clot that killed him. I’m hoping it can warn others about the danger of the blood from the blood bank,” she said.

According to American Red Cross, they don’t “label blood products as containing vaccinated or unvaccinated blood as the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream & poses no safety risks to the recipient.”

“While the antibodies that are produced by the stimulated immune system in response to vaccination are found throughout the bloodstream, the actual vaccine components are not,” said Jessa Merrill, the Red Cross director of biomedical communications.

JIM⭐⭐⭐ULTRA NUCLEAR MAGA
@Cookies4Jim
·
Follow
Horrifying precedent @RedCross blood needs to be labeled vaccinated with covid-19 vaccine or non.

It is medical malpractice to not label them as such.

This is an experimental pharmaceutical and is not fully authorized to date.

Do not have a blood transfusion unless you know
American Red Cross #HurricaneIan
@RedCross
Replying to @LClaw85
We don't label blood products as containing vaccinated or unvaccinated blood as the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream & poses no safety risks to the recipient. If you have safety concerns about potential blood transfusions, please speak with your medical care team.
8:29 AM · Sep 23, 2022

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that a peer-reviewed study in Italy found that 94% of people who experienced side effects after receiving mRNA vaccines had abnormal blood and contained foreign matter one month after vaccination.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...9-345x181.jpeg



Italy: Peer-Reviewed Study Finds ‘Metal-Like Objects’ in 94% of Individuals With Reported mRNA Vaccine Side Effects

A peer-reviewed study in Italy found that 94% of people who experienced side effects after receiving mRNA vaccines had abnormal blood and contained foreign matter one month after vaccination, Epoch Times reported. This new study was published in August 2022 in the open access peer-reviewed journal, International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research (IJVTPR). Starting … Continue reading

https://brownstone.org/articles/an-u...tm_source=push

An Update on College Mandates

https://brownstone.org/wp-content/up...08-800x469.jpg


An Update on College Mandates

By Lucia Sinatra September 30, 2022 Education 5 minute read
SHARE | PRINT | EMAIL

A handful of colleges have recently announced they will require students to get the new COVID-19 bivalent booster shot.

Harvard University and Smith College are both requiring students to take the bivalent booster but not faculty and staff. Tufts is mandating the bivalent booster for everyone, and for the first time ever, mandating the flu vaccine for students only. Some University of California (UC) college websites state that the UC vaccine policy requires all staff and students to get the bivalent vaccine, but other UC websites invite comments to the “proposed revisions to the UC Policy on Vaccination Programs” by Dec. 1, 2022. Whitman College is requiring the bivalent booster for everyone, and Wake Forest has announced it will require the bivalent booster “when it becomes available.”

For thousands of college students, this means they will be required to get a second booster dose that was approved without any human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the new formula and that was rushed through development “when we are at practically historic lows for deaths and ICU stays due to COVID.”

On Aug. 11, 2022, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated its COVID-19 guidance. Most notable is that the CDC stated that people with previous infection have some immunity from severe infection. Colleges that maintain “blanket mandates ignore critical data, such as the benefit of prior infection and the data on adverse events” per a study authored by academics from the Universities of Washington, Oxford, Toronto, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, UCSF, and others.

The study estimates that “per Covid-19 hospitalisation prevented in previously uninfected young adults, we anticipate 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males,” and concludes “university Covid-19 vaccine mandates are likely to cause net expected harms to young healthy adults.”

While updated CDC guidelines have made it clear that we are at the point of living with the virus and the guideline “changes shift much of the responsibility for risk reduction from institutions to individuals,” according to the New York Times, the American College Health Association (ACHA) is doubling down on instilling fear that COVID-19 cases are “on the rise.”

This claim is highly suspect and difficult to verify as many college campuses such as the State University of New York (SUNY), the largest state college system in the country, no longer track COVID-19 cases, and UC Davis, which has the third largest student population of the University of California campuses, shows a decline in COVID-19 cases in the last month.

The self-proclaimed “voice for student health and wellness,” the ACHA represents over “700 institutions of higher education and the collective health and wellness needs of 20 million college students.” The ACHA conducts research and provides educational materials to its member colleges in the hopes of being the “voice of expertise in college health.” A significant number of the most prestigious colleges in the United States are members of the ACHA, and most of those colleges are also the ones with the strictest vaccine mandates, unless they’re in states where vaccine mandates are prohibited by law.

In an effort to influence college COVID-19 policies as students returned to campuses in the last month, the ACHA recently released the results of a national study that assessed COVID-19 vaccine uptake, attitudes, experience, and intentions among college students (pdf). The ACHA claims to “recognize the continued importance of vaccination in reducing the impact of COVID-19 on our campuses,” and the study is meant to “support these efforts.”

The study concludes that “[v]accine requirements are highly effective at boosting uptake on college campuses and at making students feel safer.” However, markedly absent is any recommendation for accessing resources that communicate safety and efficacy data for young adults, and nowhere in the report does it mention that the CDC now recognizes natural immunity and that new guidelines have shifted towards individual responsibility.

When evaluating whether the ACHA’s recommendations are unbiased and ethically sound, we should seriously consider the funding the ACHA receives from Pfizer and the $2 million grant it received from the CDC to “promote COVID-19 vaccine confidence.”

It would seem that the ACHA expects resistance to continued vaccination on college campuses as it has also published a document (pdf) that advises colleges on how to manage “aggressive opposition” to vaccine campaigns so as to mitigate disruptions to vaccine efforts. If the ACHA is “the voice” for 20 million college students, why are they not advocating for the students who are opposed to vaccines? Why are they not advocating that colleges recognize natural immunity as protective?

Why are they not analyzing studies that highlight the dangers of continued vaccination for young adults? Why are they advocating for vaccine requirements that make students feel better when “[r]isk-benefit assessments should remain objective and avoid the use of some people feeling better or safer to justify behavioral rules with sanctions for non-compliance in the absence of rational justification,” according to the abovementioned study?

Instead, the ACHA created a “Vax Forward digital toolkit” for the student ambassadors they want to use as pawns to coerce other students to get vaccinated. The toolkit is fraught with claims unsupportable by data. It encourages student ambassadors to “frame vaccination as a way to protect family and friends,” to state “it is normal to have some side effects,” to “stress that long-term risks from getting COVID are greater than potential side effects of the vaccine,” to state that “researchers … didn’t skip any safety steps,” and finally to normalize COVID-19 vaccines by comparing them “to other vaccines most students got before starting college.”

Colleges have known since mid-2021 that COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection or reduce the community spread. In addition, college students are not at high risk for severe illness or hospitalization from COVID-19, yet they are forced to risk potential adverse events when they are stripped of the fundamental right to informed consent and a risk/benefit analysis in consultation with health care providers.

Colleges should immediately rescind all COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The most recent letter from campaign group “No College Mandates,” of which I am co-founder, to colleges urges them to drop vaccine mandates for both ethical reasons and their possible exposure to significant legal liability. Nearly 200 colleges that mandate vaccines have received this letter and more are on the way.

Reposted from EpochTimes
Author

Lucia Sinatra

Lucia is a recovering corporate securities attorney. After becoming a mother, Lucia turned her attention to fighting inequities in public schools in California for students with learning disabilities. She co-founded NoCollegeMandates.com to help fight college vaccine mandates.

READ MORE

Steve Kirsch just put out this Substack about the California ifamous Bill 2098 that, as I understand it, puts a totalitarian gag order on all medical doctors in California at the threat of losing their medical license.

_______________

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/i...m_source=email

I'll be speaking out for doctors in Sacramento, CA at the Capitol today
Event starts at noon and I'll be speaking around 1pm. 1315 10th Street.
Steve Kirsch
19 min ago September 30, 2022

Here’s the flier for the event:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/..._1545x2000.png

The bill, AB 2098, is unconstitutional because it punishes doctors for saying anything that goes against the mainstream consensus.

From the bill:

(4) “Misinformation” means false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.

So, for example, any doctor who tells you masks do nothing to protect you from COVID, could have their license to practice medicine revoked which means they’ll be looking for a job. Or if they tell you that the data shows that the COVID vaccines don’t reduce hospitalization or death, they can kiss their license goodbye.

The bill start by noting that In House Resolution No. 74 of the 2021–22 Regular Session, the California State Assembly declared health misinformation to be a public health crisis, and urged the State of California to commit to appropriately combating health misinformation and curbing the spread of falsehoods that threaten the health and safety of Californians.

The correct approach to stopping misinformation is for the parties to meet and resolve their scientific differences. We should not be silencing those we disagree with.

UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad said as much in an op-ed 2 years ago entitled “Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized.”

I wrote about his op-ed 2 months ago:
Steve Kirsch's newsletter
Vinay Prasad's most important op-ed
UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad is one of the few public truth-tellers in the medical community. When the CDC or the medical community put out garbage…
Read more
2 months ago · 821 likes · 282 comments · Steve Kirsch

What’s interesting is that when I ask medical professionals whether they agree or disagree with Vinay, they refuse to answer my question.

Let me be clear…

There is no scientific study published in any peer-reviewed journal showing censorship results in superior medical outcomes.

Scientific differences are best resolved by the parties communicating, rather than allowing the majority to silence the minority.

Why doesn’t California pass a law requiring public health officials to participate in open public debates on a regular basis with doctors who disagree with them? Now that would be a law I could get behind.

See you in Sacramento.

Subscribe to Steve Kirsch's newsletter

Thousands of paid subscribers

I write about COVID vaccine safety and efficacy,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z9mFeu59UA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z9mFeu59UA

Jay Bhattacharya: The legal case against Anthony Fauci

UnHerd
291K subscribers
Freddie Sayers discusses Jay Bhattacharya and Jenin Younes' lawsuit against the US federal government.

Read the accompanying article: https://unherd.com/thepost/the-legal-...

Listen to the podcast: https://shows.acast.com/lockdowntv-wi...

In October 2020, the Great Barrington Declaration was published by three academics - Jay Bhattacharya, Sunetra Gupta and Martin Kulldorff - who appeared on UnHerd to break the story. It marked a watershed moment in the pandemic, but the authors found their criticisms of COVID policy were increasingly censored on social media.

Now, Bhattacharya is taking his case to the courts to prove collusion between the Biden administration and Big Tech to silence skeptics like the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration. Talking to UnHerd's Freddie Sayers, he lays out the evidence that social media companies were instructed to quell scientific views which opposed government lockdown measures. Who was responsible for this infringement? According to the legal case, the conspiracy extends to the highest levels of power in Washington, and primarily at fault is the Chief Medical Advisor to the President, Anthony Fauci.

Follow UnHerd on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/unherd
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/unherd/

Dachsie note:
There are several hyperlinks, twitter links and images and videos in this posting. Please go to original to fully appreciate this article.

I think that the decision by this hospital to publish this advertisement to play down the seriousness of this diagnosis of myocarditis is extremely unethical.

What if the whole truth about this condition, which no professionals will talk about, suggests that that 10 year old little girl in the cartoon may be dead by age 15?

Now at this time when the horror of the reality of what these mRNA COVID vaccines have done is becoming well known by more and more of the public and how the trust and respect of hospitals and doctors and prescriptions and drugs is at an all-time low, this hospital chooses to peddle a disgusting deceptive rosy ad for the sole purpose of normalizing and trivializing a very serious disease.

I wish this awful decision could be explained by a case of poor judgment and not being aware of how much the public has learned about high numbers of adverse events and permanent disabilities and deaths. But any way you look at it, this cartoon was insult to injury, designed to further deceive and misrepresent and manipulate. It was a bad wrong thing to do and they just don't care and tried to float it out there anyway.
_______________

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...2-b49ad0da72c7

Hospital Pulls Ad After Critics Complain It ‘Normalized’ Myocarditis in Kids

09/30/22

NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital pulled a 30-second ad about myocarditis in children after Children’s Health Defense and numerous doctors accused the hospital of normalizing and trivializing the condition.
By
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...re-800x417.jpg

A New York hospital pulled a 30-second ad about myocarditis in children after Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and numerous doctors accused the hospital of normalizing and trivializing the condition.

NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital in early September published the 30-second ad, which promoted the medical center’s pediatric services for treating the condition.

Here is the Bitchute link for the 30 second ad video.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nb66s8SkpW4Q/

The hospital pulled the ad amid public outcry following three CHD.TV episodes featuring discussions about how the ad appeared to normalize and trivialize myocarditis in children. CHD.TV is produced by Children’s Health Defense.

The ad, “Pediatric Patient Story,” featured a young girl named Suri and transitioned between live-action footage and animation.

“I’ve been into fashion since I can remember,” Suri said in the ad. “But one day, I had a stomachache so bad I didn’t want to do anything.”

Suri continued:

“The team at NewYork-Presbyterian said it was actually my heart. It was severely swollen — something called ‘myocarditis.’

“But doctors gave me medicines and used machines to control my heartbeat. They saved me. So now I can become the next great fashion designer.”

The ad ended with the caption “Stay Amazing” and then faded to the hospital’s logo, without any mention of what may have caused the potentially fatal heart condition.

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show a strong link between cases of myocarditis and COVID-19 vaccines.

Between Dec. 14, 2020, and Sept. 16, 2022, 23,926 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, with 18,186 cases attributed to Pfizer, 5,304 cases to Moderna and 410 cases to the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine.

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

‘ … they make a ton of money on providing medical help.’

“I almost have no words for this type of advertisement,” said Aimee Villella McBride, CHD advocacy liaison, in a Sept. 9 episode of CHD.TV’s “Friday Roundtable.”

“It left me speechless the first time I saw it,” she said.

Summit News on Sept. 16 called out the hospital’s commercial for treating myocarditis in children “as if it’s a common illness.”

Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist and professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco, retweeted the ad on Sept. 18, adding his own questions and comments.

On Sept. 19, America’s Frontline News said the ad targeted children and noted that myocarditis is a “hallmark side effect of the COVID-19 injections.”

And in the Sept. 19 episode of CHD.TV’s “This Week,” Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel, pointed out the significance of the ad, noting that NewYork-Presbyterian, which is affiliated with Columbia University, is not “any old hospital.”

“This is one of the biggest and most prestigious hospitals in New York City,” Holland said.

Holland highlighted how the girl in the ad says the hospital’s doctors “saved me.”

“I think what’s left out of this ad,” Holland said, “is, ‘Yes, and they also injured her.’”

She added:

“They are the people — if they gave her a COVID shot — that caused myocarditis. They first injured her. They made a little bit of money on that. And then they made a ton of money on providing her medical help.

“And they lied to her about what the cause might be. I think they also neglected to say that myocarditis can result in needing a heart transplant within a matter of years.”

Holland commented further in a Sept. 18 tweet:

On Sept. 22, Tucker Carlson of Fox News discussed the ad with Dr. Marty Makary, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University, who early on warned the CDC that they needed to “rigorously study the long-term effects of vaccine-induced myocarditis.”

“Severe heart damage in otherwise healthy children” is not something “we’ve always had” happening, Carlson said. “What type of life will someone have at age 50 when they suffer unnecessary heart damage as a child?”

That same evening, Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist and cardiologist in Dallas, Texas, retweeted a clip of the Fox news interview with Makary, with this comment:

The next day, McCullough pointed out during the Sept. 23 episode of CHD.TV’s “Friday Roundtable” that there have been many fatal cases documented of vaccine-related myocarditis.

He pointed to a U.K. study published in August that reported 100 deaths due to vaccine-related myocarditis.

Sometime between Sept. 23 and Sept. 29, the hospital pulled the ad, which is still available on alternative media sites. The original youtube video is listed as private.

The Defender reached out to NewYork-Presbyterian’s public relations department to inquire about the ad and why it was pulled, but officials there did not respond by deadline.

https://merylnass.substack.com/p/med...m_source=email

Meryl’s COVID Newsletter

Medical truth was criminalized by California today

Gavin Newsom perhaps thought burying the news on Friday afternoon would be best for his future career. But we won't forget.

Meryl Nass

17 min ago September 30, 2022

California: Docs may be disciplined for spreading COVID lies

44 minutes ago from the AP

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Doctors who spread coronavirus lies could be disciplined for unprofessional conduct in California under a law signed Friday by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The bill, AB2098, introduced by Democratic Assembly Member Evan Low, declares that a physician or surgeon commits professional misconduct if they disseminate “misinformation or disinformation” about the nature and risks of COVID-19, its prevention and treatment and the development, safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

A doctor who commits such conduct could face discipline by the state medical board or osteopathic medical board and in severe cases, could potentially lose their license to practice in California.

It was the last remaining vaccine-related bill of note after the more controversial measures didn’t pass.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2018, more than 95,000 Californians have died, according to figures from the state Department of Public Health.

More than 80% of the population has been vaccinated with at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine but Low’s bill said the spread of disinformation about vaccines “has weakened public confidence and placed lives at serious risk.”

The bill’s language says that the Federation of State Medical Boards has warned that physicians who spread misinformation or disinformation “risk losing their medical license, and ... have a duty to provide their patients with accurate, science-based information.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbgMdzTfDMA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbgMdzTfDMA

Laura Ingraham: This is just a fraction of the massive COVID theft

Fox News

Laura Ingraham discusses the amount of COVID theft and economic decline that came as a result of the pandemic on ‘The Ingraham Angle.’

_________________________

News
BREAKING: Fauci’s Net Worth Soared over $12.6 Million During Pandemic – Up $5 Million (2019-2021)

https://www.openthebooks.com/breakin...ion-2019-2021/


September 28, 2022 01:34 AM

Last night, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com received Dr. Anthony Fauci’s FY2021 financial disclosures from the National Institutes of Health.



The documents contain a wealth of previously unknown information. For example, the Fauci household’s net worth now exceeds $12.6 million – up $5 million from 2019 through 2021.

Download: Dr. Anthony Fauci’s FY2021 OGE Form 278e Public Financial Disclosure Report.



In January 2022, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall forced open Dr. Anthony Fauci’s unredacted FY2019 and 2020 financial disclosures. The release followed a heated Senate exchange between Fauci and Marshall that concluded with Fauci calling the senator a “moron.”



It was Fauci’s ‘code red moment’ when America’s ‘top doctor’ melted down on national television in the Senate hearing. (When Marshall cited “Forbes,” that was our research on Fauci’s financials published in my then-column at Forbes.)



It’s been a dogfight to open the books on the Fauci finances. For example, our organization has filed four federal lawsuits versus NIH to open the books.

https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/...e3ade34d91.jpg

Today, we post more of the financial disclosures that Dr. Fauci didn’t want you to see. Here’s a summary of our findings from the latest document release:



· Net Worth: The Fauci household disclosed net worth increased from $7.6 million (January 1, 2019) to over $12.6 million (December 31, 2021).



· Top Paid: Fauci continued to be the most highly compensated federal employee earning $456,000 in 2021 and $480,000 in 2022. Fauci out-earned the president, four-star generals, and roughly 4.3 million other federal bureaucrats.



· Big Awards: In 2021, Fauci augmented his government income with nearly $1 million in prizes from non-profit organizations across the world. For example, the Dan David Foundation, based in Israel, awarded $901,400 for “speaking truth to power” and “defending science” during the Trump administration.



During the ongoing pandemic year of 2021, the Fauci’s household income, perks and benefits, and unrealized investment gains totaled $2,832,876 — including federal income and benefits of $903,497; outside awards and royalties totaling $1,019,205; and $910,174 in investment gains.



Here are the numbers as compiled by our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com, an organization I lead. This analysis uses information we previously unearthed plus the newly released disclosures.



Investment Gains: $910,174

Disclosures show $910,174 in gains within the Fauci stock, bond, and money market portfolio during 2021 – in 2020, the portfolio gained $794,369. The total value of Dr. Fauci’s investment account was $10,271,626 and his wife’s investments totaled another $2,405,887, as of 12/31/2021.



These funds were held in a mix of trust, retirement, and college education accounts. Fauci has an IRA worth $706,219 (up $67,700); a defined benefit brokerage account totaling $2,551,210 (up $147,688); and a revocable trust worth $7,014,197 (up $1,718,299). His wife’s revocable trust is worth $2,269,225 (up $306,406) and an IRA totaling $136,662 (up $16,385).



The disclosures show that he’s invested in fairly broadly targeted mutual funds, with no reported holdings of individual stocks. The Fauci’s deposited an additional net $1,346,304 in savings during this period.



Fauci’s 2021 disclosures show that he continues with an ownership stake in a San Francisco restaurant, Jackson Fillmore, worth between $1,000 and $15,000: but received minimal income from the restaurant.



Gifts And Awards: $919,205

In January 2021, Fauci received a $1 million prize for the prestigious Dan David Prize affiliated with Tel Aviv University for “speaking truth to power” and “defending science” during the Trump administration. Disclosures show that Fauci kept $901,400 of that prize with roughly 10-percent awarded to handpicked scholarship winners.



Fauci also collected awards of $12,500 from the Eliot Richardson Prize in Public Service on July 31, 2021 and the Abelson Prize from the American Association for the Advancement of Science on February 8, 2021.



Two years ago, Fauci was named Federal Employee of the Year at the 2020 Samuel J. Heyman Service To America Medals awards program and he was paid $5,198 for the virtual star-studded event.



Federal Employment Compensation: $694,998

Dr. Fauci is the director of the National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases and his wife Christine Grady is the chief bio-ethicist at the National Institutes of Health.



Background: Fauci earned $456,028 in cash compensation during 2021 – up from 434,312 (2020). Between 2010 and 2020, Dr. Fauci earned cash compensation of $3.7 million from his federal employer. Review Fauci’s ten-year salary history in my previous column published at Forbes.



Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady is the chief bio-ethicist at the National Institutes of Health and made $238,970 in 2021, up from 234,284. Since 2015, Grady made roughly $1.6 million in cash compensation.



In 2022, Anthony Fauci received another base salary increase up to $480,000. While he out earns the president, Mrs. Fauci out earns the vice-president.


Fauci’s ‘code red moment’ — U.S. Senator Marshall cited our research published at Forbes that Fauci was the top-paid federal employee and yet his financial disclosures weren’t available to the public. January 2022



Perks And Pension Benefits: $208,499 (estimated)

Federal employees have a lucrative amount of paid time off, subsidized healthcare, pension benefits and a myriad of other perquisites. For example, after just three-years, a rank-and-file federal employee receives 44 days of paid time off. Dr. Fauci has held a federal job for 55 years.



A good faith estimate of the taxpayer cost of those benefits is 30-percent multiplied by the salary amount for Dr. Fauci and his wife.

Golden Parachute: Last month, Fauci announced his retirement and we estimated he’ll reap a $375,000 first-year pension— the highest in federal history. He’ll receive well over $1 million during his first three years of retirement.



This analysis assumes that Fauci will keep his promise to retire in December 2022. Last July, the doctor then said he would retire by January 2025. If he did, we estimated his retirement pension ($414,667) would exceed the president’s salary ($400,000)



Royalties And Professional Reimbursements: $100,000

Disclosures show that Dr. Fauci edits the medical textbook, Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine and serves on the board of the publisher, McGraw Hill. In 2021, Fauci received at least $100,000 as an editor of the publication.



Earlier this year, an NIH spokesperson confirmed that Dr. Fauci has an editorial board position with McGraw Hill that is approved by NIH.



Background: OpenTheBooks filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to get a copy of all royalties paid to current and retired NIH scientists since 2005. When NIH ignored our lawful request, we sued in federal court (October 2021). Judicial Watch, a public interest law firm, represented us. NIH is producing 3,000 pages of line-by-line royalty payments; however, the amount paid to each of the 2,250 individual scientists continues to be redacted.



Fauci – and other NIH leaders – received third-party paid royalties; however, the amounts are blanked out, redacted, so the dollars received are unknown.