Printable View
Pharma publication celebrates 'new blockbuster heart disease market'
https://www.fiercepharma.com/marketi...myopathy-cases
Pfizer, Alnylam and BMS take note: The US is poised to see 'a staggering number' of cardiomyopathy cases this decade
By Ben Adams
Jul 8, 2022 10:00am
https://qtxasset.com/cdn-cgi/image/w...VDNwIj5Ih5je6V
_____________________________
Pharma publication celebrates 'new blockbuster heart disease market'
by: WorldTribune.com 07/13/2022 Source: WorldTribune.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachsie
These people are evil.
https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1/m...gv6aGQ2YvMHere is first half of aticle.
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...P05otgBYFg--~Dhttps://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...b-01e786147e8a
Important Summary of July 1 traunch of Pfizer data dump documents
07/14/22
•
COVID › News
More Deaths, Injuries Revealed in Latest Pfizer Vaccine Trial Document Dump
This month’s release of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine documents by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reveals three more reports of deaths among vaccine trial participants and more instances of Pfizer listing injuries as “not related” to the vaccine.
By
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.
More Deaths, Injuries Revealed in Latest Pfizer Vaccine Trial Document Dump
________
This month’s release of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine documents by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reveals three more reports of deaths among vaccine trial participants and further instances of Pfizer downplaying serious adverse events sustained by participants and listing the injuries as “not related” to the vaccine.
Of the approximately 80,000 pages released this month, the most revelatory is a 3,611-page “confidential” document with no title — only the file name “fa_interim_narrative_sensitive.”
The document contains information about vaccine trial participants who died, who sustained adverse events during the trial or who contracted COVID-19 during the trial.
All participants listed in the document received the 30 μg dose of the BNT162b2 candidate vaccine, which the FDA in August 2021 granted Emergency Use Authorization.
The FDA on July 1 released the documents as part of a court-ordered disclosure schedule stemming from an expedited Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in August 2021.
Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, a group of doctors and public health professionals, initially submitted the FOIA request.
Document details deaths of three trial participants
The “interim narrative” document contains reports of three clinical trial participants who died — and in all cases, the investigator ruled out the possibility the deaths were related to Pfizer’s vaccines.
One instance pertains to a 56-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID C4591001 1007 10071101), who suffered cardiac arrest on Oct. 18, 2021, and died three days later. She was vaccinated on July 30, 2020, and Aug. 20, 2020.
The “narrative comments” accompanying the report on the woman’s death stated her death could not have been related to the vaccine, due to the amount of time that had elapsed following her second dose:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the cardiac arrest was related to the study intervention or clinical trial procedures, as the death occurred 2 months after receiving Dose 2.”
The woman’s medical history did not indicate any cardiovascular problems, although ongoing obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease and sleep apnea syndrome were listed.
The second report of a death was that of a 60-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID C4591001 1162 11621327), who received one dose of the vaccine (on Sept. 10, 2020) and died sometime in the following three days of atherosclerotic disease.
According to the document:
“The study site received a police report indicating that the police visited the subject’s home to perform a welfare check on 13 Sep 2020 (Day 4) and found him dead.”
The participant’s medical history indicated ongoing autoimmune thyroiditis, obesity and depression, and a prior craniocerebral injury and prior hip arthroplasty.
According to the report:
“It was reported that the subject’s body was cold and had visible lividity. According to the medical examiner, the probable cause of death was progression of atherosclerotic disease. Relevant tests were unknown. Autopsy results were not available at the time of this report.
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the arteriosclerosis was related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures, but rather it was related to suspected [emphasis added] underlying disease. Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment.”
In other words, the participant’s death was attributed to a “suspected” cause, while the possibility that it was vaccine-related in any way, was dismissed.
___________________
go to next post for remainder of article
Rmainder of...
More Deaths, Injuries Revealed in Latest Pfizer Vaccine Trial Document Dump
The third death listed in the “fa_interim_narrative_sensitive” documents was listed under the section in the document listing reports from trial participants who withdrew, not those who died.
The report pertained to a 72-year-old Hispanic/Latino male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1152 11521497) who received one dose of the vaccine, on Oct. 7, 2020.
The subject sustained vasovagal syncope (a fainting incident) on Oct. 26, 2020, and was admitted to the hospital, causing him to miss his scheduled follow-up vaccination appointment on Oct. 28, 2020.
According to the document:
“The subject was transferred to the intensive care unit. Family medical history relevant to the syncope was unknown.
“On an unspecified date, the syncope resolved and the subject was discharged from the hospital.”
He was withdrawn from the study on Nov. 6, 2020. However, according to the subject’s sister, he died of “unknown” causes on Nov. 11, 2020.
As stated by the document (dated Nov. 22, 2020):
“The cause of death was reported as unknown. It was not reported if an autopsy was performed. A death certificate might be available at a later date.”
Nevertheless, this lack of information did not prevent the study investigator or Pfizer from dismissing the possibility that the participant’s death was vaccine-related. The document states:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the syncope was related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures.
“Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment. Per Pfizer, the syncope was most likely coincidental and associated with underlying clinical conditions.”
The document contained no reports of deaths among trial participants who received the placebo.
Investigators attribute 4 serious adverse events to vaccine, Pfizer disagrees
According to the latest document release, investigators attributed the vaccine to serious adverse events in four cases, however, Pfizer disagreed with the investigators’ conclusions in three out of the four cases.
The incidents are:
• A 53-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1018 10181159), who developed “lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia” on Oct. 20, 2020, which was ongoing as of the date of the document (Nov. 22, 2020).
She was vaccinated on Aug. 14 and Sept. 4, 2020.
The woman’s medical history did not indicate lower back or lower extremity pain, just ongoing migraines and a prior history including a right shoulder dislocation, fibrocystic breast disease and Vitamin D deficiency.
The study investigator and Pfizer disagreed on whether the serious adverse event she experienced was related to the vaccination. As stated in the document:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia were related to the study intervention, but not related to concomitant medications or clinical trial procedures.
“Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment and considered that there is not enough evidence to establish a causal relationship with the study vaccine apart from a chronological association at this time of the report.
“Based on the information currently available, it was more likely that the lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia was associated with the subject’s underlying known neurological condition.”
• A 71-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1142 11421247) sustained ventricular arrhythmias on Oct. 14, 2020 — the same day she received the second dose of the vaccine — and which continued until Oct. 21, 2020.
The woman received her first dose on Sept. 21, 2020. Her medical history indicated she was wearing a cardiac pacemaker and was experiencing ongoing atrioventricular block (complete), atrial fibrillation and supraventricular tachycardia.
Again, the study investigator and Pfizer could not agree as to whether this adverse event was related to the vaccination. The document states:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the ventricular arrhythmia was related to the study intervention based on the temporal relationship since the arrhythmias began within 24 hours of Dose 2, but not related to concomitant medications or clinical trial procedures.
“Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment. Additionally, Pfizer commented that there was not enough evidence to establish a causal relationship with the study intervention apart from a chronological association at this time of the report.
“In absence of evidence for an inflammatory response to study intervention, it was more likely that the ventricular arrhythmia was associated with the subject’s underlying known cardiac conditions.”
Pfizer dismissed the possibility that the vaccine may have exacerbated the subject’s existing cardiac conditions.
• A 48-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1178 11781107), who received one dose of the vaccine on Sept. 4, 2020, and withdrew from the study on Sept. 25, 2020.
In the interim, the participant sustained right axilla lymphadenopathy, with “at least four enlarged lymph nodes” — a condition that was still ongoing as of the document date of Nov. 22, 2020.
Her medical history indicated ongoing positional vertigo, osteoarthritis, eczema, sinus headaches, seasonal allergies and a Pitocin allergy, as well as prior menorrhagia, uterine fibroids and a past hysterectomy. In addition, her body mass index (BMI) was listed as being 36.9.
Pfizer also in this case did not agree with the study investigator’s assessment:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the lymphadenopathy was related to the study intervention. Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment.”
• A 30-year-old Asian female in the U.S. sustained a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA).
The documents did not list any severe adverse events occurring in anyone outside the U.S., even though the documents contain reports from trials in Argentina, Brazil and South Africa.
‘Unrelated’ adverse event reports habitually dismiss possibility injuries were vaccine-related
The documents reveal a large discrepancy between the number of adverse events deemed to be related to the vaccination (four) compared to those reported to be “not related” (113 non-placebo participants).
The reports associated with each incident reveal an ongoing tendency to dismiss any possibility injuries were vaccine-related — even in instances where no alternative cause was identified or where patients had no relevant prior medical history.
In still other instances, the cause of the adverse event was attributed to itself, while in several other cases, pre-existing conditions worsened following vaccination.
A significant number of accidents and falls — and subsequent injuries — also were reported.
Instances where severe adverse events were brushed over as being “not related” to the vaccination, despite no relevant medical history, include:
• A 75-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1013 10131176), who was vaccinated on Aug. 13 and Oct. 7, 2020, sustained 13 adverse events between Aug. 29 and Sept. 16, 2020, many of which were ongoing as of the document date of Nov. 22, 2020.
These adverse events included congestive heart failure, acute hypoxic respiratory failure, acute renal failure, aspiration pneumonia, anemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, leukopenia, sepsis, small bowel obstruction and mild concentric left ventricular hypertrophy.
The participant had ongoing gastroesophageal reflux disease, hiatus hernia, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension and constipation, in addition to prior small intestinal and knee surgery.
The report attributed the patient’s adverse events to his prior surgical history. The document stated:
“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the abdominal adhesions, small intestinal obstruction, pneumonia aspiration, and acute respiratory failure were related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures, but were rather likely related to subject’s previous surgery.
“Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment.”
• A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1079 10791246) sustained a “cerebrovascular accident” (stroke), as well as expressive aphasia, on Oct. 22, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 4 and Sept. 25, 2020.
Her medical history listed osteoarthritis, seasonal allergies and being postmenopausal. Nevertheless, her stroke and aphasia were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccine, although no cause was listed. Instead, the document stated, “pending medical records” with regard to the cause of her adverse events.
• A 66-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique subject ID: C4591001 1021 10211190) suffered a stroke on Nov. 2, 2020, with ongoing symptoms as of the document date on Nov. 22, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 10 and Oct. 1, 2020.
Her medical history indicated ongoing gastroesophageal reflux disease, seasonal allergies and postmenopause, as well as a BMI of 28.5.
Her stroke was dismissed as being “not related” to the vaccine, although no alternative cause was listed.
• A 68-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1092 10921015) sustained arrhythmia atrial fibrillation and elevated troponin on Aug. 26, 2020. He received his first dose on Aug. 19, 2020, and his second dose on Oct. 6, 2020, as it required “clearance from his cardiologist.”
His medical history did not specifically indicate heart conditions. Instead, it indicated ongoing basal cell carcinoma on his nose, as well as hypersensitivity, seasonal allergies, myopia, dyslipidemia, hypertension, actinic keratosis and gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Although the study investigator wrote, in reference to the cause of his injuries, that “medical records [are] being reviewed not able to answer at this time,” the report dismissed possibility that his adverse events were related to the vaccine.
• A 45-year-old Black male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1156 11561006) with ongoing Type 1 diabetes sustained deep vein thrombosis and a pulmonary embolism on Aug. 31, 2020. He received one dose of the vaccine, on Aug. 20, 2020, and was discontinued from the study on Sept. 8, 2020, “because he no longer met the eligibility criteria.”
Both adverse events were deemed as being “not related” to his vaccination, and were instead indicated as being “related to medical history of Type 1 diabetes mellitus.”
• A 67-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1178 11781015) sustained several adverse events on Oct. 10-11, 2020, including ascending aorta ectasia, diastolic dysfunction of the left ventricle and transient global amnesia. These conditions were ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. He was vaccinated on Aug. 25 and Sept. 15, 2020.
The patient’s medical record indicated ongoing depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, hypertension, insomnia and neck pain.
While the cause of his adverse events was deemed as being “not related” to the vaccination, the study did state a cause, listing it as “possibly” having been hypertension.
• A 58-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12313674) sustained adverse events including panlobular emphysema, pneumonitis, and left submaxillary sialadenitis beginning on Sept. 29, 2020. The first two conditions were indicated as continuing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
She was vaccinated on Aug. 24 and Sept. 13, 2020. Her medical record indicated ongoing Sjogren’s syndrome and insomnia.
The cause of these adverse events was deemed as being “not related” to the vaccines, although for the first two adverse events, the stated cause was listed as “unknown,” while for the third, the cause was listed as Sjogren’s syndrome.
• A 56-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12314001) was diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome on Nov. 8, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug. 25 and Sept. 15, 2020.
Her medical history consisted of ongoing hypothyroidism, allergic rhinitis and asthma — but no coronary troubles.
Nevertheless, according to the study investigator, her condition was determined to be “not related” to the vaccination, although the cause was listed as “unknown.”
‘Cause unknown’ but no chance the vaccine was to blame
In other examples, adverse events were assigned no specific cause or only a “probable” cause, but investigators dismissed the possibility the vaccines may have caused the injuries.
For example:
• A 34-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Brazil (unique subject ID: C4591001 1226 12261745) developed a Leydig cell tumor in his left testicle on Sept. 23, 2020. He received the first dose of the vaccine on Sept. 16, 2020, and second dose on Oct. 7, 2020.
His medical history listed only ongoing allergic rhinitis.
While the study investigator claimed that the adverse event was “not related” to the vaccination, the cause was listed as “unknown.”
• A 19-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Brazil (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311281) with no indicated medical history was diagnosed with acute appendicitis and QT interval prolongation — a heart condition — on Sept. 18, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 4, 2020.
These conditions were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination, although the causes were indicated as “unknown.”
• A 41-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311315) was diagnosed with anemia and malignant melanoma on Sept. 25, 2020, with symptoms continuing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 3, 2020.
The adverse events were indicated as being “not related” to the vaccination, but instead due to a “probable relationship with [a] vaginal tumor under study.”
• A 44-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12312854) was diagnosed with supraventricular arrhythmia on Sept. 17, 2020. He received the two vaccine doses on Aug. 21 and Sept. 11, 2020.
His medical history listed only ongoing sleep apnea syndrome and a BMI of 50.4.
According to the study investigator, the arrhythmia was “not related” to the vaccines, but instead “probably” corresponded “to an accessory intraventricular line.”
• A 56-year-old mixed-race male from Brazil (unique subject ID: C4591001 1241 12411825) was diagnosed with acute pyelonephritis on Nov. 2, 2020, and hypochromic anemia two days later. Both conditions were still listed as ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
The participant was vaccinated on Sept. 17 and Oct. 8, 2020. His medical history listed ongoing hypertension.
According to the study investigator, these adverse events were “not related” to the vaccination. Instead, his acute pyelonephritis was due to a “possible” bacterial urinary tract infection, while the hypochromic anemia cause was “to be clarified.”
Worsening of pre-existing conditions ‘not related’ to vaccine
In other instances, participants experienced a worsening of pre-existing conditions. However, in all instances, no relation to the COVID-19 vaccine was determined.
For instance:
• A 72-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1092 10921187) sustained congestive heart failure on Oct. 1, 2020. He received his first dose of the vaccine on Sept. 15, 2020, and his second dose on Oct. 6, 2020.
The participant’s medical history included ongoing coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes, asthma, obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, insomnia and seasonal allergies. Moreover, he had previously had a defibrillator installed.
The cause of his adverse event was simply indicated as “progression of cardiovascular disease” unrelated to the vaccine. The possibility that the vaccine may potentially have precipitated the worsening of his heart condition was not considered.
• A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1111 11111095) was reported as having sustained an “undiagnosed mental disorder” on Sept. 25, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug.11 and Sept. 1, 2020.
The participant’s medical history did not indicate any prior mental disorders or conditions. Nevertheless, the cause of the adverse event was indicated by the study indicator as being “not related” to the vaccination and instead simply due to “mental instability.”
• A 58-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1109 11091387), who sustained worsening osteoarthritis of the right knee on Oct. 14, 2020, and later also experienced deep vein thrombosis on Oct. 20, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
The participant’s medical history indicated ongoing osteoarthritis, ongoing hypercholesterolemia, hypothyroidism, sleep apnea syndrome, rosacea and an enlarged prostate. A prior knee surgery was also listed.
Both adverse events were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination and instead attributed to the patient’s prior knee surgery and “previous medical history.”
• A 70-year-old white female from the U.S. (unique subject ID: C4591001 1127 11271023) experienced a worsening of her asthma on Oct.1, 2020. She later also developed malignant invasive ductal carcinoma in her left breast, on Nov. 5, 2020. Both cases were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
She received her two doses of the vaccine on July 30 and Aug. 18, 2020. Her medical history, aside from ongoing asthma, also indicated a recurrent urinary tract infection and ongoing bronchitis, seasonal allergies, myopia, migraines, hypothyroidism, hypertension, insomnia, hyperlipidemia, osteoarthritis, bilateral deafness and postmenopause.
According to the document, both adverse events were “not related” to the vaccination, and instead were attributed to an “allergy” and to a “malignancy,” respectively.
Reports of multiple adverse events ignored
Other examples include cases where patients sustained multiple adverse events, many of which were entirely ignored by the study investigators’ assessments.
These include:
• A 61-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1114 1114108), who sustained 10 vaccine injuries beginning on Sept. 12, 2020, after he received the first dose of the vaccine on Aug. 24, 2020, and his second dose on Sept. 30, 2020.
The adverse events he experienced included acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, chest pain, left ventricular hypertrophy, mitral valve regurgitation, bilateral hand pain, pulmonary hypertension, skin avulsion on his left finger, a Staphylococcal infection and tricuspid regurgitation. Several of these conditions were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
The patient’s medical history indicated ongoing peripheral neuropathy, type 2 diabetes, anxiety, depression, asthma, Staphylococcal infection, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and a prior leg amputation.
According to the study investigator, “the staphylococcal infection” was “not related” to the vaccine, but instead was connected to the patient’s hypertension, musculoskeletal causes and an “infection.” No mention was made in this assessment as to the probable causes of the other adverse events.
Some adverse events ‘caused’ by … the adverse event
In still other cases, the “cause” of participants’ adverse events was indicated as being the same as the adverse event itself.
Examples include:
• A 68-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1095 10951204), who was diagnosed with bladder cancer on Nov. 2, 2020. He was vaccinated on Sept. 2 and Sept. 21, 2020.
According to the document, the participant’s ongoing medical history included hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia, hypercholesterolemia, angina pectoris, coronary arterial stent insertion, coronary artery disease, erectile dysfunction and osteoarthritis.
However, the cause of his bladder cancer was attributed as “cancer” and deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination and “most likely coincidental and associated with the underlying clinical conditions.”
• A 48-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1124 11241106) sustained an acute myocardial infarction on Sept. 27, 2020. He previously received two doses of the vaccine, on Aug. 26 and Sept. 16, 2020.
His medical history indicated ongoing high cholesterol, gastroesophageal reflux disease and back pain.
According to the study investigator, the adverse event sustained by the participant was “not related” to the vaccination, but instead “related to cardiovascular risk,” with no further elaboration provided.
• A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1223 12231159) was found to have a pancreatic mass on Nov. 5, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 10 and Oct. 1, 2020.
Her medical records indicated ongoing osteoarthritis, menopause, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, dyslipidemia, hypothyroidism, Eustachian tube dysfunction, prophylaxis, irritable bowel syndrome, osteoporosis and benign monoclonal hypergammaglobulinemia.
The cause of her adverse event, which was indicated to be “not related” to the vaccination, was listed as “new development of pancreatic mass” without any elaboration as to the factors that may have caused it to appear.
‘Cause unknown’ but no chance the vaccine was to blame
In other examples, adverse events were assigned no specific cause or only a “probable” cause, even as the possibility that they were related to the vaccination was dismissed.
For example:
• A 34-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Brazil (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1226 12261745) developed a Leydig cell tumor in his left testicle on Sept. 23, 2020. He received the first dose of the vaccine on Sept. 16, 2020, and second dose on Oct. 7, 2020.
His medical history listed only ongoing allergic rhinitis.
While the study investigator claimed that the adverse event was “not related” to the vaccination, the cause was listed as “unknown.”
• A 19-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Brazil (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311281) with no indicated medical history was diagnosed with acute appendicitis and QT interval prolongation — a heart condition — on Sept. 18, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 4, 2020.
These conditions were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination, although the causes were indicated as “unknown.”
• A 41-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311315) was diagnosed with anemia and malignant melanoma on Sept. 25, 2020, with symptoms continuing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 3, 2020.
The adverse events were indicated as being “not related” to the vaccination, but instead due to a “probable relationship with [a] vaginal tumor under study.”
• A 44-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12312854) was diagnosed with supraventricular arrhythmia on Sept. 17, 2020. He received the two vaccine doses on Aug. 21 and Sept. 11, 2020.
His medical history listed only ongoing sleep apnea syndrome and a BMI of 50.4.
According to the study investigator, the arrhythmia was “not related” to the vaccines, but instead “probably” corresponded “to an accessory intraventricular line.”
• A 56-year-old mixed-race male from Brazil (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1241 12411825) was diagnosed with acute pyelonephritis on Nov. 2, 2020, and hypochromic anemia two days later. Both conditions were still listed as ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.
The participant was vaccinated on Sept. 17 and Oct. 8, 2020. His medical history listed ongoing hypertension.
According to the study investigator, these adverse events were “not related” to the vaccination. Instead, his acute pyelonephritis was due to a “possible” bacterial urinary tract infection, while the hypochromic anemia cause was “to be clarified.”
Other explanations for participants’ vaccine injuries include:
• A 78-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1097 10971011), who suffered from pneumonia between Sept. 20 and Oct. 5, 2020. He had previously received two doses of the vaccine, on Aug. 20 and Sept. 9, 2020.
According to the document, the cause of his pneumonia was “not related” to the vaccines. Instead, the listed cause was “pt [patient] contracted pneumonia from somewhere.”
• An 84-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1097 10971084) contracted pneumonia on Oct. 7, 2020, symptoms of which were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. He had previously been vaccinated on Sept. 1 and Sept. 23, 2020.
Similar to the patient above, the cause of the participant’s pneumonia was indicated as being “not related” to the vaccination. The narrative comment instead stated that “Pt [patient] contracted pneumonia from unknown source.”
Very few severe adverse events — and no deaths — were reported in other countries, although Argentina, for instance, was home to the largest of the Pfizer vaccine trials in 2020.
The next 80,000-page cache of FDA documents pertaining to the FDA’s authorization of the vaccine is set to be released on Aug. 1.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...-pace-slow.jpg
Greg Hunter did a painfully truthful "vaccine" segment on his weekly wrap-up show.
War Coming, More Die “Unexpectedly,” Record Inflation, Drought Disaster
By Greg Hunter On July 15, 2022 In Weekly News Wrap-Ups
https://usawatchdog.com/war-coming-m...ught-disaster/
https://usawatchdog.com/wp-content/u...022/07/1ab.jpg
"Vaccines" commentary alone worth the price of admission
begins about 17:40,
and ends about 26:59
embedded video
57:25 video runtime
also on Rumble HERE
https://rumble.com/v1ccjtj-war-comin...-disaster.html
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/a...m_source=email
The UK government's official data shows they made a huge mistake
They should EITHER admit their data is garbage or that the vaccines should be IMMEDIATELY halted for ages 10 to 14. Ideally, they admit BOTH. Practically speaking, they will do NEITHER.
Steve Kirsch
11 hr ago
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/...c_1049x496.png
UH OH!!! The UK government now has a huge problem. A triply vaxxed child is 45 times more likely to die than an unvaccinated child. That makes the vaccine the biggest child killer ever deployed by any government and makes COVID deaths look like rounding error (45X vs. 0.05X).
Executive summary
I was inspired by this article in the Expose to take a look at the latest UK numbers.
The numbers can be found by downloading the latest dataset (the May 2022 numbers) found on the official UK ONS site.
When I did that, two things jumped out at me:
The “UK numbers are garbage” is confirmed once again by this dataset.
If you believe the UK numbers are right, then you should be jumping up and down and IMMEDIATELY BE DEMANDING a halt to the vaccines for ages 10 to 14.
Details of both claims are explained below.
But here’s the punchline: there is simply no way out of this for the UK government. They must pick either 1 or 2. They must either confirm their numbers are garbage or they must call an immediate halt to the vaccines for 10 to 14.
The UK press should force them to choose which way they want to have their credibility decimated.
My suggestion: They should come clean and admit to both.
Here are the details for each of my assertions.
The UK numbers are garbage
First of all, compliments are due to the UK government for exposing the data. The US government doesn’t expose any data nearly this detailed so it’s impossible to do the proper analyses on the US data because there is no data to use.
The UK government seems to be not including the most interesting metrics to assess safety and efficacy. The Expose points this out; it seems when the numbers work against them, they either stop reporting the data entirely, stop breaking it out, or in this case, not doing the calculation of the deaths per 100K person years so that only more motivated people will take the time and see that there is a huge problem.
For your convenience, you can download my annotated version here. Go to Table 6. My annotations are in Column G. The important numbers that we’ll use below are in red.
We see that the all-cause mortality (ACM) rate for ages 20-24 is reduced by a factor of 2 (compare G21 vs. G28).
That’s impossible! The vaccine isn’t a fountain of youth. It is only claimed to reduce death from COVID, not eliminate deaths from all known diseases.
According to the unvaccinated Row 21, only (43/378) = 8.3% of the deaths are from COVID. So if you have a PERFECT vaccine, ACM can only go down by 8.3%. It cannot go down by 50%.
This is similar to what Professor Norman Fenton has pointed out in his July 13, 2022 article: the COVID vaccines aren’t a fountain of youth but that’s exactly what his analysis found as well.
This is no surprise and isn’t new. I noted this in my May 5, 2022 article when I tried to use the UK data in calculations I found most of the UK ONS data was unusable because it simply made no sense. This is why I chose the row that I did in that particular analysis.
Producing garbage data and then using that garbage data as a basis for public policy is a huge embarrassment for the UK government.
So therefore, their official response will be to label me and Professor Fenton as misinformation spreaders and ignore us. Problem solved!
Well, not so fast.
Because if the UK data is accurate then…
Kids aged 10 to 14 are dying at a rate 45 times higher than normal
If the UK numbers are accurate, they need to halt the vaccines for ages 10 to 14 immediately because it is raising ACM for kids by a factor of 45 (G12/G5).
In other words, the vaccines are the most dangerous intervention in human history for this age group. It makes COVID look like rounding error:
COVID: 5% ACM increase
COVID vaccine: 4400% ACM increase
Some “experts” could “explain” this by claiming that only the kids who were most at risk opted for the third shot and that explains the higher ACM. Only those with an AVERAGE of a 45X higher rate of death opted for the third shot? Show me the evidence please!
And while you’re at it, show me the evidence that ONLY kids with a 15X higher rate of death decided to stick with just 2 doses.
Some people could say “oh the numbers are small for dose 3.” Fine, even if we combine all the numbers for Dose 2 and Dose 3, the ACM death rate doubles for the vaccinated kids. It is supposed to slightly decrease (and for 20-24 year olds it was cut in half as we noted above). Instead it doubled.
Then the excuse will be that the Dose 3 data “skewed” the result… you should only look at the Dose 2 data.
But that doesn’t work either. Kids who just took Dose 2 are also much more likely to die than kids in the unvaccinated group.
There is only one conclusion you can draw from this:
Someone made a huge mistake in approving these vaccines for kids
They had insufficient data to approve these vaccines in the first place since there were no child deaths FROM COVID, there cannot ever be a positive risk benefit.
But now they HAVE data from the real world and it is clearly negative. So what do they do? They ignore it because it makes them look bad.
There is no way you can spin this data as supportive of the vaccine.
The UK government and all governments throughout the world will ignore this because it is inconvenient to talk about it.
Similarly, nobody in the mainstream media will write about it. I’d be willing to bet big money on it (and I’d be thrilled if I lost the bet). Any takers?
Summary
The UK government can’t have their cake and eat it too. They have to make a decision. They must decide whether their numbers are garbage or whether to stop the vaccine for ages 10 to 14. Either way they decide, it’s a huge embarrassment for the UK government.
The right decision is to admit the truth that both are true. That’s what I would do if I were in charge.
What will they do? I know exactly what they will do. They will ignore my analysis and hope that nobody finds out about it. For sure, the mainstream media will never ask them about this data.
That is why it’s important for you to share this article everywhere on all your social media platforms. I adjusted the headline to reduce the risk of censorship.
Share
119 likes
58 Comments
Jill
4 min ago
This isn't a mistake, it's a genocide. If it was a mistake the injections would never have been approved as they cannot work and pfizer data showed they were dangerous. After the initial run showing many deaths and injury (exactly like the side effects in the FDA presentation before the original approval), any pretense that they had no way of knowing how dangerous these injections are is gone.
I really think it's important to admit this isn't a mistake. There is criminal intent to maim and kill children and adults.
You are certainly correct that these injections should be stopped and you have shown a lot of data to prove that point!
ReplyGive giftCollapse
John Raymond
Writes Great Apostasy, Covid Depopulat…
6 min ago
Why don't they just herd us into boxcar?
Lot less hypocritical.
Btw, fuck the parents... Jewish parents tried to find parents who would care for their children... (heartbreaking to think of this, but they tried to Save their children....
Not get a Twitter op)
ReplyGive giftCollapse
56 more comments…
Bhakdi/Burkhardt pathology results show 93% of people who died after being vaccinated were killed by the vaccine
The vaccine was implicated in 93% of the deaths in the patients they examined. What's troubling is the coroner didn't implicate the vaccine in any of…
Steve Kirsch
Dec 28, 2021
1,396
1,229
New studies show that the COVID vaccines damage your immune system, likely permanently
The vaccines are making it more likely you'll be infected with Omicron 90 days after you are fully vaccinated. To keep vaccine effectiveness high…
Steve Kirsch
Dec 24, 2021
1,096
799
Unprecedented: Deaths in Indiana for ages 18-64 are up 40%
This is huge. Something is killing healthy people at an unprecedented rate. It isn't COVID. Could it be the "safe and effective" COVID vaccine? I think…
Steve Kirsch
Jan 3
1,330
1,209
See all
Ready for more?
https://static-3.bitchute.com/live/c...Fu_320x180.jpg
https://www.bitchute.com/video/ShXhR8VnUNFu/
‘Doctors & Scientists’ Ep 37 with Mike Yeadon: ‘It Could Not Have Worked, and They Knew It’
First published at 13:55 UTC on July 15th, 2022.
Jim Fetzer
INCREDIBLY GOOD interview with Ex-Pfizer VP, Dr. Mike Yeadon!
“Hundreds of thousands of people have definitely been killed [by the “vaccines”] and unfortunately, it’s probably 10 times that who have been injured, so far, in a non-lethal way — myocarditis, blood clots, some people have lost limbs, many have had strokes, vision loss, blood clots in the lungs are tremendously common, deep-vein thrombosis in the long vessels in the legs. And there is also the suggestion that people’s immune systems have been damaged in a way that leaves them prey to getting a series of infections — they never quite feel well again, it’s quite a common refrain.” ~ Dr. Mike Yeadon
[Yeadon says that he heard the representatives of the international regulatory agencies for drugs say something to this effect:]
“We can anticipate that, in the future, there might be a need to make “amended,” “adjusted” Covid-19 vaccines, and if the drug companies should do that, the position we anticipate taking is to say that, because the amended vaccines are so similar to the first generation, we won’t require them to do new clinical trials, or to require ANY clinical trials.”
“So, when I heard that, I’m afraid my conclusion was, “So THAT’s why they’ve used genetic vaccines that have never been used before — it’s because they’ve got an intended purpose for them.” And they just voted on it last week — there’s no requirement for any safety efficacy studies in humans for the “variant vaccines,” which means that a drug company’s computer, that can form any code they damn well like — [just] press ALT-PRINT and manufacture a billion doses of something the FDA’s not going to check and stick it into a billion arms.
“So if, like me, you conclude that, whatever is going on and whoever is doing it, they are completely malign and evil — there’s no possible good side to this whatsoever.” ~ Dr. Mike Yeadon
https://rumble.com/v1c9s0r-doctors-a...y-knew-it.html
Tweet
See new Tweets
Conversation
Five Times August
@FiveTimesAugust
Also aged like milk... but hey, trust the experts!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXrhvd5V...jpg&name=small
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXrhv9JU...g&name=360x360
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
"Using a three-dose vaccine in 992 children between the ages of six months and five years, Pfizer found no statistically significant evidence of vaccine efficacy.”
Nevertheless, the CDC went on to recommend 3 vaccines for children.
https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/15475...jpg&name=small
12:55 PM · Jul 14, 2022·Twitter for iPhone
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
·
Jul 14
Replying to
@RandPaul
"It seems criminal that we put out the recommendation to give mRNA Covid vaccines to babies without good data," a CDC physician added.
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
·
Jul 14
"Referring to Pfizer’s vaccine efficacy in healthy young children, one high-level CDC official—whose expertise is in the evaluation of clinical data—joked: “You can inject them with it or squirt it in their face, and you’ll get the same benefit.”
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
·
Jul 14
"One subject these doctors and scientists feel passionately about but feel they cannot bring up is natural immunity. Why, they wonder, are we insisting on immunizing children who already have some immunity to the disease due to having contracted Covid?"
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
·
Jul 14
"The official public health response to Covid has undermined the public's belief in public health itself."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...d-science.html
Health experts are quitting the NIH and CDC in droves because they’re embarrassed by ‘bad science’ – including vaccinating children under 5 to ‘make their advice palatable to the White House,’ doctors claim
The NIH and CDC are reportedly facing staffing shortages as low morale drives away employees
Decisions like the closure of schools and then requiring face masks once they reopened led to many questioning leadership
Lately, the authorization of COVID-19 vaccines for children four years old of younger has confused some in America’s top medical agencies
Both agencies, along with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have been mired in controversy throughout the pandemic for inconsistent messaging and for decision-making that didn’t seem to line up with available science.
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/e...m_medium=email
Excellent SHORT educational videos on the COVID shots
The CDC should be distributing these videos because they help people understand how the COVID shots work and the science behind them. But I seriously doubt that will ever happen.
Steve Kirsch
7 hr ago July 15, 2022
Steve Kirsch's newsletter
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/...78_999x739.png
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/...78_999x739.png
Videos for your friends
Here are two excellent videos to consider watching and sharing with your friends. In fact, the second video was so good that sharing it got Dr. Robert Malone banned from Twitter:
Stop the shots (15 minute video and slide deck)
More harm than good (video slides)
I wish the CDC would re-distribute these videos so that the American public is informed as to how the shots work.
But as you know, they don’t want anyone to know that for obvious reasons.
Videos for you
If you’d like a better understanding of how the shots work, I recently ran across some videos from Wishcraft8121 who is one of my followers on Truth Social. He’s been banned from Twitter multiple times which means he’s telling the truth.
The material is excellent and the videos are both just a few minutes long (you’ll likely need to stop the video because it does go FAST):
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/...68_558x433.png
Lethal by Design (3 minutes)
The use of PEG in the COVID vaccines (2 minutes)
Excess deaths caused by the COVID vaccines (3 minutes)
Lethal by Design (17 minutes)
You’ll need a Truth Social account to view the first 3 videos because Wishcraft hasn’t figured out Rumble permissions, but you can expand the screen once you start the video. The last video is a direct Rumble link. This is Wishcraft’s Rumble channel where you can also view his videos on both COVID and Ukraine.
I love the PEG video because we talked about this in the DarkHorse podcast video with Bret Weinstein and Robert Malone. PEG is required to get the mRNA into the cell. But the problem is that it gets it into cells everywhere in your body, including inside your brain (it allows the vaccine to penetrate the blood-brain barrier).
How did this happen?
We now know the FDA colluded with Moderna to bypass the normal safety checks. See Moderna colluded with the FDA to bypass the normal safety testing.
Are you surprised?
Much of this Judicial Watch Weekly Report of Saturday, July 16, 2022, deals with Fauci and the military's denial of exemptions from having to take the "COVID vaccine."
____________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtfI9mMwed4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtfI9mMwed4
FBI Investigating Fauci? Plus—Biden Betraying Our Troops!
Judicial Watch
494K subscribers
Judicial Watch President @TomFitton discusses brand-new documents we uncovered from the NIH revealing the FBI probed the agency's gain of function research grant money--plus, what you need to know about critical race theory in America--WATCH NOW!
The Centers for Disease Control IS the disease.
______________
https://www.breitbart.com/social-jus...tivism-occult/
CDC Directs LGBT Children to Secretive Chats About Sex Changes, Activism, the Occult
Spencer Lindquist
https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...ts-640x480.jpg
Billie Weiss/Boston Red Sox/Getty, @qchatspace/Instagram
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is promoting to youth an online chat space that discusses sex, polyamorous relationships, the occult, sex change operations, and activism, and is specifically designed to be quickly hidden while being used. It also mixes LGBT adults and children and is run in part by Planned Parenthood.
Called Q Chat Space, the platform is advertised on the CDC’s LGBT Health Youth Resources page, archived here. The chat service, which describes itself as “a community for LGBTQ+ teens,” is available for those ages 13-19, can be hidden from parents, and focuses on a number of mature themes.
Q Chat hosts conversations on a number of different mature and sexual topics, including “Drag Culture 101,” “Sex and Relationships,” and “Having Multiple Genders,” intended for ‘Bi/Pan Youth.”
One chat celebrates Ru Paul’s Drag Race while another is called “Queer Youth Activism,” which is intended for “youth of color.”
Q Chat also features conversations on “Gender Affirmation Surgeries,” as well as on hormone replacement therapy. The chats are used in part to tell children “where you can find resources” related to their transition.
https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...0.47.08-AM.jpg
Above: Screen Shot (2022-07-14 at 10.47.08 a.m.) from Q Chat Space
There are also chats on astrology, including “self discovery in astrology” and one titled “Queering Tarot,” a reference to tarot cards commonly used in occult practices.
The sexually, politcally, and even spiritually charged material is intermixed with content that appeals to young children, such as conversations on video games, Pokemon, and StarWars.
One meme posted on Q Chat’s Instagram page displays a Trojan horse, explaining that children may realize they’re queer after “learning about queerness” from their friends.
The chat seems specifically designed to be concealed from parents and family members. Each section of the website has a large button on the bottom of the screen that says “Click/Tap here for a quick escape …” and shows a stick figure running towards an exit. When clicked, the button takes users to the Google homepage, hiding the site.
The site also notes that users can get reminders that obscure the name of the chat, explaining, “There are 2 text message reminder options: Discreet or Detailed,” going on to explain that “Discreet text reminders are private, they do not include ‘Q Chat Space’ or the name of the chat.”
One of the rules of Q Chat is to “Keep confidentiality” and agree that “what’s shared here, stays here.”
An academic article about Q Chat, published on the National Library of Medicine website, praised the service for its ability to be hidden from parents, saying that “The platform’s chat-based nature likely helps youth avoid concerns about family members accidentally overhearing their conversations.”
But while the chats are designed to be hidden from parents and family members, one chat session was called “Finding Chosen Family,” while another was titled “how to deal with family during the holidays.”
The conversations are facilitated by leftwing activists from a number of organizations. Some facilitators use alternative pronouns like “xe/xem,” with one identifying as “Black, genderqueer, gray-ace, and neurodivergent.”
Another facilitator is a self-described “drag artist” and is “Black nonbinary queer asexual.”
When children apply to join Q Chat, they are asked a number of different questions regarding their race, gender, and mental health. The application asks children their racial and ethnic background, how often they feel depressed or hopeless, what their “sexual/romantic” orientation is, and how they feel about their gender identity.
Q Chat is run in part by Planned Parenthood, which Breitbart News recently revealed offers hormone replacement therapy to minors and has claimed that transgender identity can be “cemented early in elementary school.” Planned Parenthood has also promoted Q Chat in a video posted to their Tumblr account.
Breitbart News revealed in May that the Arizona Department of Education has promoted Q Chat.
The CDC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Spencer Lindquist is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach out at slindquist@breitbart.com
https://brownstone.org/articles/dr-b...tm_source=push
https://brownstone.org/wp-content/up...32-800x469.jpg
Dr. Birx Praises Herself While Revealing Ignorance, Treachery, and Deceit
The December 2020 resignation of Dr. Deborah Birx, White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator under Trump, revealed predictable hypocrisy. Like so many other government officials around the world, she was caught violating her own stay-at-home order. Therefore she finally left her post following nine months of causing unfathomable amounts of damage to life, liberty, property, and the very idea of hope for the future.
Even if Anthony Fauci had been the front man for the media, it was Birx who was the main influence in the White House behind the nationwide lockdowns that did not stop or control the pathogen but have caused immense suffering and continue to roil and wreck the world. So it was significant that she would not and could not comply with her own dictates, even as her fellow citizens were being hunted down for the same infractions against “public health.”
In the days before Thanksgiving 2020, she had warned Americans to “assume you’re infected” and to restrict gatherings to “your immediate household.” Then she packed her bags and headed to Fenwick Island in Delaware where she met with four generations for a traditional Thanksgiving dinner, as if she were free to make normal choices and live a normal life while everyone else had to shelter in place.
The Associated Press was first out with the report on December 20, 2020.
Birx acknowledged in a statement that she went to her Delaware property. She declined to be interviewed.
She insisted the purpose of the roughly 50-hour visit was to deal with the winterization of the property before a potential sale — something she says she previously hadn’t had time to do because of her busy schedule.
“I did not go to Delaware for the purpose of celebrating Thanksgiving,” Birx said in her statement, adding that her family shared a meal together while in Delaware.
Birx said that everyone on her Delaware trip belongs to her “immediate household,” even as she acknowledged they live in two different homes. She initially called the Potomac home a “3 generation household (formerly 4 generations).” White House officials later said it continues to be a four-generation household, a distinction that would include Birx as part of the home.
So it was all a sleight-of-hand: she was staying home; it’s just that she has several homes! This is how the power elite comply, one supposes.
The BBC then quoted her defense, which echo the pain experienced by hundreds of millions:
“My daughter hasn’t left that house in 10 months, my parents have been isolated for 10 months. They’ve become deeply depressed as I’m sure many elderly have as they’ve not been able to see their sons, their granddaughters. My parents have not been able to see their surviving son for over a year. These are all very difficult things.”
Indeed. However, she was the major voice for the better part of 2020 for requiring exactly that. No one should blame her for wanting to get together with family; that she worked so hard for so long to prevent others from doing so is what is at issue.
The press piled on and she announced that she would be leaving her post and not seeking a position at the Biden White House. Trump tweeted that she will be missed. It was the final discrediting – or should have been – of a person that many in the White House and many around the country had come to see as an obvious fanatic and fake, a person whose influence wrecked the liberties and health of an entire country.
It was a fitting end to a catastrophic career. So it would make sense that people might pick up her new book to find out what it was like to go through that kind of media storm, the real reasons for her visit, what it was like to know for sure that she must violate her own rules in order to bring comfort to her family, and the difficult decision she made to throw in the towel knowing that she has compromised the integrity of her entire program.
One slogs through her entire book only to find this incredible fact: she never mentions this. The incident is missing entirely from her book.
Instead at the moment in the narrative at which she would be expected to recount the affair she says almost in passing that “When former vice president Biden was declared the winner of the 2020 election, I’d set a goal for myself—to hand over responsibility for the pandemic response, with all its many elements, in the best possible place.”
At that point, the book skips immediately to the new year. Done. It’s like Orwell, the story, even though it was reported for days in the world press and became a defining moment in her career, is just wiped out from the history book of her own authorship.
Somehow it makes sense that she would neglect to mention this. Reading her book is a very painful experience (all credit to Michael Senger’s review) simply because it seems to be weaving fables on page after page, strewn with bromides, completely lack in self awareness, punctuated by revealing comments that make the opposite point of what she is seeking. Reading it is truly a surreal experience, astonishing especially because she is able to maintain her delusionary pose for 525 pages.
Recall that it was she who was tasked – by Anthony Fauci – with doing the really crucial thing of talking Donald Trump into green-lighting the lockdowns that began on March 12, 2020, and continued to their final hard-core deployment on March 16. This was the “15 Days to Flatten the Curve” that turned into two years in many parts of the country.
Her book admits that it was a two-level lie from the beginning.
“We had to make these palatable to the administration by avoiding the obvious appearance of a full Italian lockdown,” she writes. “At the same time, we needed the measures to be effective at slowing the spread, which meant matching as closely as possible what Italy had done—a tall order. We were playing a game of chess in which the success of each move was predicated on the one before it.”
Further:
“At this point, I wasn’t about to use the words lockdown or shutdown. If I had uttered either of those in early March, after being at the White House only one week, the political, nonmedical members of the task force would have dismissed me as too alarmist, too doom-and-gloom, too reliant on feelings and not facts. They would have campaigned to lock me down and shut me up.”
In other words, she wanted to go full CCP just like Italy but didn’t want to say that. Crucially, she knew for sure that two weeks was not the real plan. “I left the rest unstated: that this was just a starting point.”
“No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of a two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it,” she admits.
“Fifteen Days to Slow the Spread was a start, but I knew it would be just that. I didn’t have the numbers in front of me yet to make the case for extending it longer, but I had two weeks to get them. However hard it had been to get the fifteen-day shutdown approved, getting another one would be more difficult by many orders of magnitude. In the meantime, I waited for the blowback, for someone from the economic team to call me to the principal’s office or confront me at a task force meeting. None of this happened.”
It was a solution in search of evidence she did not have. She told Trump that the evidence was there anyway. She actually tricked him into believing that locking down a whole population of people was somehow magically going to make a virus to which everyone would inevitably be exposed somehow vanish as a threat.
Meanwhile, the economy was wrecked domestically and then all over the world, as most governments in the world followed what the US did.
Where did she come up with the idea of lockdowns? By her own report, her only real experience with infectious disease came from her work on AIDS, a very different disease from a respiratory virus that everyone would eventually get but which would only be fatal or even severe for a small cohort, a fact that was known since late January. Still, her experience counted for more than science.
“In any health crisis, it is crucial to work at the personal behavior level,” she says with the presumption that avoidance at all costs was the only goal. “With HIV/AIDS, this meant convincing asymptomatic people to get tested, to seek treatment if they were HIV-positive, and to take preventative measures, including wearing condoms; or to employ other pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) if they were negative.”
She immediately hops to the analogy with Covid. “I knew the government agencies would need to do the same thing to have a similar effect on the spread of this novel coronavirus. The most obvious parallel with the HIV/AIDS example was the message of wearing masks.”
Masks = condoms. Remarkable. This “obvious parallel” remark sums the whole depth of her thinking. Behavior is all that matters. Just stay apart. Cover your mouth. Don’t gather. Don’t travel. Close the schools. Close everything. Whatever happens, don’t get it. Nothing else matters. Keep your immune system as unexposed as possible.
I wish I could say her thought is more complex than that but it is not. This was the basis for lockdowns. For how long? In her mind, it seems like it would be forever. Nowhere in the book does she reveal an exit strategy. Not even vaccines qualify.
From the very beginning, she revealed her epidemiological views. On March 16, 2020 at her press conference with Trump, she summarized her position: “We really want people to be separated at this time.” People? All people? Everywhere? Not one reporter raised a question about this obviously ridiculous and outrageous statement that would essentially destroy life on earth.
But she was serious – seriously deluded not only about how society functions but also about infectious disease of this sort. Only one thing mattered as a metric to her: reducing infections through any means possible, as if she on her own could cobble together a new kind of society in which exposure to air-born pathogens was made illegal.
Here is an example. There was a controversy about how many people should be allowed to gather in one space, as in home, church, store, stadium, or community center. She addresses how she came up with the rules:
The real problem with this fifty-versus-ten distinction, for me, was that it revealed that the CDC simply didn’t believe to the degree that I did that SARS-CoV-2 was being spread through the air silently and undetected from symptomless individuals. The numbers really did matter. As the years since have confirmed, in times of active viral community spread, as many as fifty people gathered together indoors (unmasked at this point, of course) was way too high a number. It increased the chances of someone among that number being infected exponentially. I had settled on ten knowing that even that was too many, but I figured that ten would at least be palatable for most Americans—high enough to allow for most gatherings of immediate family but not enough for large dinner parties and, critically, large weddings, birthday parties, and other mass social events.
She puts a fine point on it: “if I pushed for zero (which was actually what I wanted and what was required), this would have been interpreted as a ‘lockdown’—the perception we were all working so hard to avoid.”
What does it mean for zero people to gather? A suicide cult?
In any case, just like that, from her own thinking and straight to enforcement, birthday parties, sports, weddings, and funerals came to be forbidden.
Here we gain insight into the sheer insanity of her vision. It is nothing short of a marvel that she somehow managed to gain the amount of influence she did.
Notice her above mention of her dogma that asymptomatic spread was the whole key to understanding pandemic. In other words, on her own and without any scientific support, she presumed that Covid was both extremely fatal and had a long latency period. To her way of thinking, this is why the usual tradeoff between severity and prevalence did not matter.
She was somehow certain that the longest estimates of latency were correct: 14 days. This is the reason for the “wait two weeks” obsession. She held onto this dogma throughout, almost like the fictional movie “Contagion” had been her only guide to understanding.
Later in the book, she writes that symptoms mean next to nothing because people can always carry around the virus in their nose without being sick. After all, this is what PCR tests have shown. Instead of seeing that as a failure of PCR, she saw this as a confirmation that everyone is a carrier no matter what and therefore everyone has to lock down because otherwise we’ll deal with a black plague.
Somehow, despite her astonishing lack of scientific curiosity and experience in this area, she gained all influence over the initial Trump administration response. Briefly, she was godlike.
But Trump was not and is not a fool. He must have had some sleepless nights wondering how and why he had approved the destruction of that which he had seen as his greatest achievement. The virus was long here (probably from October 2019), it presented a specific danger to a narrow cohort, but otherwise behaved like a textbook flu. Maybe, he must have wondered, his initial instincts from January and February 2020 were correct all along.
Still, he very reluctantly approved a 30-day extension of lockdowns, entirely on Birx’s urging and with a few other fools standing around. Having given in a second time – still, no one thought to drop an email or make a phonecall for a second opinion! – this seemed to be the turning point. Birx reports that by April 1, 2020, Trump had lost confidence in her. He might have intuited that he had been tricked. He stopped speaking to her.
It would still take another month before he would fully rethink everything that he had approved at her behest.
It made no difference. The bulk of her book is a brag fest about how she kept subverting the White House’s push to open up the economy – that is, allow people to exercise their rights and freedoms. Once Trump turned against her, and eventually found other people to provide good advice like the tremendously brave Scott Atlas – it five months later when arrived in an attempt to save the country from disaster – Birx turned to rallying around her inner circle (Anthony Fauci, Robert Redfield, Matthew Pottinger, and a few others) plus assembling a realm of protection outside of her that included CNN reporter Sanjay Gupta and, very likely, the virus team at the New York Times (which gives her book a glowing review).
Recall that for the remainder of the year, the White House was urging normalcy while many states kept locking down. It was an incredible confusion. The CDC was all over the map. I gained the distinct impression of two separate regimes in charge: Trump’s vs. the administrative state he could not control. Trump would say one thing on the campaign trail but the regulations and disease panic kept pouring out of his own agencies.
Birx admits that she was a major part of the reason, due to her sneaky alternation of weekly reports to the states.
After the heavily edited documents were returned to me, I’d reinsert what they had objected to, but place it in those different locations. I’d also reorder and restructure the bullet points so the most salient—the points the administration objected to most—no longer fell at the start of the bullet points. I shared these strategies with the three members of the data team also writing these reports. Our Saturday and Sunday report-writing routine soon became: write, submit, revise, hide, resubmit.
Fortunately, this strategic sleight-of-hand worked. That they never seemed to catch this subterfuge left me to conclude that, either they read the finished reports too quickly or they neglected to do the word search that would have revealed the language to which they objected. In slipping these changes past the gatekeepers and continuing to inform the governors of the need for the big-three mitigations—masks, sentinel testing, and limits on indoor social gatherings—I felt confident I was giving the states permission to escalate public health mitigation with the fall and winter coming.
As another example, once Scott Atlas came to the rescue in August to introduce some good sense into this wacky world, he worked with others to dial back the CDC’s fanatical attachment to universal and constant testing. Atlas knew that “track, trace, and isolate” was both a fantasy and a massive invasion of people’s liberties that would yield no positive public-health outcome. He put together a new recommendation that was only for those who were sick to test – just as one might expect in normal life.
After a week-long media frenzy, the regulations flipped in the other direction.
Birx reveals that it was her doing:
This wasn’t the only bit of subterfuge I had to engage in. Immediately after the Atlas-influenced revised CDC testing guidance went up in late August, I contacted Bob Redfield…. Less than a week later, Bob [Redfield] and I had finished our rewrite of the guidance and surreptitiously posted it. We had restored the emphasis on testing to detect areas where silent spread was occurring. It was a risky move, and we hoped everyone in the White House would be too busy campaigning to realize what Bob and I had done. We weren’t being transparent with the powers that be in the White House…
One might ask how the heck she got away with this. She explains:
[T]he guidance gambit was only the tip of the iceberg of my transgressions in my effort to subvert Scott Atlas’s dangerous positions. Ever since Vice President Pence told me to do what I needed to do, I’d engaged in very blunt conversations with the governors. I spoke the truth that some White House senior advisors weren’t willing to acknowledge. Censoring my reports and putting up guidance that negated the known solutions was only going to perpetuate Covid-19’s vicious circle. What I couldn’t sneak past the gatekeepers in my reports, I said in person.
Most of the book consists of her explaining how she headed a kind of shadow White House dedicated to keeping the country in some form of lockdown for as long as possible. In her telling, she was the center of everything, the only person truly correct about all things, given cover by the VP and assisted by a handful of co-conspirators..
Largely missing from the narrative is any discussion of the science gathering outside the bubble she so carefully cultivated. Whereas anyone could have noted the studies pouring out from February onward that threw cold water on her entire paradigm – not to mention 15 years, or make that 50 years, or perhaps 100 years of warnings against such a reaction – from scientists all over the world with vastly more experience and knowledge than she. She cared nothing about it, and evidently still does not.
It’s very clear that Birx had almost no contact with any serious scientist who disputed the draconian response, not even John Iaonnidis who explained as early as March 17, 2020, that this approach was madness. But she didn’t care: she was convinced that she was in the right, or, at least, was acting on behalf of people and interests who would keep her safe from persecution or prosecution.
For those interested, Chapter 8 provides a weird look into her first real scientific challenge: the seroprevalence study by Jayanta Bhattacharya published April 22, 2020. It demonstrated that the infection fatality rate – because infections and recovery was far more prevalent than Birx and Fauci were saying – was more in line with what one might expect from a severe flu but with a much more focused demographic impact. Bhattacharya’s paper revealed that the pathogen eluded all controls and would likely become endemic as every respiratory virus before. She took one look and concluded that the had unnamed “fundamental flaws in logic and methodology” and “damaged the cause of public health at this crucial moment in the pandemic.”
And that’s it: that’s Birx grappling with science. Meanwhile, the article was published in the International Journal of Epidemiology and has over 700 citations. She saw all differences of opinion as an opportunity to go on the attack in order to intensify her cherished commitment to the lockdown paradigm.
Even now, with scientists the world over in outrage, with citizens furious at their governments, with governments falling, with regimes toppling and anger reaching a fevered pitch, while studies pour out by the day showing that lockdowns made no difference and that open societies at least protected their educational systems and economies, she is unmoved. It’s not even clear she is aware.
Birx dismisses all contrary cases such as Sweden: Americans could not take that route because we are too unhealthy. South Dakota: rural and backwater (Birx is still mad that the brave Governor Kristi Noem refused to meet with her). Florida: oddly and without evidence she dismisses that case as a killing field, even though its results were better than California while the population influx to the state sets new records.
Nor is she shaken by the reality that there is not one single country or territory anywhere on the planet earth that benefitted from her approach, not even her beloved China which still pursues a zero-Covid approach. As for New Zealand and Australia: she (probably wisely) doesn’t mention them at all, even though they followed the Birx approach exactly.
The story of the lockdowns is a tale of Biblical proportions, at once evil and desperately sad and tragic, a story of power, scientific failure, intellectual insularity and insanity, outrageous arrogance, feudalistic impulses, mass delusion, plus political treachery and conspiracy. It is real-life horror for the ages, a tale of how the land of the free became a depostic hellscape so quickly and unexpectedly. Birx was at the center of it, confirming all of your worst fears right here in a book anyone can buy. She is so proud of her role that she dares to take all credit, fully convinced that the Trump-hating media will love and protect her perfidies from exposure and condemnation.
There is no getting around Trump’s own culpability here. He never should have let her have her way. Never. It was a case of fallibility matched by ego (he has still not admitted error), but it is a case of enormous betrayal that played off presidential character flaws (like many in his income class, Trump had always been a germaphobe) that ended up wrecking hope and prosperity for billions of people for many years to come.
I’ve tried for two years to put myself in that scene at the White House that day. It’s a hothouse with only trusted souls in small rooms, and the people there in a crisis have the sense that they are running the world. Trump might have drawn on his experience running a casino in Atlantic City. The weather forecasters come to say a hurricane is on the way, so he needs to shut it down. He doesn’t want to but agrees in order to do the right thing.
Was this his thinking? Perhaps. Perhaps too someone told him that China’s President Xi Jinping managed to crush the virus with lockdowns so he can too, just as the WHO said in its February 26 report. It’s also difficult in that environment to avoid the rush of omnipotence, temporarily oblivious to the reality that your decision would affect life from Maine to Florida to California. It was a catastrophic and lawless decision based on pretense and folly.
What followed seems inevitable in retrospect. The economic crisis, inflation, the broken lives, the desperation, the lost rights and lost hopes, and now the growing hunger and demoralization and educational losses and cultural destruction, all of it came in the wake of these fateful days. Every day in this country, even two and a half years later, judges are struggling to regain control and revitalize the Constitution after this disaster.
The plotters usually admit it in the end, taking credit, like criminals who cannot resist returning to the scene of the crime. This is what Dr. Birx has done in her book. But there are clearly limits to her transparency. She never explains the real reason for her resignation – even though it is known the world over – pretending like the entire Thanksgiving fiasco never happened and thus attempting to write it out of the history book that she wrote.
There is so much more to say and I hope this is one review of many because the book is absolutely packed with shocking passages. And yet her 525-page book, now selling at a 50% discount, does not contain a single citation to a single scientific study, paper, monograph, article, or book. It has zero footnotes. It offers no go-to authorities and displays not even a hint of humility that would normally be part of any actual scientific account.
And it nowhere offers an honest reckoning for what her influence over the White House and the states foisted on this country and on the world. As the country masks up yet again for a new variant, and is gradually being groomed for another round of disease panic, she can collect whatever royalties come from sales of her book while working at her new gig, a consultant to a company that makes air purifiers (ActivePure). In this latter role, she makes a greater contribution to public health than anything she did while she held the reins of power.
Author
Jeffrey A. Tucker
Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and ten books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He writes a daily column on economics at The Epoch Times, and speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.
By Jeffrey A. Tucker July 16, 2022
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/w...m_medium=email
What would I do if someone I loved was hospitalized for COVID?
I would line up a doctor, nurse, equipment, and meds and check them out of the hospital ASAP.
Steve Kirsch
Jul 14, 2022
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/..._1000x667.jpeg
It’s not COVID that is killing people in the hospital: it is the hospital COVID treatment protocols
We know from all the surveys that we do that it isn’t COVID that is killing people from COVID: it is the hospital treatment protocols.
Hospitals maximize their revenue and also avoid liability by following what the CDC says. So that’s what they do. It’s not rocket science.
It’s not about your health or superior outcomes. It’s not about compassion. It’s about maximizing revenue for the hospital and avoiding legal liability when you die from the protocol.
This is why the protocol never changes over time.
People die, the hospitals are rewarded for each death, and the government protects them from liability. That’s just the way medicine works today.
Here’s what I would do
Here’s what I would do for myself, or for someone who urgently needed to be hospitalized.
The single best thing is to get all the recommended supplements and meds on hand BEFORE you get COVID. A little advanced planning goes a long way. When I got COVID, I had all the meds handy and started them immediately on a positive home antigen test and COVID was a non-event for me. I got my meds from myfreedoctor.com.
Note: DO NOT make the mistake of taking a steroid unless you are more than 7 days post infection and you’ve already cleared the virus. A lot of people make the mistake and take all the meds at the start. Taking a steroid while you are fighting the infection is a mistake: it makes things worse. I never needed to use a steroid. Most people won’t need it if they follow the protocol and treat COVID early.
Do not make the mistake of thinking that if you’re already recovered from COVID once, you don’t need to take any drugs. This can be a fatal mistake. We had a family member of someone who recovered from COVID, got it again, didn’t treat it, and died the second time he got it.
If you have limited funds, for the non-prescription items, partner up with your neighbors so you buy one set of supplements, nebulizer, etc which then can be used by the person who gets sick, and then replenished (by the person who got sick). That gives you an inventory at minimal up-front expense.
PLEASE: Take COVID seriously, prepare in advance, and it will be a non-event.
If the person didn’t get early treatment and if the person needed immediate hospitalization because you don’t have the items needed to treat the person at home, you have no choice: check them into the hospital, but with a medical power of attorney delegated to a family member.
Then I would VERY quickly line up a doctor (who could be remote) and nurse (who should be local) who could coordinate healthcare at home. In my case, I have this lined up in advance, but you should be able to line this up quickly.
You can use the list here or here to help you find a doctor/nurse.
The nurse should quickly procure the needed equipment and medicines, e.g., an oxygen generator, a nebulizer, distilled water, salt, budesonide, IV delivery, IV drugs (vitamin C, etc).
Once everything is in place, the responsible party should check out the injured person against medical advice (AMA) ASAP and transfer care to the physician/nurse team who is lined up to treat the person.
It’s not that complicated.
I hope this advice saves a lot of lives.
For more information
See ProtocolKills.com
See Hands for health and freedom for help in extricating someone from the hospital and help arrange oxygen concentrators at your home, caregivers, etc.
Read the comments
https://www.americaoutloud.com/publi...tional-rights/
Public Health Policy Collides with Constitutional Rights
by Dr. Peter McCullough | Jul 16, 2022 | Health, Politics
Listen to the article on America Out Loud.
0:00 / 3:14
BeyondWords
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
As the third year of the Coronavirus crisis grinds on, the news cycle continues to fill with a fundamental tension over public health policy intended to “protect the population” and individual rights such as free speech, religion, life, and liberty. While masking, lockdowns, and testing have received their fair share of attention, no issue has been more significant than mass vaccination with untested and unproven genetic transfer technology using mRNA or adenoviral DNA.
If the US vaccine program had the proper structure with a vaccine program administration (separate from the CDC/FDA/NIH), the FDA could do drug safety evaluation and pharmacovigilance advised by independent critical events, data safety monitoring, and human ethics committees reviewing safety data each month.
With this structure, if the program was limited to nursing homes, high-risk elderly, and senior care workers, the main groups where there was documented spread and serious risk of hospitalization and death, then the US COVID-19 vaccination program could have had a reasonable start and with the hopes of doing some public good while dealing with a hazardous evolving safety story on this new form of treatment.
In this scenario, the US vaccine program probably would have been shut down in February of 2021 for excess mortality in our seniors, but the government and biopharmaceutical stakeholders could have made the case that 40% of the deaths were in senior home residents and the vaccines albeit rushed and poorly conceived, represented a best effort to help in a dire public health situation.
The focus has been anywhere but the nursing homes in years 2 and 3 of the pandemic; instead, children and infants are the news cycles with hypodermic needles poised to plunge below the infants’ skin. In a final regulatory coup de gras, the vaccine manufacturers now have an understanding with the FDA that large clinical trials will not be needed for new COVID-19 vaccines that are “substantially similar” to the failed prior versions.1
These new products will be advanced as “better” and “safe and effective” with no clinical data (hospitalizations, deaths) to make or refute these claims.2 At the same time, lawsuit after lawsuit has been filed to keep at bay the advancement of the illegal mandates (n=789 according to JacksonLewis), job loss, censorship, reprisal, and personal injury all centered on mass vaccination every six months or more frequent with unwanted biologic products.3
If this sounds like a horror movie, it could be — instead, it is modern reality.
On our show this week, we have Dr. Shelley Cole, OB/GYN from Central Texas, to give us an update on the expectations of telemedicine as well as her experience in pandemic response and how the Omicron BA5 syndrome is different from prior strains.4
So let’s get real, let’s get loud; on America Out Loud Talk Radio, this is The McCullough Report!
The McCullough Report: Sat/Sun 2 PM ET Encore 7 PM – Internationally recognized Dr. Peter A. McCullough, known for his iconic views on the state of medical truth in America and around the globe, pierces through the thin veil of mainstream media stories that skirt the significant issues and provide no tractable basis for durable insight. Listen on iHeart Radio, our world-class media player, or our free apps on Apple, Android, or Alexa. Each episode goes to major podcast networks early in the week and can be heard on-demand anywhere in the world.
References:
1 https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pres...accine-booster
2 https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-re...apted-covid-19
3 https://www.jacksonlewis.com/practic...ate-litigation
4 https://healthysuccessworks.com/
Dachsie comment:
I strongly disagree with the following statements of Dr. McCullough. Give a totally unknown experimental injection to one of the three most vulnerable groups of people under a rush rush basis, "nursing homes, high-risk elderly, and senior care workers, the main groups where there was documented spread and serious risk of hospitalization and death.
"documented spread" of scientifically exactly what pathogen or "virus" ??????
and
"serious risk of hospitalization" Hospitalization from what exact diagnosis ????
(Hospitalization used to be a good hope for very sick people. Now it is like sending them to their death. !!!!!)
The elderly and the disabled and young children are the groups that need most to be protected from the rush rush plan and agenda that has proven to have nothing to do with healthcare. The agenda appears to turn those three groups into two groups - dead and seriously injured.
___________________________
"With this structure, if the program was limited to nursing homes, high-risk elderly, and senior care workers, the main groups where there was documented spread and serious risk of hospitalization and death, then the US COVID-19 vaccination program could have had a reasonable start and with the hopes of doing some public good while dealing with a hazardous evolving safety story on this new form of treatment.
In this scenario, the US vaccine program probably would have been shut down in February of 2021 for excess mortality in our seniors, but the government and biopharmaceutical stakeholders could have made the case that 40% of the deaths were in senior home residents and the vaccines albeit rushed and poorly conceived, represented a best effort to help in a dire public health situation."
I questioned the rush to vaccinate the elderly an nursing home residents early on in this “plandemic” . It was nothing more than a death sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachsie
Dachsie comment regarding posting # 3447
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...DY.6UUxidQ--~D
Dr. Yeadon tells the whole truth. (So does Dr. David Martin ) - both PhDs
Dr. Yeadon could see that the whole study designs were deliberately twisted to produce desired results. The evil regarding this "illness" and this "pandemic" was planned for arranged from at least 2016. It is about destroying economies of sovereign nation states and facilitating and hastening the "great reset." It is Satanic evil from the pit of hell.
If you go along with the official narratives of any of the presidents and leaders of the big countries and it turns out Dr. Yeadon is right, there is no coming back from what these evil leaders are promulgating. They have been plotting our harm and demise for decades at least.
Dr. Yeadon has chosen to fight now.
He said we should avoid in every way a "mandatory digital ID" or "passport" because that will close off medical freedom forever. That will close off your food and money and healthcare based on your constant surveilled behavior. (The people who are pushing for a mandatory ID (I was fighting the "Real ID" back in 2006) are the same people who perpetrated this evil PLANdemic to inflict a One World Death and Slavery System for ALL.
And avoid and work to stop Central Banking and digital currency for all.
(You will find that already businesses do not want to take checks or cash and if they take checks they will treat it as a debit card and run the check through a machine to get the routing number and stamp the check and hand it back to you.
The paper or metal money for day to day spending is absolutely necessary and it is directly connected to autonomy and freedom and anonymity/privacy.
Listen to the last 5 minutes of the show where Dr. Yeadon offers those solutions.
His solutions show that he realizes we are on the brink of the end of civilization as we know it.
Hold on to and deal in CASH as much as possible and ditch the digital.
I have been using cash as much as possible since (((they))) have been promoting a digital ID or passport. Everyone, including me, needs to get rid of their smart phone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachsie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X85T_EYQ760
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X85T_EYQ760
Federal Judge BLOCKS Biden Admin From Punishing Unvaccinated Air Force Service Members
12:39 video runtime
Facts Matter with Roman Balmakov
800K subscribers
�� Secret White House meeting finally Exposed �� https://ept.ms/SecretWHMeeting_FULL
Resources:
�� Sekur:
https://ept.ms/3yW0Wul
�� Epoch TV:
https://ept.ms/SecretWHMeeting_FULL
�� Court Order:
https://ept.ms/3oasHvL
Dachsie comment:
Dr. Coleman's audio must have been sped up because I found it almost impossible to understand, but what I did hear could be perfectly summed up by saying "we don't know."
He kept saying "not related to COVID." What a meaningless phrase!
Dr. Coleman has not been kicked off YouTube so that tells us all we need to know.
________________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMtHlucxKos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMtHlucxKos
21:17 video runtime
The Jimmy Dore Show
1.05M subscribers
In a recent video, popular YouTube host and retired nursing instructor Dr. John Campbell of the U.K. covered the alarming revelations that England and Wales – and likely many other places around the world – are experiencing higher than expected death rates even when COVID deaths are factored in. So what’s the cause of these elevated global mortality rates? Campbell shares a number of hypotheses but reserves judgment pending additional research into the matter.
Jimmy and America’s comedian Kurt Metzger share their suspicions about the source of this death rate spike as well.
The Jimmy Dore Show
Pinned by The Jimmy Dore Show
The Jimmy Dore Show
4 days ago July 14, 2022
Dachsie comment:
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthre...avirus/page344
Post # 3440
I cannot remember for sure but I think it was the above video or a few days before that and one of the scientists or medical doctors said something like..
You cannot have an effective vaccine for any of the coronaviruses because they all produce variants and subvariants so quickly that any vaccine formula that comes to market will already be too late and not address the kind of strain or variant that is affecting the population currently.
I remember many years ago, Dr. Russell Blaylock MD neuro-surgeon said on one of Dr. Stan Monteith's "Radio Liberty" show that the reason the annual flu shot offered to patients is always a formula based on last year's strain of influenza, so you will get the flu and maybe sick from side effects of the vaccine anyway. Oh, well, that problem with the flu vaccine that made so many people very ill and some severely vaccine injured is over with now because "COVID came along and cured the flu completely so we don't catch the flu anymore." *
* Flu Deaths Dropped 97 Percent In 2020. That's Amazing News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9iqtWRaRVc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9iqtWRaRVc
Rhode Island bill would double taxes and impose fines on any who refuse the Covid-19 vaccine
Incredible!
Is Rhode Island in the USA?
News | Rhode Island bill would double taxes and impose fines on any who refuse the Covid-19 vaccine
TrialSite News
Join The Conversation! | https://trialsitenews.com/
Rhode Island, Democrat Senator Samuel Bell, introduced a bill that who in effect create two classes of citizens within his state. Those who accept the vaccine, and those who don’t.
The bill if ever signed into law would cause Rhode Islander’s who don’t get the Covid-19 vaccine to face $50 monthly fines and double what they would normally owe in personal income taxes.
Tweet
See new Tweets
Conversation
Jesse Kelly
@JesseKellyDC
All you need to know about how broken and corrupt our institutions are is this: Dr. Birx should be facing a public trial with the prospect of spending the rest of her life in federal prison.
Instead, she’s publishing a book that will make millions.
Quote Tweet
Jeffrey A Tucker
@jeffreyatucker
· Jul 15
Before posting my final review of D. Birx's book, I offer you one more excerpt on how she doctored the weekly Covid reports to the states coming from the White House. You won't believe this one.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXwLbWdV...jpg&name=small
3:43 PM · Jul 16, 2022·Twitter for iPhone
1,769
Retweets
68
Quote Tweets
4,569
Likes
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W0e4NnjZslg/h...wiFCdaaTGKIFqA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0e4NnjZslg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0e4NnjZslg
8:18 video runtime
News Roundup | Vaccine Discrimination? Father Denied Kidney Donation For Son Due To Vaccine Status
7,825 views
Apr 11, 2022
605
Dislike
Share
Save
TrialSite News
118K subscribers
Join The Conversation! | https://trialsitenews.com/
For the past nine years, the Donaldsons have dedicated their lives to creating the best possible outcome for the health and well-being of their little boy Tanner. Jenn Donaldson his mother, quit her job to care for Tanner so she can meet the frequency of his medical needs.
Their little boy suffers from Posterior Urethral Valves (PUV) which are obstructive membranes that develop in the urethra, which functions by draining urine from the bladder. These valves can obstruct or block the outflow of urine, which leads the ureters and kidneys to become progressively dilated, resulting in damage. PUV cannot be prevented. It begins in the early stages of fetal development and abnormally affects male infants. Reports of the incidence of PUV vary as widely as 1 in 2,000 to as much as 1 in 25,000.
Article Link | https://trialsitenews.com/cleveland-c...
"Cleveland Clinic Disqualifies Father as Donor For 9-Year-Old Son’s Kidney Transplant Due to Vaccination Status"
Dachsie comment
So Father not qualified to donate a kidney to his son because father is not vaccinated.
Horrible policy of the Cleveland Clinic. An unvaccinated donor donates a healthier kidney and a very close relative means a more successful transplant.
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...u0M45.Cstw--~D
https://www.theepochtimes.com/dr-har...um=left_sticky
1 minute trailer video only for non-paid. Members only for full video.
July 16, 2022 American Thought LeadersViews 56.4K
Dr. Harvey Risch: Why Are Vaccinated People Getting COVID at Higher Rates Than the Unvaccinated?
American Thought Leaders
JAN JEKIELEK
Full transcript available for paid members.
“The vaccines have done damage to the immune system such that it makes people more likely to get COVID—over a longer term, not the short-term vaccine benefit period, but after that—more likely to get COVID infections, more likely to get other respiratory infections.”
I sit down with Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health.
We discuss why vaccinated individuals appear to be getting COVID-19 infections at higher rates than the unvaccinated, and how much of our policies over the last two years were based on flawed science—from lockdowns to the vaccine rollout for children.
We also reflect on the recent passing of Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who pioneered the use of early COVID treatments. Doctors all over the country are now prescribing these sorts of treatments—mostly quietly, for fear of losing their medical licenses.
“I’m sure by now, there’s a quarter of a million Americans who have been treated successfully with these medications. They know that they were treated with these things.
And they worked,” Dr. Risch says.
Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode.
* Click the “Save” button below the video to access it later on “My List“.
Below is a rush transcript of this American Thought Leaders episode from Jul 16, 2022. This transcript may not be in its final form and may be updated.
________
Dachsie comment:
Some thing said in the brief video trailer intrigued me.
Dr. Risch said something like...
It was decided 'we didn't need to measure immunity. We would just test for antibody levels instead.'
I have read a bit lately on the test for anibodies but I do not know exactly what test is used to "measure immunity."
It does appear that they have stopped relying on the PCR test.
But they are still relying on the
Rapid Antibody test - at home test.
It also appears that one can be test positive on the at home Rapid antibody test without having any symptoms.
Many employers are currently using this at home antibody test to make all employees take it after one employee ( ?)"gets COVID"The other employees have to wait 5 days or more to get results on the "rapid antibody test" when that test is done at a testing station and not at home, and the employee has to adhere to some level of quarantine until the test comes in, such as employees in a group home setting.
All of this testing protocol widely varies because employers rely on CDC website for guidelines and there is no standard interpretation of those.
So there is still a big mess out in the real world of employee work places and what is done if someone "gets COVID."
https://youtu.be/gaY4m00wXpw
How to make disease disappear. Interesting watch.
Disease exists in the mind of the physician even though it's symptoms manifest in you. I suppose that is why an MD can't cure disease by giving you a chemical. Perhaps he would have a better chance of success if he took the medication.
Here is a thought though. The next time an MD diagnoses you with a disease recommend he see a psychiatrist because his mind is the source of the disease.
Dachsie comment:
Here is some history of the PLANdemic from the Epoch Times perspective.
___________________________
https://www.theepochtimes.com/giving...2_3277200.html
March 18, 2020 Updated: June 20, 2021
There has been controversy recently about what to call the virus that has unleashed a worldwide pandemic. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) prefers “novel coronavirus.” Others have referred to it as the “Wuhan virus,” after its place of origin, as is common in naming diseases.
The Epoch Times suggests a more accurate name is the “CCP virus,” and calls upon others to join us in adopting this name.
The name holds the CCP accountable for its wanton disregard of human life and consequent spawning of a pandemic that has put untold numbers in countries around the world at risk, while creating widespread fear and devastating the economies of nations trying to cope with this disease.
After all, CCP officials knew in early December 2019 that the virus had appeared in Wuhan, but they sat on the information for six weeks. They arrested those who tried to warn of the danger, accusing them of spreading “rumors,” and employed the regime’s rigorous censorship to prevent media coverage and to delete any mentions of it from social media.
What might have been contained was allowed silently to spread, showing up in all of China. Individuals who might have protected themselves became victims, in numbers far greater than the CCP has admitted. By late January, there were reports that all of the crematoria in Wuhan were operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week to deal with the crush of dead bodies.
Medical workers in overalls stretch a patient under intensive care into the newly built Columbus Covid 2 temporary hospital at the Gemelli hospital in Rome on March 16, 2020. (Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images)
Meanwhile, the measures taken to quarantine and treat the population of Wuhan were grotesquely inhumane. Apartment buildings were welded shut. Temporary “hospitals” were created that actually served as jails for those believed to be sick with the virus. Locked into these places with no medical treatment and little food, the unfortunates were trapped there until death.
In lying about the danger facing China, the CCP was acting according to its usual script. The CCP’s dominant narrative is that the Party is “great, glorious, and correct.” The presence of the deadly CCP virus in Wuhan, or, in 2003, of the SARS virus, doesn’t fit the script. As with SARS, the first response was denial.
But in dealing with this virus, denial is not acceptable. The world needs to know its origin, and the CCP has refused to cooperate. Outside experts have not been allowed into Wuhan.
And there is understandable concern about the activities of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China’s first P4 lab, one meant for working with easily transmitted pathogens that can cause fatal illness. As the official narratives offered for the source of the virus have been disproven, questions have been raised about whether the CCP virus leaked from the institute.
In any case, as questions about the origin of the virus have gone unanswered, the CCP has begun throwing out wild charges that the United States is responsible. This will be met around the world with perplexity, if not ridicule. President Donald Trump has pushed back by referring to the “Chinese virus.”
...
The Epoch Times refers to the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19, as the CCP virus because the Chinese Communist Party’s coverup and mismanagement allowed the virus to spread throughout China and create a global pandemic.
But the CCP likely intends these charges of U.S. responsibility for its domestic audience. The CCP has victimized the Chinese people in its first denial of the virus and now seeks to victimize them again by shifting responsibility for its actions to others.
And this points out why the name “CCP virus” is needed, to distinguish the victims from the victimizer. The people of Wuhan and of China are the victims of the CCP’s arrogance and incompetence, expressed in this viral pandemic.
The name CCP virus also sounds a warning: Those nations and individuals close to the CCP are the ones suffering the worst effects from this virus, as is seen in the raging infections in the CCP’s close ally Iran and in Italy, the only G-7 nation to sign onto the Belt and Road Initiative. Taiwan and Hong Kong, which have rejected the CCP—Taiwan in a recent landslide national election and Hong Kong in months of massive demonstrations—have had relatively few infections.
Finally, the CCP virus reminds the people of the world that the source of the virus is itself evil. This is a communist virus, and with the name CCP virus, The Epoch Times reminds the world of the cure: ending the CCP.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/robert...mpaign=roundup
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Fauci’s Admission: Mainstream Media Makes No ‘Effort to Hold Him Accountable’
By Enrico Trigoso
July 16, 2022 Updated: July 16, 2022
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said it’s “astonishing” that mainstream media not holding Dr. Anthony Fauci accountable for his remarks on Wednesday that COVID-19 vaccines don’t protect “overly well” against the CCP virus.
“One of the things that’s clear from the data [is] that … vaccines—because of the high degree of transmissibility of this virus—don’t protect overly well, as it were, against infection,” Fauci said.
“It’s astonishing that mainstream media allows [Fauci] to blindly make that statement without any effort to hold him accountable for the costly national policies and the lockdowns that were utterly built upon his initial assertion that the vaccines would prevent transmission and end the pandemic,” Kennedy told The Epoch Times.
The lockdowns initially were imposed to flatten the curve in two weeks. Kennedy asserts that they “were contrary to every previous advisory for pandemic countermeasures by the CDC and the WHO.”
He believes that “the house of cards should be falling” and that the media should be putting pressure on the NIH.
“The national media, which was fooled by all these lies, should be surrounding NIH with pitchforks and torches. And yet it’s like water on a duck,” he said.
Kennedy is the author of the best-selling book “The Real Anthony Fauci,” an encyclopedic work that encompasses Big Pharma’s meddling in public health and people’s liberties.
Since no isolates of a SARS-CoV-2 virus are available lets call it what it is, a "computer generated model".Quote:
Originally Posted by Dachsie
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...b-2643f0908fdf
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...id-800x417.jpg
07/18/22
Top doctors and scientists at the leading U.S. public health agencies are “frustrated, exasperated and alarmed” about the direction of the agencies they work for, according to the authors of a Substack post published last week.
They’re also embarrassed — about “bad science.” And many are leaving.
“It’s like a horror movie I’m being forced to watch and I can’t close my eyes,” said one senior official with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). “People are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything.”
The comment was one of many culled from calls and text messages between officials and the article’s co-authors, Marty Makary M.D., M.P.H., and Tracy Beth Høeg M.D., Ph.D.
Makary and Høeg said the officials who spoke to them agreed to be quoted — but only anonymously, for fear of professional repercussions.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are plagued with “low morale” and “high turnover,” officials told Makary and Høeg.
“At the NIH, doctors and scientists complain to us about low morale and lower staffing: The NIH’s Vaccine Research Center has had many of its senior scientists leave over the last year, including the director, deputy director and chief medical officer,” they wrote.
And it’s no better at the CDC, they said:
“The CDC has experienced a similar exodus. ‘There’s been a large amount of turnover. Morale is low,’ one high-level official at the CDC told us. ‘Things have become so political, so what are we there for?’ Another CDC scientist told us: ‘I used to be proud to tell people I work at the CDC. Now I’m embarrassed.’”
Officials complained the heads of their agencies “are using weak or flawed data to make critically important public health decisions, that such decisions are being driven by what’s politically palatable to people in Washington or to the Biden administration and that they have a myopic focus on one virus instead of overall health.”
One CDC scientist told Makary and Høeg about the shame and frustration within the agency over what happened to U.S. children during the pandemic.
The scientist said:
“CDC failed to balance the risks of COVID with other risks that come from closing schools. Learning loss, mental health exacerbations were obvious early on and those worsened as the guidance insisted on keeping schools virtual. CDC guidance worsened racial equity for generations to come. It failed this generation of children.”
The CDC also ignored natural immunity, according to some officials who declined to be named. “The vast majority of children have already had COVID, but this has made no difference in the blanket mandates for childhood vaccines.”
By mandating “vaccines and boosters for young healthy people, with no strong supporting data, these agencies are only further eroding public trust,” they added.
“I can’t tell you how many people at the FDA have told me, ‘I don’t like any of this, but I just need to make it to my retirement,’” one official told Makary and Høeg.
Commenting on the revelations, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel, told The Defender, “The 33-year devolution of NIH from the world’s premier bio research agency into Big Pharma’s servile marketing subsidiary has been an excruciating downfall for NIH’s dwindling cohort of researchers and scientists of integrity.”
Kennedy added:
“The COVID-19 catastrophe exposed to the world that NIH no longer does science or public health and confronted remaining employees with the dilemma that working at NIH means living against conscience. The current exodus captures the last remaining NIH officials who still have one.”
Makary and Høeg said it’s statistically impossible for everyone who works inside U.S. health agencies to have 100% agreement about “such a new and knotty subject.”
“The fact that there is no public dissent or debate can only be explained by the fact that they are — or at least feel that they are — being muzzled,” they wrote. “It is an ancient, moral requirement of our profession to speak up when we believe questionable treatments are being proposed. It is also good for the public.”
“The leaders of the CDC, the FDA and the NIH should welcome internal discussion — even dissension — based on the evidence,” they wrote. “Silencing physicians is not ‘following the science.’”
Makary: COVID vaccines for kids at center of controversy
The Daily Mail reported on Makary and Høeg’s substack post — which also caught the attention of “Fox & Friends” and Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.
In a July 17 interview on “Fox & Friends,” Makary said senior officials — including all three leaders of the vaccine research center at the NIH and top experts at the FDA — are leaving because they see problems with the data and are frustrated.
“The top two vaccine experts at the FDA [in September 2021] quit in protest over political interference, and many people at the CDC told me that people are getting bad advice and we can’t say anything,” he said. “They’re not allowed to go to the media, and at the center of it is the treatment of children.”
bombshell embedded video Dr. Makary
must watch it in the article for now. maybe I can get a video url later.
3:50 video runtime
3.50 video runtime
“Fox & Friends” co-host Pete Hegseth brought up an example Makary cited in his article on the treatment of children:
“In the subgroup of children aged six months to two years, the [Pfizer] trial found that the vaccine could result in a 99% lower chance of infection — but that they also could have a 370% increased chance of being infected.
“In other words, Pfizer reported a range of vaccine efficacy so wide that no conclusion could be inferred. No reputable medical journal would accept such sloppy and incomplete results with such a small sample size. More to the point, these results should have given pause to those who are in charge of public health.”
Yet, without that clinical data, they’re still “pushing vaccines for infants and toddlers, for people who already had COVID and boosters for young children,” Hegseth said.
“That’s right. And parents are not falling for it after nearly a month of the government heavily pushing vaccines in kids under 5,” Makary said. “Only 3% of parents have chosen to get their kids under 5 vaccinated. More parents believe in UFOs I think.”
CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said “people are eager to get their kids vaccinated,” but this is not the case, Makary told Hegseth. Because the “vaccine trial in kids under 5 failed” — the “study was done and it showed no benefit.”
Makary said:
“Now why are we even doing clinical trials if when you get a negative result showing it has no benefit, they’re approving it anyway? You’re making a mockery of the process. This is what people within the agencies are very frustrated about. This is why they’re leaving.
“Moderna’s vaccine had a 4% efficacy and Pfizer, the results were so bad with no statistical significance that one of the internal people within the CDC said that you can inject a child with the vaccine or squirt it in their face and you’ll get the same benefit.”
“If the CDC wants to win some respect back, apologize and show some humility and less absolutism,” he added.
In their article, Makary and Høeg said there’s also an issue of how long a COVID-19 vaccine gives protection, as data in adults show that protection wanes in “a matter of months” and there’s “no such data for young children.”
“It seems criminal that we put out the recommendation to give mRNA Covid vaccines to babies without good data,” a CDC physician told Makary. “We really don’t know what the risks are yet. So why push it so hard?”
“The public has no idea how bad this data really is,” a high-level FDA official told Makary and Høeg. “It would not pass muster for any other authorization.”
“And yet, the FDA and the CDC pushed it through,” Makary and Høeg wrote. That “slap in the face of science may explain why only 40% of parents in rural areas say their pediatricians did not recommend the Covid vaccine for their child.”
White House calling the shots
In a July 15 interview with Tucker Carlson, Makary said doctors everywhere in the world, even in the government, should “always be free to speak up about their public health concerns.”
Yet, right now in the government, “doctors are muzzled.”
“I talked to many doctors for this piece, at NIH and CDC, who are extremely frustrated,” Makary told Carlson. “They’re smart people. They know vaccine efficacy of 4% doesn’t warrant authorization. They also know there’s no health emergency right now among kids six months of age.”
Makary said he learned a lot from interviewing anonymous top officials, and they’re being silenced:
“They know the underlying data. They know it’s inappropriate. They’re not allowed to speak to anyone. If a reporter calls, the communications office has to approve the conversation and if they want to ask the scientist whether or not they want to do this. Tell us what you’re going to tell the reporter and then we’ll decide whether or not to approve it.”
“At the CDC, a bunch of scientists actually said ‘look we recognize the insanity of mass testing — trying to take down every case of the virus in the United States,’” Makary told Carlson. “So they came up with a plan to use sampling data like we do with influenza every year to get better numbers from the hospital of those truly in there for COVID, not just everybody with incidental COVID tests.”
Makary said he was told by top officials the plan was “rejected by the White House.”
“I heard from smart people who were just extremely frustrated that not only are they bypassing the normal scientific process, you really can’t say anything because if they do, they know their jobs are at risk and they’ll be treated very differently,” Makary told Carlson.
“One person said there’s no transparency as to how Dr. [Anthony] Fauci makes his decisions, he doesn’t even consult with the real experts.”
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of Medicine at Stanford University and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, praised the “blockbuster article” that confirmed scientists are being subject to tremendous political pressure to distort COVID-19 science and vaccine recommendations.
Jay Bhattacharya
@DrJBhattacharya
·
Follow
An absolute blockbuster article by @TracyBethHoeg and @MartyMakary. Insider interviews with @CDCgov and @NIH scientists reveal tremendous political pressure to distort covid science and vax recommendations. Our public health agencies are in disarray. Excellent reporting!
Marty Makary MD, MPH
@MartyMakary
An ancient trait of the medical profession is to speak up when we believe something is not in the best interest of our patients. Less absolutism and more humility by health agencies would go a long way in rebuilding public trust. My piece w/ @TracyBethHoeg https://commonsense.news/p/us-public...utm_medium=web
9:22 AM · Jul 14, 2022
3.6K
See the latest COVID-19 information on Twitter
Responding to Makary’s interview with Carlson, Dr. Peter McCullough said in a tweet that the FDA needs “immediate oversight and ordered to retract EUA approval.”
[/URL][/SIZE]
embedded video in Tweet - go here
Top doctors and scientists at the leading U.S. public health agencies are “frustrated, exasperated and alarmed” about the direction of the agencies they work for, according to the authors of a Substack post. They’re also embarrassed — about “bad science.”
By
Megan Redshaw
Dachsie comment:
I posted this link a few days ago but am posting again with more extensive show notes.
This is extremely important information from Dr. Yeadon.
_____________
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...b-2643f0908fdf
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...lXsoet5HwA--~D
In early 2020, as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded, Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former Pfizer vice-president and senior scientist, realized that something wasn’t quite right with what public health officials were saying about the virus, and how lies and exaggeration led the public to embrace experimental COVID-19 vaccines.
The vaccines were unconventional in design, and despite the option to use safer benign proteins, all four drug companies (Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca) chose to use the most pathologically dangerous part of the virus — the spike protein.
“I predicted this would be dangerous,” Yeadon told Brian Hooker, Ph.D., host of CHD.TV’s “Doctors & Scientists.”
“And my peers on the inside knew that and they all did the same thing,” he said. “It’s not an accident.”
We were told, Yeadon said, that this is a new respiratory virus. But we knew early on, whatever it was, it was generally affecting the elderly — usually those with one or more comorbidities — because their immune systems are old, tired and unresponsive to new immunological threats.
But instead of protecting the only people who were really vulnerable, they locked down everyone, Yeadon said.
“And then they told us, ‘We’ll get you out of this,’ with a vaccine.”
“But if their immune system is old and they don’t respond well to normal pathogens, why would you expect them to respond well to vaccines?” Yeadon asked.
The answer is, “You wouldn’t.”
The whole vaccine strategy was wrong, Yeadon said. All we needed to do was isolate and treat the elderly — instead of pushing vaccines on everyone, including children and pregnant women.
“It wasn’t a mistake,” Yeadon said. “These are the same people who make the flu vaccines that don’t work — and they know it.”
The Centers for Disease Control
is promoting many social control ideas that have nothing to do with controlling physical disease for public health.
The Marxist controllers of "the Biden administration" are the political controllers of "health" matters for the USA. No more science and medicine for the good and the care of public health.
The CDC will double down on turning our public schools and public education into "super-spreader" entities.
__________________
Biden Administration’s CDC Encourages Teachers to Use Leftist Gender Curriculum
https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...ty-640x480.jpg
by Spencer Lindquist 18 Jul 2022
The Biden administration’s Center for Disease Control (CDC) is promoting an activist organization that seeks to embed leftist gender theory in the classroom.
The CDC LGBT Youth Resources page, archived here, directs teachers to access educator resources from the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), a leftwing organization that seeks to embed gender theory into America’s classrooms.
“Looking for ways to support Ally Week, No Name-Calling Week or the Day of Silence? Interested in finding ways to bring LGBTQ-visibility into your curriculum? You’ve come to the right place!” GLSEN’s website explains.
The organization continues by noting the guides can be used to direct activism and to embed ideological positions into school curriculum when it says “GLSEN’s education team has created educator guides for each of our Days of Action, along with other resources for increasing LGBTQ visibility and affirmation into any curriculum.”
Tweet
See new Tweets
Conversation
Breitbart News
@BreitbartNews
At a afterschool meeting in Colorado, a 12-year-old girl was told if she is "not 100% comfortable in her female body, she’s transgender."
https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/15476...jpg&name=small
Among GLSEN’s educator guides is “Supporting LGBTQ+ Students of Color,” which instructs teachers to “De-center whiteness in LGBTQ+ history, inclusive curriculum, and visual representation,” “Reflect on your own identities, privileges, and power,” and to “Participate and/or advocate for both LGBTQ+ and anti-racist education training at your school.”
GLSEN maintains a list of books that teachers can use in the classroom to encourage “LGBTQ-visibility.” The list, intended for elementary school children, includes “A is for Activist,” as well as “I am Jazz,” which endorses the idea that children can be transgender.
GLSEN also advocates for men to be able to play in women’s sports and to use women’s restrooms and locker rooms. The organization previously partnered with both the YMCA and Nike to bring an OnlyFans performer to teach children a suggestive form of dancing.
(Instagram ad for GLSEN dance classes in public schools.)
Among GLSEN’s educator guides is “Supporting LGBTQ+ Students of Color,” which instructs teachers to “De-center whiteness in LGBTQ+ history, inclusive curriculum, and visual representation,” “Reflect on your own identities, privileges, and power,” and to “Participate and/or advocate for both LGBTQ+ and anti-racist education training at your school.”
GLSEN maintains a list of books that teachers can use in the classroom to encourage “LGBTQ-visibility.” The list, intended for elementary school children, includes “A is for Activist,” as well as “I am Jazz,” which endorses the idea that children can be transgender.
GLSEN also advocates for men to be able to play in women’s sports and to use women’s restrooms and locker rooms. The organization previously partnered with both the YMCA and Nike to bring an OnlyFans performer to teach children a suggestive form of dancing.
Breitbart News previously revealed the CDC directed LGBT Youth to a chat site that was designed to be kept secret and featured discussions on sex change operations, political activism, and the occult.
Spencer Lindquist is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach out at slindquist@breitbart.com
____________________
https://vaticancatholic.com/hhs-sec-...ll-and-winter/
https://vaticancatholic.com/images/h...and-winter.jpg
"HHS Sec" Xavier Becerra: Expect A Virus "Resurgence" In "The Fall And Winter" - 19 second video
July 18, 2022 1 Comment
____________________________
https://vaticancatholic.com/gates-fu...next-pandemic/
Gates-Funded Organization Names 11 Viruses As Potential Candidates For The “Next Pandemic”
thegatewaypundit.com July 18, 2022 1 Comment
original source:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...next-pandemic/
https://vaticancatholic.com/images/g...t-pandemic.jpg
"Had enough of Covid? No worries! According to a Gates-funded international organization, there will be more available in the future.
The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) identified 11 viruses that have the potential to cause the 'next pandemic.'
'The COVID-19 pandemic wasn’t the first to devastate the world and it won’t be the last. In a new series, we round up emerging infectious threats that have the potential to erupt into global pandemics,' the organization wrote on its website."
According to Iffim, GAVI is an international organization created in 2000 – a global Vaccine Alliance, bringing together public and private sectors with the purpose of ‘saving lives and protecting people’s health by increasing the use of vaccines in an equitable and sustainable manner.’
______________
Dachsie comment:
Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are all inextricably connected to the WHO, the USA CDC, NIH, NIAID ,FDA, the "Biden administration" , the CCP Chinese Communist Party and of course, Pfizer and BigPharma.
_____
"Emerging infectious threats" - the gift that keeps on giving.
Expose the truth in love of Christ the King.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-...7813685825.jpg
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...next-pandemic/
Below is the list of viruses mentioned on GAVI’s website:
Rift Valley fever – The risk of a pandemic from a disease that affects farm animals may seem low, but the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has classed Rift Valley fever as a category A bioterrorism agent because of its potential to devastate large-scale agricultural economies and cause social disruption.
Hantavirus – The long incubation period combined with the emergence of New World species causing HPS mean that hantaviruses are becoming an increasing concern.
Another coronavirus – Although the development of COVID-19 vaccines may help to end the current COVID-19 pandemic, ongoing high rates of infection in many countries could lead to the emergence of further variants capable of evading vaccine-induced immunity. This could mean people continue to develop COVID-19.
Crimean-Congo Haemorrhagic Fever – The wide geographic spread of the hard-bodied Hyalommamarginatum ticks that carry CCHF virus, and its persistent circulation, means the risk of spill-over from animals to humans is high. Factors such as climate change and the movement of livestock or wild animals may further increase its geographic spread.
Lassa fever – The combination of a long incubation time and the fact that four in five people who become infected with Lassa virus have no symptoms means the disease can spread easily through international travel.
Marburg – As Marburg virus can spread from human to human through contact of bodily fluids, much like Ebola. As outbreaks in Europe and the US have already shown, increasing globalisation and international travel mean that the risk for global spread is high, especially when the incubation period could be up to three weeks. This could be disastrous given its high death rate.
Yellow fever – So far, yellow fever has never been reported in Asia or the Western Pacific but, as Aedes aegypti is endemic in these regions, it would only take a few introductions by people travelling from Africa or South America for the virus to spread rapidly.
H5N1 and H7N9 influenza – Since Spanish flu, there have been three pandemics – H2N2 in 1956-7, H3N2 in 1968 and H1N1 in 2009 – and before COVID-19 it was widely assumed that the next pandemic would be caused by influenza. The risk is high particularly with two subtypes, H5N1 and H7N9.
Chikungunya – Chikungunya has already been a pandemic, albeit one that didn’t affect the Global North. In 2004, a large outbreak in Kenya spilled out into the islands of the Indian Ocean and Asia and led to a pandemic that spanned several years and had more than a million cases. This means there is a growing possibility we could see another pandemic.
Ebola – if the virus mutates in ways that allow it to spread via respiratory droplets, as COVID-19 does, that would increase the potential for it to spread more easily and become a pandemic threat.
Nipah virus – The disease is also so deadly that many governments classify it as a bioterrorism threat and limit the laboratories that are allowed to culture and study it.
https://thevaccinecourt.substack.com...m_source=email
Pharmacists now can prescribe Paxlovid.
This might be just another step in the process of usurping the states.
Wayne A Rohde
7 min ago
With the announcement by the FDA right after the 4th of July celebrations, pharmacists in the US will be able to prescribe Paxlovid, the COVID-19 drug from Pfizer.
Paxlovid is an oral anti-viral pill. Pfizer promotes it as a drug that will reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19. Sound familiar. Same song, different verse.
The drug is classified as an EUA drug, not having been granted full licensed drug approval. The FDA revised the Emergency Use Authorization statutes to authorize state-licensed pharmacists to prescribe the medication to eligible patients.
The specific authorization falls under Section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act after a declaration by the Secretary of HHS. This in turn modifies the intent of The PREP Act declaration amendments.
There are some limitations. The patient’s health records provided to the pharmacist cannot be older than 12 months. And the FDA directed pharmacists to go with the most recent reports of laboratory blood work.
I guess this is the way to circumvent the patient’s doctors and to get Paxlovid into the hands of patients. More money for Pfizer and now a much desired revenue stream for pharmacies such as Walgreens and CVS.
On my podcast, The Right on Point podcast, my guest Dr. James Meehan discusses the dangers of Paxlovid and why our government setout to discredit any and all safety reviews of Ivermectin and HCQ. Click here to watch and listen to Dr. Meehan go step by step.
But I am more concerned about what this does for state regulations of vaccine policy and now drug policy.
It is commonly held that the states decide who can prescribe medicines, who can administer vaccinations and who can disburse medications. The states regulate this with the use of state boards and policy.
Currently 43 states allow pharmacists to prescribe medications for minor aliments, cuts, burns, blister treatments, minor joint pain, yeast infections, acid reflux and the very common hemorrhoid problems.
But now, states are loosing their regulation to the federal government.
In August of 2020, the Secretary of HHS issued an amendment to The PREP Act to allow pharmacists to administer the traditional childhood vaccination schedule to kids as young as three years of age.
I wrote about this in a piece “Did the Federal Government Just Secretly Take Over Vaccine Policy Usurping the Authority of the States?”
Now I ask a very similar question. Is the Federal Government usurping the authority of the States with this action?
It is an EUA regulated drug. So this order could disappear when the EUA status expires. Or by then, Paxlovid might have full regulatory approval. Will pharmacists will authority to continue to prescribe? Who knows?
My questions to HRSA regarding The PREP Act authority to administer childhood vaccines remains in effect until The PREP Act expires in 2024. Or it could be extended. Yet HRSA officials are silent, very silent regarding the sun-downing of any amendment.
Donate
I wonder if FDA officials will be the same for this EUA statute?
Stay tuned.
Keep learning, keep challenging yourself and always, always question authority.
Make it a good day.
All FDA regulations place Man into the Animal category. If you feel that you are an animal then you are livestock. These are FOOD as well as DRUG regulations.
FDA is an administrative law agency. As I posted elsewhere administrative law is classified the same as BILLS OF ATTAINDER and are specifically prohibited by constitution.
The fact that there are ADMINISTRATIVE LAW agencies tolerated is one proof that the 14th amendment cancelled the organic constitution.
The other proof of this insurrection against the constitution is that no U.S. government since 1878 has bothered to think about repayment of the civil war debt now standing at $346,681,016.
Ephesians 3:20
Now to Him who is able to [carry out His purpose and] do superabundantly more than all that we dare ask or think [infinitely beyond our greatest prayers, hopes, or dreams], according to His power that is at work within us,
Amplified bible
https://rumble.com/v14ol9b-dr.-james...m_medium=email
Was greatly encouraged by the fight this good Doctor James Meehan M.D. is putting up.
Watch this video and be encouraged too.
Dr. James Meehan - The benefits of Ivermectin
1:04:17 video runtime
Also tune in to
Rumble The Right on Point podcast
https://rumble.com/c/c-1726987
The Right on Point podcast Published May 14, 2022 345 Views
https://childrenshealthdefense.salsa...e-52f8708741e3
https://childrenshealthdefense.salsa...93d0fd1062.jpg
July 19, 2022
Get links to any of the stories listed below by clicking on...
Top News of the Day
https://childrenshealthdefense.salsalabs.org/7-19-22defender?wvpId=a64cbeac-eb3d-41f6-974e-52f8708741e3
How CDC Blatantly Uses Weekly Reports to Spread COVID Disinformation: Three Examples
Don’t Let ‘Voodoo Science’ Keep Djokovic From Competing in US Open
42% of Women Report Heavier Menstrual Bleeding After COVID Vaccines
Pfizer Annual Revenue Doubled — to $81.3 Billion — Thanks to COVID Vaccines
GMO Salmon, Pork and Chicken — Coming to Your Dinner Plate Soon?
Policies Designed to Give Money to the Rich Drive Inflation for the Rest of Us
U.S. Cardiologist Defends Novak Djokovic’s Vaccine Stance: Can’t Risk Heart Damage + More
San Diego School Board President Says Students Must Wear Masks or Don’t Bother Returning to School + More