A LIPID NANOPARTICLE + A GENE IS A NUCLEAR BOMB – DR RYAN COLE, MD
BETTERWAY CONFERENCE, BATH, UK – May 22, 2022
Rand Paul Shreds Fauci on Lack of Gov Data Supporting Boosters for Children
InfoWars | June 16, 2022
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blasted NIAID Director Anthony Fauci for promoting booster jabs for children despite refusing to provide data proving their effectiveness, or their necessity.
The tense exchange happened during a Senate Health Committee hearing Thursday, where CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, Fauci and others hoped to procure more funding for the federal pandemic response.
“Dr. Fauci, the government recommends everybody take a booster over age five,” Sen. Paul told Fauci, who was interviewed via Zoom. “Are you aware of any studies that show reduction in hospitalization, or death for children who take a booster?”
“Right now, there’s not enough data that has been accumulated, Senator Paul, to indicate that that’s the case,” Fauci responded.
“So there are no studies – and Americans should all know this – there are no studies on children showing a reduction in hospitalization or death with taking a booster,” Sen. Paul summarized.
Paul went on to hypothetically ask if booster jabs produce antibodies, wouldn’t a never-ending litany of jabs make sense?
“If I give you 10, or if I give a patient 10 mRNA vaccines, and they make protein each time, or they make antibody each time, is that proof that we should give 10 boosters?” Paul asked.
“No. I think that is somewhat of an absurd exaggeration,” Fauci responded.
Sen. Paul shot back that the only data the Committee’s seen shows possible antibody effectiveness and only in older populations with risk factors, but “for younger folks there’s not.”
“But here’s the other thing,” Paul continued, “There are some risk factors for the vaccine… So the risk of myocarditis with a second dose for adolescent boys 12 to 24 is about 80 in a million. This is both from the CDC and from the Israeli study.”
“So, there is risk, and there are risks, and you’re telling everybody in America just blindly go out there, because we made antibodies… So, it is not an absurd corollary to say, ‘If you have 10.’ In fact, you probably make antibodies if you get a hundred boosters. All right? That’s not science, that’s conjecture and we should not be making public policy on it.”
Elsewhere during Thursday’s questioning, Paul asked Fauci if he personally “ever received a royalty payment from a company that you later oversaw money going to that company?”
“I don’t know as a fact, but I doubt it,” Fauci replied.
Paul went on to point out the “NIH continues to refuse to voluntarily divulge the names of scientists who receive royalties, and from which companies, over the period of time from 2010 to 2016.”
“Can you tell me if anyone on the vaccine approval committee’s ever received money from the people who make vaccines?” Paul asked.
“People who receive royalties are not required to divulge them even on their financial statement according to the Bayh–Dole Act,” Fauci shot back, clearly incensed.
“It’s all redacted and you can’t get any information on the 1,800 scientists who received royalties,” Paul concluded, as he was cut off by the Committee chair.
The exchange comes just one day after it was reported Fauci contracted coronavirus, despite being vaccinated and double-boosted.
See also:
Ottawa police promise “unprecedented” response to Canada Day demonstrations
By Keean Bexte | The Counter Signal | June 17, 2022
With several freedom demonstrations planned for this year’s Canada Day in Ottawa, Ottawa police are gearing up and say they will have an “unprecedented” response.
According to the Canadian Press, “An Ottawa police officer says this Canada Day will be “unprecedented and unique” with a never-before-seen security posture as the main events take place off Parliament Hill, and protests are planned throughout the day.”
“Police are aware of the demonstrations and are “planning accordingly,” said the officer.”
Additionally, Canadian Heritage says they’re working with police, having held a technical briefing today for their Canada Day plans. Journalists were only allowed to attend the briefing on the condition that the names of officials involved not be disclosed.
Ottawa police have further stated that they stand for Canadians’ right to protest but will “not allow for the conditions that led to the unlawful protests in February to reoccur.”
Canada Heritage previously announced that they would not allow Canadians to participate in the annual Canada Day celebration at Parliament Hill due to construction after two years of cancelling it due to COVID.
They added that the Canada Day party, which usually sees thousands flock to Ottawa, is being moved to the LeBreton Flats approximately 1.5km Westwards.
As it stands, there are several protests against the remaining COVID mandates planned for Canada Day, which are expected to be attended by many Freedom Convoy protesters from February.
Additionally, this is the same day CAF veteran James Topp will complete his cross-country march to the capital city.
Journalist Andy Lee has also stated she plans to camp on Parliament Hill despite the ban and has given police a heads up.
1.3 million reports of injuries after COVID vaccines, VAERS data show, as CDC rubber-stamps shots for kids under 5
By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 17, 2022
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,301,356 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and June 10, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). That’s an increase of 6,027 adverse events over the previous week.
VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.
The data included a total of 28,859 reports of deaths — an increase of 327 over the previous week — and 238,412 serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 1,645 compared with the previous week.
Of the 28,859 reported deaths, 18,719 cases are attributed to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, 7,581 cases to Moderna and 2,493 cases to Johnson & Johnson (J&J).
Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 831,801 adverse events, including 13,293 deaths and 84,151 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and June 10, 2022.
Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.
Of the 13,293 U.S. deaths reported as of June 10, 16% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 20% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 59% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
In the U.S., 590 million COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered as of June 10, including 349 million doses of Pfizer, 223 million doses of Moderna and 19 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).
Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.
Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 10, 2022, for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds show:
- 1,739 adverse events, including 65 cases rated as serious and 3 reported deaths.
- 4 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).
The CDC uses a narrowed case definition of “myocarditis,” which excludes cases of cardiac arrest, ischemic strokes and deaths due to heart problems that occur before one has the chance to go to the emergency department. - 13 reports of blood clotting disorders.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 10, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:
- 11,370 adverse events, including 294 rated as serious and 5 reported deaths.
- 22 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis.
The Defender has noticed over previous weeks that reports of myocarditis and pericarditis have been removed by the CDC from the VAERS system in this age group. No explanation was provided. - 44 reports of blood clotting disorders.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 10, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:
- 32,203 adverse events, including 1,834 rated as serious and 44 reported deaths.
- 62 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 97% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
- 656 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 644 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
- 166 reports of blood clotting disorders with all cases attributed to Pfizer. VAERS reported 167 cases of blood clotting disorders in the 12- to 17-year-old age group last week.
- 19 cases of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) with all cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 10, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:
- 20% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
- 53% of those who died were male, 42% were female and the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased.
- The average age of death was 73.
- As of June 10, 5,577 pregnant women reported adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccines, including 1,744 reports of miscarriage or premature birth.
- Of the 3,608 cases of Bell’s Palsy reported, 51% were attributed to Pfizer vaccinations, 40% to Moderna and 8% to J&J.
- 889 reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome, with 42% of cases attributed to Pfizer, 30% to Moderna and 28% to J&J.
- 2,290 reports of anaphylaxis where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death.
- 1,724 reports of myocardial infarction.
- 14,102 reports of blood-clotting disorders in the U.S. Of those, 6,309 reports were attributed to Pfizer, 5,054 reports to Moderna and 2,701 reports to J&J.
- 4,229 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis with 2,590 cases attributed to Pfizer, 1,438 cases to Moderna and 186 cases to J&J.
- 11 cases of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease with 5 cases attributed Pfizer, 5 cases to Moderna and 1 case to J&J.
- 264 cases of POTS with 162 cases attributed to Pfizer, 84 cases to Moderna and 17 cases to J&J.
FDA authorizes Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines for younger children
Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccines are now authorized for emergency use in infants and young children as young as 6 months, CNN reported.
The FDA on Friday authorized Moderna’s vaccine for use in children 6 months through 17 years and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children 6 months through 4 years.
The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) on Wednesday unanimously voted 21-0 to recommend Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines for infants and young children, stating the totality of the evidence available shows the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks of use.
The panel ignored pleas from experts, the vaccine-injured and a congressman representing 17 other lawmakers to halt authorization until questions about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for the nation’s youngest children could be properly addressed.
Pfizer’s three-dose vaccine would cover children 6 months to 5 years old, while Moderna’s two-dose vaccine covers children 6 months to 6 years old.
States have already ordered millions of doses made available prior to FDA authorization by the Biden administration.
White House officials said the administration of vaccines for these age groups could start as early as June 21.
CDC advisors hold impromptu meeting to get vaccines for kids rolled out by White House deadline
During a meeting Thursday, the CDC announced it scheduled a special two-day meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Friday to discuss authorization of Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines for infants and young children.
The meeting to discuss authorization of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine for 6- to 17-year-olds is scheduled for June 22 and 23.
The CDC today discussed the safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of the Moderna shot in kids 6 months through 5 years of age and Pfizer’s vaccine in children 6 months through 4 years of age.
The ACIP is scheduled to vote Saturday.
“The entire process is set up to rubber-stamp the VRBPAC meetings from yesterday,” said Toby Rogers, Ph.D.
In a CHD.TV live blog, Dr. Liz Mumper, a pediatrician and Children’s Health Defense board member, said Pfizer showed an estimate of 80.3% vaccine efficacy but based it on only 7 cases in the placebo group and 3 in the vaccine group.
“These numbers are ridiculously small — the 80% may not stand” if more kids are included in the numbers, Mumper said.
Mumper also pointed out the shots being considered at today’s meeting were based on the original Wuhan strain that is no longer circulating.
“It is not so important how good a vaccine is at generating antibodies to Wuhan strain,” Mumper said. “[We] need long-term data about the impact of the shot on the number of kids who get COVID in [the] community and have severe or mild [cases].
Mumper said:
“U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to June 3, 2022, for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds show 1,658 adverse events, including 63 cases rated as serious and 3 reported deaths.
“The risk of a child dying if they have a diagnosis is 1,086/10,700,00 or 1086/10700000 = 0.00010149532. The risk of any child dying of COVID-19 over this time period is 1,086/73000000 = 0.00001487671.”
“Forty-nine states have already bought vaccines for children in the age groups being debated,” she added. “Seems like a done deal.”
FDA’s vaccine advisors endorse Moderna’s COVID vaccine for kids ages 6 to 17
The FDA’s vaccine advisory panel on Tuesday voted unanimously to recommend Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 6 to 17 after determining the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks for use.
VRBPAC voted 22 to 0 to recommend Moderna’s two-dose vaccine for 6- to 11-year-olds at half the strength of the adult version, and 22 to 0 in favor of authorizing the shot for 12- to 17-year-olds at the same strength as adults.
During the public comment session, individuals expressed concern over recommending a vaccine for an age group that has an almost zero risk of experiencing severe illness or death from COVID-19 and has already acquired a high level of natural immunity.
Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a vaccine safety official at the CDC, said some data suggest a higher risk of myocarditis among people 18 to 39 years old after receiving Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, but findings were not consistent across various safety databases and were not statistically significant.
The CDC confirmed 635 cases of myocarditis, or heart inflammation, in the 5-to-17 age group out of almost 55 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine administered. The agency said the condition occurred most often in adolescent boys after receiving their second dose.
Florida only state not to preorder vaccines for young children
Florida is the only state in the nation that did not place an order with the federal government for doses of COVID-19 for young children prior to U.S. health agencies authorizing the vaccines, Politico reported.
The deadline for placing a pre-order was Tuesday and 49 other states met the cutoff date.
The Florida Department of Health (DOH), said in a statement to Politico on Wednesday that it did not pre-order vaccines for kids 5 and under because it doesn’t advise all children get vaccinated.
“States do not need to be involved in the convoluted vaccine distribution process, especially when the federal government has a track record of developing inconsistent and unsustainable COVID-19 policies,” the DOH statement said.
Jeremy Redfern, press secretary for Florida’s DOH, confirmed the department “chose not to participate” in the vaccination program.
“It is also no surprise we chose not to participate in distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine when the department does not recommend it for all children,” Redfern said. “Doctors can order vaccines if they are in need, and there are currently no orders in the department’s ordering system for the COVID-19 vaccine for this age group.”
Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Bill Gates and the Frame Game
BY THOMAS HARRINGTON | BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | JUNE 16, 2022
A few weeks back, at the World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Bill Gates said some surprising things. In the course of a 56-minute panel discussion the vaccine pusher extraordinaire admitted (starting at the 18:22 mark) that the Covid vaccines do not block infection and that the duration of whatever protection they bring to the table is extremely short.
He later talked (starting at 51:00 mark) of the absurdity of implementing any Covid passport program—and one can logically deduce any other measure to segregate the vaccinated from the unvaccinated—when the injections have shown no ability to do the least that one should expect from a vaccine: prevent infection and transmission.
These admissions violently kick the stool out from under the arguments made in favor of the more assaultive and damaging Covid “containment measures” taken in the past two years, many of which are still being pursued with pitiless vigor by public officials, CEOs, and educational “leaders” all around the world.
Are we to believe that Bill Gates had a sudden impulse to undermine all that he used his billions to mercilessly promote over the last two years? And that he was giving all those currently carrying out those plans permission to stand down?
It’s a nice thought. But I don’t believe it to be the case.
No. Bill was simply engaging in one of the more tried and true techniques of elite information management, the limited hangout, or what I prefer to call a drive to “save the frame” of an argument that is quickly taking on water.
Since Bill and many of the people he has paired up with to force the experimental and often harmful vaccines upon the world, effectively own or have donated untold amounts of money to many of the world’s more important media outlets, he knew beforehand that he did not have to worry much about his words being widely circulated.
And so it was. Only relatively small independent news gatherers took any note of what he said.
So who was he addressing his words to and why?
He was speaking to the fellow true believers and providing them with a rhetorical model for handling the loss of faith some among their ranks are having in the face of the vaccines’ abject failure.
The key to understanding the frame game here is the clause Gates uttered right before the “but” with which he introduced his truthful words about the “vaccines” pitiful infection-blocking capabilities and short duration of effectiveness: “The vaccines have saved millions of lives.”
Those familiar with the work of cognitive linguist George Lakoff, or the activities of pollster and so-called political wordsmith Frank Luntz will know what I’m talking about.
What these two men have in common—despite their divergent political allegiances—is their belief in the extraordinary power of rhetorical framing; that is, the tendency of the human brain to subordinate the careful analysis of empirically proven details to the embrace of an overarching cognitive metaphor that appeals to their deeper, if often unstated, cultural and emotional values.
It’s the difference between, for example: “The US invaded Iraq on false pretenses and destroyed it, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people.” and “In its efforts to bring democracy to Iraq, the US made a number of tragic mistakes.”
The first states a bald empirical truth. The second obfuscates that crude reality and subordinates it to the noble vision, so cherished by Americans when contemplating their role in the world, of a country that is constantly helping people around the world to better their lives.
And with widespread imposition of mental frames like this through the media, “poof!” go all the gory, on-the-ground details, and with them more importantly, the need to actually interrogate what we did and how we might seek to repair the lives we broke.
Going back to Davos, Bill was effectively saying to his minions, “You are on a great moral crusade. We’ve had some small problems along the way, but don’t give up, because the world needs us to continue to be heroic and save more lives.”
And with that cognitive frame in place, any creeping doubts those in the audience might have about what they have done, and their future mission, disappear just like that.
We see the same gambit used when the US government inevitably links the apparent waning of the pandemic to the use of vaccines. Here, for example, is what the CDC said to CNN shortly after lifting requirement that US citizens be tested before returning home from foreign travels:
“The Covid-19 pandemic has now shifted to a new phase, due to the widespread uptake of highly effective Covid-19 vaccines, the availability of effective therapeutics, and the accrual of high rates of vaccine-and infection-induced immunity at the population level in the United States. Each of these measures has contributed to lower risk of severe disease and death across the United States.”
It’s no accident that the first factor adduced to explain the onset of happier days, the one that sets the frame for all that follows, is the “widespread uptake of highly effective Covid-19 vaccines.”
The goal here— as it was in the case of Gates at Davos—is to preserve, in the face of abundant empirical evidence to the contrary, the frame that presents the forced administration of vaccines as the great slayer of the pandemic and gifter of our vanquished freedoms, and to turn that suggestion into an established fact through constant repetition.
But, of course, neither Gates’s claim about the vaccines saving “millions of lives” nor the CDCs’ assertion that “widespread vaccine uptake” was the key reason for ending the pandemic are established facts. Far from it. Indeed, there are no scientific studies that I know of capable of authenticating either claim. But that’s just the point.
The elites that deign to rob us of our bodily sovereignty and so much more in the name of Covid, or whatever other “mortal health threat” that they choose to publicize next through their carpet-bomber control of most media, have all done their homework on the frame game and carefully tailor their communications to fit with its imperatives.
Unfortunately, most citizens are still not clued in to how it operates in their lives. Verbal details such as the ones cited above matter because they play an enormous role in establishing and maintaining what the now sadly tarnished Chomsky once brilliantly called the field of “thinkable thought” in our public discussions.
To open up that field we need to smash their frames. But to smash those frames we first need to admit they exist, and where we can go to find them.
Thomas Harrington, Senior Scholar at the Brownstone Institute, is an essayist and Professor Emeritus of Hispanic Studies at Trinity College in Hartford (USA) where he taught for 24 years. He specializes in Iberian movements of national identity Contemporary Catalan culture. His writings are at Thomassharrington.com.
Rash of blood clots caused by… the heat?
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | June 17, 2022
Perhaps you’ve heard about the rash of blood clots in young healthy people, recently?
Well don’t you worry your silly head about it, they were caused by dehydration due to the hot weather.
Some of them, anyway. Maybe. Definitely the most recent ones, and certainly any you may hear about in the future.
Naturally, any reported spike in blood clots before the summer was nothing to do with the hot weather.
… that was the cold weather.
Or maybe it was a long-term side effect of Covid19 infection.
Or maybe it wasn’t a clot, it was just Sudden Adult Death Syndrome.
Or one of the 300,000 symptomless cases of aortic stenosis wandering around.
Or maybe they were suffering from “post-pandemic stress disorder”.
Or maybe there weren’t any deaths at all, and the fact-checkers have debunked all of that.
It doesn’t matter. Forget it. There’s no point even considering what may or may not have caused the blood clots that may or may not have happened in the past.
The point is, in the future, they will be caused by the hot weather.
And nothing else.
Have a good day.
Fauci Finally Gets Covid: The Significance
BY JEFFREY A. TUCKER | BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | JUNE 17, 2022
What precisely happened in the month of February 2020, when Anthony Fauci and cohorts were plotting their pandemic response, is still a mystery. Jeremy Farrar, of the Wellcome Trust, in his book on the topic says that during these weeks, they went to burner phones, clandestine video calls, and warned family members that something terrible could happen to them.
Their top concern was the possibility of the lab leak from Wuhan. They needed to get to the bottom of it and prepare the spin. We know that the initial draft of the academic article denying the lab leak came out February 4, 2020, later published in the Lancet on March 16. But what happened in these three weeks – apart from the mid-February NIH junket to China to learn how to control a virus – remains foggy.
But this much we do know: by March 2, 2020, Fauci had his game plan lined up. Michael Gerson of the Washington Post wrote him on that day and asked about the purpose of social distancing. This was weeks before most Americans had even heard this euphemism for forced human separation. Was the idea to wait for a vaccine, Gerson asked?
Fauci answered in a private email as follows:
“Social distancing is not really geared to wait for a vaccine. The major point is to prevent easy spread of infections in schools (closing them), crowded events such as theaters, stadiums (cancel events), work places (do teleworking where possible… The goal of social distancing is to prevent a single person who is infected to readily spread to several others, which is facilitated by close contact in crowds. Close proximity of people will keep the R0 higher than 1 and even as high as 2 to 3. If we can get the R0 to less than 1, the epidemic will gradually decline and stop on its own without a vaccine.”
There we have it: the Fauci theory of how we get rid of the virus. We don’t need a vaccine. Just close things. Stay away from people. Don’t gather. Shut schools. Lock businesses and churches. All people stay away from all people. The R-naught will drop.
Then the virus will… and this is where the theory gets murky. Does it just vanish? Get bored? Get frustrated, give up, and vanish into the ether? And how long does this new social system of “social distancing” have to last? Years? Forever? And what happens once people start acting normally again?
This is very clearly crank science, one that confuses ex post data collection with causation itself and also seems to deny the workability of the human immune system. That such things would be written by a person in Fauci’s position is truly mind boggling. But the press went along, and still does after all this time.
What Fauci was imagining – and very few people picked up on it at the time – was the construction of a new social system. It was not just about this virus. It was about all pathogens and the whole functioning of society. He believed – or he decided to come to believe – that a re-engineering of the social order could successfully beat back common pathogens and bring about universal health.
He finally revealed this in his August 15, 2020, article for Cell that received very little attention at all. He was on his own attempting to implement an entire new social system based on a new ideology.
Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues. In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming.
This article reveals the most important point. The pandemic response was not just about this one pathogen. It was about what amounts to a political, economic, social, and cultural revolution.
It’s not socialism or capitalism. It’s something else entirely, something very strange, like a Rousseauian technocracy, simultaneously primitive and high tech, as managed by a scientific elite, an untested dystopia worthy of the most terrifying literature in the English language.
No one has voted for such a thing. It is something Fauci and his friends dreamed up on their own and deployed all their enormous power to enact just as a test, until it fell apart. The US and many parts of the world were in their grip for the better part of a year and two years in some places.
This is a scandal for the ages, one that far outstrips issues of tax-funded gain-of-function research, as important as that is. It’s even more important than reports that Fauci has been earning personal royalty payments from pharmaceutical companies that receive grants that he has personally approved. The real problem comes down to his power and the ability of elected representatives and courts to control him for many decades.
Regardless of Fauci’s millenarian vision, the course of the virus took the usual path but for one major exception: the waves of infection occurred based on class rank in society. There was a political hierarchy of infection that started with the working classes, moved to the bourgeoisie, hit the professional classes, then high-end journalists, and finally, at the very end came for the elite ruling class itself – Trudeau, Psaki, Ardern, Gates, and finally Fauci – regardless of their multiple vaccines.
And here is why Fauci’s covid infection is significant, 28 months after the first lockdowns. It’s a sign and symbol that his entire theory of virus control was wrong. He got his way with policy and it did not work. The virus finally landed on him, as if to reenact Edgar Allan Poe’s fictional story of Prince Prospero in his castle that he believed would protect him.
And as a result of his exposure, Fauci will surely (unless his repeated injection of the same vaccine harmed the operation of his immune system) gain the natural immunity that is already possessed by 78 percent of kids and likely two thirds of the general population.
It should also alert us to three points of moral urgency:
- We need to replace Fauci-style feudalism with a new theory of how to reconcile the freely functioning society with the presence of infectious disease, so that neither he nor people in his pay or sway can attempt this again.
- We need to act to disable the unmitigated power of administrative-state bureaucrats to seize control of the machinery of government.
- We need a new system to decentralize science away from privileged elites so that they can never again have monopoly control over what is considered to be the science much less posses the power to censor dissent.
These are the lessons, at least the start of them. This virus is either endemic or at least almost so, but we are left with astonishing social, cultural, and economic destruction from Fauci’s attempt to implement an experimental plan on the whole population not only in the US but all over the world.
We will suffer for many years or generations from it. And yet, in the end, infection is individual and probably unavoidable for most people. The immune system adapts. That’s how we evolved to coexist. To pretend otherwise is the very essence of denying the science.
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.
Our Letter Putting Colleges on Notice
Presidents, senior leadership and trustees can’t say they didn’t know.
No College Mandates | June 12, 2022
No College Mandates has launched a major letter campaign to put colleges on notice that continued Covid-19 vaccination mandates put their students, their reputations, and potentially their endowments at risk. The purpose of the letter is to make these policy makers aware of new information they likely did not know existed and to prompt them to further investigate.
To date, more than 60 college presidents have received this letter via certified mail. Across those 60 colleges, approximately 1400 individuals were copied. Many more college letters are in process. By the time we are finished, thousands of college administrators and trustees will be notified.
No College Mandates is so proud to have the following organizations as signatories on our letter: Health Freedom Defense Fund, The Mendenhall Law Group, Health Freedom Counsel, and The Unity Project.
The letter is below. If you are interested in working on this effort, email us at info@nocollegemandates.com. We’ll set you up to fight this fight with us and make change.
To College and University Presidents, Senior Leadership and Trustees:
We are writing to notify you of recently available information prompting concern that fraud has been committed by Pfizer and by the FDA in the development and continued distribution of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine. Given that your institution mandates Covid-19 vaccination for students as a condition of enrollment, it is incumbent upon you to be fully informed about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines and the claims of fraud that call both into question.
If fraud or willful misconduct is proven, the manufacturers and those involved in the distribution or mandating of the vaccines will lose immunity from liability granted to them under the existing EUA and the PREP act.
We urge you to further investigate. We believe that once you do, you will see how continued Covid-19 vaccine mandates jeopardize the safety of your students and the reputation of your institution.
The new information consists of Pfizer’s biological product file used to obtain FDA approval of Comirnaty and data from the insurance industry showing a huge rise in excess deaths in Millennial and Gen X populations concurrent with the implementation of vaccine approvals and mandates. The excess death data is raising concerns in the insurance industry and on Wall Street. We are also including timely news about product safety, given the FDA’s recent restriction of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine due to blood clotting concerns.
Following is a brief overview of each category and starting points for further inquiry. We are standing by to provide you with additional information or to connect you to scientists, lawyers and investors who are reviewing the current and evolving data.
Pfizer Biological Product File – background and highlights:
The Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT) is a nonprofit group made up of public health professionals, medical professionals, scientists, and journalists. The group exists solely to obtain and disseminate the data relied upon by the FDA to license Covid-19 vaccines. Four days after the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine was approved for children over 16, this group submitted a Freedom of Information Act for all data within Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine biological product file. When the FDA asked for 75 years to release that data, PHMPT sued to obtain it and won. Beginning in March 2022, the public has access to Pfizer’s clinical trial data, which is being downloaded in batches monthly. You can find the document releases to-date here.
Thousands of volunteers including scientists, statisticians, doctors, and lawyers continue to examine these downloads and publish their findings. For ready reference, below are just a few of the findings of greatest concern that call into question the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer product and support a thesis of fraud:
- Pfizer failed the all-cause mortality endpoint in their unprecedentedly short 28-day clinical trial. In brief, more people died in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group. This was known yet has still not been widely disclosed to the public.
- The CDC talking point that vaccines stopped transmission was based on no data, as this metric was not evaluated during Pfizer’s clinical trials. Pfizer and the FDA knew this yet did not disclose it to the public.
- Pfizer and the FDA knew as early as November 2020 that Pfizer’s clinical trials showed:
- Vaccine failure
- Waning vaccine efficacy
A baseline condition for granting a product Emergency Use Authorization is that it must be safe and effective. The data showed that the products are not effective. Yet, based on FDA approval, the CDC promoted them as such. From the initial roll-out in December 2020 through April 1, 2021, the public health messaging was that if you received the shot, you could not get infected and could not transmit the virus. The Pfizer documents are proof that they and the FDA colluded to lie to the American people and the CDC created false public health narratives based on these lies.
- Pfizer and the FDA most likely knew in May 2021 that the vaccines caused heart damage in teenagers based on a paper that was already in peer review at that time. The FDA approved the product for teenagers in June 2021 yet did not disclose this risk factor to consumers until August. During that time, all those who received this product did not have informed consent. Parents were not made aware of this known potential risk to their children.
- Brook Jackson, a regional director employed by Pfizer sub-contractor Ventavia Research Group, came forward in September 2020 with documented evidence that the company falsified data, unblinded patients and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial conducted by Ventavia. Her findings call into question the integrity of not only Ventavia’s results but of all of the results from Pfizer’s other trial sites and the entire clinical trial. Further information is available in The British Medical Journal.
Excess death data and the insurance industry:
In December 2021, Midwest insurer One America CEO Scott Davidson disclosed a 40% increase in excess deaths over pre-pandemic levels in the working-age (18-64) population in the third quarter. Putting the number into context Davidson said, “The data is consistent across every player in this business . . . Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be a 10 percent increase over pre-pandemic. So 40 percent is just unheard of”. Other major insurers have subsequently reported increases in death claims ranging from 21–57 % over expected levels. Most of these deaths are not Covid-19 deaths. Long-term disability claims are also seeing an uptick.
These reports prompted a former institutional investor who was a #1 ranked Wall Street sell-side insurance analyst to confirm the numbers using CDC reported data. His findings, independently confirmed by others, show the spikes in excess deaths are related to the timing of vaccine approvals and mandates. This data is prompting concern at insurance and reinsurance companies, who will bear the financial brunt of this unexpected and unprecedented rise in mortality. It is raising questions about the safety of the Covid-19 vaccines in the investment community and beyond.
Of related interest is Pfizer’s amendment in February of its business risk disclosures in its Q4 2021 earnings report. The changes from the Q3 2021 report language center around disclosures of unfavorable safety data and “further information regarding the quality of pre-clinical, clinical or safety data, including by audit or inspection”.
It is likely that neither Pfizer nor the FDA anticipated the court-compelled release of their clinical trial and post-marketing surveillance data and the subsequent public scrutiny of it.
Additional product safety concerns:
The FDA announced on May 5 that they were restricting use of the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine due to the risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), a syndrome of rare and potentially life-threatening blood clots in combination with low levels of blood platelets. The decision to restrict was based on 60 reported cases and 9 fatalities. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines also have serious risks and fatalities associated with them including but not limited to blood clots and myocarditis in college-aged populations. These are shown in Pfizer’s post-marketing surveillance data and in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Recording System (VAERS). As of April 29, 2022, there were approximately 1.2 million reports of adverse events following Covid-19 vaccination including more than 18,056 reports of deaths following the Pfizer vaccine, and 7,223 following the Moderna vaccine. Logic demands that Pfizer and Moderna products be restricted immediately as well. Why have they not been? Further, a recent Danish review of all three products in preprint in The Lancet showed that the J&J reduced all-cause mortality but that Pfizer and Moderna did not and may have increased it. Given all this, it is reasonable to think that Pfizer and Moderna products could be restricted or discontinued very soon due to safety concerns. This might well trigger a much higher level of scrutiny of the now-publicly available Pfizer data and the actions of our public health institutions. How would such a situation impact institutions such as yours that continue to mandate the products while knowing such risks exist?
One last thing to consider is the nature and associated secrecy of the contracts that Pfizer forced upon governments as conditions of sale and distribution of their Covid-19 vaccines in their respective countries. A review of some of these contracts can be found here. Terms included such things as the waiving of sovereign immunity, countries assuming full liability in the event that Pfizer was shown to have used another entity’s intellectual property, and that Pfizer be held harmless in the event of injury or death from the products. Why would a company require such terms if it knew its conduct and its products were sound?
We sincerely hope this information has been useful and that you will investigate this matter fully. We urge you to end your vaccine mandates to protect your institution’s students, reputation, and, in the event that fraud is proven, potentially your endowment.
Yours truly,
No College Mandates is a coalition of thousands of concerned students, parents, professors, staff, and community members working to end college Covid-19 vaccination mandates and restore medical choice on college campuses. Contact us at info@nocollegemandates.com
Health Freedom Defense Fund is a 501(c)(3) non-profit which seeks to protect and advance health freedom, educate Americans on informed consent, advocate for human rights and bodily autonomy for all people, and legally challenge unethical mandates, laws, and policies when necessary. (HealthFreedomDefense.org)
The Mendenhall Law Group is a mission-oriented practice focused on holding government, educational institutions and corporations accountable. The group is keenly interested in medical freedom and provides legal support for those concerned about Covid-19 mandates and policies. Mendenhall Law has offices in Ohio and Massachusetts and a national network of affiliated practices. (WarnerMendenhall.com)
Health Freedom Counsel believes in the right to medical choice and provides clients with the resources to stand up to mandates that infringe upon medical freedom. (HealthFreedomCounsel.com)
The Unity Project is a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting the Covid-19 Vaccine Mandate for students, kindergarten through 12th grade. We have enlisted globally esteemed physicians, scientists and business leaders and more than 150 grassroots groups and concerned individuals focused on preserving medical freedom.
Pfizer Phase 3 clinical trial fraud allegations that should be immediately investigated by the FDA
There are more than a dozen “smoking guns” that indicate that the Pfizer Phase 3 trial was not properly conducted
By Steve Kirsch | June 15, 2022
It is in the best interest of all parties to have transparency in these issues in order to restore public trust in the medical community and reduce vaccine hesitancy which are key goals of the CDC and FDA.
For example, Dr. Peter Marks recently stated:
“We do have a problem with vaccine uptake that is very serious in the United States and anything we can do to get people more comfortable to be able to accept these potentially life-saving medical products is something that we feel we are compelled to do,” said Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.
There are two things Dr. Marks can do to achieve his goal:
- He can have an open discussion with the people who he alleges are the main spreaders of “misinformation.”
- He can open an official FDA investigation into allegations of fraud in the Pfizer trial and produce a written report responding to each allegation.
Dr. Marks, like every other public health official, will not do #1. I understand why he won’t: the data isn’t supportive of the government narrative so he’d lose the debate very badly. This is why nobody at the FDA, CDC, or NIH will talk to any of my colleagues. In ignoring us, he is acting in a way inconsistent with what is expected which was outlined by UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad in this op-ed published 2 years ago, Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized
But #2 is critically important. If there is fraud/ willful misconduct, the liability protection is removed. If the FDA is truly working for the people, these allegations must be investigated.
In order to help facilitate option #2, I personally am aware of over a dozen fraud allegations that should be investigated. This is not a complete list. There are dozens of articles like this one that highlight irregularities in the data that need to be investigated.
My suggestion is that, in addition to the allegations in this article, the FDA should solicit a list of irregularities via an open public process to ensure that all of the key allegations are considered and investigated in order to restore trust in the system. Why would they not want to do that?
Here is only a partial list:
- Pfizer admitted in a US court proceeding that there was fraud and the FDA knew about it. An admission in a court like this of fraud is surely grounds for an investigation. Watch this 2 minute video where attorney Robert Barnes describes what happened in his federal court case against Pfizer. Read this article for more: Pfizer admits to COVID vaccine clinical trial fraud in federal court.
- 13-year old Maddie de Garay developed paralysis less than 24 hours after she was vaccinated. I know Maddie. I know her parents. Today, Maddie is confined to a wheelchair. She was perfectly healthy before she received the vaccine. Less than 24 hours after her second dose, she couldn’t walk off the school bus. Why were her symptoms reported to the FDA in the 12-15 trial results as “functional abdominal pain”? See FDA Buries Data on Seriously Injured Child in Pfizer’s Covid-19 Clinical Trial. I notified acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock on Friday, June 25, 2021 6:21 AM. She promised me the FDA would investigate the fraud. To this day (Jun 14, 2022), the family was never contacted by anyone. I know the FDA is busy, but why has nobody reached out in the year since Commissioner Woodcock promised to investigate? If one child out of 1,000 ends up paralyzed for life, shouldn’t this be something the FDA should be concerned about?
- There were 5 times as many exclusions in the treatment arm as in the placebo arm of the trial. It is statistically impossible for such an imbalanced number of exclusions to have happened by chance. It appears to be a deliberate culling of patients with adverse events which is not allowed. If it wasn’t a deliberate culling, then how do you explain such large numbers? The amount of the discrepancy is greater than the entire effect size of the trial. This is from page 18 of the December 10, 2020 VRBPAC meeting document:
Image from December 10, 2020 VRBPAC meeting document
- Why were the allegations of data integrity documented by the BMJ never investigated by the FDA? This is published in a major medical journal yet there was no follow up from the FDA at all. I just talked to Brook Jackson on the phone. She now has 20 lawyers on his whistleblower case. Pfizer was able to get the judge in her case to stay discovery for 6 months so an FDA investigation is the only way to compel discovery. I asked her if anyone at the FDA ever contacted her about her allegations and she said nobody ever called to talk to her. Instead, on the very same day that she emailed the FDA about what happened, she was fired. She emailed the FDA about the issues at 9am on September 25, 2020 and she was fired from her job at Ventavia at 3pm. This suggests that the FDA tipped off Pfizer who notified Ventavia. There was no other way Pfizer could have known: Brook only contacted the FDA. Period. The FDA needs to find out who at that FDA tipped off Pfizer, and then who at Pfizer told Ventavia to fire Brook instead of investigating the allegations. There has to be a chain of custody here. We deserve to know what actions the FDA is going to take against that employee who notified Pfizer. Or to notify the public that this is the proper behavior by FDA employees receiving whistleblower complaints is to take actions to get the whistleblower fired. We need to understand how the leadership of the FDA feels about what happened and whether they intend to get to the bottom of it or simply ignore it.
BMJ article documenting irregularities in the Pfizer trial. The whistleblower was fired 6 hours after notifying the FDA which must have leaked the information for Pfizer.
- Why are there more deaths in the trial report than the document Pfizer submitted to the FDA? Shouldn’t they be the same since they are reporting on the same Pfizer study? Here is another article questioning the numbers.
- There were more deaths in the treatment arm than in the placebo arm. How does the FDA know for certain that the people who died in the treatment arm did not die as a result of the drug? Did they ever look at the data from Pfizer on this? If so, what convinced them the deaths were not related? Can we see the written report which certified this? Pfizer says the deaths were unrelated, but we are never told how they determined this. Were the same tests done as Dr. Walter Lang did (see this video and also this article) and that Dr. Bhakdi and Dr. Burkhardt did? Dr. Peter Schirmacher also discovered that at least 30% to 40% of the deaths shortly after vaccination were likely caused by the vaccine. Schirmacher’s family’s life was then threatened if Schirmacher said anything more publicly. Did Pfizer use the same methodology as Dr. Schirmacher, Bhakdi, Burkhardt, and Lang? Why did Schirmacher, Bhakdi, Burkhart, and Lang all find a huge rate of causality but Pfizer found nothing. They cannot both be right. How will the FDA resolve the discrepancy and assure the public they found the truth?
- A report Pfizer filed with the FDA entitled “Summary Basis for Regulatory Action” contains the following statements which are in conflict with data in the VAERS system which is reporting unprecedented increases in adverse events. There are more adverse and serious adverse events reported for the COVID vaccines than for all vaccines combined over the past 32 years. Therefore, the VAERS data and this report simply cannot both be true. The FDA needs to find out which is giving inaccurate data and correct the problem:
From Summary Basis for Regulatory Action filed with the FDA
- Mysterious blood clots are only being found in vaccinated cadavers and have never been investigated by the CDC or FDA. Why are these blood clots only happening in vaccinated people if the vaccines are safe and effective? See also this article: EXCLUSIVE: Shocking microscopy photos of blood clots extracted from those who “suddenly died” – crystalline structures, nanowires, chalky particles and fibrous structures. Will someone at the FDA provide public assurances that they have investigated these clots and can explain them?
- If the vaccines are safe as represented then why does the blood of vaccinated patients look dramatically different under a darkfield microscope?
- If the vaccines worked as in the trials, how can double-masked, quadruply vaccinated Tony Fauci get COVID?
- The Pfizer data shows nobody became disabled, yet we had 1.8M people added to the disability system after the vaccines rolled out. If the trial data is correct, how did this happen? The trial was large enough to detect a signal this large, so how could it have gone undetected?
- The documents released by Pfizer show a large number of discrepancies that are impossible to explain if the trial was executed as stated. Can you investigate all the discrepancies pointed out in articles such as this and this?
- Brook Jackson’s whistleblower suit against Pfizer has not been dismissed by the court.
- The story of patient Augusto Roux needs to be thoroughly investigated. Please see Is Subject #12312982 the Key to Proving Pfizer Vaccine Trial Fraud?
- Why is Sudden Adult Death Syndrome only affecting people who have been vaccinated with the COVID vaccines? Is there a counter-example?
- Why are athletes dying at 22X the normal rate? And why is this only happening after the vaccines rolled out?
- Why are there more deaths reported associated with the COVID vaccines in VAERS than for all vaccines combined in the 32 year history of the VAERS system? It isn’t over-reporting because the deaths for all other vaccines for all years is still completely normal as you can see from this chart:
Mortality chart from OpenVAERS shows that the death reports are elevated only for the COVID vaccines and not for any other vaccines in the entire history of the VAERS system
- Shouldn’t the FDA and CDC call for a protective order to prevent retribution by state medical boards against physicians who are reporting adverse events and death following vaccination on social media? Clearly, the CDC and FDA are extremely safety conscious and would want to know about these incidents? So why not make a statement encouraging licensed MDs to speak out?
- Why are there so few autopsies? And why are the detailed autopsies showing causality ignored? And why is the CDC not warning people about the risk of death?
- Why is the public not permitted to see the assessments made of the 13,225 US deaths reported in the VAERS system that were determined to be not linked to the COVID vaccines?
- Nearly 500 articles in the peer-reviewed medical literature have been written about vaccine adverse events from the mRNA vaccines. That isn’t consistent with a vaccine found to have fewer adverse events than the placebo. Someone is lying. Is it hundreds of authors of peer-reviewed papers? Or was the study flawed? The FDA should investigate this because this needs to be resolved ASAP.
- Dr. John Su at the CDC appears to be a co-conspirator with Pfizer to hide the safety data. Whenever he presents, he never mentions that the VAERS data should be multiplied by the appropriate under-reporting factor (URF). This allows the vaccines to look 100 times safer than they actually are. He knows he shouldn’t be doing this, but this hasn’t inhibited his actions at all. The FDA and CDC refuse to acknowledge what the VAERS URF is for these vaccines and they stonewall newspaper reporters who ask about it. How is that being transparent?
- Anecdotal data from physicians. There is simply too much anecdotal data from formerly pro-vax physicians who report patients who are previously healthy become “unhealthy” (new disease, existing disease reoccurs, or cognitive decline, or menstrual issues) shortly after being vaccinated. How can that be if the rates are the same before and after the vaccine?
Disappearing MSN Article – Severe COVID-19 ‘Rare’ In Unvaccinated People, Survey Reveals
MSN quickly removes article along with the study itself
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | June 17, 2022
I am back after a disruptive week, flight cancelled, tech stolen etc.
The bonus about having limited access to the internet is that by the time I started to write about a news article I was reading, it had been removed. Normally I wouldn’t have noticed but my sporadic typing meant going back and forth to the article over a number of days.
I was going to write about the study in the article but instead I will preserve the original article itself which was published on MSN.com
*UPDATE – As I type the actual study has been removed as well*
Severe COVID-19 ‘Rare’ In Unvaccinated People, Survey Reveals
A survey has found that people who did not get the vaccine had a lower rate of suffering severe COVID-19 amid the pandemic.
The survey uploaded to the preprint server ResearchGate presented data from more than 18,500 respondents from the “Control Group” project with more than 300,000 overall participants. An analysis revealed that compared to those who got jabbed, unvaccinated people reported fewer hospitalizations.
The international survey also found that the unvaccinated people from more than 175 countries were more likely to self-care to prevent and manage COVID-19 infection. They used natural products like vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, quercetin, and drugs, such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Many participants experienced discrimination for refusing the administration of “genetic vaccines” and struggled with mental health burdens due to the stigma in the mostly “vaccinated” society.
The participants admitted to avoiding vaccines due to their preference for natural medicine interventions and skepticism of pharmaceutical interventions. They also voiced distrust of government information and fear of the possible adverse effects of the vaccines in the long run.
The survey was conducted from September 2021 through February 2022. During the period, participants experienced mild to moderate COVID-19 infection and were infrequently hospitalized.
A number of female participants suffered menstrual and bleeding abnormalities, prompting the researchers who analyzed the data to surmise that the issues might have been caused by spike protein exposure and shedding, as per The Epoch Times.
Data collected from the survey were analyzed and interpreted by an independent, international team of scientists led by Robert Verkerk, Ph.D., the founder and executive and scientific director of Alliance for Natural Health International.
The link to the original article is here but as you can see this just diverts back to the home page.
Wayback Machine seems to be empty but fortunately Google has cached it for now.
The study itself can be read on ResearchGate. (Update – this has now been removed). However, this one is still available on the Wayback Machine.
It used data from a UK citizen-led cooperative called the Control Group Cooperative (CGC). This was formed in July 2021 “to represent the interests of individuals and families around the world who have chosen to not receive COVID-19 ‘vaccine’. Among the aims of the CGC is to evaluate long-term health outcomes among the COVID-19 vaccine-free, as well as linking its members to country support networks and online community groups. Participants who join the ‘control group’ may obtain an ID card (Fig. 1), in the relevant language. The card includes the statement that the individual is part of a SARS-CoV-2 Control Group and “must not be vaccinated”. Many members have reported that these ID cards have been successful in allowing travel, preventing forced vaccination (vaccination without informed consent) or avoiding the loss of liberties, such as access to venues otherwise limited to COVID-19-vaccinated individuals.”
There were around 300,000 members of the CGC which were predominantly from Europe (40.2%) with 25% from North America and 27% from Oceania. Approximately 18,500 were part of the survey on which the study was based.
The study was independent to the CGC and looked at the first five months of survey data. By using data from this group there is an obvious bias but interesting to see the results nevertheless.
Findings included the fact that the unvaccinated did not place a disproportionate burden on health systems. In fact only 0.4% of the cohort were hospitalised with COVID-19 which compared with 0.6% for the US population as a whole.
Reasons for individuals not wanting to be vaccinated was an almost equal five way split between preferring natural medication (16.8%), distrust of pharmaceutical intervention (16.4%), distrust of government information (16.4%), poor/limited trial study data (16.3%) and fear of long-term adverse reactions (15.4%).
Almost 75% of respondents, who had COVID-19, engaged in self-care using vitamins (such as D and C), minerals (zinc), quercetin, as well as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The amount of people using dietary supplements was highest in the USA with 71% of respondents but still relatively high at 60-65% in the rest of the Western world.
A surprising finding was that there were common reports of menstrual disturbances and bleeding abnormalities in the unvaccinated female cohort. The authors suggest a number of reasons this may have occurred, including: COVID-19, pandemic lifestyle changes, shedding exposure or chronic stress.
Around 40% of respondents reported mental health problems due to the psychological stress of the pandemic. It is suggested that “the mental health burden may be associated more to the human response to the pandemic, rather than psychological, fear-based reactions to any threat posed by the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself. This includes discrimination in the workplace, by peers or by family members, as well as victimisation by states (governments/health authorities) owing to ‘unvaccinated’ status.
Much of this disproportionate and discriminatory treatment is likely the result of widespread misunderstandings about, and over-stated benefits of, COVID-19 ‘vaccines’, false claims over societal risks posed by the unvaccinated, media and state propaganda and coercion to ensure high rates of COVID-19 vaccination, institutional mandates, and the desire for in-group identity as explained by social identity theory (Scheepers and Derks, 2016).”
As I said above, the study is clearly biased. However, there is some interesting data to look at (which public health authorities have largely hidden or not collected) and so this study should not be disappeared. It should remain to be dissected and analysed and if others decide the findings are nonsense, it is for them to argue the reasons why.
Minsk deal was used to buy time – Ukraine’s Poroshenko
Petro Poroshenko said the Minsk agreements “meant nothing” – ©STR / NurPhoto via Getty Images
Samizdat | June 17, 2022
Petro Poroshenko has admitted that the 2015 ceasefire in Donbass, which he negotiated with Russia, France and Germany as president of Ukraine, was merely a distraction intended to buy time for Kiev to rebuild its military.
He made the comments in interviews with several news outlets this week, including Germany’s Deutsche Welle television and the Ukrainian branch of the US state-run Radio Free Europe. Poroshenko also defended his record as president between 2014 and 2019.
“We had achieved everything we wanted,” he said of the peace deal. “Our goal was to, first, stop the threat, or at least to delay the war – to secure eight years to restore economic growth and create powerful armed forces.”
He cited Sun Tzu’s stratagems as an inspiration for the deception. Winning a war does not necessarily require winning military engagements, Poroshenko said, calling the deal he made a win for Ukraine in that regard.
Poroshenko failed to be reelected in a landslide vote for President Volodymyr Zelensky, who promised voters that, unlike his predecessor, he would secure peace in Donbass.
In the interviews, Poroshenko spoke about his role in negotiating the Minsk agreements, a roadmap for reconciliation between his government and the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The former president apparently confirmed that Kiev hadn’t come to the talks in good faith, but simply wanted a reprieve after suffering a military defeat.
The agreements included a series of measures designed to rein in hostilities in Donbass and reconcile the warring parties. The first steps were a ceasefire and an OSCE-monitored pullout of heavier weapons from the frontline, which were fulfilled to some degree.
Kiev was then supposed to grant general amnesty to the rebels and extensive autonomy for the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. Ukrainian troops were supposed to take control of the rebel-held areas after Kiev granted them representation and otherwise reintegrated them as part of Ukraine.
Poroshenko’s government refused to implement these portions of the deal, claiming it could not proceed unless it fully secured the border between the rebellious republics and Russia. He instead endorsed an economic blockade of the rebel regions initiated by Ukrainian nationalist forces.
Zelensky’s presidency gave an initial boost to the peace process, but it stalled again after a series of protests by right-wing radicals, who threatened to dispose of the new Ukrainian president if he tried to deliver on his campaign promises.
Kiev’s failure to implement the roadmap and the continued hostilities with rebels were among the primary reasons that Russia cited when it attacked Ukraine in late February. Days before launching the offensive, Moscow recognized the breakaway Ukrainian republics as sovereign states, offering them security guarantees and demanding that Kiev pull back its troops. Zelensky refused to comply.
Now an opposition MP, Poroshenko, called on Western nations to provide more and heavier weapons for Kiev so that Ukrainian soldiers can “do [the West’s] job” and defend Europe from Russia. He also called for more anti-Russia sanctions and for his country to join the EU and NATO as soon as possible.
Poroshenko claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin was the one who broke the Minsk agreements. He claimed credit for Ukraine not falling into Russia’s hands within a matter of days, which was the prediction of some Western officials. The country stood up to the attack thanks to military reforms that his government implemented, the former president claimed. Moscow never gave a timeline for its military operation in Ukraine, stating only that it has proceeded as intended.
The Ukrainian official also called for the “de-Putinization” of Europe, his own country and Russia itself. He said this meant curbing Russian influence in other nations and toppling Putin. It is the only way to save the world from an “existential threat” that, Poroshenko claimed, the Russian leader poses.
Why India must decouple from I2U2
Foreign Ministers of India, Israel, UAE, US (clockwise) held a videoconference in October 2021 to launch a ‘Quad’ for West Asia
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JUNE 17, 2022
Indian diplomacy is descending from the sublime to the absurd. Such wild swings signal rank opportunism. These are extraordinary times when to be smart is equated as being opportunistic.
Hardly a week passed since PM Modi received the Iranian Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian in Delhi and expressed high hopes for India-Iran relationship. Now it transpires that India also forms part of the Gang of Four led by US President Joe Biden to “contain” Iran, from a new platform called I2U2 — the ‘I’ being India and Israel, and ‘U’ being US and UAE.
The I2U2 summit in mid-July between Biden, Israeli Prime Minister Bennett, Modi, and Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed is destined to be a signpost in the geopolitics of West Asia. This new Quad first appeared on 18th October 2021 as an offspring of External Affairs Minister Jaishankar’s 5-day trip to Israel when from Tel Aviv he pulled a rabbit out of the hat, leaving the Indian public wonder what new grandstanding their impulsive minister was indulging in.
Between October and July this year, the I2U2 is getting an upgrade from foreign minister to prime minister/president level. On Tuesday, while announcing Biden’s first West Asian tour as president in mid-July, Washington has made some effort to rationalise Biden’s intentions in undertaking the planned visits to Israel and Saudi Arabia. A senior White House official said Biden intends:
- To demonstrate “the return of American leadership to bring countries together”;
- To create “new frameworks that aim to harness unique American capabilities to enable partners to work more closely together, which is essential to a more secure, prosperous, and stable Middle East region over the long term”;
- To build on the “resounding vote isolating Iran last week at the IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna where 30 countries condemned Iran’s lack of compliance with safeguard obligations” (where India, by the way, had abstained from supporting the US move);
- “To make sure we’re doing all we can to strengthen Israel’s security, prosperity, and integration into the larger region, both now and over the longer term”;
- To “focus on Israel’s increasing integration into the region” through new formats other than Abraham Accords, such as the “entirely new grouping of partners… what we call I2U2”!
So, that’s it. India will lend a hand to assist the US to refill the fizz that has gone out of the Abraham Accords. The hope that more countries would join Abraham Accords is withering away. Israel needs to be shown around to prospective suitors in its neighbourhood. I2U2 is, in essence, a dating agency. When it concerns Israel, the role of pandar comes naturally to the US presidents. But why should India squander away its soft power?
The US prestige and influence in West Asia has suffered a severe jolt during the Biden presidency. Not too long ago, Biden had called Saudi Arabia a “pariah” and pledged to make a horrible example of it on account of its human rights record. But now the shoe is on the other foot. Biden is craving for attention from Saudi Arabia. He had taken a second vow not to have any dealings with the powerful Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. But he is now beseeching the proud Prince for an audience. His recent phone calls weren’t answered.
The White House official explained Biden’s U-turn this way: “we have important interests interwoven with Saudi Arabia, and engagement is essential to protecting and advancing those interests on behalf of the American people.” In reality, Biden is swallowing pride and reviving the old matrix of US-Saudi relationship riveted on the petrodollar.
With poll rating falling abysmally low, Biden is desperate to tackle the rising inflation in the US economy, and the soaring price of oil is fuelling public disaffection. Saudi Arabia can help Biden salvage his standing.
However, it is the turn of the Saudis now to tell Americans there’s no free lunch. They want a written treaty to the effect that the US won’t ditch them when the crunch time comes or if the Kingdom or the ruling family feels insecure. Put differently, they want the Americans to act as their Praetorian guards as before.
In return, of course, Saudis will generate massive business for the US military-industrial complex, recycle their petrodollar to strengthen the Western banking system and create lucrative business for American companies — in short, help the beleaguered Western economies to pursue their post-pandemic recovery that is getting derailed by the war in Ukraine.
Indeed, the Saudis also have a rich history of lavishly greasing the palm of the American elite in the administration, the Pentagon and the Congress. In a nutshell, Biden as a seasoned operator in the Beltway knows which side of the bread is buttered.
But to rationalise his U-turn, an alibi is needed. So, Biden has decided to hoist “Iranian threat” as the leitmotif of the revamped US-Saudi security alliance. All signs are that Biden has acceded to the Saudi demand to scuttle the JCPOA and pile new sanctions against Iran, although the negotiations in Vienna are in home stretch and an agreement is within sight.
Biden’s West Asian agenda is completely US-centric, aimed at securing US business interests and shoring up its regional influence. Israel, of course, is a “holy cow”. Very soon Biden will begin fund-raising for his re-election bid in 2024, and Jewish donors are a generous lot.
However, the million dollar question remains: What has India got to do with Biden’s agenda? There are real risks, for the subplot here is that Biden hopes to nix India’s plans to revive its atrophied relationship with Iran. The recent visit of the Iranian foreign minister to India would have set alarm bells ringing in Washington and Tel Aviv.
Biden has a game plan for leaders like Modi who have a tendency to disregard the US diktat occasionally. Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan spoke candidly just the other day:
“We’re playing the long game here. We are investing in a relationship (with India) that we are not going to judge by one issue even if that issue is quite consequential, but rather that we are going to judge over the fullness of time, as we try to work to convergence on the major strategic questions facing our two countries.
“On one of those questions — how to deal with the challenge posed by China — there’s much more convergence today, and that is important to US foreign policy. On the question of Russia, obviously, we have different historical perspectives, different muscle memories, but we feel confident that the dialogue we have going with India right now will bear fruit over time.”
Sullivan was discussing India’s time-tested relationship with Russia — how Washington hopes to erode and dissolve it all in good time.
Plainly put, Americans estimate that Indians have no “staying power,” or “big picture.” They probably estimate that the Indian government would grab the I2U2 platform to burnish its international image. But if there is any sanity left in the Indian foreign policy establishment, a subaltern role to serve US and Israeli interests cannot enhance India’s prestige in West Asia where, as it is, Modi government is perceived as an Islamophobic regime backed by religious fanatics.
In the life of individuals and nations alike, there are moments when one has to learn to say “no.” This self-serving, cynical overture from 78-year old Biden is one such moment. That’s why, despite zero chance of India turning down Biden’s invite, not to urge Modi to say “Nyet” to I2U2 will be a serious lapse.
South Block is underestimating the gravity of its folly. India never ever got entangled in the intra-regional issues in West Asia. It never acted as the surrogate of extra-regional powers, either. Most important, it never sought the “containment” of any regional state. That’s how it held its head high in the choppy waters of the Persian Gulf.
Featured Video
‘Never vaccinated’ vs ‘Ever vaccinated’ mortality rate illusion
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Psychiatric drugs kill 500k+ Western adults annually, few positive benefits – leading scientist
RT | May 13, 2015
Psychiatric drugs lead to the deaths of over 500,000 people aged 65 and over annually in the West, a Danish scientist says. He warns the benefits of these drugs are “minimal,” and have been vastly overstated.
Research director at Denmark’s Nordic Cochrane Centre, Professor Peter Gøtzsche, says the use of most antidepressants and dementia drugs could be halted without inflicting harm on patients. The Danish scientist’s views were published in the British Medical Journal on Tuesday.
His scathing analysis will likely prove controversial among traditional medics. However, concern is mounting among doctors and scientists worldwide that psychiatric medication is doing more harm than good. In particular, they say antipsychotic drugs have been over-prescribed to many dementia patients in a bid to calm agitated behavior.
Gøtzsche warns psychiatric drugs kill patients year in year out, and hold few positive benefits. He says in excess of half a million citizens across the Western world aged 65 and over die annually as a result of taking these drugs.
“Their benefits would need to be colossal to justify this, but they are minimal,” he writes.
“Given their lack of benefit, I estimate we could stop almost all psychotropic drugs without causing harm.”
Gøtzsche, who is also a clinical trials expert, says drug trials funded by big pharmaceutical companies tend to produce biased results because many patients took other medication prior to the tests.
He says patients cease taking the old drugs and then experience a phase of withdrawal prior to taking the trial pharmaceuticals, which appear highly beneficial at first.
The Danish professor also warns fatalities from suicides in clinical trials are significantly under-reported. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
michael on Serbs Aware of UK’s… roberthstiver on Putin and Xi Standing Firm on… roberthstiver on Putin and Xi Standing Firm on… Thomas Lee Simpson on Why hypersonic weapons change… Bill Francis on Why I don’t believe there ever… spy on this on I am the “US-based Kremlin int… Balthasar Gerards on Why I don’t believe there ever… Thomas Lee Simpson on Biden fails to dismiss censors… 5 dancing shlomos on Is Dr. Malone Invested in Huma… Pip on Mom files lawsuit after being… jbthring on Setting the record straight on… rediscover911com on Why I don’t believe there ever…
Aletho News- Ron Unz: JFK Assassination, Iranian Channel Four TV (IRIB) March 24, 2023
- Mexican President Says Trump Arrest is About Keeping Him Off the Ballot March 23, 2023
- Russian governor’s son flees house arrest in Italy March 23, 2023
- Turkiye ‘reviewing options’ for Syria withdrawal: Report March 23, 2023
- Iraq war is epitomy of media duplicity March 23, 2023
- US to build new military bases near South China Sea March 23, 2023
- Why hypersonic weapons change everything March 23, 2023
- Serbs Aware of UK’s ‘Gift’ for Ukraine: NATO Poisoned Serbia’s Soil for Billions of Years to Come March 23, 2023
- Putin and Xi Standing Firm on the Right Side of History March 23, 2023
- Western Sanctions Targeting Russians Failed, PM Mishustin Says March 23, 2023
- Russia’s economy recovers while dozens of US banks face collapse March 23, 2023
- ‘Never vaccinated’ vs ‘Ever vaccinated’ mortality rate illusion: Survivor bias and how to overcome it March 23, 2023
- Indiana’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles is caught collecting and selling personal data March 23, 2023
- I am the “US-based Kremlin intermediary” that tried to help Tucker Carlson book an interview with Putin March 23, 2023
- Mom files lawsuit after being reported to law enforcement for questioning “polysexual” school poster March 22, 2023
- Biden fails to dismiss censorship collusion lawsuit March 22, 2023
- Is Dr. Malone Invested in Humanity or Transhumanism? March 22, 2023
- Why I don’t believe there ever was a Covid virus March 22, 2023
- If Americans Knew
- Bezalel Smotrich calls a lie “the biblical truth” March 22, 2023
- Joel Osteen’s startling interview with Bibi Netanyahu March 20, 2023
- Thursday-Friday: Israeli forces kill 5 Palestinians March 18, 2023
- Brownstone Institute
- How They Convinced Trump to Lock Down March 23, 2023
- The Lab Leak and the Counter Measures: What Really Happened March 23, 2023
- The Latest in the War on Science March 23, 2023
- The Covid Disaster was Foreshadowed with Love Canal March 23, 2023
- The Real Trauma of Love Canal March 22, 2023
- The Narrative in Retreat March 22, 2023
- Richie Allen
- Bordeaux Town Hall Burnt Down By Pension Reform Protesters March 24, 2023
- Scottish Schools Tell Kids There Are THREE Biological Sexes March 24, 2023
- Greta Thunberg To Sue Sweden For Climate Change Inaction March 23, 2023
- USA Today Names BLOKE In WOMEN Of The Year List March 23, 2023
- Not A Lot Of People Know That
- Prominent physicist warns that wind power “fails on every count” March 23, 2023
- Rural Homes Will Be Forced To Install Unaffordable Heat Pumps March 23, 2023
- Met Office & Their Opinion Poll March 22, 2023
- Climate change isn’t ‘particularly dangerous’: Richard Lindzen March 21, 2023
- No Tricks Zone
- Consent Factory
- The Censorship Industrial Complex March 10, 2023
Aletho News 