Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The mad rush for ventilators in the Covid-19 killing fields, Part 2

By Niall McCrae and Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | April 18, 2023

This is the second of our two-part series on the role played by ventilators in the pandemic phenomenon. In Part 1 published yesterday, which you can read here, we considered the dubious clinical rationale and adverse outcomes of the widespread use of ventilators, and today we explore the psychological purpose.

VENTILATORS AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL TOOL

‘LOOK her in the eyes and tell her you never break the rules’, exclaimed a billboard posted around the country in spring 2020, each version depicting a petrified patient with a breathing tube or mask. This was the State of Fear documented by Laura Dodsworth (2020) in the aftermath of the first lockdown, imposed purportedly to limit the spread of a deadly new coronavirus. To achieve compliance with an unprecedented deprivation of liberties, the government pushed propaganda at every opportunity, inducing fear of the disease and loathing of anyone daring to stray from pandemic discipline.

For the regime to work, the people needed to be sufficiently scared. The virus was portrayed as universally life-threatening, with an exaggerated fatality rate in the early weeks derived from a relatively low number of cases. The reported rate of about 5 per cent declined after mass testing, which reduced the IFR to nearer that of influenza (this inversion was useful in demonstrating the effectiveness of lockdown and social distancing), but the initial message was highly effective.

Alongside the seriousness of the contagion was an absence of cure. For a patient who developed severe symptoms, typically drowning in pneumonia, the only chance of survival was to be intubated and to rely on a ventilator in the hope of microbial mercy.

Nothing invokes public dread more than scenes of multiple patients on ventilators; even better if those working around them are covered in maximally protective clothing and face masks. Rows of patients in ordinary hospital beds would not have had the same effect; indeed, in some televised recordings politicians visiting wards were met by stoical Brits, inconveniently chatty or smiling. NHS hospitals became a tightly scripted stage show, as illustrated by nurses doing choreographed TikTok dances (often imploring people to ‘stay at home’), and activist Debbie Hicks arrested (and later fined almost £1,000) for filming in her local hospital corridors.

‘Ventilator’ became le mot du jour in conversations with friends and family. This was all part of the theatre: overwhelmed doctors and nurses, beds in the corridors, hurriedly built Nightingale hospitals (which never fully opened), and a treatment apparatus that filled minds with fear. Being put on a ventilator may be traumatising, one Covid-19 patient reflecting on it as the ‘worst experience of her life’. The blunt message was that if you wanted to avoid such drastic intervention you must follow all guidelines and mandates.  Through their daily projection in mainstream media, ventilators were a useful tool for compliance with social distancing, lockdown, regular testing and mask-wearing.

Indeed, we suggest that the deployment of ventilators was primarily for psychological rather than clinical reasons. For many watching the news on television, this machine was as terrifying as the disease. Furthermore, it contributed to the government-desired yearning for a promised vaccine. Mainstream media, controlled by the authorities throughout the pseudo-pandemic, contributed to the fear by reporting that one’s chances of survival on a ventilator were at best 50:50. As discussed in Part One, the real odds were only about one in four.

Although ventilators aroused fear, their scarcity was also instrumental. As the outbreak reached the UK, people had seen images of chaotic hospitals in Italy, and wanted to believe that the wonderful NHS would be better prepared. Instead, they were told by news bulletins that only a fraction of the necessary machines were available. Reckless rule-breakers, perceived as tantamount to murderers running amok, were deemed undeserving of such resources.

On March 15 2020 prime minister Boris Johnson called on British manufacturing firms to adapt their production lines to making ventilators, with the Department of Health issuing specifications to companies that expressed interest. Yet despite the appearance of the government going on a war footing, there was no requisitioning, which you would expect if the need was so dire. Dyson designed a new machine, CoVent, but decided not to proceed with mass production after Covid-19 cases had passed a peak. Similarly in the US, the federal government announced a budget of a billion dollars for ventilator production, having lined up companies such as General Motors, but only a small fraction of the order was fulfilled.

Having failed to achieve its initial target of 18,000 mechanical ventilators by the end of April, the UK government was reportedly making substantial progress towards the later target of 30,000 by the end of June. Although incidence was falling, the authorities were preparing the public for a predicted second wave of the pandemic. Despite the disastrous results, and knowing that ultimately supply would vastly outstrip demand, ventilators remained centre-stage.

Like testing kits and other Covid-19 paraphernalia, ventilator provision was mired in allegations of ministers’ conflict of interest and corruption. As reported by Private Eye in Profits of Doom, thousands of these ventilators went into storage in Ministry of Defence warehouses. Nevertheless, the money for their purchase is stored in the bank accounts of the people who, subject to little scrutiny, supplied them.

Ventilators were elevated to a first-line treatment when they should have been a last resort. Their use as an instrument of fear is abhorrent, but worse is the suspicion that such equipment caused death. At the very least we can say that physicians continued to put Covid-19 patients on ventilators in the knowledge that this would most likely hasten their demise. This is quite a charge, but have we not seen enough crimes against humanity over the last three years to think the unthinkable?

April 18, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

AIDS – Fauci’s First Fraud

Rumble – Full Documentary

Full Documentary – Youtube:

Full Documentary – Bitchute

In honor of the memories of Nobel prize winner Kary Mullis (1944-2019), researcher and gay rights activist Hank Wilson (1947-2008), writer and activist Christine Maggiore (1956-2008), journalist Terry Michael (1947-2017), journalist Liam Scheff (d. 2017), and biomedical researcher David Crowe (d. 2020) who worked ceaselessly and courageously to expose the numerous frauds of Anthony Fauci and his fellow conspirators in the HIV=AIDS industry.

This is the story they would have us believe.

A deadly new virus is discovered… there’s no treatment or cure… it’s highly contagious… everyone is a potential victim… the world is at risk from asymptomatic super spreaders…new clusters of cases reported daily…

Everyone must get tested even though the tests are unreliable… positive antibody tests are called “infections” and “cases” even when the patient has no symptoms…every politician gets involved… media hysteria in high gear… activists demand salvation from government and Big Pharma…

Billions of dollars are authorized for fast track drug and vaccine research… simple, effective remedies are rejected while expensive, dangerous ones are pushed…presumptive diagnoses… exaggerated death statistics… falsified death certificates…

Covid 2020?

No.

AIDS in the 1980s.

Every single fraud technique being used today to “sell” CoVid hysteria was invented in the 1980s and 1990s by Tony Fauci to sell the AIDS fraud.

Are you surprised to hear AIDS called a fraud? You won’t be after you see this film.

This is the first and only film to put Fauci where he belongs: squarely in the middle of the AIDS fraud story.

Share widely.

Demolishing the AIDS fraud is one of the keys to undermining the CoVid Con and it will save millions of lives here in the US, in Africa and around the world.

Sections:

CoVid response’s social impact – 00:11

Fauci’s Public Face – 04:20

Fauci’s Power Base: AIDS – 05:41

Aids: Fauci First Fraud – 09:50

Peter Duesberg challenges HIV = AIDS – 15:24

AZT: The Untold Story – 21:22

Who Ran ACT-UP? – 29:25

Poppers: Fauci Hides the Smoking Gun – 45:47

A Look at Testing – 01:02:26

Summary – 01:28:01

Sources:

AIDS – A Second Opinion (2001), Gary Null & Associates

AIDS Inc. (2007), Gary Null

AIDS: The Unheard Voices (Dispatches series) (1987), Meditel Productions/Joan Shenton

AZT: Cause for Concern (Dispatches series) (1991), Meditel Productions/Joan Shenton

Deconstructing the Myth of AIDS (2003), Gary Null

House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic (2009), Brent W. Leung

Perspectives on the Pandemic (Episodes 3, 4, 5) (2020), Journeyman Pictures/Libby Handros & John Kirby

The Age of AIDS (Frontline) (2006), PBS/Renata Simone

The Other Side of AIDS (2004), Robin Scovill

April 18, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

The mad rush for ventilators in the Covid killing fields, Part 1

By Niall McCrae and Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | April 17, 2023

‘You’ll end up on a ventilator’. That threat was frequently aimed at dissidents in the early months of Covid-19. ‘End’ is the operative word, as most patients who were put on to the mechanical breathing apparatus lost their lives. Many may have died anyway, but undoubtedly ventilators did more harm than good.

As Registered Nurses, we are concerned by needless iatrogenic deaths in the Covid-19 regime, whether by excessive use of midazolam, cardiovascular harm from vaccines, curtailed access to cancer screening and surgery, or the impact of fear-inducing  propaganda. What was the role played by ventilators in the pandemic phenomenon?

We have divided this review into ‘how’ and ‘why’. In Part One we  consider the dubious clinical rationale and adverse outcomes of such widespread treatment, and in Part Two we explore its psychological purposing. It’s not a pretty picture.

THE CLINICAL CARNAGE

IMAGINE being admitted to hospital for any reason and after testing positive for a respiratory virus, being moved to another ward, sedated into semi-consciousness and hooked up to a mechanical breathing machine. How on earth did you get here? Yet this was a common fate of hospital patients admitted in the Covid-19 outbreak in 2020. For too many, it was a silent spring, as their last breaths were taken before the tube was passed into their lungs.

A ventilator operates by a tube inserted through the mouth reaching down the windpipe into the lungs, blowing oxygen in and enabling exhalation of carbon dioxide out. The ventilated patient is normally sedated, partly to reduce distress caused by losing the ability to breathe naturally.

In an exchange with TCW editor Kathy Gyngell, former Pfizer chief scientist Mike Yeadon asserted: ‘I believe they were sedating, intubating and ventilating people admitted for non-respiratory reasons if they tested positive for Covid. My bottom line is that close to zero people should ever have been ventilated. Did you know that once sedated/unconscious and ventilated, everyone will die in due course? It’s a horribly dangerous procedure. When lifesaving like deep surgery or after trauma in a road accident, or perhaps a chest wall injury or stabbing and pneumothorax, or if you’ve an obstructive lung disease and are physically exhausted by the work of breathing, and finally a 50 per cent burn victim in agony, mechanical ventilation may be justified.’

The equipment is not standard treatment for influenza and pneumonia, a leading cause of death in older people, for whom such intervention would normally be regarded as unnecessarily invasive (and costly). Indeed, Yeadon doubts whether any patients testing positively for Covid-19 should have been ventilated.

The mad rush for ventilators began after the virus reached Italy and then spread across Europe and North America. On March 25 2020 the analytics company GlobalData estimated that about 10 per cent of the Covid-19 cases worldwide needed ventilators and that 888,000 ventilators would be needed. The company’s medical devices analyst Tina Deng said: ‘Ventilator shortages are a crucial reality as the Covid-19 outbreak continues to worsen globally. All ventilator manufacturers have full order books and hold little in stock – receiving orders not only from regular customers such as hospitals, but also directly from governments.’

Italy became the benchmark for the rest of Europe, but account was not taken of the uniqueness of the Italian health service. Before Covid-19, Italy had considerably higher bed occupancy than in the UK. With similar populations (60million for Italy68.5million for UK), the former has 25,000 more beds than the latter (187,000 for Italy162,000 for UK). In 2019 Italians were admitted to hospital a staggering 58.6million times compared with approximately 6million in the UK. Patients in Italy are much more likely to be admitted, with high use of intensive care units (ICU), where Italy has 3.1 beds per 1,000 people compared with 2.4 in the UK.

At the time of the Covid-19 outbreak the NHS had 5,000 adult and 900 child ventilators, but at least 30,000 were deemed necessary for the surge in pandemic patients. The government called on major British manufacturers such as Rolls-Royce and Dyson to build ventilators instead of engines and vacuum cleaners (see Part Two).

But ventilators were clearly no panacea. In April 2020 the Daily Mail reported data from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre on the first 777 Covid-19 patients treated in 285 ICUs, showing that only 34 of 98 ventilated patients lived to tell the tale. According to the newspaper, volunteers at the hurriedly erected Nightingale Hospital in London were told that 80 per cent of patients on ventilators would die.

On April 9 the Independent reported that ‘some working on the front lines of the coronavirus epidemic are now wondering whether (ventilators) might do more harm than expected’. On the same day the Daily Mail went almost as far as saying that doctors knew that this intervention was killing people. On April 26 an NIH pre-print reported that ‘mortality rates range from 50-97 per cent in those requiring mechanical ventilation’. Meanwhile the US publications STAT (twice) and Time both reported warnings by physicians that use of ventilators for Covid-19 patients was misguided.

As Kit Knightly remarked in OffGuardian (May 4 2020),  ‘over-use of ventilators may actually be killing people who could otherwise have survived’. Knightly’s detailed article explained why so many patients were dying, including this quote from German pulmonologist Thomas Voshaar: ‘Invasive ventilation is fundamentally bad for patients. Even if the ventilator is optimally adjusted and the care is perfect, the treatment brings with it many complications. The lungs are sensitive to two things: excess pressure and excessive oxygen concentration in the air supplied . . . The terminal failure of the lungs is often caused by too high pressure and too much oxygen.’

Rather than ameliorating pulmonary infection, ventilators increase the risk. Under sedation, the intubated, ventilated patient’s cough reflex is disabled, often leading to fluid accumulating in the lungs. These stagnant pools are prone to bacterial infection (particularly in the microbial culture of a general hospital). Survivors of ventilation are often left with lasting damage. A study published in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene found that mechanical ventilation seriously damages the lungs of Covid-19 patients.

After the frenzied quest, ventilators were quietly dropped. According to the BMJ60 to 75 per cent of Covid-19 patients admitted to hospital in the UK in April 2020 were subjected to this apparatus. However, according to recent UK Government figures for the seven days leading up to April 6 2023, only 4 per cent of the same type of patient were ventilated. As Ingrid Torjesen said in the BMJ in January 2021: ‘The pace of the move away from invasive ventilation varies among hospitals and has been driven by greater clinical experience of treating covid patients, by data associating invasive ventilation with higher mortality.’ Yet as we have shown, there was never a good medical rationale for intubating and ventilating patients as a front-line treatment.

One ICU nurse we interviewed about the early days of Covid-19 described policy and practice on ventilation as ‘a farce’, with no consistency between physicians. But policies must have existed, whether on paper or not. Unsubstantiated anecdotes proliferated on social media of ambulant patients being intubated and ventilated to immobilise them to reduce transmission. A YouTube video by nurse Erin Marie Olszewski, featuring covertly recorded conversations in the intensive care unit of a New York hospital, tells of the tragic death of a 37-year-old man. Admitted with shortness of breath but otherwise healthy, this case illustrated how patients were regarded by hospital management as throughput, placed on ventilators simply because they had low oxygen level. In the killing fields of New York more than 80 per cent of ventilator cases died, and according to Olszewski one person who did not perish saved himself by pulling the tube out. She attributed this radical practice to orders ‘from above’ and financial incentives from the government; it was literally cash for corpses.

Most doctors and nurses who worked through the great pandemic scare of 2020 would be aghast at any implication that they were knowingly terminating lives. As with most aspects of Covid-19, the pandemic response was orchestrated at a higher level, but this does not excuse any clinician who departed from the Hippocratic Oath to first do no harm. Ventilators killed, but as we shall discuss in Part 2, they also had a much wider, malign impact on society.

April 16, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Novel Vaccine Technologies in Veterinary Medicine: A Herald to Human Medicine Vaccines

Explosion of Genetic Vaccines in Animals Gets Human Attention

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | April 16, 2023

The mRNA and adenoviral DNA COVID-19 vaccine debacle in humans has set populations on edge, distrustful of poorly conceived genetic technology. Meanwhile the field has advanced considerably in veterinary medicine. While these shots may protect animals from pathogens over the short term, what are the implications for our food supply? Any of the genetic material transmissible to humans through consumption? Raw or cooked? These and other questions are coming up as more information is being brought forward.

Aida and colleagues have graphically summarized the genetic technologies in use as of 2021 in veterinary medicine. In the consumer meat category at present, only swine are of concern given the use of plasmid DNA, replication incompetent viral vector, and RNA replicon products. Do these technologies cause noninfectious diseases in the animals? Can any of the genetic material survive denaturing during curing and cooking? How about pork intestines harvested for the production of heparin widely used in human medicine? It is conceivable that genetic incorporation of foreign RNA or DNA into humans and production of antigens for example, porcine endemic diarrhea or influenza A, could have untoward effects including autoimmunity similar to that with the COVID-19 vaccines?

Aida V, Pliasas VC, Neasham PJ, North JF, McWhorter KL, Glover SR, Kyriakis CS. Novel Vaccine Technologies in Veterinary Medicine: A Herald to Human Medicine Vaccines. Front Vet Sci. 2021 Apr 15;8:654289. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.654289. PMID: 33937377; PMCID: PMC8083957.


Now is a good time for veterinary and human medicine including the FDA and USDA, to come together and review the published studies of these new products on genetic transmissibility to humans and its potential implications. The Aida paper does not even mention the possibility of collateral impact to humans. One can see that developers, sponsors, and authors are blinded with infatuation for molecular biology and have lost sight of biological product safety in the food supply.

Aida V, Pliasas VC, Neasham PJ, North JF, McWhorter KL, Glover SR, Kyriakis CS. Novel Vaccine Technologies in Veterinary Medicine: A Herald to Human Medicine Vaccines. Front Vet Sci. 2021 Apr 15;8:654289. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.654289. PMID: 33937377; PMCID: PMC8083957.

April 16, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Droughts developing more rapidly says global study

By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | April 16, 2023

For the first time a new study has confirmed droughts across the world are developing more rapidly as a result of climate change.

The international study identifies flash droughts – which intensify in a matter of weeks – have become more frequent since the late 1950s over 74% of the world’s 33 global regions, especially those over North and East Asia, the Sahara and Europe.

The Met Office’s Dr Peili Wu is one of the paper’s authors. He said: “The transition to more flash droughts is being driven by a combination of rainfall deficit along with amplified rates of soil moisture loss.”

The paper highlights that the transition from slower-onset droughts to flash droughts is projected to expand to most land areas. This transition will become most pronounced with higher rates of global greenhouse emissions.

Obviously, a drought begins with a period with a relative absence of rain or snow. However, increased temperatures and sometimes stronger winds can rapidly amplify the loss of moisture in the soil, exacerbating the speed of the drought’s onset and impacts. This rapidity can lead to the creation of a flash drought. Droughts in their many forms can last for different time periods, from weeks to decades.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/press-office/news/weather-and-climate/2023/droughts-developing-more-rapidly-says-global-study

This has all the trappings of a study written purposely to “prove” a preconceived agenda.

It is of course predicated on a half degree rise in temperatures, the sort of difference between temperatures in Sheffield and Birmingham. Does Birmingham have flash droughts and Sheffield none? Silly question really.

As Dr Wu admits, “flash droughts” do not actually exist, he himself had to invent the term a few years ago, no doubt to pin them on global warming.

The level of moisture in soils is governed by all sorts of factors, but particularly agricultural practices. To attempt to tease out a climate influence is to all intents and purposes impossible, as it would be undetectable.

But there are other serious issues about this study. The first is that global warming has made the world wetter on the whole.

The second is that extra CO2 in the atmosphere has helped to green the planet. In particular, higher concentrations of CO2 mean that plants lose less water to the air. In other words, transpiration is reduced.

Thirdly global cooling in the 1960s, 70s and 80s led directly to massively severe droughts across a wide swathe of the world, from the Sahel across to India and China. The cause was the expansion of the polar air mass which pushed the rainbelts towards the tropics.

https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000074891

Global warming does not lead to more severe droughts, whether flash or not – global cooling does.

Indeed, the world during the ice age was a very dry one, as cold air can hold less moisture. And it is dry air which sucks the moisture out of the ground like a sponge. That is why cold deserts like the Gobi are every bit as dry as the Sahara.

There is very little global data with which to analyse droughts, but there is plenty in the US.

And NOAA’s data is quite explicit. Droughts are now much less severe than they were in the past.

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/national/time-series/110/pdsi/all/3/1895-2023

I am quite sure that Dr Wu and his colleagues are perfectly aware of all of this. That is why they have invented flash droughts, which with some dodgy computer modelling has enabled them to claim something which does not exist.

April 16, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

Zika: The Pandemic That Never Was

BY DR ROGER WATSON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | APRIL 14, 2023

Roger Daltry of mod rock band The Who screamed “We won’t get fooled again” in its lengthy and punchy signature song. But it appears we have. Almost everything that those on the sceptical side of the Covid narrative recognise about the hyped-up nature of the recent pandemic will see parallels in Overturning Zika: the pandemic that never was by Randall S. Bock.

Bock is a U.S. physician who has long harboured scepticism about something that most of us had completely forgotten: the Zika ‘pandemic’ of 2015 in Brazil. Like COVID-19, this was accompanied by dire predictions of deaths in the millions and, parallel to the ridiculous and extraordinary locking down and social distancing mandates of 2020-2021, Zika was accompanied by ludicrous suggestions that women should not have babies and even abort the ones they were carrying. Some did.

Zika is a mosquito-borne virus that is present in South America. According to Wikipedia, it can be associated with the birth defect microcephaly, whereby a child is born with a smaller than normal brain. One source, GAVI (‘The Vaccine Alliance‘) claimed in 2022 that one third of babies exposed pre-birth to Zika developed microcephaly. However, it then proceeded to say there is a “continued need to develop a safe and effective vaccine for preventing Zika virus infections during pregnancy”. GAVI has a vested interest in vaccine production and distribution.

It is worth pointing out that the author of this book is not a tin-foil hat wearing virus sceptic, ‘anti-vaxxer’ or conspiracy theorist. He does not deny the existence of the Zika virus, or specifically deny its potential to cause microcephaly and does not ascribe the manufacturing of the Zika pandemic to evil forces determined to reduce the population of the world. Instead, he examines the evidence as it stands, contextualises this within the scientific paradigm and examines some of the social and media forces at work which fan the flames. Thus, a smouldering fire of (misplaced) suspicion that there was an outbreak of Zika-related microcephaly in Brazil soon became a forest fire of panic across the country and elsewhere in the region.

The simple facts are that a case of microcephaly was attributed to Zika without a shred of evidence that Zika was the cause. Microcephaly occurs in possibly one in every 800-5,000 babies. If you go out armed with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail and other cases of microcephaly were soon identified and misattributed to Zika. In 2019, when Zika was a distant blip in the rear-view mirror, Bock tried to publish a short review demonstrating that the accompanying pandemic had been a mistake, but major medical journals refused to publish it. This was not because it was inaccurate or that what was contained was not fairly common knowledge among the medical community, but in case it undermined public trust in public health initiatives related to Covid. This is what is now referred to as ‘malinformation’; something that is true but uncomfortable for those controlling the narrative.

The story, briefly, is that Zika was considered the cause of a cluster of cases of microcephaly. This was done against a background of poor baseline information about the extent of microcephaly and without specific laboratory testing for the presence of Zika. A purported Zika test had never been standardised and Zika and its close relative dengue fever are almost identical genetically and almost impossible to distinguish. Scepticism about the existence of Zika, based on the poor science applied to its characterisation was quashed and likewise scepticism about the link between it and microcephaly.

In the sceptical free zone that was allowed to exist around the Zika microcephaly story, local, national, regional and international panic ensued. Pregnant women lived in fear that their babies were going to be born brain damaged, the WHO issued travel advice related to the 2016 Brazil Olympics and NPR, never known to let a good pandemic go to waste, reported fears amongst athletes and staff at the games over Zika infection.

However, when accurate Zika testing became available in 2016, the purported link between the virus and microcephaly failed to hold. Zika-related microcephaly, now described as ‘rare’, just disappeared. The only reasonable conclusion, in the absence of a vaccine or additional preventive measures, was that it probably did not exist. In the meantime, pregnant women had been smothering themselves in insecticides potentially harmful to their unborn babies and the family planning lobby had got to work with increased calls for ‘net zero’ related to birth rates.

Bock traces the main characters involved from the group of physicians who initially raised the alarm, through incompetent national health officials up to the ubiquitous eminence grise, without whom no pandemic is complete, Anthony Fauci who said all the usual things about vaccines and public health measures. In this case, rather than being a driving force, Fauci jumped on the Zika bandwagon. What had started as a cock-up soon became a conspiracy. Fauci used Zika to “wage war” on pandemics. We now know what he meant.

The book is written in a very familiar and even colloquial style. It is reasonably easy to read and not too heavy, within the text, on scientific jargon. It does suffer, however, from a somewhat samizdat style of presentation and there is a great deal of repetition of what the appropriate scientific procedures should have been. That said, the opening synopsis is very helpful, makes all the main points and stands alone. The accompanying diagrams and figures are far too busy, poorly produced, and not signposted properly. On the whole, some ruthless editing may have helped to produce a more concise text. Nevertheless, this is a book that should be read.

Randall S. Bock (2023) Overturning Zika: the pandemic that never was. Drivestraight Publishing, Istanbul, is available to purchase on Amazon.

Dr. Roger Watson is Academic Dean of Nursing at Southwest Medical University, China. He has a PhD in biochemistry.

April 15, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

The Indoctrinators, Part 3: Bill Gates

This is the third in our series about four well-known men whose purposeful social engineering over the years has undermined national democracies and economies, and created fertile ground for the final realisation of their post democracy dream of a global socialist/fascist world, controlled by supranational organisations such as the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organisation (WHO) and of course, themselves. They are George Soros (you can read Tuesday’s article here), Klaus Schwab (yesterday’s article is here), Bill Gates (today) and David Attenborough.

By Karen Harradine | TCW Defending Freedom | April 13, 2023

BILL Gates has a messiah complex. His obsession with ‘climate change’, vaccines and people control is proving dangerous for the world. Only a few weeks ago he gave voice to his latest megalomaniac plan for a global pandemic prison state. And as the past proves, what Gates wants he usually gets.

Together with his fellow Indoctrinators, George Soros and Klaus Schwab, 67-year-old Gates has not missed the opportunity provided by the Covid-19 crisis (which he helped to engineer) to further his revolutionist ‘global development’ green agenda. Following their precedent, he too created a foundation through which to impose his ghastly visions on an unfortunate world.

Since its inception in 2000, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), under its philanthropic guise, has found plenty of useful idiots across world governments willing to fund and support it. Successive witless British Prime Ministers, up to and including Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak, have fallen under his spell with Gates hugely benefiting from this priceless endorsement and publicity. Given his malign agenda, Western taxpayers have literally been paying for their own demise.

Gates is an enthusiastic partner of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and attendee at their gatherings in Davos, which he typically uses to announce his latest plans to drain the West of its resources to fund his vaccine and climate change lunacy. In 1999, he formed the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), which he cleverly partnered with the United Nations (UN), BMGF, foreign aid agencies and pharmaceutical companies. It was to become, together with the BMGF, the second biggest source of funding to the World Health Organisation (WHO).

More than 80 per cent of the WHO’s budget comes from voluntary contributions by member states and donors. In 2021, the BMGF was the second largest contributor with $375million, and GAVI the fourth with $245million. Both have a long history of influencing the WHO (the BMGF’s first donation was in1998). Uniquely the BMGF became its official partner in 2017, further focusing the WHO’s public health priorities on to vaccines. An enabler of and publicist for the toxic Covid-19 vaccine, his close connection with the WHO has reaped him huge profits. 

The WHO’s deeply disturbing proposed Pandemic Treaty effectively puts into action Gates’s planned grasp for global control as he detailed in his 2022 book, ‘How to Prevent the Next Pandemic’. It has been long in the planning.

In 2003, on a Davos panel called ‘Science for the Global Good’, Gates announced his foundation’s gift of $200million to the US National Institutes of Health to set up the Grand Challenges in Global Health, a vehicle for shifting US tax money into the developing world in pursuit of Gates’s own interests. 

In 2010, Gates and his wife heralded a ‘decade of vaccines’ at Davos, pledging $10billion to fund vaccines in ‘poor countries’, a vaccine zealotry which has had some appalling outcomes for which Gates has expressed no remorse. In one example, nearly half a million children in India were paralysed after taking BMGF-funded polio vaccine. Despite such appalling consequences, Gates, with an honorary knighthood in the bag from the Queen, is still widely regarded as a benign philanthropist. There’s no doubt that money buys reputation.

Like Soros, Gates has a prominent platform on the WEF website to promote green investments worth billions of dollars. A devotee of the UN’s Agenda 2030, Gates is co-chair of the Global Commission on Adaptation.

Today, thanks to our unprincipled politicians, Gates has a hotline to Downing Street and Britain finds itself in the clutches of a megalomaniac. His tentacles reach far and wide, from shaping energy policies and dominating scientific organisations and academic research, to financing the mainstream media.

In 1997, Tony Blair invited him into Downing Street to sell his flawed computer system, going on to host him several times, implementing policies based on his dictates and in his financial interests. It was an association Blair was to prosper from, later getting $3.2million for his Global Africa initiative and more than $25.2million for his Institute of Global Change.

In 2010, Gates and his wife visited the Department for International Development (DFID) to hector ministers on supporting foreign aid while promoting his Living Proof project, funded also by Soros’s Open Society Foundations and the Rockefeller Foundation.

Billionaires persuading politicians to plunder public resources to fund their own megalomaniac ambitions is not just deeply distasteful but wrong. Yet between 2011 and 2019, Gates got DFID to give over £60million for BMGF development projects.

In 2016, George Osborne pledged £2.5billion to another BMGF association, the Ross Fund. Three years later, the BMGF and World Bank ‘partnered’ with DFID to shovel more taxpayers’ money to foreign despots in the name of ‘education systems’. 

In November 2020, after Johnson played his part in the hysteria over Covid-19, Gates met him and pharmaceutical companies and plotted how to prevent ‘pandemics’. Johnson then gave £800million to the BMGF’s vaccine initiative, COVAX.

A year later, Johnson reunited with Gates and promised a further £400million to fund his green investments.

In Sunak Gates has a willing apprentice. In February, the pair met to discuss wasting more money on Gates’s terrifying ‘climate change’ goals.

The BMGF and its subsidiaries like the Global Fund, which promotes the ominous sounding ‘health security’, has, since its inception in 2002, managed to extract an astonishing £4.5billion from the UK government, with another £1billion earmarked for the next two years. When did British taxpayers vote for that?

Millions today in this country can no longer afford both food and energy costs, they are medically neglected and live in substandard housing. Questions must be asked why politicians are funding this Indoctrinator to dictate policies that are provenly detrimental to British citizens and are only to the benefit of one man. The multi- billionaire land owner, Bill Gates. If a vampire is invited into a home, best be prepared for a bloodbath.

The last in this series will focus on green evangelist Sir David Attenborough.

April 14, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Doubled Pregnancy Loss Rate, Raised Foetal Abnormality Rate and Concentration of Lipid Nanoparticles in Ovaries – How Could They Call This Vaccine ‘Safe’?

BY ALEX KRIEL AND DR DAVID BELL | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | APRIL 14, 2023

The mRNA vaccines were released globally in early 2021 with the slogan ‘safe and effective’. Unusually for a new class of medicine, they were soon recommended by public health authorities for pregnant women. By late 2021, working age women, including those who were pregnant, were being thrown out of employment for not agreeing to be injected. Those who took the mRNA vaccines did so based on trust in health authorities – the assumption being that they would not have been approved if the evidence was not absolutely clear. The role of regulatory agencies was to protect the public and, therefore, if they were approved, the drugs were safe.

Recently, a lengthy vaccine evaluation report sponsored by Pfizer and submitted to the Australian regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) dated January 2021 was released under a Freedom of Information request. The report contains significant new information that had been supressed by the TGA and by Pfizer itself. Much of this relates directly to the issues of safety in pregnancy and impacts on the fertility of women of child-bearing age. The whole report is important, but four key data points stand out:

  • The rapid decline in antibody and T cells in monkeys following a second dose;
  • Biodistribution studies (previously released in 2021 through an FOI request in Japan);
  • Data on the impact of fertility outcomes for rats;
  • Data on foetal abnormalities in rats.

We focus on the last three items as, for the first point, it is enough to quote the report itself: “Antibodies and T cells in monkeys declined quickly over five weeks after the second dose of [Pfizer Covid vaccine] BNT162b2 (V9), raising concerns over long term immunity.” This point indicates that the regulators should have anticipated the rapid decline in efficacy and must have known at the outset that the initial two dose course was unlikely to confer lasting immunity and would, therefore, require multiple repeat doses. This expectation of failure was recently highlighted by Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director at the U.S. NIH.

The three remaining items should be a major cause for concern with the pharmaceutical regulatory system. The first, as revealed in 2021, involved biodistribution studies of the lipid nanoparticle carrier in rats, using a luciferase enzyme to substitute for the mRNA vaccine. The study demonstrated that the vaccine will travel throughout the body after injection and is found not only at the injection site but in all organs tested, with high concentration in the ovaries, liver, adrenal glands and spleen. Authorities who assured vaccinated people in early 2021 that the vaccine stays in the arm were, as we have known for two years, not being honest.

Lipid concentration per gram, recalculated as percentage of injection site.

In terms of the impact on fertility and foetal abnormalities, the report includes a study of 44 rats and describes two main metrics, the pre-implantation loss rate and the number of abnormalities per foetus (also expressed per litter). In both cases the metrics were significantly higher for vaccinated rats than for unvaccinated rats.

Roughly speaking, the pre-implantation loss ratio compares the estimated number of fertilised ova and the ova implanted in the uterus. The table below is taken from the report itself and clearly shows the loss rate for vaccinated (BNT162b2) is more than double the unvaccinated control group.

In a case control study, a doubling of pregnancy loss in the intervention group would represent a serious safety signal. Rather than take this seriously, the authors of the report then compared the outcomes to historical data on other rat populations – 27 studies of 568 rats – and ignored the outcome because other populations had recorded higher overall losses. This range is shown in the right hand column as 2.6% to 13.8%. This analysis is alarming as remaining below the highest previously recorded pregnancy loss levels in populations elsewhere is not a safe outcome when the intervention is also associated with double the harm of the control group.

A similar pattern is observed for foetal malformations with higher abnormality rate in each of the 12 categories studied. Of the 11 categories where Pfizer confirmed the data are correct, there are only two total abnormalities in the control group, versus 28 with the mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2). In the category which Pfizer labelled as unreliable (supernumerary lumbar ribs), there were three abnormalities in the control group and 12 in the vaccinated group.

As with the increased pregnancy losses, Pfizer simply ignored the trend and compared the results with historical data from other rat populations. This is very significant as it is seen across every malformation category. The case control nature of the study design is again ignored, in order to apparently hide the negative outcomes demonstrated.

These data indicate that there is no basis for saying the vaccine is safe in pregnancy. Concentration of lipid nanoparticles in ovaries, a doubled pregnancy loss rate and raised foetal abnormality rate across all measured categories indicates that designating a safe-in-pregnancy label (B1 category in Australia) was contrary to available evidence. The data imply that not only was the Government’s ‘safe and effective’ sloganeering not accurate, it was totally misleading with respect to the safety data available.

Despite the negative nature of these outcomes, the classification of this medicine as a ‘vaccine’ appears to have precluded further animal trials. Historically,  new medicines, especially in classes never used in humans before, would require a very rigorous assessment. Vaccines, however, have a lower burden of proof requirement than ordinary medicines. By classifying mRNA injections as ‘vaccines’, this ensured regulatory approval with significantly less stringent safety requirements, as the TGA itself notes. In fact, these mRNA gene therapy products (to use the proper term) function more like medicines than vaccines in that they modify the internal functioning of cells, rather than stimulating an immune response to presence of an antigen. Labelling these gene therapy products as ‘vaccines’ means that, as far as we are aware, even today no genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies have been carried out.

This report, which was only released after a FOI request, is extremely disturbing as it shows that authorities knew of major risks with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination while simultaneously assuring populations that it was safe. The fact that mainstream media have (as far as we are aware) completely ignored the newly released data should reinforce the need for caution when listening to the advice of public health messaging regarding COVID-19 vaccination.

Firstly, it is clear that regulators, drug companies and the Government would have known that vaccine induced immunity tails off very rapidly, with this being subsequently observed in real world data with efficacy against infection falling to zero. Accordingly, the single point in time figures of 95% and 62% efficacy against symptomatic PCR-positive infection quoted for Pfizer and AstraZeneca respectively meant almost nothing since a rapid decline was to be expected. Similarly, the concept of a two dose course was inaccurate as endless boosters would likely have been required given the rapid decline in antibodies and T-cells observed in the monkeys.

Most importantly, the data do not in any way support the ‘safe’ conclusion with respect to pregnancy; ‘dangerous’ would be much more accurate. The assurances of safety were, therefore, completely misleading given the data disclosures in the recent freedom of information release. Regulatory authorities knew that animal studies showed major red flags regarding both pregnancy loss and foetal abnormalities, consistent with the systemic distribution of the mRNA they had been hiding from the public. Even in March 2023, it is impossible to give these assurances, given the fact that important studies have not, to the best of our knowledge, been done.  Pfizer elected not to follow up the vast majority of pregnancies in the original human trials, despite high miscarriage rates in the minority they did follow. Given all of the problems with efficacy and safety, the administration of these products to women of childbearing age and administration to healthy pregnant women is high risk and not justified.

Alex Kriel is by training a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial Covid model; he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach. David Bell is a public health physician with a PhD in population health and formerly worked as a scientific and medical officer at the World Health Organisation.

April 14, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Fear of a Microbial Planet

BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | APRIL 13, 2023

Fear of a Microbial Planet, by Dr. Steve Templeton, is a wonderfully accessible book on the Covid era now published by Brownstone institute, offers desperately needed clarity and science on the organization and management of individual social life in the presence of pathogenic infection. It can be read as a definitive answer to expert arrogance, political overreach, and population panic.

For three years following the arrival of the virus that causes Covid, the dominant response from governments and the public has been to be afraid and stay far away through any means possible. This has further mutated into a population-wide germophobia that is actually being promoted by elite opinion.

Steve Templeton, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute and Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology at Indiana University School of Medicine – Terre Haute, argues that this response is primitive, unscientific, and ultimately contrary to individual and public health. The most unhealthy populations are those which preserve immunological naivete in the presence of a virus that is otherwise going to circulate widely.

Dr. Templeton’s story is both scientific and highly personal, taking the reader through the basics of immune response and public health even while relaying his personal frustrations with trying to talk sense to others in senseless times.

If a public health response is like an immune response, then consider this book as immunization against germophobia, politicized science, a self-defeating safety culture, and misplaced faith in experts. Dr. Templeton is our guide to helping us gain a new and more robust understanding of the relationship between the microbial kingdom and our own lives.

The pandemic forecasts in the United States were very grim. Experts were predicting that 60-70 percent of the population would ultimately be infected resulting in over 1.5 million deaths in just a few months. People on social media were in an absolute panic. Stories about empty shelves and runs on toilet paper were everywhere. Those who tried to refute these doomsday predictions were shouted down and eventually silenced.

And yet, the science on the virus was very clear. Disease severity was age-stratified. Extreme measures would not drive it away and would cause a tremendous amount of collateral damage. Even if the worse-case scenarios were true, it was extremely important that we take measures based on evidence.

But eventually, the cry to “do something” became overwhelming, and the costs no longer mattered. Trying to calm people with wisdom about infectious disease became nearly pointless. Germophobia swept through society and political culture.

Hardly anyone wanted to hear the truth that microbes are everywhere, and they cannot be avoided. There are an estimated 6×10^30 bacterial cells on Earth at any given time. By any standard, this is a huge amount of biomass, second only to plants, and exceeding that of all animals by more than 30-fold.

To live at peace with the microbial kingdom requires trained immune systems, as George Carlin said years ago. That means exposure and the protection of normal social functioning even under pandemic conditions with a new virus.

Many books have been and will be written about pandemic response mistakes, and that’s a good thing. There can’t possibly be enough reflection on what went wrong, otherwise we will be doomed to follow the same path, or an even worse one, next time. This book argues that the safety-at-all-costs culture will continue to result in counterproductive policies until it is challenged at its root.

How did people in our communities and around the world get to the point of hysteria over a pandemic with a clear age-stratified and comorbidity-amplified mortality? Why were young and healthy people with very little risk for disease and death treated as if they were a grave danger to others?

It was always pointless to try to stop much less eradicate this virus. We’ve evolved with pathogens and need to learn to live with them without imposing mass psychological, social, economic, and public-health damage.

Everyone who panicked to the point of meltdown needs this book as a corrective. And even if you did not, everyone knows someone who did, public-health officials above all else.

April 14, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Biden Administration is sued, accused of pressuring Twitter to censor journalist Alex Berenson

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | April 13, 2023

Independent journalist Alex Berenson has filed a lawsuit against President , a Pfizer board member, and others for pressuring Twitter to ban his account.

His account was banned after posting a tweet questioning COVID-19 vaccines.

Initially, Twitter resisted the calls to ban Berenson. However, eventually the social media platform caved to the pressure.

Berenson sued Twitter in a federal court in California, accusing the company of violating its contract with him. The lawsuit resulted in a settlement and Twitter admitting it should not have banned him.

The defendants in the new lawsuit, filed on April 12, are President Biden, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, former White House COVID-19 official Dr. Andrew Slavitt, Pfizer board member Dr. Scott Gottlieb, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and the White House Director of Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty.

In a meeting with Twitter, Slavitt and other White House officials asked why Berenson had not been “kicked off” Twitter. Slavitt has previously called Berenson a conspiracy theorist.

Flaherty recently said that he remembered Slavitt “expressing his view that Twitter was not enforcing its content guidelines with respect to Alex Berenson’s tweets, and that employees from Twitter disagreed with that view.”

Gottlieb also asked Twitter to suspend Berenson. He has also previously called for the suspension of other people, including former acting FDA commissioner Dr. Brett Girior.

In the offending tweet, Berenson wrote, “It doesn’t stop infection. Or Transmission. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”

According to his lawsuit, the defendants violated his First Amendment rights.

We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.

“The government Defendants specifically targeted Mr. Berenson’s constitutionally protected speech and journalism,” the suit states.

“Members of [the Biden] administration engaged in a nearly unprecedented conspiracy to suppress Mr. Berenson’s First Amendment rights.

“Through 2021, they—and a senior board member at Pfizer, Inc. which has made more than $70 billion selling COVID-19 vaccines—worked together to pressure Twitter to suspend Mr. Berenson’s account and mute his voice as a leading COVID-19 vaccine skeptic. The White House and the Biden Administration did this at the same time government officials promoted their views on the necessity of COVID19 vaccination on Twitter, effectively blocking Mr. Berenson from commenting on their own statements or making his own.”

It adds that the permanent suspension “harmed both Mr. Berenson and a clearly identifiable class of nearly 100 million Americans whose interests he helped represent—Americans who either had questions about the vaccine or did not want to be forced to take a shot that they feared had been rushed through development and lost its ability to prevent COVID-19 infections within months.”

The suit is asking the court to stop the government from targeting the journalist and to award him damages.

April 13, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Bad Pfizer Vaccine Batches Account for 4.2% of doses but 71% of Serious Adverse Events

Explains Why Some Have Severe Side Effects and Others Do Not

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | April 13, 2023

I am routinely asked: why are so many people who took the COVID-19 vaccines apparently fine while others are suffering heart damage, strokes, blood clots and are ending up disabled or dead? It has been suspected for many months that there may be variations in vaccine lots or batches that could partially explain these observations. In other words, not everyone is getting the same dose of mRNA.

Under Emergency Use Authorization, the vaccine companies and their subcontractors do not have any inspections of the final filled and finished vials. This is unprecedented for a widely used product of any type. It is possible that lipid nanoparticles aggregate in suspension and so some batches may contain more mRNA than others. Likewise, since lot size has varied over time, it is possible that contaminants from the manufacturing process may be concentrated in some smaller lots compared to larger ones. Finally, there may be product transport, storage, and use factors that denature mRNA including heating, air injected into vials, and multiple needles dipped into the suspension.

The contaminant issue came to light as Japan returned millions of doses when visible debris was seen in the bottom of the vials. Additionally, since metallic beads are used by the biodefense contactors, it is possible that smaller initial lots could have had magnetic debris that explained “magnetism” in the arm where the shot was given as reported early in the vaccine campaign.

A report from Schmeling and coworkers using Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine found that 71% of serious adverse events came from 4.2% of doses (high risk batches) conversely <1% of these events came from 32.1% of doses (low risk batches). The variation explained for the high and moderate risk batches was 78 and 89%, respectively. Thus as more doses were given out of those vials, the greater the number of side effects were reported. This means that the majority of risk is in the shot and not the person who received it.

Schmeling, M, Manniche, V, Hansen, PR. Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Eur J Clin Invest. 2023; 00:e13998. doi:10.1111/eci.13998

These are critically important results. They imply the COVID-19 vaccine debacle is indeed a product problem and not due to patient susceptibility in most circumstances. Additionally, the lack of inspections has led to a safety disaster. Some unfortunate patients are getting too much mRNA, contaminants, or both and thus are exposed to damaging and in some cases, lethal injections.

Reuters Aug 2021, Japan suspends 1.6 mln doses of Moderna shot after contamination reports

Schmeling, M, Manniche, V, Hansen, PR. Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Eur J Clin Invest. 2023; 00:e13998. doi:10.1111/eci.13998

April 13, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

FDA Commissioner says regulation is needed to target “misinformation” which harms life expectancy

Speech regulation

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | April 12, 2023

In an interview with CNBC, FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf said that online misinformation was harming the life expectancy of people, there is a need for “better regulation” on how to handle health misinformation and that “specific authorities at FDA, FTC, and other areas are going to be needed.”

“We know more and more about misinformation. It relates back to this life expectancy,” Califf said. Why aren’t we using knowledge of diet? It’s not that people don’t know about it. Why aren’t we using medical products as effectively and efficiently as our peer countries? A lot of it has to do with choices that people make because of the things that influence their thinking. The COVID vaccines and the antivirals give us an easy way to talk about it, but this is not limited to those areas. In heart disease, so many people don’t take their medicines, even though they’re now generic and very low-cost, often [they’re] deluded into taking things that are sold over the Internet that aren’t effective.”

According to the FDA commissioner, one of the solutions is telling the “truth is a louder volume.”

“In the good old days, when I was a practicing cardiologist, for the most part, people developed products, they got through the FDA, the label determined what was talked about, the Internet didn’t exist, you advertised in medical meetings and journals. There was sort of a hierarchy of information that went through the prescriber or the implanter in the case of devices to the patient. Of course, the problem in that system is it left a lot of people out. We now know about that. Now, everyone’s included because everyone’s connected to the Internet. But we can put out a statement about what we’ve determined based on the highest level of evidence, within ten minutes, someone who’s thought ten minutes about it can reach a billion people. And there’s nothing that restricts them from telling things that are not true. This has always existed. … But they couldn’t reach so many people,” he explained.

He added that there isn’t enough regulation on health information and that is “impacting our health in very detrimental ways.” As such, he thinks “there is a real need for better regulation of how to deal with this complex information.”

Califf noted that the FDA already has regulatory authority over advertisements content on tech platforms. But he feels the agency could do it better.

“And there are so many avenues now by which that information goes around that we have to think hard about what the right regulation is,” he added.

Using COVID-19 vaccination to explain his point, he said: “I’m highly aware that, in our society, people don’t want the government to have too much power, but I think specific authorities at FDA, FTC, other areas are going to be needed. I’m not saying what they are, because I don’t really know, but I do believe we’re going to need to, when we see people being harmed — like, let’s look at vaccination again, very few people are dying from COVID who are up to date on their vaccination. And if – beyond that, even if they get infected, almost no one is dying if they’ve been vaccinated up to date and they’ve gotten an antiviral that’s approved by or cleared by the FDA. So, why is this not happening? We need to work on this.”

Reiterating that misinformation should be countered with truthful information, he said that those who are succumbing to COVID “are the people that are not up to date on their vaccination and don’t encounter clinicians who are up-to-date on the advantages of antivirals. But they’re also people who have been heavily influenced by people on the Internet telling untruthful things about the vaccination. And I’m not arguing here that we should suppress free speech, that’s not — the  is the First Amendment. But we have to counter that information with truthful information and reach many, many more people.”

April 12, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment