Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US regulator fast-tracks dementia drug

RT | January 6, 2023

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday fast-tracked  the approval of lecanemab, a drug to treat the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Made by Japanese drugmaker Eisai and Biogen and marketed as Leqembi, the drug allegedly delays cognitive decline caused by the disease, though trials have shown some alarming side effects.

While a clinical trial of lecanemab’s efficacy in early Alzheimer’s published in November found it slowed cognitive and functional decline better than a placebo, the researchers noted that it was “associated with adverse events” and recommended “longer trials” to “determine the efficacy and safety of lecanemab in early Alzheimer’s disease” – an unusual call for caution in a study co-funded by the drug’s manufacturers.

Around 17% of those who took lecanemab experienced brain bleeding during the trials, while nearly 13% suffered brain swelling or effusions, compared to 9% and 2% in the placebo group respectively, according to the New England Journal of Medicine study. Some 7% of the trial participants stopped taking the drug due to the side effects.

Lecanemab’s high price point – $26,500 for a year’s worth of treatment – has also raised concerns. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review suggested $20,600 as the price ceiling, arguing a cost-effective rate could be as low as $8,500. The company suggested it could lower the dosing frequency to cut costs.

Biogen is no stranger to controversy over its Alzheimer’s drugs. In 2021, several FDA board members resigned over concerns that Aduhelm, which the company had developed as the first drug designed to target the plaque buildup then believed to be the underlying cause of Alzheimer’s, had not demonstrated sufficient efficacy in treating moderate-to-severe dementia. While not a single member of the advisory panel responsible for reviewing the drug supported its approval, the FDA did so anyway, side effects and $56,000 annual price tag notwithstanding.

A congressional investigation that concluded last week found the approval process “rife with irregularities,” noting the FDA had “inappropriately collaborated” with the company it was supposed to be regulating.

Last year, it emerged that parts of the research that established the current plaque-based disease model of Alzheimer’s were possibly fraudulent, suggesting that the amyloid plaques found in the patients could be a symptom, rather than the cause, of the illness.

January 7, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Masks – again

Despite the absence of evidence, governments want us to mask up again. Why?

By Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghan | Trust the Evidence | January 3, 2023

Those who thought they had seen the last mask mandates were badly mistaken.

It starts with the message on masking, and let’s see how the public reacts. It won’t be long before governments resort to reintroducing compulsory mask use to address the “winter crisis”. They say masks will decrease the number of respiratory infections that are the major cause of the recurring winter crisis.

Readers will recall that in early December, we challenged the evidence base cited by Lord Markham as proof that masks work. We wrote:

‘According to the UKHSA, the official scientific rationale for mask mandates in the community is based on a review last updated in the summer of 2021 of 28 studies, two of which are trials and the rest studies of abysmal quality. The review, identified through a Parliamentary Question, is in two parts: the main body and supplementary tables reporting the data. The problem is that the review is full of errors: the two parts do not match and appear to have been written separately and not even proofread.’

Most of the studies in the review are observational, making claims such as an 80 per cent reduction in cases after mask introduction – making masks use a miracle, not a human intervention. If that were the case, SARS-CoV-2 had been sent packing years ago, and with it, all the other respiratory viruses.

We also cited the co-author of Mr Hancock’s pandemic memoir, revealing that Johnson, Whitty and Hancock knew from the start that masks do not do the job, and yet they went ahead and coerced Britons to wear them.

The reality is different. Clinical trials in various settings – across vastly different ranges of circulation rates – from low influenza-like illness to pandemics have failed to show any effect. Which tallies with everyone’s personal experience of mask “protection”. So, why the sudden reintroduction?

Something odd is happening. We live in a world with more information and reactive media that fails to grasp the reality of the problem. Managing the message becomes more important than fixing the problem, particularly when you know you won’t be in your job much longer. Masks are a distraction.

The reality is a merry-go-round as new ministers, advisors, and experts pop up. They look to a simple solution to gloss over rather than fixing the long-term structural problems in the NHS.

We learnt this painful lesson with Tamiflu in the Swine flu Pandemic. Ministers reiterated, as did public health officials, that what mattered is they needed to be seen to be doing something. Whether it was evidence-based or not was immaterial. A complex problem requires a simple fix – a highly visible one: masking fits the bill perfectly.

Part of the problem is officials go unchallenged, no one asks for the evidence, and if they do, they feel intimidated – as an anonymous BBC reporter disclosed. You can virtually state anything in this modern era. By tomorrow the media will have moved on.

However, for now, let’s follow the jungle cry: do something! What? It does not matter; we have to be seen to be doing something!!!!

January 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Review of studies: The science we’re meant to be following pervasively obfuscates the risk of mRNA jabs for young men

Of the few studies that even attempt to assess population-wide risk of myocarditis following vaccination, nearly three-fourths neglect to include proper stratifiers

eugyppius: a plague chronicle | January 6, 2023

This review, co-authored by Vinay Prasad, sets out to assess the literature on the risk of myocarditis in young men following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Of 758 articles considered, the vast majority (89%) didn’t attempt any systematic risk assessment at all, and only 29 looked at population-wide risk. Of this meagre number, only eight properly stratified adverse events by sex, age, dose and vaccine manufacturer. This matters enormously, because the risk of myocarditis is heavily concentrated in men under forty following their second Pfizer or Moderna vaccination.

By failing to break out these specific categories, scientists can write studies that overlook the risk of the vaccines for younger men, effectively by spreading their heightened risk across broader subgroups or even the whole population:

This chart indicates the highest myocarditis incidence found in each of the studies reviewed. The fewer the stratifiers, the lower the stated incidence. M: male, D2: dose 2.

By looking only at men, or only at which dose, or only at which vaccine, you can reduce the highest stated incidence of myocarditis enormously, putting you in an excellent position to argue that, yes, myocarditis is a rare side effect from vaccination, but the risk of myocarditis from infection is greater.1 This is a game that is played at both ends, with complementary studies that massively overestimate the rate of myocarditis from Covid by considering only documented infections. Almost everyone with a severe outcome will have an official positive test at some point, while vastly fewer people who recover without incident will bother. A similar tactic, would be inflating the risk of severe outcome by looking only at hospital patients, or inflating the case fatality rate by looking only at those receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

The problem isn’t that a memo went out from Science Headquarters instructing researchers to cover up the obvious fact that the vaccines are clearly and beyond all cavil a bad deal for males under 40. It’s rather that science is subordinate to broader political, social and cultural forces, all of which incentivise research showing that the vaccines are safe and effective, and disincentivise research showing anything else. One kind of finding will get you promotion and grant funding, the other will – in the best case – simply be ignored. Cast in this light, the sheer paucity of studies looking at population-wide risks from vaccination in the first place begins to look deeply ominous. This is an entire area nobody wants to look into, for fear of what they might find.

It will be a long time indeed before we have any clarity on exactly how risky the vaccines are, and for whom.

1 At this point, it is convenient for the vaccinators to forget that their elixirs do not actually prevent infection, in service of presenting the false alternative.

January 6, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Name & Shame – Companies Discriminating Against The Unvaccinated

Time to boycott

The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 5, 2023

Almost a year ago, I wrote about the companies discriminating against their employees just because they were unvaccinated against Covid-19. I suggested boycotting those companies until they changed their policies.

Hopefully some of this pressure made these companies see sense, as a lot of these discriminatory policies have now been removed.

However, a year on and some companies have found a loop hole, making them appear less discriminatory. Now, they can’t be seen to be discriminating against their unvaccinated employees because they will only employ vaccinated individuals in the first place!

So it’s time to name and shame again. If you know of any companies that are still treating their unvaccinated employees differently or only employing vaccinated individuals, then add their names in the comments sections below (please add a link to their policy for verification).

Below is a list of companies, that I have compiled, that require vaccination for employment. I have only included large companies but there are thousands of examples of small companies that also require vaccination. These are for jobs including administrators, care home workers, chefs, dentists, plumbers, nurses, software engineers and support workers to name but a few.

I find it amusing how many of these companies have equal opportunities sections in their job listing postings. Equal opportunities for anyone except the unvaccinated!

And if anyone from any of these companies reads this post, I would highly recommend that you remove your policies for two reasons. Firstly for discriminatory reasons connected to any future employment law issues and secondly, you don’t want to have pushed vaccination on employees, just in case it turns out that the vaccines weren’t as safe and effective as you thought.

I would also be interested in hearing from anyone who has been turned down from a job or interview if they are unvaccinated.

A selection of companies requiring or encouraging Covid-19 vaccination for employment.

  • Accenture (Accenture requires all new employees to be fully vaccinated against Covid-19 as a condition of employment);
  • Amazon (Workers in New York City who perform in-person work or interact with the public in the course of business must show proof they have been fully vaccinated against COVID or request and receive approval for a reasonable accommodation, including medical or religious accommodation);
  • American Red Cross (As a condition of employment with American Red Cross, you are required to provide proof that you are fully vaccinated for COVID 19 or qualify for an exemption, except in states where it is prohibited by law);
  • AstraZeneca (AstraZeneca requires all US employees to be fully vaccinated for COVID-19 but will consider requests for reasonable accommodations as required by applicable law);
  • Carnival UK (To keep everyone on board fit and well, colleagues who visit or work on our ships must be fully vaccinated, including boosters);
  • CBS Studios (Must be fully vaccinated to work on-site. (To be considered fully vaccinated: 2 weeks after their second dose in a 2-dose series, such as the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, or 2 weeks after a single-dose vaccine, such as Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen vaccine);
  • Chainalysis (All employees are required to have or obtain a COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of employment at Chainalysis, unless an exemption has been approved. All employees shall be required to report their vaccine status);
  • Citi (Citi requires that all successful applicants for positions located in the United States or Puerto Rico be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment and provide proof of such vaccination prior to commencement of employment);
  • Coca-Cola ( all new employees must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and provide Coke Canada with proof of vaccination);
  • Coles (As part of that commitment, you will need to be vaccinated against COVID-19 before joining the team at Coles, unless you’re medically exempt);
  • Fitch Learning (part of Fitch Group) (UNITED STATES ONLY: As part of its continued efforts to maintain a safe workplace for employees, Fitch requires that all employees who receive a written offer of employment on or after October 4, 2021 be fully vaccinated (as defined by the CDC) against the coronavirus by the first day of employment as a condition of employment, to the extent permitted by applicable law);
  • Jefferies Group LLC (It is Jefferies’ policy that all employees and visitors be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 in order to enter any Jefferies office or participate in any Jefferies or client event in person. Should an offer of employment be made, your acceptance of that offer means that you will comply with this policy);
  • Levi Strauss (LS&CO requires proof of being fully vaccinated for COVID-19 as a condition of commencing employment, except in those jurisdictions where prohibited by law);
  • Live Nation (Currently, we strongly encourage employees to be fully vaccinated or have received a negative COVID test within [24] hours of entering an office);
  • Marella Cruises (Please note that all applicants must be fully vaccinated against Covid-19).
  • Ministry of Defence (We therefore encourage all our employees and prospective ones to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 subject to any exemptions that may apply);
  • NHS (Whilst COVID-19 vaccination is not currently a condition of employment, we do encourage our staff to get vaccinated. If you are unvaccinated, there is helpful advice and information available by searching on the ‘NHS England’ website where you can also find out more about how to access the vaccination);
  • NSF International (NSF requires all employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 as a condition of employment, with exceptions only as required by law);
  • OmniAb (New hires based in the US will be required to demonstrate that they have been fully vaccinated and boosted for COVID-19 or qualify for a medical or religious exemption or accommodation to this vaccination requirement);
  • Overseas Adventure Travel (All trip leaders are required to be double vaccinated and boosted (as are all of our passengers));
  • Paypal (Depending on location, this might include a Covid-19 vaccination requirement for any employee whose role requires them to work onsite);
  • Qantas Airways ( It is the intention of the Qantas Group to require employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and this is being explored in all our international locations);
  • Universal Music Group (All UMG employees are currently required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or provide proof of a negative PCR or Antigen test before entering any Company offices unless they have been approved for an exemption or unless prohibited by applicable law);
  • Visier (As part of this commitment, we require all employees to be fully vaccinated for COVID-19 or qualify for an exemption);
  • ZE UK (Accordingly, following with provincial and federal vaccination’s approach, we require that all of our employees to be fully vaccinated and provide their proof of vaccination or substantiated grounds for exemption);

January 5, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Solidarity and Activism | , | Leave a comment

Torsades de Pointes and Cardiac Arrest after COVID-19 Vaccination

Primary Arrhythmia without Myocarditis is a Demonstrated Mechanism of Sudden Death

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | January 5, 2023

Torsades de pointes (French for “twisting of the points”) is one of several types of life-threatening heart rhythm disturbances than can cause cardiac arrest. When case reports capture this rhythm in a fortunate survivor of a cardiac arrest it is noteworthy particularly as our CDC VAERS system indicates 16,155 Americans through December 23, 2022, have died within a few days of taking of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Drs Abrich and Olshansky reported a 65-year old woman with hypertension, a left bundle branch block with a prolonged QT interval, and a mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction after at two dose series of the Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. She came to specialty evaluation because she completely passed out while sitting. An implantable loop recorder was inserted in the chest to monitor the rhythm and then five months later she took a booster and 12 hours later went into full blown cardiac arrest. She required prolonged CPR and 14 shocks of the heart to be revived. There was no evidence of myocarditis. She had a rocky hospital course and was discharged to an inpatient rehabilitation facility.

The lessons learned from this case are: 1) syncope (passing out) after vaccination can indicate a serious arrhythmia, 2) when there are abnormal heart tests (ECG and echocardiography) after two shots, boosters are ill-advised and can be fatal, 3) COVID-19 vaccination can cause a primary cardiac arrest without myocarditis and may explain cases of “died suddenly” when the autopsy does not reveal and obvious known vaccine injury (myocarditis, blood clot, VITT, etc).

Abrich VA, Olshansky B. Torsades de pointes following vaccination for COVID-19. HeartRhythm Case Rep. 2022 Jun;8(6):393-397. doi: 10.1016/j.hrcr.2022.04.003. Epub 2022 Apr 9. PMID: 35433264; PMCID: PMC8993415.

OpenVAERS: VAERS COVID Vaccine Adverse Event Reports, Accessed January 5, 2023

January 5, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

USA – The United States of Anti-science

TSA extends requirement to be vaccinated to enter the USA

The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 4, 2023

The ‘United States of Anti-Science’ headline is not meant to insult any American readers or the American people in general. However, I have no problem with insulting the priests of anti-science who seem to be making the rules in the country.

Whilst most of the rest of the world opened up last year, the US Transportation Security Administration (part of the department of Homeland Security) still had a Security Directive in force which required that a non-US citizen must be double-jabbed to enter the country.

This was meant to expire on 8 January 2023. Hooray, let’s all book flights to the US!

Not so fast. Yesterday, an Emergency Amendment was approved, continuing the ridiculous rules until 10 April 2023.

This means that unvaccinated non-US citizens will still not be able to visit friends and family. Even if they are fit and well, they are barred from the country, whilst a vaccinated person who could actually have Covid is welcome.

Raging Covid fever but drowning in lipid nanoparticles – Welcome to the USA! Healthy with immunity from a natural infection months ago – Good riddance!

It will probably be claimed that the Emergency Amendment is necessary due to large numbers of cases in China. But vaccinated Chinese people are still allowed into the country with negative tests whilst an unvaccinated person from a country with hardly any Covid is not.

And we all know that being vaccinated does not mean you don’t get Covid or transmit it to others, probably the opposite in fact.

Utter madness. Complete anti-science.

However, when comparing both documents, I did notice that there is a difference in the wording of the text. The original Security Directive used “aircraft operators” whilst the new Emergency Amendment uses “foreign air carriers”.

Is this a loop hole? Maybe unvaccinated non-US citizens can fly in on a US plane but not a foreign one. Maybe unvaccinated travellers weren’t being checked for their vaccination status anyway. But for most people it is a big risk if you might be sent straight back home again.

And over in California, Assembly Bill No. 2098 has gone into effect meaning that doctors can lose their medical licenses if they don’t follow the state narrative.

The bill declares the following state narrative:

  • the amount of people that have died from COVID-19;
  • the unvaccinated risk of dying from COVID-19 is 11 times greater than those who are fully vaccinated;
  • vaccines are safe and effective;
  • misinformation and disinformation have placed lives at serious risk;
  • some of the most dangerous propagators of inaccurate information regarding the COVID-19 vaccines are licensed health care professionals. (Well at least they got one point right!).

If you thought doctors were unable to think critically before this, imagine how bad it will be now.

USA – The land of the free*

(*If fully vaccinated and complying with the state narrative)

January 4, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Transmission Denied

The perils of state-sanctioned censorship laid bare

Health Advisory & Recovery Team | December 24, 2022

How will we look back on 2022? For all but the most die-hard Zero Covid addicts (who had to wait until China punctured this illusion only a few weeks ago), victory was declared over Covid early in the piece when the government backed down from its obscene NHS injection mandate in February and ‘Plan B’ restrictions were also subsequently rescinded.

Yet peace, of course, was subsequently shattered by a confected – albeit shockingly deadly and costly – crisis in Eastern Europe, providing a helpful smokescreen for those that wished to obscure the obvious fallacies propping up the mainstream Covid narrative.

Of course, for most lockdown sceptics, Covid-19 should never have had a name, nor should it have been a ‘thing’. Had we had our way, the UK might now have the financial muscle to invest in schools, hospitals, updating creaking infrastructure, … this list feels endless, not dissimilar to the climb we face to reclaim the lost ground since society leaped off the cliff and into the abyss of draconian non-pharmaceutical interventions in March 2020.

These days, of course, it is fashionable to decry the harms of the over-zealous response, almost as if there had been no dissenting voices or opinions at the time. Unfortunately this is another convenient smokescreen, as the true scale of falsehoods shared by official information campaigns – or should we call them disinformation campaigns co-ordinated by officials – is now becoming impossible for even the most ardent Covidean Cultists to ignore.

We have previously reported on very strange goings-on in the upper echelons of the institutions co-ordinating various aspects of the ‘pandemic response’. Senior personalities and shadowy nameless characters that populated government committees such as SAGE – riven with conflicts of interest and serving many masters, the precise opposite of the ‘public servants’ they were portrayed as – favoured both corporate tyranny and crony capitalism.  Actions speak louder than words: achieving good outcomes for people they are meant to be serving seem not to have been the top of their agenda.

This just replicated what happened across the Western world. Consider the treatment meted out on three ‘centrist’ senior academics (hailing from Stanford, Oxford and Harvard, no less) behind the Great Barrington Declaration, an attempt to promote a rational response to the grand panic so as to minimise collateral damage. A senior honcho within US National Institutes of Health smeared them as ‘fringe epidemiologists’ and stated that there “needs to be a quick and devastating published take down of its premises”:

Various such rent-a-quote ‘take downs’ duly appeared in the following days, and a rival rallying flag – the John Snow Memorandum – was hastily erected, receiving the blessing of various official mouthpieces such as Rochelle Walensky, the head of the CDC, as well being promoted in The Lancet. The John Snow Memo was merely a totem – a weak document that has laughably failed to stand the test of time – and it was correctly critiqued at the time. It is littered with hostage to fortune statements such as “Japan, Vietnam, and New Zealand, to name a few countries, have shown that robust public health responses can control transmission, allowing life to return to near-normal, and there are many such success stories”. Oops.

But despite these clangers, the ‘women and children last’ brigade were given a free pass by the mainstream press to use the John Snow Memorandum as a stick to beat — and silence — those that fought to limit collateral damage. Mission accomplished: pharma profits maximised.

This all came to light back in 2021… it is old news, though it is noteworthy that even lockdown sceptic Isabel Oakeshott recently mislabelled the centrist creed as the ‘Barrington Declaration’ (perhaps assuming the ‘Great’ was self-aggrandisement, rather than the more prosaic fact of being a geographical label referring to Great Barrington, Massachusetts, where the Declaration was signed).

A new development is that Anthony Fauci, head of the NIA, is now unable to recall these matters when providing an ‘on the record’ legal deposition, stating that he didn’t “have time to worry about things like the Great Barrington Declaration”… despite writing a few days after the above email from Collins that he had “come out very strongly against the Great Barrington Declaration”.

And following on from confirmation of the active suppression and censorship of the Great Barrington Declaration and its authors, the new owner of a recently acquired social media company seems to have unearthed information that led to this exchange:

This is not merely playground politics – it is a matter of life and death. As fashionable as it is to subsequently admit that lockdowns – and the associated excesses which led to such terrible collateral damage – were a mistake, this was known before they were enacted. The shenanigans cost lives, livelihoods, and robbed families of last goodbyes.

It is tempting to see the debacle of recent years as a great misadventure – part of life’s rich tapestry that contributes to the furtherment of human knowledge. Lockdowns – ah, a failed experiment, but we didn’t know any better!

The sad – if unpalatable – truth is that not only should that experiment never have happened, it was known to very many powerful people that the experiment – and its compounding consequences and associated harms – should never have been promoted.  It was a grand self-immolation that happened to enrich various characters that were not necessarily acting in your best interests. As more painful truths come to light, we owe it to our children and children’s children to continue to dissect these discredited lockdown policies, and those that promoted them. Watch this space.

January 4, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

How to hide adverse events

FDA compared apples and oranges

Health Advisory & Recovery Team | December 24, 2022

The FDA have finally conceded that the mRNA vaccinations increase the risk of pulmonary embolism. The study that led to this conclusion had a very odd methodology. Using this same methodology other risks were dismissed in an unjustified way. There are two FDA studies which use this same methodology. The first reported on people vaccinated aged 12-64 years and the more recent publication was for those aged 65 years and over. The study on the younger population used insurance databases whereas for the older population it was a medicare database.The studies are repeatedly described as being “rapid” and even “near-real time monitoring” even though nearly two years had passed before they were published.

Imagine you want to see if the risk of a certain condition was higher after vaccination was introduced compared to before. Data from voluntary reporting systems can act as an alarm signal but an accurate measure is better derived from comparing how common the condition is to how common it was in the past.

Ideally, the total number of people diagnosed with the condition for a period after vaccination would be compared to a similar period in a previous year. The MHRA set out to carry out such analysis once a week because of the unprecedented nature and size of the rollout. They have not published any findings.

The FDA chose to only look for 28 days for most conditions. The tally was compared to a 28 day period pre-covid. No justification is given for this short window. For comparison, when the Pandemrix vaccine was rushed out for swine flu in 2009, there was an 8 month lag between vaccination and onset of narcolepsy that was so devastating for the young people affected. (Narcolepsy is a condition where there is sudden paralysis or sleep meaning that a normal life is not possible). It is now known that the spike protein circulates for at least 4 months after vaccination and there has been a post mortem study showing characteristic vaccine induced inflammation of the coronary arteries leading to death 4 months after the last dose. The FDA only looked at the risk for the first 28 days.

Let’s say there was a condition where there were more cases in that 28 day period than in a random 28 day period used as a control. This would be very concerning because of a phenomenon called the “healthy vaccinee effect”. People tend to postpone vaccination when they are unwell such that every condition would be expected to be less common in the period immediately after vaccination. To measure the size of this effect it is important to include conditions in the analysis for which there is no expectation of an association as a control. For example, this group included coeliac disease as a control diagnosis. The FDA did not include a control condition.

The FDA methodology did not make a straightforward comparison. Instead they removed all the people who did have the condition but had not got a complete medical record for 365 days prior to the condition being noted. This might have been more justifiable if they had also removed people from the historical data who had not had an intact record for 365 days, but they did not.

They then removed all the people with the condition after the vaccine who had had a diagnosis of that condition in the 365 days prior to vaccination. They did not do the same for the control group.

If vaccination causes an increased risk of myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism or other clotting problems then it would not be unreasonable to suspect that people who already had a propensity for those conditions would be at highest risk. Not only was their data removed but no separate analysis was reported for this group.

Having removed these people from the vaccination group the scales tipped such that there was only a slight difference between the control group (including people with bad records and previous history) and the post vaccination group (excluding those people). Even then the risk after vaccination was still higher in most of the groups analysed than in the control group.

The FDA then compared the vaccination group with data on people who had had an influenza vaccination. Again, they do not state that they excluded people who had not got an intact medical record or who had had that condition recently. Finally, they managed to tip the scale enough to claim that the vaccines were safe for myocardial infarctions and clotting issues but not pulmonary embolisms in the over 65 year olds. The rate of transverse myelitis was 4 to 7 times higher in those 12-64 year olds given Janssen (an adenovirus vaccine similar to Astrazeneca) but the FDA still concluded they “identified no safety signals.” … Full article

January 4, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

The Final Proof of Lockdown and Mask Impact

The Fat Emperor – Ivor Cummins | January 2, 2023

The fact-stuffed short video can be downloaded here for you to keep and upload wherever…. https://we.tl/t-XqUKvZSxZ6

NOTE: My extensive research and interviewing / video/sound editing, business travel and much more does require support – please consider helping if you can with monthly donation to support me directly, or one-off payment: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=69ZSTYXBMCN3W – alternatively join up with my Patreon – exclusive Vlogs/content and monthly zoom meetings with the second tier upwards: https://www.patreon.com/IvorCummins

January 4, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Injury on ‘Monday Night Football’ prompts 20 vaccine observations …

An uncomfortable question: Could one death save many lives?

Aaron Rodgers was right on vaccines and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was wrong.
By Bill Rice, Jr. | January 3, 2023

By now, millions of Americans (who can still find somewhere to practice free speech) have commented on the apparent heart attack of Buffalo Bills’ safety Damar Hamlin, which occurred last night on “Monday Night Football.”

The extreme interest in this case further confirms that millions of Americans understand a giant elephant has been sitting in our family rooms for more than two years.

Since I now have my own Substack site, I can offer a few of thoughts on this potentially very important (if tragic) news event.

  1. We don’t know if Hamlin’s cardiac event was related to him getting a vaccine, which he almost certainly has received as probably 99 percent of NFL players have been vaccinated.
  2. But his cardiac event could be related to the vaccine. This is the “elephant in the room.”
  3. People began receiving Covid “vaccines” in December 2020 – more than two years ago. In those two years, I have not heard one American announcer broach the subject that vaccines could be dangerous to young, healthy athletes. No announcer has mentioned the thousands of possible vaccine-related injuries and fatalities that have now happened to people around the world (whether these people were playing organized sports, weekend sports, running in a 5k or rock-climbing).
  4. This “radio silence” is strange as every time a current or recently-retired athlete “dies suddenly” throngs of people comment on this (again, at the sites that still allow uncensored comments).
  5. For two years, I’ve been saying that the only thing that might change the “safe and effective” vaccine narrative is if some U.S. athlete died on national television … probably in a game with tens of millions of viewers … a game like “Monday Night Football.”
  6. But even if, God forbid, such a tragedy occurred, I’m no longer certain this would be enough to change the narrative enough to cease all future vaccinations.
  7. Too many groups are now “stakeholders” in the vaccine narrative for these people and organizations to admit they were wrong.
  8. For example, the NFL Players Association could probably go a long way towards challenging the “safe” narrative by simply voting to not play football again until these vaccine demands are stopped. However, this union – created to look out for the well-being of its members (today and in the future) – actually supports Covid vaccines … and supported masking requirements and mandatory testing of non-sick players.
  9. If this union belatedly decided the vaccines might be dangerous to its members, it would be admitting it was wrong (on a life-or-death matter) for three years, something the Union’s leadership will NOT do.
  10. Nor will any announcer or journalist covering sports leagues admit one incredibly-relevant Covid fact: No college or pro sports athlete in the world has died from Covid in the past three years. This means there has been zero mortality risk to these athletes from Covid, according to three years of observable data. This means there was no reason any of these athletes should have been vaccinated in the first place.
  11. Everyone in the world also now knows that the vaccines neither prevent infection nor spread so there is absolutely no evidence that vaccines produce any important benefit for these athletes.
  12. Aaron Rodgers, Brooklyn Nets guard Kyrie Irving and tennis superstar Novak Djokovik were right and smart to refuse vaccination.

13. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and every other sports league commissioner was wrong to mandate these vaccines (or to bully, penalize and coerce athletes into doing this). So too was every college sports league and all their member colleges and all the esteemed science department faculty members who comprised these leagues’ “expert” safety panels.

14. Every fine that commissioners have levied against athletes and coaches who didn’t wear masks, or salaries that were withheld because non-vaxxed athletes couldn’t play in certain games, should be returned with interest and punitive damages for discrimination.

15. Every journalist or TV talking head who refused to acknowledge the above facts are cowards who refused to do their jobs and present any of these facts. This, or they are simply obtuse and the public should know our “watchdog” journalists are too ignorant to add two and two together.

16. We’ll never definitively know if the vaccines killed or harmed young athletes because the autopsies that might determine this will either never be performed or the autopsies that are performed won’t look for the right clinical markers. And/or the cause of death will be listed as a medical issue which the vaccines might have caused.

17. Still, a tiny chance (maybe 0 to 1 percent) exists that some officials will rule a high-profile death as being vaccine-caused. If, by some miracle, such an official determination was made, many more people would then have to acknowledge that, at least for pro athletes, Covid vaccines are more deadly than Covid-19 (a disease the vaccines don’t prevent). Such a finding would perhaps qualify as a narrative-changer.

18. … Which, alas, is why this can’t happen.

19. Pfizer is actually a corporate sponsor of the SEC and pays the league untold millions of dollars. In a recent media campaign, the SEC and Pfizer joined forces to “encourage everyone to get their boosters.” The NFL, NBA, MLB, Big-10, Pac-12, etc. are also firmly on the record of endorsing vaccines … just like all the networks that televise the sporting events of these leagues.

20. Question: Are any of these institutions now going to admit they were wrong and were putting the health and lives of athletes at risk all along?

Share

At one time I thought if one prominent American athlete died on national TV in front of 20 million people such a tragedy might save many lives .. so such a death would actually have a silver lining. But now I doubt this would even be the case.

When you’ve reached the conclusion that one death might need to happen to save many more lives, something’s gone terribly wrong with our society.

January 3, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Over a Quarter of Americans Think They Know Someone Killed By the Covid Vaccines

BY WILL JONES | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 3, 2023

Nearly half of Americans think COVID-19 vaccines may be to blame for many unexplained deaths, and more than a quarter say someone they know could be among the victims – including 22% of the vaccinated and 33% of Democrat voters. Pollster Rasmussen Reports has the story.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that (49%) of American Adults believe it is likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths, including 28% who think it’s Very Likely. Thirty-seven percent (37%) don’t say a significant number of deaths have been caused by vaccine side effects, including 17% who believe it’s Not At All Likely. Another 14% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Twenty-eight percent (28%) of adults say they personally know someone whose death they think may have been caused by side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, while 61% don’t and another 10% are not sure.

The documentary Died Suddenly has been criticised as promoting “debunked” anti-vaccine conspiracy theories but has been seen by some 15 million people.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of Americans believe there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, while 37% think people who worry about vaccine safety are spreading conspiracy theories. Another 15% are not sure.

The survey of 1,000 American Adults was conducted on December 28th-30th, 2022 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Seventy-one percent (71%) say they have received a COVID-19 vaccination, while 26% have not. Concerns about vaccine safety are much higher among the unvaccinated.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of adults who have not gotten COVID-19 vaccinations believe it’s at least somewhat likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths. Among those who have gotten the vaccine, just 38% consider unexplained deaths from the vaccine at least somewhat likely.

Similarly, while 45% of those who have not been vaccinated against COVID-19 think someone they know personally might have died from vaccine side effects, only 22% of vaccinated adults think so.

Forty-six percent (46%) of adults who have gotten vaccinated against COVID-19 believe people who worry about vaccine safety are spreading conspiracy theories, but just 15% of the unvaccinated share that belief. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of those who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine think there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, as do 40% of those who have gotten vaccinated against the virus.

More Democrats (85%) than Republicans (63%) or those not affiliated with either major party (64%) have been vaccinated against COVID-19. More Republicans (60%) than Democrats (44%) or the unaffiliated (43%) think there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. However, there is less political difference in the number who suspect someone they know might have died from vaccine side effects – 33% of Democrats and 26% of both Republicans and the unaffiliated.

These are huge numbers and show this is set to be a major political issue.

Worth reading in full.

January 3, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Interpreting Damar Hamlin’s Sudden Collapse

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 3, 2023

Dr. McCullough is in the midst of a long deposition, so he is unable to respond to the flurry of queries he received this morning about the sudden collapse of Damar Hamlin on the playing field last night. He just sent me an E-mail with the following assessment that he developed last night:

I watched the play live both as a fan and a cardiologist and I saw blunt neck and chest trauma, a brief recovery after the tackle and then a classic cardiac arrest. I have communicated to one of the most experienced trainers in the world and we agree that it was a cardiac arrest in the setting of a big surge of adrenalin. If Damar Hamlin indeed took one of the COVID-19 vaccines, then subclinical vaccine-induced myocarditis must be considered in the differential diagnosis. We have been told he was successfully defibrillated on the field and has been intubated and is not spontaneously breathing which is consistent with anoxic encephalopathy. The nation prays for his complete recovery.

That Damar Hamlin collapsed shortly after receiving a blow to his chest naturally raises the suspicion of commotio cordis—a blunt, nonpenetrating trauma to the chest resulting in irregular heart rhythm and often leading to sudden death.

Reviewing mainstream media reporting today, I see several doctors opining that commotio cordis was the likely cause of Hamlin’s collapse. A physician named Chris Haddock—whose Tweet was quoted in a Men’s Health report—felt compelled to add:

Those trying to tie this to vaccine status to project their unscientific beliefs are terrible, horrible people.

Three studies of commotio cordis—one published in 2002, another one published in 2009 and another one published in 2022 are worth reading in full. These studies indicate it is a complex phenomenon. To quote the first study:

Occurrence of commotio cordis is related to time of impact during the cardiac cycle, direct impact over the heart, the hardness and speed of the projectile, and the ineffectiveness of chest barriers.

The condition seems to occur most frequently in male athletes in their teens.

Young males, ages 4 to 18 years old, are at greatest risk. Vulnerability in this age group has been attributed to increased chest wall pliability, but it is unclear why there is a male predilection.

Somewhat counterintuitive is the finding that the event is frequently triggered by a projectile (most often a baseball) traveling at a relatively low velocity (around 40 MPH). When I first read this, I wondered if it was attributable to the fact that young males, ages 4 to 18 years old, can’t pitch much faster than 40 MPH. However, I then came to the part of the study documenting projectile velocity experiments on swine.

Link et al reported that projectiles traveling 40 mph were most likely to cause VF [Ventricular Fibrillation] in swine. Incidents of VF actually decrease when the velocity of the impact is between 50 and 60 mph.

To interpret Damar Hamlin’s sudden collapse from an epidemiological standpoint, it would be useful to examine other documented cases of commotio cordis that have occurred in NFL games.

A 2002 study published in JAMA analyzed 107 cases of commotio cordis reported the following:

Of 107 commotio cordis events that were regarded as part of competitive or other sporting activities, 87 (81%) involved a blunt precordial blow from a projectile (which served as a standard implement of the game), or another object propelled against a stationary chest wall, resulting in relatively localized contact, during organized or recreational play. Projectiles were most commonly baseballs (n = 53), including 50 of apparent regulation design, 1 hard rubber ball, and 2 others marketed commercially as reduced-injury, softer-than-normal (so-called safety or training) balls, made largely of rubber of various textures contained in a synthetic covering.

Other projectiles included 14 softballs, as well as 10 hockey pucks and 5 lacrosse balls, both of which are made of hard rubber. With the exception of 1 air-filled soccer ball, each projectile that resulted in commotio cordis had a hard solid core. Six of these 87 cases were innocent bystanders inadvertently struck in the chest by a thrown or batted ball, including spectators or players observing the game from the dug-out or bull pen.

A Google search of the words “football player commotio cordis” between the years 1970 and 2022 yielded ONE 2011 report of a junior varsity football player in Massachusetts who suffered from commotio cordis.

So far, I have been unable to find any documented cases that have occurred in the NFL. (Perhaps our readers can find some cases and share them with us).

This suggests that the age of NFL players and the protective padding over their hearts result in a lower incidence of commotio cordis than the incidence documented in sports such as baseball, in which players’ chests are exposed to a projectile.

In the final analysis, only a thorough physical examination of Damar Hamlin’s heart can determine what caused his sudden collapse. As Dr. McCullough stated in his initial assessment last night:

If Damar Hamlin indeed took one of the COVID-19 vaccines, then subclinical vaccine-induced myocarditis must be considered in the differential diagnosis.

Will the doctors examining Damar Hamlin consider this possibility in their differential diagnosis? If so, will the full truth of their findings be reported to the public?

I raise this question because the NFL is a member of the COVID-19 Community Corps—a Biden Administration & HHS program for transferring money to participating organizations in exchange for promoting COVID-19 vaccination among their members.

This may explain why Green Bay Packers quarterback, Aaron Rodgers, came under such immense pressure to receive the vaccine in spite of his known severe allergy to one of its ingredients, as he explained in his recent Joe Rogan interview.

As I have remarked in previous posts, individuals and institutions who make massive, highly publicized commitments to participating in a high-risk, experimental enterprise have a built-in motive for concealing evidence that their actions resulted in harm.

January 3, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »