The HighWire with Del Bigtree | March 6, 2025
H5N1’S LAB LINK? DR. MCCULLOUGH EXPOSES SHOCKING ORIGINS
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | March 6, 2025
Cardiologist & Epidemiologist, Peter A. McCullough, MD, joins Del with a shocking study linking the origins of the current clade of H1N5 dominating the news cycle and crushing the egg industry can be tracked back to a USDA poultry research lab in Georgia.
SUGAR, NOT GENES: THE HIDDEN DRIVER OF CHRONIC DISEASE?
Most U.S. infant formulas contain mainly added sugars, posing a serious risk to babies’ health, researchers say
By Pamela Ferdinand | US Right To Know | February 25, 2025
Most infant formulas in the U.S. contain mostly added sugars instead of natural lactose, which experts say can harm early development, a new report from the University of Kansas shows.
“Infants may consume upwards of 60 grams of added sugars per day, or the equivalent of two soft drinks per day if they are entirely formula-fed,” researchers say in the study, published yesterday [Feb. 24, 2025] in the Journal of Food Composition and Analysis.
The findings reveal “the staggering extent” to which sugar-laden U.S. formulas undermine federal healthy diet recommendations for infants—and cannot be easily avoided, they say.
“[Most] of the formulas that parents and caregivers feed their infants likely present a substantial risk to their infant’s health and development. Ultimately, caregivers and infants in the US deserve a formula market that promotes healthy infant development and does not promote early obesity risk.”
Added sugars provide energy but lack nutritional value, boosting the odds of rapid infant weight gain that can eventually lead to obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other health problems. They may also make babies develop a stronger preference for sweet foods, increasing the risk of overeating and obesity later in life. And they do not support beneficial gut bacteria as well as lactose.
In contrast, lactose, which is naturally found in breast milk, cow and goat milk, is perfectly designed to support an infant’s nutrition, immune system, and gut health, researchers say. Because lactose digests slowly, it doesn’t cause the sharp spike in blood sugar that can set the stage for long-term health problems. It also satiates hunger and helps the body absorb minerals that are important for bone health.
Dr. David Ludwig, an endocrinologist and researcher at Boston Children’s Hospital who conducted some of the original studies linking sugar-sweetened beverages and fast food to obesity, calls infant formula spiked with added sugars a “metabolic nightmare for infants.”
“You lose the beneficial effects of what lactose does, and you get the harmful effects of what these fast-digesting sugars do,” Ludwig says. “Unless we’re talking about the very rare child who can’t take lactose, that should be the dominant carbohydrate.”
Out of 73 formulas available in the U.S. in 2022, the vast majority of which were for infants up to 12 months old, the researchers found only five contained mainly naturally occurring lactose—and those are no longer available in this country. It is unknown whether any formulas on the current U.S. market contain primarily naturally occurring lactose, they say.
The study also shows the quality and type of sugars in infant formulas varied by formula. Gentle (with marketing claims such as “gentle,” “soothe,” “sensitive,” or “acid reflux”) and lactose-free formulas contain less sugar than standard formulas but much more starch, the study shows.
“Our findings highlight a major problem with the infant formula supply,” says lead author Audrey Rips-Goodwin, who headed the analysis of data from the Nutrition Data System for Research for KU’s Health Behavior and Technology Lab. “Our infant formula market totally contradicts what experts in infant health recommend.”
Children under 2 years should not be given any foods or beverages with added sugars, since they need nutrient-rich diets and are developing taste preferences, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (2020–2025). Yet with few formula options free of added sugars, the researchers say parents and caregivers who can’t breastfeed or access breast milk face tough choices in terms of finding a nutritionally suitable formula due to lax government regulations.
Unlike adult food products, US regulations do not require that added sugars be reported on the nutrition label of infant formulas (only total carbohydrates). The FDA specifies 30 nutrients that must be included in infant formulas but does not regulate the types of carbohydrates or require their clear labeling. That means formula manufacturers can use any type of carbohydrate, including starches or added sugars such as corn syrup solids, fructose, and glucose.
“Consumers are blinded to the fact that added sugars may be present in infant formulas, and in what quantities,” the researchers say. “As a result, parents and guardians may unknowingly feed their infants formula that contains substantial quantities of added sugars.”
The study builds on others that revealed the high sugar content of infant formula. It also comes less than a year after news reports that two of Nestlé’s leading baby-food brands, promoted as healthy in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, contain high levels of added sugar.
To promote healthy development, the researchers say efforts should focus on requiring formula companies to produce products that contain naturally occurring lactose as the only sugar. The amount of lactose present in infant formula should also reflect that of human milk.
At the same time, societal barriers to breastfeeding, including a lack of parental leave and affordable early child care, should be removed, the researchers add.
“[The] focus on an individual-level solution (breastfeeding promotion to women and caregivers) is not well matched to addressing the systemic nature of the problem and places an unfair burden on women and families who are expected to navigate this systemic issue,” Rips-Goodwin says.
Senior author Tera Fazzino agrees.
“Even though breastfeeding is promoted as the best option, the lack of support makes it hard to do exclusively,” says Fazzino, associate director of the Cofrin Logan Center for Addiction Research & Treatment at KU’s Life Span Institute. “Most parents end up using formula, either as a supplement or completely. But our findings suggest that formula itself may pose a serious risk to infant health.”
Reference
Rips-Goodwin AR, Jun D, Griebel-Thompson A, Kong KL, Fazzino TL. US infant formulas contain primarily added sugars: An analysis of the infant formulas on the US market. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis. Published online February 2025:107369. doi:10.1016/j.jfca.2025.107369
CHD, Doctors Ask Supreme Court to Hear Medical Free Speech Case
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |March 6, 2025
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), Physicians for Informed Consent and a group of doctors who sued the Medical Board of California after it disciplined them for allegedly spreading COVID-19 “misinformation” have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review their case.
The plaintiffs in Kory v. Bonta submitted their petition on March 1, following the November 2024 dismissal of their case by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta is named in the suit, along with the state’s medical board.
The lawsuit, filed in January 2024, is a follow-up to a previous complaint filed in 2022 and an amended suit filed in 2023, which challenged California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 2098 — a law allowing the medical board to discipline doctors who give “false” information about COVID-19 for engaging in unprofessional conduct.
A federal judge blocked AB 2098 in January 2023, and the law was later repealed. However, according to the lawsuit, the Medical Board of California is still targeting “COVID misinformation” and is threatening physicians with disciplinary action.
Three medical professionals — Dr. Brian Tyson, a board-certified family practitioner who owns an urgent care facility; Dr. LeTrinh Hoang, a pediatric osteopathic physician; and Dr. Pierre Kory, president emeritus of the Independent Medical Alliance, launched the lawsuit.
According to the petition to the Supreme Court, the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, “with the assistance of the California Legislature,” have threatened disciplinary actions against the plaintiffs and other physicians for offering information to patients that departs from official COVID-19 narratives.
In April 2024, a federal district court rejected the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction against the medical board. The 9th Circuit upheld the ruling in November 2024. In January, the Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs’ emergency application for an injunction.
Lawsuit hopes to set precedent that ‘informed consent is free speech’
The case seeks to resolve contradictory precedents from two federal appeals courts on whether the First Amendment protects physicians’ communications to patients — “a question that is particularly significant in a field like medicine, where scientific understanding is continually advancing and rarely settled.”
In a Physicians for Informed Consent press release, Rick Jaffe, who represents the plaintiffs, said the lawsuit “touches on the foundational rights of professionals to share knowledge and opinions essential for patient autonomy and informed consent.”
Tyson said patients cannot provide informed consent if their physicians are denied the opportunity to speak freely.
“We want doctors and all providers to be able to discuss risks and benefits with our patients, be able to speak out against things that are wrong, and be heard when breakthroughs are made,” Tyson said. “The hope is the Supreme Court will set the precedent that informed consent is free speech.”
Supreme Court asked to decide between competing legal precedents
According to the petition, federal courts have established competing legal precedents relating to medical free speech.
In a 2022 decision in Tingley v. Ferguson, the 9th Circuit upheld the ability of professional boards in Washington to restrict members’ speech, arguing this is similar to the boards’ enforcement of “other restrictions on unprofessional conduct.”
But in a 2020 decision in Otto v. City of Boca Raton, the 11th Circuit struck down local ordinances that limited the speech of therapists and counselors, finding that such content-based and viewpoint-based restrictions violate the First Amendment, which has no carveout for controversial speech.
Tyson said the California Medical Board’s disciplinary proceedings against him jeopardized his career. “I had to defend my position against the [board] and almost lost my license … That would have been devastating to the community I serve and to all those I employ.”
Jaffe said Kory v. Bonta is similar to another First Amendment case relating to medical speech, Stockton v. Ferguson. Filed in March 2024, the lawsuit seeks “to protect the right of physicians to speak” and the public’s right to hear such speech.
CHD is a plaintiff in the lawsuit, as are several doctors facing disciplinary proceedings by the Washington Medical Commission for their public statements criticizing mainstream COVID-19 narratives. Basketball legend John Stockton is also a plaintiff, advocating for the public’s right to access and listen to “soapbox speech.”
In January, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ emergency appeal in Stockton v. Ferguson. The case remains active before the 9th Circuit. Oral arguments are scheduled for May 14, Jaffe said.
“The two cases represent the entire spectrum of cases involving what physicians say and would allow the court to give a definitive and comprehensive answer to whether and how much the First Amendment protects professionals when they communicate to patients and the public,” Jaffe said.
According to Physicians for Informed Consent, four justices must agree before the full court can hear Kory v. Bonta. If the Supreme Court decides to take the case, it will hear Kory v. Bonta in October.
Jaffe said the Supreme Court may ultimately jointly consider Kory v. Bonta and Stockton v. Ferguson. He credited CHD with its role in supporting both cases.
“We hope to establish the constitutional right of healthcare providers to speak out against the prevailing medical and scientific consensus about COVID-19, as well as whatever public health challenges face the country in the future,” Jaffe said.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
New Mexico Health Officials Mum on Whether Adult Died From — or With — Measles
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 7, 2025
An adult who died in Lea County, New Mexico, tested positive for measles, state health officials said on Thursday, but officials did not confirm that measles caused the death.
David Morgan, public information officer for the New Mexico Department of Health (NMDOH), told The Defender today that the state’s medical examiner is still investigating the official cause of death.
However, given the presence of the measles virus, the health department was counting the death as a “measles-related death,” Morgan said.
He said no additional information about the patient would be released, including comorbidities or other information about the patient’s health status.
The NMDOH said in a press release that a laboratory confirmed the presence of the measles virus and that the person was unvaccinated. The health department also said the person did not seek medical attention before dying, suggesting the measles test was performed post-mortem.
New Mexico health authorities said people should get vaccinated. “We don’t want to see New Mexicans getting sick or dying from measles,” said Dr. Chad Smelser, NMDOH deputy state epidemiologist. “The measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is the best protection against this serious disease.”
The health department scheduled two free MMR vaccination clinics for next week.
The New Mexico Office of the Medical Examiner and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did not respond to The Defender’s request for comment.
The NMDOH announcement followed news last week that a hospitalized 6-year-old child in Texas who died also reportedly tested positive for measles — it was the first measles-related death reported in the U.S. in 10 years. Texas health authorities did not release additional information about the child’s health.
‘Why do they keep so much information hidden?’
Internist Dr. Meryl Nass, who has been covering the measles outbreaks on her Substack, said, “The big question in my mind is, why do they keep so much information hidden?”
Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), voiced a similar concern. “This is the second death reported from a state health department where the minimum amount of information was released.” He accused health authorities of inciting fear and promoting vaccination as the “solution to that fear.”
In an email to The Defender, Jablonowski wrote:
“Lea County [New Mexico]: adult, unvaccinated, measles, dead. Lubbock [Texas]: school-aged child, unvaccinated, measles, dead. Without cause of death, comorbidities, circumstances, or any other details, it is akin to screaming fire in a crowded theater.”
CHD Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker said the adult who died was not tested for measles until after death — presumably an autopsy — showing that the person “most likely died with the measles but not necessarily from the measles.”
Hooker added:
“This is similar to the death of a young adult woman in 2015 in Washington state whose autopsy testing revealed she died with the measles virus. The woman had multiple comorbidities, including pneumonia, which was the cause of death.
“To tell the reader that they died from the measles is quite a quantum leap for a deceased person who wasn’t tested for measles until their autopsy, which yielded a positive test.
“Also, was it a RT-PCR test? Do we know the reliability of the test? There are so many questions that need to be answered rather than ‘rubber stamping’ this a ‘measles death.’
“It seems all too convenient for the narrative of ‘vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate.’”
Mainstream media were quick to report that the adult death in New Mexico was from measles, even though the NMDOH did not confirm that:
- “Second measles death reported as outbreak grows in Southwest” — The Hill
- “Second death reported in growing measles outbreak — The Washington Post
- “Unvaccinated New Mexico Resident Dies of Suspected Measles — The New York Times
Public health strategy: ‘increase vaccination rates at all costs’
Six adults and four children have tested positive for measles in Lea County, which borders West Texas, where a larger outbreak is ongoing. However, health authorities have not confirmed a link between the two outbreaks.
The outbreak in West Texas — particularly in Gaines County — garnered mainstream media attention after the Texas Department of State Health Services last week reported what it called “the first death from measles in the ongoing outbreak in the South Plains and Panhandle regions.”
Media reports highlighted the fact that many of the cases were among a Mennonite community.
Many members of that community said they feel “frustrated” and “targeted” by mainstream media coverage of the outbreak, said Mennonite community member Tina Siemens in an interview with The Defender.
“The media is portraying the unvaccinated as uneducated” and reporting that because they decline the vaccine, “they are the ones that are carrying all of the measles outbreak,” Siemens said.
Jablonowski said this type of coverage is part of a public health strategy:
“If you are over 12 months old and unvaccinated, you are unvaccinated for a reason. And there are many good reasons: religious convictions, personal philosophy, a different view of medicine, a different interpretation of the science, a different balance of risk, the beneficial effects of actually getting wild-type measles, and — frankly — distrust in the widely and wildly conflicted zealots.
“The posturing of so-called public health is to increase vaccination rates at all costs. It is a value-free enterprise, meaning it doesn’t matter what your values are — they still want you to vaccinate. When we accept achieving a goal as value-free is when we lose our humanity, let alone our freedoms.”
41 deaths reported to VAERS following MMR or MMRV vaccines in past 10 years
Evidence exists of serious health risks associated with the MMR vaccine. Researchers in 2004 found that boys vaccinated with their first MMR vaccine on time were 67% more likely to get diagnosed with autism compared to boys who got their first vaccine after their 3rd birthday.
The CDC recommends that children receive their first dose of the MMR vaccine between 12 and 15 months old.
Research also shows that the MMR vaccine causes febrile seizures, anaphylaxis, meningitis, encephalitis, thrombocytopenia, arthralgia and vasculitis.
Over the past 10 years, there have been 41 deaths following MMR or MMRV vaccination reported in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
There is also evidence that contracting measles provides more comprehensive and long-term immunity to the illness, although the illness can also be serious.
“There are risks from measles and risks from the vaccine,” Nass wrote. “There are apparent benefits from both. … And everyone should have the right to balance their own risks and benefits and make this decision for themselves.”
Mainstream media smears treatments
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last week recommended vaccination against measles. However, he also endorsed treatments for the disease — which mainstream media used to discredit Kennedy and the treatments he recommended.
The Times wrote:
“This outbreak has been a trial by fire of the new secretary of health and human services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent vaccine skeptic. His equivocal response has drawn harsh criticism from scientists, who say he has offered muted support for vaccination and has emphasized untested treatments for measles like cod liver oil.”
However, according to doctors who treat patients with measles, the treatments Kennedy recommended — cod liver oil (a food-based source of vitamin A and vitamin D), budesonide (a steroid used to relieve inflammation affecting the airways), and clarithromycin (an antibiotic) — can be effective.
Nass noted that the World Health Organization also recommends vitamin A supplements to treat measles.
Dr. Ben Edwards, an integrative medicine family practitioner in Lubbock who has been treating measles patients there, told The Defender earlier this week that he was having a lot of success with what the Times called “untested treatments” for measles.
He also said that the hospital treating the child who died refused to give the child “breathing treatments,” as the family requested.
Reports also indicate that children exposed to the measles in Texas are being given the MMR vaccine, which is contraindicated for anyone who is pregnant, immunocompromised or sick with a fever — a common measles symptom — according to its package insert.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
HHS is Opposing Experimental Bird Flu ‘Vaccines’ for Poultry. USDA Seems Supportive.
By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | March 8, 2025
Last week, I wrote about experimental “vaccines” that the United States government has been working with pharmaceutical companies to develop — different ones for poultry and people. I asked if Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins, both new to their jobs in February, would stand up against this and other aspects of “the US government’s bird flu scheme ramped up during the previous presidential administration.” Here is an update.
In a new interview at Fox Nation, Kennedy indicated that HHS opposes giving chickens the bird flu “vaccine.” Kennedy stated: “There’s no indication that those vaccines actually provide sterilizing immunity, and all three of my health agencies at NIH, CDC, and FDA — the acting heads of those agencies — have all recommended against the use of the bird flu vaccine.” This conclusion is supported, Kennedy stated, by the fact that “the vaccine could actually promote antigenic shift, which means your turning those birds into mutant factories, and that could actually accelerate the jump [of the bird flu] to human beings.”
The catch, though, is that the authority over this in regard to poultry raised in America largely resides in the USDA. Therefore, it is important what Rollins decides. So far, she seems to be “on the vaccine train” as was her predecessor in the Joe Biden administration. On February 26, Rollin released the USDA’s Five-Pronged Approach to Address Avian Flu that includes substantial boosting of giving a bird flu “vaccine” to poultry in its fourth of five sections. Here is that section:
Explore Pathways toward Vaccines, Therapeutics, and Other Strategies for Protecting Egg Laying Chickens to Reduce Instances of Depopulation
- USDA will be hyper-focused on a targeted and thoughtful strategy for potential new generation vaccines, therapeutics, and other innovative solutions to minimize depopulation of egg laying chickens along with increased bio-surveillance and other innovative solutions targeted at egg laying chickens in and around outbreaks. Up to a $100 million investment will be available for innovation in this area.
- Importantly, USDA will work with trading partners to limit impacts to export trade markets from potential vaccination. Additionally, USDA will work alongside the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to ensure the public health and safety of any such approaches include considerations of tradeoffs between public health and infectious disease strategy.
- USDA will solicit public input on solutions, and will involve Governors, State Departments of Agriculture, state veterinarians, and poultry and dairy farmers on vaccine and therapeutics strategy, logistics, and surveillance. USDA will immediately begin holding biweekly discussions on this and will also brief the public on its progress biweekly until further notice.
Will President Donald Trump step in to settle any disagreement between HHS and USDA on the matter?
Notably, the USDA report also indicated that USDA will continue to back the mass slaughter of poultry in the name of countering bird flu, stating that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service “will continue to indemnify producers whose flocks must be depopulated to control the further spread of HPAI.” HPAI is short for highly pathogenic avian influenza — bird flu.
As I wrote last week, Kennedy has in his early actions provided reason to expect that he would support ending US involvement in developing and promoting bird flu shots for people, something under the control of his department. He has yet to implement such a change.
White House COVID Task Force Coordinator Deborah Birx Came Directly from USAID
By Debbie Lerman | February 12, 2025
This article adds to the evidence presented in the COVID Dossier to support the following claim:
COVID was not a public health event, although it was presented as such to the world’s population. It was a global operation, coordinated through public-private intelligence and military alliances and invoking laws designed for CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) weapons attacks.
USAID-COVID CONNECTION
Deborah Birx, who became the White House Coronavirus Task Force Coordinator on February 27, 2020, came directly from USAID – the department everyone now knows to be a front for CIA propaganda and regime change operations. [ref]
She served as U.S. Special Representative for Global Health Diplomacy, a joint USAID and State Department office that had ” developed a strategic approach to accomplish their shared mission that focuses on robust diplomacy and development as central to solving global problems.” [ref]
Almost exactly five years ago, the public was told that Deborah Birx was appointed by Vice President Mike Pence who, on February 26, 2020, took over coordination of the U.S. government’s response to the novel coronavirus. [ref]
The announcement said:
Ambassador Birx is a world-renowned global health official and physician. She will be detailed to the Office of the Vice President and will report to Vice President Mike Pence. She will also join the Task Force led by Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. She will be supported by the National Security Council staff. [ref]
This announcement contains hints that Birx was not chosen by public health agencies or officials. Rather, she appears to be coming from the national security apparatus, and “will be supported by the National Security Council staff.”
Further supporting this supposition, on March 11, 2020, at a Heritage Foundation Talk, Trump’s National Security Advisor, Robert O’Brien, when discussing what the White House and NSC were doing about the virus, said:
We brought into the White House Debi Birx, a fantastic physician and ambassador from the State Department. We appreciate Secretary Pompeo immediately moving her over to the White House at our, well at the President’s, request. [min. 21:43 – 21:56]
In other words, Birx was “moved over to the White House” by the Secretary of State, at the request of the National Security Council.
The National Security Council Was in Charge of the U.S. Government’s Covid Response
These facts about Deborah Birx’s appointment to the Task Force are consistent with the government pandemic planning documents that show the NSC – not the HHS, CDC, NIAID, or any other public health agency – was in charge of the U.S. government’s Covid response policy.
Investigating Deborah Birx’s Role in the Covid Response
In August 2022 I published a series of articles investigating how Deborah Birx got the job on the Task Force, the bogus science she promoted, and her relationship with the public health officials on the Task Force.
Here are excerpts from, and links to, those articles:
How Did Deborah Birx Get the Job?
Deborah Birx, an immunologist and Army Colonel who worked for the Department of Defense and US Military on AIDS research, served as Directory of the CDC’s Division of Global HIV/AIDS and as the US Global AIDS Coordinator [ref], was appointed White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator on February 27th, 2020.
She had no training or experience in epidemiology, novel pathogen pandemic response, or airborne respiratory viruses like the coronavirus.
She was offered the position by Matt Pottinger, Deputy National Security Advisor for China, who told Birx that if she did not take the job American lives could be lost.
In her “excruciating story” of the pandemic, Silent Invasion, Deborah Birx does not even try to make coherent scientific or public health policy arguments in favor of the Chinese-style totalitarian measures she advocated. Instead, she provides self-contradictory assertions – some downright false and others long disproven in the scientific literature.
We know Birx was not working with President Trump, although she was on a task force ostensibly representing the White House. Trump did not appoint her, nor did the leaders of the Task Force, as Scott Atlas recounts in his revelatory book on White House pandemic activity, A Plague Upon Our House. When Atlas asked Task Force members how Birx was appointed, he was surprised to find that “no one seemed to know.” (Atlas, p. 82)
Yet, somehow, Deborah Birx – a former military AIDS researcher and government AIDS ambassador with no training, experience, or publications in epidemiology or public health policy – found herself leading a White House Task Force on which she had the power to literally subvert the policy prescriptions of the President of the United States.
It is my (as yet unproven) theory that the lab-leak cabal, for which Birx was a primary agent in the US government, wanted to impose strict lockdowns all over the world.
Whatever their motives, the goal seems very clear: Get as many countries as possible to lock down for as long as possible, at least until vaccines become available.
But locking down entire countries full of healthy populations was never an accepted or ethically/medically/scientifically supported pandemic response, and people might object to such draconian measures. So Birx+cabal had to create enough panic to make it happen.
Given this connection between the U.S. government’s Covid response, the CIA-adjacent USAID, and the National Security Council, maybe those who say they are interested in full transparency can answer the questions presented here:
Hey, Jim Jordan: Ask Fauci Who His Bosses Were!
And the crucial questions raised by the Covid Dossier.
Like dropping napalm on the whole Climate Blob: US EPA recommends dropping ‘endangerment finding’
If CO2 isn’t endangering lives, legally, there’s no reason to outlaw oil and gas
By Jo Nova | February 27, 2025
Marc Morano of ClimateDepot calls this the “holy grail” of the climate agenda. Most of the climate policies of the United States depend on “the Endangerment Finding”– so President Trump asked the new EPA head to look closely at it. This is the “finding” in 2009 that CO2 endangers the public, and that in turn means the EPA must regulate this “pollutant”. Thereby becoming the perfect excuse to allow the bureaucrats to regulate cars, trucks, planes, gas stoves and anything from hair dryers to home insulation.
The new EPA head just finished his 30 day consideration and recommends the Whitehouse rewrite the past conclusion entirely.
Ann Carlson of LegalPlanet says undoing the Endangerment Finding …”would mean full-blown warfare against all things climate.” She describes how the entire bureaucratic edifice crumbles if CO2 is not a pollutant:
If the Administration were to reverse the endangerment finding, greenhouse gases would no longer need to be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Presumably, EPA would then simply move to revoke all of Biden’s major climate rules regulating cars, trucks, power plants, and oil and gas operations. As Joe Goffman, former Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation under President Biden, told Politico, recently, “taking away the 2009 endangerment finding would really make it almost a virtual formality to take down all the greenhouse rules for CO2 and methane,”
This great news, of course, blows some minds
From Bloomberg :
“There is a lot of shocking stuff happening now, but to completely deny climate change and any federal obligation to control the pollution that’s driving it would be shocking and irresponsible,” said David Doniger, senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Environmental advocates contend it also would be illegal. “Climate pollution is air pollution, and it is fueling a crisis,” said Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign. “There is no scientific basis – none – to claim otherwise.
Ann Carlson of LegalPlanet explains, bless her, that the EPA did all “the Science” and public consultation (after twenty years of indoctrination) to get this endangerment “finding” through in the first places so if Trump doesn’t follow the same process, they’ll get sued. She’s sure Trump would lose “because the science is… overwhelming”. Clearly, she has no idea ten times as many people die of the cold, (or even twenty times as many) or that the entire causal “evidence” for the dangers of CO2 depends on models that pretend the Sun is just a big light-globe. These models ignore the solar-electric field, the magnetic field, UV changes and the solar wind, and then, surprise, get nearly every prediction wrong.
Global warming saves 166,000 lives a year. It’s just a shame CO2 doesn’t cause more warming.
We’re just getting started
Believers are telling themselves all kinds of lies at the moment just to cope with the shock. They’re hoping that individual states will still be able to make self defeating climate rules, they’re warning it could take years for the EPA to get through the proper rule-making process. They’re comforting themselves that other legal doors will open if this one closes: even though teenagers might not be able to sue essential corporations for doing their jobs, “it could revive public nuisance laws” against oil producers. Praise the Lord!
Trump should not only set up a scientific group to investigate whether CO2 causes any harm, he should follow the evidence all the way. If the scientists consider the total cost-benefits of CO2, they’d easily show CO2 is an asset that feeds the poor, restores the forests, and improves life on Earth. Obviously, those companies and countries emitting CO2 are doing the world a favor. Coal, oil and gas plants should get tax deductions for their contributions.
Indeed, airconditioners save 20,000 lives in USA each year, so any products that increase the cost of electricity are the ones endangering lives…
NEW HHS SECRETARY MAKES INFORMED CONSENT CORNERSTONE OF THE DEPARTMENT
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | February 28, 2025
The news around public health is shifting in recent weeks including legacy news questioning Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla about vaccine liability shields, the postponement of the CDC’s ACIP meeting, state health departments no longer promoting mass vaccination, and a halt on vaccine advertising.
HighWire Dispels Misinformation About Measles
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | February 28, 2025
Del does a deep dive into the science behind the measles virus, dispelling decades of misinformation from public health agencies, as well as what is actually driving the recent measles outbreaks in the U.S. See a shocking scientific equation comparing the number of individual deaths that would occur if the measles vaccine had never been introduced based on pre-vaccine stats to the number of deaths from MMR injury.
USDA’s $1 Billion Plan to Combat Bird Flu Calls for Vaccines and Killing More Birds — Will It Work?
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | February 28, 2025
The government has a new, $1 billion plan to combat the spread of bird flu among U.S. chickens and rising egg prices.
But some critics said the plan will just perpetuate the ineffective and harmful practice of culling birds and promote the potentially risky vaccination of chickens.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Brooke Rollins on Wednesday announced the five-pronged “$1 billion comprehensive strategy,” including funding for biosecurity measures, financial relief for farmers, actions to reduce “regulatory burdens” and increase egg imports — and “$100 million for vaccine research.”
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published the same day, Rollins said the USDA is “working with the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to cut hundreds of millions of dollars of wasteful spending” — that will pay for the strategy’s $1 billion price tag.
According to the op-ed, the average price of a dozen eggs increased 237% in the last four years. Rollins said the increase “is due in part to continuing outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, which has devastated American poultry farmers and slashed the egg supply.”
The USDA did not respond to requests for comment by press time.
Chicken culls have had ‘disastrous consequences’
Some farmers and medical experts questioned the USDA’s plan, under which chicken culls will continue.
Vermont attorney and farmer John Klar said, “Economic relief for poultry farmers is appropriate, as is monitoring flocks and supporting improved biosecurity measures.” However, Klar said he is “dismayed by the fearmongering about bird flu” and fears that a “silver bullet” to tackle the crisis may not be available.
According to Rollins, about 166 million laying hens have been culled since 2022. Culling “can be an effective way to stop an outbreak,” CNN reported.
But, according to epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher of the McCullough Foundation, bird culls are ineffective.
“The single most effective action to reduce egg prices in the long-term is to stop the practice of mass depopulation, which has led to a costly and ineffective cycle that not only wastes taxpayer dollars but also worsens the spread of H5N1.”
Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough said the USDA plan potentially incentivizes measures that have not been effective.
“By taking government money to cull healthy birds and then bring eggs to market at higher prices, big egg producers have perverse incentives to keep the poorly conceived biosecurity measures going,” McCullough said.
According to CNN, culling has contributed to higher egg prices, due to a reduced egg supply and because taxpayers are “footing the bill for the dead birds.”
Over the past three years, the U.S. government has issued $1.25 billion in compensation to farmers who have had their chickens culled. Approximately 20% of those payouts “have gone to farms that have become infected multiple times,” CNN reported.
Hulscher said these payments have had “disastrous” consequences. “Mass culling has failed to stop the spread of bird flu, caused egg prices to reach a 45-year high, and resulted in the only source of chicken-to-human transmission.”
McCullough said culling mostly healthy birds “doesn’t stop bird-to-animal transmission of the next index case coming into farms by migratory birds, mainly mallard ducks. Instead, he said, “Culling causes the spread of H5N1 from birds to mankind” and “puts the workers at unnecessary risk.”
Iowa farmer Howard Vlieger said that during a 2016 bird flu outbreak in his area, USDA officials stacked culled chickens in compost piles. Within days, infected flies made their way to nearby farms, leading to the death of a laying hen.
“They notified USDA and USDA subsequently euthanized every bird on their farm, even though the broilers were not exhibiting any sign of sickness,” Vlieger said.
Vlieger also questioned the accuracy of tests used to determine whether birds are infected. He cited the example of a neighboring farm where a chicken initially tested positive to a USDA test, but a second test was negative.
“We know the tests they use have very low reliability,” Vlieger said.
Natural immunity more effective than vaccination in birds
Klar suggested that “better policy would be to let the birds develop ‘flock immunity,’ which would be better for humans as well.”
McCullough agreed. “A healthy bird flock allowed to acquire natural immunity to the mild current H5N1 strain will essentially end the current outbreak,” he said.
Several studies have found that bird culls are ineffective in stopping the spread of viruses among birds and that allowing natural immunity to develop may be a more effective means of containing outbreaks.
A December 2024 New England Journal of Medicine study found that between March and October 2024, “All the case patients who were exposed to infected poultry were involved in depopulation activities.”
According to a March 2024 report by the European Food Safety Authority, the number of bird flu detections in birds from December 2023 to March 2024 “was significantly lower, among other reasons, possibly due to some level of flock immunity in previously affected wild bird species, resulting in reduced contamination of the environment.”
“The new plan should stop culling,” McCullough said. “Biosecurity measures should focus on protecting the workers and allowing natural immunity to settle in on American farms.”
Experts question the safety and effectiveness of vaccines for birds
The USDA plan also calls for a “hyper-focused” and “targeted and thoughtful strategy for potential new generation vaccines, therapeutics, and other innovative solutions to minimize depopulation of egg laying chickens.”
The USDA recently granted a conditional license to Zoetis for a bird flu vaccine. CNN reported that other bird flu vaccines for poultry already are licensed in the U.S.
Other vaccines, including one by Moderna, are under development. However, Bloomberg reported this week that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is “reevaluating” the $590 million contract for bird flu shots that the Biden administration awarded to Moderna.
The World Organization for Animal Health recently stated that vaccination may be necessary to stem the spread of bird flu.
According to CNN, “Poultry producers have resisted the use of bird flu vaccines, which are costly and labor intensive to administer to millions of birds,” adding that “many countries won’t accept” exports of vaccinated poultry.
Klar questioned the practice of administering bird flu vaccines to poultry, saying he “strongly objects” to the use of mRNA vaccines in birds or other wildlife.
“I am far more concerned about adverse health effects from experimental pharmaceuticals than I am about natural microbes,” Klar said.
In a December 2024 interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Dr. Leana Wen, the former commissioner of the Baltimore City Health Department and a professor of public health at George Washington University, called for the immediate approval of bird flu vaccines for humans and ramped-up testing throughout the U.S.
Over the past year, former public health officials and mainstream news outlets have also stoked fears of a bird flu outbreak among humans.
Is current bird flu strain a product of gain-of-function research?
While the USDA plan suggests that bird flu has a zoonotic — or animal — origin, McCullough cited research suggesting the current clade of H5N1 avian influenza may have originated from gain-of-function research in mallard ducks performed at the USDA Poultry Research Center in Athens, Georgia.
According to the study, the strain of the virus circulating globally was first found in mallard ducks and other wildlife in Georgia and other locations near the USDA’s laboratory in 2021 and 2022.
Gain-of-function research involves the genetic alteration of an organism to enhance its biological functions — potentially including its transmissibility.
The McCullough Foundation’s research, published last year in the journal Poultry, Fisheries & Wildlife Sciences, calls for investigations to identify laboratory leaks that may have resulted in the release of bird flu strains, and a global moratorium on gain-of-function research.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Israel Would Have No Qualms About USS Liberty-Style FALSE FLAG If Iran Campaign Falters – Analysts
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 18.06.2025
Donald Trump is mulling whether or not to join Israel’s aggression against Iran as Tel Aviv faces problems sustaining its defenses against growing counterstrikes, and apparently lacks a realistic game plan for an end to hostilities after failing to achieve its goals. Analysts told Sputnik how the US could be ‘nudged’ into the conflict.
“The US is already assisting Israel with supplies, intel, refueling support, etc. One of the many US posts in the region could be attacked for a casus belli,” former Pentagon analyst Karen Kwiatkowski explained.
“If Trump doesn’t comply with Israel’s demand” and join its aggression voluntarily, “a false flag may be needed” to drag the US in, Kwiatkowski, retired US Air Force Lt. Col.-turned Iraq War whistleblower, fears.
Netanyahu has a diverse array of options at his disposal, according to the observer, including:
- a false flag against US assets abroad blamed on Iran or one of its Axis of Resistance allies, like the Houthis
- a US domestic attack or assassination blamed on Iran
- Iranian air defenses ‘accidentally’ hitting a civilian jetliner carrying Americans
- use of a dirty bomb or nuclear contamination somewhere in the region blamed on Iran
- even blackmailing by threatening to use nukes against Iran if the US doesn’t join the fight
Kwiatkowski estimates that Israel probably has “enough blackmail power” against President Trump and Congress to avoid the necessity of a false flag operation, but a “USS Liberty-style” attack, targeting the soon-to-be-retired USS Nimitz supercarrier that’s heading to the Middle East, for example, nevertheless cannot be ruled out entirely, she says. … continue

