Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Saturday Night Fights at the Pharmacy

BY PIERRE KORY | BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | JANUARY 13, 2022

I am exhausted: physically, emotionally, and morally. Although I am not sure moral exhaustion is “a thing,” the daily witnessing of masses of physicians and pharmacists abandoning their core responsibility of placing the welfare of the patient as their primary consideration is beyond wearying.

In the United States of Pharma, individual docs and pharmacists have been led so far astray, forgivably or unforgivably, due to the relentless barrage of dis-information targeted at them by the federal pharmaceutical regulators (further supported by relentless, daily propaganda appearing in both major media and medical journals).

Let us be clear about the rule and tradition. In the US, doctors are permitted to prescribe any medicine that has been approved by the FDA, even for indications the medicine was not originally approved for. Such “off-label” prescribing is both legal and historically encouraged by the FDA.

Pharmacies are there to fill prescriptions, and in only rare circumstances and in only a handful of states do they have the right to refuse to fill a valid prescription. Otherwise, what medicines are deployed, for whom, and for what purpose, is a matter between patient and doctor. This is the long-standing rule.

This principle has been violated now for almost two years. It has created a labyrinth of confusion over basic and well-tested therapies for dealing with a virus that can be very serious for many.

It is no longer the case that any doctor can depend on any pharmacist to distribute safe and effective medicines. They are very likely now to say no and they do so as a result of having been been unfairly intimidated by the threatening memos issued by federal agencies and the state medical and pharmacy boards. These reprehensible actions are just the latest salvo in the pharmaceutical industry’s decades-long war on off-patent, repurposed medicines.

What prompts me to write this was my most recent failure (and the resulting distress that led to terrible sleep last night) over not being able to get a pharmacist to fill my orders in the hours prior to closing of pharmacies for an acutely ill COVID patient that had contacted me reporting high fevers, sore throat, and body aches.

I immediately wanted to start him on a short course combination regimen of three, old, safe, cheap generic medications, all with large clinical trials evidence bases showing high efficacy against COVID (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine). What is important to note is that, months ago I stopped trying to contact ANY pharmacy unless I KNEW they would fill my scripts for these off-patients medications because unless I knew a pharmacy was “safe”, I ran a high probability of entering an un-affordably time-wasting and ultimately losing argument with some smug, obstinate pharmacist.

As a result, we early treatment docs have long since been forced to build lists of “safe haven” pharmacies where we know we can easily get access to these medicines for our patients.

However, last night, I was inspired to make an attempt on a new, unknown pharmacy on behalf of my new patient as I had just read Steve Kirsch’s substack about my colleague and early COVID-treatment pioneer/expert Dr. Brian Tyson, in which was included the letter written by Dr. Brian Tyson’s attorney (also with the last name Tyson) that was used to “sway” a local pharmacy that had suddenly refused to fill.

The letter is thorough, deeply well-argued, and informs the pharmacists that they are; 1) violating the civil rights of patients, 2) interfering with a physician’s ability to practice medicine and 3) exhibiting behavior that constitutes the unlicensed and negligent practice of medicine.

Now, I had argued all these points before in previous “conflicts” with pharmacists, but never all at the same time, and rarely threatening a lawsuit. Duly and newly emboldened I made the call.

4:20 Pacific time (pharmacies close there at 6pm).

Transcript (from memory):

“Hi, I’d like to call in a prescription for a couple of patients.”

“OK, what’s the first patients name and date of birth?”

“Timothy Thomas (not his real name), born Nov. 6th, 1977.”

(pause, clacking of keyboard)

“OK, what does he need?”

(Wait for it)

“He needs ivermectin, 3 milligram tablets, I want him to take 15 each day as he is a big guy, and for 5 days with a refill. Then he needs, hydroxychloro…

“Doctor, I am sorry but I cannot fill the ivermectin. The owner has said we are not to fill for COVID, there is no evidence it works.”

“Listen, I don’t know who the owner is but you are the pharmacist on duty, and I am calling in a prescription to you, not the owner.”

“I, I, I am sorry but I can’t.”

I look at the letter, and then start spewing rapid fire arguments at him, “well unfortunately for you, my patient is an executive of a company and their lawyer is prepared to and will send a letter of intent to sue if it has not been filled because you are violating his civil rights, blocking my licensed ability to practice medicine and care for my sick patient, and you are clearly practicing medicine illegally and highly ignorantly. You should at least know what you are doing if you are going to do it without a license man.”

“But I am allowed to refuse, doctor.”

“That is what you think and what you have been told… But, I can promise you, that when you bring your arguments up in court as to why you refused, they will not hold up if any harm comes to my patient by your refusal. They will NOT HOLD UP, but you can try. The lawyer will serve the letter on Monday, I promise you, we are fed up out here and are fighting back, all of my fellow physicians being blocked by pharmacists are now using legal action (OK, so I overstated things a bit), I am sorry you are in the position you are in, but you have no rational or scientific evidence to support a refusal, but if you want to go to court to find out, we can make that happen for you”

“I, I feel intimidated.”

“Well, I am sorry for that, but you are hurting my patient and my ability to care for them. It is THEY who YOU are intimidating Sir. All you have to do is take my script, fill it, and we don’t have to go on like this. These medications are FDA approved, I am using them off-label based on a large body of evidence and experience in COVID, and off label prescribing is both legal and historically encouraged by the FDA. You are clearly practicing medicine and I promise that will be proven to you in a court of law. Please just fill it and you wont have to hear from me or my patient again.”

(Pause, silence)

“I cannot do it, I am not supposed to.”

“OK then, I will also remind you that you are legally required to provide me your name and license number as we will be pursuing legal action against you.”

“I am not giving you my name, I am not comfortable with that.”

“OK, so you think I can’t find it out? Fine, I am also documenting this refusal. Again, I am not interested in a contentious argument, I am asking you simply to fill the prescriptions for two sick patients who need my help, and if you do, you won’t have to hear from me or the patient’s lawyer.”

He whispers. “OK, tell me the rest of the prescriptions.”

I tell him the rest, then say, “my patient will be there by closing time, thank you and I apologize for my tone but I am just trying to do the best for my sick patients.”

Victory? Yes! Haven’t won one of these in months.

I finish telling him the rest of the scripts for my patient and his wife (I also needed to call in medicines for her so she could have some on hand and also begin ivermectin as a prophylactic agent given it ensures an easier course even if she is already or eventually becomes infected).

I then happily call the patient, tell him to get his wife to pick up the medicines along with the other over-the-counter compounds that have clinical trials supporting their use. And then I go to the couch to literally lay down (insane day of dozens of patient care requests, other zooms and phone calls, maybe 12+ hours on the phone).

30 minutes later… patients texts me… my wife went there and the pharmacist won’t fill.

Now, despite the fact that I co-wrote a document with Executive Director Kelly Bumann of the FLCCC and Unity Project Founder Jeff Hanson, called “Overcoming the Barriers to Access,” which is a document full of sound, pragmatic tactics and dialogue examples offered to patients (and docs) in order to help them navigate such pharmacist obstructions, they typically will not work when it is an hour before closing on a weekend.

So, here I am the next morning. Fortunately I was able to get two of the medicines filled through another pharmacy, with enough for his wife as she unsurprisingly fell ill overnight (omicron moves fast). Unfortunately, they will have to wait until tomorrow to get the third medicine from a “friendly” or “underground” pharmacy (not really underground but you get the analogy).

This is what it is like out here trying to fight for patients sick with COVID – widespread delays in care as blocking access to generic or “repurposed” medicines by ignorant/arrogant pharmacists is ubiquitous. The majority of pharmacists (not all!) have simply stopped thinking critically or devoting effort to review the evidence base, instead simply believing what they are told by their Boards (a.k.a. their “Ministries of Truth”). As if the insane numbers of ill omicron patients to care for is not challenging enough.

In the words of Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, who went after his state’s Pharmacy Board when they tried to scare the states pharmacists away from prescribing ivermectin by sending them threatening letters, “it is shocking that pharmacists are suddenly developing a conscience after spending the last decade handing out opiates like they were M & M’s”.

Well said and tragically absurd.

This newfound conscience influencing such actions is likely further fueled by a sometime resident psychology of pharmacists who may feel “less than” a physician given their limited scope of patient care tasks.

Emboldened by a seemingly legal opportunity to assert superiority and control over physicians, many find these irresistible. Consequently, they seem to be “getting off” from telling the “stupid” doctors that the Ministry of Truth has done the research for them and the Ministry has found, that in the name of science, doctors should stop using “ineffective horse de-wormer” to treat COVID.

Just another day in the life of an early COVID treatment expert.

A version of this article appeared on the author’s substack.

Pierre Kory is a Pulmonary and Critical Care Specialist, Teacher/Researcher. He is also the President and Chief Medical Officer of the non-profit organization Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance whose mission is to develop the most effective, evidence/expertise-based COVID-19 treatment protocols.

January 14, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Huge Number Of Post-Vax Deaths & It’s Getting Worse – Dr. Pierre Kory

By Greg Hunter | USA Watchdog | January 8, 2022

World renowned CV19 critical care and pulmonary expert Dr. Pierre Kory says the data is clear the CV19 injections are “not safe, not effective” and shows they are causing a huge number of deaths.

It’s going to get much worse if we don’t stop the shots. Dr. Kory warns,

“They already broke death records with these vaccines almost a year ago. Now, you are starting to see it in actuarial data with life insurance companies.  The life insurance companies have been paying out claims like they never have before, and they are noticing the deaths cannot be explained by Covid. If you look at the actual morbidity and mortality from the CDC . . . 2019, 2020 and 2021 in the ages of 18 to 64

. . . you’ll see in America, starting in quarter two of the year 2021 (when the vaccines started), the mortalities started to rise, and it rose from 120 percent above normal to 140 percent above normal, and it’s far exceeded the death rates in 2020. The difference in 2020 and 2021, we had covid in both years.  In 2021, we had the vaccines.  They know the amount of deaths they are reporting cannot be explained by Covid.

. . . There is something else driving a huge and extremely terrifying mortality signal in the U.S. population. To think that it is anything but the vaccines, if we get this wrong and if you keep saying they are safe, that line which is already in a significant and steep incline will continue the more we boost and the more we vaccinate. . . . This has to stop.  We have to stop, people are dying.”

Meanwhile, the captured regulatory agencies like the CDC and FDA are trashing and cutting off proven scientific cures for Covid such as Ivermectin. Dr. Kory says Ivermectin has been proven effective in defeating Covid infections, and he says, “It is “one of the safest drugs ever brought to market.”

Dr. Kory also says the so-called experimental vaccines “are not safe and not effective.” So, why do government agencies push them anyway?

Dr. Kory says, “I have had a front row seat to see this.” . . . And he goes on to say government agencies are suffering from “regulatory capture” by big Pharma.  Meaning, the FDA and CDC push ineffective and dangerous vaccines so Big Pharma can make money off them, while disregarding cheaper, safer and more effective drugs like Ivermectin.

Dr Kory gives a real-world example during the pandemic and explains,

“Prescriptions in this country (for Ivermectin) in August were hitting 90,000 per week. So many doctors were using it for Covid that it spooked the pharmaceutical companies. . . . In response to the massive uptake in the use of Ivermectin by physicians with prescriptions and pharmacists filling them, the CDC went on the attack.

They sent a bulletin to every state department of health which was full of propaganda and misinformation screaming the FDA has not approved Ivermectin (for treating Covid) and it’s not a proven drug, and it’s dangerous and there are overdoses and all of these things that were false.

It went to all state departments of health. But guess what happened next? The medical boards and the pharmacy boards started sending that to every licensed physician and pharmacist in the land. The average physician and pharmacist, I am sorry to say this, is not well read. They are not keeping up with data.

They are overwhelmed and they are easily influenced. That’s why in this country you have a war between the physicians that know that Ivermectin is effective . . . and are at war with the pharmacies.

A huge proportion of pharmacists will refuse to fill a decades-old safe drug for Covid because they have been threatened and manipulated by their boards. They are afraid to lose their licenses. It all smoke.

It’s all B.S. because you cannot lose your license for use of a safe drug. . . We need our doctors to do doctoring, and we need our pharmacists to do pharmacy and stop being influenced by propaganda by pharmaceutical companies who don’t want you to use this drug.

We have to stand up, and we have to resist on behalf of our patients. We are finding that with compounding pharmacies and small pharmacies we can still get access (to Ivermectin), but it is a battle and you do have to navigate.”

Former Pfizer VP Dr. Michael Yeadon said this week,

“Max vaccination is leading to mass death.” Dr. Kory agrees and explains, “It’s not only data from a life insurance company that came out this week that is based on CDC data that can’t be explained by Covid alone, there are huge increases of dying in this country this year. . . They have done huge analysis of the European mortality data as well as the U.S. mortality data and they controlled for vaccination status.

They found that for every age range that they looked at, the all-cause mortality of the vaccinated were increased over the unvaccinated. All-cause mortality and that means that you are more likely to die of something if you are vaccinated. . . All-cause mortality are coming out of actual databases by credible scientists.

You have life insurance companies showing the data, and you have our own federal government showing unexplained large rises in dying. . . Don’t you think a good scientific question and a good hypothesis to test would be ‘Could these be the vaccines?’

The answer is ‘the vaccines,’ and I cannot find a better fit to answering that hypothesis than that, it’s this mass explosion of this vaccination policy with single, double and booster shots. It’s going like wildfire through the population. If the mortality of the vaccinated is higher than the unvaccinated, you have the data that you can safely and confidently conclude the vaccines are associated with and causing death.”

In closing, Dr. Kory says, “What has happened in the last month or so is the data for adverse reactions and effects are no longer hidden and suppressed. They are coming out on servers . . . and actuarial tables.”

Dr. Kory tells people to go to the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance website and get any and all information for treating Covid-19 for free.

Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Dr. Pierre Kory, one of the top Pulmonary and Covid Critical Care experts on the planet, who is co-founder of the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (flccc.net). (There is much more in the nearly 59 min. interview)

After The Interview:

Dr. Kory has said in past interviews that history will also not be kind to Dr Fauci.  Dr. Kory contends Dr. Fauci made nearly every decision in favor of Big Pharma and not the public.

All the information is free on Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance website flccc.net.

January 14, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Why Biden gets my vote as the worst President in US history

I believe history will judge President Biden as the worst President in US history. Here’s why.

By Steve Kirsch | January 13, 2022

Biden’s approval rating has dropped to a new low of 33%. I think it’s going to go even lower. I think history will eventually judge him as the worst President in US history. Sure, Biden didn’t create COVID. But by enabling Fauci instead of firing him, he has turned a bad situation (COVID) into a national and worldwide disaster.

A wise chief executive will always solicit opposing points of view on any important decision

The most important quality in a chief executive is his decision-making ability.

Take, for example, the question as to whether or not to mandate the vaccination of the entire population of the US with a vaccine which was never properly tested on animals (they never did the amount, duration, and distribution studies of the spike protein on non-human primates, for example, and still haven’t) and where the safety signals in VAERS are off the charts (and nobody can explain the reason for that other than using hand-waving arguments without any evidence).

You’d think he might solicit input from at least a dozen experts who hold differing viewpoints before making the decision. People like Robert F. Kennedy, Robert Malone, Byram Bridle, Geert Vanden Bossche, and Peter McCullough should be at the top of the invite list for a decision like this.

Nope, not going to happen. Biden is just going to listen to one side of the story (NIH, CDC, and FDA) and go with it. It’s a good bet that Biden never read RFK Jr.’s book on Fauci.

Biden made sure nobody else would hear the other side of the story too

Biden didn’t stop at just poor decision making. He went one step further. A step that as far as I know, no other US President has ever taken. He actually has a Disinformation Dozen list of people to censor. Not only doesn’t he want to listen to differing viewpoints, but he also wants to make sure you don’t hear differing viewpoints either.

The surveys I’ve done all show that nearly 100% of Americans believe it is wrong for an American President to have a censorship list. Yet, not a single member of Congress has voiced any objection to Biden’s censorship list. That’s stunning to me.

And government censorship is not limited to just the people on the Disinformation Dozen list. The censorship directive extends to anyone who disseminates information that differs from the official government narrative.

Do you think the social media companies are doing this censorship on their own? No way. They are being instructed to censor the information by the government. This is why none of the social media companies will discuss the science with us; the decision was made above their heads so any discussion of the facts are irrelevant.

The same is likely true of medical boards. As far as I know, all of them resolved to take away the livelihood of anyone who dares to speak in opposition to what the CDC says. They all decided to do this within about a week of each other. No evidence of patient harm is required. The bottom line is that in America today, your license to practice medicine can be revoked for what you say, even if there is no proof whatsoever that anyone has been harmed.

In fact, I just learned last night that Dr. Meryl Nass had her license to practice medicine revoked for speaking out. This sends a chilling message to all medical professionals: say anything we don’t agree with and we’ll destroy both your reputation and your ability to earn and income.

How does President Biden feel about the censorship? He likes it. He thinks we should do more of it.

Contrast Biden’s views with that one of America’s most beloved Presidents:

Biden is now promoting the use of an intervention which does nothing more than make people believe they are being protected

This is outrageous. Masks do not work. There are only two randomized trials for masks relative to COVID specifically (the Denmark and Bangladesh studies) and both proved masks did nothing. Nobody will debate any of us on this.

Now Biden is compounding the error by spreading misinformation that masks make a difference. This lulls people into a false sense of security they are being protected which makes the problem worse.

If Biden really wanted to stop COVID misinformation, he could solve it in a heartbeat: stop talking.

There are no debates either: nobody can get a debate

America isn’t allowed to hear both sides of the most important story of the decade. They are only allowed to hear the government narrative unchallenged.

I can’t get a recorded video debate with anyone from the CDC, NIH, or FDA. They all refuse to debate any members of our team.

Even TrialSiteNews called for a debate on vaccine safety and not a single qualified person responded.

Jake Tapper insulted RFK Jr, and RFK challenged him to a debate. Jake refused.

Ever see Robert Malone interviewed on CNN or in the The NY Times? Not going to happen. You aren’t allowed to hear any views that differ from the government narrative. Reminds me of how China and North Korea operate.

And there are Americans like Dr. Ben Rein of Stanford University and Taylor Nichols MD who both want to tighten things down even more. Nichols wants to revoke the medical license of anyone who says anything counter-narrative. Rein wants Malone censored. I asked Rein and Nichols if they would debate us. No answer from either.

None of the people promoting the myth that the vaccines are safe and effective is willing to be challenged on their assertions in a neutral public forum

It’s clear why:

It’s getting even worse… if you have differing views, they’ll lock you up

The impact of not soliciting divergent views: at least 150,000 dead Americans… maybe over 400,000

At least 150,000 Americans have been killed by the COVID vaccines. The benefit? We might save 10,000 deaths from COVID, but probably not that high since the virus mutated since the Phase 3 trials. We kill 15 people to maybe save 1 life. That’s insane.

Note that 150,000 is a minimum. The actual number is likely larger than that; probably larger than all the Americans who died in World War II.

In this case, these people died for nothing. They died because of a poor decision by a US President to deploy an unsafe and inadequately tested vaccine on America.

Mark my words, the immediate deaths and disability are just the tip of the iceberg. There are going to be very severe repercussions of these vaccine that will be felt for years to come including deaths from myocarditis, increasing cancer rates, prion diseases, lack of fertility, and negative vaccine efficacy causing us to be more vulnerable to diseases.

The decision to deploy and mandate these vaccines is going to go down in history as the worst mistake ever made by a US President.

President Biden is not going to correct it either, even after it is obvious that he’s now killing our kids.

Ernest Ramirez lost his only son, 16-years-old, just 5 days after the first shot. It was determined that the vaccine killed him. Did the CDC care? No. They ignored it, just like all the vaccine injuries and deaths. They still tell people that nobody has died from the vaccine. OK, fine, if nobody died from the vaccine then tell us what caused the death of his son?

How many kids do we have to kill or permanently disable (like Maddie de Garay) before Biden admits he screwed up?

Biden will never admit he made a mistake. Presidents never like to admit they were wrong. He’s never going to admit he’s killed 150,000 Americans. But we all know.

At best, he’ll drop the mandate. But even that is unlikely.

I’m not getting any more shots. My wife isn’t either. But two of our kids are still convinced that the vaccines are safe and effective. Their argument is typical, “Dad, none of my friends have died from the vaccine.” They are both adults and I can’t change their minds. Not only that, they are being forced to take the booster by their schools (Harvard and University of Rochester). They could end up dead or disabled.

I’m sure other parents are in similar situations.

So that’s why Biden has lost all my trust. Apparently, I’m not alone as his approval rating is at an all time low. I am certainly trying to do my part to drive his approval rating to zero.

January 14, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Constitutional protections are being abridged by the Misinformation Witchhunt – Dr. Meryl Nass’ side of the story

By Meryl Nass, MD | January 13, 2022

The Constitutional amendments I have excerpted below are the premier law of the land. States and state agencies are not allowed to abridge these rights, which have been granted to all US citizens. However, my state’s Medical Board is trying hard to abridge them. The Board has apparently realized they do not have the evidence to convict me of anything, so they are now going on a fishing expedition, asking for a list of every patient I have seen during the past six months, and much more.

The reason my story has gotten so much press is because the Board ordered a neuropsychological evaluation of me–which leads to mandatory reporting to a national physician database, and makes my case accessible to the media.

Since the Maine Medical Board wanted to “out” me publicly, I feel no compunction about telling my side of the story to the public, and I will continue to do so.

For those who feel there must be a fire where there is smoke, and that I may in fact be a danger to my patients, I would like you to know my history and the facts as I see them. I was probably one of the safest and most careful physicians in the state:

1.  There has not been a single complaint to the Board by a patient in this case. Not one.

2.  I have never been accused or charged with malpractice, in 41 years of practicing medicine.

3.  I have only ever had one complaint to a Medical Board, about 15 years ago, and the complainant apologized to me after the investigation, once he learned my treatment was excellent. The Board found in my favor then.

4.  I am well known for successfully treating very challenging cases of chronic, undiagnosed illnesses.

5.  I am listed in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in the World for my accomplishments, which included the first scientific analysis of an epidemic that proved it was due to biological warfare.

6.  I have spent most of my career trying to serve patients who were ‘left behind’ by the prevailing medical system. This included soldiers being forced to receive a dangerous anthrax vaccine, and those who were injured by it; veterans with Gulf War syndrome; patients with chronic fatigue syndrome; with Lyme disease; and patients with puzzling illnesses that other doctors were unable to diagnose and/or treat. I pivoted my practice to focus on the best care of COVID precisely because other doctors failed to prescribe treatments that would keep the vast majority of patients out of the hospital.

7.  I charged a one-time fee of $60 to treat COVID–this included as much treatment as needed for no additional cost. I am flabbergasted that the Board is criticizing my charting of many text messages, phone calls and emails, and calling them “telemedicine visits” as if each one deserved a history and physical. Don’t other doctors chat briefly with their patients outside the office any more?

I spoke to patients nights and weekends, and made brief notes of these many encounters, which I think is exactly what other doctors do. The Board has tried to turn my exemplary care of patients and one missed phone call (the doc had left the hospital when I called back) into a charge of negligence. And then into a charge of cognitive decline or psychiatric illness.

It seems that if you do not support vaccinations that the CEOs of Pfizer and BioNTech have now deemed practically worthless, and you treat patients with usually effective, legal medicines like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, then you must be stopped, whatever it takes.

And what about the patients who want their COVID treated with methods other than those prescribed by the NIH of Tony Fauci, Francis Collins and Lawrence Tabak,* all of whom conspired to cover up the lab origin of COVID and furthermore ‘take down’ the esteemed physicians who wrote the Great Barrington Declaration? In other words, unindicted criminals are responsible for our government-authorized COVID treatments. 

What is the Board doing to serve these patients?

The Board wants to cut off these patients’ access to cheap, safe and effective COVID medicines, and deny them any choice. It even wants to cut off their access to treatment information. 

I do not intend to roll over while the Board trashes the First Amendment, imposes government-designated medical care on patients, and destroys the sacred bond between patients and their physicians.

Meryl Nass

*Tony Fauci is the Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Francis Collins just stepped down as the Director of the National Institutes of Health.  Lawrence Tabak is the current Acting Director of the National Institutes of Health. All three are shown in numerous emails to have covered up the role of the NIH in funding research in Wuhan through a pass-through organization, created a fake scientific paper designed to kill the lab origin hypothesis (without disclosing their role), and worked to get articles published to destroy the Great Barrington Declaration and its 3 prominent authors. Fauci has also perjured himself to Congress on multiple occasions.

AMENDMENT I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

AMENDMENT IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

AMENDMENT XIV – Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

January 14, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

DR. MERYL NASS – BIOLOGICAL WARFARE IN HISTORY AND GOVERNMENT LIES

Zee Interviews | January 11, 2022

Dr. Meryl Nass has been practicing medicine for over 40 years with a special interest in biological warfare.

An expert in this area, she discusses how epidemics have been launched in the past that were not natural, government lies surrounding these events and how we are undoubtedly facing a similar situation right now.

If you would like to support Zeee Media to continue raising awareness and improve production, you can donate via this link:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=48KZT6SYT2R44

Website:

https://www.zeeemedia.com

Regular Live News Broadcasts on my Instagram:

https://www.instagram.com/realmariazeee/?hl=en

Uncensored on Telegram:

https://t.me/zeeemedia

January 14, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

The Five Deadly Lies of Jacinda Ardern and her Government

By Guy Hatchard | TCW Defending Freedom | January 14, 2022

The Government should be your single source of truth

SEPTEMBER 4, 2020 – New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said in Parliament: ‘I want to send a clear message to the New Zealand public: we will share with you the most up-to-date information daily. You can trust us as a source of that information. You can also trust the Director-General of Health and the Ministry of Health . . . dismiss anything else. We will continue to be your single source of truth.’

This is one of the most oft-repeated and misleading lies of Jacinda Ardern. Whistleblowers from within government departments including nurses, doctors and officials have reported that they have been instructed to refrain from revealing to the public the true extent of adverse events and deaths following vaccination, thus hiding the real risks. The excuse presented to employees by the government was that ‘a medical emergency’ justifies the expedient of hiding the truth. Moreover the risks of Covid itself have been consistently overblown to stoke the fear narrative. Based on this lie, the government has refused to acknowledge the import of published research.

The virus spreads because of the unvaccinated

October 4, 2021 – Jacinda Ardern quoted in Stuff: ‘The vast majority of New Zealanders eligible now are being vaccinated, but the virus is finding our unvaccinated individuals. A boundary is not an ironclad way of protecting ourselves against Covid; a vaccine is.’

Even before the start of the NZ vaccination roll out in February 2021, the government was warned that the vaccine allowed transmission. Dozens of published papers since show that there is little or no correlation between transmission and vaccination. 

The government failed to call out false information in articles published by the media and sponsored by vaccine interests pretending that Covid spreads 20 times more easily among the unvaccinated. This created unnecessary fear of the unvaccinated and overconfidence among the vaccinated. It has divided our nation. It has led to an economic disaster for businesses who are required to discriminate against the unvaccinated. It has caused personal hardship for thousands of highly qualified and experienced NZ professionals and greatly reduced the pool of qualified individuals in NZ. This lie was the false basis for mandates.

The vaccine is entirely safe

22 October 2021 – Jacinda Ardern quoted in the NZ Doctor: ‘The vaccine we are using in New Zealand is safe and effective.’

This lie has been repeated again and again in the saturation government advertising which has cost millions. Individuals known to be vulnerable to vaccination adverse effects including people with a history of anaphylactic shock, past reactions to vaccination etc, have been denied information which might enable them to make informed choices. They have also been denied exemption to vaccination. Young people who have very little risk of serious Covid outcomes, yet a relatively high risk of vaccine injury, have been left completely uninformed.

There is no need to require reporting of vaccine adverse events

December 15 2021 – Astrid Koorneeff, Director, National Immunisation Programme: ‘An accurate measurement of all adverse events [subsequent to vaccination] is not required.’

This is among the most damaging of lies. Faced with a novel vaccine with a short period of testing developed by a company with a history of medical harm lawsuits against it, the government refused to institute mandatory procedures which would correctly evaluate the extent of any adverse effects. Instead they continued with a voluntary system. A Medsafe website records that only 5 per cent of adverse effects are reported. This has enabled Jacinda Ardern and the government to deny the extent of adverse events and death following vaccination by pleading insufficient information.

Heart disease affects only 3 out of 100,000 vaccinated individuals

15 December 2021 letter – Dr Ashley Bloomfield, Director General of Health: ‘In New Zealand, the true incidence of vaccine-associated myocarditis is unknown as the onset of symptoms occurs in the first few days after vaccination and is potentially under-reported. However, the overall rate of this event in New Zealand is reported to be around 3 per 100,000 vaccinations.’

How can any rational person say in the same paragraph that incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis is underreported in NZ, but also assert an absurdly low rate for incidence? In fact a new study puts the risk of myocarditis to be higher among vaccinated males under 40 than from Covid itself. The latest careful assessment of incidence of perimyocarditis in the published literature puts the incidence as high as 1 in 2,000, not 3 in 100,000.

Multiple reports from individuals reveal that it is common practice to turn away recently vaccinated individuals experiencing symptoms of myocarditis from NZ general practices and hospitals without treatment or a report of cardiac problems. This is mediated by another myth that myocarditis is a ‘mild’ disease that is short-lived. That’s a frightening lie. The damage to the heart from acute viral myocarditis is typically permanent, and the three- to five-year survival rate for myocarditis has historically ranged from 56 per cent to 83 per cent.

Whistleblowers from emergency rooms around NZ report that facilities are being overwhelmed with cardiac cases among vaccinated individuals.

Taken together, the misinformation effort by the NZ government led by Jacinda Ardern has irreparably changed the character of our society and caused needless suffering for thousands.

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Biden calls for tighter censorship of Covid-19 content

RT | January 13, 2022

US President Joe Biden’s latest “surge response” to fight the spread of Covid-19 includes an appeal for Big Tech and media companies to block allegedly false pandemic-related claims.

“I make a special appeal to social media companies and media outlets,” Biden said on Thursday. “Please deal with the misinformation and disinformation that’s on your shows. It has to stop.”

Biden made the comment as he announced a series of new measures to mitigate the spread of Covid-19, including plans for free masks, more free tests, and additional deployments of military medical teams to help hospitals cope with rising patient loads. He didn’t specify what constitutes misinformation or disinformation in the pandemic age.

Biden urged a crackdown immediately after chiding people who have chosen not to get vaccinated by saying they were “standing in the way” of the fight against the virus.

Twitter, Facebook, and other platforms already have strict policies on commentary about Covid-19 if it clashes with the currently mainstream approach to dealing with the virus. Social media giants have also employed teams of fact-checkers, vigorously working to enforce those policies. But Biden’s administration is scrambling to find more ways to fight Covid “misinformation” after the fast-spreading Omicron variant pushed new infections and hospitalizations to record highs.

Biden’s apparent censorship appeal quickly sparked backlash on social media. This included claims that the president is among those spreading misinformation. Biden falsely said last month that “almost all” Covid-19 deaths were among unvaccinated people, and he claimed last July that “you’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”

Other critics blasted Biden’s statement on principle. “Imagine calling for censorship of your own nation as the POTUS when you’ve taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the FIRST Amendment is freedom of speech,” podcast host Barrington Martin II said on Twitter.

Many observers questioned the wisdom of letting gatekeepers decide which speech is misinformation, thereby blocking open discussion and independent truth-seeking. Still others suggested that Biden is trying to do damage-control after his failure to meet campaign promises on Covid-19 contributed to a downward spiral in his approval ratings.

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Google demonetizes meteorologist and researcher Roy Spencer

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 13, 2022

The website DrRoySpencer.com has been demonetized by Google, its owner, climatologist and former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, announced in a blog post.

According to Spencer – who is considered a climate change skeptic but has rejected the label of being a “climate denier” – Google has cut his website off from Adsense for allegedly spreading unreliable and harmful claims.

Spencer notes that revenue he is now losing was low, but other aspects of this decision concern him more, although the scientist doesn’t plan on appealing for the time being, believing that it would be an uphill struggle against what he calls “liberal arts educated fact checkers” – and Google’s announced policy to stomp out content it labels as skeptical of the climate change theory.

Spencer also revealed that warnings have been coming from Google his way for several months about his website engaging in Adsense policy violations, but as usual, the tech giant did not explain what the violations were and where on the site they could be found. During this time, he thought it had to do with the placement of ads rather than content that he produces.

Only once the demonetization occurred, Spencer received information about why his site was no longer eligible for making money from ads, along with links to offending pages.

Spencer says he believes his content to be “mainstream enough” since he thinks that the climate has warmed and that this is for the most part the consequence of the so-called greenhouse effect.

But apparently, his “faith” in these pillars of climate change isn’t exhibited strongly enough; in fact, Google not only demonetized, but also delegitimized his content by calling it misleading and harmful.

Spencer explains that while he supports most of the mainstream climate change science, he differs on issues of the amount of warming that has happened and the level that can be expected in the future – and also how to solve this problem, “from an energy policy perspective.”

He said that Google’s links to pages that violated its policies show those were mostly the monthly global temperature update pages.

“This is obviously because some activists employed by Google (who probably weren’t even born when John Christy and I received both NASA and American Meteorological Society awards for our work) don’t like the answer our 43-year long satellite dataset gives,” he writes.

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

The media’s Covid mouthpieces don’t know their SARS from their elbow

By Suzie Halewood | TCW Defending Freedom | January 13, 2022

LAST week Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff (A Hard Lesson For Djokovic: Patience with vaccine sceptics is wearing thin) took a gleeful swipe at tennis star Novak Djokovic, who was initially denied the right to remain in Australia to defend his Australian Open title.

This was despite the world number one receiving an exemption from a review panel appointed by the state of Victoria’s Department of Health, which took into consideration Novak having previously been tested positive for asymptomatic Covid.

‘Few tears will be shed for the man now inevitably known as “Novaxx” Djokovic,’ opined Gaby, who has clearly never organised a tennis tournament.

She attacks the Serbian star for his ‘wacky beliefs’ such as ‘natural’ healing, as though natural immunity is a conspiracy theory, before equating him with the one rule for them, one rule for us elites of Downing Street, merely because he’s earned millions from being focused and talented. (A parallel piece in The Telegraph suggests they’re all still singing from the same hymn sheet).

But Djokovic isn’t trying to slip under the radar because he’s a millionaire. He isn’t trying to slip under the radar at all. Prior to the 2021 Australian Open, he quarantined as per the requirements of the Australian department of health. This year, having had Covid and therefore natural immunity, he applied for an exemption, which was granted. Djokovic’s only mistake was to travel to Australia during election year.

However, Gaby’s attack isn’t really on Djokovic, it’s on the unvaccinated in general: ‘Just over a month ago, I wrote about how the mood might harden as intensive care beds filled with patients realising too late that they should have got the jab, while restrictions once again loomed over people who had done what was asked of them.’

Sorry Gaby, but intensive care beds aren’t filling up with the unvaccinated. According to the latest technical briefing from UKHSA, Britain’s health security agency, emergency admissions up to December 29 consisted of 206 unvaccinated, 591 vaccinated and 18 unlinked.

As for restrictions once again looming over people who had done what was asked of them, more fool you for believing the Government. Three weeks to flatten the curve, a firm pledge to loosen restrictions once the vulnerable were jabbed, double-jabbed means fully jabbed – until you need a booster. When exactly are you going to catch on?

Like every other sloppy columnist with a ‘vaccine refusenik’ in their sights, Gaby clearly feels that as she unquestioningly followed the rules, so should everybody else, never stopping to ask who made the rules, why and to what end? History should have taught us that blindly following rules does not end well.

Vince Cable is another one who believes the unvaccinated are responsible for restrictions affecting everyone, sidestepping the latest UKHSA technical briefing to declare that the Covid circus is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. ‘The harm caused to society by the unvaccinated is partly that there is increased transmissibility,’ says Vince.

The UKHSA says otherwise, showing vaccine effectiveness against contracting the disease in all 18+ cohorts as a negative (the most extreme figure being minus 151.2 per cent in the 40-49 year-old cohort) which means you are more likely to catch the disease if vaccinated. If more catch it, more can spread it.

And let’s not forget the overburdened NHS, struggling to cope with a reduction in perfectly healthy staff who were sent home after testing positive using a lateral flow test that can find Covid in an orange.

The UKHSA, usually so reliable with a positive (if favourably skewed) spin on its own data, could manage only a crestfallen ‘among those who had received two doses of AstraZeneca, there was no effect against Omicron from 20 weeks after the second dose’. Oh dear.

Having dug himself into one hole, Vince – who is about as adept at statistics as he is at dancing – decides to dig himself an even bigger one, saying: ‘The most difficult objection is that there are distinct groups who have refused injection not as a result of laziness or bloody-mindedness, but because of widespread suspicion, based on experience, that the authorities are not to be trusted.’

Ignoring that something learned from experience is more than a suspicion, Vince goes on digging. ‘In the US, some black Americans cite the history of being used for scientific experiments (as to why they won’t get vaccinated) … but these arguments are wearing a little thin.’

Or to look at it another way Vince, perhaps being viewed as little more than a Petri dish by pharmaceutical companies and US governments alike for the best part of the 20th century is wearing a little thin for African Americans, or Guatemalans, or Africans.

Vince’s three options to deal with the unvaccinated in the UK (thankfully he had zero policy influence even when in office) are ‘compulsion through employment conditions; changes to rights of treatment under the NHS and a more comprehensive vaccine passport system’.

He does stop short of ‘refuseniks dragged away, held down and forcefully injected’, primarily because it’s impractical. A true Liberal.

Another Liberal (whilst at Cambridge at least) happy to inhabit the scientific wasteland of journalism is Matthew ‘How to wrongfoot an anti-vaxxer’ Parris, who trips over himself trying to prove in his Spectator article that those who choose not to be vaccinated against a disease with a survival rate of 99.98 per cent must be paranoid.

‘Mass paranoia is plainly a strand in the anti-vax movement,’ proclaims Matthew, whose Imperial College-worthy research includes a tale about a ‘lonely Arab boy’ who mistook a porch light for a death ray and one about a woman in Glasgow he has never met, whose neighbour believed someone was trying to poison the residents.

I wonder how he’d label those getting boosted against an Omicrom variant a third of the strength of the Delta strain, which is itself a twentieth of the strength of Alpha?

The Parris article is one of pure projection. He ‘cannot condone frightening people with stories that are not true’. Really? Then how about an article on wealthy Marxist pandemic adviser Susan Michie, or one on the government’s Nudge Unit, or the taxpayer millions thrown at PR companies such as 23red and MullenLowe, who are paid to frighten people into believing Covid is the new plague?

Parris’s claims that ‘viral ideas and beliefs’ fuel the ‘anti-vax rumour machine’ remain unsubstantiated, as he offers zero proof. Conversely, the unvaccinated have a plethora of government data from around the world to study.

Early data from Italy for example showed the average age of death from Covid was 84.1. In the UK, ‘deaths for any reason within 28 days of a Covid positive test’ in the healthy under-65 cohort – for the whole of 2020 – were 1,549. And on March 19 2020, both the Four Nations Public Health Group and The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) were in agreement that Covid-19 need no longer be classified as an HCID – high consequence infectious disease.

But it isn’t just Cambridge graduates attacking the pro-choicers. Michael Deacon, in a particularly mean spirited piece in the Telegraph, singles out John O’Looney. He is he funeral director brave enough to speak out about the vaccine injuries he’s witnessed and the families who have opened up to him not only in regard to family members who died following the Covid jab, but also families of those who died with a Covid mention on the death certificate when their loved one clearly died of something else, like Alzheimer’s, cancer or a car crash.

Unlike O’Looney, Deacon does not attend autopsies of those who died with a suspected vaccine injury. Neither does Andrew Neil, who also claims those who choose not to get vaccinated do so through ‘fear, ignorance, irresponsibility or sheer stupidity’.

Or maybe they just studied government data or read autopsy report summaries of what the vaccines can do to the heart, lungs, liver and thyroid gland. ‘You can’t shout “fire!” in a crowded cinema if there is no fire,’ says Neil. But that is exactly what the Government did. And journalists either fell for it, or got paid to look the other way.

At least the ‘What Are We Going To Do With the Antivaxxers?’ pudding in Forbes magazine gets one thing right. ‘It is unacceptable,’ declares Enrique Dans ‘that millions of people, seemingly influenced by a small group of irresponsible idiots, have decided to endanger not only their own lives, but also the possibility of eradicating the pandemic’. Absolutely,  Enrique. Here in the UK we refer to those idiots as the Government.

Thankfully, such rhetoric is already beginning to feel outdated. There is light at the end of the tunnel.  ‘Mass population-based vaccination in the UK should now end,’ says Dr Clive Dix, former chairman of the UK’s vaccine task force.

Meanwwhile, Professor Angus Dalgleish, writing in the Mail points out that ‘the policy of obsessive Covid screening of the population using lateral flow tests has lurched into mass hysteria. Worse, it is tantamount to national self-harm’.

As Dr Steve James, the hospital anaesthetist who took on Sajid Javid over forced vaccination pointed out, there is no sense in a sustained boosting campaign when efficacy wanes after eight weeks and most will have been exposed to Covid by now.

But hold the front page. Researchers at Imperial College have now discovered the ‘Holy Grail’ of Covid resistance. News from the  Telegraph heralds a ground-breaking study which found that – and I hope you’re sitting down – large numbers of Britons were already protected from coronavirus before the pandemic began because of previous exposure to common colds. Which is exactly what Mike Yeadon and every other sane scientist flagged up prior to the vaccine rollout, before being laughed out of town.

The net is tightening around the Johnson government. If Boris  chooses to push forward with his NHS mandatory vaccination drive, come April 1, he could end up with 100,000 agitated NHS whistleblowers on his hands who now have a lot less to lose.

If he pulls back from mandatory vaccination for all NHS staff, he risks facing the wrath of both the sacked non-vaccinated care workers and those care workers forced to take the jab in order to keep their jobs.

And he will still have to answer to the millions (estimated prior immunity 30-50 per cent) of vaccinated who will surely want to know why they were hoodwinked into taking an experimental treatment when all along they could have been offered a T-cell test option which would have told them if they were even likely to develop Covid. Especially in light of the fact that the Johnson government invested taxpayer money in the very T-cell research that could have prevented any need for a jab – long before the vaccine rollout.

Whether or not Djokovic gets to defend his title, his greatest service yet may be worldwide publicity for basic common sense.

For here is a healthy, fit, intelligent 34-year-old sportsman with prior immunity who, having weighed up the odds of vaccine risk versus Covid risk, has maybe decided that taking an experimental treatment with zero long-term safety data and extremely concerning short-term safety data (especially amongst young, fit sportsmen) to ward off a much-weakened Omicron variant, defies logic.

Hinsliff, Cable, Parris and Neil meanwhile will no doubt continue to be guided by the voices coming out of the telly.

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

More humiliation for Anthony Fauci and MSM vaccine advocates

By Alex Berenson | Unreported Truths | January 12, 2022

They promised a booster would work – despite obvious evidence it wouldn’t. Not years ago. Months ago. Sometimes WEEKS ago. Don’t let them gaslight you. Don’t let them forget.

In August, when Israel became the first country to push Covid vaccine boosters, I warned that the evidence for them verged on nonexistent and they were unlikely to last more than a few months.

This was, to say the least, not the consensus view in the elite media or the public health establishment.

Lots of vaccines required boosters, they said! A third dose several months out simply fixed the rushed scheduling of the second dose, they said!

And no one pushed this view more aggressively than Dr. Anthony Fauci – who went so far as to promise that the third dose would do what the first two had not and confer long-lasting immunity:

….


Those stories are from early September.

And America’s Doctor (TM) got his way. Within weeks regulators had approved boosters – and as the fall went on they opened the spigots ever-wider.

Needless to say the media asked its usual critical questions. (Have a barf bag handy as you scroll.)

The NY Times :

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

“We Failed”: Danish newspaper apologizes for publishing official COVID narratives without questioning them

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | January 12, 2022

In August, Germany’s top newspaper, Bild, apologized for the outlet’s fear-driven Covid coverage – with special message to children, who were told “that they were going to murder their grandma.”

Now, a newspaper in Denmark has publicly apologized for reporting government narratives surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic without questioning them.

“We failed,” reads the article’s headline from tabloid Ekstra Bladet, which goes on to admit that “For ALMOST two years, we – the press and the population – have been almost hypnotically preoccupied with the authorities’ daily coronavirus figures.” (translated).

Read the rest below:

WE HAVE STARED at the oscillations of the number pendulum when it came to infected, hospitalized and died with corona. And we have been given the significance of the pendulum’s smallest movements laid out by experts, politicians and authorities, who have constantly warned us about the dormant corona monster under our beds. A monster just waiting for us to fall asleep so it can strike in the gloom and darkness of the night.

THE CONSTANT mental alertness has worn tremendously on all of us. That is why we – the press – must also take stock of our own efforts. And we have failed.

WE HAVE NOT been vigilant enough at the garden gate when the authorities were required to answer what it actually meant that people are hospitalized with corona and not because of corona. Because it makes a difference. A big difference. Exactly, the official hospitalization numbers have been shown to be 27 percent higher than the actual figure for how many there are in the hospital, simply because they have corona. We only know that now.

OF COURSE, it is first and foremost the authorities who are responsible for informing the population correctly, accurately and honestly. The figures for how many are sick and died of corona should, for obvious reasons, have been published long ago, so we got the clearest picture of the monster under the bed.

IN ALL, the messages of the authorities and politicians to the people in this historic crisis leave much to be desired. And therefore they lie as they have ridden when parts of the population lose confidence in them.

ANOTHER example: The vaccines are consistently referred to as our ‘superweapon’. And our hospitals are called ‘superhospitals’. Nevertheless, these super-hospitals are apparently maximally pressured, even though almost the entire population is armed with a super-weapon. Even children have been vaccinated on a huge scale, which has not been done in our neighboring countries.

IN OTHER WORDS, there is something here that does not deserve the term ‘super’. Whether it’s the vaccines, the hospitals, or a mixture of it all, is every man’s bid. But at least the authorities’ communication to the population in no way deserves the term ‘super’. On the contrary.

*  *  *

Will other news outlets have the journalistic integrity to follow suit? Perhaps CNN’s ratings wouldn’t be down 90% from last year in the key 25-to-54 demographic if they simply owned up to their complicity in breathlessly spewing government propaganda.

January 13, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Parents Must Be Allowed to Decide on COVID Vaccines for Kids, Physician Tells Maine Lawmakers

The Defender | January 12, 2022

Parents must be allowed to make individualized decisions regarding the risks and benefits of COVID vaccines for their children, Dr. Meryl Nass told Maine lawmakers this week.

Nass, a Maine-based practicing physician and member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory committee, submitted written testimony to the Maine Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee in support of a bill that would ban state-mandated COVID-19 vaccinations without informed consent.

Hundreds of Maine residents on Tuesday attended a public hearing in support of the bill. Click here to listen to the entire hearing.

There are many reasons why preventing COVID vaccine mandates until adequate, sufficient safety studies have been performed is “the right decision for this committee and legislature,” Nass wrote.

Those reasons include:

  • All available COVID vaccines are experimental products.
  • Legally, recipients must be offered the right to refuse.
  • Mandates negate the right of refusal.
  • Basic safety questions regarding the vaccines have not been resolved, and some will not be answered until 2027.
  • The WHO does not recommend broad COVID vaccinations for children.
  • Parents should be permitted to make individualized decisions regarding their children’s risks and benefits from COVID vaccines.
  • Unfortunately, no one can make a fully informed decision about COVID vaccines until the public has access to complete information on safety and efficacy, which are not now available. This fact alone should negate all mandates.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Tracy Quint, a Republican from Hodgdon, Maine, told the committee the bill would protect “the vital right of all Mainers to informed consent” about a vaccine whose long-term effects are unknown. She called it a chance “to change course” on the controversial issue.

Quint told Newscenter Maine she’s been hearing from people, particularly concerned parents, from across the state who are fearful there will soon be a vaccine mandate in schools.

“It didn’t matter whether they were a Democrat or a Republican, just parents in general, had some concerns whether or not this would be mandated for their children,” Quint said.

Matt Landry of Greene, Maine — one of more than 280 people who testified remotely or wrote in during the three-hour hearing — told lawmakers he is “tired of these jabs being forced against the people’s will and making people sick, injured or dead. I can see it happening to people I know, and it makes my blood boil.”

Maine Gov. Janet Mills, who opposes the bill, told Newscenter Maine:

“This is the time for everybody in leadership positions, everybody in public office, everybody in roles of leadership in their community, to get the word out to make sure people understand how safe and thoroughly tested these vaccines are and how critical they are to keep you out of the hospital, keep you out of the ICU, keep you from dying.”

But Nass told lawmakers no matter what claims have been made regarding these vaccines, they are not “safe and effective.”

Nass wrote:

“‘Safe and effective’ is an [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] ‘term of art’ that may only be applied to licensed drugs and vaccines. All currently available COVID vaccines in the United States are unlicensed and experimental, a.k.a. investigational.”

Read Nass’ full testimony below:

January 11, 2022

Honorable Chairpersons, Members and Senators,

I write in support of LD 867. There are many reasons why preventing COVID vaccine mandates until adequate, sufficient safety studies have been performed is the right decision for this committee and legislature.

1. COVID vaccines are experimental

Let me say, first, that no matter what claims have been made regarding these vaccines, they are not “safe and effective.” “Safe and effective” is an FDA “term of art” that may only be applied to licensed drugs and vaccines. All currently available COVID vaccines in the United States are unlicensed and experimental, a.k.a. investigational.

Medicines and vaccines are either licensed products or experimental products. There is no gray area between them in US law. Whether or not research is explicitly conducted, the use of experimental products (including those issued an Emergency Use Authorization) falls under the Nuremberg Code and under US law regulating experimental drugs. As former FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn himself noted, “EUA products are still considered investigational.”

According to 21CFR Subchapter D Part 312: “an experiment is any use of a drug except for the use of a marketed drug in the course of medical practice.” Vaccines are considered a subset of drugs by FDA. And the use of unlicensed, Emergency Use Authorized vaccines is thus, by definition, experimental.

US law requires that humans receiving experimental products must provide written informed consent. However, when the PREP Act creating Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) was written, this requirement was loosened slightly for emergencies in which EUA products would be used. The required disclosures when using EUAs were specified below. Please note the option to accept or refuse.

21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3 – Authorization for medical products for use in emergencies (ii) Appropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed —

(I) that the Secretary has authorized the emergency use of the product;

(II) of the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and of the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown; and

(III) of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.

All Moderna, Janssen (Johnson and Johnson) and all childhood Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are being used under EUAs. And while the adult Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is supposed to be licensed with brand name Comirnaty, in fact the Pfizer adult vaccines being used in the US today are EUA products as well.

2. While FDA licensed Comirnaty, the only approved COVID vaccine, only Emergency Use Authorized (experimental) vaccines are being used in the US

Despite claims to the contrary, the licensed and branded Comirnaty has not been made available for administration in the US. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which is currently available, is authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization, which provides a broad liability shield to the manufacturer, distributor, administrator, program planner, and virtually anyone else involved in the vaccination process. The branded product, on the other hand, is subject to ordinary liability claims at the present time.

Exactly three weeks after FDA issued Comirnaty a license, the National Library of Medicine, part of the NIH, posted information that Pfizer was not planning to make Comirnaty available in the US while the EUA vaccine was still available.

Pfizer received FDA BLA license for its COVID-19 vaccine

Pfizer received FDA BLA license on 8/23/2021 for its COVID-19 vaccine for use in individuals 16 and older (COMIRNATY). At that time, the FDA published a BLA package insert that included the approved new COVID-19 vaccine tradename COMIRNATY and listed 2 new NDCs (0069-1000-03, 0069-1000-02) and images of labels with the new tradename.

At present, Pfizer does not plan to produce any product with these new NDCs and labels over the next few months while EUA authorized product is still available and being made available for U.S. distribution. As such, the CDC, AMA, and drug compendia may not publish these new codes until Pfizer has determined when the product will be produced with the BLA labels.

FDA extended the vaccine’s EUA authorization on the same day it licensed the vaccine.

FDA appears to have been acceding to the White House demand that the vaccine be licensed, to allow it to be mandated for large sectors of the US population. Under an EUA, which specifies that potential recipients have the right to refuse, mandates cannot be imposed. So a license was issued, allowing the administration to inform the public that the vaccine was fully approved and licensed. But in fact, the public was unable to access the licensed vaccine.

Why was this convoluted regulatory process performed? While under EUA, Pfizer has an almost bulletproof liability shield. According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on September 23, 2021, “courts have characterized PREP Act immunity as ‘sweeping.’” The CRS explains, “the PREP Act immunizes a covered person from legal liability for all claims for loss related to the administration or use of a covered countermeasure.”

3. FDA instructed Pfizer-BioNTech that FDA’s Congressionally-mandated databases are inadequate to assess the danger of myocarditis (and other potential COVID vaccine side effects) and therefore Pfizer-BioNTech must perform studies to evaluate these risks over the next six years

On the day FDA issued a license for Comirnaty, August 23, 2021, FDA instructed Pfizer-BioNTech that it did NOT have sufficient information on serious potential risks of the product, and required Pfizer and BioNTech, the manufacturers, to conduct a series of studies to assess these potential risks. These studies were to be performed on both products: the licensed Comirnaty and the EUA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Note that they include the requirement for a safety study in pregnancy, which will not be completed until December 31, 2025.

I have reproduced part of what FDA wrote about these required safety studies below, directly from pages 6-11 of the FDA approval letter sent to BioNTech.

FDA’s admission that it cannot assess these safety risks, and that up to 6 years will be taken to study them, provides us with additional de facto evidence that the Pfizer vaccines cannot be termed safe, as many of the fundamental safety studies are only now getting started.

“POSTMARKETING REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 505(o) Section 505(o) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) authorizes FDA to require holders of approved drug and biological product applications to conduct postmarketing studies and clinical trials for certain purposes, if FDA makes certain findings required by the statute (section 505(o)(3)(A), 21 U.S.C. 355(o)(3)(A)).

We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.

Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that FDA is required to maintain under section 505(k)(3) of the FDCA is not sufficient to assess these serious risks. Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies:

  1. Study C4591009, entitled “A Non-Interventional Post-Approval Safety Study of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine in the United States,” to evaluate the occurrence of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY. We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: August 31, 2021 Monitoring Report Submission: October 31, 2022 Interim Report Submission: October 31, 2023 Study Completion: June 30, 2025 Final Report Submission: October 31, 2025
  2. Study C4591021, entitled “Post Conditional Approval [EUA] Active Surveillance Study Among Individuals in Europe Receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech Coronavirus Page 7 – STN BL 125742/0 – Elisa Harkins Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine,” to evaluate the occurrence of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY. We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: August 11, 2021 Progress Report Submission: September 30, 2021 Interim Report 1 Submission: March 31, 2022 Interim Report 2 Submission: September 30, 2022 Interim Report 3 Submission: March 31, 2023 Interim Report 4 Submission: September 30, 2023 Interim Report 5 Submission: March 31, 2024 Study Completion: March 31, 2024 Final Report Submission: September 30, 2024
  3. Study C4591021 sub-study to describe the natural history of myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of COMIRNATY. We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: January 31, 2022 Study Completion: March 31, 2024 Final Report Submission: September 30, 2024 7. Study C4591036, a prospective cohort study with at least 5 years of follow-up for potential long-term sequelae of myocarditis after vaccination (in collaboration with Pediatric Heart Network). We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: November 30, 2021 Study Completion: December 31, 2026 Page 8 – STN BL 125742/0 – Elisa Harkins Final Report Submission: May 31, 2027
  4. Study C4591007 sub-study to prospectively assess the incidence of subclinical myocarditis following administration of the second dose of COMIRNATY in a subset of participants 5 through 15 years of age. We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this assessment according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: September 30, 2021 Study Completion: November 30, 2023 Final Report Submission: May 31, 2024
  5. Study C4591031 sub-study to prospectively assess the incidence of subclinical myocarditis following administration of a third dose of COMIRNATY in a subset of participants 16 to 30 years of age. We acknowledge the timetable you submitted on August 21, 2021, which states that you will conduct this study according to the following schedule: Final Protocol Submission: November 30, 2021 Study Completion: June 30, 2022.

Final Report Submission: December 31, 2022 …

  1. Study C4591022, entitled “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine [the EUA vaccine] Exposure during Pregnancy: A Non-Interventional Post-Approval Safety Study of Pregnancy and Infant Outcomes in the Organization of Teratology Information Specialists (OTIS)/MotherToBaby Pregnancy Registry.”

Final Protocol Submission: July 1, 2021 Study Completion: June 30, 2025

Final Report Submission: December 31, 2025

4. The World Health Organization does not recommend COVID vaccines for normal children

The WHO website “WHO SHOULD GET VACCINATED” states the following:

Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults, so unless they are part of a group at higher risk of severe COVID-19, it is less urgent to vaccinate them than older people, those with chronic health conditions and health workers.

More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19.

WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) has concluded that the Pfizer/BionTech vaccine is suitable for use by people aged 12 years and above. Children aged between 12 and 15 who are at high risk may be offered this vaccine alongside other priority groups for vaccination. Vaccine trials for children are ongoing and WHO will update its recommendations when the evidence or epidemiological situation warrants a change in policy.

If the World Health Organization believes there is insufficient evidence to support general vaccination of normal children, why would this committee and the Maine Legislature think otherwise?

To sum up:

  • All available COVID vaccines are experimental products.
  • Legally, recipients must be offered the right to refuse.
  • Mandates negate the right of refusal.
  • Basic safety questions regarding the vaccines have not been resolved, and some will not be answered until 2027.
  • The WHO does not recommend broad COVID vaccinations for children.
  • Parents should be permitted to make individualized decisions regarding their children’s risks and benefits from COVID vaccines.
  • Unfortunately, no one can make a fully informed decision about COVID vaccines until the public has access to complete information on safety and efficacy, which are not now available. This fact alone should negate all mandates.

Thank you very much for your attention.

Meryl Nass, MD

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

January 12, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment