CDC lies again–it will now try to impose universal Hepatitis B vaccination of adults!
By Meryl Nass, MD | November 7, 2021
The criminals at CDC began 30 years ago to appropriately target iv drug abusers, sex workers and others with a high risk of Hepatitis B to be vaccinated. There were not enough takers, according to CDC, so the public health officials set their sites on newborns, aimed and fired.
Hepatitis B is a viral disease transmitted via intercourse, iv drugs, or from mother to baby. All mothers are supposed to be tested for it during pregnancy, and less than 1% are positive. Mothers and their newborns who test positive are treated for it with vaccinations and immune globulin.
But that did not suffice for the science-light, pharma-heavy CDC. So some dim bulb decided that ALL newborns should be vaccinated for hepatitis B, within a few hours after birth. This practice was never shown to be safe, but it pleased public health officials, who could impose the vaccinations on babies while their moms were still recovering and dopey from the birth, the babies were stuck in a hospital, and the newborns were basically chickens to be plucked.
No one ever explained why newborns whose moms were negative needed to be protected from a disease that only affected those with more than one sex partner (primarily gay men) and those using dirty needles. But the CDC decided this was a great way to get everyone vaccinated, and it would protect those newborns when they did become old enough for sex and needles.
A bell should have gone off when it turned out their immunity waned after a few years–even though those poor infants had suffered 3 doses of a vaccine they had no need for, starting in the first moments of life. But the dim bulbs at CDC ignored it.
The thing is, rates of Hepatitis B in the US are low. They are high in east Asia, but the US is not east Asia. Rates have fallen since vaccine has been available over the past 30 years.
If you look at CDC’s Figure 2.5 below you will see that reported new Hepatitis B cases are 1 per 100,000 per year in women, and 1.5 per 100,000 in men in 2018, the last year for which CDC provides data.
In 2018, a total of 3,322 cases of acute hepatitis B were reported to CDC, for an overall incidence rate of 1.0 cases per 100,000 population.
The rate of reported acute HBV infections declined approximately 90% since recommendations for HepB vaccination were first issued, from 9.6 cases per 100,000 population in 1982 to 1.0 cases per 100,000 population in 2018.
So why in heaven’s name would CDC want to start vaccinating everyone when rates are very low and have fallen dramatically? However…
On Wednesday November 3, CDC briefed its supine advisory committee on the imaginary need for hepatitis vaccines. CDC briefers are trained to scare the pants off you to get the votes they want. Here is what was said:
CDC medical officer Mark K. Weng, MD, MSc, FAAP, who leads the ACIP’s hepatitis vaccines work group, presented data on the importance of vaccinating adults against HBV.
“In the U.S. every year, there are 20,700 estimated acute hepatitis B infections, and over $1 billion dollars spent on hepatitis B-related hospitalizations,” Weng said. “There are almost two million people estimated to be living with chronic hepatitis B in the U.S., of whom there’s a [15% to 25%] risk of premature death from cirrhosis or liver cancer.”
How did he get these deadly numbers? Well, CDC claimed that only about one tenth of the cases get reported, that is how. CDC used its dubious estimates to claim cases were ten times greater than reported–something they never claimed before. How do they know this? They never tell. They can’t give us a number to multiply the VAERS reports by to find out the rate of adverse vaccine events, but they are quick to come up with a magic multiplier when they want new vaccine programs to be approved.
What happened? The ACIP sleepwalkers voted to vaccinate all adults for hepatitis B–even those who are monogamous and don’t take any drugs. Why? Because they can, and they get pharma contracts when the advisory committee members behave.
So, this is what is next. Get ready to fight against more mandates. The elites are making war on us.
ACIP recommends universal hepatitis B vaccination for adults aged 19 to 59 years
UKHSA Admits it’s Monitoring Current Vaccine Effectiveness But Not Publishing It. What’s it Got to Hide?
By Will Jones | The Daily Sceptic | November 6, 2021
The UKHSA has admitted for the first time that it is undertaking internal analysis “every week or two” to monitor the current real-world performance of the vaccines but not publishing the results.
In an email seen by the Daily Sceptic, Dr Mary Ramsay, Head of Immunisation at the UKHSA, admits that her agency is continuing to undertake regular analysis of vaccine effectiveness but, despite publishing a weekly Vaccine Surveillance report, is not publishing the estimates.
The Vaccine Surveillance reports have recently been criticised by the U.K Statistics Authority and others for including data which shows infection rates in the vaccinated running at more than double the rate in the unvaccinated. Critics have argued this gives a misleading impression that the vaccines are ineffective or worse. They say it is really a result of problems with the population estimates and systemic differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.
The UKHSA has responded by altering the presentation of its data to draw attention to these limitations and make clear that, in its view, the data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness.
However, it has not published an update of its own estimates of vaccine effectiveness using data more recent than May 2021. This means it has not updated its estimates with data from the summer and autumn, a period when its raw data shows infections in the vaccinated outpacing those in the unvaccinated.
In a recent post I encouraged readers to contact Dr Ramsay to ask her to publish an update of her agency’s study of vaccine effectiveness. In a reply to one reader, seen by the Daily Secptic, Dr Ramsay made the stunning admission:
We continue to undertake TNCC analysis every week or two and will update this when things change or when we want to highlight a new analysis, for example for a new variant or the booster effect.
TNCC stands for test-negative case control, and it is one of the approaches UKHSA uses for estimating vaccine effectiveness, which it deems to eliminate key biases in the data, especially from different testing behaviour.
Dr Ramsay has thus admitted that they are continuously monitoring real-world vaccine effectiveness using their worrying data. Why then are they not routinely publishing the results? What have they got to hide?
Dr Ramsay says they will publish an update when “things change” or when they want to highlight a new variant or the impact of boosters. In the meantime, they are publishing the raw data showing infections in the vaccinated eclipsing those in the unvaccinated, but telling people the data is biased and no conclusions can be drawn about the vaccines. This is an absurd state of affairs and needs to be challenged.
As before, if readers want politely to suggest that UKHSA actually publishes its estimates of vaccine effectiveness based on the latest real-world data, you can email Dr Mary Ramsay here (or find her on Twitter here).
FDA makes it hard to identify the temporary members who voted on COVID vaccines for 5-11 year olds
By Meryl Nass, MD | November 7, 2021
I want to make it easier for others to correctly identify their conflicts of interest.
Below are the permanent members of the committee–but most were not at the meeting, which was stuffed with 11 temporary members whose votes were assured, plus 7 or 8 of the permanent members.
I have put a line through those who did not attend, and added the temporary members who replaced them at the bottom of the page.
Chair
Expertise: Vaccines, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2022
Professor
Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology
Department of Medicine
Section of Infectious Diseases
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, TX 77030
Expertise: Industry Representative
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Vice President and Therapeutic Area Head
Vaccines Clinical Research
Merck
North Wales, PA 19454
Expertise: Pediatrics, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2023
Dean Chicago Medical School
Vice President for Medical Affairs
Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
North Chicago, IL 60064
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Senior Associate Dean
Vice Chair for Research & Faculty Development
Associate Professor, ObGyn
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Duke University
Durham, NC 27710
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 05/09/2018-01/31/2022
Simon & Bessie Grollman Distinguished Professor
Associate Dean for Global Health
Vaccinology and Infectious Diseases
Center for Vaccine Development
University of Maryland School of Medicine
Baltimore, MD 21201
Expertise: Biostatistics
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2023
Professor
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division
Division of Public Health Sciences
Seattle, WA 98109
Expertise: Pediatric & Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Director
Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases
Emory University School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA 30322
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Tufts University School of Medicine
Director, Pediatric Infectious Disease
Tufts Medical Center
Boston, MA 02111
Expertise: Pediatrics, Vaccines
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Chief Medical Officer
National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Atlanta, GA 30333
Expertise: Pediatrics, Infectious Diseases
Term: 06/21/2019-01/31/2023
Professor of Pediatrics
Department of Pediatrics
Stanford University Medical Center
Stanford, CA 94305
Expertise: Infectious Diseases, Pathology
Term: 08/06/2018-01/31/2022
Director, Division of Clinical Innovation
National Center for Advancing Translation Sciences
National Institutes of Health
Bethesda, MD 20852
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2018-01/31/2022
Professor of Pediatrics
Division of Infectious Diseases
Abramson Research Building
The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, PA 19104
Expertise: Infectious Diseases
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Medical Director
Infection Prevention
Seattle Cancer Care Alliance
Seattle, WA 98109
Expertise: Pediatric & Infectious Diseases
Term: 05/09/2018-01/31/2022
Director, Division of Infectious Diseases
Albert B. Sabin Chair in Pediatric Infectious Diseases
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital
Medical Center
Professor, Department of Pediatrics
University of Cincinnati School of Medicine
Cincinnati, OH 45229
Expertise: Alternate Industry Representative
Term: 02/01/2020-01/31/2024
Vice President
Medical Affairs
Seqirus Inc.
Summit, NJ 07901
Critics fume as education official says she & others needed to flout mask mandate at event
RT | November 7, 2021
The head of a leading US teachers’ union said she and other speakers dropped their masks during a conference so people could hear them better, sparking outrage among critics of mask mandates at schools.
Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), was accused of hypocrisy for not wearing a mask during an event she attended earlier this week in Puerto Rico.
She and several other visiting officials speaking at the annual Somos conference addressed a “packed room” without wearing masks.
This appeared to violate the health guidelines of the US unincorporated territory, which requires face coverings to be worn in all indoor public spaces, regardless of vaccination status.
Weingarten, an outspoken advocate for mask mandates at schools, was confronted about photos from the conference on Twitter on Saturday.
She said people attending the event needed to have proof of vaccination and that she personally had a fresh negative Covid-19 test, but acknowledged the criticism was fair.
“I think you are right. If kids are wearing masks in schools to protect themselves & others educators must wear masks inside as well. I’m sorry,” Weingarten tweeted.
The official said she usually wore masks indoors, including during “the rest of the conference” and that she and other speakers “took them off as people were having a hard time hearing us.” The room was big and the audio system was bad, she explained.
The thread was bombarded with negative responses from anti-mandate campaigners, teachers who said they didn’t get to bend the rules like Weingarten did when in classrooms, and others displeased with her remarks.
AFT, the union that Weingarten leads, is the second-largest in the country, with some 1.7 million members. Other visiting speakers at Somos included Betty Rosa, New York City’s commissioner of education, and Meisha Porter, the chancellor of the city’s Department of Education.
The event was briefly disrupted by protesters, who decried Rosa for the role she plays in imposing austerity measures on Puerto Rico. She is a member of the Financial Oversight and Management Board, colloquially known as La Junta, installed by the US government to supervise the commonwealth’s budget. One of the protesters wore a voucher mask that covered his entire head.
No, Roanoke Times, Climate Change Is Not To Blame for Virginia Beach’s Flooding
By H. Sterling Burnett | ClimateRealism | November 5, 2021
A Google news search of the term “climate change” turns up a recent story in the Roanoke Times claiming human caused climate change is causing increased incidences of flooding in Virginia Beach, Virginia. This is false. Flooding may be worsening in Virginia Beach, and human activities may be contributing to it, but research indicates a climate change induced increase in the rate of sea level rise is not to blame.
A story, titled “Virginia Beach confronts inescapable costs of rising seas,” discusses a $568 million bond issue being proposed to improve infrastructure and lessen future damage from flooding in the region. If voters don’t approve the bond, the story warns “the city could lose billions of dollars in the next half-century as recurrent flooding inundates roads, businesses and homes.”
The Roanoke Times the proceeds to incorrectly attribute the danger of recurrent future flooding in Virginia Beach to climate change induced rising seas.
“The referendum underscores the mounting costs of adapting to climate change for U.S. cities,” writes the Roanoke Times. “The need for money to protect communities against climate change is growing across the globe ….”
Data show seas are not rising at an unusual rate in the Chesapeake Bay region where Virginia Beach is located.
As discussed in a recent Climate Realism article, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has maintained a tidal gauge at Sewell’s Point in Norfolk since the 1920s. The tidal records, as shown in the NOAA graph below, show the pace of sea-level rise remains the same now as it was 100 years ago – when there was minimal human-emitted carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
NOAA has maintained three other tidal gauges in the Norfolk region, dating back to the 1930s, 1950s, and 1970s, respectively. None of the other three show any acceleration, either.
Each of these tide gauges is within 30 miles of Virginia Beach and none show unusual rates of sea level rise or an increasing rate in recent decades.
To the extent flooding has increased in the Chesapeake Bay region and Virginia Beach in particular, research shows it is due to localized land subsidence. According to a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) report, titled “Land Subsidence and Relative Sea-Level Rise in the Southern Chesapeake Bay Region,” states:
Land subsidence has been observed since the 1940s in the southern Chesapeake Bay region at rates of 1.1 to 4.8 millimeters per year (mm/yr), and subsidence continues today.
This land subsidence helps explain why the region has the highest rates of sea-level rise on the Atlantic Coast of the United States. Data indicate that land subsidence has been responsible for more than half the relative sea-level rise measured in the region. Land subsidence increases the risk of flooding in low-lying areas, which in turn has important economic, environmental, and human health consequences for the heavily populated and ecologically important southern Chesapeake Bay region.
The aquifer system in the region has been compacted by extensive groundwater pumping in the region at rates of 1.5- to 3.7-mm/yr; this compaction accounts for more than half of observed land subsidence in the region.
The proposed bond issue may be needed to prevent increased incidences of flooding in Virginia Beach, but it will only work to prevent flooding if the “fixes” funded by it focus on the right causes of the problem. Local water withdrawals, wetlands conversion, and land compaction are to blame for Virginia Beach’s flooding woes, not climate change. Better land and water management, not fossil fuel use restrictions, are needed to reduce the incidences of homes and businesses in Virginia Beach flooding.
Is the Global Warming Myth Part of Advancing a Dystopian Nightmare?
By Stephen Lendman | November 7, 2021
What’s gone on since last year is an unprecedented — made-in-the-USA — plot against humanity with mass-extermination of unwanted people and transformation of global nations into ruler/serf societies in mind for survivors.
Is the global warming myth part of the diabolical scheme?
Are rising fossil fuel prices a plot to make them unaffordable for countless millions worldwide?
Is the same going on for food and other essentials of life to make them increasingly unaffordable?
Do US/Western and partnered dark forces want countless millions to perish from malnutrition, starvation, lack of healthcare, medical malpractice and other forms of neglect?
Eminent Physics Professor Denis Rancourt, an expert in his field, earlier argued the following:
“(G)lobal warming (climate change, climate chaos, etc.) will not become humankind’s greatest threat until the sun has its next hiccup in a billion years or more (in the very unlikely scenario that we are still around),” adding:
“(G)lobal warming is presently nowhere near being the planet’s most deadly environmental scourge.”
“(G)overnment action and political will cannot measurably or significantly ameliorate global climate in the present world.”
“(T)here are strong societal, institutional, and psychological motivations for having constructed and for continuing to maintain the myth of a global warming dominant threat” with diabolical aims in mind.
“(B)y far the most destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven corporations and their cartels backed by military might…”
“(T)he global warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth.”
“(T)he atmospheric greenhouse effect is a well known natural phenomenon, mostly caused by atmospheric water vapor…”
It “keeps our planet warm and habitable.”
“(T)he global greenhouse effect gives earthlings a needed and much appreciated base warming of 33 C (degrees Celsius)…”
“(T)he alleged ‘global warming’ would contribute an extra 0.5 to 1 C of warming (a 1 to 5 % increase), on a planet that has seen a dozen or so ice ages since human kind has appeared.”
From millions of years, humans and animals with similar longevity survived in climates ranging from steaming hot to frigid cold, as well as from climate-related disasters.
Humans “adapted to dramatically different regional climates occurring in every corner of the planet and the alleged future global changes are very small compared to these existing variations,” Rancourt explained.
“There are more displaced refugees from wars and from economic aggression than there will ever be displaced inhabitants from rapid climate-induced habitat transformations.”
The global warming myth shifts attention away from issues mattering most.
The same goes for bread and circus distractions, along with manipulating the public mind on virtually all major issues — suppressing what’s most important, focusing exclusively on what ruling elites want people to know.
MSM operate as press agents for powerful interests — fake news mass deception their specialty.
Notably in the US/West and partnered countries, what serves privileged interests comes at the expense of most others worldwide.
The vast majority of people are exploited, otherwise harmed, and now unwanted millions and billions are targeted for elimination.
All things flu/covid is their method of choice — especially by bioweaponized health-destroying jabs.
They work far better than endless wars — accomplishing mass-extermination with jabbing, rejabbing, booster and forever-jabbing ease.
Like lemmings to the slaughter, mind-manipulated millions rolled up their sleeves for health-destroying toxins to be jabbed into their bodies.
Brainwashed by MSM propaganda, they’re none the wiser until serious health issues take their irreversible toll.
Lincoln and others reportedly said that while everyone can’t always be fooled, some people can be fooled at all times, others some of the time.
Everyone jabbed one or more times in the US/West and elsewhere was either fooled to believe what’s harmful is beneficial or succumbed to self-inflicting harm pressure.
With minimal due diligence effort, everyone connected online can learn facts about what’s going on that dispel state-sponsored/media proliferated fake news about all things flu/covid — especially about health-destroying jabs crucial to shun.
Facts over state-approved talking points also explain that the diabolical plot aims to transform free and open societies into ruler/serf ones everywhere.
It’s what full-blown tyranny is all about.
It aims to control our lives, crush our spirit, make us subservient and accept lost freedoms that no one should relinquish voluntarily.
What’s unfolding in plain sight is a brave new world dystopian nightmare.
Deceptive equitable-sounding socioeconomic rhetoric conceals the menace posed to most people everywhere.
Pulling off the scheme requires voluntary consent from the vast majority of ordinary people.
A minority of committed others can defeat the diabolical plot.
Opposition is growing through initiatives like walk out protests in US cities, European ones and elsewhere against what no one should tolerate.
The way to defeat tyranny is for enough mad as hell people refusing to be abused anymore.
The time to fight back against diabolical dark forces is now to keep what’s vital to preserve before it’s banned and lost.
We’re Not in a ‘Pandemic of the Unvaccinated,’ Peter Doshi Explains During COVID Panel
By Jeremy Loffredo | The Defender | November 5, 2021
U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) Tuesday held a roundtable discussion on federal COVID vaccine mandates with a panel of people injured by COVID vaccines and scientists from some of the most prestigious research organizations in the world, including The BMJ and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
Peter Doshi, a senior editor at The BMJ and associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, and Retsef Levi, a health system and analytics professor at MIT, expressed doubts about COVID vaccine efficacy and the failures of the scientific community.
“I’m saddened we’re super-saturated as a society right now in the attitude of ‘everybody knows,’ which has shut down intellectual curiosity and led to self-censorship,” said Doshi.
Doshi said we’re not in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” If hospitalizations and deaths are almost exclusively occuring in the unvaccinated “why would booster shots be necessary?” Doshi asked. “And why would the statistics be so different in the UK, where most COVID hospitalizations and deaths are among the fully vaccinated?”
“There’s a disconnect there, and something to be curious about,” Doshi said. “There’s something not adding up.”
Doshi argued the public was lied to in early 2021, when health officials including Dr. Anthony Fauci, claimed COVID vaccine trial data proved the vaccine saved lives.
After presenting the trial data for the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S., Doshi pointed out “there were similar numbers in the vaccine and placebo groups.” He argued those “who claimed the trial showed the vaccine was highly effective in saving lives were wrong” and that “the trials did not demonstrate this.”
Doshi talked about anti-vaxxers and criticized the official definition of the term. He presented the panel the official Merriam-Webster definition of anti-vaxxer: “A person who opposes the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination.”
“The second part [of the definition] stunned me,” said Doshi.
“There are entire countries from the United Kingdom to Japan which do not mandate childhood vaccines,” he said. “There are no mandates, and I would wager that perhaps a majority of the world’s population meet this definition of an anti-vaxxer.”
Doshi told the panel that “vaccine” is another definition “worth checking on.”
“I argue these products which everyone calls MRNA vaccines are qualitatively different from standard vaccines,” Doshi said. “So I found it fascinating to learn that Merriam Webster changed the definition of vaccine early this year.”
“mRNA products did not meet the definition of vaccine that has been in place for over 15 years, but the definition was expanded such that mRNA products are now vaccines,” Doshi said.
He then argued that just because we’re calling the COVID shot a “vaccine” doesn’t mean “these new products are just like all other childhood vaccines which get mandated.”
“Each product is a different product, and if people are OK with mandating something simply because it’s a vaccine, I believe it’s time to inject some critical thinking into the conversation,” Doshi said.
He also criticized the fact that society is vaccinating and mandating the vaccine for large portions of the public despite the raw data on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines not being available yet.
“So while we are told to keep following the science, what we are following is not a scientific process based on open data, we are following a process where the data are secret, and in my view there is something very unscientific about that,” Doshi said.
Levi told the panel “scientists in the most prestigious journals assert that the vaccine is safe, failing to report on serious side effects such as deaths.”
He explained that national emergency services calls in Israel for cardiac arrest among young individuals under 40 years old saw a dramatic increase — more than 25% — in parallel to the COVD vaccination campaign.
“We wrote an academic paper raising concerns regarding these statistics and called on the authorities to check on this … needless to say they never got back to us.”
Levi claimed the government attempted to censor the research by calling its credibility into question. “They called the research fake,” Levi said.
Levi warned the panel:
“These vaccines have serious and unknown side effects, and we need to use them with caution.”
Watch here (Doshi starts at 1:18:40 and Levi starts at 1:49:07):
Jeremy Loffredo is a freelance reporter for The Defender. His investigative reporting has been featured in The Grayzone and Unlimited Hangout. Jeremy formerly produced news programs at RT America.
© 2021 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.
Infection Rates More than Twice as High in the Vaccinated, New UKHSA Data Shows, as Agency Dismisses Own Data as ‘Biased’.
But Why No New VE Estimate Since May?
By Will Jones • The Daily Sceptic • November 5, 2021
The latest UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance report was released Thursday, and its authors are now bending over backwards to keep their critics happy. Following a telling-off this week from the U.K. Statistics Authority, the UKHSA’s Head of Immunisation, Mary Ramsay (pictured above), published a blog post explaining what they’ve done to appease their detractors, while the report now states no fewer than four times, twice in bold typeface, that “these raw data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness”. Ramsay grovels:
To make our data less susceptible to misinterpretation, the U.K. Health Security Agency has worked with the UK Statistics Authority to update some of the data tables and descriptions in the report, specifically around rates of infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In our commitment to transparent and clear data, we regularly review our publications to ensure they reflect the current situation within the pandemic, and we will continue to work with our partners at the statistics bodies, to ensure our reporting is as scientifically robust as possible.
As I noted last week, the UKHSA does not accept the criticism of its population estimates levelled by, among others, David Spiegelhalter, who declared that using them was “deeply untrustworthy and completely unacceptable”.
The agency instead takes the view that the problem is systemic biases in the data which mean it “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness. But as I have noted repeatedly, those biases just mean that the estimate will be of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness, which is a perfectly legitimate quantity to estimate and has its uses, particularly when looking at trends or when there is reason to think the biases may be relatively small. (For instance, a recent vaccine effectiveness study in California adjusted its raw data for 22 different factors but in almost all cases the adjustments were tiny.)
The UKHSA report itself correctly gives the definition of vaccine effectiveness: “Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to rates in unvaccinated individuals.” The U.S. CDC, likewise, states the definition as “the proportionate reduction in disease among the vaccinated group”. The CDC distinguishes “vaccine efficacy”, estimated from controlled studies, from “vaccine effectiveness”, which is used “when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions”. It is therefore not appropriate for the UKHSA, a Government agency, to insist that its data “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness, which is a false statement and amounts to attempted Government censorship of scientific enquiry.
The report explains that “vaccine effectiveness is measured in other ways as detailed in the ‘Vaccine Effectiveness’ Section.” However, that section is clear that each estimate “typically applies for at least the first three to four months after vaccination”, and “there may be waning of effectiveness beyond this point”. The report discusses this waning, but only for the Alpha variant: “Data (based primarily on the Alpha variant) suggest that in most clinical risk groups, immune response to vaccination is maintained and high levels of VE are seen with both the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines.” What use is data based primarily on the Alpha variant, which went almost extinct around six months ago? There is no attempt to present adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness based on the most up-to-date data. Instead, we are just given repeated insistences that the data is not showing what it appears to be showing because it is subject to unquantified biases.
What are those biases? Last week the report claimed that vaccinated people “may engage in more social interactions because of their vaccination status”, which didn’t fit with the more usual idea of unvaccinated people as a less cautious sort. Neither did it fit with the other reason they gave, that the vaccinated “may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19”. This week they kept the latter but changed the former to the entirely ambiguous: “People who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions.”
The other two biases they suggest are that “many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19” and “people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19” previously. (The latter they say gives a person “some natural immunity to the virus for a few months”, which seems a very pessimistic view of natural immunity, particularly seeing how optimistic they are about the effectiveness of the vaccines.)
The report asserts categorically that the unvaccinated have higher previous infection rates, but cites no evidence to support this. Why not? Why, almost a year into the vaccination campaign, are researchers still so often waving their hands when talking about the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups? Where is the published data? Precisely how much more likely are the unvaccinated to have had a previous infection? This is a simple data comparison. Why hasn’t it been done? The study in California mentioned earlier found that 2% of the vaccinated had recovered from Covid against 2.3% of the unvaccinated, so not a large difference. Is England similar? Why don’t we know? Likewise, how much more likely are vaccinated people to be tested? This is just a comparison of the testing rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Why hasn’t it been done? This is not good enough. We want more data from UKHSA, not lectures on how not to use the meagre amounts of data they release.
In her blog post, Mary Ramsay points to studies PHE (UKHSA’s predecessor) has published in the past:
These factors are all accounted for in our published analyses of vaccine effectiveness which uses the test-negative case control approach. This is a recommended method of assessing vaccine effectiveness that compares the vaccination status of people who test positive for COVID-19, with those who test negative.
This method helps to control for different propensity to have a test and we are able to exclude those known to have been previously infected with COVID-19. We also control for important factors including geography, time period, ethnicity, clinical risk group, living in a care home and being a health or social care worker.
While PHE did publish such studies earlier in the year (I analyse them here and here), they have not published anything based on data more recent than May, over five months ago. This was just as Delta arrived, and before infections surged over the summer and the raw data started showing infections in the vaccinated eclipsing those in the unvaccinated.
So where is the update? It’s all very well writing pages at the behest of the U.K. Statistics Authority policing how people use your data, but where are the studies setting the picture straight? We’ve had studies from California, Sweden and Israel using data from over the summer, all showing sharp decline in vaccine effectiveness. Where is the U.K.’s contribution to this emerging understanding of the vaccines?
Yes, we had that dubious study in August from Oxford University based on the ONS Infection Survey. But there’s been no update from UKHSA to its studies based on Government testing data.
Here’s a suggestion. Why don’t Daily Sceptic readers write a (polite!) email to the UKHSA’s Mary Ramsay (address here, Twitter here) asking for an update on their very useful test-negative case control study with data from the summer and autumn. You might say you have been concerned about the data in their Vaccine Surveillance reports showing high infection rates in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated, but note they say vaccine effectiveness can only be properly estimated in a study, so would be grateful for an update on this.
Here’s this week’s table of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness and the updated graphs showing how it is changing over time. It shows infection rates currently twice as high in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated for those aged 40-79, corresponding to an unadjusted vaccine effectiveness of minus-100% or more. Vaccine effectiveness is negative for all over-30s, and almost zero for those aged 18-29 (and still declining). It remains high for under-18s, and effectiveness against hospital admission and death is holding up. This week the decline appears to have stopped, or at least paused, in most age groups.
Government’s Own Data Proves COVID-19 Shots Are Causing Blood Clots, Heart Disease, and DEATH
Apparatchiks who should be arrested immediately for lying to the American people and causing massive deaths and injuries through the COVID-19 vaccination program
By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | November 4, 2021
There are currently two different and opposing narratives in the public regarding the safety of the COVID-19 shots.
One view claims they are safe, and the other view claims they are not.
Both views cannot be true. One view is correct, and one view is wrong.
The view of the pharmaceutical companies producing the shots and earning great profit from them is that they are safe, and this view is backed up by the U.S. Government regulatory agencies and the officials who lead them.
Here is their official statement through the CDC, as of November 1, 2021.
Source
Please note that in order for the pharmaceutical companies and the government health agencies to make a claim that COVID-19 “vaccines” are “safe,” there must be a safety monitoring system in place in order to make such a claim. Otherwise, their claims would be without basis, because nobody would know whether those claims are true or not.
The CDC admits this in this statement on their website. And they go on to explain that this safety monitoring system is called VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
Based on the VAERS reporting system, the CDC goes on to state:
Serious adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination are rare but may occur.
For public awareness and in the interest of transparency, CDC is providing timely updates on the following serious adverse events of interest:
They then list four adverse events they have noticed from VAERS, and also make a statement regarding deaths.
Here are the four adverse events they admit are recorded in VAERS:
- Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination
- Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination
- CDC and FDA are monitoring reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) in people who have received the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.
- Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare.
- Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare.
Notice how they frequently use the word “rare” to describe these adverse events following COVID-19 vaccinations. But how many people even know about these “rare” side effects prior to receiving a COVID-19 shot?
Two of the side effects are only linked to one of the three FDA authorized COVID-19 “vaccines,” the J&J shot, which is the one least used.
The nice thing about the Government VAERS database is that it is open to the public, and anyone can search it. I use the MedAlerts front end to search the database, and you can find that here.
So anyone around the world can do their own search of the data in the VAERS database and fact-check the CDC’s claims, which represent the view of the pharmaceutical industry and the government health agencies and their heads.
And that’s what I am going to do in the rest of this article.
Please note that I am not dealing with the issue of under-reporting in VAERS in this article. Everyone admits that the data in VAERS is vastly under-reported, which is why when the CDC states that an adverse reaction that they admit is seen in VAERS is “rare” based on how many doses of the vaccine have been distributed, we should not take their statement at face value, because they actually do not know how rare it is.
So I am only going to deal with the available data to fact-check their claims, the very same data that they are using.
What I am going to do is compare the data on adverse reactions to the COVID-19 shots to the data recorded for the past 30 years for all other vaccines, as this will be a truer “apples to apples” comparison, and it is also a simple one that anyone can search themselves.
At the end of this analysis of the available data, nobody in the pharmaceutical industry or in the government health agencies can say that the data is wrong, because it is their data. They also cannot claim ignorance, because the statements they make regarding the “safety” of these COVID-19 vaccines is based on this data in VAERS, according to their own published statements.
And what we will see when we look at the data as compared to all other data from non-COVID-19 vaccines, is that they are lying, and that the COVID-19 vaccines are most definitely causing blood clots, heart disease, and deaths.
If they are lying, then they are complicit with causing these crippling injuries and deaths, and they should all be arrested immediately for being complicit to mass murder.
CDC Claim: Deaths following COVID-19 Shots are “Rare”
Let’s begin with deaths, since this is obviously the most serious adverse event following COVID-19 vaccination.
Here is the CDC claim as of November 1, 2021:
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 423 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through November 1, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 9,367 reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths pdf icon[1.4 MB, 33 pages].
Notice that according to the CDC the only “plausible causal relationship” between a COVID-19 vaccine and death is with the J&J shot, which is linked to blood clots. And they claim that this is among 9,367 reports of death following COVID-19 shots for the past 10 months.
I am not even sure where they get this number of “9,367” from, because when we search the VAERS database for deaths following COVID-19 shots, it returns a value of 17,619. (Source.) If we exclude all the foreign reports, we still get a different value than what they are stating, with 8,068 deaths. (Source.)
So they are applying some other kind of filter to get this death count, it would seem.
For the purpose of this analysis in this article, I am going to use ALL the data in VAERS and not filter out anything, since we already know the data is vastly under-reported.
Now to determine if these reports of deaths are “rare,” let’s look at how many deaths there are from ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30+ years.
The easiest way to do this is to simply run a search for all deaths in the database, and then subtract the deaths from the COVID-19 vaccines, which as I stated above is 17,619.
Here is the result: 26,680 deaths from ALL vaccines in the database as of October 22, 2021, which covers a period of over 30 years.
17,619 of those deaths are following COVID-19 vaccines for the past 10 months. That means that for all other vaccines over the past 30 years, there have only been 9,061 deaths recorded, about 300 deaths per year. But into October of 2021, there have been already been 17,619 deaths following COVID shots.
Does this sound “rare,” or is this a national catastrophe where heads should roll and people should be locked up in jail and prosecuted?
And remember, this is THEIR DATA! They know this.
And now they are targeting children 5 to 11 years old.
Fetal Deaths
Also, the CDC and the FDA are recommending the COVID-19 shots for pregnant women, claiming it is safe for them.
But is it? What does their own data in VAERS report about fetal deaths following COVID-19 injections of pregnant women?
Through October 22, 2021 they have recorded 2,369 cases where the mother lost her baby after receiving a COVID-19 shot. (Source.)
How does that compare with fetal deaths in pregnant women following ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30+ years?
For the past 30+ years there have been 2,192 cases where the mom being given a vaccine lost her baby, about 73 a year. (Source.)
But this year, 2,369 unborn babies have already died following a COVID-19 shot injected into the pregnant mother.
Does this sound “safe” to you? Would pregnant women continue getting COVID-19 shots if they knew these statistics in the government’s own database?
CDC Claim: Blood Clots from COVID-19 Shots are “Rare”
The admission that the CDC makes for COVID-19 vaccines causing blood clots is:
Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination is rare. As of October 27, 2021, more than 15.5 million doses of the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine have been given in the United States. CDC and FDA identified 48 confirmed reports of people who got the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and later developed TTS. Women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event. There are other COVID-19 vaccine options available for which this risk has not been seen. Learn more about J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS.
To date, two confirmed cases of TTS following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Moderna) have been reported to VAERS after more than 401 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered in the United States. Based on available data, there is not an increased risk for TTS after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.
What the CDC is clearly doing here is only reporting one kind of blood clot, Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS). They claim that this is the only kind of blood clot they found, and it is only 48 cases with J&J, and 2 cases with Moderna.
But there are many kinds of blood clots, so we should not just limit our search for only TTS. If we just search for ALL cases involving any kind of “thrombosis” following COVID-19 shots, we get a value of 13,930 cases of blood clots. (Source.)
When we search for each of the 3 FDA authorized COVID-19 vaccines where blood clots are recorded along with deaths, we get 626 total deaths when blood clots are present: 381 deaths for Pfizer, 118 deaths for Moderna, and 127 deaths for J&J.
So this horrible side effect is not related to only one manufacturer.
How does this compare with cases of “thrombosis” from ALL vaccines that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines for the past 30 years? With the available data we find only 489 cases of any kind of thrombosis for ALL vaccines for the past 30+ years, resulting in only 18 deaths. (Source.)
This is not a “rare” event following COVID-19 shots. This is criminal.
And frontline doctors are confirming that they are seeing high rates of blood clots in patients who have been vaccinated for COVID-19.
Canadian doctors were the first ones to blow the whistle on this. This past July we published an interview with Dr. Charles Hoffe, a doctor who has been practicing medicine for 28 years in the small, rural town of Lytton in British Columbia, Canada.
He was the first one to state publicly that these blood clots were not rare, as he tested vaccinated patients in his province in Canada and found that 62% of them had evidence of small blood clots.
The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc. The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test. (Source.)
Since then an emergency medicine doctor, Dr. Rochagné Kilian, has come forward to tell the public what she was seeing in fully vaccinated patients, and the high rate of blood clots. She lost her job in order to bring this information to the public, so it is well worth listening to.
This is on our Rumble and Bitchute channel.
CDC Claim: Heart Disease from COVID-19 Shots is Rare
Here is what the CDC admits for heart disease following COVID-19 shots:
Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. As of October 27, 2021, VAERS has received 1,784 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people ages 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccine. Most cases have been reported after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults. Through follow-up, including medical record reviews, CDC and FDA have confirmed 1,005 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis. CDC and its partners are investigating these reports to assess whether there is a relationship to COVID-19 vaccination. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.
Notice that they admit to 1,784 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis in people under age 30, and yet still choose to call these events “rare.”
Again, myocarditis and pericarditis are just two kinds of heart diseases, so let’s select all cases where a “carditis” is listed as an adverse event following COVID-19 shots. When we expand the search of the available data, we find 9,859 cases of cardits, resulting in 136 deaths and 327 permanent disabilities. (Source.)
This is a lot more than what the CDC is telling us, because they only included 2 kinds of “carditis.”
How does this compare with reported cases of “carditis” following ALL vaccines for the past 30+ years that are NOT COVID-19 vaccines?
For the past 30+ years there have been only 913 cases of “carditis” following ALL vaccines, resulting in only 95 deaths, about 3 deaths per year. (Source.)
Heart disease following COVID-19 shots is most certainly not rare! Young people, especially athletes, are having heart attacks in record numbers this year, as almost every day now we are seeing news reports of young, healthy athletes having heart attacks, like this professional hockey player who was in the news yesterday. There’s a list of athletes dying, mostly from cardiac arrest, here.
America is Run by Criminals and Mass Murderers
Your government is lying to you. They have this data, because it is their data. They know all of this.
But who will bring them to justice?
Sadly, these people in government who run the “health” agencies are simply pawns and puppets in these crimes against humanity.
The real decision makers who are guilty of mass murder are in corporate America. We have already shown how each of the pharmaceutical companies that currently have a COVID-19 “vaccine” authorized by the FDA also employ a former FDA Commissioner. See:
All 3 FDA-Authorized COVID-19 Vaccine Companies Employ Former FDA Commissioners
Charles Hugh Smith published an article today highlighting just how corrupt and evil corporate America has become.
Some excerpts:
It’s becoming a routine story: a whistleblower emerges with copious documentation, revealing the ethical / managerial rot at the very top of Corporate America icons. Recently it was Facebook that was revealed as devoting far more resources to masking corporate guile than to actually improving longstanding ethical and quality issues.
Now it’s Pfizer’s fast and loose treatment of supposedly rigorous protocols that’s been heavily documented. The prestigious British Medical Journal (BMJ) stated that the whistleblower provided “The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails.” BMJ Investigation: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.
The purpose of playing fast and loose is to maximize profits regardless of any other factors. And while corporations exist to maximize profits, the trend in Corporate America is to sacrifice everything to maximize profits and keep the putrid sewage hidden from regulators, the media and the public.
This isn’t about profit, it’s about hiding the rot that has seeped into every nook and cranny of Corporate America. The foundation of the stock market’s extreme valuations is corporate profits, and the stock market bubble is now the precarious foundation of the entire U.S. economy: should the bubble pop, everyone knows the economy and the financial system will both crash.
The usual corporate strategy–defame the whistleblower and blow smoke to cover the rot–loses traction when the rot is documented by internal memos, recordings, etc. It’s difficult for the lackeys of Corporate America to dismiss the British Medical Journal as just another tin-foil-hat outlet of “fake news,” especially with all the documentation now made public.
Lost in the obsession to profiteer and hide the rot is the notion that corporations have responsibilities to the public and their customers/users, not just to greedy managers and shareholders. These responsibilities have been tossed into the muddy ditch.
Regulations only exist in name in America. Corporate America plays by its own rules. Corporate America is no longer regulated in any consequential fashion, as the list of Pfizer’s actions reveal:
— Participants placed in a hallway after injection and not being monitored by clinical staff
— Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events
— Protocol deviations not being reported
— Vaccines not being stored at proper temperatures
— Mislabelled laboratory specimens, and
— Targeting of Ventavia staff for reporting these types of problems.
The last item appears in virtually every whistleblower case: the corporation doesn’t rush to fix its glaring ethical and quality issues, it rushes to silence the whistleblower and “manage the narrative” to protect its precious profits. Never mind that the public pays the price for corporations saying one thing and doing another, for hiding what they dare not let regulators, users, customers and patients learn about their practices and behind-closed-doors goals.
The Prime Directive of Corporate America is to hide the rot that’s permeated the entire corporation, starting at the top.
We shouldn’t be too surprised that Corporate America is rotten to the core–the entire status quo is rotten to the core. Ethics and regulations are annoyances to be skirted, and if some random regulator catches insiders in the act, the corporation pays an inconsequential fine and then returns to BAU–business as usual, rotten to the core.
Any citizen who desires to be well-informed would be well-served to read this report closely: BMJ Investigation: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial.
He goes on to write about an amazing database someone has put together which documents all the “Corporate fines and Settlements” over criminal cases since the 1990s. Pfizer, for example, has paid out over $8 BILLION in fines for criminal activities over the years.
As further documentation, I am honored to share a remarkable data base of Corporate Fines and Settlements from the early 1990s to the present compiled by Jon Morse. Here is Jon’s description of his project to assemble a comprehensive list of all corporate fines and settlements that can be verified by media reports:
“This spreadsheet is all the corporate fines/settlements I’ve been able to find sourced articles about, mostly in the period from the 1990s up to today (with a few 80s and 70s). This is by far the most comprehensive list of such things online. At least that I could find, because the lack of any decent list is what made me start compiling this list in the first place.”
What’s noteworthy is the sheer number of corporate violations of laws and regulations–thousands upon thousands, the vast majority of which occurred since corporate profits began their incredible ascent in the early 2000s–and the list of those paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and settlements, which reads like a who’s who of Corporate America and Top 100 Global Corporations.
I encourage you to open one of the three alphabetical tabs at the bottom of the spreadsheet on Google Docs and scroll down to find your favorite super-profitable corporation.
Many have a long list of fines and settlements, and many of the fines are in excess of $100 million. Many are for blatant cartel price-fixing, not disclosing the dangers of the company’s heavily promoted medications, destroying documents to thwart an investigation of wrong-doing, etc.
In other words, these were not wrist-slaps for minor oversights of complex regulations— these are blatant violations of core laws of the land.
Jon offered this commentary on Corporate America’s slide to the bottom of the moral cesspool:
“With the increases in concentration of wealth there has been a culture of idolizing wealth, one example is how prosecutors no longer find it appropriate to put bankers and CEOs in jail. I think one side-effect of the culture changing has been an increased willingness to break the law to increase profits.
The settlements with the banks along with the ongoing investigations have shown that virtually every market is being manipulated; the stocks, metals markets, LIBOR, FOREX, everything. The companies would only break so many laws if they felt they would have a reasonable chance of getting away with it; they would also need a reason to do it, which is provided by the infinite growth model our economy is based on.”
Thank you, Jon, for compiling a tremendously important and valuable database, and for connecting this staggering list of violations to the cultural worship of maximizing private gains at any cost. I am reminded of socio-economist Immanuel Wallerstein’s description of the current system of central-state/private-corporation collusion as “a particular historical configuration of markets and state structures where private economic gain by almost any means is the paramount goal and measure of success.”
Read the full article here.
It is time to STOP the killer COVID-19 vaccine campaigns, and way past time to round up all of these murderers and lock them up.
These talking heads on TV use what is called an “appeal to authority” to try and convince the public to get these shots. The data and the science is NOT on their side, and they are not nearly as intelligent as they want you to believe they are.
I know there is great risk right now in refusing the COVID-19 shots for some people, as your livelihood and means to earn income could be at stake.
But this is NOT a sustainable path we are on, and at some point those who refused the shots are going to be needed again, and chances are you will, at some point, be able to earn income again.
Just remember one indisputable FACT:
If you risk getting a COVID-19 shot, you could die or become crippled with very serious injuries. Deaths and injuries are happening at a record pace, and they are not “rare” as is being claimed, based on the data.
If you do not take a COVID-19 shot, you cannot die from that shot.
It really is that simple.
Parents who subject their children to these shots are guilty of child abuse, and attempted murder. Keep your children home, and safe, no matter what the cost, if you truly love them.
Media outlets campaign to get Facebook to censor climate “misinformation”
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 6, 2021
A series of articles have been appearing lately in Big Media, piling pressure on Facebook to step up censorship of what’s considered to be “climate misinformation” on the giant platform.
These reports published by the BBC, The Guardian, and The Verge – all citing and giving a lot of space to a study into climate-related content on Facebook produced by several fairly obscure advocacy groups – came shortly after Big Tech declared “climate misinformation” and “climate denial” to be its next censorship target.
One of these groups, “The Real Facebook Oversight Board,” announced on Twitter that it is publishing a quarterly report that documents “Facebook’s harms on climate change.”
The outfit, which states to be a part of the the-citizens.com site (that for now has a landing page and is funded, among others, by Luminate – an offshoot of billionaire Pierre Omidyar’s organization), said it was working with “Stop Funding Heat” and “Sum of Us” to produce the report.
The Verge bases its article on the “study” published on the Stop Funding Heat website, which accuses Facebook of “fact-checking” less than 4 percent of posts for climate misinformation, that is said to have increased by as much as 77% since January, to garner between about 800,000 and 1.3 million views.
“Facebook has been told over and over, through public reports and in private meetings, that its platform is a breeding ground for climate misinformation. Either they don’t care or they don’t know how to fix it,” Stop Funding Heat’s Sean Buchan is cited as stating.
“The Real Facebook Oversight Board” crops up again in a Guardian article dedicated to the same issue, which reveals that a majority of the 195 Facebook pages the activist groups analyzed mostly share memes ridiculing some politicians’ focus on climate change as a policy issue.
Facebook is singled out as being “among the world’s biggest purveyors of climate disinformation,” while the giant’s perceived inaction in censoring content skeptical of climate change is seen as harmful to the “the battle” led by the elites who gathered in Glasgow for UN’s COP26 summit.
The BBC also covered the topic of the allegedly rampant climate misinformation on Facebook, choosing to cite a study which said only 8% of the 7,000 posts they consider misleading were labeled as misinformation.
COP 26: Methane Madness
By David Wojick, Ph.D. | PA Pundits – International | November 5, 2021
The grandly aspirational announcements getting all the COP 26 press actually have nothing to do with the COP, which is basically a business meeting.
Most of these big news events are in reality trivial, such as India saying it will try to hit net zero 50 years from now. Greta Thunberg will be pushing 70 so she is right that this is not action. As blah blah goes this is the real deal, hence her strident take on coming around the mountain, which I love.
One grand aspiration, however, is worth a closer look, because it is worse than empty. It is dangerously stupid. This is the growing pledge to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030.
Here is how Climate Home News put it: “The US and EU got more than a hundred countries on board with a commitment to cut methane emissions 30% by 2030, putting oil and gas sector leakage in the spotlight”.
Wow, more than a hundred countries. And who needs leakage, right? Leakage sounds like waste, although like recycling it might be ridiculously expensive to stop the waste.
The problem is that very few countries outside the EU and US generate a lot of methane from extensive oil and gas production. For most countries the methane comes from FARMING. If you cut farming by 30% a lot of people quickly starve to death. No one seems to have noticed this inconvenient truth.
The estimates of methane emissions by source are all over the place, which is another reason promising a 30% cut in 8 short years is stupid. But here are some standard global numbers that frame the issue.
The three big sources are energy, livestock and rice growing and they are roughly equal. In the US and EU energy is huge, while rice is very small and livestock is just sizable. In many developing countries energy is small while either rice or livestock are huge as a fraction of methane emissions. It does not matter how small your economy is, your target is still a 30% cut.
Livestock is not just cows, it is all domestic ruminants. In round numbers the estimated global population is 1.5 billion cows, 1.1 billion sheep and 0.9 billion goats. Basically 3.5 billion methane generating critters. Imagine the impact of cutting these huge numbers by 30%.
Rice is even worse because it can be the staple diet, or a leading export good, or both. Global rice production is right around half a billion tons a year. Cutting that 30% would be catastrophic.
All things considered this proposed methane reduction looks just as unrealistic as net zero, except it is supposed to happen in just 8 short years. We are not about to cut livestock and rice production at all, much less by an incredible 30%. Just as we cannot do without fossil fuels, we cannot do with huge cuts in livestock and rice.
Perhaps there is a method to this methane madness. Maybe having impossible aspirations is the road to great achievement. Should I aspire to be President or an Olympic gold medalist? Does possibility not matter? I find this hard to accept as a rational policy.
Or maybe the US and EU are promising big bucks to those poor countries that at least try to cut their methane emissions (even though methane is harmless climatewise). Is this just another great green bribe, like so much of the war on climate?
Let’s hope this methane madness is just another pointless aspiration.
Al Gore proposes mass surveillance to find climate change ‘culprits’
By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | November 5, 2021
Former Vice President Al Gore promoted a technology developed by the Climate TRACE coalition that tracks greenhouse gas emissions. The technology can help identify those that are “most responsible for climate change” but the system is already being accused of being nothing but mass surveillance.
Gore was vice president under President Bill Clinton. The Democrat has long been an advocate for measures to combat climate change.
In an interview on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, he touted the Climate TRACE technology, saying it would help reveal the identities of those responsible for greenhouse gases emissions. The government and climate change activists could use the data to hold greenhouse gases emitters accountable for “destroying” the environment.
“We get data consistently from 300 existing satellites, more than 11,000 ground-based, air-based, sea-based sensors, multiple internet data streams and using artificial intelligence,” Gore outlined. “All that information is combined, visible light, infrared, all of the other information that is brought in, and we can now accurately determine where the greenhouse gas emissions are coming from.”
“And next year we’ll have it down to the level of every single power plant, refinery, every large ship, every plane, every waste dump, and we’ll have the identities of the people who are responsible for each of those greenhouse gas emission streams, and if investors or governments, or civil society activists want to hold them responsible, they will have the information upon which to base their action and holding them responsible,” he added.
Featured Video
“Trump’s presidency is at risk of being destroyed” Col Douglas Macgregor
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda
Dr. Joseph Mercola | July 9, 2022
“Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda,” is the fourth vaccine-related documentary by Dr. Andrew Wakefield. It tells the story of an intentional infertility vaccine program conducted on African women, without their knowledge or consent.
While it’s been brushed off as a loony conspiracy theory for years, there’s compelling evidence showing it did, in fact, happen, and there’s nothing to prevent it from happening again. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- No More Bombs for Iran, Economic War Instead?
- “Trump’s presidency is at risk of being destroyed” Col Douglas Macgregor
- Iran has legal right to act in Hormuz, holds US responsible for disruptions: UN mission
- Sudan’s RSF leaders build Dubai property empire with UAE backing: Investigative group
- West losing leadership position to Global South: Russia’s president
- How Cognitive Science Explains Our Looming Nuclear Crisis
- Have the US and Israel killed non-proliferation?
- Moscow, Tehran to support each other amid US aggression: Russia’s defense minister
- Iran says EU’s insistence on sanctions hastens its ‘embarrassing descent into irrelevance’
- Argentina’s Javier Milei sells out his country for Israel
- If Americans Knew
- By Week’s End, Trump’s War Will Be Plainly Illegal
- CBS News Reportedly Ousts London Bureau Chief Over Differences With Bari Weiss Over Gaza Coverage
- State Department Says US Is in Conflict With Iran ‘At the Request’ of Israel
- What ceasefire? Israel won’t stop killing in Gaza, Lebanon – Daily Update
- Palestinians in Gaza Want to Rebuild Food Systems. Israel Isn’t Letting Them.
- Under Trump, Green Card Seekers Face New Scrutiny for Views on Israel
- Sheep Theft Sent Shockwaves Through a Palestinian Village. Then, a 12-year-old Boy Was Shot Dead
- Trump alum helps Israel mount AI influence campaign
- Dispatches From Catastrophe
- Despite Denials, AIPAC Is Now Funding Campaign of Ala Stanford In Philadelphia
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
Aletho News 