Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Scientists Develop Hedge Hyssop Extract for Advanced Cancer Treatment

Sputnik – 19.10.2023

Scientists from Razumovsky University – or, to give it its full name Saratov State Medical University Named After VI Razumovsky (SSMU) – have developed an innovative anti-tumor herbal medicinal product based on the gratiola officinalis, a plant commonly known as medicinal hedge hyssop.

Fundamental research has been continuing for more than a decade, and according to the researchers, it has yielded compelling results. Based on these findings, the university has received approval from the Russian Ministry of Health to conduct Phase I clinical trials.

Medicinal Hedge Hyssop (gratiola officinalis) is a wild, perennial herb widely distributed in various regions of Russia. Although it possesses toxic properties, it has been used in traditional medicine in the form of infusions, known as the “Zdrenko mixture”.

Alexander Fedonnikov, SSMU’s Vice-Rector for Science and Innovations, told Sputnik that this new hedge hyssop-based drug has no direct analogue in global pharmacopeia. He clarified that existing drugs on the market, known as cytostatic drugs, cause massive destruction of tumor cells, often accompanied by severe toxicity to the body.

However, SSMU scientists claim that their innovative herbal treatment, based on hedge hyssop, activates apoptosis – programmed cell death that occurs under normal conditions in the body’s functioning.

“According to the results of pre-clinical studies, this drug produces significantly fewer side effects and is better tolerated by the body,” Fedonnikov emphasized.

He also said that the developed extract is a candidate for the position of the world’s first-class plant-based anti-tumor medication. According to his assessment, industrial production and clinical application of this drug could become a cutting-edge import substitution technology in cancer treatment.

The process of hedge hyssop extraction was developed by scientists from the Research Institute of Fundamental and Clinical Uronephrology of the Department of Pathological Anatomy, and the Faculty of Pharmacy.

“A complex recipe was selected: the herb was mixed with alcohol, dissolved in water, chloroform, and so on. By comparing different extract fractions, we selected the most active one. This is how we obtained a phytopreparation from components with the highest biological activity,” explained Professor Natalia Polukonova.

She noted that during pre-clinical research, safety data for the drug were obtained for various types of laboratory animals, and the potential efficacy of the phytopreparation was proved.

“Our experiments on laboratory animals showed that one month of taking the obtained extract reduces the tumor’s growth rate by 70 percent. These are very promising numbers. A drug is considered potentially effective if it slows tumor development by at least 30 percent,” she added.

The university reported that the research was conducted on 10 different cancer cell lines, including kidney cancer, bladder cancer, sarcoma, liver cancer, ovarian cancer and breast cancer. Based on the results, the university obtained approval from the Russian Ministry of Health to conduct a Phase I clinical trial. It is expected that cancer patients in the late stages of the disease will participate in this trial.

“These individuals will receive comprehensive treatment, and the developed drug is planned to be prescribed as an addition to it,” SSMU explained, pointing out that in this regard, scientists are guided by global ethical practices. New anti-tumor drugs are typically first applied to patients in the advanced stages of the disease. The clinical trials will be conducted at the Mirotvortsev University Clinical Hospital No 1.

According to Saratov scientists, the availability of an extensive raw material base for collecting wild medicinal hedge hyssop, combined with the already established production technology, ensures 100 percent localization of the entire production cycle in Russia, from plant collection to the finished medicinal form.

“Medicinal plants are not just promising; they have long been a part of our medical aid kits, and they work. The successful completion of this clinical trial will allow us to proceed to further phases of research to evaluate its effectiveness and, after a series of clinical trials, complete the process of state registration,” the university’s deputy director noted. He added that with this development, the university has become a part of the Russian Ministry of Health’s federal project “Medical Science for Humanity”.

October 19, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Dear American College of Clinical Pharmacy:

By Lori Weintz | Brownstone Institute | October 17, 2023

I just sent this letter off to the Board of Regents of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy:

October 12, 2023

Dear Executive Director Maddux and Board of Regents,

During the past 3 1/2 years, I have observed the troubling pattern of silencing viewpoints that depart in any way from the official Covid narrative. Your cancelation of Dr. Vinay Prasad as a keynote speaker at the upcoming ACCP Conference is an example of this inappropriate trend.

This is America. The founding principle of America is the freedom of speech, without which none of the other rights enumerated in the Constitution matter, because they cannot be pursued. Healthy, vigorous, oppositional debate is essential to innovation and problem-solving.  Without debate there is no progress and people become afraid, first to speak, and then to think for themselves.

Alicia Lichvar states she “cannot – in good conscience – share a platform with an individual who promotes such harmful rhetoric.” Ms. Lichvar claims there is a role for critical discourse, but not as the Keynote speaker. Why not? Since when is it assumed that the speaker at a conference, or graduation ceremony, or civic event represents the viewpoint of all?

In this instance, ACCP appears to have sided with the false ideology recently stated at Twitter (X) that people are entitled to “freedom of speech, not reach.” In Ms. Lichvar’s world, people like Dr. Prasad have the right to their views, just not in public, which is no right at all.

This was the moment to clarify that your group values varied viewpoints by inviting Ms. Lichvar to share her side in a debate with Dr. Prasad, or in her own presentation. It was not a moment to say you will be “revisiting the keynote speaker vetting and selection process to ensure alignment with the expectations and values of ACCP members.” There were obviously ACCP members who wanted to hear from Dr. Prasad, or he would not have been selected as a keynote speaker in the first place.

People who are so fragile they cannot even hear a differing viewpoint to their own, especially one presented by a licensed and credentialed colleague, need a wakeup call, not coddling.

You, Mr. Maddux, Mr. Olsen, Ms. Farrington, Ms. Phillips, Ms. Blair, Mr. Hemstreet, Ms. See, Ms. Finks, Ms. Parker, Ms. Ross, Ms. Clements, and Ms. Badowski, are listed on the ACCP webpage under the dropdown menu of “Leadership.”

The role of real leaders is not to “ensure alignment with the expectations and values” of the vocal few, but rather to preserve the ability to approach problems and issues in a manner that allows for consideration of all sides. People cannot make informed, adult decisions, if they’re awash in a culture of “safety” where “words are violence,” and differing viewpoints are “harmful.”

I invite you to reconsider your roles, and the bigger picture of what is happening in our country today, so as to ensure that free speech and thought are the elevating principles of enlightenment in your organization.

Sincerely,

Lori Weintz

October 17, 2023 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Dozens And Dozens Of Doctors Team Up To Fight “Chilling Attack” On The Freedom Of Speech Of Senior Doctor

Dr Aseem Malhotra with his father Prof Kailash Chand OBE, who he believes died from a sudden cardiac arrest due to the Pfizer vaccine.
By JJ Starky | The Stark Naked Brief | October 16, 2023

In June, a group of doctors, some of whom are general practitioners (GPs), initiated legal action against the General Medical Council (GMC). The basis of their claim was the GMC’s alleged failure to address misinformation about the Covid vaccines.

The doctors, who prefer anonymity – cowards – delivered a pre-action protocol letter to the GMC, signalling their intent to pursue legal action. Earlier in January, this group had urged the regulator to assess Dr. Aseem Malhotra’s suitability to practice medicine, citing his alleged “prominent dissemination of misinformation regarding Covid-19 mRNA vaccines.”

Dr. Malhotra, a renowned cardiologist, activist, and author, boasts over half a million Twitter followers, with his latest content primarily centering around the safety, or the lack there of, of the Covid vaccines.

Prior to receiving an official denial from the GMC, the doctors contended in an April letter that the regulator should determine if Dr. Malhotra’s professional conduct had been compromised by his alleged “anti-Covid-19 vaccine stance”. They stressed that inaction could jeopardise patient safety and public trust in both the medical field and the GMC.

Professor Trish Greenhalgh, an Oxford University GP, highlighted the GMC’s reluctance to tie perceived “anti-vaccine statements” to direct harm inflicted upon a patient. She emphasised the expansive reach of “misleading statements” in the era of social media, necessitating a reevaluation of the definition of “harm” in this context.

To defray the legal expenses for challenging the GMC, the group embarked on a fundraising campaign, collecting a reported £5,000.

Dr. Malhotra defended his stance, citing a commitment to evolve his position in line with new evidence. He mentioned his own early vaccination with the Pfizer vaccine and efforts to combat vaccine hesitancy, but stressed his belief that the mRNA vaccines present serious risks while noting their approval despite the absence of long-term safety data.

Earlier today, Doctors For Patients UK, the UK Medical Freedom Alliance, and Health Advisory & Recovery Team, issued a press release in response to the Good Law Project.

(It constitutes a bit of an ass-whopping in my opinion so I dare not summarise it. Here it is in its entirety):

Dear Editor

We, the undersigned doctors, and the campaign groups Doctors for Patients UK, UK Medical Freedom Alliance and HART, wish to publicly state our support for Dr Aseem Malhotra, a well-published academic and cardiologist who has been a popular commentator on medical and public health matters in the UK media for many years. We condemn the actions of a group of (mostly anonymous) doctors, supported by the Good Law Project (GLP), in seeking to silence and punish Dr Malhotra for speaking out about his concerns about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines. This is a serious and chilling attack on the freedom of speech of a senior doctor.

Dr Malhotra is the son of the late BMA stalwart and NHS campaigner, Dr Kailash Chand. Following the unexpected death of his father from previously undetectable heart disease, Dr Malhotra made public statements highlighting his concerns that his father’s Covid-19 vaccinations were a causal factor in his death.

Despite initially endorsing and promoting the Covid-19 vaccines on ITV’s Good Morning Britain on 5th February 20212 he is now calling for an immediate suspension of the novel mRNA Covid-19 vaccines and a full investigation into their adverse effects, for reasons detailed in the 2-part, peer-reviewed paper he wrote, published in September 2022 in the Journal of Insulin Resistance. This is entirely in line with his duty as a responsible doctor, to protect the British public from the harm which he believes his family have suffered and to uphold the fundamental principle of medical ethics to “First do no harm”.

Dr Malhotra presented his concerns to the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Vaccine Damage, on 20th October 2022 at Portcullis House, Westminster. His impassioned call to prioritise patient safety resulted in a group of anonymous doctors reporting him to the General Medical Council (GMC) for ‘high-profile promotion of misinformation about Covid-19 mRNA vaccines’, demanding they investigate his fitness to practice. When the GMC refused to carry out a Fitness to Practice (FtP) investigation, Dr Matt Kneale, a junior doctor in the group, instructed The Good Law Project (GLP) to begin crowdfunding for a legal action against the GMC’s decision, and launched a judicial review against the GMC in the High Court.

Dr Malhotra is a senior cardiologist, a well-established commentator and campaigner on public health issues, and a long-standing advocate for patient safety. His previous campaigns have raised awareness about heart disease, obesity, the harms of sugar, and corruption within the pharmaceutical industry. As an ambassador for the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, he was the lead author in this joint initiative with the BMJ to tackle the harms of overprescribing and unnecessary medical interventions. It is a mark of Dr Malhotra’s high regard for medical ethics that he felt compelled to speak publicly about his new and growing concerns of a link between Covid-19 vaccines and heart damage, despite initially endorsing the mRNA jabs.

It is deeply unsettling that the GLP, an entity funded primarily by the public, would turn its legal machinery toward silencing an ethical doctor. This is especially troubling given the organisation’s stated commitment to transparency and a better world. Rather than exerting legal force to silence professionals, should they not focus instead on compelling the full release of the Covid-19 vaccine trial data? The absence of such vital information from public and medical scrutiny is not just a lapse; it’s a serious breach of trust and a blow to patient safety.

By contesting the GMC’s decision to support Dr Malhotra’s right to free speech and not to carry out a formal FtP investigation (on the grounds that his statements were not sufficiently egregious to merit action), the legal action supported by the GLP risks undermining the resolve of medical professionals to speak candidly on serious health issues, a move that would have profound consequences for patient safety and the ethical practice of medicine.

The GLP challenge against the GMC decision is misconceived, misguided, and threatens doctors’ individual right to free speech and proper scientific debate on matters relating to protecting the public from dangerous products. It is deeply regrettable in a democratic society that instead of being applauded for his courage in raising the alarm, Dr Malhotra is being persecuted in this way.

Thousands of doctors worldwide and in the United Kingdom11 share Dr Malhotra’s reasonable concerns regarding Covid-19 vaccine safety. Many have spoken out on this issue, including the eminent US cardiologist, Dr Peter McCullough, who called for an immediate withdrawal of these products in a speech made in the EU Parliament on 13 September 2023. The undersigned doctors and organisations are aware of multiple harms associated with the Covid-19 vaccines; among them frontline doctors who have reported vaccine-associated injuries and deaths in their own patients.

The list of signatories and co-signatories is something to behold:

  • Dr Ayiesha Malik, MBChB, MRCGP (2014)
  • Dr Clare Craig BM BCh, FRCPath
  • Dr Elizabeth Evans, MA, MBBS, DRCOG
  • Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State 2001-2003, former Consultant in Public Health Medicine
  • Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMedSci, Professor of Oncology, University of London; Principal, Institute for Cancer Vaccines & Immunotherapy
  • Professor John A Fairclough, BM BS, BMed Sci, FRCS, FFSEM(UK), Professor Emeritus, Honorary Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
  • Dr Ali Ajaz, MBBS, BSc, MRCPsych, PGCert, Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist
  • Dr Victoria Anderson, MBChB, MRCGP (2016), MRCPCH (2013), DRCOG, General Practitioner
  • Dr Lucy Apps, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Michael Bazlinton, MBChB, MRCGP, DCH, General Practitioner
  • Dr Mark A Bell, MBChB, MRCP(UK), FRCEM, Consultant in Emergency Medicine
  • Dr Gill Breese, BSc, MBChB, DTM&H, DFFP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Emma Brierly, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Rachel Brown, MBChB, LLM, CFMP, MRCPsych
  • Mr John Bunni, MBChB (Hons), Dip Lap Surg, FRCS [ASGBI Medal], Consultant Colorectal and General Surgeon
  • Dr Selena Chester, MBBS, Medical Practitioner
  • Dr David Cartland, MBChB, BMedSci, General Practitioner
  • Mr Ian F Comaish, MA, BM BCh, FRCOphth, FRANZCO, Consultant Ophthalmologist
  • Dr Phuoc-Tan Diep, MBChB FRCPath. Consultant Histopathologist
  • Dr Jonathan Eastwood, BSc, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Jonathan Engler, MBChB, LLB
  • Dr Bob Gill, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Catherine Hatton, MBChB, General Practitioner
  • Dr Tony Hinton, MBChB, FRCS, Consultant Surgeon
  • Dr Rosamond Jones, MBBS, MD, FRCPCH, retired Consultant Paediatrician
  • Dr Tim Kelly, MBBCh, BSc, Hospital Doctor
  • Dr Caroline Lapworth, MBChB, General Practitioner
  • Dr Theresa Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, Director, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd, Bath
  • Dr Andrew Lees, MB BS, MRCGP, DCH, retired General Practitioner
  • Mr Malcolm Loudon, MB ChB, MD, FRCSEd, FRCS (Gen Surg). MIHM, VR, Consultant Surgeon
  • Dr Imran Malik, MBBS, MRCP (2006), MRCGP (2007), General Practitioner
  • Dr Fiona Martindale, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Janet Menage, MA, MBChB, retired General Practitioner
  • Dr Alan Mordue, MBChB, FFPH, retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine & Epidemiology
  • Dr Campbell Murdoch, MBChb, General Practitioner and PCN Clinical Director, Somerset
  • Dr Greta Mushet, MBChB, MRCPsych, retired Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy
  • Dr Angela Musso, MD, MRCGP, DRCOG, FRACGP, MFPC, General Practitioner
  • Dr Sam McBride, BSc (Hons) Medical Microbiology & Immunobiology, MBBCh BAO, MSc in Clinical Gerontology, MRCP(UK), FRCEM, FRCP(Edinburgh), NHS Emergency Medicine & geriatrics
  • Mr Ian McDermott, MBBS, MS, FRCS(Orth), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
  • Dr Geoffrey Maidment, MBBS, FRCP, retired Consultant Physician
  • Dr Fairoz Miller, BSc, MBBCh, MRCP (1999), MRCGP (2016), General Practitioner
  • Dr Alistair J Montgomery, MBChB, MRCGP, DRCOG, retired General Practitioner
  • Dr Sarah Myhill, MBBS, Dip NM, retired GP, Independent Naturopathic Physician, UKMFA Director of Medical Ethics
  • Dr Dean Patterson, Consultant Cardiologist and General Physician, MBChB, FRCP
  • Dr Jessica Robinson, Bsc (Hons), MBBS, MRCPsych, MFHom
  • Dr Susannah Robinson, MBBS BSc MRCP MRCGP General Practitioner
  • Dr Jon Rogers, MB ChB (Bristol), MRCGP (1981), DRCOG (1980), retired General Practitioner
  • Mr T. James Royle, MBChB, FRCS, MMedEd, Colorectal and General Surgeon
  • Dr Magdalena Stasiak-Horkan, MBBS, DCH, MRCGP (2003-2017), General Practitioner
  • Dr Rohaan Seth, BSc, MBChB, MRCGP (2012), retired General Practitioner
  • Dr Jannah van der Pol, iBSc, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner
  • Dr Helen Westwood, MBChB (Hons), MRCGP, DCH, DRCOG, General Practitioner
  • Dr Lucie Wilk, BSc, MD, FRCPC (2013), Consultant Rheumatologist

You can find a full copy of the press release here.

Currently working on a new exposè concerning the coordinated attempt to tarnish “conspiracist” celebrities. It is, however, proving to be more time-consuming than I originally expected. I should have it up in the next few days.

October 16, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

More circus theatre from the ‘safe and effective’ brigade

Nobel Prize awarded for mRNA vaccines

HART | OCTOBER 10, 2023

On 2nd October 2023, Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman were awarded a Nobel Prize for their contribution to the design of the mRNA vaccines. Notably, the original inventor, Robert Malone was not included. Karikó and Weissman’s main contribution was to include a synthetic nucleotide – pseudouridine – to reduce immune attack, increase protein production and to increase the longevity of the mRNA. How long did they make it last you may ask? Nobody knows!

Dr Drew Weissman wrote in 2018 of his concerns regarding the “non-trivial” safety concerns of the mRNA technology. He included concerns about:

1. Where in the body mRNA would act

2. How long it would last

3. Autoimmunity

4. Toxicity of recycled pseudouridine nucleotides

5. Lipid nanoparticle toxicity

6. Clotting issues from naked RNA

Since 2020, he failed to raise concerns about any of these issues and instead advocated as if every single one of these concerns had been remedied.

They received their prize while both wearing large white face masks indicating their total lack of faith in the product.

The vice chair of the Nobel Committee claimed:

“giving a Nobel Prize for this COVID-19 vaccine may make hesitant people take the vaccine and be sure it’s very efficient and safe.”

This rather implies that the latest stunt is nothing more than a publicity/marketing exercise to ‘nudge’ consumer confidence. It is hard to imagine that anyone who resisted the billion dollar advertising campaign and behavioural nudges of 2020/2021 will be susceptible to this cheap trick. It is interesting how Ivermectin could be smeared by the FDA as being horse paste despite scientists being awarded a Nobel Prize for its use in medicine, specifically against parasitic diseases in humans. People’s thinking on these subjects is being constantly manipulated by those in power and is nothing if not entirely inconsistent.

Until recently, the most shameful Nobel Prize was awarded to the inventors of the lobotomy procedure. To avoid another similar disaster the committee has waited at least ten years before awarding a prize to ensure that breakthroughs stand the test of time. For some reason, that rule was ignored in this case. Perhaps the motivations were political. The question has to be asked as to whether these two characters are being set up to be the fall guys in due course.

October 15, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

DNA & SV40 In The #Pfizer Shot

October 15, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Vaccine and stroke – the unmentionable connection

By Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | October 13, 2023

As reported in one of our favourite outlets, Global Health Now, the newsletter of the Bloomberg School of Public Health and Johns Hopkins University, we can expect a rise in stroke. It is already the second leading cause of death, and the recent Lancet Neurology Commission report predicts a 50 per cent rise by 2050, taking the worldwide total to 9.7 million deaths a year.

According to the report the underlying cause of the predicted increase is high blood pressure generally; in younger people, a rise in diabetes and obesity may increase stroke. The factors identified above are all, indeed, leading causes of stroke.

Could anything else lead to an increase in stroke? In these pages, reference has been made recently by Dr Angus Dalgleish to the now widespread use of mRNA vaccines introduced as a purported way of preventing Covid-19 infection (they didn’t). In that article, he refers to stroke from blood clotting as one dangerous and even fatal outcome of the mRNA vaccines. Dr Dalgleish says that the risk associated with mRNA vaccines is so great that their use ought to be banned. But, as a search of the Lancet report reveals, there is not a single mention of any relationship between the use of mRNA vaccines and stroke. Since Pfizer propose to develop further mRNA vaccines, for example for flu, the use of these vaccines may become even more widespread.

The omission of any mention of mRNA vaccines and their relationship to stroke is, surely, a major flaw in the Lancet report. This is strange, deliberate possibly, given how common the knowledge is that there is such a relationship. The possibility of a link has been reported, among other places, in BMJ Case Reports, medRxiv, Stroke, Medical News Today, Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Disease and even in Lancet eClinical Medicine. So we know that the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines can cause stroke, and we know that the campaign to keep pushing the Covid-19 vaccines is relentless with proposals to develop further mRNA vaccines for more infectious diseases. What could possibly go wrong?

In addition to the likelihood of Covid-19 vaccines contributing to the increase in stroke, other aspects of the virtually worldwide overreaction to Covid-19, principally lockdown, undoubtedly contributed. Enforced confinement led to lower levels of physical activity and an increase in alcohol intake, among other things. As a result, levels of obesity rose, one of the contributing factors to stroke. While the imposition of lockdown may have ended, many people remain locked down in their minds, unable to leave home and suffering from depression. The working from home ‘pandemic’ is also unlikely to stop and this is known to be contributing to obesity.

A further effect of lockdown was lack of access to healthcare. Even one of the architects and proponents of lockdown and ‘saving the NHS’, Chris Whitty, warned in 2022 that there had been adverse consequences as a result of people not having access to life-saving drugs for cardiovascular disease. Surely, he saw that coming in 2020 and 2021, but chose to say nothing. Also a leading advocate of the Covid-19 vaccines, he was knighted in 2022. It’s enough to give you a stroke!

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

HPV vaccine on trial – the making of another drug tragedy, Part 2

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | October 11, 2023

In Part Two of our serialisation of the book HPV Vaccine on Trial by Mary Holland, Kim Mack Rosenberg and Eileen Iorio, we analyse what happened when an NGO, supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, recruited girls in India to test the HPV vaccine. More than 25 per cent of all newly diagnosed cases of cervical cancer in the world occur in India. It is the second leading cause of can­cer death in women, claiming approximately 74,000 lives a year. Despite this large number, cervical cancer deaths by 2005 had dropped almost 50 per cent. This occurred without the vaccine and without widely accessible screening because of several factors including better hygiene, cleaner water, and improved nutrition, among others. You can read Part One here. 

IN 2010 seven girls died in India allegedly after taking part in Gardasil and Cervarix HPV vaccine trials. A cover-up was then instigated stating that they had died of insecticide poisoning, snake bites or suicide, it is alleged. The vaccine trial is now being described by the Indian authorities as child abuse.

While India’s parliament says the trials were unauthorised and unethical, manufacturers Merck, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and their allies, strongly disagree. However, an investigation discovered that the ‘safety and rights of children were highly compromised and violated’ as it emerged that their parents and guardians had not given proper informed consent.

A fact-finding report by physicians detailed several interviews with subjects and their family members. They learned that families were told that the vaccine would protect the subjects from ALL cancers, they were not told about any side effects, and they were not provided with any medical insurance in the event of injury or death. They learned that several of the girls suffered adverse events including loss of menstrual cycles, and psychological changes such as depression and anxiety. The report concluded that ‘the safety and rights of the children in this vaccination project were highly compromised and violated’.

Here is the background.

Shortly after the US Food and Drink Administration (FDA) approved Gardasil (Merck) in June 2006, an international NGO called Programme for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH) began a five-year project described as a ‘demonstration project’ (to test and measure effects of drugs in real-world situations). Its objective was to generate and disseminate evidence for informed public sector introduction of HPV vaccines. They chose India, Uganda, Peru and Vietnam to monitor safety and efficacy. All four countries have state-funded immunisation programmes and if Gardasil and Cervarix were adopted, Merck and GSK (the maker of Cervarix), stood to make major financial gains.

Two remote provinces in India, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat, were chosen for the trials in 2009 and 2010. The subsequent investigation, while initially focusing on the girls’ deaths, uncovered systemic failures in government agencies and their oversight of the trials.

PATH engaged in extraordinary practices to obtain ‘informed consent’ from minors in economically vulnerable areas. Indian law requires parents’ or guardians’ consent on behalf of minors to participate in clinical trials. For the uneducated, an independent person must be present to explain and witness the consent process.

A 2011 parliamentary committee reviewed thousands of consent forms from the two provinces signed by dormitory supervisors in schools where the girls lived without their parents. These supervisors were not the girls’ legal guardians. The committee found forms with no witness signatures and signatures by thumb impression of those who could not write. Many forms had no dates. Direct interviews revealed that trial participants had received grossly inadequate information about potential risks and benefits while being offered financial inducements to participate.

The committee harshly criticised PATH’s treatment of adverse events. They noted that there were clear situations when a vaccination should not have been given to a girl, but those conducting the study ignored contraindications. The committee observed that this was ‘clearly an act of wilful negligence’. They noted that the project design failed to account for the possibility of serious adverse events and failed to provide for an independent monitoring agency. ‘Investigations into causes of deaths took an unacceptably long time’ and there were critical discrepancies in the investigation.

The report noted: ‘PATH’s wrongful use of governmental logos made it appear as if the project were part of the Indian Universal Immunisation Program.’ The committee found governmental responses ‘very casual, bureaucratic and lacking any sense of urgency’. They concluded that ‘PATH exploited with impunity the loopholes in the system’ and ‘had violated all laws and regulations laid down for clinical trials by the government’.

PATH’s sole aim had been to promote the commercial interests of HPV vaccine manufacturers who would have reaped windfall profits had PATH been successful in getting the HPV vaccine included in India’s immunisation programme. ‘This act of PATH is a clear-cut violation of the human rights of these girl children and adolescents . . . and an established case of child abuse.’

A second Parliamentary Committee report in 2013 described how PATH entered into a memorandum of understanding to study HPV vaccination with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the highest medical research body in India. PATH said the project would vaccinate around 23,000 girls aged between ten and 14. They said it did not conform to the definition of a clinical trial, so it was an observational study.

Merck and GSK supplied the vaccine to PATH free of charge. In turn, PATH distributed the vaccines to local medical agencies free. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the other costs of the study as part of its global public health activity.

(The Gates Foundation has invested heavily in India’s vaccine programme through two organisations that have influenced vaccine policy since 2002: the Global Alliance for Vaccines and immunisation (GAVI) and the Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI), India’s largest non-profit organisation. Pharma executives sit on GAVI’s board, which has a public-private partnership with the Indian government, providing hundreds of millions of dollars to fund vaccine programmes. Although the Indian government set up PHFI, the Gates Foundation largely funds it, causing potential conflicts of interest.)

The parliamentary committee dismissed PATH’s explanations that these studies were not clinical trials, and the report alleges that PATH resorted to subterfuge, jeopardising the health and wellbeing of thousands of vulnerable Indian girls. The report makes clear that these de facto clinical trials could not have occurred without corruption within India’s leading health organisations. The committee noted ‘serious dereliction of duty by many of the institutions and individuals involved’ and accused some of having ‘undisclosed conflicts of interest with the vaccine manufacturers’.

In October 2012, activists on behalf of the girls in the trials filed a petition in the Indian Supreme Court against the drug controller general, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the State of Andhra Pradesh, the State of Gujarat, PATH, GSK, Merck and others. The petition alleged that the clinical trials for Gardasil and Cervarix were unethical, that the vaccine use was illegal, and that various actors enlisted girls in an experiment and then abandoned them without follow-up treatment or adequate information.

The complaint stated that ‘adverse events were grossly under-reported and hidden. Records were falsified. Deaths that took place were stated as having nothing to do with the vaccines and were described as deaths due to suicides, insecticide poisoning, and snake bites.’ To date, the case has not been heard and proceedings seem to have stalled.

Largely because of the HPV vaccine scandal, the Indian government restricted clinical trials in 2013 and forced an end to the Merck and GSK demonstration projects. That same year the Supreme Court suspended 162 drug approvals pending the creation of a better monitoring system. In 2014, the government published new guidelines for audio/visual recording of informed consent in clinical trials.

Since 2015, though, provinces obtained the right to approve some drugs without national approval, bypassing general regulators. The Delhi government launched a school-based HPV vaccination programme in November 2016, and the Punjab government followed suit in early 2017.

In the US, there are currently about 80 cases pending in federal court against Merck for injuries associated with Gardasil, with hundreds more cases likely to be filed in the coming months.

Trey Cobb, 22, was injured by Gardasil aged 14 and developed autoimmune symptoms and severe fatigue. He won a major victory recently when the federal vaccine court ruled that he is entitled to compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

In the meantime, Gardasil 9, which replaced Gardasil, is expected to generate £1.2billion a year in sales.

PATH contests any notion that there may have been conflicts of interest in India: ‘Any suggestion that inappropriate collusion existed in this project is baseless, wholly inaccurate, and defies the very spirit of our cross-sector partnerships, which are essential in India and around the world.’

Merck and GSK strongly deny any wrongdoing.

The HPV Vaccine on Trial was written and researched by Children’s Health Defense legal expert Mary Holland, lawyer and advocate for autistic children Kim Mack Rosenberg, and vaccine safety advocate Eileen Iorio.

Read our previous articles on HPV vaccine injured here and here.

October 14, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Theoretical Vaccine Effectiveness for Novavax Unacceptably Low

Real World Study Disappointing for Non-Genetic Vaccine

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | October 11, 2023

If it came to forced COVID-19 vaccination against human will, I have said Novavax would be the choice since it gives a limited 5 mcg dose of the potentially lethal Spike protein and has no genetic material. The growing number of fatal side effects with mRNA vaccines and recent news of contamination with SV-40 cDNA has resulted in record low rates of booster uptake, currently at 1.3% of unwary Americans.

Mateo-Urdiales reported on 20,903 individuals who took the two shot primary series of Novavax. Theoretical vaccine effectiveness was shockingly low:

“Adjusted estimated vaccine effectiveness against notified SARS-CoV infections in those with partial vaccination (15 days after the first dose to 14 days after the second dose) was 23%(95%CI, 13%-33%), increasing after full vaccination to 31% (95%CI, 22%-39%). Estimated vaccine effectiveness was higher against symptomatic COVID-19, with an estimate of 31% (95%CI, 16%-44%) in those partially vaccinated and of 50% (95%CI, 40%-58%) in those fully vaccinated.”

Mateo-Urdiales A, Sacco C, Petrone D, et al. Estimated Effectiveness of a Primary Cycle of Protein Recombinant Vaccine NVX-CoV2373 Against COVID-19. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(10):e2336854. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.36854

If a vaccine cannot safely provide at least 50% protection for a year, it is not viable in my clinical practice. Sadly Novavax failed at both of these outcomes. With low-risk Omicron, and likely substantial natural immunity by Fall of 2022, only 26 infections led to hospitalization during the study period; 1 occurred during the reference period, 7 during partial vaccination, and 18 after full vaccination. No deaths were reported.

In summary, Novavax is probably the safest of all the COVID-19 vaccines because it does not use genetic technology. Sadly, it is useless against Omicron and cannot be recommended for any health benefit.

 

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

Lawsuit Pushes Back Against California Medical Board’s “Misinformation” Censorship Power

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | October 12, 2023

A lawsuit has been amended in California against this US state’s medical boards’ “misinformation powers” – based on a law that is soon to be repealed, and which critics – some of them legal plaintiffs – say allowed the government to prevent them from practicing medicine, the way they were trained to do.

It was one of the rules, called Assembly Bill 2098 (AB 2098), introduced to keep medical professionals in check, in case they felt like speaking their minds freely as insights into Covid were developing.

And since the world has now moved on to other crises, the “forgotten pandemic” censorship laws are getting “quietly” repealed.

But not really, the plaintiffs in this case claim – because of the nature of the repeal of the short-lived AB 2098, made null-and-void on September 14 via Senate Bill 815 (SB 815). California Senator Newsom got to sign all three documents.

However, the repeal – which will not be in effect before the start of 2024 – at the same time incorporates Democrat member of California Assembly Evan Low’s provision that doctors who get accused of “misinformation” can still be punished – “held accountable” – regardless of whether the controversial law was actually applicable.

“The Medical Board of California will continue to maintain the authority to hold medical licensees accountable for deviating from the standard of care and misinforming their patients about COVID-19 treatments,” Low said.

How in the world is this political, ideological, pre-election, and legal gymnastics even supposed to work?

The lawsuit against the bill, Hoang et al. v. Bonta et al., has the plaintiffs represented by California attorney Richard Jaffe.

He had this to say: “Because of the repeal of AB 2098, and the board’s position that it can still sanction the speech targeted by the soon-to-be-repealed law, we are pivoting in our lawsuit and arguing to the judge that they can’t do it under their general statute either because the speech does not change just because the legal theory/statute changes.”

The world clearly has moved to other crises – but it seems, not the California Democrats. And so the plaintiffs in the lawsuit’s amended format are also asking to add more to their ranks. One of the original ones is Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

However absurd the “standard of care” argument that supersedes a law may seem to a layperson, Jaffe is obviously taking it seriously.

The court will hear the arguments related to this new development on November 13.

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

Yes, Treating COVID Patients With Hydroxychloroquine Can Save Lives

By Angelo DePalma, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 11, 2023

Hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone, or HCQ plus the antibiotic azithromycin, had significantly lower mortality than those not receiving the drugs, according to a study released this month in New Microbes and New Infections.

Researchers in Belgium report that just 16.7% of COVID-19 patients given HCQ, with or without azithromycin, died within 28 days compared to 25.9% among those not taking HCQ — a 35% lower mortality.

After adjusting for age differences, the risk of death was still 24% lower for HCQ-treated hospitalized patients.

The survival benefit was seen across all ages and was statistically significant.

The results support the efficacy of HCQ and azithromycin in improving outcomes for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This contrasts with earlier studies using dangerously high HCQ doses that found no benefits.

Who participated in the study?

Led by Dr. Gert Meeus, a nephrologist at AZ Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium, researchers collected data from March 16 to May 20, 2020 — the first few months of the pandemic.

They compared outcomes for 352 COVID-19-positive, HCQ-treated adults hospitalized at AZ Groeninge Hospital with those of 3,533 patients across Belgium who did not receive the drug.

Treated patients averaged 69.7 years versus 73.1 years for the control group. While this age difference favors the younger subjects who face less risk from the virus, this factor was more than offset by the treatment group’s higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, liver and lung diseases, and weakened immunity.

Treated subjects were also more obese — a COVID-19 risk factor — with lower blood oxygen (suggesting severe illness) and higher C-reactive protein levels. C-reactive protein is a blood marker for inflammation and poor COVID-19 outcomes.

During the 28 days following initial treatment, 16.7% of patients who received HCQ, either alone or with azithromycin, died compared with 25.9% in the control group.

How was HCQ administered?

For the study, 299 patients (85%) received HCQ plus azithromycin versus 53 who took HCQ alone. Researchers only prescribed the antibiotic when they suspected bacterial pneumonia. Data for HCQ alone and HCQ plus azithromycin were combined.

Subjects received HCQ as two 400-milligram doses on day one and two 200-milligram doses on days two through five.

Patients younger than 75 years received 500 milligrams of azithromycin for five days. Older patients took 500 milligrams on day 1 and 250 milligrams per day for four days.

88% of patients received the full treatment course but 12% took the drugs for less time, at the caregiver’s discretion, due to side effects or reaching a terminal condition.

Otherwise, side effects observed in 197 patients were mild and mostly stomach issues. One patient had hallucinations and two developed a skin rash.

Thirteen patients dropped out of the study due to side effects, including 4 of 15 who developed heart muscle abnormalities — despite an earlier study reporting an association between HCQ and lower cardiovascular risk.

Nine patients dropped out because of digestive upset. One patient developed an abnormal but nonfatal post-study heart rhythm, but no treated patients experienced sudden death or irregular heartbeat during the study.

How the drugs work

HCQ and azithromycin work together to eliminate the COVID-19 virus, but the drugs may benefit patients in other ways.

Both drugs act on the immune system in ways that may suppress the COVID-19 cytokine storm responsible for much of COVID-19-related illness and death.

HCQ may also prevent blood clots in COVID-19 patients, while azithromycin may prevent additional, non-lung bacterial infections.

HCQ was approved in the U.S. in 1955 to treat malaria, but because of its anti-inflammatory effects it is also prescribed to adults to treat autoimmune diseases like lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.

Most serious side effects — including retinopathy, which causes blindness — occur after years of use, while COVID-19 treatments generally last for less than one week.

The World Health Organization lists HCQ as an “essential medicine” based on its “safety, efficacy and public health relevance.”

Study strengths and weaknesses

Meeus designed his study and interpreted his findings to include results that may not have supported the “safety and efficacy” of HCQ.

For example, all patients receiving at least one dose of HCQ were included in the treatment group regardless of whether they completed the study. One dose of HCQ was unlikely to affect their survival, but including such patients would have increased mortality numbers in the treatment group, thereby underestimating HCQ survival benefits.

Excluding very sick patients in a survival study tends to make data appear stronger because fewer deaths invariably occur among healthier subjects. Meeus and coworkers did not do this.

Meeus’ results also likely underestimated the benefits of HCQ treatment by reviewing patients only after hospitalization, when they were already quite sick. COVID-19 treatment experts stress the importance of treatment before patients reach this stage.

This retrospective study associated a current outcome (death) with an earlier effect (receiving HCQ). Retrospective studies are less capable of establishing causation than prospective studies that first look at the intervention or cause and only later for effects.

Another potential study shortcoming involves the statistics investigators chose to report HCQ’s benefits. A reduction in deaths from 25.9% to 16.7% is a 36.5% decrease, but the effect is smaller when survival, not death, is the outcome measured.

Death rates of 25.9% and 16.7% mean that 83.3% of treated and 74.1% of untreated patients survived, for an overall survival benefit under 10%.

Reporting relatively large differences between two small numbers is a common strategy for amplifying modest clinical benefits.

Meeus did not account for the many observational studies carried out by such doctors as Didier Raoult, Vladimir Zelenko, Pierre Kory, Peter McCullough and others using HCQ with azithromycin and/or zinc to treat COVID-19 beginning in 2020 — some with very large practices — all demonstrating significant benefits with early treatment.

He also did not review early treatment randomized control trials or the many other studies showing clear benefits of HCQ treatment.

Conclusion: ‘remarkable’ results

The authors described their results as “remarkable” since large HCQ studies during the first pandemic year showed no benefit.

However, where Meeus and co-workers used HCQ at standard doses, the earlier trials used a fourfold higher total dose, including an initial dose seven times higher than the maximum approved dosage.

For example the WHO “Solidarity” and U.K. “Recovery” clinical trials used HCQ dosages that were considered fatal.

According to Meeus, other studies (see here, here, and here) using more reasonable HCQ dosing failed because they did not recruit enough subjects to show a statistically significant effect.

One of these studies found a 44% reduction in death at 28 days but included too few patients to be able to claim an HCQ benefit.

Percentage of patients who died in the HCQ group (white bars) vs. the no-HCQ group (black bars) by age group. A survival benefit was seen in all age groups. While about 2.5% of untreated 31- to 44-year-olds died during the study, no treated patients in this age group died. Credit: Gert Meeus et al.

Meeus concluded:

“Our study suggests that, despite the controversy surrounding its use, treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin remains a viable option. The favorable results and reassuring safety data support the need for adequately powered confirmatory randomized controlled trials using low dose hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin.

“Given the pandemic emergency it is reasonable to give this treatment the benefit of the doubt pending the results of these trials or the advent of better treatment options.”

Angelo DePalma, Ph.D., is a science reporter/editor for The Defender.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 12, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Nothing To Sea Here Folks

Climate Discussion Nexus | October 2, 2023

In this “Fact Check” video from the Climate Discussion Nexus, Dr. John Robson expands on our Sea Level Check series to rebut claims of dangerous, accelerating, man-made sea level rise by examining the actual history and current state of melting land ice, changes in the land and other complex factors that contribute to this non-crisis.

To support the Climate Discussion Nexus, subscribe to our YouTube channel (http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_egd…, our Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/user/ClimateDN), our newsletter (at http://www.climatediscussionnexus.com/) and our podcast on Spotify (https://open.spotify.com/show/6IX3QVN…) and Google (https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0…, like us on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/ClimateDN/), follow us on Twitter (http://www.twitter.com/ClimateDN) and Gettr (https://www.gettr.com/user/climatedn).

October 12, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

FDA HEAD GOES ANTI-VAX

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | October 5, 2023

Once labeled a dangerous ‘anti-vax’ technique, head of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Dr. Peter Marks is now stating he would space out vaccines to avoid mounting adverse reactions.

October 11, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »