Recipients of repeated COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations may have fully damaged their immune system’s capacity to protect them from severe effects from the disease. Each successive booster shot may actually worsen protection.
But now new mice research (Gao et al., 2022) provides damning evidence that continued COVID-19 booster vaccinations “negatively impact the immune response” and “fully impair the… neutralizing efficacy” of COVID-19 antibodies and memory.
Scientists warn that continuing the course of booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations may pose risks of “enhanced disease severity” for those re-infected with COVID-19 and thus the administration of boosters “should be preceded with caution.”
“Our findings revealed that repeated dosing after the establishment of vaccine response might not further improve the antigen-specific reactivity; instead, it could cause systematic tolerance and inability to generate effective humoral and cellular immune responses to current SARS-CoV-2 variants.”
In other words, health authorities have mandated young people get a shot that may fully impair their immune system’s capacity to protect them from the very variants the shots were intended to neutralize.
Covid mRNA vaccines are “clearly the most failing medical product in the history of medical products, both in terms of efficacy and safety” and should be withdrawn immediately as they cause “an unprecedented level of harm including the death of young people and children”, a top drug safety expert has said.
Professor Retsef Levi, an expert in analytics, risk management and health systems at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, released a video this morning where he set out the alarming findings of his investigations and how they have been completely ignored by the Israeli Government. The video was tweeted by leading cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra.
There follows a complete transcript of Professor Levi’s video.
Hi. My name is Retsef Levi, and since 2006 I’ve been a faculty member at MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I have more than 30 years of experience as a practitioner and an academic in using data analytics to assess and manage risk, particularly in the context of health systems and health policies, as well as the management of safety and quality of manufacturing of biological products.
I’m filming this video to share my strong conviction that at this point in time all COVID-19 mRNA vaccination programmes should stop immediately. They should stop because they completely fail to fulfil any of their advertised promises regarding efficacy. And more important they should stop because of the mounting and indisputable evidence that they cause an unprecedented level of harm, including the death of young people and children.
I personally became concerned with the vaccine safety around the middle of 2021, when it became known that the mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart.
Since myocarditis is known to be hard to diagnose, because it often has vague symptoms or can even be subclinical with no symptoms – it’s also known to be a frequent cause of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest, especially among young people – I was very concerned that it will not be detected by the existing vaccine safety surveillance systems.
Motivated by that, we decided to analyse the Israel national EMS [emergency services] data to see if there are any signals of increased out-of-hospital adverse events. The analysis of the EMS cause and diagnosis data from 2019 throughout the first half of 2021 revealed some very concerning signals. We detected an increase of 25% in the cause ‘with cardiac arrest’ diagnosis among ages 16-39 in the first half of 2021, exactly when the vaccination campaign in Israel was launched. A smaller increase was also detected in the older ages. Moreover, we also detected a statistically significant temporal correlation between the number of the Pfizer vaccine doses administered to this population and the number of EMS calls with cardiac arrest diagnosis.
Interestingly, we did not find any statistically significant correlation with the number of COVID-19 infections during this period of time. While this is not a proof of causal relationship, it left us very concerned, especially given the known suspected mechanism. And we called for an immediate thorough investigation by the Israeli Ministry of Health to investigate what are the underlying causal mechanisms of this observed increase in the cardiac arrest calls.
Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, such thorough investigation was never conducted. By now I believe that the cumulative evidence is conclusive and confirms our concern that the mRNA vaccines indeed cause sudden cardiac arrest as a sequel of vaccine-induced myocarditis. And this is potentially only one mechanism by which they cause harm. Data from the U.K., Scotland and Australia replicate the data from Israel. Additional data from Israel indicate that in 2021 the EMS service in Israel conducted more than 3,000 more resuscitations compared to 2019, which amounts to an increase of 27%.
Two prospective studies from Thailand and Switzerland in which vaccinees were tested before and after they received the vaccine indicate that the rates of heart damage are likely to be significantly higher than the rates detected by clinical diagnosis. This is exactly the same finding that the U.S. military found in 2015 when it conducted a similar study on the smallpox vaccine. Another study from Harvard Medical School detected in the blood of children with vaccine-induced myocarditis an entire spike [protein], which is another indication of the underlying mechanism of harm, but in fact has even broader implications about the safety of the vaccine given the repeated evidence that we have that the mRNA and the lipids are actually penetrating the blood system.
And finally, autopsies of people that die closely after they receive the vaccine indicate that with the enlarged number of cases, there is strong evidence that the death was caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis.
So presented with all of this evidence, I think that there is no other ethical or scientific choice but to pull out of the market these medical products and stop all the mRNA vaccination programmes. This is clearly the most failing medical product in the history of medical products, both in terms of efficacy and safety. And we need to investigate and think hard: How did we end up in a situation that it’s also the most profitable medical product in the history of medical products?
Today, January 27th, marks 50 years since the signing of the Paris Peace Accords which effectively ended American participation in the Vietnam war. One of the consequences, according to Georgetown University international affairs scholar Charles Kupchan, was that an “isolationist impulse” made a “significant comeback in response to the Vietnam War, which severely strained the liberal internationalist consensus.”
As the Cold War historian John Lamberton Harper points out, President Jimmy Carter’s hawkish Polish-born national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, scorned his intra-administration rival, the cautious, gentlemanly secretary of state Cyrus Vance as “a nice man but burned by Vietnam.” Indeed, Vance and a number of his generation carried with them a profound disillusionment in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. And for a short time, the ‘Vietnam Syndrome,’ (shorthand for a wariness and suspicion of unnecessary and unsupportable foreign interventions) occasionally informed American policy at the highest levels and manifested itself in the promulgations of the Wienberger and Powell Doctrines which, in theory anyway, represented a kind of resistance on the part of the Pentagon to unnecessary military adventures.
But such resistance didn’t last long. Only hours after the successful conclusion of the First Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush declared, “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all.” And kick it Bush did: In the decades following his 1991 pronouncement, the United States has been at war in one form or another (either as a belligerent or unofficial co-belligerent – as is the case with our involvement in Saudi Arabia’s grotesque war on Yemen) for all but 2 of the 32 years that have followed.
Yet the atmosphere that now prevails in Washington makes it exceedingly difficult to believe such a thing as a ‘Vietnam Syndrome’ ever existed. Indeed, President Joe Biden’s handling of the war in Ukraine has been met with rapturous approval from the Washington establishment, winning plaudits from all theusualsuspects.
But can the Biden policy truly be credited as a success when the entire ordeal might have been avoided by judicious diplomatic engagement? Are we really to believe that the war which so far has resulted in 8 million refugees and roughly 200,000 battlefield deaths has been worth a promise of NATO membership for Ukraine?
While the war has seemingly ground to a stalemate, the legacy media and various and sundry think-tank-talking-heads have been busy issuing regular assurances of regime change in Moscow and steady progress in the field with victory soon to come:
Writing in the Journal of Democracy this past September, political scientist and author of the End of History and The Last Man Francis Fukuyama exulted: “Ukraine will win. Slava Ukraini!”
Washington Post reporter Liz Sly told readers in early January that “If 2023 continues as it began, there is a good chance Ukraine will be able to fulfill President Volodymyr Zelensky’s New Year’s pledge to retake all of Ukraine by the end of the year — or at least enough territory to definitively end Russia’s threat, Western officials and analysts say”
Also in early January, the former head of the US Army in Europe, Lt. General Ben Hodges told the Euromaidan Press that, “The decisive phase of the campaign… will be the liberation of Crimea. Ukrainian forces are going to spend a lot of time knocking out or disrupting the logistical networks that are important for Crimea… That is going to be a critical part that leads or sets the conditions for the liberation of Crimea, which I expect will be finished by the end of August.”
Newsweek, reporting in October 2022, informed readers by way of activist Ilya Ponomarev, a former member of the Russian parliament, that “Russia is not yet on the brink of revolution… but is not far off.”
Rutgers University professor Alexander J. Motyl agrees. In a January 2023 article for Foreign Policy magazine titled ‘It’s High Time to Prepare for Russia’s Collapse’ Motyl decried as “stunning” what he believes is a “near-total absence of any discussion among politicians, policymakers, analysts, and journalists of the consequences of defeat for Russia. … considering the potential for Russia’s collapse and disintegration.”
And this week comes word, courtesy of Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of the once realist National Interest magazine, that “The German decision to send tanks to Ukraine is a turning point. It is now clear that Vladimir Putin signed the death warrant of his regime in invading Ukraine.”
As Gore Vidal once quipped: “There is little respite for a people so routinely – so fiercely – disinformed.”
Conspicuous by its absence in what passes for foreign policy discourse in the American capital is the question of American interests: How does the allocation of vast sums to a wondrously corrupt regime in Kiev in any way materially benefit everyday Americans? Does the imposition of a narrow, sectarian Galician nationalism over the whole of Ukraine truly constitute a core American interest? Does the prolongation of a proxy war between NATO and Russia further European and American security interests? If so, how?
In truth, the lessons of Vietnam were forgotten long ago. The generation that now populates the ranks of the Washington media and political establishment came of age when Vietnam was already in the rearview mirror. The unabashed liberal interventionists who staff the Biden administration cut their teeth in the 1990s when it was commonly believed that the US didn’t act often enough, notably in Bosnia and in Rwanda. As such, and almost without exception, the current crop of foreign policy hands now in power havesupported every American mis-adventure abroad since 9/11.
The caution which, albeit all-too-temporarily, stemmed from the ‘Vietnam Syndrome’ is today utterly absent from the corridors of power in Joe Biden’s Washington.
The Vietnam Syndrome is indeed kicked: Dead and buried.
But we may soon come to regret its passing.
James W. Carden is a former advisor on Russia to the US-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission and to the Special Representative for Intergovernmental Affairs at the State Department. He is a member of the Board of ACURA.
Will Thailand become the first country to take Pfizer to court claiming fraud and declare the contracts null and void?
Professor Sucharit Bhakdi seems to think so. He claims to have talked to officials high up in government and told them that the contracts were fraudulent. According to him, the Thais want to be the first country in the world to declare the contracts null and void. If this goes ahead and found to be true in the courts, it will mean a significant sum of damages will have to be paid by Pfizer and set off a chain of events that will likely bankrupt the company.
23 days after the Thai King’s daughter had her booster, she collapsed and is still in a coma. Officially she has a bacterial infection but many claim she is the victim of vaccine damage. If the Thais do take Pfizer to court, will this have been the reason?
The National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 issued to Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by at least 2003) began the work on synthetically altering the Coronaviridae (the coronavirus family) for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, manipulation, and potential therapeutic interventions targeting the same. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for their commercial benefit.1 In one of the several papers derived from work sponsored by this grant, Dr. Baric published what he reported to be the full length cDNA of SARS CoV in which it was clearly stated that SAR CoV was based on a composite of DNA segments. “Using a panel of contiguous cDNAs that span the entire genome, we have assembled a full-length cDNA of the SARS-CoV Urbani strain, and have rescued molecularly cloned SARS viruses (infectious clone SARS-CoV) that contained the expected marker mutations inserted into the component clones.”2 On April 19, 2002 – the Spring before the first SARS outbreak in Asia – Christopher M. Curtis, Boyd Yount, and Ralph Baric filed an application for U.S. Patent 7,279,372 for a method of producing recombinant coronavirus. In the first public record of the claims, they sought to patent a means of producing, “an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.” This work was supported by the NIH grant referenced above and GM63228.
In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was involved in the funding of amplifying the infectious nature of coronavirus between 1999 and 2002 before SARS was ever detected in humans.
This dossier is by no means exhaustive. It is, however, indicative the numerous criminal violations that may be associated with the COVID-19 terrorism.
Not sure I want to wade into the Jordon Trishtan Walker story. But he is a good starting point for me to collect my thoughts about everything that is happening today and what it means and where it came from and where it is going.
Mr. Walker thought he was on a date and was trying to impress his date. He did not know actual details about what he was talking about. He seemed to lack a moral compass—but that sort of omission appears to be extremely common these days.
Mr. Walker is the 2023 version of a Valley Girl, which means his success in society is an enigma to those of us who are older and befuddled/appalled by what passes for popular culture and competence these days. See #4 below.
The Boston Consulting Group, one of the world’s largest business consulting corporations, where Senator Mitt Romney, the RINO from Utah or was it Massachusetts cut his teeth is not the type of place where morals fit well.
A diverse workforce with a combination of unique backgrounds and cultures, we’re united by our common purpose and values, curious minds, keen intellect, and powerful motivation to make a difference. If you’re ready to use your instincts and imagination to drive meaningful action, then come unlock your potential and join our global community.
Missing from the job description: knowledge and hard work. Mr. Jordon Walker was using his imagination while looking for action and he got it, but not the kind he was looking for. He will probably have to change his identity to ever get another job. I feel kind of sorry for him.
Pharma can’t sell anything without FDA’s okay. Not a single lot of a drug or vaccine can be shipped out unless it has an FDA stamp of approval. Not a single human test can be started until FDA gives the go-ahead.
However, FDA obeys its masters elsewhere in government. FDA has made countless decisions that make no scientific, legal or moral sense. Sometimes we can see the strings: meetings by FDA officials with Congressional bigwigs on the FDA appropriations committees to favor certain products (Sen. Menendez and an orthopedic device come to mind, but I don’t think FDA finally approved it). Then there is the problem of industry user fees, aka “pay to play.” 75% of the money FDA uses to regulate drugs comes from user fees. FDA approves a much higher percentage of drug candidates now, compared to the days before user fees were adopted in the 1990s.
“We currently lack efficacy data that would help us understand how well this drug may mitigate painful monkeypox symptoms and prevent serious outcomes,” NIAID director Anthony Fauci, M.D., said in a release. “This clinical trial was designed to answer those important questions.”
“the rapidly evolving monkeypox virus is only one mutation away from rendering Tpoxx ineffective. Recent studies of monkeypox reveal that it has “several genetic pathways” to evade Typoxx, which has a “low barrier to viral resistance,” the CDC said.
So we know that FDA is used to channel profits for political gain and does not always act in the public’s best interest. But was it also used to poison Americans on an industrial scale? Or was that Pfizer? Or was that DOD? Clearly we’ve been poisoned. But by whom and why?
What is not entirely clear is the mechanics of how it was done. Katherine Watt and Sasha Latypova have the best bead on this. During the Obama administration a huge industry of global biosecurity was built—before then it was all about US biosecurity. Suddenly we needed global biosecurity, and we needed to build biosecurity networks with China and the rest of the world. This is why France helped China create its first Biosafety Level 4 lab. Whee! Now labs everywhere could collaborate on biodefense and creating bioweapons to be sure we could defend against them. Or at least that was the theory that EcoHealth Alliance put forward. And that was the theory DOD, NIH, NSF, USAID and others funded using your tax dollars.
During the Obama administration a new contracting method was created: the Other Transactional Authority. This is the underpinning of how all the vaccines could be contracted and paid for outside the FDA regulatory system, using DOD logisticians and DOD contractors. (I am getting all this info from Watt and Latypova and have not dived into the documents myself, but it fits with what Whitney Webb and other have dug up and makes perfect sense given what I know of DOD and anthrax vaccine.)
As long as the vaccines were mislabeled PROTOTYPES FDA did not need to worry its pretty head about them. Criminal Janet Woodcock, former head of CDER and former Acting FDA Director was put in place as the liaison between Operation Warp Speed/DOD and the FDA. As prototypes they were not real vaccines.
Under the Emergency Use Authorization law 360-bbb-3, the shots (now identified as “covered countermeasures” with covered meaning no liability) did not need to meet any formal standard for safety or efficacy. FDA (in this case, the seasoned FDA criminal Janet Woodcock, MD [think oxycontin for only one example] and Stephen Hahn, MD, who was probably put in place as FDA Commissioner by Alex Azar because he lacked government experience and had no idea what was happening) simply needed to guess that their benefit would exceed their risk. As long as the proper lingo for an emergency had been declared by Secretaries Azar, later Becerra (both of whom were lawyers without medical or scientific training) the EUAs could roll out.
The only problem for the evil mofos was that under EUA the vaccines had to be voluntary. So we saw lotteries, cheeseburgers, donuts, college tuition and various other bribes accompany them. In fact, you were a chump if you didn’t get a prize with your shot.
By August 2021 there weren’t enough takers. But we (some of us) also knew by that time the vaccines did not prevent spread. Recall that Kathrin Jansen PhD, the top vaccine official for Pfizer, had admitted on December 10, 2020 to the VRBPAC that the vaccine had not prevented spread in primates. I provided the link for her admission in my blog a couple of years ago.
How many takers did they need? Why did they want to get everyone vaccinated? Why did the US government, helmed by caricature Biden, need to take peoples’ jobs and educations if they were not vaccinated? Why did so many other countries carry out similar evil plans? The leaders may have been ignorantly following orders. But didn’t they have a responsibility to ask WHY?
So, knowing that it was against the law to do so, Biden et al. imposed mandates. This was illegal because the vaccines were not licensed. So on August 23, 2021 the FDA complied/caved/happily acceded—I don’t know which—to killing Americans with a product that by then was known to be a killer. (FDA has databases on over 100. They issued Comirnaty a license, followed later by Moderna. Later FDA killed off the J and J vaccine. It isn’t clear if this was because it was actually worse or whether it was to clear the runway for the mRNA platform.
I suspect that Marion Gruber and Philip Krause, top vaccine officials at FDA, were fired because they would not go along with this, while the feckless Peter Marks had no qualms about issuing a fake license. See the the article this past week in Epoch Times about FOIA’d emails of Peter Marks at that time, where he said he would handle Gruber and Krause.
Fake you say? Yes, fake because after the license was issued, only EUA product was used. Because had licensed product been used, FDA could have gotten in trouble and so could Pfizer—because the vaccine had not met the standards for licensure, AND a licensed product had liability attached—it lost that magical liability waiver given to EUA products that were thought to be voluntary. The USG created a massive fraud on the public, making people believe they were getting a “safe and effective” licensed product when they were not.
Not only that, but both the Trump administration and the Biden administration (as did the EU and other nations) contracted for about ten or more doses per person of these concoctions, including hundreds of millions of doses, maybe billions, for which they signed contracts after knowing they did not work and were killing people.
I just read something by John Leake, who blogs with Peter McCullough, that I think puts the issue of who is responsible in a nutshell.
[I]t seems to me that it’s of limited utility to draw sharp distinctions between the DoD and companies like Pfizer and Moderna. Like Krupp and I.G. Farben during the Third Reich, these companies are bound to U.S. government institutions like the DoD, DARPA, NIH, HHS, and BARDA in an arrangement that strongly resembles Fascist Corporatism.
What we are dealing with is a criminal conspiracy that includes DOD, Department of Justice, DHS, DHHS (FDA, CDC,NIH and other subagencies), all the 17 intel agencies, the White House and selected corporations. They have been working together for decades. Pharma commits crimes, and DOJ gives them a plea bargain, no one goes to jail, and they get to do it again. Some of the fines go to DOJ’s favorite charities.
Our whole federal government has become a Potemkin village, allegedly carrying out its duties, but in fact carrying out the plans of some higher entity. Tony Fauci is a brilliant example of this, channeling billions of dollars to favored products, companies, universities and scientists while killing their competitors.
And the federal agencies use subcontractors to avoid transparency, provide more means to gain extraordinary wealth, and waste more of the peoples’ money.
I think that the medical enterprise was hijacked as a means to take over the world, because someone realized it could be used this way. First, it sucks up 20% of GDP, so there is a great deal of money that might be siphoned off. Second, it was a means to gain a lot of surveillance material, with online medical records. Third, it and doctors were trusted. Americans were convinced they had the best healthcare in the world, and it is only in the past 5-10 years that they realized this was far from true. Fourth, vaccines had a shiny patina. People believed in them. And for the 25 years that I have been closely observing vaccines, the federal government, and industry, have put unbelievable effort into shoring up the elusive “vaccine confidence” and demonizing “vaccine hesitancy.” A few examples:https://vaccineconfident.pharmacist.com/
All over the world, peoples’ beliefs about vaccination have been put under a microscope, in order to pitch the most effective messages to them. It’s about loving your child. Caring about your community. Not being stupid. Not being a redneck, a racist, a science denier, someone who deserves to be shunned by society, someone who deserves to be moved to a camp for the safety of the rest of us, someone who should be held down and vaccinated for the good of the tribe.
See how they used propaganda so skillfully that much of society were convinced the unvaccinated should be treated like prisoners?
Looking back, I do not think this happened by accident, nor do I think a couple hundred billion in Pharma profits with kickbacks to politicians explains it. I think this was all part of a strategic plan put in place decades ago. I remember when CDC was using the “Knowledge Attitudes Beliefs” model for investigating how to cope with anthrax vaccine refusals 25 years ago.
I think the ability of the government to inject us with a liquid of their choice, one that cannot be fully identified by the end-user, is the best way to explain what has been happening. mRNA vaccines, because they degrade quickly, can never be fully characterized, and this leaves open the possibility that the mfr/govt or whoever is really in charge can include some mRNA in the vaccine that has a specific purpose without us knowing it. Without us ever being able to prove it. mRNA can have specific purposes, turning genes on and off, affecting our risk of cancer, possibly giving us cancer or other diseases. We don’t know, and with the RNA vaccine platform, we will never be able to know.
Now the government, in cahoots with pharma, is developing flu and RSV mRNA vaccines. Maybe all of them will be made of mRNA. What can we trust right now? Why should we trust the FDA to do the right thing by us for any product it regulates?
But vaccines are only a part of the problem. There is the vaccine passport—which is still a “thing” in much of Europe, even now that we know the darn things are worse than useless. The goal of ultimate control is still with us.
As the governments begin to relinquish the COVID vaccines, they will try to regain our trust. Or alternatively they will double down on totalitarian control.
They will create more bogeymen from which they promise to save us. They know how to turn up the dial on fear. How many will fall prey to it yet again?
How many diseases do they have in the hopper, ready to release? There must be many, but most will be duds. You see, viruses mutate. Bacteria too. And what happens to them, once they are released, is not predictable. Until you see what a virus does in a population, even the best scientist cannot predict where and how it will mutate, because that is a function of the human-virus interaction.
And they virtually always mutate to be less virulent, though perhaps more infectious. Most will mutate into duds.
COVID showed us that we had more useful drugs in the pantry (repurposed drugs) than we expected. If there is no Fauci, Walensky and Woodcock to suppress them next time, it won’t be so scary.
It won’t be just viruses. They have done a good job of threatening nuclear war. But historically, the US has been the reckless cop on the block, not Putin. They can destroy our ability to access oil and natural gas. They can reduce the food supply. The can despoil the air and water.
We all need to get a grip, and protect ourselves from propaganda, and stop the destruction of what we need to survive. Everyone needs to learn how to distinguish fact from spin. Start practicing as you read a news article, or watch TV. Which part of the story is fact? Which is spin/opinion/designed to make you believe something?
Once enough of us recognize what is going on, we can make a big enough stink and stop much of it. I think we can, if we are smart and work together. There are 8 billion of us, after all, and just some thousands of them. We need to educate their minions to come over to our side. Let’s create ourselves as the warriors we were put on this planet to be at this time in history.
Julie Gamble had a fulfilling life: a stable career, the freedom to travel, and three children and one grandbaby to cherish.
But that life was disrupted in the spring and summer of 2021 when Gamble developed severe adverse reactions after getting the two-shot COVID-19 vaccine primary series — which resulted in her losing her job.
Gamble, now 53, spoke to The Defender about the vaccine injuries she sustained, the symptoms and challenges she is still experiencing, the ongoing difficulties finding doctors willing to treat her and classify her symptoms as vaccine-related, and the supportive role online groups for vaccine-injured individuals have had in her life.
The Defender reviewed documentation and photographic evidence verifying Gamble’s claims prior to publishing her story.
‘I felt really, really tired … anesthetic tired’
Gamble, who lives in Ontario, Canada, received the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on May 17, 2021. For the second dose, she received the Moderna vaccine on July 18, 2021.
Her symptoms appeared almost immediately after the first dose, she said:
“I came home and I was really, really tired. It felt like an anesthetic tired, it didn’t feel like a ‘regular’ tired.
“I had developed a rash all over my body. I was itchy and my eyelids swelled up. I recall the bottoms of my feet being extremely itchy, more so than anywhere else, and I was sweating profusely. I started getting Charley horses in my calves. So, of course I was drinking a lot of water. I recall losing my vision in my right eye.”
Variations of the symptoms lasted for about a week after her first dose. She called a pharmacist who told her to take an antihistamine and, “if my tongue started to swell up, go to the ER.”
Soon afterward, Gamble developed other symptoms, including weakness in her ankles and a fluctuating heart rate.
“I also recall I was wearing my Fitbit. I’d walk into work, and I’d check my heart rate and sometimes it was at 140 and then it would drop down to regular, about 70 beats per minute. I’d be sitting down and I felt a little odd and I’d look at my Fitbit and my heart rate would shoot right up and then it would come right back down. And I stopped wearing it because I assumed my Fitbit was broken.”
The leg cramps kept getting worse, but Gamble attributed them to dehydration because where she worked “was quite hot, and so that’s what I thought was happening.”
‘I felt guilted’ into getting second dose
Gamble said her reactions to the Pfizer shot made her “leery” of getting a second dose — even her pharmacist recommended against it, she said.
“I spoke to the pharmacist about it, and I told him what had happened to me and about my muscles cramping up,” Gamble said. Her pharmacist recommended she see an immunologist before he would administer the second shot.
However, the doctor Gamble saw was far less sympathetic, she said:
“I didn’t have a family doctor, so I went down to the hospital thinking the receptionist or somebody would just book me an appointment with an immunologist.
“Instead, they put me in a waiting room. I saw a doctor and he told me right from the get-go he was not going to give me an exemption, he wasn’t going to give me an appointment with an immunologist. He told me to take an antihistamine and I would be fine.”
A combination of “nudging” from her doctor and Canada’s strict COVID-19-related restrictions led Gamble to go ahead with the second dose — especially after her doctor lectured her about “being a good citizen and not killing people,” she said.
“So, I felt guilted into it, and I knew I couldn’t leave Canada unless I was fully vaccinated.”
Gamble’s pharmacist was uncomfortable administering the second dose but proceeded on the doctor’s recommendation. Though Gamble didn’t develop a rash this time, she did experience fatigue and blurry vision again.
“I felt like, okay, I’m going to sleep this off. And once again, after about three days I started to feel a little bit better. But then I started dropping things all over the place. At first, I just kind of thought it was weird.
“But then I noticed my sense of perception was off. I’d go to open a door and where I thought the door was, my hand would be two inches away from the door. I started having brain zaps. I still tried to work, and so I was at work, and I tried to write a report and I could barely hold my pen. My hands were cramping up.”
Gamble also noticed slurred speech and changes in her ability to swallow food. “At that point, I decided obviously I can’t go to work. And I noticed muscles were starting to atrophy between my pinky finger and my ring finger.”
A neurologist at her local hospital, the London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, “looked at my hands and said, ‘There’s something going on here.’” He admitted her for the night.
However, in the morning, another doctor dismissed her concerns, telling her she was ‘bending my arms too much.” She then made an appointment with a doctor she had seen during a previous adverse reaction to medication. But by that point, her condition had deteriorated further.
“I was losing the muscles rapidly,” Gamble said. “Within two months, I went from having normal-looking hands to completely skeleton-looking hands. The muscles in my arms started to atrophy, [and] in my feet behind my kneecaps. I could really feel it. My balance was off. My blood pressure was low.”
Trying to get a diagnosis ‘has been hell’
During one of several hospital visits, Gamble said doctors were particularly dishonest to her.
“One of the doctors said to me that some people are getting Guillain-Barré syndrome and he was going to check me for that. So, he gave me blood work.” But Gamble later learned that’s not even the right test for Guillain-Barré.
“They have to do it with a spinal tap,” she said. “I kind of feel like every doctor I saw had a reason to try to make up something different other than it was the vaccine.”
Gamble is still having trouble finding a doctor willing and able to treat her — and medication that will be effective and not cause further adverse reactions.
Meanwhile, she is dealing with multiple health-related challenges. “Just trying to get to the bottom of what is going on has been hell,” she said.
She has since found a family doctor who prescribed prednisone, but Gamble said she had a “horrible” reaction to it. “My hands turned blue, my tongue turned blue, I was getting brain zaps. I was passing out and my husband took me to the hospital.”
Doctors then told Gamble she had Raynaud’s disease, but “I don’t have that because [the symptoms were] on both sides of my hands and on my tongue,” she said.
She added:
“They sent me home like that. I tried to get help at one point, and I couldn’t get help. My husband, I guess I got a message out to him, but it was all gibberish. He came home thinking I’d had a stroke. He took me to the hospital; they did a CT scan, and everything came back normal. Apparently, my blood work comes back normal.”
Canada’s healthcare system, in conjunction with the country’s COVID-19-related restrictions, has made it challenging to even get treatment, Gamble said.
“I’m just trying to figure out what happened and am trying to get medical care,” Gamble said, “but I’m just hitting roadblocks everywhere. I figured maybe I could start physiotherapy, but in Canada you have to be 16 and under, or 65 and over, in order to qualify for free physiotherapy.”
Gamble said the pressure on doctors to look the other way when it comes to potential vaccine injury cases, and “a whole lot of doctor drama,” has been “frustrating.”
A neuromuscular doctor who previously worked at the London Health Sciences Centre confided in Gamble that she “got in trouble” with the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada for writing COVID-19 vaccination exemptions. “And so, her hands are tied, pretty much,” Gamble said.
Meanwhile, Gamble’s symptoms continue to evolve, and doctors continue to reject the possibility that the vaccines are to blame. Recently, her tongue started “turning white and swelling up” and her ears became “really itchy and scabby.”
“My doctor thought this must be an allergy, so I went and I saw an immunologist,” she said. “But as soon as I showed him my hands and said, ‘vaccine,’ he told me he wasn’t interested in that. He was only interested in things that put you in instant anaphylactic shock.”
Gamble asked for a second appointment, during which it was noted that her heart rate had dropped to between 44 and 52 beats per minute. Doctors suggested she was experiencing a reaction to the prednisone.
Gamble asked to be tested for an allergy to polyethylene glycol, or PEG, because it’s unusual to have a reaction to prednisone, she said.
“The second doctor tested me and I said to him, since I’ve had this vaccine, I’m not doing well with certain foods or medications,” said Gamble. “And I talked to him about the muscle wasting, and he looked at my hands and he said he didn’t see it, which is ridiculous because it’s so obvious.”
Instead, the doctor “kind of wondered if it was psychosomatic,” said Gamble. She responded with, “no, I’ve had the nerve conduction studies done. It’s proven that my muscles are wasting.”
Gamble also saw a spine surgeon “who said she believes it’s a back injury.”
But one doctor Gamble saw later — a rheumatologist — was willing to draw a connection between her injuries and her vaccination.
“[The] rheumatologist said, ‘I don’t know what the big issue is. This is a vaccine injury.’ And she wrote me a letter to show people that I can’t be boosted.”
‘You kind of lose everything, don’t you?’
Unfortunately, Gamble said, Canada’s COVID-19 regulations restrict the extent to which exemptions are recognized.
Gamble told The Defender :
“I still can’t get a legal exemption, which is kind of important in a way because in Canada you can be refused a job. So, if I get better and I’m hoping I can go find employment again, they have the right to tell me that they’re not going to hire me because I’m not up to date on my booster. Or even traveling to another country — it’s up to them if they’re going to let me in if I’m not up to date on all this stuff.
“This government doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge the neurological damage. They only — from what I was told — give you an exemption if it’s a PEG allergy or if you have myocarditis, but not for neurological damage.”
As a result, said Gamble, “I’m going in circles here.” She described being told by a doctor that she “just happen[s] to be one of the people who ‘fall through the cracks’” — an obstacle that has also prevented her from collecting employment insurance.
She said:
“I don’t qualify for anything in my own country. And they have a vaccination injury support program, but very few people are getting paid out from that. It has to be ‘severe’ and it has to be permanent, and I don’t know if they’re going to consider this ‘severe,’ but right now I can’t work because I have no muscles left in my hands.”
Gamble did get severance pay, she said, but everything else “has been denied, denied.”
“The government in Canada, they certainly aren’t doing anything for people who are injured by the vaccine,” Gamble said. “So, you kind of lose everything, don’t you? And then you’re put in this category that you never wanted to be a part of.”
Despite these challenges and obstacles, Gamble perseveres, even though she can’t work.
“There are things that I want to do,” she said. “I want to start exercising, but I’m even scared of that because you see these videos [of people who] died suddenly … a lot of people apparently have died while they’ve been playing sports. So that’s a little bit concerning for me, and just in general, just still not knowing what happened to me.”
Online support groups for vaccine-injured individuals ‘a godsend’
In contrast to her experience with most doctors and many friends, who dismissed her condition, Gamble praised the support she’s received from members of online support groups for vaccine-injured individuals.
“It’s been a godsend,” she said. “For the first seven or eight months, I’m on my couch and I’m feeling my muscles wasting and I’m struggling to walk. Anybody that I tried to talk to that didn’t have an injury, they assumed it had to be something else, because they’ve been told that these vaccines are ‘safe and effective.’”
But participation in online groups, such as the Vaccine Injury/Side Effects Support Group on Facebook, has allowed Gamble to interact with “decent” people who “don’t judge” and who have experienced similar symptoms and conditions as her.
“I have found a few women with the exact same injuries that I have,” she said. “It was nice to know that there are other people out there, that you’re not alone. We don’t all share the same symptoms, but we share a lot of similar symptoms, and so I can say, ‘so-and-so tried this, well I’m going to try it.’”
Gamble said she’s not sure the medical system will ever regain her trust. But she had some advice for others experiencing vaccine injuries.
“People need to realize if they get injured by this vaccine, probably medically they’re not going to get a lot of help or [doctors] are going to try to tell them it wasn’t the vaccine.”
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”
Recently the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee expressed concern that some wayward Republican’s might need some “education” on the dire global consequences if Russia wins the war in Ukraine. Sounding somewhat desperate representative Michael McCaul told CNN’s Dana Bush on “State of the Union” last Sunday that, “We have to educate our members. I don’t think they quite understand what’s at stake.”
He went on to claim that a Russian win would lead to China attacking Taiwan. The implication is that Russia and China will start attacking their neighbors if the West doesn’t step in to stop Russia and teach Putin a lesson.
This sounds eerily familiar. If you are of a certain age you may recall that the Pentagon insisted that if we didn’t invade Vietnam back in the 60’s and stop the commies the domino’s would start to fall as the Soviet Union and China would be emboldened to wage war across the globe.
So did the Pentagon’s dire predictions come true?
In a word: NO!
The warmongers were spreading the exact same propaganda back in the 50’s and 60’s to get a good, lucrative shooting war going just like the neocons, Democrat and Republican, are doing today.
According to a British Medical Journal study in 2008 the Vietnam War resulted in a combined death toll of an estimated 3,812,000 human beings. US Military personnel made up just over 58,000 of the dead. But just as horrifying, if not more so, were the mangled, mutilated, maimed human beings shot, burned, blown up, traumatized and poisoned who had the misfortune to survive their injuries.
There is no way to know for sure, but estimates are at least double the deaths or over 7.5 Million wounded. We’re not even taking into account the billions wasted on needless war. And what did we get for all that sacrifice?
Vietnam went full commie after we left. Did the world end as we know it? No. Please understand I’m not trying to gloss over the horrific carnage caused by Communist regimes. The Soviets under Stalin murdered over 20 million of their citizens and Mao’s China over 30 million.
The point is the Vietnam War was a senseless, needless war that was promoted by breathless, hyperventilating propogandist’s just like the neocons today promoting war with Russia in Ukraine. The false flag Gulf of Tonkin attack on US Naval vessels (which never happened) was the excuse to invade Vietnam. Russia has tried to warn the West that a false flag event in Ukraine is likely. Will we ever learn?
Everyone is asking the question: Why can’t people see the obvious? Why can’t people believe what is going on and stand up and do something about it?
And we have heard a lot of possibilities in response, from mass psychosis to 5G affecting the brain, to totalitarian brainwashing, to raw fear of death and illness, to the loss of critical thinking skills.
All, or most of these things may certainly be in place, but there is possibly not a “one reason” answer to the question. I for one have seen people utterly terrified of the “virus,” as well as people not at all afraid of the disease, but with no interest in going against authority in a stable and structured culture (so they think).
I’ve seen people who have no clue there is any resistance to the mandates and if there is, it is coming from hillbillies living out of touch with reality. Even the “New World” Google definition of “psychosis” includes an example:
[psychotic people] may be worried that the government is trying to harm them and their loved ones.”
That includes you and me, folks. Welcome to the loony bin.
I saw a post from a long-time Facebook friend the other day: “Well, it finally got me, after 3 years staying indoors and away from people, two Covid vaccines and three boosters, I finally got Covid. It is horrible! I can’t stop coughing, I have a fever, and every time I swallow I feel like I am swallowing glass.”
The post is followed with dozens of sympathetic responses: “Got it too! Hang in there!”“Prayers for you, five shots later I have the same thing.” On and on.
What is it with these people? Have they REALLY not heard at least a rumour that the vaccines MIGHT be unsafe, MIGHT not be effective? Really?
I sincerely can’t answer that question. Maybe they really haven’t heard even a rumour of truth, which opens up a whole new discussion. And then if they have heard something why hasn’t it at least gotten them curious, or cautious, at least a little bit?
And you would think that if this person were proudly exclaiming their misfortune in getting whacked with the bug after being so careful to do everything to avoid it, they would put two and two together and not be so proud of their ineffable stupidity.
I almost posted my flippant response: “Well, thank god you got all those shots!” But I refrained because I knew the irony of my comment would be lost, eliciting the reply, “I know!! I would probably be dead if I hadn’t!!” They can ALWAYS say that… ignoring completely that everyone on that side of the hill said, from day one, “You will not get Covid if you take these shots.”
“Oh, oh, oh… that’s ok they said that, they just didn’t know. You know, they didn’t know EVERYTHING about the shots, they had to move so fast to save humanity,” so say the little lambs.
How come if they readily make that as an excuse when it comes to efficacy, why can’t they present that same explanation regarding the purported safety of the vaccine? “Oh, I know thousands are dying, but, you know, they didn’t know EVERYTHING about the shots at first… blah, blah, blah, baa, baa, baa” Selective logic.
Maybe it is because they have not died, or been horribly compromised, other than the “not so bad” glass shards in their throat and suffering a 104 temperature for a week. “At least I’m not dead.” I wonder if when they actually DO die from the vaccine-induced failure of their immune system, they will say, right before their last breath, “Well, at least I didn’t die of COVID… dying from the vaccine is just the price we have to pay to keep from dying of this wicked virus.”
I met a guy the other day who told me he contracted Bell’s palsy right after taking the fourth jab. He treated it like you would treat a sore arm after a shot. “Oh, that’s nothing.” Really? “At least I didn’t die.” And why would that even be an acceptable possibility after taking a vaccine for something (Covid) that would probably be less invasive than Bell’s palsy? What weird logic reasoning, “spooky science.”
More than likely these people are embarrassed to admit their decisions were totally ludicrous and irrational. They have to make up some reason for their actions. “Oh, I drank that glass of arsenic that burned out my stomach lining and put me on my death bed (only a few more hours to live!), because I had some parasites in my stomach. Those bastards are dead for sure, at least I didn’t die from THAT.”
Although this may be a possibility, it would have to be an unconscious realization. And it would have to be dependent on the supposition that at least their unconscious was aware of the truth. I never get the impression that people’s egos are so big that they have to consciously make up a story to save face. It may come to that for some people. But right now I really do not think the realization that they are fools is conscious.
People are always making stuff up to rationalize their irrationality in making stupid decisions. Many people make up stuff to keep themselves from looking stupid, or feeling stupid. The key here is that these rationalizations are compelled unconsciously.
Otherwise we (those of us who do this) would be liars. And most people are not chronic liars (I might be an unconscious liar at times, but I don’t think I am too often a conscious one). As for this Covid stuff, the unconscious reason to make up stories that fit our actions could be largely to avoid an inconvenience.
Most people who do this probably are mortified (unconsciously at the moment) they have done something so preposterously stupid as to allow an injection into their body for no good reason (and honestly, there never was a good reason). I do think when the truth really hits the mainstream they will get angry and blame everyone who was lying to them, maybe not, but if they do, this will be horribly inconvenient.
They will then have to scream and yell at everyone responsible, politicians, doctors, friends and family, etc. That’s a lot of work and a lot of energy. Since this awareness is not wholly conscious yet, why not just go along with it all (the illusion). Accept SOME inconveniences like a bad case of SOMETHING causing symptoms—what they conveniently call Covid, or the flu, or whatever else it might be.
Another inconvenient truth they would have to accept is that all us “anti-vaxxers” were right, and all their sheep friends were wrong. That is very inconvenient.
Their whole world will come crashing down, and that is the most inconvenient event imaginable. Much easier to just continue to play along, until there is no choice but to accept the truth, which is for the most part pretty dark, and, of course, quite inconvenient.
Replacing fossil fuel with hydrogen seems like an ideal solution to make transportation environmentally friendly and to provide a backup for intermittent energy sources like solar and wind. But how environmentally friendly is hydrogen really? And how sustainable is it, given that hydrogen fuel cells rely on supply of rare metals like platinum and iridium? In this video, we have collected all the relevant numbers for you.
Turns out that the possibility of COVID originating from a lab leak was not a conspiracy theory after all.
“Experts” dictated many inexcusable and destructive protocols during the pandemic, from pushing ineffective mask mandates to promoting lockdowns and school closures.
But one of their most sinister actions was the almost immediate attempt to shut down debate over the lab leak hypothesis.
This likely emanated from the wrong people noticing the bizarre coincidence of a novel coronavirus beginning to spread in Wuhan, just a few miles away from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research lab dedicated to studying viruses and how they spread.
Republican Senator Tom Cotton was one of the first prominent individuals to suggest the lab could have been partially responsible. Former President Donald Trump did as well.
That meant that politically motivated “experts” and media outlets such as the Washington Post immediately rushed to label any discussion of the hypothesis as a debunked conspiracy theory.
However, over the past year and a half, the discussion finally shifted towards taking the possibility seriously. That shift has even more abruptly accelerated in recent days.
The Interceptjust published newly unredacted emails showing that the same “experts” who had attempted to undermine competing narratives, actually believed it was probable the virus came from the lab.
Scientists like Dr. Fauci, the UK’s Jeremy Farrar, and multiple others repeatedly sent each other messages during the early days of the pandemic suggesting that they harbored substantial doubts about the possibilities of a natural origin.
However, when they realized the implications of that possibility, they rapidly and dramatically switched positions.
Lab Leak Was Initially Deemed Possible
Naturally Dr. Fauci was one of the ringleaders of the early discussions.
When one expert, Kristian Anderson explained that there was a possibility that the virus had been “engineered,” he leapt into action.
Fauci was so concerned that he believed this information might need to be reported to the FBI and MI5
“He should do this very quickly and if everyone agrees with this concern, they should report it to the appropriate authorities. I would imagine that in the USA this would be the FBI and in the UK it would be MI5,” he wrote.
International experts quickly organized a conference call to discuss, and Fauci famously emailed one of his top employees, Hugh Auchincloss, that he would urgently need to speak with him.
“It is essential that we speak this AM. Keep your cell phone on. … You will have tasks today that must be done,” Fauci said.
During a recent deposition, he gave quite an unsatisfactory explanation for the motivations in that email.
He claimed in one answer that he “wanted to be briefed on the scope of what our collaborations were and the kind of work that we were funding in China. I wanted to know what the nature of that work was.”
Except, of course, that doesn’t explain what “tasks” said employee would be required to complete. Explaining the scope of their work and connection to the Wuhan lab would explain why it was “essential” to speak. But what tasks were so imperative that Auchincloss “must” do?
Fauci is, of course, no stranger to deflection when it comes to full and complete explanations for his behavior or statements.
Multiple “experts” on that conference call repeated in writing that they believed the lab leak required strong consideration.
One was described as being “70:30” or “60:40” in favor of an “accidental-release.” Another said he essentially couldn’t imagine the virus occurring naturally.
“I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. … it’s stunning.”
Many of those involved then collaborated to write an article just over a month later. It was famously published in Nature, and stated that those who signed didn’t believe “any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”
That article was released quickly, despite the concerns, thanks in large part to Fauci.
One of the other scientists involved in the email chain, Dutch scientist Ron Fouchier, had suggested waiting for more information to emerge before taking a public position.
But Fauci was more concerned about protecting reputations, egos, money and his organization. So he pushed for immediate action.
“I agree that we really cannot take Ron’s suggestion about waiting,” Fauci emailed. “Like all of us, I do not know how this evolved, but given the concerns of so many people and the threat of further distortions on social media, it is essential that we move quickly.”
Jeremy Farrar concurred, replying, “Critical that responsible, respected scientists and agencies get ahead of the science and the narrative of this and are not reacting to reports which could be very damaging.”
Self-Protection
Farrar implying that it could be “very damaging” if the lab leak hypothesis was deemed credible is likely the explaination for the rapid mobilization.
Experts didn’t want the wrong people, or those in the media, to seriously consider the possibility that the lab could have potentially “engineered” the virus in some capacity.
Another email from Fouchier was even more obvious.
Lab leak discussion “would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular,” Fouchier said.
The emails make it clear that no one involved really had a definitive answer either way.
But instead of telling the truth about their uncertainty while acknowledging the need for more information, they moved to quickly shut down debate.
Informing the public about the possibility of the lab leak may have led to additional government oversight, or in a more catastrophic outcome, awareness that scientific research may have gone too far, resulting in a loss of funding.
So with no further justification, they rapidly coalesced and organized into “debunking” the lab leak as a “conspiracy theory” spokesmen in order to ensure that the proper channels closed ranks around their perspective.
And how right they were. Media outlets and “fact checkers” rushed to label anyone who discussed the lab leak hypothesis. They fanatically defended Fauci and patronizingly dismissed legitimate concerns.
All to protect themselves and their field.
The Intercept quoted Sergei Pond, a virologist from Temple University, on these unredacted emails. He pointed out that they show how poorly conducted their process was, once they determined that it could be damaging for their profession.
“It started out being a fairly careful discussion, with anomalies being aired out and people saying multiple times that there is simply not enough data to resolve this,” he said. “But at some point, I think there was such strong pressure that they went from ‘Let’s just wait to get more data’ to ‘Let’s publish something that has a very strong opinion favoring one explanation over another without acquiring any new data.’”
David Relman, another expert professor of microbiology, immunology, and medicine at Stanford University, agreed.
“When I first saw it in March 2020, the paper read to me as a conclusion in search of an argument,” he said. “Among its many problems, it failed to consider in a serious fashion the possibility of an unwitting and unrecognized accidental leak during aggressive efforts to grow coronaviruses from bat and other field samples. It also assumed that researchers in Wuhan have told the world about every virus and every sequence that was in their laboratories in 2019. But these [unredacted emails] actually provide evidence that the authors considered a few additional lab-associated scenarios, early in their discussions. But then they rushed to judgment, and the lab scenarios fell out of favor.”
Par for the course
Multiple investigations have suggested that COVID was “most likely” due to a lab leak, yet many of those involved in these initial discussions have refused to take responsibility.
Their dismissals shaped the national and international conversation for months, if not years. Yet they were intentionally misleading, as is now almost universally acknowledged.
In particular, Anthony Fauci is guilty of revisionist history, as he so often has been.
The emails clearly show his intention was always to protect his profession, his agency and the scientific community by shutting down debate.
Yet recently he’s claimed to have an “open mind” about the lab leak.
“I have a completely open mind about that, despite people saying that I don’t,” Fauci told Meet the Press.
He made this laughable assertion despite the truth; he didn’t approve of the open discussions taking place daily on social media.
This would be the same social media he claims he never uses.
“I don’t have a Twitter account. I have never had a Twitter account. I don’t intend on having a Twitter account. And I have had nothing to do with Twitter,” Fauci told Neil Cavuto recently.
Intellectually honest people with nothing to hide would have apologized, admitted why they had misgivings, and worked to regain the public’s trust.
But as has been publicly displayed over the past few years, there are evidently few intellectually honest people in the fields of epidemiology or virology.
The unredacted emails reveal what should have been obvious from the beginning. The lab leak was the possible, if not likely explanation for the start of the pandemic.
Yet politics and self-protection took over, and open debate was crushed by the expert-media industrial complex.
Like so many other aspects of COVID debates, Fauci did his best to ensure that he, his methods and his allies were never questioned.
U.S. Involvement in Wuhan Lab Wasn’t Properly Monitored
Fauci’s rush to discredit the lab leak hypothesis was also due in part to what he likely learned from Auchincloss. Namely, the fact that hundreds of thousands of dollars of grant money from the U.S. government had been sent to the Wuhan lab.
And not just by the U.S. government, but agencies he was directly involved with.
The National Institutes of Health, under former leaders like Dr. Francis Collins and Fauci, gave grant money to the EcoHealth Alliance, a “scientific research” group that works to prevent the outbreak of emerging diseases.
EcoHealth received this money ostensibly to study how best to identify and control pandemics. They then redirected funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where bat viruses were being studied.
The same Wuhan Institute of Virology which may possibly be the source of the pandemic.
NIH Didn’t Ensure Lab Compliance With Requirements
The Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Health and Human Services recently conducted an audit of NIH and EcoHealth and found that they failed to ensure compliance with grant requirements.
“Despite identifying potential risks associated with research being performed under the EcoHealth awards, we found that NIH did not effectively monitor or take timely action to address EcoHealth’s compliance with some requirements,” the report read.
Essentially, NIH sent grant money to EcoHealth Alliance with certain limitations on what kind of research it could fund. EcoHealth then sent money to the Wuhan lab, which was conducting risky experiments, and neither the agency or the company effectively monitored the work that was actually being performed.
If that sounds like a major problem, that’s because it is.
Although the investigators said that the lab did cooperate for a time, after the start of the pandemic, they immediately stopped.
“Although WIV cooperated with EcoHealth’s monitoring for several years, WIV’s lack of cooperation following the COVID 19 outbreak limited EcoHealth’s ability to monitor its subrecipient,” it read.
In a stunning turn of events, after the initial outbreak that they may have played a role in starting, the Wuhan lab declined to cooperate with efforts to uncover what happened.
Who could have possibly predicted that? Certainly not those in charge of NIH who distributed grant money and then essentially turned a blind eye to what it was used on afterwards.
Massive Mistakes
The importance of this inexcusable decision making can’t be overstated.
The U.S. government essentially handed over taxpayer money to the Wuhan lab, with little knowledge of how it was being used.
And then scientists involved in funding and advancing this research used their credentials and status to label anyone who pointed out the connection.
Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins, Peter Daszak and an international community of experts organized to write a paper claiming to debunk the lab leak, all while being fully aware that the lab had been experimenting with little oversight or accountability.
Their emails show that they had been reliably informed that the virus could have been “engineered,” and that it seemed impossible for it to have occurred naturally.
NIH had little to no awareness of how their grant money was being used, yet its leaders collaborated with the company who could not or would not give them answers.
While it’s extremely disturbing, it’s not remotely surprising.
At this point, it’d be more of a surprise if an investigation uncovered that they had actually been telling the truth.
The CDC recently codified International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes for Covid-19 vaccine status. ICD codes are extensively used in medical records, medical insurance data and health research to classify precisely disease states as well as injuries from exogenous agents such as accidents, medication and medical device injuries, toxic chemicals, etc. Vaccination status is not a disease or an injury state, yet CDC has rationalized creating ICD codes for it. The coding is set to become effective on April 1, 2023.
As described by Dr. Robert Malone, “The ICD classification system is run by the World Health Organization, not the US government.” The vaccine status ICD codes were developed by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) some nine months ago, and CDC is implementing them.
The coding scheme, Z28.xxx, includes both vaccination status and possible reasons for the status. However, there does not appear to be a code for “fully vaccinated,” only for various states of “not fully vaccinated.”
The code Z28.0 means “immunization not carried out because of contraindication.” Z28.1 means “immunization not carried out because of patient decision for reasons of belief or group pressure.”
Z28.2 means “immunization not carried out because of patient decision for other and unspecified reason.”
Z28.8 means “immunization not carried out for other reason” which because of code Z28.2 must refer to reasons not attributable to patient decisions.
Finally, Z28.39 means “other underimmunization status,” including “Delinquent immunization status” and “Lapsed immunization schedule status.”
However, a potential contradiction arises because code Z28.310 means “unvaccinated for COVID-19.”
In order to reconcile this, the Z28 codes in the previous paragraph must refer to vaccines other than for Covid-19. The only other Covid-19 code is Z28.311 which means “partially vaccinated for COVID-19,” where “partial” refers to the CDC definition for “fully vaccinated” at the time when the patient visits the health-care provider who records the vaccination status in the medical chart.
It is apparent that the details of reasons for patient choices for vaccine status are not specified in codes for Covid-19 vaccines, but the CDC has some two months to fix this. There are no specific codes yet for “refused to divulge COVID-19 vaccination status” or “unknown COVID-19 vaccination status,” but these codes are likely to be added at some point.
What is the usage for which this information is planned? There is certainly a public health rationale for agencies to be able to monitor population vaccination status. Personal health information is routinely analyzed by public health agencies, insurance companies and health researchers, but in anonymized and grouped formats. The identifiable information is recorded in the databases, however HIPAA and other laws strictly protect identifiable health information and regulate how such information may be used for analyses.
In theory, vaccination status could be no different. Medical records already know your age, gender and race, where you reside, about your obesity, diabetes, your smoking and alcohol usage and your HIV status. Some of this information could be stigmatizing if released publicly, but at present there are no politicized or other circumstances to force unwanted choices on members of the public based on this compiled personal information.
Imagine, however, that one day, government agents are pounding on your door at 6am, telling you that you are required to take smoking cessation medications, under penalty of forced residence in a “smoking-cessation hotel” until you submit to the government’s requirement.
The medications have built-in transmitters that are activated when exposed to stomach acid, so taking them is recorded. After all, 500,000 Americans die every year from smoking-related diseases and their end-of-life medical care is an expense for which the government no longer wants to pay. Your smoking is economically hurting the medical care that grandma needs. Or something.
But Covid-19 and its vaccination are different. The Covid vaccines and their boosters were created under emergency-use authorization (EUA) protocols and are not fully licensed. The Biologics License Application (BLA) versions, e.g., Comirnaty, are not generally available in the US. This licensing chicanery has not gone unnoticed by the American public and a substantial fraction of people find the vaccines controversial.
Many people have seen their multiple-vaccinated friends and relatives get Covid, some multiple times. Many have also seen friends and relatives harmed by the vaccines, and most people know of the incessant daily deaths of healthy athletes, deaths discussed as caused by “coincidence.” People have seen the vaccines touted as solutions to the pandemic, yet utterly fail across the population to suppress transmission of the infection.
And, people have been bombarded with daily narratives for two solid years that the vaccines are “safe and effective” and that they must be taken, and that unvaccinated people are “bad,” “selfish,” demonized as doing damage to society, and should be shunned.
That is, personal vaccination status today is the most stigmatizing personal data of modern times, surpassing having AIDS. As such, any government compilation must be “bulletproof” against hacking and misuse. As well, the government must be trusted to maintain the data for use only as other personal medical data have been used.
Given the two-plus years of massive government propaganda about the vaccines, about their adverse effects, about Covid, about early Covid treatment, and the government collusion with social media companies in suppression of valid dissenting medical and scientific opinions and data, there is no empirical reason to support trusting the government with such sensitive, stigmatizing data.
There is no reason to believe that the government will not release the status information to insurance companies or other companies doing large business with the American public. Further, there is no recourse should the government actually release such confidential data. Thus, nothing may stop such companies from restricting activities based on the stigmatized data. For example, public travel could be blocked; bank accounts could be blocked; purchasing could be blocked.
The free pursuit of happiness is enshrined in our Declaration of Independence. The government cannot lawfully interfere with normal transactions of everyday life. But private companies working at the government’s behest, with government-supplied personal status information, could very well do it.
As has been seen from the FOIA documents, hundreds of government employees have spent the pandemic years doing exactly this unconstitutional behavior in getting social media companies to suppress Americans’ freedom of speech.
Furthermore, there is now no rational government interest in compiling vaccination status at all. At a time when vaccination was generally thought (incorrectly) to reduce Covid-19 transmission across the population, there might have been a rationale for doing so.
However, on August 11, 2022, the CDC stated publicly that the Covid-19 vaccines do not work as a public health measure to control virus transmission. They said, “Receipt of a primary series alone, in the absence of being up to date with vaccination* through receipt of all recommended booster doses, provides minimal protection against infection and transmission (3,6).” “Being up to date with vaccination provides a transient period of increased protection against infection and transmission after the most recent dose, although protection can wane over time.”
The fact that such benefit is “transient” and wanes implies that after some short period, boosters fail to reduce risk of transmission and thus that vaccine mandates are invalid.
The only government interest in mandating Covid vaccines, and thus in compiling personal information about vaccination status, is that the vaccines reduce transmission. They don’t.
Secondly, the CDC’s August 11th policy guidance does not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated people in any way for any policy. There is thus no compelling government purpose in defining people as vaccinated or unvaccinated. It would be like the government compiling personal information on hair color, except that hair color is not stigmatizing and vaccination status is extremely stigmatizing.
The government itself—through the CDC—has determined that vaccination status is not of policy importance. There can thus be no compelling interest for the government to forcibly collect this information against the wishes of the population, even were it not stigmatizing. So much more so after the government has spent the last two years publicly demonizing unvaccinated people for their rational and legitimate personal health choices.
Harvey Risch, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a physician and a Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His main research interests are in cancer etiology, prevention and early diagnosis, and in epidemiologic methods.
The American Bar Association will vote on February 6 whether to promote a newly created definition of antisemitism that has been used “consistently (and nearly exclusively) not to fight antisemitism, but rather to defend Israel and harm Palestinians
This has been done “at the cost of undermining and dangerously chilling fundamental rights of free speech, freedom of assembly and protest, and academic freedom
“The ABA’s embrace of the definition would legitimize this infringement on core democratic rights as well as undermine the ABA’s own ability to engage on issues related to Palestinian rights…”
For 20 years, Israel and its partisans have worked to embed a newly fabricated, Israel-centric definition of antisemitism in governments and institutions around the world. The latest iteration is known as the IHRA definition.
Now there is an effort to push the American Bar Association to promote this definition to “federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal governments in the United States.”
At its upcoming national meeting (which begins on February 1), delegates will be voting on resolution 514 on Monday, February 6.
Numerous groups have written letters opposing the ABA’s use of this definition, pointing out that it would be used against Palestinian rights, would infringe on freedom of speech, and would interfere with academic freedom.
Juan Thomas, Chair
Mark Schickman, Senior Advisor
Paula Shapiro, Director ABA Section on Civil Rights and Social Justice
Hon. Benes Z. Aldana (Ret.), Chair
Skip Harsch, Director
Ann Breen-Greco ABA Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
Twanda Turner-Hawkins, Chair
Selina Thomas, Director ABA Coalition on Racial and Ethnic Justice
Priya Purandare, Executive Director
Navdeep Singh, Interim Policy Director
Wendy Shiba, Past President, ABA Delegate National Asian Pacific American Bar Association
James L. Schwartz, Chair
Richard M. Leslie, Chair-Elect
Jack Young, Delegate Senior Lawyers Division
Marcos Rios, Chair
David Schwartz, Chair-Elect
Michelle Jacobson, Policy Officer ABA International Law Section
This is what opponents of Palestinian rights enable:
By Khalid Amayreh, in occupied East Jerusalem | The People’s Voice | October 18, 2010
A major Jewish religious figure in Israel has likened non-Jews to donkeys and beasts of burden, saying the main reason for their very existence is to serve Jews.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, spiritual mentor of the religious fundamentalist party, Shas, which represents Middle Eastern Jews, reportedly said during a Sabbath homily earlier this week that “the sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews.”
Yosef is considered a major religious leader in Israel who enjoys the allegiance of hundreds of thousands of followers. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News 
