Was there more to COVID-19 in terms of underlying agendas, in particular with respect to global-level actors?
Updated July 2023 based upon article originally published in March 2022
It’s been three years since COVID-19 emerged as a dominant and, for some time, all-consuming issue. Now there are signs we are witnessing the unravelling of some of the key policy responses – blanket lockdowns and population-wide injections – that have been so aggressively promoted by many, although not all, governments around the world. There is also reluctance by many to concede there have been problems with the COVID-19 responses to date. However, doubts about the efficacy of lockdowns are now widely aired and well substantiated and there is increasing evidence for, and awareness of, the dangers surrounding the mRNA genetic vaccine. And it is at least clear that large numbers of people, including scientists and academics, are expressing views at odds with authority or mainstream claims that lockdowns reduce mortality and that mass injections are a rational and efficacious solution.
As debate over ‘The Science’ increases, more and more people now question whether or not there is more to COVID-19 in terms of underlying agendas, in particular with respect to global-level actors such as the World Economic Forum (WEF), the World Health Organization (WHO) and so-called ‘Big Pharma’. In the early days of COVID-19 any such talk was immediately dismissed as ‘conspiratorial’ nonsense and, broadly speaking, people raising non-mainstream doubts about any aspect of the COVID-19 issue were subjected to vilification by ‘authoritative’ voices and corporate media.
Such dynamics were very much in evidence with respect to debate over the origins of COVID-19. And yet, today, the so-called ‘lab leak theory’, whatever its veracity, has moved from a ‘sphere of deviance’ to a ‘sphere of legitimate controversy’ with mainstream scientists through to legacy media and governments discussing it. At the same time, there is increased public awareness of various political agendas, for example the WEF’s ‘Great Reset’ visions. Indeed, a refrain from some quarters is that yesterday’s conspiracy theory is today’s fact. So, if all this is not about a virus, what might actually be going on?
COVID-19 and the ‘Structural Deep Event’ concept
First and foremost, it is necessary to dispel the idea that any attempt to understand intersections between political-economic agendas and COVID-19 is absurd or crazy. Here, we can learn much from Professor Michael Parenti’s 1993 talk on conspiracy and class power:
No ruling class could survive if it wasn’t attentive to its own interests; consciously trying to anticipate, control or initiate events at home and abroad both overtly and secretly. It is hard to imagine a modern state if there would be no conspiracy, no plans, no machinations, deceptions or secrecy within the circles of power. In the United States there have been conspiracies aplenty … they are all now a matter of public record.
PARENTI, 1993
It is a fact, then, that powerful political and economic actors do not blindly and irrationally stumble through history but rather strategise, plan and take actions that are expected to achieve results. They may make mistakes and plans are not always successful, but that does not mean they do not try and sometimes succeed in their aims and objectives. For example the tobacco industry worked long and hard, and with some success, to shape scientific and political discourse regarding their product and delay public awareness of its dangers.
Second, it is also true that powerful actors can have clear perceptions of their interests and are guided by the desire to realise, protect and further them. Where those interests come from might be reducible to any number of material or ideological influences. But origins do not matter, powerful actors still have conceptions of their interests and what they want to do.
Third, in today’s world of weakening democracies, corporate conglomerates and extreme concentration of wealth, it is also true that many political and economic actors are extremely powerful, whether measured in relative or absolute terms. They have resources and skills at their disposal that others do not. One potent tool available is that of propaganda, which grants significant leverage and influence to those with the skills and resources to disseminate it. For those liberals who remain at peace with their world – believing that powerful actors simply relay their political, economic and social goals to knowledgeable publics who then consent, or refuse to consent, to those goals – the fact that propaganda is exercised extensively across liberal democratic states comes as a shock. Indeed, many mainstream scholars struggle to recognise the role of propaganda even in well documented examples such as that of the tobacco industry shaping the science on the harms of smoking or the bogus claims regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) used to justify the invasion of Iraq. Recognising that propaganda is a major component of exercising power within so-called liberal democratic states logically removes any justification for the assumptions that a) powerful actors cannot or do not manipulate publics and b) citizenry are sufficiently autonomous and knowledgeable to always be able to grant or withhold consent.
And as Parenti observed, history is replete with examples of powerful actors successfully pursuing goals and manipulating populations in the process. In the days after 9/11, we now know that British and American officials were planning a wide-ranging series of actions – so called ‘regime-change’ wars – that went well outside the scope of the official narrative regarding combating alleged ‘Islamic fundamentalist terrorism’. One British embassy cable stated, four days after 9/11, that ‘[t]he “regime-change hawks” in Washington are arguing that a coalition put together for one purpose [against international terrorism] could be used to clear up other problems in the region’. Within weeks British Prime Minister Tony Blair communicated with US president George W. Bush saying, amongst many other things, ‘If toppling Saddam is a prime objective, it is far easier to do it with Syria and Iran in favour or acquiescing rather than hitting all three at once’. As these two western leaders conspired at the geo-strategic level, a low-level ‘spin doctor’, Jo Moore, commented on the utility of 9/11 in terms of day-to-day ‘media management’, noting that it was ‘a good day to bury bad news’. Jo Moore was forced to resign, Bush and Blair laid the tracks for 20-plus years of conflict in the international system, including the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the recently ended 20-year occupation of Afghanistan. And today, there is substantial evidence that the foundational official story regarding the 9/11 crimes is in fact false with the evidence clearly pointing toward the involvement of a number of state-level actors, including within the US.
Professor Peter Dale Scott (University of California, Berkeley) developed the concept of the ‘structural deep event’ and this is useful in capturing the idea that powerful actors frequently work to instigate, exploit or exacerbate events in ways that enable substantive and long-lasting societal transformations. These frequently involve, according to Scott, a combination of legal and illegal activity implicating both legitimate and public-facing political structures as well as covert or hidden parts of government – the so-called deep state which is understood as the interface ‘between the public, the constitutionally established state, and the deep forces behind it of wealth, power, and violence outside the government’. So, for example, Scott argues that the JFK assassination became an event that enabled the maintenance of the Cold War whilst the 9/11 crimes likewise enabled the global ‘war on terror’, and that both involved a variety of actors not usually recognized in mainstream or official accounts of these events. It is important to note that Scott claims his approach does not necessarily imply a simplistic grand conspiracy, but is rather based on the idea of opaque networks of powerful and influential groups whose interests converge, at points, and who act to either instigate or exploit events in order to pursue their objectives.
Applied to COVID-19, a ‘structural deep event’ reading would point toward a constellation of actors, with overlapping interests, working to advance agendas, and being enabled to do so because of COVID-19. Such a reading does not necessarily include or exclude the possibility of COVID-19 being an instigated event and one that functioned, in the widest sense, as a propaganda event enabling powerful actors to realise their goals. What are the grounds for seriously considering a ‘structural deep event’ reading?
The damaging COVID-19 response
There is now an overwhelmingly strong case to be made that the key responses to COVID-19 – lockdowns, cloth masking and mass injection – were, on their own terms, flawed.
A large swathe of scientists and medical professionals are now clearly and repeatedly warning governments and populations that lockdowns are harmful and ineffective whilst mass injection of populations with an experimental genetic vaccine resulted in substantial harms. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that the use of the PCR test, which gave a skewed impression of infection and death rates leading to the locking down of entire (healthy) populations for extended periods of time in response to a respiratory virus, and then attempting to submit people to an experimental injection on a repeated basis, were not scientifically robust policies. As of mid 2023, although causes are disputed, there continues to be worrying excess mortality across many countries. It is also now clear to many that the scale and nature of COVID-19 was exaggerated in a way that suggested the existence of an entirely new and unusually deadly pathogen that demanded drastic responses when, in fact, this was not the case.
It is also now apparent that a remarkable and wide-ranging propaganda effort, involving extensive use of behavioural scientists, was used to mobilise support for lockdowns and, later on, injections as well as exaggerate any threat posed. An early paper published in April 2020, authored by over 40 academics, presented a blueprint for how ‘social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts’. Furthermore, many Western governments have behavioural psychology units attached to the highest levels of government, designed to shape thoughts and behaviour, and these were engaged early on during the COVID-19 event. According to Iain Davis, in February 2020 the WHO had established the Technical Advisory Group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences for Health (TAG); ‘The group is chaired by Prof. Cass Sunstein and its members include behavioural change experts from the World Bank, the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Prof. Susan Michie, from the UK, is also a TAG participant’. In the UK, behavioural scientists from SPI-B (Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour) reconvened on 13 February 2020 and subsequently advised the UK government on how to secure compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Broadly, these propaganda techniques included maximising perceived threat in order to scare populations into complying with lockdown and accepting the experimental genetic vaccines as well as utilising non-consensual measures involving incentivization and coercion through, for example, various mandates.
We also now know that propaganda activities included smear campaigns against dissenting scientists and, in at least one major case, were initiated by high-level officials: in Autumn 2020, Anthony Fauci and National Institute of Health director Francis Collins discussed the need to swiftly shut down the Great Barrington Declaration, whose authors were advocating an alternative (and historically orthodox) COVID-19 response focused on protecting high-risk individuals and thus avoiding destructive lockdown measures. Collins wrote in an email that this ‘proposal from the three fringe epidemiologists … seems to be getting a lot of attention … There needs to be a quick and devastating published takedown of its premises’. Rather than a civilised and robust scientific debate, a smear campaign followed. Furthermore, censorship and suppression appears to have been experienced widely across swathes of academia whilst the White House is currently being sued with respect to First Amendment violations against scientists including Professors Kulldorff and Bhattacharya from the Great Barrington Declaration.
The legacy corporate media, social media platforms and large swathes of academia appear to have played an important role in disseminating this propaganda and promoting the official narrative on COVID-19. The proximity of legacy corporate media to political and economic power has been well understood for many decades: concentration of ownership, reliance upon advertising revenue, deference to elite sources, vulnerability to smear campaigns and ideological positioning are all understood to sharply limit the autonomy of legacy media (these factors also arguably shape academia). With COVID-19 these dynamics are exacerbated by, for example, direct regulatory influence, such as Ofcom direction to UK broadcasters, and censorship by ‘Big Tech’ of views deviating from those of the authorities and the WHO. The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) and Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) have coordinated major legacy media in order to counter what they claim to be ‘misinformation’, and this appears to have played a role in suppressing legitimate scientific criticism whilst elevating ‘official’ narratives. At the global ‘governance’ level, both the United Nations and the WHO promoted campaigns around combating alleged ‘disinformation’ and the so-called ‘misinfo-demic’. Currently moves are afoot to further strengthen elite control over media discourse via legislation aimed at preventing so-called ‘misinformation’, ‘disinformation’ and ‘online harms’ and which is being rolled out over multiple legislatures.
Finally, confirmation of direct involvement of US authorities with censorship decisions by the social media company Twitter has been presented in the ‘Twitter Files’ and, in the UK, further corroboration regarding the role and significance of a Counter Disinformation Unit within the UK government. Matt Taibbi’s work on the ‘Twitter Files’, presents what is described as the Censorship Industrial Complex, or Counter-Disinformation Industry, which links universities, foundations, NGOs and federal agencies and which have actively censored content on Twitter during the COVID-19 event. Critically, these censorship regimes dovetail with the aforementioned legislative developments relating to ‘disinformation’ and ‘online harms’.
Extreme and flawed policy responses – societal lockdown and mandated mass injection – combined with widespread propaganda activities aimed at securing the compliance of the population might be explicable in a number of ways. For example:
- The cock-up thesis might be invoked to explain all of this as an irrational panic response by well-intentioned or ideologically driven actors who got things badly wrong and imitated each other while doing so.
- It might be that these policy responses are the result of narrow vested interests and corruption.
- Powerful actors might have sought to take advantage of COVID-19, even instigate the event, so as to advance substantial political and economic agendas and, as part of this, helped to promote advantageous narratives during the COVID-19 event.
Following two years of massive societal disruption aimed at containing a seasonal respiratory virus, and the persistence of some aspects of the COVID-19 narrative despite substantive scientific challenges, it is clearly necessary to take seriously the very real possibility that vested interests and substantial political agendas underly the COVID-19 event. So, what is the key evidence for explanations two and three?
Manipulation and exploitation of Health Agencies: Regulatory Capture at the NIH and CDC plus the World Health Organization and Pandemic Preparedness Agenda
Evidence for vested interests and corruption has come, in particular, from analyses of US regulatory bodies and the actions of the WHO. In particular, evidence has emerged showing that key authorities in the US – the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – under the influence of Anthony Fauci, the Chief Medical Officer to the US President, have suffered from conflicts of interest. The term ‘regulatory capture’ is frequently used to describe this situation. [2]
For example, Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s detailed analysis of the US-led COVID-19 response in The Real Anthony Fauci, documents the corrupt relationship between so-called ‘Big Pharma’ and Anthony Fauci arguing that, to all intents and purposes, there has been regulatory capture whereby pharmaceutical companies and public officials enjoy mutually beneficial arrangements. This mutual infiltration is understood by Kennedy to underpin the COVID-19 response, especially the commitment to a ‘vaccine-only’ solution and suppression of preventative treatments such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). By way of example, Kennedy relays the case of Dr Tess Lawrie and WHO researcher Andrew Hill in which Hill appeared to confirm there was pressure to delay publication of results supporting the efficacy of Ivermectin. Regarding HCQ, Kennedy writes:
By 2020, we shall see, Bill Gates exercised firm control over WHO and deployed the agency in his effort to discredit HCQ’ …
On June 17, the WHO – for which Mr. Gates is the largest funder after the US, and over which Mr. Gates and Dr Fauci exercise tight control – called for the halt of HCQ trials in hundreds of hospitals across the world. WHO Chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus ordered nations to stop using HCQ and CQ. Portugal, France, Italy, and Belgium banned HCQ for COVID-19 treatment.
More broadly, the WHO has been important in terms of co-ordinating COVID-19 policy responses. Although notionally independent, the WHO has increasingly come under corporate influence via both the growth of corporate-influenced organisations such as Gavi (Global Vaccine Alliance), CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) and private financing via the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The WHO is also currently negotiating the treaty on pandemic preparedness with the governments of member states to provide unprecedented powers to this organisation to enable rapid responses, transcending national governments, when the WHO declares pandemics in the future, thus centralising control and potentially overriding national sovereignty.
This line of analysis might lead to a conclusion that what we have experienced to date – harmful lockdowns and injection strategies underpinned by massive propaganda – is primarily the result of corruption, conflicts of interest and vested interests, rather than what could reasonably be described as good faith errors by politicians and bureaucrats.
The World Economic Forum and the ‘Great Reset’
The World Economic Forum (WEF) has been associated by some analysts with the COVID-19 event and in 2020 Klaus Schwab, its founder, published a co-authored book titled COVID-19: The Great Reset. Schwab declared: ‘The Pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world’. One key component of the political-economic vision promoted by the WEF is ‘stakeholder capitalism’ (Global Public-Private Partnerships, GPPP) involving the integration of government, business and civil society actors with respect to the provision of services. Another key component involves harnessing ‘the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution’, especially the exploitation of developments in artificial intelligence, computing and robotics, in order to radically transform society toward a digitised model. Slogans now frequently associated with these visions include ‘you will own nothing and be happy’, ‘smart cities’ and ‘build back better’.
It is also apparent that the WEF, as an organising force, has considerable reach. It has been involved with training and educating influential individuals – through its Young Global Leaders Programme and its predecessor, Global Leaders for Tomorrow – who have subsequently moved into positions of considerable power. It has also been noted that many national leaders (e.g. Merkel, Macron, Trudeau, Ardern, Putin, and Kurz) are WEF Forum of Young Global Leaders graduates or members and have ‘played prominent roles, typically promoting zero-covid strategies, lockdowns, mask mandates, and ‘vaccine passports’. In 2017 Schwab boasted:
When I mention our names like Mrs Merkel, even Vladimir Putin and so on, they all have been Young Global Leaders of the World Economic forum. But what we are very proud of now is the young generation like prime minister Trudeau, president of Argentina and so on. So we penetrate the cabinets. So yesterday I was at a reception for prime minister Trudeau and I will know that half of this cabinet or even more half of this cabinet are actually young global leaders of the World Economic Forum …. that’s true in Argentina, and it’s true in France now with the president a Young Global Leader
Corporate members of the WEF’s Forum of Young Global Leaders includes Mark Zuckerberg whilst ‘Global Leaders for Tomorrow’ included Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos.
Financial Crisis, the Central Banks and Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)
It is now established that a major crisis in the repo markets during the Autumn of 2019 was followed by high-level planning aimed at resolving an impending financial crisis of greater proportions than the 2008 banking crisis. According to some analysts, one response appears to have been a strengthened drive to control currencies via the Central Banks: Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). The General Manager of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), Agustin Carstens, stated in October 2020 that:
we intend to establish the equivalence with cash and there is a huge difference there. For example, in cash we don’t know who is using a $100 bill today … the key difference with the CBDC is that the central bank will have absolute control on the rules and regulations that will determine the use of that expression of central bank liability and also we will have the technology to enforce that.
A programmable CBDC potentially provides complete control over how and when an individual spends money, in addition to allowing authorities to automatically deduct taxes through a person’s ‘digital wallet’. According to some analysts, this development would also effectively remove any significant control over financial policy at the national level. Although decried as a ‘conspiracy theory’ in the early days of the COVID-19 event, it has now become clear that there is a determined drive toward implementing CBDCs and which has the potential to qualitatively change the character of national-level governance.
Technologies associated with programmable CBDCs overlap with those associated with 4IR and concepts regarding digitised society. Specifically, digital identity, a potential component of the intended CBDC, provides a basis for the creation of a digital grid upon which information relating to all aspects of an individual’s life will be available to governments, corporations and other powerful entities such as the security services. Also notable is the relationship between digital ID and the drive to create ‘vaccine passports’ as part of the COVID-19 response: Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation are central players in ID2020, alongside Gavi. The overall objective is to create a global-level digital ID framework that integrates with health/vaccination status. As with CBDC, the push to implement these frameworks is ongoing, not dissipating, and include the recent announcement by the WHO and EU of a ‘digital health partnership’ aimed at facilitating implementation of digital health certificates for health and travel controlled by the WHO. [3]
All of these political and economic agendas point toward a conclusion more closely aligned with the ‘structural deep event’ (Scott) thesis, in that they highlight the possibility that COVID-19 has been exploited to advance major political and economic agendas. As such, COVID-19 is itself primarily a propaganda event, instrumentalized in order to pursue political-economic agendas. This hypothesis is, at least in part, distinct from the idea that corruption and narrow vested interests explain most of what we have seen.
Threats to democracy and understanding what this all might mean
The political and economic processes identified regarding the WEF, WHO, digital ID, the central banks and CBDC, the pandemic preparedness agenda and the Censorship Industrial Complex/Counter-Disinformation Industry are not speculative or theoretical, they are directly observable and ongoing. They are also proceeding in the absence of serious scrutiny by legislatures and wider democratic debate whilst new ‘emergencies’ over war in Ukraine and the climate appear to be being exploited in order to maintain momentum even as COVID-19 recedes from view. Indeed, one scholar of political communication notes that ‘insidious scare tactics deployed during Covid are still being used in the field of climate communications, where they were first developed.’
It is also worth spelling out the potential interaction between these agendas and threats to democracy. It is now clear that populations have been subjected to highly coercive and aggressive attempts to limit their autonomy, including restrictions on movement, the right to protest, freedom to work and freedom to participate in society. Most notably, significant numbers of people were pushed, sometimes required, to take an injection at regular intervals in order to continue their participation in society whilst PCR test requirements for travelling, for example, have introduced further coercive elements into everyday life. These developments have been accompanied by, at times, aggressive and discriminatory statements from major political leaders with respect to people resisting injection. The threat to civil liberties and ‘democracy as usual’ is unprecedented. The economic impact has been dire and COVID-19 has seen a dramatic and continued transfer of wealth from the poorest to the very richest (see for example Oxfam, 2021 and Green and Fazi, 2023). And, today, the drive to create a regulatory framework via the pandemic preparedness agenda, which includes modification of the International Health Regulations, combined with the rolling out of online ‘harm’ legislation and the promotion of moral panic over ‘disinformation’ and ‘online harm’, all create an architecture that enables high levels of control over populations within ostensibly democratic polities.
Furthermore, the combination of a programmable CBDC, a ‘vaccine passport’ that determines access to services and real-world spaces and the availability of all online behaviours to corporations and governments, can enable a system of near total control over an individual’s life, activities and opportunities. This system of control can be seen in China with the social credit system currently being implemented in certain provinces. Integration of personal data and money though a digital ID would also allow individuals to be readily stripped of their assets. These developments reflect the rise of technocracy whereby government and society become increasingly controlled by experts and technicians and individual autonomy and democracy are curtailed. They can also be related to the transhumanist movement which enthusiastically looks forward to human-machine interfaces and their proclaimed potential to ‘perfect the human condition’.
Of course, it is still possible that the sustained adherence to lockdown and mass injection (in spite of growing evidence against their efficacy and safety) are explicable through reference to government blunders, whilst the parallel political and economic projects and rapid reduction in civil liberties are coincidences.
However, it would be remiss to set aside the fact that organisations such as the WHO and the WEF exist within a wider network, or constellation, of extremely powerful, non-elected political and economic entities made up of major multinational corporations, intergovernmental organisations (IGOs), large private foundations and other non-governmental organisations (NGOs). These include, in no particular order, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and other central banks; asset managers Blackrock and Vanguard; global-level entities such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Club of Rome, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation, Chatham House, the Trilateral Commission, the Atlantic Council, the Open Society Foundations and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; and major corporations including so-called ‘Big Pharma’ and ‘Big Tech’ such as Apple, Google (part of Alphabet Inc), Amazon and Microsoft. And, of course, governments themselves are part of this constellation, with the most powerful – the US, China and India – having considerable influence. In addition, the European Union (EU) supranational body, via its President Ursula von der Leyen, promoted the EU Digital COVID Certificate and also demanded at times that all EU citizens be injected.
As such, it is entirely plausible, if not increasingly likely, that the interests shared between multiple political and economic actors have manifested themselves in the form of concrete political and economic agendas which, in turn, have been advanced via the COVID-19 event. It is also possible that the current war in the Ukraine as well as climate issues are being exploited by many of the same actors and in a similar fashion. Along these lines, Denis Rancourt recently noted:
It is only natural now to ask “what drove this?”, “who benefited?” and “which groups sustained permanent structural disadvantages?” In my view, the COVID assault can only be understood in the symbiotic contexts of geopolitics and large-scale social-class transformations. Dominance and exploitation are the drivers. The failing USA-centered global hegemony and its machinations create dangerous conditions for virtually everyone.
An increasingly large body of work supports the understanding of COVID-19 as a structural deep event. Important and pathfinding analyses were provided in the early months of the COVID-19 event by Cory Morningstar, Whitney Webb and Piers Robinson, amongst others. James Corbett was one of the first to warn of the impending dangers of a biosecurity state all the way back in March 2020, whilst Patrick Wood alerted us to the dangers of technocracy long before the arrival of COVID-19.
In States of Emergency (2022) Kees van der Pijl argues there has been a ‘biopolitical seizure of power’ in which an intelligence-IT-media complex has crystallised as a new class block seeking to quell growing unrest and the strengthening of progressive social movements throughout the world. Under cover of Covid-19, and via ruthless exploitation of people’s fear of a virus, van der Pijl traces how this new class block is attempting to impose control via high-tech, digitised societies necessitating mandatory injections and digital ID, as well as censorship and manipulation of public spheres. In short, van der Pijl describes a total surveillance society involving massive concentration of power and the end of democracy. Kheriaty’s The Rise of the Biomedical State (2022) offers a detailed presentation of how COVID-19 provided the impetus for an emerging biosecurity state whilst Iain Davis’ Pseudopandemic (2022) presents the COVID-19 event as primarily a propagandised phenomenon functioning to enable the continued emergence of a technocratic order built around the Global Public-Private Partnership (GPPP) and ‘stake-holder capitalism’ that has appeared primarily to serve the interests of what he describes as an elite ‘parasite class’. Simon Elmer’s (2022) analysis presents all of these developments in terms of the rise of a new form of fascism whilst Broecker (2023) emphasises the technocratic and anti-democratic underpinnings of the political developments ushered in under the cover of the COVID-19 event.
Robert F. Kennedy’s The Real Anthony Fauci, although focused on documenting the corruption with respect to public health institutions and ‘Big Pharma’, is clear about its consequences for our democracies. Early in the book he notes that Fauci ‘has played a central role in undermining public health and subverting democracy and constitutional governance around the globe and in transitioning our civil governance toward medical totalitarianism’. Later in the book, Kennedy discusses the interplay between military, medical and intelligence planners and raises questions about an ‘underlying agenda to coordinate dismantlement of democratic governance’:
After 9/11, the rising biosecurity cartel adopted simulations as signaling mechanisms for choreographing lockstep responses among corporate, political, and military technocrats charged with managing global exigencies. Scenario planning became an indispensable device for multiple power centers to coordinate complex strategies for simultaneously imposing coercive controls upon democratic societies across the globe.
Broadly in line with this analysis, the work of both Breggin and Breggin and Paul Shreyer argue that the political and economic agendas advanced during the COVID-19 event had been long in the pipeline and point toward it being an instigated event as opposed to a spontaneous – naturally occurring – one that groups opportunistically took advantage of.
Along with all this, transhumanism, life extension or ‘enhancement’ through technology and digitalised society, observable in some of the output from the WEF and public musings of key individuals, appears to reflect a set of beliefs in technology and progress that can be traced back to Enlightenment thinking of the last 300 years. Philosophical debates over technology and what it means to be human have remained at the heart of the Enlightenment ‘project’, although perhaps deeply buried. Associated with this might be scientism as a religious cult of the West.
Attempts to attach a label to the complex political and economic processes we are witnessing include descriptors such as ‘global fascism,’ ‘global communism,’ ‘neo-feudalism,’ ‘neo-serfdom’, ‘totalitarianism,’ ‘technocracy,’ ‘centralization vs. subsidiarity,’ ‘stakeholder capitalism’, ‘global public-private partnerships,’ ‘corporate authoritarianism’, ‘authoritarianism,’ ‘tyranny’ and ‘global capitalism.’ Dr Robert Malone, inventor of part of the mRNA technology used in the COVID-19 injections, openly refers to the threat of global totalitarianism as does US presidential hopeful Robert Kennedy Jr.
In summation, there are multiple and readily observable signs of political and economic actors working to variously instigate, exaggerate and/or exploit the COVID-19 event. At the same time there are no signs that those promoting the claim that COVID-19 represented an unusually dangerous health crisis are conceding any ground, even as the facts become clear that it was nothing exceptional and that the responses have been a disaster for public health and well-being. Both ideology and underlying agendas appear to be influencing the dynamics of current events, all of which are occurring in the context of major shifts in the distribution of power globally: witness the BRICS block and various geo-political realignments, including the increasingly likely strategic failure for the West in relation to the Ukraine war. None of this looks like the COVID-19 response was just some innocent and incompetent blunder by our scientific and medical establishments.
The tasks ahead
For those occupying corporate or mainstream positions in politics, media or academia, the fear of being tarred with the ‘conspiracy theorist’ label is usually enough to dampen any enthusiasm for serious evaluation of the ways in which powerful and influential political and economic actors might be shaping responses to COVID-19 to further political and economic agendas. But the stakes are now simply too high for such shyness and, indeed cowardice, to be allowed to persist. There are strong and well-established grounds to take analyses along the lines of the ‘structural deep event’ thesis seriously, as set out in this article, and there are clear and present dangers to our civil liberties, freedom and democracy.
Building on the work already started, researchers must explore more fully the networks and power structures that have shaped the COVID-19 responses and which have sought to move forward various political and economic agendas. Analysing more fully the techniques used, including propaganda and exploitation of COVID-19 as an enabling event, is now an essential task for researchers to undertake. It is also important to consolidate understanding of linkages with ongoing drives related to the UN sustainability agenda – e.g. 15 minute cities – and the climate agenda, all of which potentially involve technocratic and top-down policy approaches at odds with autonomy and democracy. Such work, ultimately, can not only deepen our understanding of what is going on; it can also provide a guide for those who seek to oppose what is being described by some as ‘global totalitarianism’ or ‘fascism’. It is of equal importance for scholars of democracy and ethics to further unpack the implications of these developments with respect to liberty and civil rights as well as, more widely, creative thinking with respect to alternative visions of social, political and economic organisation and including the development of parallel societies.
It could of course be the case that such a research agenda ultimately leads to a refutation of the ‘structural deep event’ thesis and confirmation that everything witnessed over the last three years has been simply cock-up or blunder. But it seems increasingly unlikely that this would be the result and evidence in support of the structural deep event reading is stronger now than ever. It is essential that critical research into the consequences of the COVID-19 response does not become bounded by an unwarranted assumption that all can be reduced to well- intentioned but erroneous responses. The stakes are high and it has never been more essential to seriously engage with uncomfortable possibilities – even if that means interrogating uncomfortable and alarming explanations.
Endnotes
1. Thanks to David Bell, Isa Blumi, Heike Brunner, Jonathan Engler, Nick Hudson and Ewa Siderenko for comments and input.
2. Sheldon Watts offers historic background illustrating how the establishment regularly rewrites the science to serve other purposes. In the case of Cholera, the main editors of The Lancet in the late 19th century actually contradicted their own findings of a previous decade in order to accommodate trade interests concerning the quarantining of British ships from India that would have harmed the British Empire’s economic model. From being a human communicable disease, it transformed into a dark-skinned disease of the orient. Watts, Sheldon. “From rapid change to stasis: Official responses to cholera in British-ruled India and Egypt: 1860 to c. 1921.” Journal of World History (2001): 321-374. Thanks to Isa Blumi for this reference.
3. See https://www.who.int/initiatives/global-digital-health-certification-network – Global ‘public health infrastructure’ to ‘expand digital solutions’ and EU Digital Covid Certificate taken over by the WHO’s GDHCN Certificate https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/coronavirus-response/safe-covid-19-vaccines-europeans/eu-digital-covid-certificate_en.
Selected References
‘Organized Persuasive Communication: A new conceptual framework for research on public relations, propaganda and promotional culture’ by Vian Bakir, Eric Herring, David Miller, Piers Robinson, Critical Sociology, 2019.
‘The unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy: why mandates, passports and restrictions may cause more harm than good’ by Kevin Bardosh, Alex de Figueiredo, Rachel Gur-Arie, Euzebiusz Jamrozik, James Doidge, Trudo Lemmens, Salmaan Keshavjee, Janice E Graham, Stefan Baral, British Medical Journal, 2023.
‘Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response’ by Jay Van Bavel et al, in Nature Human Behaviour by Jay Van Bavel et al, 2020.
‘Global Health And The Politics Of Catastrophe: Who will save us from the WHO and its new world order?’ by David Bell, PANDA, 2021.
‘The World Health Organization and COVID-19: Re-establishing Colonialism in Public Health- PANDA’ by David Bell and Toby Green, PANDA, 2021.
‘Negotiating the future of political philosophy and practice: Renewal of democracy or technocratic governance’ by Hannah Broecker, Kritische Gesellschaftsforschung, 2023.
Covid 19 and the Global Predators, by Peter Breggin and Ginger Breggin, 2021.
Pseudopandemic: New Normal Technocracy, by Iain Davies, 2021.
A State of Fear by Laura Dodsworth, Pinter & Martin Publishers, 2021.
The Road to Fascism: For a Critique of the Global Biosecurity State, By Simon Elmer, architectsforsocialhousing, 2022.
‘The Covid Consensus’ by Toby Green and Thomas Fazi, Hurst Publishers, 2023.
‘Engineering Compliance: From Climate to Covid and Back Again’ by Philip Hammond, Propaganda In Focus, 2023.
The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, 2021.
The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State, by Aaron Kheriaty, 2022.
Doubt is Their Product by David Michaels, Oxford University Press.
‘Propaganda Trudeau Style’ by Ray McGinnis, Propaganda in Focus, 2022.
‘PCR testing skewed and corrupted data on SARS-CoV-2 infection and death rates’ by Jennifer Smith, PANDA, 2022.
‘Conspiracy and Class Power: A Talk by Michael Parenti’, – Global Research, 1993.
States of Emergency: Keeping the Global Population in Check, by Kees van der Pijl, Clarity Press, 2022.
‘COVID Coercion: Boris Johnson’s Psychological Attack on the UK Public’ by Mike Robinson, UKColumn, 2020.
‘Threats to Freedom of Expression: Covid-19, the ‘fact checking counter-disinformation industry’, and online harm legislation’, by Piers Robinson, Propaganda In Focus.
‘Deafening Silences: propaganda through censorship, smearing and coercion’ by Piers Robinson, Propaganda in Focus, 2022.
‘COVID is a Global Propaganda Operation’, interview with Piers Robinson, Asia Pacific, 2021.
‘The Propaganda of Terror and Fear: A Lesson from Recent History’, by Piers Robinson, OffGuardian, 2020.
The American Deep State by Peter Dale Scott, Rowman and Littlefield, 2017.
‘Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics’, by Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ety Elisha, Brian Martin, Natti Ronel & Josh Guetzkow, Minerva, 2022.
‘Chronik einer angekündigten Krise’ by ‘Paul Schreyer’, 2021.
‘Who is responsible for inflicting unethical behavioural-science ‘nudges’ on the British people?’ by Gary Sidley, PANDA, 2022.
‘The Show Must Go On. Event 201: The 2019 Fictional Pandemic Exercise’ by Cory Morningstar, 2020.
‘From Covid to CBDC: The Path to Full Control’ by John Stylman, Brownstone Institute, 2022.
‘Transhumanism and the Philosophy of the Elites’ by Danica Thiessen, PANDA, 2023.
‘Was SARS-CoV-2 entirely novel or particularly deadly?’ by Thomas Verduyn, Todd Kenyon, Jonathan Engler, PANDA, 2023.
‘Red pill or blue pill variants inflation and the controlled demolition of society’ The Philosophical Salon, available at ‘Red Pill or Blue Pill? Variants, Inflation, and the Controlled Demolition of Society’ by Fabio Vighi, The Philosophical Salon, 2021.
‘All Roads Lead to Dark Winter’, by Whitney Webb, Unlimited Hangout, 2020.
‘COVID-19 and the shadowy “Trusted News Initiative”’, by Elizabeth Woodworth, Common Ground, 2021.
September 11, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Book Review, Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, Gates Foundation, Human rights, Rockefeller Foundation, UK, United States, WEF, WHO |
Leave a comment
Maine Mom, RN, Paid Ultimate Price Trusting Her Doctors
A toxicology report shows that a new mom in Maine was right. Her baby, Sawyer, died when he was just eight weeks and six days old, just 34 hours after being vaccinated.
On October 20, 2022, Melissa, who herself is a registered nurse, took her baby to the pediatrician. Baby Sawyer had a rash around his torso that just wouldn’t go away. The pediatrician diagnosed him with a viral infection, which was causing the rash.
The doctor gave her Eucerin cream and told her to monitor her son’s temperature for a possible fever.
Seven days later, on October 27, 2022, Melissa went to the same pediatrician for her son’s well-child check-up. At that two-month check-up, Melissa asked the doctor if they should wait on the two-month vaccinations because her baby was still sick.
The doctor said no.
Although Baby Sawyer still had a rash, he didn’t have a fever. And Since Baby Sawyer didn’t have a fever during the appointment, the doctor insisted it would be perfectly safe for the baby to get all his recommended vaccines.
Even though her intuition, as both a nurse and a mom, was that they should wait until the baby was feeling better, Melissa trusted her doctor.
That turned out to be the biggest mistake of her life.
At that visit, the baby was given:
Rotateq
Hib
Prevnar 13
Pediarix (a combination vaccine that contains DTaP, IPV, and hepatitis B)
It’s worth noting that a new version of Pediarix was approved by the FDA in 2019, making this formulation one of the newer vaccinations on the market.
By the time Melissa got home that day, Baby Sawyer was screaming like he had never screamed before.
More experienced moms, moms whose babies have suffered brain damage, would recognize that heartbreaking sound as the “DTP scream”—a high-pitched uncontrollable almost inhuman expression of agony.
Melissa’s pediatrician had told her during the appointment to give the baby acetaminophen to help make him more comfortable. Even though Baby Sawyer didn’t have a fever, Melissa gave him a partial dose of baby Tylenol for discomfort.
The next morning, on October 28, 2022, the baby was still acting fussy and uncomfortable.
Melissa gave him more Tylenol, held him, and rocked him. He drank five ounces of expressed breastmilk from a bottle.
When her husband got home from work, they put the baby down in his bassinette for a nap. This was around 5:30 p.m. Her husband then ran out to get some food for dinner.
Melissa, who worked remotely, heard the baby fussing around 6:15 p.m. Her husband went in to check on him. He readjusted him, and rubbed his back as Fathers do. Baby Sawyer fell back to sleep.
Sawyer was asleep off and on for about four hours, during which time she and her husband both checked on him. They also had a baby monitor and it was easy to hear the baby anyway because their home is small.
But the last time Melissa went to check on Baby Sawyer, the baby wasn’t moving or breathing. She picked him up out of the bassinette and the baby was completely limp and lifeless. Melissa started screaming. Her husband, who was the last one to see him alive, rushed in to help his wife.
They immediately called 911.
When the emergency medical technicians arrived, they did everything they could to revive the baby. But they were unable to save him.
Baby Sawyer was pronounced dead at 10:51 that night.
His tiny body was put in a body bag and taken away by the Brookings-Smith Funeral Home.
The Penobscot County Sheriff’s office and the state police had also responded to investigate. Because it was an infant death, the state of Maine opened a formal investigation and ordered an autopsy.
The autopsy was performed the next day, on October 29, 2022.
The Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Mark Flomenbaum, determined that the cause of death was “asphyxiation due to inappropriate sleep position and environment.”
His report essentially blamed the parents, citing a “sub-optimal sleeping environment,” for purportedly causing their infant’s death.
At this point, law enforcement began questioning Melissa and her husband as if they were murder suspects.
One asked Melissa if she thought her husband could have hurt the baby, implying that her husband might have suffocated their son on purpose.
She was also asked her if her husband had been drinking and whether he had a problem with alcohol.
However, the investigators found no evidence of foul play.
According to the pathology report, the child was “well developed” and had no signs of injury or bruising on his body.
Baby Sawyer’s death was ruled an accident and the case was closed.
Melissa, who was devastated, mentioned to anyone who would listen that her son had just been vaccinated.
Though she did not know why her son had died, she did not understand how the timing could be coincidental.
Her intuition would not allow her to ignore the fact that her healthy baby had a viral infection, got four vaccines against eight illnesses, and died the next day.
How could that possibly be a coincidence?
Researching on-line, Melissa found a pathology protocol, a list of recommended tests for infants when over-vaccination is a suspected culprit.
She emailed the state medical examiner, Dr. Mark Flomenbaum. She formally requested that the tests on the protocol list she’d found be performed to explore if vaccinations may have played a role in her son’s death.
Here’s the email Melissa sent to the Medical Examiner. I have reprinted it in its entirety:
“I am writing to you to formally request the following additional pathology assays, analyses and tests be performed on my son Sawyer DOB 8/27/22 post-mortem blood and tissue samples and to preserve the samples and data they reveal for my legal counsel to review.
Infant Vaccines Autopsy Tests
· CRP (C-reactive protein: if inflammation is high, that would indicate vaccines were to blame as a small infant or toddler could not generate such results) This would indicate severe brain inflammation.
· Test for liver enzymes
· Test for heavy metals, especially Hg and Al in blood and brain tissue
· Test for formaldehyde and Formalin–in particular, which would come from vaccines. Even though the body manufactures a little formaldehyde, large amounts would implicate formaldehyde, or Formalin, especially in vaccines.
· Test brain tissue for Hg and Al, which would indicate those metals crossed the blood brain barrier and may have been the precipitating factor in the child’s demise, as they are potent neurotoxins and can cause encephalopathy.
Cytokine panel:
1. Interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) — IL-1beta is one of the key mediators of the inflammatory response to physical stress.
2. Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
3. Interleukin-8 (IL-8)
4. Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) TNF-α is a growth factor for immune cells and osteoclasts, the cells that break down bone.
5. Fibrinogen
6. Vitamin C assay
7. Titer levels on all the vaccines. If they are sky high, that could make a case for molecular mimicry causing death.
Sincerely,
Parents of deceased infant Sawyer”
Flomenbaum’s office, which has come under scrutiny several times in the past, refused to perform any of the tests Melissa requested.
Sandra Slemmer, Medicolegal death investigator for the State of Maine, explained to Melissa via email that:
“Dr. Flomenbaum and I reviewed your correspondence to Office of Chief Medical Examiner (OCME). I will do my best to address all of your requests and concerns. If you have more questions, please feel free to contact me.”
Slemmer’s email, in a screenshot below, asserts that heavy metals do not cause SIDS, so additional testing was not necessary.
However, Slemmer’s office did not list the cause of Baby Sawyer’s death as SIDS.
But their emailed response further claims that if there were heavy metals in his system, the amounts would be “so small” that these metals would not be a contributing factor in his demise.
The email also claims that the description of the baby’s sleeping environment was “compelling,” and therefore they saw no reason to perform any additional tests.
The entire email suggests that before they even did any testing on Baby Sawyer’s body, the Medical Examiner’s office had already determined the cause of his death.
Since she was unable to get the Medical Examiner to do any further investigation of her baby’s death, Melissa reached out to Health Choice Maine.
Health Choice Maine is a statewide non-profit that works to protect families and restore medical freedom in Maine. I spoke at their conference, Find Your Light, a year ago.
Tiffany Kreck, Health Choice Maine’s Executive Director, met with Melissa and helped her to build a timeline of evidence and documentation. They decided they needed to find a new pathologist, someone willing to order additional testing.
Health Choice Maine started an exhaustive search to find a competent pathologist.
“We searched the entire country,” Kreck told me when I spoke to her by phone. “We came up empty handed. No medical professional wants to touch this issue. They are terrified of losing their career and their ability to support their families.
”It took four months,” she continued, “utilizing every network we had. We finally found one person who, seeing the grief of the mother, agreed to order the tests.”
Working with the fluid and tissue samples collected by the state medical examiner, this pathologist did as many of the suggested tests as he could.
The results of this report were shared with the family and with Health Choice Maine on August 3, 2023.
In the meantime, trying to deal with the unfathomable grief of losing her only child, Melissa went to a psychiatrist in March of 2023, five months after her son died.
Instead of sympathy, however, Melissa was met with a cold diagnosis.
She was told she was having an “adjustment disorder.”
The therapist recommended mood stabilizers and anti-depressants. Melissa left the therapist’s office crying. She felt like she was going crazy. Was she a bad mom? Had she done something wrong? Was there something wrong with her because she couldn’t let it go and was still grieving?
The aluminum concentration in the baby’s blood was at adult toxicity levels.
Baby Sawyer had 95 micrograms per liter, which far, far exceeds safety amounts.
Several of the vaccines Baby Sawyer received, including Hib and Pediarix, contained high amounts of aluminum.
So the medical examiner’s office was wrong in assuming (without ever testing it) that heavy metals did not contribute or even cause the death.
“This additional pathology report shows how much our medical examiners don’t know because they won’t look. How many other parents have been blamed for their infants’ death that were innocent?” Kreck said.
“These tests must be standard in all unexplained infant death.”
Health Choice Maine is working with attorneys to find out how to challenge the cause of death listed on Baby Sawyer’s death certificate and file a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) claim.
“Follow your instincts, even when everyone’s telling you you’re wrong,” Kreck says.
“Vaccines are implicated far more often in infant deaths than parents realize.”
About the Author
Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D., is an award-winning investigative journalist and book author.
September 10, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | United States |
Leave a comment
This week the World Council for Health (WCH) issued an official caution against all vaccines on the childhood vaccination schedule. I’ve re-published the statement below.
The following images have been taken from WCH General Assembly Meeting #101 in which Prof. Brian Hooker presented the latest research:
The number of vaccines given to babies and children has increased dramatically without the necessary due diligence by regulatory authorities. Parents are urged to adopt a common-sense, ‘Safer to Wait” approach.
Growing international concerns about vaccine regulatory processes and vaccine safety have emerged following the widespread regulatory failure of Covid-19 vaccines. The Covid-19 crisis has demonstrated that regulatory bodies, once public watchdogs, are now at best incompetent and at worst have been deeply corrupted by pharmaceutical industry interests.
In the context of emerging revelations of regulatory body incompetence and corruption, e.g. The Perseus Report, the WCH Health and Science Committee notes that:
- Several research studies now indicate that vaccinated children have far worse health outcomes with higher rates of many chronic diseases than non-vaccinated children.
- The integrity of scientific research and the regulatory process of childhood vaccines, including the new nasal ‘flu’ vaccine, now being administered en masse in schools is in question.
- Pharmaceutical corporations have a long-standing history of misrepresenting products that cause injuries and deaths. Pfizer, for instance, has paid the largest criminal settlement in history for drug fraud. The childhood vaccination schedule provides these unscrupulous corporations with unregulated access to the bodies of our children.
- Modern society is experiencing unprecedented rates of autism, asthma, allergies, inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, obesity, depression and more, for which the root cause/s have not been established.
- Much of what we have been told about the success of early vaccines, including smallpox and polio vaccines is emerging as untrue. Clean water, modern plumbing, hygiene, refrigeration, and improved nutrition are real factors that have correlated with the dramatic reduction in many infectious diseases over the past century.
- National regulatory agencies have never done the necessary evaluation to determine whether vaccines given to children alone or together according to the ever-expanding childhood vaccination schedules are associated with poor health outcomes compared with children who are not vaccinated.
- National regulatory agencies have been turning a blind eye to the mounting evidence linking childhood vaccination with autism that has emerged since a possible link was first suggested in 1998.
- National regulatory agencies have also been turning a blind eye to the mounting evidence linking childhood vaccination with other diseases, including asthma, allergies, and bowel disease.
- The vast majority of children find vaccination with needles painful and long-term psychological harms, including disruption to breastfeeding and maternal bonding, have not been properly evaluated.
- There are serious concerns among experts that existing childhood vaccines will be converted to mRNA technology, which has never been proven safe for use in vaccines for adults let alone children, and that this will be done without public awareness, consent and a robust research and regulatory process.
- With regard to Covid-19 vaccination, evidence from independent experts and official international databases show that the Covid-19 vaccines are not effective and are not safe, raising serious questions around the authorisation of the Covid-19 vaccines for babies and children.
In addition to these specific considerations, the burgeoning vaccination schedule for children needs to be viewed in the context of the following supranational developments in global health policy:
- The World Health Organisation (WHO) and its private and state stakeholders have financial and ideological interests in the provision of vaccines and has committed to providing 500 vaccines by 2030.
- The WHO and its stakeholders are working for the pharmaceutical industry and creating legislation that would give them the power to mandate injections by force for you and your children.
- The WHO supports gain-of-function research, facilitating the creation of dangerous pathogens as well as the vaccines to combat newly created pathogens, thus creating a self-perpetuating vaccine industry based on fear.
In the current circumstances, the World Council for Health urges parents to consider childhood vaccination very carefully and adopt a common-sense, “Safer to Wait” approach to the vaccination of your boys and girls.
For the sake of all children and a healthy society it is time that we all question our blind faith in vaccines, the corporations that produce them, and the regulatory bodies and supranational organisations that enable and profit directly or indirectly through their authorisation.
The World Council for Health will continue to bring you supportive information and resources to help you optimize your family’s health naturally. Be assured that reducing infectious disease and maximizing your children’s health is rooted in wholesome nutrition, good physical and mental hygiene, a healthy outdoor lifestyle and your unconditional love.
- WCH meeting #101, August 28th 2023. https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/brian-hooker-vax-unvax/
- Anthony R. Mawson et al., “Preterm Birth, Vaccination and Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study of 6- to 12-Year-Old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children,” Journal of Translational Science 3, no. 3 (2017): 1-8, doi:10.15761/JTS.1000187.
- Anthony R. Mawson, et al., “Pilot Comparative Study on the Health of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated 6 to 12-year-old U.S. Children,” Journal of Translational Science 3, no. 3 (2017): 1-12, doi:10.15761/JTS.1000186.
- Brian Hooker and Neil Z. Miller, “Analysis of Health Outcomes in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children: Developmental Delays, Asthma, Ear Infections and Gastrointestinal Disorders,” SAGE Open Medicine 8, (2020): 2050312120925344, doi:10.1177/2050312120925344.
- Brian Hooker and Neil Z. Miller, “Health Effects in Vaccinated versus Unvaccinated Children,” Journal of Translational Science 7, (2021): 1-11, doi:10.15761/JTS.1000459.
- James Lyons-Weiler and Paul Thomas, “Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses along the Axis of Vaccination,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 22 (2020): 8674, doi:10.3390/ijerph17228674.
- Wakefield AJ, et al. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet. 1998. doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096-0.
- Turtles All The Way Down. Vaccine Science and Myth. 2022. Editor: Zoey O’Toole. Foreword by Mary Holland.
- Kirsch S.If vaccines don’t cause autism, then how do you explain all this evidence? May 2023.
- Vax-Unvax. Let the Science Speak. August 2023. Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Brian Hooker, PhD.
- Countering the WHO’s “Big Catch-up” Global Campaign and Immunization Agenda 2030. WCH Statement. May 12, 2023.
- Rejecting Monopoly Power over Global Public Health. WCH Policy Brief. May 2023.
September 10, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
On August 31, the Nation magazine published an article entitled “Chile: The Secrets the US Government Continues to Hide,” which details the CIA’s continued steadfast insistence on keeping its records secret that relate to the agency’s 1970-1973 efforts to bring regime change to Chile.
The CIA’s continued secrecy, of course, brings to mind the agency’s equally steadfast insistence on keeping its JFK-assassination related records secret into perpetuity.
The CIA, needless to say, cites the two magic words — “national security” — to justify its continued secrecy in both events.
I suggest that two other words are the real reason for the CIA’s continued secrecy in both events: “criminal cover-up.”
After all, the JFK assassination took place 60 years ago and the Chilean coup took place 50 years ago. The notion that the release of CIA assassination-related and coup-related records would threaten “national security,” no matter what definition is used for that ridiculous, meaningless term, is laughable to the extreme.
Actually, the Chilean coup bears a relationship to the JFK assassination. That’s because the national-security establishment’s mindset toward its regime-change operation in Chile reflected its mindset toward its regime-change operation in Dallas. My hunch is that those still-secret records relating to Chile would provide further circumstantial evidence pointing toward the reasons for the operation in Dallas.
In 1970, Chilean voters delivered a plurality of vote to Salvador Allende in the presidential election. Since Allende had not received a majority of votes, the election was thrown into the hands of the Chilean congress.
U.S. officials deemed Allende a grave threat to U.S. national security, on two grounds: that he was a socialist but, more important, that he was befriending the communist world, including Cuba and the Soviet Union, something that Kennedy had done as well in his famous Peace Speech at American University a few months before he was assassinated.
The CIA embarked on a campaign of bribing the members of the Chilean congress to vote against Allende (which, of course, is somewhat ironic given the fierce U.S. reaction to supposed Russian involvement in U.S. elections).
At the same time, the U.S. national-security establishment made plans for a Chilean military takeover. What’s interesting is that the CIA did not assassinate Allende. Instead, it convinced the Chilean national-security establishment that Allende posed a grave threat to Chilean national security and, therefore, that the Chilean national-security establishment had a moral duty to violently prevent Allende from assuming the presidency.
That’s a very important and very revealing point, one that undoubtedly comes across loud and clear in those still-secret CIA records relating to the Chile coup. The point reveals the U.S. national-security establishment’s conviction that it had the moral duty to violently remove JFK from power in order to protect America from a president whose policies, they concluded, posed a grave risk to “national security.” (See FFF’s book JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne.)
Much to the chagrin of the U.S. national-security establishment, however, the commanding general of Chile’s armed forces, Gen. Rene Schneider, opposed the idea of a coup. His position was that the Chilean constitution did not permit a coup as a way to remove a democratically elected president from office. He said that Chileans would have to wait until the next election.
Therefore, the CIA simply orchestrated a violent kidnapping of Schneider which left him dead from gunshot wounds on the streets of Santiago. Ironically, the CIA’s kidnapping and assassination of this innocent man boomeranged because the Chilean congress, faced with tremendous anger over Schneider’s murder among the Chilean citizenry, rejected the CIA’s bribes and installed Allende into power.
Three years later, however, the U.S. national-security establishment prevailed in its efforts and helped military strongman Gen. Augusto Pinochet violently take over the reins of power. By the end of the war between the executive and national-security branches of the government, Allende was dead, just as Kennedy was ten years before.
With the full support of the Pentagon and the CIA, Pinochet’s henchmen rounded up some 60,000 innocent people and proceeded to torture and/or rape most of them. They also killed or disappeared around 3,000 of them.
Orlando Letelier
Among those rounded up was Orlando Letelier, a highly respected man who had served in the Allende administration as ambassador to the United States, minister of foreign affairs, minister of the interior, and minister of defense. After being tortured in captivity, world pressure forced Pinochet to release him.
Letelier moved to Washington, D.C., where he joined a leftist think tank and began lobbying against the Pinochet regime. Pinochet and his national-security establishment deemed Letelier to be a grave threat to Chilean “national security.”
On September 21, 1976, Letelier was killed by a car bomb on the streets of Washington, D.C., along with his young assistant Ronni Moffitt.
It was determined that Pinochet’s secret Gestapo-like internal police force, which was called DINA and which worked with the CIA, had orchestrated and carried out the Letelier assassination. Among those convicted of the crime was a DINA agent named Michael Townley, who was a U.S. citizen.
As part of what was clearly a sweetheart deal, Townley pled guilty in U.S. District Court as part of a plea bargain with U.S. officials. Get this: He was sentenced to only ten years in jail for what amounted to the cold-blooded murder of two innocent people. To put that in perspective, compare it to the 22-year jail sentence that a U.S. District Judge recently meted out to a man convicted of simply participating in the January 6 protests. Townley was also given immunity from prosecution in Chile for another national-security assassination in which he had allegedly been involved.
But that’s not all. After serving only 62 months in jail, get this: He was admitted into the federal witness protection program! That meant that the feds gave him a secret identity and let him live a normal life somewhere in the world.
The Letelier assassination has always been blamed on Pinochet. Is it possible that the CIA, working with DINA, was also embroiled in that assassination, on grounds of “national security”? My hunch is that those records relating to Chile that the CIA steadfastly continues to keep secret would help provide an answer to that question, which, needless to say, would be a good reason for wanting them to kept secret.
September 10, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Deception, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Chile, CIA, JFK Assassination, United States |
Leave a comment
Far from bringing down the final curtain, it seems that the Covid comedy show is going to run and run.
First up (as they say), there is the seemingly unending stream of Covid variants. It is almost as if someone is making them up. In the middle of August, I wrote in these pages about Eris, but now others have emerged such as BA.2.86 which may evade the Covid vaccines (code for ‘we need more vaccines’) and Pirola. While we are exhorted to ‘be worried’, if you dig deep into the details it transpires that there is little to worry about.
After all, we have been here before. We were warned about BA.4 and BA.5 (‘variants of concern’) late in 2021 but, probably much to the surprise of the doom-mongers, humanity has survived. Who can forget Omicron which even those who discovered it described as nothing to worry about? But we were urged to worry about it nevertheless. Even more baffling is that some people who did not fall for the Covid vaccine propaganda are still with us. Quelle surprise!
Next on the bill is animal-to-human transmission. There has long been speculation that Covid may spread from humans to animals, so they could become a reservoir for the virus which could then spread back to humans. Early in 2020 the British government issued mundane advice (e.g. ‘wash your hands’) for people with animals and provided a list of the creatures to which it was considered Covid-19 may spread. The list was extensive and may as well have proclaimed ‘the animal kingdom’ as a potential reservoir for the virus. Though little advice related to specific animals, the government saw fit to include a specific section: ‘If you own a ferret’. Sadly, it did not contain the advice ‘don’t put it down your trousers’; a comedy opportunity missed, in my view.
There remains concern that humans are spreading Covid to deer. We first read about this early in the pandemic but, unless we are concerned about the welfare of deer, which surely have better things to worry about than Covid, it is unclear why we should be concerned now. It is suspected (not confirmed) that three humans have contracted Covid from deer in the United States from a population of around 334,233,000 where 120 people are killed annually in road accidents involving deer. The animal crackers continue with the risk of zoo employees contracting Covid from lions. It may just be me, but if I was working with lions, catching a dose of Covid would be way down my list of concerns.
Long Covid is an old favourite on the comedy circuit, and by special request, it is here tonight courtesy of our sponsors Medscape. Concern is now turning to long Covid in children, and we are told: ‘Long Covid most often strikes seniors and adults, but children are also affected, even though they get less attention, new research shows.’ It was only a matter of time, and the irony is lost on the authors that children were given undue attention by the vaccine obsessed during the ‘pandemic’ given that they were at such low risk from Covid. Some children are suffering from extreme debilitation but the possibility of this resulting from vaccine injury is not even contemplated.
In another Medscape article the ‘mystery’ of long Covid is explored. A single case is presented of someone disabled with post-viral symptoms. His symptoms are not in doubt, but the cause seems to be unknown, yet Medscape is convinced this is long Covid. After all, it must be as the list of symptoms associated with long Covid, having been whittled down to a mere seven, now seems to have expanded again to 37, which does not exactly narrow down to a precise diagnosis.
In breaking news, again in that redoubtable organ Medscape, ‘some people with long Covid tested negative for Covid-19’. Intellectual gymnastics from various sources are drawn on to explain this phenomenon. Primarily it is attributed to not diagnosing the original Covid infection properly (code for ‘we need more Covid testing’). It never seems to enter the heads of these Covid boffins that long Covid either does not exist or is something else altogether. We already know that half of people reporting long Covid symptoms also reported that they had never had Covid and that some long Covid symptoms in women bear a remarkable resemblance to early onset menopause. Nevertheless, it is clear that someone has an interest, presumably financial, in perpetuating the long Covid narrative which, if they succeed, may well prove to be as lucrative as the HIV/AIDS narrative which is still giving good returns forty years on.
However, the team at TCW are at pains to let you know that there is no cause for alarm, be it scariant variants, transmission from rampaging lions or the dreadful prospect of long Covid (everyone has at least one symptom after all). We are here to spread a message of hope and that comes with the information that our caring and sharing government are going to prepare new vaccines against the new variants and bring forward the autumn vaccine programme. What’s more, some of you lucky people who received the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines will continue to produce harmless spike proteins . . . for ever. So, you see, there is absolutely nothing to worry about.
Truthstream Media | September 4, 2023
September 9, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular, Video | Covid-19 |
Leave a comment
Here’s what never happened in the hospital during COVID: a doctor sat down next to a patient and said, “You have a choice. We can give you Remdesivir, which killed 53 percent of the patients in an Ebola trial. It was so bad the trial had to be shut down. And you’ll notice here in Remdesivir’s fact sheet, it says, ‘Not a lot of people have used Remdesivir. Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.’ Or we can give you ivermectin, a safe and effective drug that’s been successfully used for decades, and send you home. Which do you prefer?”
The reason that conversation never happened is that it would have cost the hospital too much money. If the hospital gave you ivermectin and sent you home, the federal government paid the hospital $3,200. If the hospital gave you Remdesivir, the federal government paid the entire hospital bill, plus a 20 percent bonus. So the hospital executives’ choice was to receive $3,200 or $500,000, which was the average hospital bill. No contest. Patients were going to get Remdesivir — whether they wanted it or not.
Informed consent died a grotesque death in the hospitals during COVID, and we need an autopsy. There was no information, and there was no consent, and without them, patients are reduced to helpless victims, exploited for corrupt financial gain and immoral experiments.
Informed consent has been enshrined in numerous judicial rulings as the foundation of ethical medical practice and seared into the public’s conscience from the Nuremberg trials. Seven Nazi doctors were hanged in Germany by an American military tribunal for “murders, tortures, and other atrocities committed in the name of medical science.” Yet murders, tortures, and other atrocities are exactly what was committed by medical staff in the hospitals against thousands of Americans during COVID.
Take, for example, Ray Lamar, who arrived in the emergency room with a message written with a black sharpie pen on his arm: “NO VENT NOREMDESIVIR.” On his other arm, he wrote the same message and added his wife’s name and phone number. Yet the doctors gave him Remdesivir anyway, without ever informing him. His widow Patti told me she constantly wonders what she could have done to save him.
Christine Johnson told the doctors that she discussed all her medications with her daughter, who is a nurse, and she concluded that she didn’t want Remdesivir. It didn’t matter. Christine was given Remdesivir while she was sleeping, and now her daughter Michelle doesn’t have her mother.
Rebecca Stevens was an avid reader of Epoch Times, where she learned about Remdesivir’s dangers. She declined Remdesivir on five separate occasions, as her hospital records confirm. But the medical staff didn’t care what Rebecca wanted. She was given Remdesivir without her knowledge, and now Rebecca’s five grandsons are bereft.
I asked Michael Hamilton how it’s possible to give Remdesivir to patients without them knowing. Hamilton is a lawyer for several families who are suing California hospitals for the murder of their loved ones, and he’s heard thousands of victims’ stories. “They would lie right to your face,” he said. “You’d tell the nurse that you didn’t want Remdesivir and she’d say, ‘Fine. But you’re a bit dehydrated, so let’s get some fluids in you.’ And she’d hook up the IV, but it wasn’t fluids. It was Remdesivir.”
Hamilton told me that another favored tactic was to knock out patients with sedatives like morphine and fentanyl. While they lay there in a stupor, they were injected with Remdesivir.
If secret injections of Remdesivir weren’t enough to kill you, the hospitals had more torture lined up. After all, the federal government paid hospitals a big bonus to ventilate patients — so patients were going to get ventilated, whether they wanted to or not. A lot of patients turned down being vented, because the whole process is a nightmare. You’re painfully intubated, rendered unable to talk; your lungs start shredding, and you may acquire bacterial pneumonia, which the hospital will refuse to treat.
But “no” is not an acceptable answer when the hospital has money at stake. The medical staff’s preferred method for gaining “consent” was relentless bullying, screaming, coercion, and threats until the patient finally caved. Patti Lamar, Ray’s widow, told me that when she refused to let them ventilate her husband, the doctors screamed at her over and over, “You’re killing him! You’re killing him! You’re killing him!” When she couldn’t take it anymore, she reluctantly gave in. Ray died shortly thereafter, and Patti lives with the trauma of that moment.
Michael Hamilton told me the fate of his friend who was a nurse, hospitalized in the place where she had worked for 26 years. When she refused ventilation, the doctor shrieked, “You’re refusing medical advice! Now your insurance company won’t pay your hospital bill when you die! Do you want to bankrupt your family? Do you? Do you?” The nurse panicked, and to protect her family, she “consented.” Two days later, she died.
“This was a very common technique,” Hamilton said. “I’ve heard it hundreds of times. You tell the patient that unless they do what the doctor says, they’ll bankrupt their family because insurance won’t pay the hospital bills. Nobody wants to do that to their family.” Does this sound like informed consent to you? It sounds more like medical battery to me.
The entire hospital environment was a hellscape of abuse in which informed consent wasn’t even a distant memory. Hamilton told me that patients were routinely denied all access to food and water, stupefied with 50 medications that included drugs contraindicated for each other, tortured with oxygen machines set at such high levels that they couldn’t breathe, and zip-tied to the bed till their wrists bled and their hands turned black. His stories align with 1,000 collected testimonies of the COVID-19 Human Betrayal Memory Project, which documents the victims’ fates.
The ultimate denial of informed consent was the hospitals’ refusal to allow the patients to leave. “Patients lost all rights when they went in the hospital,” Senator Ron Johnson told Patty Myers in her documentary, Making A Killing. “They became prisoners.” A cottage industry of hospital rescues cropped up, as desperate family members hired lawyers to try to spring their loved ones out of hospital “care.” Ralph Lorigo, a lawyer in Buffalo, told me that in every case when he succeeded in getting a patient’s case before a judge and the judge ruled in the family’s favor, the patient went home and survived. In all cases where the judge refused to hear the case or ruled against the family, the patient died.
Every American is a sovereign individual with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a sack of meat to be treated as a profit opportunity. Informed consent must be revived from the grave if Americans are to have a fighting chance against powerful financial interests allied against them.
Stella Paul is the pen name of a writer in New York who has covered medical issues for over a decade. In 2021, she lost her husband in a locked down nursing home in New York City where he had been brutally isolated for almost a year. He died one week after getting the vaccine. Stella is focused on exposing the Hospital Death Protocol to honor her husband’s memory and to support thousands of bereaved families.
September 9, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Covid-19, United States |
Leave a comment
Lancet Paper Inadvertently Discloses Data on Vaccination Worsening Long-COVID Symptomatology
I have seen patients in my practice become progressively more ill with fatigue, weakness, hair loss, headaches, effort intolerance, sleep disturbance and in some cases cardiac and neurological symptoms with progressive mRNA injections every six months. Meanwhile the Biden Administration US HHS National Action Plan on Long COVID-19 has been running a billion dollar research plan with no consideration that the vaccine could be the cause of symptoms. The medical literature is loaded with papers on long-COVID ignoring the fact the same patient groups have all been taking COVID-19 vaccines. In essence, there is a global coverup of vaccine injury syndromes as “long-COVID.”
Mateu et al studied 548 individuals, 341 with long-COVID, followed for a median of 23 months (IQR 16.5–23.5). With continued vaccination, only 26 subjects (7.6%) recovered from long-COVID during follow-up; almost all of them (n = 24) belonged to the less symptomatic cluster and importantly the syndrome finally lessened when they dropped vaccination. The authors fail to include vaccination in their multivariate models, thereby missing this effect in the patient population. However, they inadvertently show the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on persistent long-COVID in a figure shown in the Lancet manuscript.
No wonder people are sick with long-COVID! The vaccines install long-lasting genetic code for the Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein which deposits in tissues and organs and directly causes cardiovascular, neurological, thrombotic, and immunologic disease which is being blamed on “long-COVID.” Thus an important part of treatment for long-COVID is to stop ill-advised every six-month mass vaccination.
Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
President, McCullough Foundation
www.mcculloughfnd.org
Lourdes Mateu, Cristian Tebe, Cora Loste, José Ramón Santos, Gemma Lladós, Cristina López, Sergio España-Cueto, Ruth Toledo, Marta Font, Anna Chamorro, Francisco Muñoz-López, Maria Nevot, Nuria Vallejo, Albert Teis, Jordi Puig, Carmina R. Fumaz, José A. Muñoz-Moreno, Anna Prats, Carla Estany-Quera, Roser Coll-Fernández, Cristina Herrero, Patricia Casares, Ana Garcia, Bonaventura Clotet, Roger Paredes, Marta Massanella, Determinants of the onset and prognosis of the post-COVID-19 condition: a 2-year prospective observational cohort study, The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, 2023, 100724, ISSN 2666-7762, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100724. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666776223001436)
September 9, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, United States |
Leave a comment
Nearly all of the alleged anthropogenic link to climate change can be removed simply by exchanging and/or replacing biased temperature and solar activity data sets.
A new study authored by 37 scientists in the journal Climate finds using rural-only Northern Hemisphere temperature data (i.e., removing artificial, non-climatic urban heat effects) reduces the post-1850 warming trend from 0.89°C per century to 0.55°C per century.
Further, using a total solar irradiance (TSI) dataset neglected by the IPCC (Hoyt and Schatten, 1993, updated to present) allows TSI to explain up to 87% of modern warming.
Variations in cloud cover, albedo, and natural ocean circulations may also be factors arising from internal climate variability that could explain modern climate changes.
In summary, then, much of modern global warming’s alleged link to human activity may have been formulated by selecting data that align with the hypothesis, and neglecting or dismissing data which do not.
September 9, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular |
Leave a comment
Dismal UK CFD auction results may be a landmark moment
The Government has today announced the results of the fifth auction of Contracts for Difference subsidies for renewable electricity generation. Its has been a failure, and may represent a landmark moment for renewables policy.
Only 3.7GW of new capacity has bid successfully, mostly through small projects, as compared to nearly 12GW last year. There were no bids for offshore wind, the UK’s flagship renewable generator.
Participants in the auction bid for guaranteed prices, below a cap set by ministers in advance of the auction. The cap for offshore wind was set at £44/MWh (in 2012 prices, equivalent to around £70/MWh today). This is higher than successful bids in the past, yet no wind farm developers felt able to bid at this price. Wind industry claims that this is due to rising prices are implausible – CfD contracts are index-linked.
While offshore wind’s failure to bid may be surprising to some, perhaps even to the Government, it will come as no shock to those familiar with the long-term capital and operating cost trends for wind power, as revealed in audited financial statements. Costs have not been falling dramatically as the industry claimed. All around the world the wind industry is in trouble for the same reasons; costs remain high, and high levels of subsidy are needed to reward investors.
In addition, the latest auction round closes down the loophole that allowed windfarms to reap huge windfall profits by failing to activate their contracts so that they could benefit from higher prices in the open market.
The fact is that wind power, wherever, is an expensive way of generating energy. That isn’t surprising either; wind is a physically low-quality fuel and the cost of turning it into electricity is intrinsically high.
The previously successful low bids for offshore wind were unrealistic, a point we made at the time. Even when built, wind farms delayed taking up their contracts so they could operate on a merchant basis, taking advantage of temporarily high wholesale prices.
Importantly, the cap for onshore wind bids in this round of the CFD auction was higher than that for offshore, at £53/MWh (2012 prices). There were a substantial number of successful bids at this price, though they are all located in Scotland, where land rents are lower and where the developers can expect to make extra income through the infamous “constraint payments”, where a wind farm is paid to reduce output. (Demand in Scotland is low and the grid links to England are congested, limiting exports.) Even so, we doubt that these successful onshore bids are strongly economic.
Andrew Montford, director of Net Zero Watch, said:
Government seems to have believed the spin about falling offshore wind costs, and set a low cap on bids for new contracts, thus calling the wind industry’s bluff by accident. Doubtless, the industry will now beg for new and higher subsidies, blaming inflation and supply chain problems. Government should not believe this spin. As global experience shows, wind power is extremely and intrinsically expensive.”
Dr John Constable, energy editor of Net Zero Watch, said:
The CfD auction results are symptomatic of a wider failure of wind power around the world. The industry is in a crisis from which it is unlikely to recover, because its costs are simply too high to be sustainable. The time has come for Government to admit that renewables have failed, and to start looking at realistic energy policies.
September 9, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular | UK |
Leave a comment
Dr Ros Jones, the founder of CCVAC and long-term critic of the Government’s advisory body on vaccine policy JCVI, has just written to them again to ask why, in defiance of the evidence, are they recommending an autumn booster for healthy 12-64s who live with an immunocompromised household member. Here she explains her concern.
SCARY and ill-informed headlines like ‘New Covid fears as kids return to school and daily rates numbers double in a month’ have given grist to the government’s mill that an increase in Covid cases justifies them in bringing forward the autumn booster programme from October to September 15.
If you think this is irrelevant for most healthy children, it is not. The proposed schedule, though excluding the majority of healthy under-64s, recommends that perfectly healthy 12-64s get a booster if they are a household contact of someone with immunosuppression, for example someone who has been under cancer treatment. Once again guilt is being exploited. Whose needs do parents prioritise, their healthy teenage son or daughter or their elderly immunocompromised mothers and fathers? The simple answer is they have to do neither: their child does not need a booster for his or her own health and it is abundantly clear that the vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission, and may well have the opposite effect. There is good evidence that repeated boosters actually increase the likelihood of infection, particularly in the first week or two after vaccination, quite apart from all the other immediate and long-term potential risks of harm.
This is why I, with more than one hundred health professionals and academics, have once again written to Professor Wei Shen Lim, chairman of the JCVI’s Covid-19 committee, to point out the total lack of logic or indeed ethics in the current guidelines. The letter is published below and can also be found on the Hart group website here: Professor Lim, how can boosters protect others? – HART (hartgroup.org)
***
4th September 2023
Professor Wei Shen Lim and all members, Joint Committee of Vaccination and Immunisation
Rt Hon Stephen Barclay MP, Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Care
cc Dr Camilla Kingdon, President, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health
Dear Professor Lim and Mr Barclay,
re: JCVI advice for Covid-19 vaccination of healthy young adults if living with an immunocompromised household member
I, and many of my co-signatories, have written to you on several occasions since May 2021[i], when you were first deliberating over whether to recommend Covid-19 gene-based vaccines for healthy children, given the lack of any robust safety data on these new mRNA technologies and the acknowledged low impact of SARS-CoV-2 on children.
It is very gratifying to see that this autumn’s booster programme [ii] has now been dropped for almost all healthy under-65s. However, there is one group still being offered a booster that causes us serious concern, namely the offer of a booster to healthy over-12s if they have an immunocompromised household member. We set out our reasons below.
1. It is clear that Covid-19 vaccines are failing to prevent infection by or transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
2. There is now good evidence that multiple boosters actually increase the likelihood of a SARS-CoV-2 infection [iii].
3. There is good evidence of a specific rise in infection risk in the first 7-10 days after vaccination, thus putting family members at increased rather than reduced risk [iv],[v].
4. The more recent omicron variants are poorly covered by the original vaccines, but even the newer bivalent boosters generate a much lower response against the non-Wuhan sequences in the vaccines, indicative of immune imprinting [vi].
5. The potential benefit of vaccination now for healthy young adults is low, and for children is effectively zero, given the poor efficacy of the vaccines and the high prevalence of naturally-acquired immunity [vii].
6. The safety profile of these vaccines is woefully inadequate for use in a healthy low-risk population, especially children, giving a poor risk : benefit balance. The hazard of myocarditis, recognised early on as an increased risk in younger age groups [viii], has still been poorly delineated, but risks as high as 1 in 25 are reported for subclinical myocarditis in a recent study from Switzerland [ix], confirming similar findings from Thailand. Although symptoms usually resolve quickly, scarring has been demonstrated on cardiac MRI scans [x] and has been found to persist at 6-12-month follow-up [xi]. Pfizer’s own 5-year follow-up study is not due to report until 2027; likewise a large FDA-sponsored study in the US [xii].
7. Many other adverse effects have been reported and listed in our previous letters [xiii], [xiv], perhaps the most worrying of which is the deleterious effect on the immune system [xv],[xvi]. Basic pharmacokinetics of these products are only just being reported, with a paper this week, as we write, reporting findings of vaccine-derived spike protein persisting in the circulation for many months (or longer) after vaccination [xvii],[xviii]; with serious implications for prolonged effects of any vaccine injuries.
8. The issue of excess all-cause deaths in younger age groups in 2022 and 2023 has yet to be properly investigated and a link to vaccines cannot be ruled out until this is done[xix].
9. Even if there was good evidence that vaccination could protect vulnerable household contacts, there would be major ethical concerns around asking children to take a vaccine with any potential risks of harm, to protect family members. The Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights [xx] Article 4 and Article 7 make it clear that all medical interventions must be in the best interest of the individual concerned, particularly in the case of children who are not able to give consent. If a booster was in the best interests of a healthy 12-17-year-old, then surely the JCVI would be recommending it for all, but it is clear that these children are being offered the vaccine merely in a likely unsuccessful attempt to benefit other household members.
10. Whilst it may be argued that technically these products have now been approved and are therefore no longer a research tool, these ethical principles and the precautionary principle must still apply, especially since the approval itself is still based on much less evidence than would be expected for other drugs.
Please could you urgently provide the following, under a FOI request:
- minutes of the meetings at which these decisions were made;
- calculations of numbers of healthy 12-17-year-olds (and of all household members aged 12-64) needed to vaccinate to prevent the hospitalisation of one vulnerable family member;
- any legal advice taken on how these unnecessary booster doses to children comply with UK and international law.
We look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency before the commencement of the vaccine booster rollout to healthy 12-17-year-olds .
Yours sincerely
Dr Rosamond Jones, MD, FRCPCH, retired consultant paediatrician, convenor of CCVAC (Children’s Covid Vaccines Advisory Council) and many others….
Professor Anthony J Brookes, Professor of Genomics & Health Data Science, University of Leicester
Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMedSci, Professor of Oncology, University of London; Principal, Institute for Cancer Vaccines & Immunotherapy
Professor Richard Ennos, MA, PhD. Honorary Professorial Fellow, University of Edinburgh
Professor John A Fairclough, BM BS, BMed Sci, FRCS, FFSEM(UK), Professor Emeritus, Honorary Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
Professor David Livermore, BSc, PhD, retired Professor of Medical Microbiology
Professor Karol Sikora, MA, MBBChir, PhD, FRCR, FRCP, FFPM, Honorary Professor of Professional Practice, Buckingham University
Professor Roger Watson, FRCP Edin, FRCN, FAAN, Honorary Professor of Nursing, University of Hull
Professor Keith Willison, PhD, Professor of Chemical Biology, Imperial, London
Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former parliamentary under-secretary of state 2001-2003, former consultant in Public Health Medicine
Dr Roland Salmon, MBBS, MRCGP, FFPH, former Director, Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre (Wales)
Dr Ali Ajaz, Consultant Psychiatrist
Dr Shiraz Akram, BDS, Dental surgeon
Dr Victoria Anderson, MBChB, MRCGP, MRCPCH, DRCOG, General Practitioner
Julie Annakin, RN, Immunisation Specialist Nurse
Wendy Armstrong, Practice Nurse
Helen Auburn, Dip ION, MBANT, NTCC, CNHC, Registered Nutritional Therapist
Dr Ancha Bala-Joof, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr Michael Bazlinton, MBChB, MRCGP, DCH, General Practitioner
Dr Mark A Bell, MBChB, MRCP(UK), FRCEM, Consultant in Emergency Medicine, UK
Dr Michael D Bell, MBChB, MRCGP, retired General Practitioner
Dr Ashvy Bhardwaj, MBBS, DRCOG, MRCGP (2018)
Dr Alan Black, MBBS, MSc, DipPharmMed, Retired Pharmaceutical Physician
Dr Gillian Breese, BSc, MB ChB, DFFP, DTM&H, General Practitioner
Dr Ian Bridges, MBBS, retired General Practitioner
Dr Emma Brierly, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr Elizabeth Burton, MB ChB, Retired General Practitioner
Dr David Cartland, MBChB, BMedSci, General practitioner
Dr Peter Chan, BM, MRCS, MRCGP, NLP, General Practitioner, Functional Medicine Practitioner
Dr Bernard Choi, MBBS, MRCGP, DCH, DRCOG, General Practitioner
Michael Cockayne, MSc, PGDip, SCPHNOH, BA, RN, Occupational Health Practitioner
Mr Ian F Comaish, MA, BM BCh, FRCOphth, FRANZCO, Consultant ophthalmologist
James Cook, BN, MPH, NHS Registered Nurse
Dr Clare Craig, BMBCh, FRCPath, Pathologist
Dr David Critchley, BSc, PhD, 32 years in pharmaceutical R&D as a clinical research scientist
Dr Sue de Lacy, MBBS, MRCGP, AFMCP UK, Integrative Medicine Doctor
Dr Christine Dewbury, retired General Practitioner
Mr Keith Dewbury, retired Consultant Radiologist
Dr Jayne Donegan, MBBS, DRCOG, DCH, DFFP, MRCGP, homeopathic practitioner, retired NHS GP
Dr Damien Downing, MBBS, MRSB, private physician
Dr Jonathan Eastwood, BSc, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr Jonathan Engler, MBChB, LlB (hons), DipPharmMed
Dr Elizabeth Evans, MA(Cantab), MBBS, DRCOG, Director UKMFA
Dr Chris Exley, PhD FRSB, retired professor in Bioinorganic Chemistry
Dr Brian Fitzsimons, MBChB, DipOccMed, FRCGP, General Practitioner, Occupational Health Physician, Pre-Hospital Emergency Care Practitioner
Dr John Flack, BPharm, PhD. Retired Director of Safety Evaluation at Beecham Pharmaceuticals 1980-1989 and Senior Vice-president for Drug Discovery 1990-92 SmithKline Beecham
Dr Charles Forsyth, MBBS, FFHom, Ecological and Homeopathic Physician (Retired)
Dr Sheena Fraser, MBChB, MRCGP (2003), Dip BSLM, General Practitioner
Sophie Gidet, RM, Midwife
Dr Jenny Goodman, MA, MBChB, Ecological Medicine
Dr Ali Haggett, Mental health community work, 3rd sector, former lecturer in the history of medicine
Mr David Halpin, MBBS, FRCS, Orthopaedic and trauma surgeon, retired
Alex Hicks, MEng, MCIPS, Compliance Director (Supply Chain)
Mr Anthony Hinton, MBChB, FRCS, Consultant ENT surgeon, London
Dr Richard House, PhD, CPsychol, AFBPsS, CertCouns, Chartered Psychologist, former senior lecturer in Psychology (Roehampton) and Early Childhood (Winchester), retired psychotherapist
Dr Keith Johnson, DPhil, former patents officer
Dr Timothy Kelly, MB BCh BSc, NHS doctor
Dr Tanya Klymenko, PhD, FHEA, FIBMS, Senior Lecturer in Biomedical Sciences
Dr Caroline Lapworth, MB ChB, General Practitioner
Dr Branko Latinkic, BSc, PhD, Molecular Biologist
Dr Theresa Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, Director, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd
Dr Jason Lester, MRCP, FRCR, Consultant Clinical Oncologist
Dr Felicity Lillingstone, IMD DHS PhD ANP, Doctor, Urgent Care, Research Fellow
Dr Nichola Ling, MBBS, MRCOG, Consultant obstetrician and digital advisor to NHS England
Katherine MacGilchrist, BSc (Hons) Pharmacology, MSc Epidemiology, CEO, Systematic Review Director, Epidemica Ltd
Dr C Geoffrey Maidment, MD, FRCP, retired consultant physician
Mr Ahmad K Malik, FRCS (Tr & Orth), Dip Med Sport, Consultant Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgeon
Dr Ayiesha Malik, MBChB, General Practitioner
Dr Kulvinder S. Manik MBChB, MRCGP, MA(Cantab), LLM, Gray’s Inn
Dr Fiona Martindale, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner in out-of-hours
Julie Maxwell, MBBCh, MRCPCH, Associate Specialist Community Paediatrician
Dr Fatou Mbow, MD(Italy), MRCGP, DFFP, 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
Kaira McCallum, BSc, retired pharmacist, Director of strategy UKMFA
Mr Ian McDermott, MBBS, MS, FRCS(Tr&Orth), FFSEM(UK), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
Dr Janet Menage, MA, MBChB, retired General Practitioner
Dr Franziska Meuschel, MD, ND, PhD Affiliations, IDF, BSEM, Nutritional, Environmental and Integrated Medicine
Dr Scott Mitchell, MBChB, MRCS, Associate Specialist, Emergency Medicine
Dr Alistair J Montgomery, MBChB, MRCGP, DRCOG, retired General Practitioner
Dr Alan Mordue, MBChB, FFPH, Retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine & Epidemiology
Margaret Moss, MA(Cantab), CBiol, MRSB, Director, The Nutrition and Allergy Clinic, Cheshire
Dr Claire Mottram, BSc Hons, MBChB, Doctor in General Practice
Dr Greta Mushet, MBChB, MRCPsych, retired Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy
Dr Angela Musso, MD, MRCGP, DRCOG, FRACGP, MFPC, General Practitioner
Dr Sarah Myhill, MBBS, Dip NM, Retired GP, Independent Naturopathic Physician
Dr Chris Newton, PhD, Biochemist
Dr Rachel Nicoll, PhD, Medical researcher
Tim Nike, Specialist Neurological Physiotherapist
Sue Parker Hall, CTA, MSc (Counselling & Supervision), MBACP, EMDR. Psychotherapist
Dr Dean Patterson, MBChB, FRCP. Consultant Cardiologist
Dr Christina Peers, MBBS, DRCOG, DFSRH, FFSRH, Menopause Specialist
Rev Dr William J U Philip MB ChB, MRCP, BD, Senior Minister The Tron Church Glasgow, formerly physician specialising in cardiology
Dr Angharad Powell, MBChB, BSc (hons), DFRSH, DCP (Ireland), DRCOG, DipOccMed, MRCGP, General Practitioner
Dr Gerry Quinn, PhD, Microbiologist
Dr Jessica Robinson, BSc(Hons), MBBS, MRCPsych, MFHom, Psychiatrist and Integrative Medicine Doctor
Dr Jon Rogers, MB ChB (Bristol), retired General Practitioner
Mr James Royle, MBChB, FRCS, MMedEd, Colorectal Surgeon
Dr Charlie Sayer, MBBS, FRCR, Consultant Radiologist
Sorrel Scott, Grad Dip Phys, Specialist Physiotherapist in Neurology, 30 years in NHS
Dr Rohaan Seth, BSc (Hons), MBChB (Hons), MRCGP, Retired General Practitioner
Dr Rajendra Sharma, MBBCh, BAO, LRCP&S(Ire), MFHom, Private Doctor, Medical Director, Dr Sharma Diagnostics
Natalie Stephenson, BSc (Hons) Paediatric Audiologist
Dr Noel Thomas, MA, MBChB, DObsRCOG, DTM&H, MFHom, Retired Doctor
Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt, PhD, NHS Clinical Scientist
Dr Helen Westwood, MBChB (Hons), MRCGP, DCH, DRCOG, General Practitioner
Dr Carmen Wheatley, DPhil, Orthomolecular Oncology
Dr Samuel White, MBChB, MRCGP, Functional Medicine Specialist, former General Practitioner
Dr Ruth Wilde, MBBCh, MRCEM, AFMCP, Integrative & Functional Medicine Doctor
Dr Stephanie Williams, Dermatologist
Dr AZ, MBChB, NHS Specialty doctor
[i] https://www.hartgroup.org/open-letter-to-mhra-17-05-2021/
[ii] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-autumn-2023-vaccination-programme-jcvi-advice-26-may-2023/jcvi-statement-on-the-covid-19-vaccination-programme-for-autumn-2023-26-may-2023
[iii] Shrestha NK, Burke PC, Nowacki AS et al. Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Bivalent Vaccine, Open Forum Infectious Diseases 2023;10 (6): doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad209
[iv] Shrotri M, Krutikov M, Palmer T et al. Vaccine effectiveness of the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 against SARS-CoV-2 infection in residents of long-term care facilities in England (VIVALDI): a prospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2021. doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00289-9
[v] Bar-On YM, Goldberg Y, Micha, M et al. Protection by a Fourth Dose of BNT162b2 against Omicron in Israel, N Engl J Med 2022; 386:1712-1720. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2201570
[vi] Fujita S, Uriu K, Pan L et al. Impact of Imprinted Immunity Induced by mRNA Vaccination in an Experimental Animal Model, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2023;, jiad230, https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiad230
[vii]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1131409/appendix-1-of-jcvi-statement-on-2023-covid-19-vaccination-programme-8-november-2022.pdf
[viii] Oster M, mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine-Associated Myocarditis, 2022, https://www.fda.gov/media/153514/download
[ix] Buergin N, Lopez-Ayala P, Hirsiger JR et al. Sex-specific differences in myocardial injury incidence after COVID-19 mRNA-1273 booster vaccination. European Journal of Heart Failure 2023. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejhf.2978
[x] Jain SS, Steele JM, Fonseca B et al. COVID-19 Vaccination–Associated Myocarditis in Adolescents. Pediatrics 2021; 148 (5): e2021053427. doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-053427
[xi] Yu CK, Tsao S, Ng CW et al. Cardiovascular Assessment up to One Year After COVID-19 Vaccine-Associated Myocarditis. Circulation 2023; 148(5): 436–439. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10373639/
[xii] https://www.nymc.edu/news-and-events/news-archives/us-fda-awards-dr-supriya-jain-19-million-to-support-research-on-covid-19-vaccine-associated-myocarditis.php
[xiii] https://www.hartgroup.org/open-letter-to-the-jcvi-pause-vaccines-for-children-pending-urgent-review/
[xiv] https://www.hartgroup.org/open-letter-to-the-jcvi-2/
[xv] Uversky VN, Redwan EM, Makis W, Rubio-Casillas A.IgG4 Antibodies Induced by mRNA Vaccines Generate Immune Tolerance to SARS-CoV-2’spike Protein by Suppressing the Immune System. Vaccines 2023; 11(5): 991. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11050991
[xvi] Noé A, Dang TD, Axelrad C et al. BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous pathogens and Toll-like receptor agonists. Front Immunol 2023; 14:1242380. doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1242380
[xvii] Castruita JAS, Schneider UV, Mollerup S et al. SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA vaccine sequences circulate in blood up to 28 days after COVID-19 vaccination. APMIS 2023; 131: 128-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.13294
[xviii] Brogna C, Cristoni S, Marino G et al.Detection of recombinant Spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: Possible molecular mechanisms. Proteomics Clinical Applications 2023; https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.202300048
[xix] https://vigilantnews.com/post/excess-mortality-just-got-even-worse-ed-dowd-drops-alarming-new-data
[xx] https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/universal-declaration-bioethics-and-human-rights
September 8, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
The vast majority of the population of Haiti is unvaccinated for COVID-19 but the impoverished Caribbean nation recorded virtually no deaths from the virus.
Haiti remains one of the least vaccinated countries in the world while also showing the lowest Covid death rate.
As of the end of April, just 254 people have died in Haiti from what authorities agree constitutes Covid, according to reports.
However, this figure is likely overblown considering SARS-CoV-2 has never even been isolated and proven to exist.
Compared to the United States, which currently has a COVID-19 death rate of around 1,800 per one million people, Haiti has a Covid death rate of just 22 per one million people, or 0.0022% – basically 0 percent.
NPR admits in a report about Haiti that Covid restrictions were never enforced there.
Nobody there wears a mask, people are mostly unvaccinated, and daily life is normal with busy and crowded buses and markets.
For most Haitians, the pandemic never happened.
“And Haiti hasn’t yet administered a single COVID-19 vaccine,” NPR‘s Jason Beaubien further reveals.
It turns out that Haiti had its own version of Tony Fauci, a man named Dr. Jean “Bill” Pape, who headed up a commission during the “pandemic” to deal with the fallout. In the end, however, the commission was dissolved because Haiti was, and continues to be, COVID-free.
“The reason mainly is because we have very, very few cases of COVID,” Pape said about why the commission was ultimately disbanded.
GHESKIO, the local health agency that Pape heads, also closed its COVID units last fall due to a lack of patients.
While the Western world is stricken with hordes of “fully vaccinated” people who are now sick as dogs, Haiti is back to normal thanks to its rejection of the shots.
“Sometimes it’s two, sometimes zero, sometimes it’s 20 cases,” Pape said.
“But we are not seeing a second wave as we thought would happen.”
Unlike much of the rest of the world, Haiti remained open during the “pandemic.”
Outdoor markets were never closed, and people there continued working because sheltering in place and remote employment are not things that the average Haitian can afford.
“Most people don’t wear a mask,” Pape added, noting that Haitians continued working as normal throughout the pandemic because “if they don’t work, they don’t eat – their family doesn’t eat.”
When AstraZeneca tried to peddle its COVID injection in Haiti, the Haitian government denied a shipment of it.
It turns out that the medical community in Haiti heard about all the “rare” side effects of the jab and thus rejected it.
“COVID did not impact us as badly,” said Dr. Jacqueline Gautier, who serves on the national technical advisory group on COVID vaccination in Haiti.
“People don’t think [the vaccine] is worth it, actually.”
Another factor that makes Haiti an incredible success story compared to other nations is the fact that its population is very young.
The average age in Haiti is around 23, while in the United States, it is closer to 40.
Younger people tend to have stronger immune systems than older people.
And without COVID jabs to destroy them, Haiti’s millions of unvaccinated people fared well compared to the rest of the world.
“Also, there are many other major problems the country is facing,” Gautier added.
“So people don’t see COVID as our major, as a major, problem for us.
“And who can blame them?”
September 8, 2023
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, Haiti |
Leave a comment
Aletho News
Aletho News 