Aletho News


Booster Jabs To Be Offered To 32 Million Brits From September

By Richie Allen | August 2, 2021

It is being reported this morning that booster jabs will be offered to 32 million Britons from next month. Pharmacies will play a key role in delivering 2.5 million doses a week.

It is hoped that while pharmacies administer the booster jabs, GP surgeries and hospitals can tackle the backlog of patients who are waiting for other treatments. According to The Telegraph :

All adults aged 50 and over, as well as the immuno-suppressed, will be offered the booster jabs.

The campaign could start as soon as Sept 6, which would see the rollout completed by early December if it goes to plan. It is hoped the timetable will leave at least a fortnight for the final people vaccinated to benefit from the jab’s effect before Christmas.

Proposals have been drawn up for the covid-19 vaccine to be co-administered alongside the flu jab with one injection in each arm mooted.

Apparently, ministers are considering giving people a different booster shot to the one they got for their first and second dose. Nobody in the mainstream media is asking any questions about the dangers of giving people two vaccines at once.

Nor is anyone questioning the need for booster jabs. As the flu jab rarely works (Google that statement if you don’t believe me) and they claimed that flu disappeared last year, how can they possibly prepare a jab for it?

As usual, the MSM is deaf dumb and blind. Nothing to see here. I’m beginning to get fairly alarmed. What sort of pressure will be brought to bear on people like me who will continue to tell them to stick their jabs where the sun doesn’t shine?

I don’t expect to travel internationally ever again. My days of going to concerts, the theatre, the cinema and restaurants are over. It’s devastating, but I can cope. However, they won’t stop there. They’ll do everything in their power, short of mandating the jabs, to coerce the rest of us to give in. It’s going to be a long Winter.

August 2, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

Does This Data From Public Health Scotland Show that Vaccine Effectiveness Against Death is Just 46%?

By Will Jones | The Daily Sceptic | August 2, 2021 

How well do the vaccines protect from death? The two most recent weekly reports from Public Health Scotland give us death data by vaccination status, and by subtracting one from the other we can work out how many Covid patients died in the week July 9th-15th. The results are shown below.

We see that 38 people died with Covid that week, 37 of whom were over 50. Twenty-eight (74%) were fully vaccinated (18 of whom were over 80 and 24 were over 70). Thirty-three (87%) had had at least one dose. Just five (13%) were unvaccinated.

To fully interpret these we need to know how many people were vaccinated in each age group. The problem with obtaining this information is that the official Scottish statistics appear to use the same method as the NHS for estimating vaccine coverage, which gives figures which exceed the likely more accurate estimates of Public Health England by around 5%.

This means the official Scottish figures show extremely high coverage in the over-60s, implausibly hitting 100% in three of the age bands. If we compare this to the latest PHE figures we can see that the corresponding figures in England, taken from the NIMS database, are more like 90-95% than 100%. In fact, the PHE figures are generally around 10 percentage points lower than the PHS figures for the under-70s. That’s a lot.

Even if the Scottish really are more keen on vaccination than the English (not unlikely, if only because of the smaller minority ethnic population), we know from the English figures that the NHS estimates appear, as mentioned, to overestimate vaccine coverage by around 5%. I’m going to use a very rough estimate then that around 93% of the over-50s in Scotland have had at least one dose (compared to around 90% in England) and around 91% are fully vaccinated (compared to around 88% in England).

Looking at just the deaths in the over 50s now (so dropping the one in the under 50s), this means that 89% of the deaths in the week 9th-15th July were in the 93% who were vaccinated with at least one dose; 76% of the deaths were in the 91% who were fully vaccinated; and 11% of the deaths were in the 7% who were unvaccinated. This does imply that the vaccines are having some protective effect, but not as much as we might have expected from other sources such as PHE which claim the vaccines are 75-99% effective against death.

Note that these figures suggest that those who had received only one dose were particularly vulnerable to death, as they made up only around 2% of the over-50s population but accounted for 14% of the deaths. Since almost all the over-50s had been offered two doses by this point, this means those who had only one may have had particular reason to avoid the second, such as a bad reaction to the first, or simply being otherwise more vulnerable.

We can use these figures to do a crude estimate of the vaccine effectiveness against death. The four deaths in the seven percent who were unvaccinated imply that if the vaccines have no effect there would have been 57 deaths in total (4/0.07), or 52 deaths in the 91% who were fully vaccinated. There were 28 deaths in the fully vaccinated, meaning the vaccines reduced the expected deaths among the over-50s by 46%. This is 46% overall protection, not protection in addition to protection from infection and hospitalisation, and is considerably below the 75-99% PHE estimate.

This is a very crude estimate, however, as 20 of the deaths were in the over-80s. Once we have more data from the recent surge we may be able to get a better estimate.

August 1, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

That big lie from last week – that 97% of hospitalized and 99.5% of deaths occur in the unvaccinated…

… Proven a lie by CDC’s own slide deck

By Meryl Nass, MD | August 1, 2021

This is from the slide deck leaked a few days ago from CDC:

August 1, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | 1 Comment

Apple removes dating app for the unvaxxed Unjected as its creators cry ‘CENSORSHIP!’

RT | August 1, 2021

Apple has removed the dating app Unjected, marketed as a “safe space” for unvaccinated Americans, from its store, saying it “inappropriately refers to the Covid-19 pandemic.” The app’s developers say this amounts to censorship.

Unjected describes itself as a “platform for like-minded humans that support medical autonomy.” The dating app has been pitched as a ‘safe space’ of sorts for unvaccinated Americans looking to date without the pressure of being or not being inoculated against Covid-19. Critics, however, have viewed the app as a growing social-media platform for anti-vaxxers and a hotspot of Covid misinformation.

After the app was removed from Apple on Saturday, the company blasted the move as “censorship.”

“Apparently, we’re considered ‘too much’ for sharing our medical autonomy and freedom of choice,” the company said in a Saturday statement posted to Instagram.

The app remains on the Google Play store, but they acknowledge that the move by Apple may mean a website may be Unjected’s best option moving forward so that they are not reliant on app stores.

Other dating apps such as Tinder and Bumble have introduced features to encourage vaccinations, making Unjected stand out even more after launching in May.

But the boiling point for the platforms was reached after Unjected added a social feature that allowed more general postings. It was flagged by Google after Unjected’s moderators were accused of not doing enough to police misinformation on Covid-19 and the vaccines available.

In response to Google’s concerns, the social feed was removed, though co-founder Shelby Thompson wants to soon reintroduce it and the flagged posts.

“We’ve had to walk a censorship tightrope,” she said, according to Bloomberg News, which first reported Apple removed Unjected on Saturday after being contacted by a reporter about the app.

The app also includes lists of businesses that disagree with vaccine mandates.

Apple has already had issues with Unjected, initially denying approval for the app during its initial review process. Changes had to be made for it to get approval to be in compliance with the company’s strict policy on Covid-19 “misinformation,” but a spokesperson for Apple said updates to the app, as well as statements made to its thousands of users, have brought it back out of compliance.

“The developer has made statements externally to its users as well as updates to the app that once again bring it out of compliance,” the spokesperson said.

Apple argued that, because some phrases and words were initially flagged by the company in the app’s social feature, Unjected users began using different placeholder words and phrases to essentially promote the same conspiracy theories about Covid-19 vaccines.

The new decision makes clear, the company said, that “if you attempt to cheat our system, your apps will be removed from the store.”

Thompson maintains, however, that Apple is merely looking for an excuse to censor Unjected, and even says the removal “violates our constitutional rights.”

August 1, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment


ArmerLainie@123 | July 31, 2021

Dr Mike Yeadon speaks with Dr Michael Palmer

August 1, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | 2 Comments

Whatever politicians are, they aren’t rational

By Paul Collits | The Conservative Woman | July 31, 2021

THERE are two sources of support for those who find conspiracies behind the creation of the Covid State, who believe that it must all be about ‘something else’.

One is the ‘they know they are lying’ argument of former Pfizer executive and research scientist Mike Yeadon and others, who suggest that even if the politicians don’t fully realise that the Wuhan virus is not a global threat, their public health advisers surely do. They therefore MUST know that they are telling lies, day after day. If they are lying, why?  Who or what is behind the Covid State’s lies? On this view, there must be something hidden and menacing in play.

The second source of support for seeing Covid conspiracies is the fact that so many of the decisions taken by democratic governments are so patently stupid and pointless. So much of what has passed for rational decision-making – ‘we are simply following the science’ – is risible. Locking up the healthy rather than protecting the vulnerable? Making people wear masks that, for decades, we have known not to work? Allowing people with life-threatening illnesses to die for want of attention from supposedly stretched hospitals and doctors? Wrecking the economy? Changing the rules every other day on a whim? Spending billions on contact-trace technology that achieves nothing save spreading further needless panic? The very idea that governments can control, let alone eliminate, rapidly spreading viruses?

Now, there are a number of explanations other than the two obvious ones – conspiracy or stuff-up – that seek to explain the flight from rationality of our politicians and their ‘expert’ advisers these past eighteen months. Elementary political science tells us that there are several models of decision-making seeking to explain why politicians do the things they do.

One theory is called ‘the rational actor model’, and it might well sum up what the ordinary punter believes to be abilities and motivations of governments. This model assumes that well-informed politicians with a clear understanding of the problem to be solved think through the options and make the best choice. Perhaps even use some cost-benefit analysis. Clarify the problem, list the options, weigh the issues carefully, consider likely outcomes, recognise the downsides of any actions taken, be consistent, measure success (evaluate) with standardised and agreed methods.

I know – try not to laugh. But the rational actor model probably best described how the bureaucracy used to work. Frank, fearless advice based on research and understanding of issues was offered to elected officials by disinterested public servants. That proposition is now as naïve as believing that their political masters are rational actors.

But you would like to think that politicians should aspire to be well-motivated, well-informed and determined to achieve the best outcome possible for the good of the country or state over which they preside.

Yet we seem to be falling very, very short of the ideal. Politicians are nowadays greedy, motivated by career, factionalised, prone to lying, controlled by outside interests, fearful of losing their power and seemingly willing to do anything to get off the hook. They are patently driven by the enjoyment of power, accessing the perks of office, protecting their mates, setting up post-political career opportunities and settling scores. There is little evidence that they are focused on problem solving (as per the rational actor model), even remotely interested in it or equipped to do it.

A second model of decision-making has been called ‘bounded rationality’. This is the idea that time-poor politicians facing complex problems do not seek the best policy, but are satisfied with an ‘acceptable’ solution, achieving as good an outcome as can be expected under the circumstances.

A third model of decision-making is called ‘incrementalism’. This suggests that no political decision is made in isolation. Every decision builds on what is already there. Its chief advocate (an American called Charles Lindblom) calls the approach ‘muddling through’.

A fourth model is that democracies consist of interest groups all vying for influence over decision-making, and that politicians simply respond to these interest groups in the decisions they make. They especially respond to loud, persistent, clever, monied interest groups. Like Big Pharma, perhaps? Or Big Tech? If this sounds corrupt, it is.

A fifth model of politics – public choice theory – suggests that politicians and bureaucrats have selfish interests like voters and like sellers and buyers in the marketplace that is the economy, and that they make decisions according to this self-interest. Leaders look out for number one. This is getting very warm, and isn’t remotely surprising. Nothing has been so clear during the Covid affair as the self-interest of politicians.

So, we have an array of theories trying to explain how politicians make decisions.  But nothing, nothing, in the study of politics or of decision-making explains fully why governments all over the world simultaneously threw sanity out the window in seeking to deal with a middling, flu-like virus.

Two conclusions can confidently be reached, however. One is that to date there hasn’t been a sliver of very thin paper between the major parties on Covid policy. Right, left or centre, they are all equally panicked, all pandering to the fear in the community that they themselves have created, all scared witless – in the age of the social media pile-on – of instant electoral retribution. All are ignoring science, all are either crushing dissent or ridiculing those (few) who question their approach, and none are remotely able or willing to ask their advisers hard questions, and in doing so to act as our representatives in a quest for the truth.

The second conclusion relates to something called the ‘Overton Window’, which explains what governments are willing and unwilling to do when making decisions. How far they feel comfortable going. It is their window of opportunity (named after the guy who thought this model up), their area of safety, the constraints that stop them doing anything too ‘courageous’, as the fictional Sir Humphrey Appleby would have said.

Another name for this is the ‘meerkat theory of politics’. Meerkats emerge from their hidey-holes and look around to see what dangers there are and what possibilities are open to them. Our Covid politicians are like meerkats. They see what they might be able to get away with. They venture a little farther from the hidey-hole, but still look over their shoulders for electoral danger.

What the political class has done since March 2020 is massively to expand the Overton Window. The political science textbook has been thrown out and a new set of theories is needed to explain why freedom and economies have been destroyed.

We-the-people have allowed them to do this. We have let them throw away the rule book. Like the slowly boiling frog, we have sat there doing almost nothing, saying almost nothing, while our freedoms have been trashed. Now we are willing to stay locked in our home for no good reason, to bump elbows with friends, to dob in our neighbours for doing nothing remotely wrong or dangerous, to watch breathlessly every new announcement by a health bureaucrat, to tell the Government our whereabouts, to bow before the violent actions of thug-police, to have experimental, yet-to-be-approved drugs injected into our bodies, and to abuse anyone who won’t do these things.

Whatever else they are, our leaders are not being remotely rational. And yes, as Mike Yeadon says, they ARE lying and they must know their decisions are stupid and, on balance, massively harmful.

What on earth is the rule book for that?

July 31, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , | 1 Comment

Lack of Compelling Safety data for mRNA COVID Vaccines in Pregnant Women

Trial Site News | July 30, 2021

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, FACC, FACP, FAHA, FASN, FNKF, FNLA, FCRSA, Professor of Medicine, Texas Christian University and the University of North Texas Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, Dallas, TX,

Ira Bernstein, MD, CCFP, FCFP, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON,

Sanja Jovanovic, MD, MSc Community Health and Epidemiology, The Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd, Bath, UK,

Deanna McLeod, HBSc, Principal, Kaleidoscope Strategic,

Raphael B. Stricker, MD, Union Square Medical Associates, San Francisco, CA,

Response to the Shimabukuro et al. (2021) NEJM Publication

The article by Shimabukuro et al. (2021) presents preliminary safety results of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines given to pregnant women from the V-Safe Registry.1 These findings are of particular importance, as pregnant women were excluded from the phase III trials assessing mRNA vaccines.

In Table 4, the authors report a rate of spontaneous abortion (Sab) in early pregnancy (<20 weeks) of 12.6% (104 Sabs/827 completed pregnancies). This number is misleading, however, as this subset represents only 20.9% of women enrolled in the registry, and 84.6% (n=700) of women received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester. For all other pregnancy outcomes, the authors calculated event proportions by dividing the number of events by the number of participants eligible for that event. However, for Sab they divide the number of events by the entire cohort of completed pregnancies, rendering the statistic meaningless.

Moreover, although authors fail to report the median follow-up at the time of the analysis, they do state that limited follow-up calls were placed every 10 to 12 weeks, and pregnancies were ongoing in the vast majority of women who were vaccinated in their first and second trimesters. Therefore, the effect of the vaccines on early pregnancy losses (<20 weeks) is concerning and remains to be determined. Presumably, the Sab rate will be higher than 12.6% when more of the data on women vaccinated in early pregnancy is fully disclosed. Additionally, the authors indicate that the rate of Sabs in the published literature is between 10% and 26%.2-4 However, this range includes clinically-unrecognized pregnancies2,5,6 so the upper limit should be closer to 10% because the study relied on self-reporting that would only detect clinically recognized pregnancies.2,5,7 Reporting a Sab rate of 12.6% in Table 4 may  lead some to conclude that there is no increased vaccine-associated risk of Sab in early pregnancy by comparing it to the background rate of 10% to 26%, whereas in reality the analysis cannot address this question in a meaningful fashion.

Finally, the authors conclude that “no obvious safety signals were detected among pregnant persons who received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines”. However, this does not seem to account for the >12.6% of reported grade 3 adverse events or 8% of women who reported a temperature ≥38 °C among those receiving 2 doses where it is known fever itself can induce miscarriage or premature labor.8-10 Additionally, administration of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines results in the production of the spike protein, which has been implicated in pathogenic mechanisms that affect the uterus, placenta, and possibly the fetus.11-21 To our knowledge these biologically active agents lack studies of teratogenicity, oncogenicity, and genotoxicity that assure their safety.22-24 As mentioned previously, these agents have not been proven safe in phase III trials of pregnant women nor have they been studied long-enough to ensure their continued safety through the nine-month development trajectory of the unborn infants and into their early years.

We therefore suggest that it would be more appropriate for the authors to exercise the precautionary principle and conclude that the “mRNA COVID-19 vaccines may be associated with severe adverse events; their effect on pregnancy outcomes, especially when administered in early pregnancy, have yet to be determined and their use should be limited to clinical trials”. Given that the V-safe registry is the best source of vaccine safety data in pregnant women, we request that the authors make the data available for public scrutiny, conduct a temporal association analysis to explore vaccine-related events in pregnant women, and calculate Sab rates based on cohorts at risk of the event, especially when the vaccines are given in early pregnancy. Thus, according to the Requirements for Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling by the US DHHS and the FDA,25,26 the vaccines should contain a narrative summary equivalent to a “Category X” labeling in pregnancy, indicating that the potential risks involved in use of the COVID-19 vaccine in pregnant women clearly outweigh any future benefits since COVID-19 is mild27 and treatable28 for the majority of pregnant women.

* The populations from which these rates are derived are not matched to the current study population for age, race and ethnic group, or other demographic and clinical factors.

† Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester. Data on neonatal outcomes are based on 724 live-born infants, including 12 sets of multiples.

‡ A total of 96 of 104 spontaneous abortions (92.3%) occurred before 13 weeks of gestation.

§ The denominator includes live-born infants and stillbirths.

¶ The denominator includes only participants vaccinated before 37 weeks of gestation.

‖ Small size for gestational age indicates a birthweight below the 10th percentile for gestational age and infant sex according to INTERGROWTH-21st growth standards ( These standards draw from an international sample including both low-income and high-income countries but exclude children with coexisting conditions and malnutrition. They can be used as a standard for healthy children growing under optimal conditions.

** Values include only major congenital anomalies in accordance with the Metropolitan Atlanta Congenital Defects Program 6-Digit Code Defect List (; all pregnancies with major congenital anomalies were exposed to Covid-19 vaccines only in the third trimester of pregnancy (i.e., well after the period of organogenesis).

†† Neonatal death indicates death within the first 28 days after delivery.

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this letter were reported.


1. Shimabukuro TT, Kim SY, Myers TR, et al. Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2273-82.

2. Dugas C, Slane VH. Miscarriage.  StatPearls [Internet]. (; Accessed Jun 21, 2021) StatPearls Publishing LLC; 2021.

3. Obstetricians ACo, Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 200: Early pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 2018;132:e197-e207.

4. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Evaluation and treatment of recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012;98:1103-11.

5. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, O’Connor JF, et al. Incidence of early loss of pregnancy. N Engl J Med 1988;319:189-94.

6. Zinaman MJ, Clegg ED, Brown CC, O’Connor J, Selevan SG. Estimates of human fertility and pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 1996;65:503-9.

7. Magnus MC, Wilcox AJ, Morken N-H, Weinberg CR, Håberg SE. Role of maternal age and pregnancy history in risk of miscarriage: prospective register based study. BMJ 2019;364:l869.

8. Dreier JW, Andersen A-MN, Berg-Beckhoff G. Systematic review and meta-analyses: fever in pregnancy and health impacts in the offspring. Pediatrics 2014;133:e674-e88.

9. Edwards MJ. Hyperthermia and fever during pregnancy. Birth Defects Res Part A: Clin Mol Teratol 2006;76:507-16.

10. Krubiner CB, Faden RR, Karron RA, et al. Pregnant women & vaccines against emerging epidemic threats: ethics guidance for preparedness, research, and response. Vaccine 2021;39:85-120.

11. Yu J, Yuan X, Chen H, Chaturvedi S, Braunstein EM, Brodsky RA. Direct activation of the alternative complement pathway by SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins is blocked by factor D inhibition. Blood 2020;136:2080-9.

12. Kulkarni HS, Atkinson JP. Targeting complement activation in COVID-19. Blood 2020;136:2000-1.

13. Wang H, Chen Q, Hu Y, et al. Pathogenic antibodies induced by spike proteins of COVID-19 and SARS-CoV viruses. (preprint) 2021;doi:10.21203/

14. Colaco C. Thrombosis, Spike and Complement activation in COVID19 (Response to: Thrombosis after covid-19 vaccination). BMJ 2021;373:n958/rr-6.

15. Lei Y, Zhang J, Schiavon CR, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2. Circ Res 2021;128:1323-6.

16. Biancatelli RC, Solopov P, Sharlow ER, Lazo JS, Marik PE, Catravas JD. The SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Subunit 1 induces COVID-19-like acute lung injury in Κ18-hACE2 transgenic mice and barrier dysfunction in human endothelial cells. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol (online ahead of print) 2021;doi:10.1152/ajplung.00223.2021.

17. Suzuki YJ, Gychka SG. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein elicits cell signaling in human host cells: Implications for possible consequences of COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccines 2021;9:36.

18. Cines DB, Bussel JB. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine–induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2254-6.

19. Scully M, Singh D, Lown R, et al. Pathologic antibodies to platelet factor 4 after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2202-11.

20. Greinacher A, Thiele T, Warkentin TE, Weisser K, Kyrle PA, Eichinger S. Thrombotic thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2092-101.

21. Schultz NH, Sørvoll IH, Michelsen AE, et al. Thrombosis and thrombocytopenia after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. N Engl J Med 2021;384:2124-30.

22. Assessment report: Comirnaty, COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (nucleoside-modified). Procedure No. EMEA/H/C/005735/0000. 2021. (Accessed June 17, 2021, at

23. Kostoff RN, Briggs MB, Porter AL, Spandidos DA, Tsatsakis A. [Comment] COVID‑19 vaccine safety. Int J Mol Med 2020;46:1599-602.

24. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting December 17, 2020. FDA Briefing Document Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. 2020. (Accessed June 17, 2021, at

25. Food Drug Administration DHHS. Content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products; requirements for pregnancy and lactation labeling. Final rule. Fed Regist 2014;79:72063-103.

26. Gruber MF. The US FDA pregnancy lactation and labeling rule–Implications for maternal immunization. Vaccine 2015;33:6499-500.

27. Zambrano LD, Ellington S, Strid P, et al. Update: characteristics of symptomatic women of reproductive age with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection by pregnancy status—United States, January 22–October 3, 2020. Morb Mortal Weekly Rep 2020;69:1641.

28. Fesler MC, Stricker RB. Pre-exposure prophylaxis for covid-19 in pregnant women. Int J Gen Med 2021;14:279.

July 31, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

WaPo’s big CDC scoop on Delta variant in the vaccinated is unintelligible. Was it meant to be?

By Meryl Nass, MD | July 30, 2021

Here is the WaPo article, which the paper exclaims is “free” for all, not kept behind a paywall like the rest of the Post. So they want everybody to read it. Perhaps a federal agency or vaccine company paid for the privilege?

In a nutshell: WaPo reports that CDC admits that vaccination does not protect you against the Delta variant. Unsaid is whether it protects you against the other variants.

Has protection worn off, or was it missing for Delta to begin with? That simple question is never addressed. Might the vaccine make you more susceptible?  This is a rare possibility, if it induced blocking antibodies.

Or is antibody dependent enhancement occurring? I don’t think we know yet.

Ingrained in this message is the hint that we will immediately need boosters–but they may not actually be boosters, if there is no immunity to boost. We might instead need a newly designed vaccine. Two more doses? But not to worry, that was the whole idea of the mRNA vaccines: new versions can be put together in a hurry. And Pfizer has been working on it.

Don’t forget, our government in its infinite wisdom contracted for a couple of billion doses. What did they know that we didn’t?

No doubt this story will stoke the market for monoclonal antibodies, a several thousand dollar treatment that only works in the early stage of illness, before you actually know whether you need it.

This article is allegedly based on a leaked slide show from CDC. And CDC is said to have its knickers in a twist over its vaccine “messaging.” How will CDC deal with the fact that government officials told a Big Lie last week about 99.5% of hospitalized cases being unvaccinated, when the truth might stoke vaccine hesitancy? What message can they now use, having painted themselves into a corner?

But why did they paint themselves into a corner? Why did Fauci et al. make such an outrageous claim (the 99.5% one), when data from Israel, the UK, Singapore and elsewhere belied the lie?

Much of the rest of the article is a collection of quotes from people to whom the WaPo showed the slides. Since these experts are vaccine boosters, what would you expect them to say? Their remarks are vapid and unenlightening.

Of course this is more fear-mongering (CDC claiming that delta is the most virulent strain of all) designed to make us happily grab our retired masks and stop hanging with our vaccinated friends.

And now the government is going to force a vaccine that doesn’t work on millions of employees.

The one thing that is clear in this whole story is they want the ability to inject us with something, and to do it over and over. We don’t know why. And they’re not telling.

The NYT says half a million Americans are getting the shot every day. Join the crowd! The Europeans are besting us in the number vaccinated. Do I believe the NYT ?

The NYT is confused tonight. It has one article on the Delta variant– CDC slides story, while it has another article claiming:

Although those steps fall short of a mandate, Mr. Biden also ordered the Defense Department to move rapidly toward one for all members of the military, a step that would affect almost 1.5 million troops, many of whom have resisted taking a shot that is highly effective against a disease that has claimed the lives of more than 600,000 Americans.

And Biden was late to get the message about the CDC slides, saying today:

“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” Mr. Biden said, calling it an “American tragedy” and talking directly to the 90 million Americans who are eligible for a vaccine but have not gotten one. “People are dying and will die who don’t have to die. If you’re out there unvaccinated, you don’t have to die. Read the news.”

I guess those CDC slides really were leaked unexpectedly. I had been wondering if the federal employee vaccine mandate might bring a few federal whistleblowers out of the woodwork. Let’s hope they keep the information coming.

July 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | 1 Comment

Israel and Covid: Is the drug deadlier than the disease?

By Neville Hodgkinson – The Conservative Woman – July 30, 2021

ISRAEL’S nine million people, and Gibraltar’s 34,000, are among the most Covid-19 vaccinated in the world, almost entirely using the Pfizer mRNA injection. But after a fall in cases, both communities are now once again seeing a rapid rise in infections.

Sacrifices made in life and liberty are beginning to look less worthwhile – a fact that French legislators seem to have overlooked this week in requiring Covid vaccine passports for a wide range of normal life activities.

Governments and media commentators internationally praised Israelis and Gibraltarians as they did their best to support scientists and politicians trying to minimise damage wrought by SARS-COV-2, the genetically engineered virus (see here and here and here) first identified in Wuhan, China.

Less attention was given to the fact that Gibraltar suffered the highest Covid mortality rate in the world, proportional to its small population, during the first three weeks of a vaccine rollout that began on January 10 this year.

Despite the opportunity for a focused inquiry that could have shed light on the vaccine’s safety, regulators failed to look into claims that the jab itself, in the frail and elderly people who received it first, contributed to this tragic loss of life, the worst in Gibraltarians in over 100 years.

More than 78,000 doses were administered, reaching close to 100 per cent of the population, as well as some visiting tourists and workers.

Residents went along with promises that the jab would prevent a renewal of the lockdowns they suffered last year, which were hugely socially and economically damaging.

But today Gibraltar is experiencing a surge in breakthrough infections. More than 700 people are in self-isolation, and there are over 260 active Covid cases, although only seven of those are receiving treatment in hospital.

Globally, regulators have downplayed deaths and injuries associated with the Covid vaccines, insisting that the protection they offer against the disease offers the best way out of the crisis.

In Israel this week, however, the health ministry reported that 2,260 new infections were diagnosed on Tuesday alone, a high not seen since mid-March.

Across Israel there are now 14,365 confirmed cases, described as ‘skyrocketing’ by the Israeli newspaper Arutz Sheva. Of those, 258 are in hospital, 153 in a serious condition, and 35 are critically ill.

It has not been revealed how many of these cases had received the vaccine. More than five million Israelis have had both doses, but ‘vaccine hesitancy’ has grown, as news of the apparent dangers has spread, and the rate of full vaccination has slowed to a crawl.

A study by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, reported this week by The Times of Israel, indicated however a fall in the Pfizer vaccine’s effectiveness over time, with those vaccinated in January having just 16 per cent protection against infection now. Since elderly people, who respond less to the vaccine, were among the first to receive the jab, that failure is unlikely to be as great across the population as a whole.

Nevertheless, the phenomenon of so-called breakthrough infections is causing mounting concern in the scientific community.

The Israeli government has recognised the harm caused by lockdowns and to try to curb the resurgence in infections is focusing instead on mask-wearing, social quarantining, and reinstatement of a vaccine passport for events of more than 100 people in closed venues.

It has also announced a continuing programme of vaccinations, and health ministry officials met on Wednesday to decide whether a third, booster dose should be provided to all elderly people. Israel set a world precedent by administering a third shot two weeks ago to those with severely compromised immune systems.

If the world goes down the route of regular Covid jabs, as with the (largely ineffective) flu vaccine, it will be great news for Pfizer shareholders, but not for those who suffer the resulting injuries and deaths from the vaccine.

Nearly 6,500 deaths have been attributed to Covid in Israel, but one study claimed there were ‘orders of magnitude’ increases in death rates during a massive vaccination campaign beginning in mid-December.

In the two months to mid-February, 2,337 deaths occurred, leading the study authors to conclude that ‘vaccinations have caused more deaths than the coronavirus would have caused during the same period.’

The Israeli People’s Committee, a team of doctors, lawyers, and scientists of various disciplines concerned at the impact of both the vaccine drive and civil rights restrictions on ‘our people’s welfare and the destiny of our country’, has announced an inquiry into what it called ‘suspected governmental and institutional criminality’ during the crisis.

It says the state has ‘systematically shut down all monitoring and tracking systems’ designed to identify vaccine adverse events, despite the experimental nature of the product.

The result has been ‘an unprecedented flood of thousands of serious adverse event reports after the vaccine on social media, which seems to be the only forum that still allows people to share their experiences’.

The gap between this reality and information published by the Israeli ministry of health and the media, is ‘inconceivably large’, the committee says, raising concerns of ‘a dangerous deception not only of Israeli citizens, but of citizens of the entire world, who view Israel as the research laboratory of Pfizer’s corona vaccine.

‘Such a deception, whether negligent or premeditated, could create additional cycles of harm to humans around the globe.

‘We wish to say to the Israeli government and governments throughout the world: A lack of transparency kills people. Deception and concealment lead to disability and loss of life. Remove all confidentiality, create transparent and controlled reporting mechanisms; only then can lives be saved and further damage avoided from the very tool that is supposed to preserve health.

‘Is this a case where the drug is more deadly than the disease? Or is it equally, or less, deadly? We can only come to a true conclusion if comprehensive data is revealed in real time and if the press, which is supposed to be free and a watchdog of democracy, will remain on guard and raise the alarm when necessary. And it is indeed very necessary.’

Meanwhile, Pfizer has applied to US regulators for full approval of its jab, arguing that the company’s data ‘confirm the favourable efficacy and safety profile of our vaccine’.

July 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Twitter forced Dave Rubin to delete a tweet criticizing federal vaccine mandates

By Tom Parker | Reclaim the Net | July 30, 2021

Twitter locked talkshow host and author Dave Rubin out of his account and forced him to delete a tweet where he called out federal vaccine mandates and noted that people with the vaccine are getting and transmitting COVID.

“They want a federal vaccine mandate for vaccines that are clearly not working as promised just a few weeks ago,” Rubin said in the now-deleted tweet. “People are getting and transmitting COVID despite vax. Plus now they’re prepping us for booster shots. A sane society would take a pause. We do not live in a sane society.”

Twitter flagged the tweet for allegedly “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19” and ordered him to delete the tweet to regain access to his account.

But Rubin fired back by noting that the so-called misleading and potentially harmful information in the tweet echoed recent statements from President Joe Biden and the mainstream media.

“Everything I said in this tweet is true,” Rubin said. “Biden mentioned federal mandate today, the vax obviously isn’t working as intended, and Pfizer is talking booster shots.”

Rubin pointed to several mainstream media articles that agree with the points he made in the tweet including a USA Today article describing Biden’s Thursday announcement of some vaccine mandates, a Washington Post article that describes how the director of Emory Vaccine Center was Walter A. Orenstein, associate director of the Emory Vaccine Center “struck by data showing that vaccinated people who became infected with delta shed just as much virus as those who were not vaccinated,” and a CNN article about Pfizer releasing new data that supports a third booster shot.

In an interview with Fox News, Rubin described how Big Tech’s misinformation rules are only applied to certain perspectives while others get a pass.

“If they’re going to delete people for misinformation, you’d have to delete basically every single Democrat on Twitter because they all claimed that there was Russian collusion, that Trump was an agent of Russia for four years, they claimed that Brett Kavanaugh was a serial rapist, they claimed that the Covington kids were all racist, they claimed that Jussie Smollett was almost lynched, Hillary Clinton tweeted that Donald Trump was an illegitimate president, there are all endless lies from these people,” Rubin said. “Who decides what COVID misinformation is? If you’re banned for COVID misinformation, Fauci should be banned from the internet in perpetuity.”

This is the latest of many examples of independent creators being censored for posts about the coronavirus while those deemed to be “authoritative sources” by Big Tech get a pass.

Last year, numerous mainstream media outlets that are often boosted by Big Tech for supposedly being authoritative sources downplayed the coronavirus by suggesting that it’s no more dangerous than the flu and advised against wearing masks. These outlets weren’t censored by Big Tech, even after rules were introduced that expressly prohibit claims that COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the flu or claims that wearing a face mask does not help prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Meanwhile, independent creators or members of the public that simply debate or question these same issues are swiftly censored by the tech giants.

July 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | 1 Comment