OUR drugs watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), have sent out the most extraordinary press release ten months into the Covid-19 vaccination campaign. They have decided it is now prudent to use social media to encourage those who have suffered serious or life-changing adverse events to report them to the MHRA’s Yellow Card scheme.
The scheme has been such a well-kept secret since the beginning of the vaccination rollout that many GPs and hospital doctors have never heard of it and virtually none of the public knows what it is. Hospital staff who want to report an adverse reaction (ADR) often find the site blocked from hospital computers. According to an NHS managerial source, who wishes to remain anonymous: ‘We have clinical colleagues who have sent videos showing that the Yellow Card website is BLOCKED from within some hospital sites . . . deliberately so that they cannot report.’
Meanwhile, the press release’s headline is clear. It says: ‘Every report counts: support the Yellow Card scheme by reporting suspected side effects.
‘People who suspect they have may have [sic] experienced a side effect from a medicine or vaccine are being encouraged to report it as part of the global #MedSafetyWeek campaign from 1-7 November 2021.
‘The social media campaign calls upon healthcare professionals, national immunisations programme staff, as well as patients, their carers and families, to report suspected side effects.
‘Healthcare professionals prescribing, dispensing or administering medicines or vaccines are encouraged to discuss side effects with their patients and to be vigilant for new or rare suspected side effects.’
The campaign is backed by healthcare regulators in 60 countries.
Yellow Card is a self-reporting system which informs the MHRA whether something is amiss with a new drug. It is funded largely by Big Pharma and has been accused of allowing the fox to guard the hen house, or to use another metaphor, to mark its own homework. Ministers often dismiss the reports as coincidental because little or no investigation is done into them. The site does not show the age of the person involved or the timeframe of reactions, so it is impossible to know whether the reaction was noticed within 12, 24, 48 hours or one to two weeks after vaccination.
These omissions in data collection mean that basic conclusions about safety cannot be drawn. We know from VAERS, the American system, that most deaths occur within 48 hours of vaccination, which should be a huge red flag. Those details are not available in the weekly summaries the MHRA produce. Therefore, the public and healthcare workers cannot rely on the system to reveal the real incidents of mortality and morbidity.
Earlier this year, this is how the MHRA responded to an inquiry as to the number of vaccine reports they received: ‘We estimate that 10 per cent of all drug reactions are reported to the Yellow Card.’
Asked how they evaluated the few reports they did receive, they said: ‘We apply statistical techniques that can tell us if we are seeing more events than we would expect to see, based on what is known about background rates of illness in the absence of vaccination. This aims to account for factors such as coincidental illness. We also look at the clinical characteristics to see if new patterns of illness are emerging that could indicate a new safety concern.’
It took a Freedom of Information request to discover that reported death rates in the UK per million doses are approximately 28 times higher for Covid-19 vaccines than for influenza vaccines. This does not support MHRA statements that the number of suspected adverse drug reactions is not unusual for an immunisation programme of this scale.
When the injured report an ADR such as the autoimmune disorder Guillain-Barré syndrome, when the immune system damages nerves causing weakness and sometimes paralysis, or vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) characterised by blood clots and low platelets, they receive an acknowledgement but not much else. None of the seven we spoke to who reported injuries after being injected with Oxford/AstraZeneca’s batch PV46671 has had any meaningful follow up.
One of the seven, BBC food broadcaster Jules Serkin, 63, from Canterbury, reported her serious adverse reaction in May, two months after receiving the AstraZeneca (AZ) vaccine. Since the jab, she’s had constant headaches, tested positive for blood clots, and had problems with her eyesight and pains in her legs and sinuses. Her symptoms have worsened over time and no help has been offered to her or to her GP by either the MHRA or AZ. She said: ‘I have not heard back from the MHRA. My doctor submitted a report to AstraZeneca in September but we have heard nothing since.
‘I’m bouncing from pillar to post trying to find help.’
It is vital that the MHRA see as many reports as possible to get a realistic overview.
Men’s sexual and reproductive data is particularly under-reported, even by the alternative media.
In September, Trinidadian-born singer Nicki Minaj tried to raise awareness and was ridiculed for a Twitter post that her 2million followers sent viral. It said her cousin’s friend was jilted at the altar by his fiancée because the Covid-19 vaccine had made his testicles swell. #BallGate turned into quite a drama with the White House inviting Nicki to a meeting aimed at neutralising her views and to ‘talk to one of our many doctors to answer questions about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines’. Meanwhile, the MHRA have quietly been receiving reports of swollen testicles plus erection and ejaculation disorders.
Their data also show other disturbing reports affecting men’s sexual health.
Out of the 49.6million people injected the average rate of overall reporting rate for all vaccines combined is 1-in-131 people impacted.
Total fatalities – 1,738; Pfizer – 576, AstraZeneca – 1,111, Moderna – 20, Unspecified – 31
Men’s sexual/reproductive health specific data
Infections including epididymitis (swelling in one or both testicles), orchitis (inflammation of the testes) and prostate (gland located between penis and bladder)
• Pfizer = 13
• AZ = 13
• Moderna = 2
Penis injury or contusion (blood builds up under the skin and penis may become swollen and badly bruised)
• Pfizer = 1
• AZ = 4
Neoplasms (excessive tissue growth) including prostate, male breast, penile and testicular cancers
• Pfizer = 4
• AZ = 12
Erection and ejaculation disorders
• Pfizer = 78
• AZ = 135
• Moderna = 19
Penile, scrotal and prostate disorders
• Pfizer = 61
• AZ = 88
• Moderna = 9
Sperm and testicular disorders
• Pfizer = 72
• AZ = 180
• Moderna = 16
Gynaecomastia (swelling in men’s breasts)
• Pfizer = 3
• AZ = 9
The last word should go to Mick Foy, Head of Pharmacovigilance Strategy at the MHRA, who says: ‘The most important part of our work is making sure the vaccines and medicines you and your family take are effective and acceptably safe. This campaign comes at a crucial time when millions of people in the UK are vaccinated against COVID-19 but is equally applicable to all vaccines and medicines.
‘Yellow Card scheme reports play a key role in helping the MHRA monitor the safe use of all medicines and vaccines to protect public health through effective regulation.’
He’s upset the peasants have access to common sense and reason!
He’s upset the peasants actually read scientific studies for themselves!
And he’s very upset that the peasants are speaking to him without his express written permission!
Apparently, he’s also clairvoyant (like Santa) because he knows what you are writing before you even send it to him, so he has set up an auto-reply on his email account to let you know he’s very important, he gets lots of emails and he does not like “misinformation.”
Chen defines “misinformation” as anything that contradicts the Pharma narrative. Chen is adamant that nothing be allowed to pierce his protective Pharma information bubble.
I’m reminded of the phrase, “Methinks thou doth protest too much.”
What Chen is actually mad about is that he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
A search of the government website Open Payments reveals Chen accepted $437,250.70 from Emergent BioSolutions and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in 2020.
GSK is one of the four largest vaccine makers in the world. GSK makes the incredibly toxic Hep B vaccine (Engerix-B), the troubled HPV vaccine (Cervarix), a meningococcal vaccine that is loaded with aluminum (Bexsero) and various flu vaccines among others.
All of GSK’s products must go before the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), that Chen sits on, in order to be approved.
Emergent BioSolutions has an abysmal safety record. Even though federal regulators are generally like Mr. Magoo when it comes to spotting safety problems, the issues at Emergent’s plant in Baltimore were so egregious that earlier this year the U.S. Food and Drug Administration shut down the plant and ordered J&J to take it over and run it themselves.
The FDA also ordered 75 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines manufactured at that plant be destroyed because of contamination. All of the vaccines manufactured at the Emergent BioSolutions plant must first be approved by the ACIP where Chen is a member.
This is completely unacceptable. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 27,550 pediatricians employed in the U.S. There is absolutely no reason for the ACIP to utilize a person with such extensive financial conflicts of interest.
The CDC must be above reproach in order to have any credibility with the general public. Sadly the CDC appears to do whatever it can get away with — a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse.
The fact that these decisions involve the health of our children makes corruption all the more appalling.
Please contact the following four officials (as well your elected representatives) to let them know that you are troubled by Chen’s extensive financial conflicts of interest and please ask that he be removed from the ACIP before it meets on Tuesday, Nov. 2.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
It is beyond alarming that the ACIP has failed to properly monitor financial conflicts of interest amongst its members. All prior ACIP votes involving Chen should be reviewed by an independent outside review board to see if they must be thrown out because of this blatant corruption.
The CDC should also examine and release publicly all financial conflict of interest statements from all remaining ACIP members to determine if there are additional problems before Tuesday.
UNREPORTED by the MSM was an impassioned speech by an MP in the Victorian Parliament against legislation being pushed through to confer unlimited Covid powers on the State Premier, the egomaniac Dan Andrews, and the Health Minister.
The MP is Steph Ryan, and she is an example to all MPs in threatened democracies worldwide. She is also the deputy leader of the National Party of Australia, known as the Nationals. She certainly deserves wider notice and recognition not just for the stand she is taking but for the quality of her speech. I am grateful to the despairing Australian reader who brought her to my attention:
‘We’re in trouble in this country,’ she wrote to me, ‘From being a free, relaxed and happy nation (after all, one of the stock-standard phrases used when expressing universal optimism was always “She’ll be right, mate!”) we’re now a fearful, cowering, woke country expecting cradle to grave coddling and direction.’
Steph Ryan’s speech is a lifeline for citizens like our reader. I found it truly inspiring. Setting out the very principles upon which democracy and our freedom are based, it is everything that we want and need to hear said by a politician. You can watch it below and the full transcript follows.
Steph Ryan: I feel sick that we are having this debate. I do not think there has ever been a piece of legislation come before this chamber that I have been more vehemently opposed to. I feel sick that Labor MPs are not brave enough to stand up and speak the truth about this legislation. I do not care if you think that the Premier’s handling of this pandemic has been infallible. I do not care if you stand with Dan. I do not care if you think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread. The truth is that this legislation is about handing the Premier and the Minister for Health the ability to rule by decree. Is that power that you want to hand to every future Premier and health minister? It does not matter what you think about the Premier. This is not even about the current government. This is about the management of pandemics but also the ability to trigger these powers for ever into the future. It is about the regime that it has the potential to set up here in this state. That is what is at stake here. Is that what we want as Victorians?
This Bill allows the government to declare a pandemic in Victoria and make orders that lock down the state even when there is no presence of disease here. Yes, the chief health officer needs to publish his or her advice within 14 days of those orders being made, but that advice, even if it contradicts the order made by the Premier or the health minister, does not invalidate those orders if it does not support them.
The Bill gives the government the right to make orders on the ability of attributes – things like race, gender, sexuality. How on earth can people support that? How on earth can members opposite support that? It is extraordinary. It offers no rights of appeal to courts for people who are incarcerated. It sets up a penalty regime of fines that would see an individual face more than $90,000 [c £50,000]. That would send most ordinary Victorians to jail. Who can afford a $90,000 fine? The government says, ‘Don’t worry. That’s just about the worst breaches.’ Well, that is not what the legislation says. It is extraordinary. I cannot believe that those opposite are not brave enough to stand up and speak out about it. I imagine that the member for Altona is going to speak on this legislation. She has been the Attorney-General; she has been a lawyer. She cannot possibly agree with this; she cannot. Where are your values?
There is no Parliamentary oversight of these powers. The Bill sets up a consultative committee of people appointed by the Premier and the health minister, and they do not even need to take the advice of that – it is just a consultative committee. Central to a liberal democracy is a belief in shared power, and central to a liberal democracy is a suspicion of concentrated power. Central to a liberal democracy is the accountability of the executive to the Parliament. Central to a liberal democracy is the preservation of the following rights: freedom to criticise the government, freedom from arbitrary arrest, freedom of worship, the right to a fair trial, the right of assembly, freedom of movement. This Bill hands the government the power to throw out every one of those rights by decree, and there is no oversight of these powers. We are supposed to think critically in this place. We are supposed to come here, representing our constituents, thinking critically. That is why people elected us. Stop being sheep!
I find it inconceivable that a future Premier, for example, might determine that people with red hair cannot hold a job. I find that completely out of the realm of possibility. But do you know what? Two years ago I never contemplated that we would live in a world where someone who is not vaccinated cannot hold a job, cannot go into a shop, cannot go to an event. I never believed that we would come to a place as a state where we would see that – but here we are. These things do not happen overnight; they happen by degrees. Do I trust the Andrews government and all future governments to exercise these powers responsibly? No, I do not, and I think anyone who does is an absolute fool.
Labor MPs protest that this is what we asked for, that we called for elected politicians to be accountable for these decisions. What we called for was proper Parliamentary oversight, and that is why we have proposed that the power to make orders should require the approval of a constitutional majority of both houses of the Parliament.
When the president of the Victorian Bar Council comes out and says that the Stasi would be happy with the powers that this Bill confers, people need to sit up and take note. This is how he summarised it yesterday:
‘The Bill confers on the health minister in a practical sense an effectively unlimited power to rule the state by decree, for effectively an indefinite period, and without . . . judicial or parliamentary oversight . . . That doesn’t add up to good democracy.’
People might argue that ultimate accountability sits with the people at an election. If you do not like what a Premier has done, well, vote them out. But yesterday when we had the Bill briefing, the department could not say whether this Bill gives the power to the Premier to suspend elections. They did not know the answer to that, and they said they would have to come back and give us advice, which we still have not received. That remains unanswered.
The department does not know whether the Premier could use this Bill to suspend an election. Do you realise how extraordinary that is?
The Irish philosopher Edmund Burke said, ‘The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.’ Those opposite tell us that unprecedented powers are required for unprecedented times. Governments always present compelling reasons to concentrate power. My grandmother came to this country fleeing Mussolini, and I am glad that she is not alive today to see what is happening. I genuinely am. I think she would be absolutely horrified. I honestly never believed that the people elected to this chamber would think that it is appropriate to hand the Premier and the health minister the kind of power to lock people up, to lock people down and to cancel protests without the checks and balances of Parliament – to strip people of their most basic rights without the oversight and the checks and balances of Parliament. The erosion of people’s liberties does not happen overnight; it happens by degrees. Streamline pandemic laws, by all means. We do not argue with that. We know that the government needs a certain degree of flexibility to control dangerous outbreaks of disease. We are not arguing about that. We are arguing for proper accountability and oversight. This Bill does not deliver those measures.
Let me conclude with the proverb that we all know because it is inscribed into the foyer of this building:
Where no Counsel is the People Fall; but in the Multitude of Counsellors there is Safety.
That is the principle of this Parliament, and it is the principle that I urge members of the Labor Party to adhere to. Do not give this unchecked power not just to this government but to future governments. It is wrong.
The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 28,103 fatalities, and 2,637,525 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.
A Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.
The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.)
So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured following COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through October 19, 2021 there are 28,103 deaths and 2,637,525 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:
From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,249,109) are serious injuries.
“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”
A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.
Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*
Here is the summary data through October 19, 2021.
Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2, Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 13,271 deaths and 1,168,872 injuries to 19/10/2021
31,537 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 183 deaths
33,677 Cardiac disorders incl. 1,958 deaths
312 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 25 deaths
16,024 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 10 deaths
273,678 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,376 deaths
908 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 54 deaths
4,241 Immune system disorders incl. 26 deaths
29,229 Infections and infestations incl. 367 deaths
11,837 Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 166 deaths
22,810 Investigations incl. 137 deaths
12,087 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 88 deaths
155,324 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 85 deaths
570 Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 20 deaths
215,104 Nervous system disorders incl. 900 deaths
490 Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 11 deaths
177 Product issues incl. 1 death
19,380 Psychiatric disorders incl. 57 deaths
3,911 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 55 deaths
14,363 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
36,720 Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 691 deaths
47,763 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 43 deaths
1,391 Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths
1,273 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 24 deaths
25,752 Vascular disorders incl. 423 deaths
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 1,522 deaths and 87,883 injuries to 19/10/2021
824 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 35 deaths
1,512 Cardiac disorders incl. 141 deaths
31 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
865 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 1 death
54 Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
1,188 Eye disorders incl. 6 deaths
7,668 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 66 deaths
22,981 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 408 deaths
108 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 9 deaths
364 Immune system disorders incl. 7 deaths
2,933 Infections and infestations incl. 107 deaths
816 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 16 deaths
4,359 Investigations incl. 90 deaths
531 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 36 deaths
13,245 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 34 deaths
46 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 2 deaths
17,645 Nervous system disorders incl. 165 deaths
33 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
22 Product issues
1,208 Psychiatric disorders incl. 13 deaths
345 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 17 deaths
1,544 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 6 deaths
3,133 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 176 deaths
2,708 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 6 deaths
276 Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
630 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 46 deaths
2,814 Vascular disorders incl. 129 deaths
*These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) advisory committee on Tuesday endorsed Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for children ages 5 to 11, despite strong objections raised during the meeting by multiple scientists and physicians.
Brian Dressen, Ph.D., is one of the scientists who testified during the 8-hour hearing.
Dressen is also the husband of Brianne Dressen, who developed a severe neurological injury during the Utah-based portion of the U.S. AstraZeneca COVID vaccine trial in 2020. After being injured by the first dose, Brianne withdrew from the trial.
During his 3-minute testimony, Dressen, a chemist with an extensive background in researching and assessing the degree of efficacy in new technologies, told the FDA advisory panel Pfizer’s vaccine “failed any reasonable risk-benefit calculus in connection with children.”
Dressen said:
“Your decision is being rushed, based on incomplete data from underpowered trials, insufficient to predict rates of severe and long-lasting adverse reactions. I urge the committee to reject the EUA [Emergency Use Authorization] modification and direct Pfizer to perform trials that will decisively demonstrate that the benefits outweigh the risks for children. I understand firsthand the impact that you will or will not have with the decision you’re going to make today.”
Dressen told the FDA how his wife was severely injured last November by a single dose of a COVID vaccine administered during a clinical trial. He said:
“Because study protocol requires two doses, she was dropped from the trial, and her access to the study app deleted. Her reaction is not described in the recently released clinical trial report — 266 participants are described as having an adverse event leading to discontinuation, with 56 neurological reactions tallied.”
He said he and his wife have since met participants from other vaccination trials — including Pfizer’s trial for 12- to 15-year-olds — who suffered similar reactions and fate.
Dressen said:
“Injured support groups are growing. Memberships number into at least the tens of thousands. We must do better. Those injured in a trial are a critical piece of vaccine safety data. They are being tossed aside and forgotten. The FDA has known first-hand about her case and thousands of others. The FDA has also stated that their own systems are not identifying this issue and that VAERS is not designed to identify any multi-symptom signals. The system is broken.”
Dressen said his family’s lives have changed forever. “The clinical trials are not appropriately evaluating the data,” he said. “The FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the drug companies continue to deflect the persistent and repeated cries for help and acknowledgment, leaving the injured as collateral damage.”
He added:
“Until we appropriately care for those already injured, acknowledge the full scope of injuries that are happening to adults, please do not give this to kids. You have a very clear responsibility to appropriately assess the risks and benefits to these vaccines. It is obvious that isn’t happening.
“The suffering of thousands continues to repeatedly fall on deaf ears at the FDA. Each of you hold a significant responsibility today and know that without a doubt, when you approve this for the 5 to 11-year-old’s, you are signing innocent kids and uninformed parents to a fate that will undoubtedly rob some of them of their life.”
In an interview with KUTV on Tuesday, Brianne said her kids will not receive a COVID-19 vaccine if approved. “I will react to the vaccine regardless of the brand, and so if my kids have this same genetic makeup, there is the high potential now that the same thing could happen to them,” she said.
Since his wife’s injury — diagnosed by doctors at the National Institutes of Health — the Dressens have met with other trial participants and families with children who also believe they were injured by the COVID vaccines. They formed a support group and website called, C19 Vax Reactions, to share their stories of vaccine injuries.
On June 26, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) held a news conference to discuss adverse reactions related to the COVID vaccines — giving individuals, including Brianne, who have been “repeatedly ignored” by the medical community a platform to share their stories.
According to KUTV, the group continues to push the FDA and CDC for answers and help. Largely ignored, they reached out to Utah Senator Mike Lee, who wrote a letter to the CDC and FDA on their behalf.
Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.
The public relations campaign to push COVID vaccines on children is at full throttle, as evidenced by a telling opinion piece published Tuesday in the New York Times — the same day an advisory panel to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended granting Emergency Use Authorization for Pfizer’s shot for 5- to 11-year-olds.
In her op-ed, Dr. Lee Savio Beers — president of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) — bluntly dictated the requisite information under the headline: “Yes, You’ll Want to Vaccinate Your Kids Against Covid. An Expert Explains Why.”
Times readers might make wiser decisions if they had more information about the true risks to their children. Beers acknowledged the widely supported data demonstrating children are at very low risk for severe illness or death — then made an eloquent though unfounded case for why they should be vaccinated anyway.
Beers declared vaccinating children will help slow the spread of the disease — contradicting conclusive studies that show vaccines do not stop transmission.
Beers and the AAP might have some conflict of interest due to the close financial and professional relationship they have with Pfizer.
Yet no one blinks, as an expert comes forward to front a product, manufactured by his pharmaceutical pals, as the FDA prepares to make an important decision.
Beers’ attempt at persuasion is a classic snake-oil sales pitch, declaring the special qualities of his cure, albeit with no supporting data.
With unfounded confidence, she projects sacrosanct wisdom, even daring to say: “The expanded availability of vaccines should bring peace of mind to many families …”
The extremis of vaccine promotion has reached a ludicrous new level. However, the damage that is about to be inflicted on children is criminal.
Although the FDA heard concerns about the practicality and risks of vaccinating young children, it seemed members of the panel had already made up their minds.
U.S. government regulators and their colleagues at the AAP are complicit in devious criminality.
The AAP has a history of supporting the position of Big Pharma. It includes denying the dangers of mercury and thimerosal in vaccines, endorsing routine HPV vaccines and recommending Ritalin, a psychiatric drug, for 4-year-olds.
The academy also officially denied any dangers of GMO foods, including milk containing growth hormones — proven to have disease-inducing estrogen levels — suggesting there are no benefits to organic products.
Before trusting the latest sage advice from Beers and the AAP, parents should know the AAP was ambiguous for years, and certainly didn’t mount any campaign around the issue, even though they were aware of the evidence linking pesticides and cancer in children.
How many children’s lives could have been saved if there were opinion pieces in newspapers across the country warning about the risks of household chemicals?
The AAP’s failure to alert the public to the known risk of childhood leukemia from chemical exposure before birth and a child’s early years is negligent, yet the academy wasted no time in advising parents to inject a risky, experimental vaccine into healthy young children for a virus that poses little if any risk to them.
Severe illness and deaths among children are much greater than the repercussions of the COVID virus, yet the scare tactics are being ramped up to sell the vaccine.
In what is potentially the greatest historical instance of iatrogenesis, the youth of America are about to participate in an experiment promulgated by those who should be protecting them.
David Marks is an investigative reporter and documentary producer. His new book, “The Way,” is an interpretation of the Chinese classic, the Tao Te Ching, available at LaoTzu-TheWay.org.
Nothing reported by the Pharma-Controlled CDC, FDA and other US anti-public health agencies can be taken at face value.
The same goes for their MSM press agents.
The vast majority of flu/covid outbreaks occur in jabbed individuals.
Based on CDC fake news, the NYT falsely reported that fully-jabbed Americans “had a much lower chance of testing positive for flu/covid or dying from it” than their unjabbed counterparts (sic).
Reality is the other way around.
Except for natural immunity that protects best against infection, staying unjabbed is significantly safer from contracting the viral illness than if jabbed.
The Times quoted Pharma-connected epidemiologist David Dowdy’s Big Lie claim that jabs are “working (sic)” — ignoring indisputable evidence of the serious harm they cause.
The above fake news is all about pushing refuseniks to get theirs, along with urging double-jabbed individuals to get a third dose of health-destroying toxins from booster-jabs.
The more gotten, the greater the damage to health — at some point leading to premature death.
If hospitalized in the US for flu/covid, individuals aged-50 and older are willfully and maliciously mistreated with intent to eliminate them in cold blood.
For bloodcurdling more on what’s going on, see my article titled Healthcare Redefined: Hospitals Transformed into Prisons — for extermination of unwanted older Americans.
More Times-repeated CDC Big Lies followed, saying:
“(F)ederal data (show) that all three brands of (jabs) administered in the US substantially reduced rates of cases and deaths (sic).”
According to peer-reviewed truth-telling science, it’s the other way around.
Toxins in jabs destroy health and shorten lifespans. Jab-free individuals live longer in better health than their jabbed counterparts.
According to UK data, deaths of children in the country increased by 62% since mass-jabbing began — based on the average percent of fatalities of the group over the previous five years.
Kaiser Family Foundation data show that 72% of unjabbed US workers vow to quit if ordered to roll up their sleeve for doses of toxins designed to destroy their health.
Many thousands of US healthcare professionals and staff refuse to agree to destroying their health from jabs as a condition of employment.
According to one nurse likely speaking for countless others:
As “an intelligent, healthy, and empowered healthcare professional that takes excellent care of herself, it is an insult to expect that I would accept an injection of unknown substance and efficacy and provide an example to the great people that I serve that they too should submit their power over to pharmaceutical companies — convicted felons — in an effort to put a band-aid on the gaping wound of reality.”
“It is unconscionable to mandate injections without exemption, especially when the injection is a brand new medical product still undergoing its first year of study.”
“Breakthrough cases are not properly reported on.”
“We know (these jabs are) ‘leaky.’ ”
“The(ir) safety and effectiveness has not been proven.”
“There are other safe and alternative treatments.”
“It is impossible to give fully informed consent without longterm, unbiased data.”
“Threatening our jobs is blatant coercion.”
“Our God-given right to bodily integrity and personal autonomy has been stripped with these mandates and we will not stand for it.”
Another nurse made similar comments, saying:
“I did not take the (jab), even though I will be terminated.”
“Why would I need a (jab) for something with a 99% survival rate?”
“Health care workers are not taking it because they know that the side effects are real.”
“In urgent care, I have seen myocarditis, cellulitis, (and) unusual neurological symptoms, among a variety of other side effects.”
“I have seen people very ill post-(jabbing), and then go on to test positive.”
“The positivity rate for contracting (flu/covid) on the (jabbed) is very high per recent studies and what I am seeing in my clinic.”
Flu/covid jabs are “not working.”
“I will never take risk (harm) on myself.”
The above remarks are a snapshot of widespread opposition to jabs from healthcare professionals.
They’ve seen what damage they’ve done to countless numbers of people.
September survey data from the Trafalgar Group and Convention of States Action showed that over 70% of respondents oppose mandated jabs.
Growing numbers in the US reject and oppose the steady drumbeat of pro-jabbing propaganda by Biden regime officials and their MSM press agents.
According to head of Convention of States Action Mark Meckler:
“Americans have never taken kindly to being told what to do, and they are not going to start now.”
“After being told ‘my body, my choice’ for nearly five decades by the same crowd now hypocritically pushing mandates, is it any wonder the public isn’t on board?”
If enough Americans and others reject mass-jabbing madness, refusing more doses by those already inoculated and none by others entirely free from their harm, the ugly scheme will collapse under the weight of Big Lies, mass deception and false promises.
Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist and trained epidemiologist, not only sees patients every week but is the editor of two medical journals and has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers. Prior to the pandemic, he was involved in the interface between heart disease and kidney disease — but that all changed.
McCullough is now a “hunted doctor” who’s been threatened with disciplinary actions, including suspension or revocation of his medical license, by the American Board of Internal Medicine for the “dissemination of misinformation.”1 He stepped forward during the COVID-19 pandemic because he saw something very wrong was going on early in 2020, and he felt compelled to do something about it.
In the video above, you can view McCullough’s October 27, 2021, presentation with the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). I urge you to set aside one hour to view it in its entirety, as it’s packed with data that call into question the true motivations behind the mass injection campaign, which he believes should have been shut down in January.
Red Flags Showed Jabs Were Unsafe From the Start
According to McCullough, by January 22, 2021, there had been 186 deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database following COVID-19 injection — more than enough to reach the mortality signal of concern to stop the program.
“I know data, and I know safety. The FDA knows I know safety. In fact, I’ve chaired data safety monitoring boards for the National Institutes of Health and Big Pharma,” he said.3 It’s standard to have an external critical event committee, an external data safety monitoring board and a human ethics committee for large clinical trials — such as the mass COVID-19 injection program, but these were not put into place.
“With a program this size, anything over 150 deaths would be an alarm signal,” he said. The U.S. “hit 186 deaths with only 27 million Americans jabbed.” McCullough believes if the proper safety boards had been in place, the COVID-19 jab program would have been shut down in February 2021 based on safety and risk of death.4
Such was the case in 1976, when a fast-tracked injection program against swine flu was halted after an estimated 25 to 32 deaths.5 “We are far beyond that now,” McCullough said.6
While many have been silenced, McCullough found a way to share his concerns via regular contributions to The Hill and, back in August 2020, he warned that putting off early treatment in favor of waiting for an experimental injection was taking a gamble with people’s lives:7
“Warnings and barriers have prevented hundreds of thousands of patients from being treated at home with appropriate non-labelled use of off-target antivirals (zinc, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, doxycycline), steroids (dexamethasone, prednisone, budesonide, colchicine), and antithrombotics (low-molecular weight heparin, oral anticoagulants).
It has become apparent that America has adopted a late-illness hospitalization model while waiting patiently and painfully for the panacea of a COVID-19 vaccine.”
The Jab’s Spike Protein Is a Deadly Protein
The whole world seems to be in lockstep with one narrative — that an injection is the only way out of the pandemic. What’s been kept quiet is the significant health risks that come with the experimental jabs. “Spike protein is a deadly protein,” McCullough said.8 It should be noted that McCullough is not antivaccine — he’s recently had a flu shot. However, the COVID-19 jabs are different:9
“It’s the first time in human medicine that we are injecting vaccines and we’re asking the human body to make a potentially lethal protein. The hope is we make a small enough amount of it and it would create just enough of an immune test that we form immunity to this deadly protein.
The gamble was, what if we make too much? What if we make it for too long of a period of time? What if these lipid nanoparticles go to the wrong organs and don’t stay in the arm, and we start to produce this lethal protein …?”
In August 2021, a large study from Israel10 revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,11 leading to the condition at a rate of one to five events per 100,000 persons.12 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID-19 jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.13
Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia is another serious complication of COVID-19 injections,14 and fertility concerns have also been raised. Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances go in the body, even showed the COVID spike protein from the shots accumulated in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.15
In May 2021, McCullough was one of 57 authors to sign a paper demanding answers to urgent questions on the jabs’ safety and calling for the mass injection program to be halted immediately if safety cannot be adequately proven and monitored.16
At the very least, McCullough noted, pregnant women, women of childbearing age and COVID-19 survivors shouldn’t have been vaccinated, as these groups were excluded from the jabs’ clinical trials because “they knew they weren’t going to work or would cause excessive harm” in these populations.17
Even with all of these blatant risks, health officials haven’t given any updates or regular briefings on the jabs, such as which one of the three — Pfizer, Moderna or Johnson & Johnson — works “best” or is preferred. A “vaccine ‘report card’ on safety is long overdue,”18 according to McCullough, who believes, “The disability that we are going to see due to these vaccines will go down in history as an unbelievable atrocity.”19
Injection Deadlier, Statistically, Than COVID-19
People are dying from COVID-19 jabs. In an analysis of COVID-19 vaccine death reports from VAERS, researchers found that 86% of the time, nothing else could have caused the death, and it appears the vaccine was the cause.20 Despite this, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention continues to say that no causal link has been found between COVID-19 and the deaths.21 That’s malfeasance, McCullough says.
Even more shocking is a Toxicology Reports study that found the injections are deadlier, statistically, than COVID-19.22 “Because not everybody gets the respiratory infection, and because the respiratory infection is treatable and manageable, in fact one is more likely to die after the vaccine than just take their choice with forgoing the vaccine and potentially getting COVID-19. Statistically, in every age group, that’s the case,” he stated.23
You can see the data for yourself in the study’s graphical abstract, below. The researchers explained:24
“A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.”
Vaccine Failures Can’t Be Denied
Along with the health risks are the undeniable cases of “breakthrough infections,” otherwise known as vaccine failures. As of October 12, 2021, the CDC stated that 31,985 people who were fully injected against COVID-19 were hospitalized or died from COVID-19.25
Yet, media reports keep referring to the pandemic as a crisis of the unvaccinated, which is simply inaccurate since COVID-19 continues to affect and spread among those who have been vaccinated. The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) posted online July 30, 2021, details an outbreak of COVID-19 that occurred in Barnstable County, Massachusetts — 74% of the cases occurred in fully vaccinated people.26
With breakthrough cases on the rise, on May 1, 2021, the CDC stopped monitoring most COVID-19 infections among vaccinated people.27 “The CDC started to do asymmetric reporting to start to craft a narrative that this was going to be a failure of the unvaccinated, a crisis of the unvaccinated,” McCullough said. “But the CDC data continued to come in showing us just the opposite.”28
Pivot to Early Treatment Is Necessary
The data are clear that a pivot away from mass injections to early treatment for COVID-19 could save lives, and McCullough and colleagues recommend that you demand early treatment if you have COVID-19, whether or not you’ve been vaccinated.29
McCullough’s early treatment regimen initially includes a nutraceutical bundle of zinc, vitamin D, vitamin C and quercetin. While you’re recovering at home, open your windows and get plenty of fresh air and ventilation in your home. If symptoms persist or worsen, he recommends calling your doctor and demanding monoclonal antibody therapy.
The treatment progresses to include anti-infectives like HCQ or ivermectin, antibiotics, steroids and blood thinners. If your doctor refuses to treat COVID-19 in the early stages, find a new one and/or visit a telemedicine clinic that will help, as “the prehospital phase is the time of therapeutic opportunity.” You can also download McCullough’s and colleagues’ Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment.30 He states:31
“I have not let a single one of my high-risk patients get slaughtered by the virus. And any doctor who has — and there’s been a million doctors who have — is immoral, is unethical and, from a clinical and civil perspective, is illegal. And I think there is going to be a price to pay.
It’s going to be years in the future, but there’s going to be a price to pay for all of these patients who have died. And if you look through the records on all of them, I will tell you they were all inadequately treated. Every single one of them.”
Outrage Over Forced Injection Grows
With the injections causing harm and failing to protect as promised, frustrations are mounting worldwide due to increasing injection mandates. McCullough noted:32
“The tension is ratcheting up all over the world as the Delta outbreak continues to flare in many heavily vaccinated regions of the world. When more than 25% of the population takes the ill-advised COVID-19 vaccine, this promotes a super-dominant mutant that can easily evade the vaccines’ weak protection, which has happened with Delta.
… Frustration is coming out in folk songs, and the pop music industry, as shown in Eric Clapton’s ‘Enough is Enough’ and ‘Waking Up’ … Expect more to come as many wake up to the reality that our government agencies have failed us on the science, transparency, and safeguarding Americans from conflict of interest.“
McCullough is among a growing number of experts who believe COVID-19 injections are making the pandemic worse instead of better, while effective solutions are being ignored and intentionally suppressed.
“Early ambulatory therapy with a sequenced, multi-drug regimen is supported by available sources of evidence and has a positive benefit-to-risk profile,” he explains, while “COVID-19 genetic vaccines have an unfavorable safety profile and are not sufficiently effective, thus they cannot be supported in clinical practice at this time.”33
Unfortunately, “censorship and reprisal are working to crush freedom of speech, scientific discourse and medical progress”34 McCullough calls on everyone to stand up against the propaganda, but especially doctors, who he believes can save lives by offering early COVID-19 treatment to their patients.
The Biden administration is now suggesting federal employers and government contractors offer “flexibility” when enforcing COVID vaccine mandates against unvaccinated employees. This announcement is an about-face from the far-reaching rules President Biden laid out in a September speech where he lashed out at those who are hesitant to get the vaccine.
“Deadlines are not cliffs,” Jeff Zients, White House coronavirus response coordinator, told reporters at a briefing Wednesday. “The federal worker deadline is the 22nd of November, and the federal contractor deadline is not until December 8th,” he said.
Zients added:
“But even once we hit those deadlines, we expect federal agencies and contractors will follow their standard HR processes and that, for any of the probably relatively small percent of employees that are not in compliance, they’ll go through education, counseling, accommodations and then enforcement.”
This announcement followed a meeting earlier this week between business groups and the White House Office of Management and Budget during which business leaders asked the Biden administration to postpone its vaccine mandate until after the holiday season.
The National Retail Federation, American Trucking Association and Retail Industry Leaders Association asked the White House to give businesses 90 days to comply, which would pause the implementation of the mandate until no earlier than late January.
In an interview with CNBC, Retail Industry Leaders Association President Evan Armstrong warned the coming mandate could trigger resignations at places already facing severe staffing issues.
While business leaders are holding discussions with policymakers and airing their grievances regarding how mandates will affect their bottom line, thousands of workers are protesting the policy, with some walking off the job.
A recent survey by Kaiser Family Foundation, found 72% of unvaccinated workers say they will quit their job if their employer mandates the vaccine.
Earlier this week, in Elma, New York, hundreds of workers at Moog Facilities walked off the job to protest the federal vaccine mandate.
“We just want to work,” said Matt Schieber, a Moog employee. “We don’t want to be forced to take a medical procedure if we don’t want it.”
New York City is requiring all city workers to be vaccinated before the Nov. 1 deadline. According to CBS-NY, employees from all city departments are protesting the mandate, some by “not providing city services and others by organizing rallies.”
On Thursday, thousands of firefighters and fire union officials protested the vaccine mandate in front of Gracie Mansion, the main residence of New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio.
“There is going to be a catastrophic manpower shortage if 3,500 firefighters that are currently unvaccinated are told not to go to work,” Uniformed Firefighters Association President Andrew Ansbro told ABC7.
The New York Post reported the New York City Fire Department is “preparing to shutter as many as 20% of all city fire companies and take an equal portion of its ambulances off the streets ahead of the impending deadline.”
Firefighters aren’t the only workers protesting the mandate in The Big Apple. Thirty-five percent of the workforce at the Department of Sanitation are unvaccinated and some have stopped showing up to work.
Residents of the Westerleigh neighborhood in Staten Island and the Bay Ridge neighborhood of Brooklyn are beginning to see the result of a city missing large swaths of its sanitation workforce.
One Bay Ridge resident told CBS, “It’s starting to smell. They’ve got tuna fish bags down the block.”
New York healthcare workers are currently in court over the state’s vaccine mandate, which did not make exemptions for those with religious objections to the COVID jab.
Also, scores of healthcare workers took to the streets of Rochester, New York, Monday to express their opposition to Mayo Clinic’s vaccine mandate.
As of Oct. 14, about 8,000 workers — or 12% of Mayo Clinic’s entire workforce — were unvaccinated. The clinic said employees not in compliance with the mandate by Jan 3 will be terminated.
One Mayo Clinic administrative assistant who recently resigned over the coming mandates estimated at least 700 employees are “ready to quit or be fired.”
In New Jersey, one of the largest hospital systems, RWJBarnabas Health, fired more than 100 of its employees this week who refused to comply with its vaccination policy.
Another behemoth hospital chain, Ballad Health, decided to forgo its vaccine mandate for healthcare workers after computer modeling suggested 15% of their nurses would quit.
Police in several states have resisted and protested the new mandate requirements. As reported by the DailySignal, “major cities across the United States risk losing one-third or more of their police forces” due to COVID vaccine mandates.
Chicago Fraternal Order of Police President John Catanzara said, “It’s safe to say that the city of Chicago will have a police force at 50% or less for this weekend coming up.”
NPR reported at least 150 Massachusetts State Police officers resigned ahead of the state vaccine mandate.
The Washington State Police force has also faced problems regarding COVID vaccine mandates, with 74 commissioned officers, 67 troopers, six sergeants and one captain resigning in protest to new vaccine policies.
The city of Seattle lost more than 300 officers over the past year. Earlier this month, Seattle’s police department had to send detectives and non-patrol officers to respond to emergency calls because of a shortage of patrol officers.
At the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, 185 employees quit as a result of the lab’s COVID vaccine mandate, which they opposed in court. Their legal action failed. Newsweek reported, “more than 100 scientists, nuclear engineers, research technicians, designers, project managers, and other employees joined the attempt to block the mandate.”
City workers in Los Angeles have until Dec. 18 to get fully vaccinated. Those who refuse to get vaccinated should “prepare to lose their job,” Mayor Eric Garcetti said earlier this week.
The workers originally had until Oct. 20 to get fully vaccinated. During the extended period, unvaccinated workers will have $65 deducted from their paychecks twice a week to cover the cost of weekly testing.
In Lafayette, Indiana, workers at GE Aviation are protesting the company’s vaccine mandate for a second time. Employees have until Dec. 8 to be vaccinated or they could lose their jobs.
Protesters say many of them have already had COVID so they feel their natural immunity will protect them. They say they feel they should have the choice to get it or not.
Jeremy Loffredo is a freelance reporter for The Defender. His investigative reporting has been featured in The Grayzone and Unlimited Hangout. Jeremy formerly produced news programs at RT America.
In the latest editions of This Week in the New Normal, we mentioned a group of Members of the European Parliament who held a press conference where they opposed mandatory vaccination and the “Green Pass”.
On the 28th five of those same MEPs held another press conference, and while the whole thing is worth watching (embedded above), the highlight is definitely German MEP Christine Anderson who speaks for two of the truest minutes in the EU’s history:
All through Europe, governments have gone to great length to get people vaccinated. We were promised the vaccinations will be a “game changer”, and it will restore our freedom… turns out none of that was true. It does not render you immune, you can still contract the virus and you can still be infectious.
The only thing this vaccine did for sure was to spill billions and billions of dollars in the pockets of pharmaceutical companies.
I voted against the digital green certificate back in April, unfortunately it was adopted nonetheless, and this just goes to show there is only a minority of MEPs who truly stand for European values. The majority of MEPs, for whatever reasons unbeknown to me, obviously support oppression of the people while claiming – shamelessly – to do it for the people’s own good.
But it is not the goal that renders a system oppressive it is always the methods by which the goal is pursued. Whenever a government claims to have the people’s interest at heart, you need to think again.
In the entire history of mankind there has never been a political elite sincerely concerned about the well-being of regular people. What makes any of us think that it is different now? If the age of enlightenment has brought forth anything then, certainly this: never take anything any government tells you at face value
Always question everything any government does or does not do. Always look for ulterior motives. And always ask cui bono?, who benefits?
Whenever a political elite pushes an agenda this hard, and resort to extortion and manipulation to get their way, you can almost always be sure your benefit is definitely not what they had at heart.
As far as I’m concerned, I will not be vaccinated with anything that has not been properly vetted and tested and has shown no sound scientific evidence that the benefits outweigh the disease itself in possible long-term side effects, which to this day we don’t know anything about.
I will not be reduced to a mere guinea pig by getting vaccinated with an experimental drug, and I will most assuredly not get vaccinated because my government tells me to and promises, in return, I will be granted freedom.
Let’s be clear about one thing: No one grants me freedom for I am a free person.
So, I dare the European Commission and the German government: Throw me in jail, lock me up and throw away the key for all I care. But you will never be able to coerce me into being vaccinated if I, the free citizen that I am, choose not to be vaccinated.
Must Watch Very Powerful.
“In the entire history of mankind there has never been a political elite sincerely concerned about the wellbeing of regular people. What makes any of us think that it is different now. – Christine Anderson European Parliament.” pic.twitter.com/oSVYzg81p5
Today, Governor Kristi Noem signed Executive Order 2021-14, protecting state employees from President Biden’s federal vaccine mandates. She also released this video announcing her decision.
“South Dakota is fighting back against President Biden’s illegal vaccine mandates,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “Our state has many contracts with the federal government, and President Biden is attempting to use those contracts to force state employees to be vaccinated against their will. My executive order will protect their rights to medical and religious exemptions under any federal vaccine mandates. I am already talking with legislators about extending these protections to private employees through legislation as well.”
For the medical exemption, employees need a written statement from a physician stating that the COVID-19 vaccination is contraindicated for medical reasons.
For the religious exemption, a form will be made available by the Bureau of Human Resources that shall read in full, “I, [insert person’s full name], dissent and object to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine on religious grounds, which includes moral, ethical, and philosophical beliefs or principles.”
Due to established precedent, this Executive Order does not apply to service members with the South Dakota National Guard who must meet federal readiness responsibilities for deployment.
During the 2022 legislative session, Governor Noem will work with the legislature to make these protections for state employees permanent, and to extend similar health and religious liberty protections to employees of private businesses who adopted mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies.
Today, following Governor Noem’s promise to “see [President Biden] in court,” the State of South Dakota joined a lawsuit against the Biden Administration’s COVID vaccine mandate for federal contractors.
“South Dakota is standing up with other states to protect our people from the Biden Administration’s illegal mandates,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “Though they are delaying their announcement of other mandates because they know those would be unconstitutional, we will not wait to fight this federal contractor mandate. We set up our defense with an executive order earlier this week. Now it’s time to go on offense.”
Earlier this month, the Biden Administration sent notices to federal contractors, including state entities, indicating that they will be enforcing the federal contractor mandate. This lawsuit is in response to those enforcement steps.
This action follows Governor Noem’s executive order earlier this week to protect South Dakota state employees from the Biden Administration’s illegal mandate for federal contractors. Governor Noem’s order guaranteed medical and religious exemptions for these employees, and Governor Noem also announced her intention to bring legislation to extend similar protections to private workers.
South Dakota is joined in the lawsuit by the states of Missouri, Nebraska, Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wyoming. You can find the court filing here.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is calling for employers to be held liable if their employees suffer injuries from mandated vaccines — even if the mandates were a result of federal edicts.
“We need to take action to protect Florida jobs and we have a situation now, unfortunately, in our country where we have a federal government that is very much trying to use the heavy hand of government to force a lot of these injections,” DeSantis said.
Saying he and his constituents believe in “basic medical freedom and individual choice,” and that “your right to earn a living should not be contingent upon COVID shots,” DeSantis said
If OSHA ends up coming out with the mandate dictated by President Biden, he plans to contest it, DeSantis added. He also plans to contest federal mandates on contractors that work with the federal government, but also work on the state level.
He also plans to contest the mandate that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services are talking about handing down on hospitals and health care providers that accept Medicare and Medicaid.
“So what we’re going to be doing in addition to mounting aggressive legal challenges to federal mandates [is to] be taking legislative action to add protections for people.”
A while ago, I received an email from a friend who asked:
How can many, many respected, competitive, independent science folks be so wrong about [global warming] (if your [skeptical] premise is correct). I don’t think it could be a conspiracy, or incompetence. … Has there ever been another case when so many ‘leading’ scientific minds got it so wrong?
The answer to the second part of my friend’s question—“Has there ever been another case where so many ‘leading’ scientific minds got it so wrong?”—is easy. Yes, there are many such cases, both within and outside climate science. In fact, the graveyard of science is littered with the bones of theories that were once thought “certain” (e.g., that the continents can’t “drift,” that Newton’s laws were immutable, and hundreds if not thousands of others).
Science progresses by the overturning of theories once thought “certain.” … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News 