Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

CDC director gives misleading testimony to Congress

Walensky misled Congress on vaccine effectiveness against viral transmission and on Cochrane review of face masks

BY MARYANNE DEMASI, PHD | APRIL 20, 2023

This week, CDC director Rochelle Walensky provided witness testimony to the House Committee on Appropriations responsible for overseeing the funding of various federal programs related to labour, health, education, and other related agencies.

But serious questions have been raised about the veracity of Walensky’s testimony.

Congressman Andrew Clyde (R-Ga) asked Walensky if her March 2021 public statement on MSNBC, in which she unequivocally said that “vaccinated people do not carry the virus, they do not get sick” was accurate.

“At the time it was [accurate]” Walensky replied confidently.

She then proceeded to explain, “We’ve had an evolution of the science and an evolution of the virus” and that “all the data at the time suggested that vaccinated people, even if they got sick, could not transmit the virus.”

However, there was no such evidence at the time and it prompted criticism from scientists who said there weren’t enough data to claim that vaccinated people were completely protected or that they could not transmit the virus to others.

One of those critics was Jay Bhattacharya, professor of health policy at Stanford University School of Medicine.

“Back then, Walensky didn’t know if it was true. It was just an irresponsible use of a bully pulpit as a CDC director to say something that she did not know for certain to be true at the time,” said Bhattacharya.

“Unfortunately, people used that information to discriminate against unvaccinated individuals and would certainly have been used as fuel for very destructive policies like vaccine mandates,” he added.

Notably, only days after Walensky made that statement to MSNBC, a spokesperson from her own agency had to walk back the comments saying, “Dr Walensky spoke broadly in this interview” adding that it was possible for fully vaccinated people to get COVID-19.

Walensky missed the memo

Walensky should have known that when mRNA vaccines were first authorised in 2020, the FDA listed critical ‘gaps’ in the knowledge base. One of them was the vaccine’s unknown effectiveness against viral transmission.

Also, in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s original pivotal trials, there were 8 and 11 people respectively, who developed symptomatic COVID-19 in the vaccine group, proving the vaccines never had absolute effectiveness, like Walensky had claimed.

Several months later, the FDA’s evaluation stayed the same. In a clinical review, the FDA wrote, “remaining uncertainties regarding the clinical benefits of BNT162b2 in individuals 16 years and older, include its level of protection against asymptomatic infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2, including for the delta variant.”

Even today, the FDA remains clear that efficacy against transmission is unproven. The FDA’s website states, “While it is hoped this will be the case, the scientific community does not yet know if Comirnaty will reduce such transmission.”

Walensky says Cochrane summary ‘retracted’

Another astonishing falsehood made by Walensky was her response to Congressman Clyde’s question about the Cochrane review which found that wearing face masks in the community “probably makes little to no difference” in preventing viral transmission.

Walensky enthusiastically stated, “I think its notable, that the Editor-in-Chief of Cochrane, actually said that the summary of that review was…[stumble]..she retracted the summary of that review and said that it was inaccurate.”

However, the summary of the review was not retracted, nor have the authors of the review changed the language in the summary.

Misleading statements by New York Times columnist Zeynep Tufekci has likely led to this falsehood being repeated (which I cover in a previous article).

In response to Walensky’s comments, Tom Jefferson, lead author of the Cochrane study said, “Walensky is plain wrong. There has been no retraction of anything.”

“It’s worth reiterating that we are the copyright holders of the review, so we decide what goes in or out of the review and we will not change our review on the basis of what the media wants or what Walensky says,” remarked Jefferson.

Bhattacharya was also stunned by Walensky’s comments. “It’s irresponsible for her to claim that the Cochrane review [summary] was retracted when it was not. It damages her credibility and harms the scientific process, which requires public officials to be honest about scientific results,” he said.

Did Walensky lie to Congress or is she poorly informed?

Witnesses at these hearings are expected to provide truthful and accurate information to the committee and may be subject to legal penalties if they provide false information or knowingly make false statements.

But will Walensky be held accountable for misleading Congress? Unlikely.

April 20, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

What Is A Conspiracy Theory?

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | April 19, 2023

In our book, The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical ComplexDr. McCullough and I give numerous examples of how anyone—even eminently qualified scientists and researchers—who questions the prevailing orthodoxy about a range of public policy issues will likely be labelled a “conspiracy theorist.” Since the JFK assassination, “conspiracy theorist” has become a pejorative, accusatory label like “racist” or “sexist.” Through common usage, the label has become charged with the power to smear and dismiss someone outright without supporting evidence.

The greatest trick that powerful interest groups ever pulled was convincing the world that everyone who detects and reports their activities is a conspiracy theorist. Only the naivest consumer of mainstream news reporting would fail to recognize that powerful interest groups in the military, financial, and bio-pharmaceutical industries work in concert to further their interests. Their activities cross the line into conspiracy when they commit fraud or other crimes to advance their interests. The term “conspiracy theory” suggests the feverish imaginings of a crackpot mind. This ignores the fact that the United States government prosecutes the crime of conspiracy all the time. As one prominent defense attorney describes this reality:

Any time the government believes that it can allege that two or more individuals were a part of a common agreement to commit the same crime, they will include a charge of conspiracy in the indictment. There is no requirement that all of the members of the conspiracy even know about each other, or even know each other personally.

A person may be charged with conspiracy to commit a crime even if he doesn’t know all of the details of the crime. History is full of well-documented conspiracies. During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, there were three major conspiracies to murder her and replace her with Mary Queen of Scots. All were detected and foiled. The final “Babington Plot” was discovered by Elizabeth’s secretary, Sir Francis Walsingham (an astute intelligence gatherer) and this led to Mary’s execution for treason.

Are we really to believe that there are no longer power-hungry men who conspire to acquire greater power and wealth?

As far as “theory” goes, every prosecutor develops a theory of a crime and presents it to the jury. If you are a concerned citizen and you perceive that your government officials and media are not telling the truth about a vitally important matter, you have no choice but to formulate a theory of what is going on. Developing a theory to explain a pattern of ascertainable facts is a rational attempt to detect and expose criminal conduct. To be sure, some theories are more plausible than others. Some are logical and coherent; others are wild and contradictory.

When President Eisenhower left office in 1961, he expressly warned about what he called the Military-Industrial Complex acquiring “unwarranted influence” that could “endanger our liberties and democratic processes.” When COVID-19 arrived, the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex vigorously and exclusively pursued the vaccine solution instead of the early treatment solution. In order to realize their ambition, multiple actors simultaneously waged a propaganda campaign against hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and other repurposed drugs.

It’s likely that only a relatively small number of these actors knew they were making fraudulent claims about the generic, repurposed drugs, and knew they were taking action to impede access to these drugs based on fraudulent claims. These actors were the conspirators. Countless others unwittingly played roles in the conspiracy because they themselves believed the propaganda.

April 20, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Former Director Of National Intelligence Admits That Fauci Lied About Gain Of Function Research

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | April 19, 2023

Only two years ago numerous alternative media sources including Zero Hedge were accused of spreading “conspiracy theories” and false information relating to the origins of the Covid-19 virus. Specifically, anyone who dared to suggest that the Level 4 virology lab in Wuhan, China (right across town from covid ground zero) might be the source of the outbreak, faced outright censorship on social media. The question many people should have been asking is: “Why?” – Why was the censorship so aggressive over clearly reasonable investigations into Wuhan lab operations?

Not only that, but why were the denials and spin from officials like Anthony Fauci so swift?  Why not simply examine the evidence instead of dismissing it out of hand?

The real reason for the campaign to silence discussion on the Wuhan lab becomes evident as the connections between Fauci, the NIH and the lab are revealed. Elements of the US government including Fauci were in fact bankrolling gain of function research on coronaviruses at Wuhan, and shielding it from government oversight. It is undeniable. If one accepts that the most likely source for the covid pandemic was the Wuhan laboratory then one must also accept that Fauci and his associates helped to create the pandemic.

Fauci lied about these connections incessantly under oath. Here is Anthony Fauci defending his initial lie to Congress using further lies during questioning by Sen. Rand Paul:

Evidence of the research includes documents from the Department of Defense (obtained by Project Veritas ) which confirm that EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in 2018 about gain of function research on bat borne coronaviruses under a proposal called Project DefuseDARPA rejected the proposal on the grounds that it did not outline the risks of such experimentation and violated a moratorium on gain on function research. EcoHealth then went to Fauci and the NIH for funding, and Fauci was quick to support it using the labs in Wuhan.

Documents from the NIH itself also show that the group engaged in gain of function research at Wuhan focusing on developing coronaviruses that could be transferred from animals to humans. Fauci was aware of this research by at least 2021 (and was likely involved from the very beginning) and yet continued to lie about NIH involvement.

Meanwhile, the National Pulse – which has done multiple deep-dive investigations on the topic, uncovered in May of 2001 that the WIV scrubbed all mention of its partnership with the NIH from their website.

Scrutiny over Fauci’s disinformation campaign may be too little too late, and we have to wonder if the man will ever face consequences for his actions. However, the exposure of Fauci and the NIH is so overwhelming that the former Director of National Intelligence now admits that Fauci misled Congress and the American public.

Hopefully, this revelation will help to discourage people from blindly following the claims of government bureaucrats during the next manufactured global crisis.

April 19, 2023 Posted by | Deception, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

The mad rush for ventilators in the Covid-19 killing fields, Part 2

By Niall McCrae and Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | April 18, 2023

This is the second of our two-part series on the role played by ventilators in the pandemic phenomenon. In Part 1 published yesterday, which you can read here, we considered the dubious clinical rationale and adverse outcomes of the widespread use of ventilators, and today we explore the psychological purpose.

VENTILATORS AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL TOOL

‘LOOK her in the eyes and tell her you never break the rules’, exclaimed a billboard posted around the country in spring 2020, each version depicting a petrified patient with a breathing tube or mask. This was the State of Fear documented by Laura Dodsworth (2020) in the aftermath of the first lockdown, imposed purportedly to limit the spread of a deadly new coronavirus. To achieve compliance with an unprecedented deprivation of liberties, the government pushed propaganda at every opportunity, inducing fear of the disease and loathing of anyone daring to stray from pandemic discipline.

For the regime to work, the people needed to be sufficiently scared. The virus was portrayed as universally life-threatening, with an exaggerated fatality rate in the early weeks derived from a relatively low number of cases. The reported rate of about 5 per cent declined after mass testing, which reduced the IFR to nearer that of influenza (this inversion was useful in demonstrating the effectiveness of lockdown and social distancing), but the initial message was highly effective.

Alongside the seriousness of the contagion was an absence of cure. For a patient who developed severe symptoms, typically drowning in pneumonia, the only chance of survival was to be intubated and to rely on a ventilator in the hope of microbial mercy.

Nothing invokes public dread more than scenes of multiple patients on ventilators; even better if those working around them are covered in maximally protective clothing and face masks. Rows of patients in ordinary hospital beds would not have had the same effect; indeed, in some televised recordings politicians visiting wards were met by stoical Brits, inconveniently chatty or smiling. NHS hospitals became a tightly scripted stage show, as illustrated by nurses doing choreographed TikTok dances (often imploring people to ‘stay at home’), and activist Debbie Hicks arrested (and later fined almost £1,000) for filming in her local hospital corridors.

‘Ventilator’ became le mot du jour in conversations with friends and family. This was all part of the theatre: overwhelmed doctors and nurses, beds in the corridors, hurriedly built Nightingale hospitals (which never fully opened), and a treatment apparatus that filled minds with fear. Being put on a ventilator may be traumatising, one Covid-19 patient reflecting on it as the ‘worst experience of her life’. The blunt message was that if you wanted to avoid such drastic intervention you must follow all guidelines and mandates.  Through their daily projection in mainstream media, ventilators were a useful tool for compliance with social distancing, lockdown, regular testing and mask-wearing.

Indeed, we suggest that the deployment of ventilators was primarily for psychological rather than clinical reasons. For many watching the news on television, this machine was as terrifying as the disease. Furthermore, it contributed to the government-desired yearning for a promised vaccine. Mainstream media, controlled by the authorities throughout the pseudo-pandemic, contributed to the fear by reporting that one’s chances of survival on a ventilator were at best 50:50. As discussed in Part One, the real odds were only about one in four.

Although ventilators aroused fear, their scarcity was also instrumental. As the outbreak reached the UK, people had seen images of chaotic hospitals in Italy, and wanted to believe that the wonderful NHS would be better prepared. Instead, they were told by news bulletins that only a fraction of the necessary machines were available. Reckless rule-breakers, perceived as tantamount to murderers running amok, were deemed undeserving of such resources.

On March 15 2020 prime minister Boris Johnson called on British manufacturing firms to adapt their production lines to making ventilators, with the Department of Health issuing specifications to companies that expressed interest. Yet despite the appearance of the government going on a war footing, there was no requisitioning, which you would expect if the need was so dire. Dyson designed a new machine, CoVent, but decided not to proceed with mass production after Covid-19 cases had passed a peak. Similarly in the US, the federal government announced a budget of a billion dollars for ventilator production, having lined up companies such as General Motors, but only a small fraction of the order was fulfilled.

Having failed to achieve its initial target of 18,000 mechanical ventilators by the end of April, the UK government was reportedly making substantial progress towards the later target of 30,000 by the end of June. Although incidence was falling, the authorities were preparing the public for a predicted second wave of the pandemic. Despite the disastrous results, and knowing that ultimately supply would vastly outstrip demand, ventilators remained centre-stage.

Like testing kits and other Covid-19 paraphernalia, ventilator provision was mired in allegations of ministers’ conflict of interest and corruption. As reported by Private Eye in Profits of Doom, thousands of these ventilators went into storage in Ministry of Defence warehouses. Nevertheless, the money for their purchase is stored in the bank accounts of the people who, subject to little scrutiny, supplied them.

Ventilators were elevated to a first-line treatment when they should have been a last resort. Their use as an instrument of fear is abhorrent, but worse is the suspicion that such equipment caused death. At the very least we can say that physicians continued to put Covid-19 patients on ventilators in the knowledge that this would most likely hasten their demise. This is quite a charge, but have we not seen enough crimes against humanity over the last three years to think the unthinkable?

April 18, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

AIDS – Fauci’s First Fraud

Rumble – Full Documentary

Full Documentary – Youtube:

Full Documentary – Bitchute

In honor of the memories of Nobel prize winner Kary Mullis (1944-2019), researcher and gay rights activist Hank Wilson (1947-2008), writer and activist Christine Maggiore (1956-2008), journalist Terry Michael (1947-2017), journalist Liam Scheff (d. 2017), and biomedical researcher David Crowe (d. 2020) who worked ceaselessly and courageously to expose the numerous frauds of Anthony Fauci and his fellow conspirators in the HIV=AIDS industry.

This is the story they would have us believe.

A deadly new virus is discovered… there’s no treatment or cure… it’s highly contagious… everyone is a potential victim… the world is at risk from asymptomatic super spreaders…new clusters of cases reported daily…

Everyone must get tested even though the tests are unreliable… positive antibody tests are called “infections” and “cases” even when the patient has no symptoms…every politician gets involved… media hysteria in high gear… activists demand salvation from government and Big Pharma…

Billions of dollars are authorized for fast track drug and vaccine research… simple, effective remedies are rejected while expensive, dangerous ones are pushed…presumptive diagnoses… exaggerated death statistics… falsified death certificates…

Covid 2020?

No.

AIDS in the 1980s.

Every single fraud technique being used today to “sell” CoVid hysteria was invented in the 1980s and 1990s by Tony Fauci to sell the AIDS fraud.

Are you surprised to hear AIDS called a fraud? You won’t be after you see this film.

This is the first and only film to put Fauci where he belongs: squarely in the middle of the AIDS fraud story.

Share widely.

Demolishing the AIDS fraud is one of the keys to undermining the CoVid Con and it will save millions of lives here in the US, in Africa and around the world.

Sections:

CoVid response’s social impact – 00:11

Fauci’s Public Face – 04:20

Fauci’s Power Base: AIDS – 05:41

Aids: Fauci First Fraud – 09:50

Peter Duesberg challenges HIV = AIDS – 15:24

AZT: The Untold Story – 21:22

Who Ran ACT-UP? – 29:25

Poppers: Fauci Hides the Smoking Gun – 45:47

A Look at Testing – 01:02:26

Summary – 01:28:01

Sources:

AIDS – A Second Opinion (2001), Gary Null & Associates

AIDS Inc. (2007), Gary Null

AIDS: The Unheard Voices (Dispatches series) (1987), Meditel Productions/Joan Shenton

AZT: Cause for Concern (Dispatches series) (1991), Meditel Productions/Joan Shenton

Deconstructing the Myth of AIDS (2003), Gary Null

House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic (2009), Brent W. Leung

Perspectives on the Pandemic (Episodes 3, 4, 5) (2020), Journeyman Pictures/Libby Handros & John Kirby

The Age of AIDS (Frontline) (2006), PBS/Renata Simone

The Other Side of AIDS (2004), Robin Scovill

April 18, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

The mad rush for ventilators in the Covid killing fields, Part 1

By Niall McCrae and Roger Watson | TCW Defending Freedom | April 17, 2023

‘You’ll end up on a ventilator’. That threat was frequently aimed at dissidents in the early months of Covid-19. ‘End’ is the operative word, as most patients who were put on to the mechanical breathing apparatus lost their lives. Many may have died anyway, but undoubtedly ventilators did more harm than good.

As Registered Nurses, we are concerned by needless iatrogenic deaths in the Covid-19 regime, whether by excessive use of midazolam, cardiovascular harm from vaccines, curtailed access to cancer screening and surgery, or the impact of fear-inducing  propaganda. What was the role played by ventilators in the pandemic phenomenon?

We have divided this review into ‘how’ and ‘why’. In Part One we  consider the dubious clinical rationale and adverse outcomes of such widespread treatment, and in Part Two we explore its psychological purposing. It’s not a pretty picture.

THE CLINICAL CARNAGE

IMAGINE being admitted to hospital for any reason and after testing positive for a respiratory virus, being moved to another ward, sedated into semi-consciousness and hooked up to a mechanical breathing machine. How on earth did you get here? Yet this was a common fate of hospital patients admitted in the Covid-19 outbreak in 2020. For too many, it was a silent spring, as their last breaths were taken before the tube was passed into their lungs.

A ventilator operates by a tube inserted through the mouth reaching down the windpipe into the lungs, blowing oxygen in and enabling exhalation of carbon dioxide out. The ventilated patient is normally sedated, partly to reduce distress caused by losing the ability to breathe naturally.

In an exchange with TCW editor Kathy Gyngell, former Pfizer chief scientist Mike Yeadon asserted: ‘I believe they were sedating, intubating and ventilating people admitted for non-respiratory reasons if they tested positive for Covid. My bottom line is that close to zero people should ever have been ventilated. Did you know that once sedated/unconscious and ventilated, everyone will die in due course? It’s a horribly dangerous procedure. When lifesaving like deep surgery or after trauma in a road accident, or perhaps a chest wall injury or stabbing and pneumothorax, or if you’ve an obstructive lung disease and are physically exhausted by the work of breathing, and finally a 50 per cent burn victim in agony, mechanical ventilation may be justified.’

The equipment is not standard treatment for influenza and pneumonia, a leading cause of death in older people, for whom such intervention would normally be regarded as unnecessarily invasive (and costly). Indeed, Yeadon doubts whether any patients testing positively for Covid-19 should have been ventilated.

The mad rush for ventilators began after the virus reached Italy and then spread across Europe and North America. On March 25 2020 the analytics company GlobalData estimated that about 10 per cent of the Covid-19 cases worldwide needed ventilators and that 888,000 ventilators would be needed. The company’s medical devices analyst Tina Deng said: ‘Ventilator shortages are a crucial reality as the Covid-19 outbreak continues to worsen globally. All ventilator manufacturers have full order books and hold little in stock – receiving orders not only from regular customers such as hospitals, but also directly from governments.’

Italy became the benchmark for the rest of Europe, but account was not taken of the uniqueness of the Italian health service. Before Covid-19, Italy had considerably higher bed occupancy than in the UK. With similar populations (60million for Italy68.5million for UK), the former has 25,000 more beds than the latter (187,000 for Italy162,000 for UK). In 2019 Italians were admitted to hospital a staggering 58.6million times compared with approximately 6million in the UK. Patients in Italy are much more likely to be admitted, with high use of intensive care units (ICU), where Italy has 3.1 beds per 1,000 people compared with 2.4 in the UK.

At the time of the Covid-19 outbreak the NHS had 5,000 adult and 900 child ventilators, but at least 30,000 were deemed necessary for the surge in pandemic patients. The government called on major British manufacturers such as Rolls-Royce and Dyson to build ventilators instead of engines and vacuum cleaners (see Part Two).

But ventilators were clearly no panacea. In April 2020 the Daily Mail reported data from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre on the first 777 Covid-19 patients treated in 285 ICUs, showing that only 34 of 98 ventilated patients lived to tell the tale. According to the newspaper, volunteers at the hurriedly erected Nightingale Hospital in London were told that 80 per cent of patients on ventilators would die.

On April 9 the Independent reported that ‘some working on the front lines of the coronavirus epidemic are now wondering whether (ventilators) might do more harm than expected’. On the same day the Daily Mail went almost as far as saying that doctors knew that this intervention was killing people. On April 26 an NIH pre-print reported that ‘mortality rates range from 50-97 per cent in those requiring mechanical ventilation’. Meanwhile the US publications STAT (twice) and Time both reported warnings by physicians that use of ventilators for Covid-19 patients was misguided.

As Kit Knightly remarked in OffGuardian (May 4 2020),  ‘over-use of ventilators may actually be killing people who could otherwise have survived’. Knightly’s detailed article explained why so many patients were dying, including this quote from German pulmonologist Thomas Voshaar: ‘Invasive ventilation is fundamentally bad for patients. Even if the ventilator is optimally adjusted and the care is perfect, the treatment brings with it many complications. The lungs are sensitive to two things: excess pressure and excessive oxygen concentration in the air supplied . . . The terminal failure of the lungs is often caused by too high pressure and too much oxygen.’

Rather than ameliorating pulmonary infection, ventilators increase the risk. Under sedation, the intubated, ventilated patient’s cough reflex is disabled, often leading to fluid accumulating in the lungs. These stagnant pools are prone to bacterial infection (particularly in the microbial culture of a general hospital). Survivors of ventilation are often left with lasting damage. A study published in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine & Hygiene found that mechanical ventilation seriously damages the lungs of Covid-19 patients.

After the frenzied quest, ventilators were quietly dropped. According to the BMJ60 to 75 per cent of Covid-19 patients admitted to hospital in the UK in April 2020 were subjected to this apparatus. However, according to recent UK Government figures for the seven days leading up to April 6 2023, only 4 per cent of the same type of patient were ventilated. As Ingrid Torjesen said in the BMJ in January 2021: ‘The pace of the move away from invasive ventilation varies among hospitals and has been driven by greater clinical experience of treating covid patients, by data associating invasive ventilation with higher mortality.’ Yet as we have shown, there was never a good medical rationale for intubating and ventilating patients as a front-line treatment.

One ICU nurse we interviewed about the early days of Covid-19 described policy and practice on ventilation as ‘a farce’, with no consistency between physicians. But policies must have existed, whether on paper or not. Unsubstantiated anecdotes proliferated on social media of ambulant patients being intubated and ventilated to immobilise them to reduce transmission. A YouTube video by nurse Erin Marie Olszewski, featuring covertly recorded conversations in the intensive care unit of a New York hospital, tells of the tragic death of a 37-year-old man. Admitted with shortness of breath but otherwise healthy, this case illustrated how patients were regarded by hospital management as throughput, placed on ventilators simply because they had low oxygen level. In the killing fields of New York more than 80 per cent of ventilator cases died, and according to Olszewski one person who did not perish saved himself by pulling the tube out. She attributed this radical practice to orders ‘from above’ and financial incentives from the government; it was literally cash for corpses.

Most doctors and nurses who worked through the great pandemic scare of 2020 would be aghast at any implication that they were knowingly terminating lives. As with most aspects of Covid-19, the pandemic response was orchestrated at a higher level, but this does not excuse any clinician who departed from the Hippocratic Oath to first do no harm. Ventilators killed, but as we shall discuss in Part 2, they also had a much wider, malign impact on society.

April 16, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Fear of a Microbial Planet

BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | APRIL 13, 2023

Fear of a Microbial Planet, by Dr. Steve Templeton, is a wonderfully accessible book on the Covid era now published by Brownstone institute, offers desperately needed clarity and science on the organization and management of individual social life in the presence of pathogenic infection. It can be read as a definitive answer to expert arrogance, political overreach, and population panic.

For three years following the arrival of the virus that causes Covid, the dominant response from governments and the public has been to be afraid and stay far away through any means possible. This has further mutated into a population-wide germophobia that is actually being promoted by elite opinion.

Steve Templeton, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute and Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology at Indiana University School of Medicine – Terre Haute, argues that this response is primitive, unscientific, and ultimately contrary to individual and public health. The most unhealthy populations are those which preserve immunological naivete in the presence of a virus that is otherwise going to circulate widely.

Dr. Templeton’s story is both scientific and highly personal, taking the reader through the basics of immune response and public health even while relaying his personal frustrations with trying to talk sense to others in senseless times.

If a public health response is like an immune response, then consider this book as immunization against germophobia, politicized science, a self-defeating safety culture, and misplaced faith in experts. Dr. Templeton is our guide to helping us gain a new and more robust understanding of the relationship between the microbial kingdom and our own lives.

The pandemic forecasts in the United States were very grim. Experts were predicting that 60-70 percent of the population would ultimately be infected resulting in over 1.5 million deaths in just a few months. People on social media were in an absolute panic. Stories about empty shelves and runs on toilet paper were everywhere. Those who tried to refute these doomsday predictions were shouted down and eventually silenced.

And yet, the science on the virus was very clear. Disease severity was age-stratified. Extreme measures would not drive it away and would cause a tremendous amount of collateral damage. Even if the worse-case scenarios were true, it was extremely important that we take measures based on evidence.

But eventually, the cry to “do something” became overwhelming, and the costs no longer mattered. Trying to calm people with wisdom about infectious disease became nearly pointless. Germophobia swept through society and political culture.

Hardly anyone wanted to hear the truth that microbes are everywhere, and they cannot be avoided. There are an estimated 6×10^30 bacterial cells on Earth at any given time. By any standard, this is a huge amount of biomass, second only to plants, and exceeding that of all animals by more than 30-fold.

To live at peace with the microbial kingdom requires trained immune systems, as George Carlin said years ago. That means exposure and the protection of normal social functioning even under pandemic conditions with a new virus.

Many books have been and will be written about pandemic response mistakes, and that’s a good thing. There can’t possibly be enough reflection on what went wrong, otherwise we will be doomed to follow the same path, or an even worse one, next time. This book argues that the safety-at-all-costs culture will continue to result in counterproductive policies until it is challenged at its root.

How did people in our communities and around the world get to the point of hysteria over a pandemic with a clear age-stratified and comorbidity-amplified mortality? Why were young and healthy people with very little risk for disease and death treated as if they were a grave danger to others?

It was always pointless to try to stop much less eradicate this virus. We’ve evolved with pathogens and need to learn to live with them without imposing mass psychological, social, economic, and public-health damage.

Everyone who panicked to the point of meltdown needs this book as a corrective. And even if you did not, everyone knows someone who did, public-health officials above all else.

April 14, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

“They deliberately gave the unvaccinated a lower standard of care” – An honest doctor speaks out

This is an important testimony to add to the historical record

Forgotten Side of Medicine | April 12, 2023

I am a physician who stood against the false narratives swirling around Covid and, for a time, it seemed like I lost.

Before Covid became a public reality, I was working as a successful trauma surgeon and surgical ICU physician in the hospital that had the first diagnosed Covid case in America. I was working as one of the more senior surgeons of a team of 12 surgeons. The hospital and medical community had already been struggling prior to Covid with various departures from reality with narratives including ‘racism everywhere’ and ‘diversity as long as it supports deviancy’, but it wasn’t appearing to dramatically affect patient care.

In 2018-2019, I stumbled onto a fraud scheme perpetrated by some of the administrative doctors in our hospital that did cause patient harm, so I reported our hospital administration for fraud. I similarly observed and discovered other connected issues that caused patient harm by various other providers that I tried to bring to light in our hospital. I was ‘rewarded’ with 12 complaints filed against me over a two week period, in retaliation. These complaints accused me of breaches of almost every aspect of professional behavior and ethics. They followed one of the administrators sending out an email asking her colleagues to “get rid of Dr. Miller”. None of these allegations stood (they were all false to begin with), and I continued to do my job to the best of my abilities in this hostile situation, but it became increasingly difficult. Eventually, every single complaint was dismissed as unsubstantiated.

Then, through February and March of 2020, our hospital had a large number of Covid patients including a real upsurge of many sick patients in early March. A couple of weeks later, it hit the news, but only after the virus had passed its inflection point in our hospital and after our healthcare system was not in any threat of having inadequate resources. Things then went completely mad with hype and fear – again, this was after the real infectious surge was passed.

Suddenly, our hospital outcomes and quality data became hidden and opaque to us. Prior to this, almost all data were openly shared and discussed in quality assurance meetings. The hospital forced upon us a narrative that was pure lunacy and contrary to all available observations and previously available data. A chilling example is the following.

I was working a shift in the ICU in late April 2020 and had basically nothing to do because greater than half our beds were empty.  We were ‘low censusing’ any nurses willing to go home because there were so few sick patients. I was having a cup of coffee, chatting with the staff and another ICU physician, who was in leadership, when the daily newspaper was delivered. Prior to the paper being delivered, we were all relaxed, jocular and noting how little work we all had. The other ICU physician picked up the local paper where the main headline said, “Local ICU Overwhelmed”. The article was referencing our ICU, as we were the only hospital in the county. He looked at me, started sweating, panicked and said, “What are we going to do? We may not be able to handle this!” I replied with, “Pour another cup of coffee and laugh at the morons writing the paper.” He became visibly distressed and left to call the hospital administration about the situation, who confirmed they were complicit with the newspaper article. This colleague was one of the medical directors of our ICU. Our hospital and ICU were not overfull at the peak number of infections in March 2020. In fact, the ICU was never overfull, even after the horrible protocols that hurt so many patients were established. I knew we were in serious trouble as a medical community when clinical leaders started believing the words in a newspaper and hospital administrators more than their own eyes and experience.

Then, I watched as every policy, practice and quality metric that makes a trauma and surgical programme have good patient outcomes was undermined or abandoned by my colleagues and hospital administration. I filed countless complaints to our quality department for disgusting breaches of care that were now becoming commonplace. I could not turn my back on my oaths taken to advocate for patients. Between mid-2020 and 2021, following a leak of information from the opaque administration, I learned that our unanticipated morbidity and mortality numbers had more than doubled for indexed trauma patients. It was horribly demoralising to watch.

After the vaccine was rolled out in late 2020, it became a functional mandate in the broader community, and then definitively mandated by the late summer of 2021.  The medical community in the county I was working in (Snohomish, Washington State) started refusing to care for unvaccinated patients except in the hospital setting. I couldn’t believe that patients were banned from accessing basic primary care at first, but then I spoke to a man at my church who was denied both refills of his diabetic medications and treatment for a sinus infection by his primary care provider, all because of his Covid vaccination status. This was so inconceivable that I still didn’t believe it. Even when patients did make it to the hospital, I learned that the physicians and staff in the emergency room were directed to provide a lower tier of medicine to this group of patients. It was less than acceptable, and worse, less dignified, than the care given to any other patients pre- and post- Covid. I had to verify with physician leaders that they approved of this inhumanity. I found out that all the major healthcare systems in the county had agreed to this action, and drove the creation of the policies that demanded physicians act in direct opposition to their oaths. After discovering this, I departed from the medical community in spirit.

Working with my pastor, we turned our church into a free clinic to care for those ostracised from society. I obtained independent malpractice insurance and we started seeing patients. People were desperate. We didn’t advertise, but there were so many people seeking basic healthcare that we struggled to see everyone. I did my best to see people in their time of need, but it was hard. I was still working in my full-time hospital position. I just didn’t have enough hours in the day. Most of the people I cared for were seen at the church – they were met with maskless smiles, prayer, support and free medical care. Sometimes, people would be waiting in my driveway for me when I arrived home in the early morning after a night shift or late at night after I finished a day shift. What became obvious as the most important thing about our clinic is that our patients needed to be treated as valuable people created in God’s image.

Prior to this experience, I was a seasoned (and hardened) subspecialist with the best reputation one could hope for in the hospitals I worked in. When other doctors, health executives, nurses and local politicians or their families had surgical problems, I was often the one asked to deliver their care even if I wasn’t scheduled to be working. After our health care system abandoned the oaths we took as physicians, I had an identity crisis and pivoted to putting more efforts into the free clinic, caring for the dispossessed patients.

Eventually, my work at the free clinic treating unvaccinated patients became known, and the hospital administration learned of it. Subsequently, the real pressure against me started. The hospital responded by opening an investigation of me on synthesised charges of ‘micro-aggression’.  There ended up being two separate and independent investigations (one by the hospital, one by my physician group leadership who were working in tandem with the hospital) into my conduct. My colleagues, who months earlier asked for my help and guidance about both professional and personal matters, would no longer return my calls, text messages or emails, or speak to me in public, for fear of being labelled as affiliated with me while in my state of political disfavour. The investigations themselves and the repercussions to my reputation were the punishment. I was treated as guilty, even when proven innocent, by the hospital administration and my colleagues. The investigations eventually exonerated me, my behaviour and my healthcare delivery, but left open the possibility for immediate suspension or termination if I committed a ‘micro-aggression’ in the future. Obviously, this was a no-win scenario for me since micro-aggressions are subjective, undefinable, unprovable and therefore indefensible. I refused to continue working without an independent mediator, so the hospital gladly paid out my contract instead of mediation and restoration.

Separately during this time I was reported to the State Medical Board by an outpatient pharmacist for prescribing a two-week course of fluvoxamine (an anti-depressant) to help a patient recovering after Covid. This prescription had been banned by the Washington State Medical Association as a treatment for Covid or its repercussions. Incidentally, the patient had a positive response and near complete recovery from her illness, but the pharmacist and WSMA didn’t seem to care about that data point and were apparently just offended that I violated their protocol.

By March and April of 2022, multiple other clinics in the county began to accept care for most patients, regardless of vaccination status, and so we wound down the free clinic at my church, transitioning people’s care to physicians in established practices who would now agree to deliver appropriate care. As I had been reported to the state (although no formal charges were brought) and I was being pushed out of hospital medicine for practising ethical medicine, I knew it was time to leave Washington State. The message to me was clear: if I stayed, I would have formal investigations that would prohibit me from obtaining a medical licence in another state. My livelihood would be stripped away. So, we sold our homes and boats, liquidated our assets and moved to South Florida in May 2022. I was, and am, bitter at the medical establishment that committed these crimes, so I planned to retire at age 50 with the move and have nothing further to do with the establishment.

However, after the hurricane came through Florida in the fall of 2022, I started doing volunteer work for hurricane victims. This included some medical relief work. I realised there is still good that can be done in medicine, that people need healthcare providers, and that by nature, I am a healer.

So, in February of 2023, I returned to practising medicine and started working as a primary care physician at a holistic clinic where no patient is turned away. I discovered that I enjoy being a family physician, too. I lost my prestigious career and my social position, but I did not lose my ethics or integrity. I did not violate my oaths of practice. So, ultimately, I have won. And I’m happy.

April 13, 2023 Posted by | Corruption | , , | Leave a comment

HOW SWEDEN GOT COVID RIGHT

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | April 6, 2023

The data is in, and it suggests that government lockdowns killed people. Sweden led the world with the sanest, evidence-based response to the pandemic maximizing freedoms for its citizens while minimizing the litany of harms.

April 10, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

COVID deaths up 39% after vaccines rolled out in Ontario Canada

Weren’t the vaccines supposed to REDUCE deaths from COVID? Oddly, there was no press coverage on this. 

By Steve Kirsch | April 7, 2023

Executive summary

The official government numbers show COVID deaths are up in Ontario by nearly 40% since the vaccines rolled out and hospitalizations due to COVID are up by 31%!

Both hospitalization and deaths from COVID were up dramatically.

You can see it yourself (see the red box below):

Deaths went from 5,485 in 2021 to 7,625 in 2022.

Could that be statistical noise? Not likely. Sigma is 74 so it’s a 29-sigma increase. In other words, this increase in death didn’t happen by chance; something caused it.

The data from the Ontario website

We know the vax makes you more likely to get COVID. If you had 3 shots, the Cleveland Clinic study showed you are about 2.5X more likely to get COVID. So that big spike in cases in 2022 is totally expected: it was our own doing. The more people who got COVID, the more people who died from COVID.

You’re less likely to die from a COVID case in 2022 than in 2021 because the variant is less deadly, not because the vaccine worked.

Cases

Hospitalizations

Deaths

Possible explanations

Was this because the virus was more deadly in 2022? I don’t think so.

Let’s look the world’s least vaccinated countries: Yemen, Haiti, and PNG. As you can see, deaths are way down in 2022 because the variants are less lethal:

These numbers show that the “it would have been worse if people weren’t vaccinated” excuse won’t hold any water.

Furthermore, we know the vaccines are super deadly. Consider the following recent post which is based on CDC data:

If it wasn’t the vaccine that caused this dramatic rise, what caused it?

Also, even the US data shows a decrease in 2022 vs. 2021, so it’s hard for Ontario to argue that the virus was more deadly in 2022:

This visualization was done on the CDC website on the Weekly Provisional Counts of Deaths page

So there is no rock they can hide under.

Of course, this is embarrassing for the narrative which is why nobody is talking about it.

Even Professor David Fisman is silent about the report. I reached out to him for an explanation and he ignored it, exactly as expected.

This is why there is no press coverage of this: because the numbers are inexplicable if the vaccine worked.

I just thought you’d like to know.

Summary

It’s unfortunate that the mainstream press isn’t covering this.

I can’t figure out why. The press is supposed to report this and get comments from both sides. Instead, they ignore the story.

A nearly 40% increase in COVID deaths and the mainstream press ignores the story!?! WTF is going on here?

But I thought people would want to know the truth.

April 8, 2023 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Half of ‘Long Covid’ Sufferers Have Never Had Covid, Says New Study

BY IAN MACLEOD | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | APRIL 3, 2023

The battle of ideas around Covid has few clashes as hotly contested as Long Covid. Alarmists have hyped the frequency and severity with which infection causes long-term damage. Sceptics see no reason for panic. A new study helps to settle at least part of this debate.

The paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association’s (JAMA) Network Open looked at “post–COVID-19 condition (PCC) in young people after mild acute infection” to find how common it was and to find risk factors. Participants were aged between 12 and 25.

The authors offer this straightforward conclusion: “PCC was not associated with biological markers specific to viral infection.” That is, participants were equally likely to suffer from ‘Long Covid’, whether or not they had suffered from acute COVID-19.

The researchers concluded that Long Covid is predicted by “initial symptom severity” and, intriguingly, “psychosocial factors”.

The full article is available on JAMA Network Open.

The main results from the present study were: (1) the prevalence of PCC six months after acute COVID-19 was approximately 50%, but was equally high in a control group of comparable SARS-CoV-2-negative individuals; (2) acute COVID-19 was not an independent risk factor for PCC; (3) the severity of clinical symptoms at baseline, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 status, was the main risk factor of persistent symptoms six months later.

Symptom prevalence data are consistent with other controlled studies of young people after acute COVID-19 reporting a high symptom load, with only subtle differences between individuals testing positive and negative for SARS-CoV-2. Correspondingly, a large population-based study found no associations between most persistent symptoms attributed to COVID-19 and serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. …

These findings suggest that persistent symptoms in this age group are related to factors other than SARS-CoV-2 infection, and therefore question the usefulness of the WHO case definition of PCC.

Worth reading in full.

April 7, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Highly Vaccinated COVID ‘Success’ New Zealand Sees Huge Increase in Death Rates

Concerning increase in mortality in New Zealand

By Ian Miller | Unmasked | April 7, 2023

COVID has unfortunately created any number of repetitive stories.

Jurisdiction imposes mask mandates, population complies, masks prove ineffective, media claims masks didn’t work because of lack of compliance.

Another example would be when countries with extraordinary compliance, such as Singapore or South Korea, would see increases ignored entirely, or blamed on the population not wearing masks of a correct level of quality.

Yet as a general rule, the most consistently predictable repetitive storyline has been the media and expert community declaring that a country was a pandemic success, only for their results to dramatically change in a relatively short period of time.

This was the case with the Czech Republic, with Australia, with Taiwan and many other locations.

Even within the United States adjustments showed that states like California – heralded as pandemic winners – actually had significantly worse results than previously realized.

But few places on earth have been as heavily praised as New Zealand.

Their science-following leadership was repeatedly hailed, honored, and praised for their effective communication, endless lockdowns, tyrannical response to protests, and prolific commitment to mandates.

All of the above, combined with their strict border controls, should have meant that New Zealand would avoid the significant increase in negative outcomes seen in other parts of the world.

At least, that’s what the media and activist public health authorities claimed would happen.

The reality is far more complicated.

New Zealand’s COVID Metrics

Throughout 2020 and into 2021, New Zealand saw very little COVID transmission.

Unsurprisingly, the BBC praised the country for their efforts, explaining in detail how the country had become “COVID free.”

Jacinda Arden, now former prime minister, was once so completely committed to maintaining an illusion of infallibility that she claimed that the only source of accurate information available to the public was the government.

Of course, Arden then made the provably inaccurate claim that those who were vaccinated would net get sick and would not die.

The ridiculous over-confidence in the proclamations of public health authorities led to Arden convincing New Zealanders that strict mandates and interventions could stop the spread of the virus.

As winter and new variants arrived in 2021, Arden and local leaders predictably enforced increasingly strict measures. Mask mandates, lockdowns and “red traffic light” policies include vaccine passports.

Surprise. None of it worked.

After several months of completely unchecked spread, even the country’s cumulative metrics, once seemingly so impressive, exploded in dramatic fashion.

Consistently and exceptionally high mask wearing rates were also entirely ineffective.

And yet defenders of New Zealand’s authoritarian policies still believed that the country’s strategy was warranted, for one specific reason.

They had delayed the spread of the virus until the COVID vaccines became widely available.

In theory, that was supposed to prevent a substantial increase in deaths, especially considering their extraordinary rate of uptake.

That didn’t work either.

While these rates were generally lower after adjusting for population than many other countries, they still represented an obvious, significant surge compared to previous time periods.

But COVID related deaths only tell a part of the story, often influenced by attribution methodology and testing.

In theory, New Zealand’s exceptional vaccination rate and consistently high mask compliance should have meant that all cause mortality would also remain low.

So did it?

Fortunately, thanks to the New Zealand government’s own data, we now have an answer. And just as the country’s failure to stop omicron, it presents another contradiction to the endless media praise.


All Cause Mortality Shows New Zealand’s Mandates Failed

Despite the exceptionally high vaccination rate, despite their exceptionally high booster rate, despite vaccine passports, strict lockdowns, “red traffic light” policies and border controls, the pandemic came for New Zealand as well.

The government’s own data shows that all cause deaths in New Zealand jumped significantly in 2022, to the highest level in recorded data.

The country universally praised for their dedication to following The Science™, whose leadership told the public that following her dictates would keep them safe, stop the spread and control outcomes, has seen a record level of all cause mortality.

Exactly the same as other countries who were criticized for their supposedly less effective response.

Even after adjusting for population, the scale of the surge in 2022 is exceptional.

In fact, it represents an over 17% increase from 2020.

Not to mention that the one year increase, over 10%, represented the largest single year increase in New Zealand since the 1918 flu.

So why didn’t their policies prevent this? Why didn’t waiting for widespread vaccination to open up prevent this?

The New Zealand government themselves blame COVID for at least a portion of the increase. So why were so many people dying of COVID given the country’s exceptional vaccination and booster uptake and masking?

After all, ~95% of the population over 12 had been fully vaccinated by the middle of 2022, with over 90% fully vaccinated by early 2022. Similarly, adult booster rates were nearly 80% by early in 2022.

Why didn’t it work?!

Some may try to claim that their results would have been worse had they not had such policies.

But countries like Sweden thoroughly debunk that theory. Sweden had one of the least restrictive responses anywhere on earth, yet their results were among the best in their region.

Even throughout 2022, excess deaths remained low.

So why did New Zealand fail?


Mistaken Assumptions

Compared to other countries, New Zealand’s cumulative COVID mortality rate still remains low. But the all cause mortality tells a different story.

Their strict policies and delayed opening were supposed to prevent this exact situation from occurring. All because the government put their faith in experts.

The experts mistakenly believed that vaccinations would prevent virtually all deaths, as Jacinda “we are your sole source of truth” Arden explained.

Obviously that was not the case.

It’s not clear what percentage of the excess mortality rate came from vaccinated people. But even more importantly, the majority of the increase was entirely unrelated to COVID.

Nearly 6,000 more people died in 2022 than did in 2020, despite a relatively small population increase. Yet the government says just 2,400 were associated with COVID.

So what caused the other 3,600 unexpected deaths?

In raw numbers, nearly 7,500 more people died in 2022 than in 2016. Accounting for population increases, that meant virtually 100 more people per 100,000 died in 2022 than in 2016.

What happened?

Whatever it was, it’s almost certainly related to New Zealand’s mistaken assumptions. Ancillary lockdown-related causes, missed health screenings, side effects — any or all of it could have contributed to the dramatic increase.

And all of it was because the government mistakenly proclaimed that they could control COVID. Instead, they delayed the inevitable.

Governments have many lessons to learn from the pandemic, but the first should be to never, ever, put blind faith in “experts.”

All too often they’re flying blind themselves.

April 7, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment