Sanctions hurt everyone, but Russia will prevail: Putin
Samizdat | March 16, 2022
Western sanctions are a blow to Russia, but also hurt the entire global economy, Russian President Vladimir Putin said during a government meeting on Wednesday.
“As their weapons, [Western states] choose economic, financial, trade and other sanctions against Russia. They are now backfiring on the Europeans and Americans through rising prices for gasoline, energy, food, and job losses associated with the Russian market,” Putin said.
He noted that the current situation is a lesson for Russian entrepreneurs, who should learn to choose partners wisely, keeping in mind that “there is nothing more reliable than investments at home.”
“We see the position of those foreign companies that, despite the shameless pressure … continue to work in our country. In the future, they will certainly receive additional opportunities for development. We also know those who cowardly betrayed their partners, forgot about their responsibility to employees and clients in Russia, and hurried to earn illusory dividends by participating in the anti-Russia campaign,” Putin said, pointing out, though, that “unlike Western countries” who were quick to freeze the assets of Russian firms, “We will respect the right to property” of foreign businesses working in Russia and abstain from nationalizing their assets.
The Russian president described the sanctions policy implemented by the US, EU, and allies as a deliberate “blow to our entire domestic economy, to our social humanitarian sphere, to every family, every citizen of Russia.” He emphasized that it’s “a conscious, long-term strategy [to] weaken Russia,” which had been in the works long before Moscow launched its military operation in Ukraine.
However, Putin also said that Russia can stand up to sanctions pressure. Specifying that all national development goals for the country until 2030 must and will be achieved.
“Our economy, the state budget, and private businesses have all the necessary resources to solve long-term tasks. All the strategic national goals that we have set for the period up to 2030 must be achieved. The current challenges and opportunities they open up should only mobilize us,” he stated.
The president also noted, that, obviously, adjustments will have to be made to all the programs amid the current events, “and here the initiatives of business circles, scientists, and public associations are in demand.”
He warned that the new circumstances will require deep structural changes to the Russian economy, which may lead to rising unemployment and inflation, and “our task is to minimize such risks.” The head of state stressed the country needs to not only fulfill all its social obligations, but also to find new effective mechanisms to support citizens. In this regard, he called on the government to expand support for people who have lost jobs, find ways to reduce the level of poverty by the year’s end and solve logistical problems leading to price spikes.
“The current situation is, of course, a test for us all. I am sure that we will pass it with dignity – with hard work, joint work and mutual support, we will overcome all difficulties and become even stronger, as it has always been throughout Russia’s thousand-year history,” Putin emphasized.
“The Russian economy will definitely adapt to new realities. We will strengthen our technological and scientific sovereignty, direct additional resources to support agriculture, the manufacturing industry, and housing construction infrastructure,” the president added.
‘West’s global political and economic dominance ends’ – Russian President
Samizdat | March 16, 2022
Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that the latest rounds of unprecedented sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and its allies over the Kremlin’s military campaign in Ukraine, mark the end of an era. According to Putin, from now forward the West will be losing its “global dominance” both politically and economically.
On Wednesday, the Russian head of state proclaimed that the “myth of the Western welfare state, of the so-called golden billion, is crumbling.” Moreover, it is the “whole planet that is having to pay the price for the West’s ambitions, and its attempts to retain its vanishing dominance at any cost,” Putin said.
The president predicted food shortages across the world as Western sanctions against Russia adversely affect the entire global economy.
Touching on the decision by several Western powers to freeze Russia’s central bank assets, Putin said that this would only serve to irreparably undermine trust in those nations, and make other countries think twice before placing their reserves in the care of those countries. According to him, nearly half of Moscow’s assets were “simply stolen” by the West.
Addressing people in the West, the Russian leader said the massive sanctions imposed on Russia are already backfiring on the US and Europe themselves, with governments there trying hard to convince their citizens that Russia is to blame.
Putin warned ordinary people in the West that attempts to portray Moscow as the primary source of all their woes were lies, with many of those issues being the direct result of Western governments’ “ambitions” and “political short-sightedness.”
Western elites, according to Putin, have turned their countries into an “empire of lies,” but Russia will keep on presenting its own position to the whole world, no matter what.
Iran frees two dual British nationals jailed for espionage
Press TV – March 16, 2022
Iran has released two dual British-Iranian nationals jailed for involvement in espionage activities against the Islamic Republic, with the pair preparing to leave the country.
British-Iranians Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anousheh Ashouri are heading to a Tehran airport to leave the country, their lawyer Hojjat Kermani confirmed to Reuters on Wednesday.
Ashoori, who previously lived in southeast London with his family, was detained in August 2017 and was sentenced to 10 years in prison for cooperating with Israel’s spy agency Mossad and two years for obtaining 33,000 euros in “illicit funds” nearly a year later.
Zaghari-Ratcliffe, 43, had been found guilty of plotting to orchestrate a soft overthrow of the Islamic Republic and has been in jail since 2016.
Back in October 2017, the prosecutor general of Tehran stated that she was being held for running “a BBC Persian online journalism course which was aimed at recruiting and training people to spread propaganda against Iran.”
Both Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her employer had maintained she was simply visiting family while on vacation.
A report published by Fars news agency on Monday said Zaghari-Ratcliffe would be released soon in return for London’s commitment to pay off a long-overdue debt to Tehran.
In return, Britain would pay $530 million (400 million pounds) to Iran to settle a debt related to an unfulfilled military contract that dates back to before the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, Fars reported.
Britain has delayed the payment for many years citing problems faced because of foreign sanctions against Iran.
However, Tehran has insisted the debt should be settled regardless of issues that exist between Iran and the West.
The money is owed to Iran over an upfront payment made by the former Shah of Iran to Britain to buy 1,750 Chieftain tanks and other military vehicles.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Tuesday declined to comment on Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s case and whether there have been direct talks on the debt issue in Tehran although he admitted that talks on consular cases have been going on for a long time.
Later in the day, British lawmaker Tulip Siddiq said Zaghari-Ratcliffe has had her British passport returned.
“I am very pleased to say that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been given her British passport back,” Siddiq said on Twitter.
British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said on Wednesday morning that her country is looking at ways to pay the 400 million pound debt to Iran.
“We have been clear this is a legitimate debt that we do owe Iran and we have been seeking ways to pay it,” Truss told Sky News.
Covid vaccine damage figures head for half a million
By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | March 15, 2022
UNTIL now in our regular MHRA adverse effects reports we’ve focused quite heavily on myocarditis and acute cardiac disorders, not least for the dramatically increased risk of the vaccine for younger age groups, young men in particular. In terms of numbers recorded, however, these are eclipsed by what the MHRA classifies as nervous system disorders and about which we hear little.
Adverse events for this ‘category’ now stand at an astonishing 282,041, which is possibly less than 10 per cent of the real figure, 182,251 of them associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Nor does the overall figure include the further 12,769 ‘tremor’ events. Eugyppius, written about elsewhere in these pages today, has been recording his readers’ reports of their adverse vaccine reactions. He recently reported the response, commenting on the ‘many letters describing shingles and Bell’s Palsy following vaccination; and of more puzzling and potentially more serious neurological problems, from vertigo to muscular tremors to seizures’.
We hope to be able to report on a breakdown of the nervous disorder data in weeks to come.
We are in the dark as to how many unrecognised cases of paralysis and disability there are. Would, for example, Tony Shingler’s severe vaccine reaction and final diagnosis of Guillain-Barré syndrome ever been known about but for the tenacity of his wife Nicola?
It’s high time the NHS, the MHRA and individual doctors came clean about what they have seen. We need to know about ALL the ‘coincidences’.
Here is the latest Yellow Card summary, a little late from us this week. Once again, overall deaths are up and overall reactions are heading for the half million mark. If this is only 10 per of the real numbers (as the MHRA itself suggests) I leave you to do the maths.
MHRA Yellow Card reporting summary up to February 23, 2022 (published March 3)
Adult – Primary & Booster/Third Dose, Child Administration
Primary doses
* Pfizer – 26million people – Yellow Card reporting rate – 1 in 156 people impacted
* AstraZeneca – 24.9m people – reporting rate – 1 in 102 people impacted
* Moderna – 1.6m people – reporting rate – 1 in 44 people impacted
Overall 1 in 117 people injected experiences a Yellow Card Adverse Event.
Total doses including boosters administered – 78.4m (Pfizer) + 49.15m (AZ) + 12m (Moderna) = 139,648,374 million doses
Adult Booster or 3rd Doses given = 38,112,342 people
Booster Yellow Card Reports – 29,609 (Pfizer) + 487 (AZ) + 16,195 (Moderna) + 163 (Unknown) = 46,454
Reactions – 477,632 (Pfizer) + 863,696 (AZ) + 120,124 (Moderna) + 4,739 (Unknown) = 1,466,191
Reports – 166,225 (Pfizer) + 243,903 (AZ) + 36,113 (Moderna) + 1,554 (Unknown) = 447,795 people impacted
Fatal – 726 (Pfizer) + 1,235 (AZ) + 40 (Moderna) + 39 (Unknown) = 2040
Blood Disorders – 16,850 (Pfizer) + 7,806 (AZ) + 2,449 (Moderna) + 62 (Unknown) = 27,167
Pulmonary Embolism & Deep Vein Thrombosis – 881 (Pfizer) + 3,042 (AZ) + 112 (Moderna) + 26 (Unknown) = 4,061
Anaphylaxis – 653 (Pfizer) + 873 (AZ) + 87 (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 1,615
Acute Cardiac – 12,575 (Pfizer) + 11,239 (AZ) + 3,096 (Moderna) + 95 (Unknown) = 27,005
Eye Disorders – 7,864 (Pfizer) + 14,817 (AZ) + 1,481 (Moderna) + 84 (Unknown) = 24,246
Blindness – 156 (Pfizer) + 318 (AZ) + 32 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 510
Deafness – 292 (Pfizer) + 425 (AZ) + 50 (Moderna) + 5 (Unknown) = 772
Spontaneous Abortions – 478 + 1 premature baby death / 14 stillbirth/foetal deaths (13 recorded as fatal) (Pfizer) + 230 + 5 stillbirth (AZ) + 62 + 1 stillbirth (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 776 miscarriages
Nervous System Disorders – 79,478 (Pfizer) + 182,251 (AZ) + 19,467 (Moderna) + 845 (Unknown) = 282,041
Vomiting – 5,172 (Pfizer) + 11,633 (AZ) + 1,740 (Moderna) + 59 (Unknown) = 18,604
Strokes and CNS haemorrhages – 768 (Pfizer) + 2,319 (AZ) + 52 (Moderna) + 16 (Unknown) = 3,155
Seizures – 1,073 (Pfizer) + 2,058 (AZ) + 255 (Moderna) + 17 (Unknown) = 3,403
Paralysis – 499 (Pfizer) + 875 (AZ) + 100 (Moderna) + 9 (Unknown) = 1,483
Gastrointestinal Disorders – 41,753 (Pfizer) + 80,845 (AZ) + 10,485 (Moderna) + 385 (Unknown) = 133,468
Infections – 11,791 (Pfizer) + 20,177 (AZ) + 2,211 (Moderna) + 153 (Unknown) = 34,332
Herpes – 2,180 (Pfizer) + 2,682 (AZ) + 243 (Moderna) + 23 (Unknown) = 5128
Immune System Disorders – 2,398 (Pfizer) + 3,284 (AZ) + 596 (Moderna) + 21 (Unknown) = 6,299
BCG Scar Reactivation – 67 (Pfizer) + 38 (AZ) + 51 (Moderna) = 156
Skin Disorders – 33,395 (Pfizer) + 53,230 (AZ) + 12,771 (Moderna) + 335 (Unknown) = 99,731
Respiratory Disorders – 21,232 (Pfizer) + 29,661 (AZ) + 4,115 (Moderna) + 202 (Unknown) = 55,210
Psychiatric Disorders – 9,983 (Pfizer) + 18,330 (AZ) + 2,378 (Moderna) + 109 (Unknown) = 30,800
Reproductive/Breast Disorders – 30,704 (Pfizer) + 20,719 (AZ) + 5,037 (Moderna) + 213 (Unknown) = 56,673
Epistaxis (nosebleeds) – 1,068 (Pfizer) + 2,302 (AZ) + 190 (Moderna) + 11 (Unknown) = 3,571
Tremor – 2,134 (Pfizer) + 9,934 (AZ) + 651 (Moderna) + 50 (Unknown) = 12,769
Children and young people special report
Suspected side effects reported in individuals under 18 years old
* Pfizer – 3,200,000 children (1st doses) plus 1,700,000 second doses resulting in 3,186 Yellow Cards (up 75 since last week)
* AZ – 12,400 children (1st doses) plus 9,200 second doses resulting in 256 Yellow Cards – Reporting rate 1 in 48
* Moderna – 2,100 children (1st doses) and 1,400 second doses resulting in 24 Yellow cards
* Brand Unspecified – 21 Yellow Cards
Total = 3,214,500 children injected
Total Yellow Cards under-18s = 3,487
For full reports including 348 pages of specific reaction listings see here.
How to measure vaccine harms
Health Advisory & Recovery Team | March 11, 2022
Drug harm reporting systems, like the MHRA’s yellow card system, are designed to alert the regulator to a potential issue. They are not designed to measure the size of the problem. If an issue is highlighted then the regulator has a responsibility to carry out an audit and see whether the incidence of the condition of concern has been higher than historical levels in the population who were vaccinated.
The Government appears to be treating the yellow card reports as if they are a record of every occurrence of a condition in the country, comparing the number of reports with background levels in the whole population. It is well known that reporting systems only capture a fraction of cases and it is very odd that the Government is treating this data as comprehensive.
As an example, let’s take Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) which is a rare condition where the immune system attacks the nervous system. It is usually caused by a viral infection but has been attributed to vaccination adverse reactions in the past. There are 1,300 cases every year and 608 cases have been reported on the yellow card system.
A study by Hanson et al in the USA of 10 million patients showed that in the first 21 days after the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine the rates of GBS were 15 times higher than expected levels. Extrapolating from this figure we would expect 500 AZ vaccine related cases in the UK. There have been a total of 488 reported in the yellow card system but it is not clear whether these were within 3 weeks of vaccination.
In a three week period we would expect 29 background cases to have occurred co-incidentally. Based on the Hanson data of 500 cases after 24.9 million doses, the cause of someone having GBS within 3 weeks of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine would be the vaccine 95% of the time and coincidental 5% of the time. The morally right thing to do for these people, is to accept that they have been vaccine injured and be wrong 5% of the time rather than claim these were coincidental and be wrong 95% of the time.
The Government appears to want to claim coincidence. A few of these patients have filed claims with the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. None of the claimants have been helped, even patients whose deaths have been investigated at inquest and where a coroner has determined the vaccine as the cause of death. When rolling out a £12bn vaccine programme it is naive not to set aside a budget for vaccine injury. The current claims system requires proof of “60% disability”, a ‘proof of cause’ and does not compensate for lost earnings or costs of care. Maria Caulfield, the minister for patient safety and primary care, said that they were employing people to look through the claimant’s medical records for a “causal link” as if vaccines write confession notes. Surely, this is the real waste of public funds and seems to point to a reluctance to compensate deserving victims.
Reality Check: “100 day vaccines” are NOT possible
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | March 11, 2022
Neatly nestled behind the Ukraine headlines plastered all over the front pages, this past week has seen the World Health Organization meeting to discuss the global legislation to empowering the WHO to combat “future pandemics”.
The first consultation was held on March 1st. The EU passed a motion authorizing the bloc to negotiate such a treaty on March 3rd.
Nobody knows exactly what the hypothetical international regulations – dubbed the “Pandemic Treaty” – would entail, but there are hints.
It’s almost certainly going to involve some kind of international vaccine passport, possibly based on the SMART Health Cards currently rolling out all across the US.
It’s also interesting to note that this treaty is being developed in parallel to the UK “reforming” their Human Rights Act 1998 into a new “UK bill of rights” which seeks to prevent the “abuse” of “rights culture” and place a new emphasis on “social responsibility”.
However, the specifics will remain a mystery until the final proposal is published later this year.
One thing we do know though, is that a big part of the proposed “strengthening” of our pandemic response will be increased funding and resources for developing vaccines even faster than the Covid vaccine.
This aim was announced at the recent Global Pandemic Preparedness Summit in London, where the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) announced their “100 Days Mission”.
CEPI, for those who don’t know, is a foundation jointly funded by (among others) the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum, whose stated aim is “to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics”.
The 100 Days Mission, which already has its own website and a trending hashtag (#100DaysMission), is pretty much exactly what it sounds like.
In future CEPI wants to produce new vaccines for unknown emerging diseases – what they call Disease X – within 100 days of the pathogen being isolated.
They’ve already secured 1.5 BILLION pounds sterling to further this effort.
Let that percolate.
Over a billion pounds to produce vaccines for a disease that – as yet – does not even exist, and may never exist.
This looks like a further step in the process, begun by the ‘pandemic’ narrative, of redefining everything we previously understood about how infective agents and vaccines interact.
Covid, let’s remember, was a disease-narrative totally removed from all social, scientific and historical context to create a fluid, agenda-driven alternate reality. And it looks as if this is intended to be the ‘new normal’.
Here’s a little refresher course on just how fast the Covid vaccines sped through the usual scientific process:
- The virus was allegedly discovered in December.
- It was fully genetically sequenced by January 10th 2020.
- The paper that all the PCR tests were based on was peer-reviewed in less than 24 hours.
- After decades of failure, the human race produced a dozen effective coronavirus vaccines in less than three months.
- These vaccines were then “safety tested” in less than six months.
All told, from ‘discovering’ the virus to getting the vaccine(s) approved for use on people, it took 300 days.
This process normally takes at least 3-10 years.
It usually takes at least 5-10 years to bring a fully-tested vaccine to market. A paper by Pronker et al, “Risk in vaccine research and development quantified” (PubMed 2013), estimates the average development time for a new vaccine to be over 10 years.
Simply put, it has never been possible to make a vaccine for a new disease in 1000 days, let alone 100.
The speed with which the covid vacines were produced is totally unprecedented in the history of vaccines.
The idea you could further reduce this unprecedented time frame, and produce a safe and effective vaccine in only 100 days is frankly absurd. It’s surreal. Fictional.
For one thing, the vast majority of candidate vaccines don’t work.
The Pronker paper, found that of all potential vaccines products being researched, only about 6% ever actually hit the market.
So, back in the real world, a vaccine manufacturer will go through that 5-10 year process knowing there is a ~94% chance there will be nothing to show for it in the end.
After decades of trying they haven’t managed to produce a vaccine against AIDs, or the flu, or malaria or many other common diseases. These are conditions they know and (allegedly) understand, but they cannot make vaccines for them.
So, in that old world of veridical reality, even if you managed to make a vaccine in 100 days, the odds are it either won’t produce immunity, or it will but will also produce harmful side effects, or maybe it will do literally nothing.
Now, granted, science and technology are not static. We are always moving forward and making progress… but that’s irrelevant to this issue, because even if vaccine manufacturing technology really did take a huge leap forward just in time to battle covid, you still can’t produce a safe vaccine in 100 days, or even 300 days – because the process NEEDS time.
It takes time to test rigorously, it takes time – a lot of it – to a assess long term side effects. The clue is right there in the name.
No amount of new tech is going to permit you to know the ten-year effects of a vaccine in under three months.
With the public eye fixed on Ukraine, and Covid now firmly in the collective unconsciousness’s rearview mirror the powers that be are trying to normalise what was, inherently, an abnormal, unreal (if not impossible) process. To make it easier “next time”.
We’ve already seen Bill Gates lament that the vaccine was too slow, and he was partially right. The Covid story didn’t keep people hypnotized enough to secure everything they needed, in part because their “vaccine” rollout took almost a year.
But for the future “Disease X” waiting in the wings, it will officially only take three months, and the fear will still be fresh. The fact the process will be completely incompatible with reality or sense will not matter in the slightest.
To be clear: You cannot develop a “safe and effective” vaccine for a brand new disease in three months.
You can’t do it in one year.
And if in the future they claim to have done so, they will be lying.
Teach your child censorship!
By Niall McCrae | Unity News Network | March 9, 2022
As any critically thinking parent knows, schools are a hotbed of state propaganda, from subversive gender ideology to prophecies of doom on climate change. But this has worsened significantly in the past two years, with the official covid-19 narrative pushed in every possible way (whether the schools were open or in online learning). An important strategy is to teach children to avoid contrary viewpoints and controversial assertions on the internet.
Yesterday my 5-year-old brought home a booklet handed out to her class, titled Digital Parenting (sponsored by Vodafone). The contents are in tune with the Online Safety Bill: the focus is not on preventing exposure to violence, terrorism or pornography, but on suppressing inconvenient truths.
Featuring in the pamphlet is Nicky Cox MBE, editor of First News newspaper and producer of FYI on Sky News channel, both presenting current affairs to children. According to Cox, ‘as adults we have the experience to question what we read, but children are not so savvy’. The gullibility of the adult populace, duped by bought mainstream media into fearing a killer virus, fraudulent testing, wearing useless facemasks and taking a series of experimental genetic engineering injections, suggests otherwise.
Cox warns that fake news isn’t always obvious: ‘more confusingly there are stories with a kernel of truth which have biased reporting’. Shouldn’t children be taught to understand and critically appraise bias, rather than pretending it is just a tool of opponents? Shouldn’t they be shown different perspectives, and how the likes of the BBC and Guardian project their own prejudices and political agenda? These outlets become more like Pravda, the mouthpiece of Soviet totalitarianism, by the day. Audaciously, Cox congratulates her news as ‘balanced’: does she allow a smidgen of counter-narrative alongside shilling for covid vaccines or war with Russia?
The most egregiously censorial part of this guide is ‘5 terms every parent should know’. First is ‘deepfakes’, which apparently means doctored images. However, the Ukraine theatricals have shown that video or photographs do not need to be manipulated; they can simply be taken from another context, whether from a past war in another continent or from a movie.
Second is cancel culture, which you and I may see as a real problem. No, the booklet casts this as a positive, meaning ‘withdrawal of support for public figures or companies we disagree with’. This is teaching children that it is justifiable to ‘unperson’ someone who thinks differently to them; it is an affront to a free, democratic society. Children should be encouraged to tolerate and listen to other opinions, not to silence them. And resilience should be nurtured, not vulnerability.
Next are misinformation and disinformation. The former is unintentional or careless falsehood, while the latter is deliberate untruth. An example of a misleading message is ‘sharing a covid-19 “miracle cure” without knowing if it’s genuinely effective’. Well, that would be enough to put a health warning on all covid vaccine promotion. But of course the booklet authors are thinking of ivermectin, typically misrepresented by compliant broadcasters as ‘horse dewormer’.
Finally there is digital activism. Like cancel culture, this is something to encourage. It means ‘using digital platforms to encourage social or political change, as seen during the US election and Black Lives Matter movement’. Could it also include supporting the Canadian truckers’ convoy or informed choice on vaccinating kids? Don’t be silly. The establishment and its paid helpers are now nakedly discriminatory, and they don’t care. If you are angered by their hypocrisy and bias, all the better for them.
I would summarise this as a glossy guide to teaching children censorship. Using its own language – a deepfake.
Who Changed the Scientific Conclusions of a Paper that Could Have Saved Millions? At Last, We May Have a Name.
FLCCC Alliance | March 8, 2022
This is a scandal of immense proportions that warrants an immediate investigation.
First, let’s set the stage:
— Over one year ago, there were ample peer-reviewed, randomized controlled trials that provided strong evidence on ivermectin’s efficacy as a treatment for COVID in every disease phase.
— A paper considering these many studies was written by lead author Dr. Andrew Hill at the University of Liverpool for the World Health Organization’s COVID Guideline Development Group. Hill was an early and vigorous proponent for ivermectin. His paper showed that ivermectin could reduce deaths by 75% if used throughout the world.
— Inexplicably, just days before its publication, the paper appeared on a pre-print server, with its conclusions changed. Instead of concluding that ivermectin—one of the world’s safest and most inexpensive drugs— should be rolled out globally, it now concluded that more studies on ivermectin were needed before it could be recommended worldwide. Given the totality of scientific evidence for ivermectin, it was a stunning—actually shocking—reversal by Dr. Hill.
—In an urgent Zoom call to Dr. Hill initiated by Dr. Tess Lawrie, Director of the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy, Dr. Hill admitted to her that one of his study’s sponsors, Unitaid, had a say in the conclusions of his paper. But he would not divulge the name(s) of those who altered the paper’s conclusions.
But now, “The Digger” on Substack (aka producer/director Phil Harper) has revealed the name of the person who could have edited the paper’s conclusions—which led to the WHO’s non-recommendation of the use of ivermectin. That decision could have led to the unnecessary deaths of millions across the world.
GASP.
Mr. Harper studied the PDF of the paper, wanting to learn the identity of its “ghost” author. “The hope was that some artifact on the PDF would reveal something, maybe a font was different, maybe there was a hidden comment, maybe some tracked changes had been saved to the document,” said Harper. “None of those lines of inquiry came to anything.”
Then it came to him. Was it in the PDF’s metadata? “Sometimes it’s the most obvious of things,” Harper writes. “The ‘v1_stamped’ version of the paper did indeed have metadata. It even had author information inside the metadata. Expecting to see Andrew Hill listed as the author, instead, I saw a name I recognized. Andrew Owen.
“Unless someone used his computer, Andrew Owen has his digital fingerprint on the Andrew Hill paper.”
Professor Andrew Owen is the person who allegedly edited the critical Andrew Hill paper on Ivermectin. He was also in receipt of consultancy fees from pharmaceutical companies with competing products.
As it turns out, Andrew Owen is a Professor of Pharmacology & Therapeutics and co-Director of the Centre of Excellence in Long-acting Therapeutics (CELT) at the University of Liverpool. He is also scientific advisor to the WHO’s COVID-19 Guideline Development Group. Just days before Dr. Hill’s paper was to be published, a $40M grant from Unitaid, the paper’s sponsor, was given to CELT —of which Owen is the project lead. “The $40 million contract was actually a commercial agreement between Unitaid, the University of Liverpool and Tandem Nano Ltd (a start-up company that commercializes ‘Solid Lipid Nanoparticle’ delivery mechanisms)— for which Andrew Owen is a top shareholder,” says Harper.
Furthermore, Harper writes that, “Andrew Owen is prolific in the art of receiving money from pharmaceutical companies. He’s received research funding from ViiV Healthcare, Merck, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott Laboratories, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Tibotec, Roche Pharmaceuticals and Bristol-Myers Squibb.”
GASP.
Read the entire essay HERE. In it, Harper reveals much, much more. This is just the latest in a series of postings on ‘The Digger’ exposing the machinations and the backdoor wheeling and dealing to prevent ivermectin from saving lives so that other, more profitable (and scientifically proven more dangerous) designer drugs could take center stage and make bank.






