Truth or Consequences Covid-19: More Consequences

There are ZERO Amish kids suffering from cancer, diabetes or autism

Time to process the last three years

COVID-19 Vaccine: The Lies they Tell

Good Little Sheep Wear Their Mask The same people who bought into mandates over a 99% survival rate will do it for the next one, and the next one after it turns out, cowards will always act cowardly. Adjust your social circles accordingly

Good Little Sheep Wear Their Mask
The same people who bought into mandates over a 99% survival rate will do it for the next one, and the next one after that… it turns out, cowards will always act cowardly. Adjust your social circles accordingly

The Ministry of Health has been lying and making thing up from April 2020. Health Minister Yaakov Litzman quit over the lies

COVID-19: The Lies they Tell

COVID-19 TESTING: The Lies they Tell

What to do if you got the Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine Shot – Suggestions

COVID-19 The SIMPSONS-S22E06-The Fool Monty-21November2010


FDA: Vaccines Don’t Have to Prevent Infection or Transmission

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Zachary StieberApril 25, 2023 Updated: April 25, 2023


Vaccines don’t have to prevent infection or transmission to be cleared in the United States, the country’s top regulatory agency said in a new document.


“It is important to note that FDA’s authorization and licensure standards for vaccines do not require demonstration of the prevention of infection or transmission,” Dr. Peter Marks, a top official at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said in the document.


Marks was writing as he rejected nearly all recommendations from a group of experts that advised the FDA to update the labels for the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.


Vaccines are traditionally known as drugs that prevent an illness. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for years said a vaccine is a product that “produces immunity” while vaccination is an injection of an infectious organism “in order to prevent the disease.” The agency changed its definitions after people correctly noted that COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection.


The Coalition Advocating for Adequately Labeled Medicines, a group of experts, had called for the FDA to make clear that the COVID-19 vaccines don’t prevent infection or transmission.


“There is a widespread (but inaccurate) notion that efficacy against infection and transmission have been established by substantial evidence, and that these vaccines contribute to herd immunity,” the group said, pointing to claims from President Joe Biden, the head of the CDC, and Dr. Anthony Fauci that vaccinated people would not get sick or infected.


Biden, for instance, falsely said in 2021 that “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”


“To remedy this situation, language clarifying that phase III trials were not designed to determine and failed to provide substantial evidence of vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 transmission or death must be added to labels,” the coalition said. SARS-CoV-2 causes COVID-19.


While it’s uncommon to include in product labeling what a product has not been proven to do, there are cases where it’s necessary due to inaccurate assumptions, the coalition said. They pointed to the FDA stating that the influenza medicine Tamiflu “has not been shown to previous serious complications of influenza” after the drug’s manufacturer said it reduced complications by nearly half.


Marks rejected the request, writing that the petitioners included “selected statements by U.S government officials suggesting that vaccination against COVID-19 may prevent infection or transmission” but omitted statements from Fauci and others that later acknowledged vaccines don’t prevent infection or transmission.


“In responding to your Petition, we are not agreeing or disagreeing with any of the statements that are selected in the Petition,” Marks said. “Rather, we are observing that the statements referenced by the Petition do not demonstrate a commonly held belief that the clinical trials provided substantial evidence of efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We are not convinced that there is any widespread misconception about this.”


The head of the CDC, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, is among those maintaining to the present day that the vaccines at one point completely prevented transmission and symptomatic illness.


Trial data showed high efficacy against symptomatic illness but not 100 percent efficacy. Real-world data has shown lower effectiveness. The trials were not designed to measure transmission, the FDA has said in various documents.

Authorization Standards

Marks also said that the FDA can authorize or approve a vaccine even if there’s no “demonstration of the prevention of infection of transmission.”


“A vaccine can meet the licensure standard if the vaccine’s benefits of protecting against disease outweigh the vaccine’s risks for the licensed use,” he added. “There is no requirement that the vaccine also prevents infection with the pathogen that can cause the disease or transmission of that pathogen to others.”


Emergency use authorization (EUA) can be granted “without any evidence that the vaccine prevents infection or transmission,” he also said.


EUAs were given to the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines in late 2020 due to a March 2020 declaration by then-Health Secretary Alex Azar under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP Act) Act. The vaccines were later approved, though the FDA reverted to emergency authorization this month when it switched all existing COVID-19 vaccines from the companies to the updated, unproven bivalent formulations.


Linda Wastila, a professor in the Department of Practice, Sciences, and Health Outcomes Research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, said she was surprised by Marks’ assertion.


“I am totally flabbergasted that the FDA responded that proof of prevention of infection and transmission is not necessary for an EUA vaccine,” Wastila, who is part of the coalition, told The Epoch Times via email. The comment “makes me wonder if the FDA has ANY standards of safety and efficacy of the EUA vaccines,” she added.


Under the PREP Act, an emergency authorization can be given for a product used to diagnose, treat, or prevent a disease or condition when officials conclude that the product “may be effective” in diagnosing, treating, or preventing the disease or condition and “the known and potential benefits of the product, when used to diagnose, prevent, or treat such disease or condition, outweigh the known and potential risks of the product.”


That assessment is based on “the totality of scientific evidence available … including data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials.”

No clinical trial efficacy data has been made public for the bivalent vaccines.


The FDA did not respond to a request for comment. Marks noted that the FDA cleared the vaccines “for active immunization to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2.”


“The vaccines are not licensed or authorized for prevention of infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or for prevention of transmission of the virus, nor were the clinical trials supporting the approvals and authorizations designed to assess whether the vaccines prevent infection or transmission of the virus,” he said.

Lack of Safety Data

Other proposed changes that were rejected, included making clear that the FDA authorized a new Pfizer vaccine formulation with a different buffer without requiring studies to evaluate the efficacy or safety.


Kim Witczak, founder of Woodymatters and another member of the coalition, criticized the response letter.


“Honest communication and transparency is key to trusting our regulatory agencies. However, the FDA’s response to the citizen petition shows they are not really interested in transparency and sharing more information with the public,” she told The Epoch Times in an email. “With an experimental rushed product, safety is paramount and the public deserves the good, the bad and ugly in real time.”


The FDA only accepted a single proposal. It added some data from a trial to the labeling for the new Pfizer bivalent vaccine.


Before this month, the labels did not include any data from trials, because the FDA authorized the new vaccines as boosters without any trial data.


After the fall 2022 authorizations, Pfizer and Moderna announced that trials showed the bivalent triggered higher levels of neutralizing antibodies than the old vaccines. Antibodies are thought to protect against COVID-19. Pfizer said the data showed a favorable “safety profile” while Moderna said that “no new safety concerns were identified.” The coalition said the labeling “should be updated to reflect current data.”


While granting authorization for the bivalents as regular shots, the FDA updated the health care provider and recipient fact sheets for Pfizer’s bivalent to include the safety data Pfizer announced. But it did not include any immunogenicity data or any data on Moderna’s vaccine.


“FDA has not conducted an evaluation of the data that is referenced in the press release,” Marks said.



Top 7 SERIOUS HEART PROBLEMS caused by the vascular-clogging Covid jabs

25April2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

human heart

human heart

(Natural News) There are not many things more devastating to a parent than to watch their child’s health spin out of control, or worse yet, the child passes away before they do. As of late, even the healthiest kids and teens on the planet are experiencing serious heart problems after getting the mRNA Covid spike-protein-producing “vaccines.” In case you are unaware, mRNA instructs human cells to produce millions of microscopic prions that resemble an influenza virus and invade every organ of the human body. Once there, the human immune system instructs the fight or flight system to respond accordingly, attacking the foreign pathogens across all systems and throughout the vascular system. This in turn creates massive stress on the heart, as the arteries are clogged and clotted, limiting blood, oxygen, and nutrient flow. Healthy kids get struck hard, just take a look at all the athletes dropping to their knees, clutching their chests in agony.

The Covid clot shots can cause the human heart to suffer from muscle thickening, irregular beating, relentless pressure, and a long-term weakening

Some people who got the clot shots experience irregular heartbeats afterwards and can’t even fathom that it’s caused by a “vaccine,” because all they hear and read about is the fake mantra that all vaccines are “safe and effective.” The Fauci falsehoods flood the televisions and newspapers. The CDC spews the disinformation across the nation daily. Arrhythmia is an irregular heartbeat that can feel like the heart is beating too fast, or too slow, or out of rhythm. Often, this is caused by blockages (sticky spike proteins) in blood vessels that cause a buildup of pressure, making the heart work harder, its muscle thicken, and eventually, a total weakening. Risk of heart attack and stroke rise quickly.


Angina is chest pain from insufficient blood flow to the heart, as spike proteins clot and clog the arteries, blood vessels, and capillaries. There is no set time limit to how long mRNA “technology” causes the manipulated human cells to create these toxic prions, and the effects can be felt long after the toxic jabs have been administered. Fauci calls this “Long Covid,” but it’s really just “Long Vaccine Damage.”


Myocarditis is the swelling or inflammation of the actual heart muscle, and pericarditis is the swelling or inflammation of the sac-like tissue surrounding the heart. Both can be caused by mRNA jabs, as we see happening to athletes, pilots, and military members, even though they are some of the healthiest folks on the planet. That is why the RISK of Covid vaccine damage is FAR GREATER than any benefit, especially since kids and teens are at next-to-zero risk of complications from catching Covid, or any other flu for that matter. Think about that long and hard. This is worth careful consideration, especially with the upcoming plandemics that the Democrats and Bill Gates keep warning the world about. They must have something “up their sleeves,” besides some rubbing alcohol on a piece of cotton.

Top 7 serious heart complications caused directly or indirectly by the vascular-clogging Covid jabs

#1. Myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle)

#2. Pericarditis (swelling of sac-like tissue surrounding the heart)

#3. Arrhythmia (irregular heartbeat)

#4. Myocardial Infarction (heart attack)

#5. Hypertension (Hypertensive heart disease)

#6. Angina (chest pain from insufficient blood flow to the heart)

#7. Coronary artery disease

Bookmark to your favorite independent websites for updates on experimental gene therapy injections the CDC and fake news claim are “safe and effective” when they’re really dangerous and health-damaging.

Sources for this article include:


gellerreport-com-logo-Pamela-Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of The Geller Report and President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and Stop Islamization of America (SIOA).

Israel’s Staggering Increase in Heart Attacks, Strokes, Post Vax Morbidity

By Pamela Geller – on 17July2023

Israel - Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund

Israel – Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund


Israel is one of the most highly vaccinated countries in the world, with 81.5% of its population having received at least one dose.

In 2023, the majority of the population have become anti-vaxxers.

Israel - Daily share of the population receiving a COVID-19 vaccine dose

Israel – Daily share of the population receiving a COVID-19 vaccine dose


Despite the decrease in experimental vaccinations by the people, deaths and cases continue to accelerate. Cardiac Arrest diagnoses nearly doubled from 2020 to 2021 and more than doubled from 2021 to 2022. This trend is accelerating. In 2020, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 251,256 population. In 2021, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 130,890 population. In 2022, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 58,275 population.

If this trend continues at approximately 200%, we see
1 in 29,137 in 2023,
1 in 14,568 in 2024,
1 in 7,284 in 2025, etc.

IsraeLab’s Substack has further commentary and context on Israel’s data.

348% increase in Cardiac Arrest rate, 35% increase in Stroke rate, Pop.=4.5 million
Israel’s ’21-’22 leap in morbidity has not yet been addressed nor explained

Data sources:
1. Number of diagnoses: FOIA response from Clalit, Israel’s largest health fund.
2. No. of clients in the health fund per year: Israel National Insurance (Bituach Leumi).
Israel - Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund

Israel – Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund


Israel - Stroke diagnoses rate per 100K Source Clalit Health Fund

Israel – Stroke diagnoses rate per 100K Source Clalit Health Fund


Israel lab published these latest findings, a 348% increase in Cardiac Arrest rate, 35% increase in stroke rate. The population of =4.5 million
Israel’s ’21-’22 leap in morbidity has not yet been addressed nor explained.

Israel - IsraeLab Table Data Source Clalit Health Fund

Israel – IsraeLab Table Data Source Clalit Health Fund


The table also includes no. of deaths during hospitalization due to ca and stroke (see raw data table). On 2017-2019 the avg. deaths were practically zero for both diagnoses. By 2022 the no. of deaths climbed unexplainedly from zero (or close to zero) to 51 (ca), and to 154 (stroke). The British Heart Foundation also reports alarming signals involving heart conditions and stroke.

Shocking data from Israel’s largest healthcare organization shows a staggering increase in cardiac arrest diagnoses.
And number of people dying post vaccination.

By: Aussie17, Pharmafiles,Substack, Jul 16, 2023

We now have some new diagnosis data from Israel, which was acquired through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by attorney Ori Shabi on May 30th, 2023.

Firstly, we can observe that Cardiac Arrest diagnoses nearly doubled from 2020 to 2021 and more than doubled from 2021 to 2022. This is an extremely concerning trend as it is showing acceleration.

Israel - Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund

Israel – Cardiac Arrest diagnoses rate per 1M Source Clalit Health Fund


In 2020, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 251,256 population. In 2021, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 130,890 population. In 2022, there was 1 cardiac arrest per 58,275 population.

If this trend continues at approximately 200%, we will see
1 in 29,137 in 2023,
1 in 14,568 in 2024,
1 in 7,284 in 2025, and so on…

Of course, we hope that with fewer people vaccinating now, the trend may reverse.


For clarification, the annual incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Israel varies between 20 and 140 per 100,000 people [SOURCE]. It is important to note that there can be significant discrepancies between population data and health insurance data for several reasons, such as insurance data only including individuals with health insurance coverage. Additionally, variations in definitions (e.g., out-of-hospital cardiac arrests vs. hospital cardiac arrests) can contribute to these discrepancies.


Instead of solely analyzing the numbers, it is more meaningful to examine the trends over time. This approach allows for a better understanding of the patterns and changes in cardiac arrest incidence in Israel.


Let’s look at trends on the number of death. The number of deaths due to cardiac arrest and stroke is also increasing at an accelerated rate between 2020 and 2022. Prior to 2020, the number of deaths in these categories was virtually zero.




1 in 35 had Heart Damage From COVID Vaccine

Subclinical Heart Damage More Prevalent Than Thought After Moderna Vaccination: Study

Zachary Stieber, Reporter


Damage to the heart is more common than thought after receipt of Moderna’s COVID-19 booster, a new study indicates.

One in 35 health care workers at a Swiss hospital had signs of heart injury associated with the vaccine, mRNA-1273, researchers found.


“mRNA-1273 booster vaccination-associated elevation of markers of myocardial injury occurred in about one out of 35 persons (2.8%), a greater incidence than estimated in meta-analyses of hospitalized cases with myocarditis (estimated incidence 0.0035%) after the second vaccination,” the researchers wrote in the paper, published by the European Journal of Heart Failure.
Click to download PDF file Click to Download Sex-specific differences in myocardial injury incidence after COVID-19 mRNA-1273 Booster Vaccination

In a generally healthy population, the level would be about 1 percent, the researchers said.


The group experiencing the adverse effects was followed for only 30 days, and half still had unusually high levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, an indicator of subclinical heart damage, at follow-up.


The long-term implications of the study remain unclear as little research has tracked people over time with heart injury after messenger RNA vaccination, which is known to cause myocarditis and other forms of heart damage.


“According to current knowledge, the cardiac muscle can’t regenerate, or only to a very limited degree at best. So it’s possible that repeated booster vaccinations every year could cause moderate damage to the heart muscle cells,” University Hospital Basel professor Christian Muller, a cardiologist and the lead researcher, said in a statement.


Moderna did not respond to a request for comment.

None of the patients experienced a major adverse cardiac event, such as heart failure, within 30 days of booster vaccination, and none had electrocardiogram changes.


The people with elevated levels were advised to avoid strenuous exercise, which may have mitigated more serious problems, the researchers said.


No imaging was done to examine the participants’ hearts, despite imaging being recommended by many cardiologists in cases of suspected vaccine-induced myocarditis.


It’s possible that imaging would have revealed inflammation, which could cause scarring or irregular heartbeat, Dr. Andrew Bostom, a heart expert in the United States who was not involved in the research, told The Epoch Times.


Dr. Anish Koka, an American cardiologist, said that the findings were “super useful to see how ‘cardioactive’ the booster is” but that it was hard to say how significant the elevated troponin levels were, particularly without a comparison to baseline levels. “There is really nothing clinically concerning at 30 days to report,” he said on Twitter.

Study Methods

Researchers posited that the incidence of vaccine-associated heart injury was more prevalent than previously thought following messenger RNA booster vaccination because of a lack of symptoms or mild symptoms.


They defined injury as a sharp increase in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T on the third day after vaccination without evidence of an alternative cause. The levels of cardiac troponin had to hit the upper limit of normal, 8.9 nanograms per liter in women and 15.5 nanograms per liter in men.


All workers at the University Hospital Basel scheduled to receive a Moderna booster for the first time were offered a chance to participate in the study, unless they experienced a cardiac event or underwent heart surgery within 30 days of vaccination. The workers received a booster, which is half the dosage level of the primary series shots, from Dec. 10, 2021, to Feb. 10, 2022. The cohort ended up being 777 workers, including 540 females. The median age was 37 years.


Among the participants, 40 had elevated levels of cardiac troponin. Alternative causes were identified in 18. For the other 22, the researchers determined they had “vaccine-associated myocardial injury.” The median age of the 22 was 46. All but two were women, making the percentage of women with elevated levels higher than the percentage of men (3.7 percent versus 0.8 percent), which contrasts with most of the previous literature on vaccine-induced myocarditis.  That could stem from women receiving a higher vaccine dose per body weight, the researchers said.


Baseline levels were not recorded because the hospital’s COVID-19 task force and the researchers decided that the study “should interfere as little as possible with the motivation of the hospital staff to obtain the mRNA-1273 first booster vaccination and the logistics of booster vaccination itself.”


None of the people with elevated markers had a history of heart disease. While half experienced symptoms, most symptoms were nonspecific like fever. Two participants suffered from chest pain. And two, according to the Brighton Collaboration case definition, likely suffered myocarditis.


Testing was done for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T because of its sensitivity.

“This marker is extremely sensitive—with other methods such as MRI we wouldn’t have been able to detect any damage to the cardiac muscle, as it only becomes visible once the damage there is about three to five times greater,” Dr. Muller said.


The researchers were not able to figure out the mechanism for the vaccine hurting the heart muscle.


The authors reported some conflicts of interest, including Dr. Muller reporting grants from drugmakers such as Novartis and Roche. The study was funded by the University of Basel and the University Hospital Basel.


Limitations include the lack of baseline levels and lack of imaging.

Previous Findings, and Pending Study

Several other prospective studies examine myocarditis following Pfizer vaccination.

In Thailand, researchers found that 29 percent of 301 adolescents developed cardiovascular effects, including chest pain, after a second Pfizer dose. Seven were diagnosed with heart inflammation.


Researchers in Taiwan established baseline electrocardiogram levels before a second Pfizer dose and recorded abnormal results following the administration in one percent of 4,928 primary school students. That included five students diagnosed with myocarditis or an abnormal heartbeat.


And an Israeli study of 324 health care workers with a median age of 51 who received a second Pfizer booster identified two cases of vaccine-induced heart injury on day three.


Other recent studies have confirmed that vaccine-induced myocarditis can kill, including a South Korean study that ruled out all other possible causes for eight sudden deaths following messenger RNA vaccination. Myocarditis was not suspected as a clinical diagnosis or cause of death before autopsies were performed, researchers said.


The Swiss researchers said more prospective studies are needed to examine post-vaccination heart injury. Long-term problems from the injuries, they stressed, remain unclear.


Moderna was required by U.S. authorities to conduct a prospective study to assess the incidence of subclinical myocarditis following a booster among adults, with a projected completion date of June 30, 2023. Neither the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor Moderna have disclosed the results of the study as of yet.


Pfizer was required to conduct a similar study, with results due on Dec. 31, 2022, but the FDA changed the end date at the request of Pfizer.


Do Not Forget about the Children:


TURBO CANCER: Children are DYING within hours or days of leukemia diagnosis, often after receiving vaccine jabs

09May2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

(Natural News) Children and young adults are dying within hours or days after being diagnosed with leukemia. Some say the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines have something to do with these untimely deaths.

Julia Chavez, 13 years old

On Feb. 13, Julia Chavez, a 13-year-old girl from Augusta, Georgia, died only hours after her leukemia diagnosis. She was a student at Harlem Middle School.


Chavez was taken to the ER with a headache and ear infection. According to reports, she had “bleeding in her brain, lungs, stomach and throughout her body.”


Jenna Randall, Julia’s mother, said the family didn’t know the young girl had leukemia. She added that Julia “never had more than a sniffle and she’s never been hospitalized for anything since she was born.” (Related: Defective brands of chemo drug still being used to “treat” leukemia in children worldwide.)


Julia did not experience any warning signs, aside from being tired and bruising easily, which her family previously accredited to her just being a tomboyish child.

Kyle Limper, 16 years old

Kyle Limper, a 16-year-old from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, died within 24 hours after being diagnosed with leukemia on April 13.


Ken Limper brought his son to urgent care for back pain after Kyle played basketball before taking him to Jefferson Hospital. Ken was then told to bring Kyle back to the hospital if his condition didn’t improve over several days.


He added that after a couple of days, Kyle was so weak that he couldn’t even stand up. Kyle was too weak to get out of bed and Ken had to help him up.


Even then, Kyle was too weak and he would just fall back down on his bed.


The boy was eventually rushed to St. Christopher’s Hospital for Children, where doctors said the young athlete’s organs were shutting down from leukemia. He passed away within 24 hours after he arrived at the hospital.


According to Kyle’s family, they didn’t notice any warning signs of leukemia prior to his diagnosis.


Experts still haven’t confirmed what type of cancer Kyle had, but the two most common types in young adults are acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).


In patients with these types of cancers, white blood cells start to grow out of control in the body before spreading to the blood vessels and vital organs. The cancer can also progress rapidly because it inherits white blood cells’ ability to multiply rapidly.


This can be bad for the patient because it is only meant to be deployed when they are fighting infections.


Dr. Arif Kamal, the chief patient officer of the American Cancer Society, explained that patients could die from leukemia within 24 hours of diagnosis because the cancer was fast growing and may only be caught in the late stages when it has spread.


For example, celebrity Jerry Springer, 79, died from pancreatic cancer at least months after his diagnosis.


Kamal thinks that the late detection of Kyle’s cancer could be due to a combination of symptoms being missed and the speed at which the cancer progressed. He added that in most cases, patients with cancer will feel very tired, sleep a lot and “may be losing weight unintentionally.”


However, it is also possible for someone to miss these signs, particularly if, like Kyle, they are an athlete and are too distracted with other strenuous activities.


It also remains to be seen how long Kyle had cancer before he started experiencing pain in his back.


According to Kamal, in some types of leukemia, like chronic leukemia, patients can have the disease for months or years without having symptoms. But with AML and ALL, symptoms often appear within a few weeks as the initial cancerous cells divide rapidly and spread within the patient’s body.

Kavieriona White, 11 years old

Kavieriona White, an 11-year-old girl from Omaha, Nebraska, died two days after her leukemia diagnosis. She passed away on Feb. 16.


First, White was sent home from school with a fever.


Antonio White, her father, said the family thought she had a head cold. After taking her to the doctor, they gave her some nausea medicine and sinus medicine.


Several days later, she was found unresponsive and was rushed to a hospital where she was diagnosed with leukemia.


Antonio said the doctor told him Kavieriona’s leukemia “was treatable and curable, but the main problem was the brain bleeds.” Kavieriona had always been healthy, and she had never shown symptoms or had any head trauma.

Unnamed vaccinated girl, 13 years old

According to a case report (VAERS ID: 2228276), a 13-year-old girl died just over a month after being diagnosed with leukemia.


The girl received the second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine on Jan. 20 and she reported feeling very tired. She previously had a headache and experienced dizziness after the first Pfizer dose.


On Jan. 24, 2022, she was taken to the emergency room because she was weak and pale. On Jan. 25, she was diagnosed with B-cell ALL.


She was hospitalized and died on March 2, 2022.

COVID-19 vaccines and leukemia risk

Data suggests that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines deliver lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) with mRNA to the bone marrow. What does this have to do with these cases?


Leukemia is a broad term for cancers of the body’s blood-forming tissues, including the bone marrow and the lymphatic system. Leukemia usually involves white blood cells. In patients with leukemia, their bone marrow produces an excessive amount of abnormal white blood cells, which don’t function properly.


These cases should be reevaluated since both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines deliver a lot of LNPs filled with mRNA to the bone marrow.


The COVID-19 vaccine spike protein is very toxic. Once it is expressed in the bone marrow, it could be causing these “turbo cancers” in children that are fatal within hours or days.

Visit for more reports on the adverse effects of vaccines.


Watch the video below as Health Ranger Mike Adams talks to Dr. Paul Cottrell about cases of “turbo cancer” following COVID-19 vaccination.

Dr. Paul Cottrell drops bombshells on the “turbo cancer” following covid and the jabs

This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on

More related stories:

Children in China develop LEUKEMIA after getting injected with COVID shots.

Flame retardants in household items linked to chronic diseases.

HISTORY REPEATS: Pfizer paid out $1.2B after its drug caused thousands of BREAST CANCER cases.

Sources include: 1 2



Growing Number of Leprosy Cases Reported After COVID-19 Vaccination

COVID Vaccines
Zachary Stieber, Reporter

A growing number of leprosy cases are being reported after COVID-19 vaccination, including two cases in the United Kingdom that researchers said may have been caused by the vaccines.


The researchers examined records from the Leprosy Clinic at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London. They found that of the 52 people who went to the clinic in 2021, at least 49 were vaccinated.


The study definition of a leprosy adverse event associated with a COVID-19 vaccine included developing leprosy or a leprosy reaction within 12 weeks of receiving a dose and the person having no previous history of leprosy or a leprosy reaction.


Two people met the case definition. One developed borderline tuberculoid (BT) leprosy one week after a second dose. The other experienced a reaction 56 days after a dose. Both doses were Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine. Pfizer did not respond to a request for comment.


“The development of BT leprosy and a Type 1 reaction in another individual shortly after a dose of BNT162b2 vaccine may be associated with vaccine mediated T cell responses,” the researchers said.


The COVID-19 vaccines can provoke a response from white blood cells, or T cells. The cells are believed to protect against COVID-19.


T-cells can theoretically trigger Mycobacterium leprae, a bacteria that causes leprosy, leading to leprosy or a leprosy reaction, the researchers said.


Other vaccines have been shown to trigger leprosy or leprosy reactions, including tuberculosis vaccines, and some people who receive repeated COVID-19 vaccinations have been shown to have weakened immune systems.

The paper was published on Aug. 4 by PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

More on Findings

The person diagnosed with leprosy is an 80-year-old man who has lived in the United Kingdom for 49 years. He suffered from symptoms including thickened nerves. The leprosy diagnosis was confirmed via skin biopsy. The man may be the first to acquire leprosy in the UK since 1954.


The man improved over time and actually received a third dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.

“Interestingly he had a third dose of BNT162b2 vaccine six months after the second dose having started anti-bacterial therapy and experienced no deterioration of his leprosy. The skin lesions and nerve thickening had resolved by the time he completed the six-month course of anti-microbial therapy. There had been no recurrence of the plaques or nerve signs after 12 months,” the researchers said.


CDC Issues Alert About Biblical Disease [Growing Number of Leprosy Cases Reported After COVID-19 Vaccination]


The reaction was recorded in a 27-year-old man who had taken multidrug therapy, a drug for leprosy, in the past. He developed red plaques and thickened nerves before arriving in the UK from an unidentified country. A biopsy supported the diagnosis. He took medicine and the symptoms improved.


The link between the vaccine and the issue in the second case was strengthened by studies showing people who took the therapy three years or more years before are unlikely to experience a new reaction, the researchers said.


Of the 52 people who went to the Leprosy Clinic for diagnosis and/or treatment in 2021, all but two reported their vaccination status. Of those 50, 49 were vaccinated.


Five of the patients at the clinic were newly diagnosed with leprosy in 2021. Five others had a type one reaction. All were vaccinated, but just one of each category was determined to be possibly caused by a vaccine after being diagnosed within 12 weeks of vaccination. It was not clear when the other four were vaccinated.


Dr. Barbara de Barros, the study’s corresponding author, did not respond to a request for comment. The authors reported no funding or competing interests.


Dr. de Barros and the other UK researchers said that doctors should be aware that COVID-19 vaccination may cause leprosy but that they believe the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination “outweigh these unwanted events.” They provided no citations for the benefits of vaccination, which have dropped dramatically as newer variants have emerged and led to more nuanced recommendations in some countries. Citations for scope of harm included a 2021 recommendation from India that people with leprosy receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

Other Cases

At least 14 other cases of leprosy or a leprosy reaction within 14 days of COVID-19 vaccination have been reported in the literature, including eight in India. The patients were all said to have eventually recovered, and some received additional vaccine doses.


In a paper published in 2021, Brazilian researchers reported two leprosy reactions called erythema nodosum leprosum after COVID-19 vaccination. They said that doctors “need to be made aware of the occurrence of erythema nodosum leprosum that may appear in patients that are vaccinated” and “have to look for the signals of active leprosy in these patients for a possible diagnose of a new case of leprosy, relapse, or reinfection.”


In December 2021, Singaporean researchers reported a new leprosy diagnosis following COVID-19 vaccination and said the problem was “likely unmasked by the COVID-19 vaccine.”


Also in 2021, Indonesian researchers reported a patient who suffered a reaction after COVID-19 vaccination.

In January 2022, Indian researchers reported one leprosy reaction and said doctors should keep reactions in mind when seeing patients presenting with neurological complications.


In March 2022, Israeli researchers reported a reaction and said early diagnosis and treatment were important.

In a case series published in 2022, Indian researchers reported four men who experienced leprosy or a reaction within 11 days of COVID-19 vaccination. The researchers said that the “sheer versatility of clinical presentation of leprosy reactions following COVID‐19 vaccination warrants further large‐scale molecular studies.”


In another paper from 2022, a different set of researchers reported that three of 35 patients who visited their clinic from July 2021 to December 2021 experienced a leprosy complication or a reaction shortly after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.




COVID-19 Vagus Nerve Inflammation May Lead to Dysautonomia: New Study

FEATURED Research & Discoveries
Megan Redshaw, J.D.
9August 2023


New data may provide answers for those experiencing persistent symptoms long after their bout with COVID-19 has ended. These may include fatigue, lightheadedness, brain fog, cognitive issues, gastrointestinal problems, heart palpitations, shortness of breath, or an inability to tolerate upright postures.


A July 15 study published in Acta Neuropathologica suggests that SARS-CoV-2 infection may damage the nerves of the autonomic nervous system (ANS), causing an inflammatory response that can later lead to dysautonomia observed in long COVID patients.

Click to download PDF file Click to Download the Study Vagus nerve inflammation contributes to dysautonomia in COVID-19

Study Findings

Using several methods, researchers at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany performed a microscopic analysis of the vagus nerves in 27 deceased patients with COVID-19 and five controls who died of other causes, without COVID-19.


The vagus nerve is a vital component of the ANS that regulates critical functions such as digestion, respiratory and heart rate, and immune response. Vagus nerve signaling to the brainstem also controls the “sickness behavior response,” where the brain mounts flu-like symptoms including nausea, fatigue, pain, and other chronic symptoms in response to inflammation.


The researchers detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in vagus nerve samples obtained from deceased patients with severe COVID-19 showing direct infection of the nerve was accompanied by inflammatory cell infiltration composed mostly of monocytes—a type of white blood cell that finds and destroys germs and eliminates infected cells. Their analysis revealed a “strong enrichment of genes regulating antiviral responses and interferon signaling,” supporting the idea that vagus nerve inflammation is a common phenomenon with COVID-19.


The researchers also analyzed 23 vagus nerve samples of deceased COVID-19 patients grouped into low, intermediate, and high SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral load to determine if the virus was directly detectable in the vagus nerve and if the viral load correlated with vagus nerve dysfunction. Results showed the virus was present in the vagus nerve and also determined there was a direct correlation between SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA load and dysfunction of the central nervous system.


Researchers then screened a cohort of 323 patients admitted to the emergency room between Feb. 13, 2020, and Aug. 15, 2022, categorized by whether they had mild, moderate, severe, critical, or lethal COVID-19. They found that the respiratory rate increased in survivors but decreased in non-survivors of critical COVID-19. These results suggest SARS-CoV-2 induces vagus nerve inflammation followed by autonomic dysfunction (respiratory rate decrease), which “contributes to critical disease courses and might contribute to dysautonomia observed in long COVID.”


Responding to the study, microbiologist Amy Proal of PolyBio Research Foundation wrote on X, “Because the vagus nerve is an essential component of the #autonomic nervous system and regulates body functions such as heart rate, digestion, and respiratory rate, direct infection of the nerve by SARS-CoV-2 may contribute to related symptoms.” She added, “The findings beg the question: Could persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection of the vagus nerve contribute to dysautonomia in #LongCovid?”

What is Dysautonomia?

Nearly 1 in 5 people in the United States continue to experience unexplained symptoms of long COVID after their infection ends, with as many as 66 percent of patients suffering from moderate to severe dysfunction of the ANS known as dysautonomia.


Dysautonomia is a disorder of the ANS, a part of the central nervous system that controls vital involuntary functions such as breathing, heart rate, blood pressure, digestion, skin and body temperature regulation, salivating, hormonal and bladder function, and sexual function. The ANS also plays a role in the acute “fight or flight” stress response and sends messages to and from internal organs.


Dysautonomia causes the ANS—which consists of the sympathetic, parasympathetic, and enteric nervous systems—to malfunction, either through an inability to perform its tasks or by causing too much activity, resulting in high blood pressure or a rapid heart rate. The condition can be confined to the arms and legs or spread throughout the entire body. It can be severe or mild, and may be reversible or worsen over time.


Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) is a common form of dysautonomia that has increased since the COVID-19 pandemic began and has been reported by those with long COVID and in those following COVID-19 vaccination.


Symptoms of POTS include but are not limited to lightheadedness, difficulty thinking or concentrating, severe and long-lasting fatigue, intolerance to exercise, blurred vision, low blood pressure, heart palpitations, tremors, and nausea.


Since the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, 801 cases of POTS were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System as of July 28. This includes 597 cases attributed to Pfizer and 171 cases to Moderna.

Treatments for Dysautonomia

Therapeutic treatment options for autonomic dysfunction in the medical community are aimed at symptom management and avoiding triggers using pharmaceutical drugs and nonpharmacologic measures.

Cardiovascular Dysautonomia

For dysautonomia affecting the cardiovascular system, a 2022 study in Frontiers in Neurology recommended the following:

  • Drink water before getting up in the morning.
  • Elevate the head during sleep.
  • Monitor water and salt intake.
  • Use compression garments.
  • Engage in progressive aerobic exercise.
  • Avoid situations that worsen symptoms such as sleep deprivation, heat exposure, large meals, and alcohol consumption.

To prevent fainting, perform physical movements like crossing the legs, tensing muscles, and squatting. For those who do not respond to nonpharmacological options, medications that inhibit heart rate, vasoconstrictors, sympatholytic drugs, and volume expanders, including intravenous fluids may be prescribed.


The Frontiers study stated that people with POTS may benefit from fluid replacement and one or two additional teaspoons of salt per day, avoiding caffeine and alcohol, and avoiding anything that worsens symptoms such as prolonged standing, hot environments, and dehydration. Moving carefully from a lying or sitting position to standing is advised.


Medical treatments may include beta blockers, drugs for orthostatic hypotension to increase blood pressure, propranolol to reduce heart rate, and pyridostigmine—typically used to treat people with muscle weakness. However, the effectiveness of drug therapy is modest, and some drugs are not well tolerated.

Dysautonomia Associated With Long COVID or Post-Vaccine Syndromes

The Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has played a major role in treating long COVID and post-vaccine injuries, including people with dysautonomia.


Many long COVID patients are vaccinated, making it difficult to determine whether their prolonged symptoms are due to COVID-19 or vaccine injury. Regardless, both are manifestations of “spike protein-related disease” and share a significant overlap in symptoms, pathogenesis, and treatment, according to the FLCCC.


The FLCCC has developed protocols for people with long COVID and those experiencing post-vaccine injuries, including POTS.

They recommend patients undergo a series of initial tests to determine whether they have long COVID, and a chest scan for those who have respiratory symptoms to differentiate between long COVID and post-vaccine syndrome.


Protocols are geared towards either long COVID (pdf) or post-vaccine injuries (pdf)—including dysautonomia disorders such as POTS—exercised under the care of a practitioner.

Other Dysautonomia Treatments

Another study published in Frontiers Neurology found that noninvasive neuromodulation using ultrasound and other techniques may benefit patients with dysautonomia.


These non-invasive therapies were shown to alleviate musculoskeletal pain and systemic fatigue and improve cognitive and physical rehabilitation and neurological disorders.



‘Alarming’ Sevenfold Increase in Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Linked to COVID-19 and Vaccine

FEATURED Health News
Megan Redshaw, J.D.
Emphasis from

A sudden increase in Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS)—a rare and potentially fatal skin disorder—may be triggered by COVID-19, increased vaccination rates, or a lowered threshold caused by vaccines or previous infection, according to a large case series recently published in the medical journal Burns.

While SJS isn’t caused by fire, it is typically treated by burn units in hospitals because of its similarities to actual burns.


Researchers with the burns unit at Concord Repatriation General Hospital in Australia saw two to four cases of SJS, or toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), per year prior to COVID-19. In the first six months of 2022 alone, the same burn center observed a sevenfold rise in cases.


Of the 14 reported cases, five patients had COVID-19 a month before developing SJS/TEN, and three of 14 patients received a COVID-19 vaccine one month prior. Not a single case of SJS/TEN was reported in an unvaccinated individual.


Researchers said the rarity of the condition and presence of medications known to trigger the disease make the link difficult to prove, but the rapid rise in cases since the beginning of the pandemic and vaccine rollout is “alarming.”


SJS/TEN is a severe hypersensitivity condition where the skin develops rashes, blisters, and peels forming painful areas that resemble a severe hot water burn. Mucous membranes, including the eyes, genitalia, and mouth, are often affected or severely damaged, leading to sepsis, pneumonia, infection, or death.


Although SJS and TEN were once considered separate conditions, they are now considered part of the same disease—with SJS representing the less severe end of the disease spectrum and TEN representing the most severe.


Medications, including epilepsy medicines, antibiotics, and anti-inflammatory painkillers, are the chief cause of SJS/TEN, but certain viruses and vaccines can also cause the condition. Due to its potentially fatal nature, SJS/TEN is considered a medical emergency, and patients are treated in burn units.

Researchers’ 3 Theories for Sudden Rise in SJS/TEN Cases

The researchers proposed three theories for the sudden increase in SJS/TEN cases.


The first theory is that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may induce SJS/TEN by directly binding to receptors that trigger a T-cell-mediated response. Other viruses known to cause SJS/TEN include the herpes simplex virus, Epstein-Barr virus, and influenza.


A second theory is that COVID-19 vaccines may directly bind to cell receptors that trigger SJS/TEN and influence the body’s T-cell immune response initiating SJS/TEN. This T-cell response peaks at seven and 28 days post-vaccination, consistent with the observed cases.


Of the three cases attributed to vaccination in the study, two patients had received an mRNA vaccine, and one received a viral vector vaccine within a month of developing SJS/TEN. Researchers identified eight other cases of SJS following COVID-19 vaccination in published literature—four were associated with mRNA vaccines, three with viral vector vaccines like AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, and one with a whole virus vaccine.


According to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 198 cases of SJS/TEN following COVID-19 vaccination were reported between Dec. 14, 2019, and June 23, 2023. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report fewer than 1 percent of actual vaccine adverse events, which means other cases of SJS/TEN may have occurred but were unreported.

Threshold Lowering

The third theory proposed by the authors is that developing a COVID-19 infection or receiving a vaccine “primes” the immune system, lowering the threshold for a drug to trigger SJS/TEN. Without this “priming,” the drug would otherwise not cause the condition, as noted in each of the following cases:

  • A 26-year-old male received two previous doses of a viral vector vaccine and one mRNA vaccine dose. After experiencing vaccine-associated symptoms, he took paracetamol and ibuprofen and developed SJS. He had previously taken both medications with no adverse effects.
  • A 60-year-old female had COVID-19 six weeks before the onset of SJS/TEN. During that time, she received allopurinol for gout and experienced a reaction, despite taking the drug in the past with no ill effect. The woman had received two doses of an mRNA vaccine.
  • A 45-year-old male developed a reaction to a seizure prophylaxis drug. He was diagnosed with COVID-19 four weeks before developing SJS/TEN and was triple vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine.
  • A 53-year-old female received a viral vector vaccine three weeks before the onset of SJS/TEN. She was quadruple vaccinated with viral vector and mRNA vaccines and reacted to medications received for a life-threatening scleroderma complication.

Regulatory agencies in the United States and abroad have not acknowledged the potential link between SJS/TEN and COVID-19 vaccines or studied the ability of the virus or vaccine to prime the immune system. The study’s authors say more research should be done to investigate the impact viruses like SARS-CoV-2 have on immune-mediated disorders such as SJS/TEN.



Hohmann: Death by Injection – Top insurance researcher provides data showing staggering numbers

by 3June2023


Guest post by Leo Hohmann

Using data from the United Kingdom, a top insurance industry analyst estimates 600,000 Americans per year are dying from the Covid shots

The United States has become one of the worst countries in the world when it comes to medical transparency. But one smart analyst has found an end-run around the U.S. system that places a dark shroud of secrecy over common statistics.


The U.K. has been more transparent with its data. And that’s where some are going to get stats that allow them to calculate the number of excess deaths in the U.S. since the roll out of the controversial Covid jabs two and a half years ago.

Read: Dr. Peter McCullough On “The Holy Grail Of COVID-19 Vaccine Detoxification”

Those who trusted the system and took the Covid vaccines have a 26 percent higher mortality rate on average compared to those who declined the jab – and the death toll is even more staggering for vaccinated people under 50 years old, where mortality is 49 percent higher than for those unvaccinated.


These numbers are based on government data from the U.K. and were brought to Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson’s attention by Josh Stirling, one of the nation’s top insurance analysts and formerly Senior Research Analyst for U.S. nonlife insurance at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. Listen to the clip below from his recent testimony, which of course received zero coverage in the corporate mainstream media.

The Vigilant Fox-tweet-7April2023-The One Chart That Tells the Entire Story

The Vigilant Fox-tweet-7April2023-The One Chart That Tells the Entire Story needs your help: If you appreciate the news and analysis you get from this independent voice, please consider helping us in our spring fundraiser. You may send a gift of any size via snail mail c/o Leo Hohmann, P.O. Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264, or via credit card here. Thank you kindly for your support.



Spike in Deaths Corresponding to Covid Vaccine Rollout Found in Peer-Reviewed Analysis of Japan and Germany

by Eugyppius
16 June 2023 7:00 AM

Spike in Deaths Corresponding to Covid Vaccine Rollout Found in Peer-Reviewed Analysis of Japan and Germany

Click to download PDF file  Click to Download the Paper Annual All-Cause Mortality Rate in Germany and Japan (2005 to 2022) With Focus on The Covid-19 Pandemic: Hypotheses And Trend Analyses

Annual All-Cause Mortality Rate in Germany and Japan (2005 to 2022) with Focus on the COVID-19 Pandemic: Hypothesis and Trend Analyses‘ is a letter in the journal Medicine and Clinical Science by Hagen Scherb and Keiji Hayashi, comparing mortality trends across these two “highly industrialised countries, which have large and ageing populations in common”. It’s the first piece I know of to look closely at pandemic-era mortality trends in Japan – a country which provides a useful control on many fronts, because it took a relatively relaxed approach to non-pharmaceutical interventions, like many other Asian jurisdictions never saw much Covid mortality, and yet since autumn 2021 has a substantially higher vaccination rate than Germany.


This will shock you, but the results don’t look great for the vaccines.


First, the less interesting part of their analysis, namely death trends in Germany:

Death trends in Germany

Death trends in Germany

The first year of the pandemic coincided with slightly elevated mortality firmly within the bounds of prior trends, while the years of mass vaccination, 2021 and 2022, saw an anomalous 48,617 and 66,528 excess deaths respectively. This is roughly equal to the official Covid death tally for these years, but the analysis of Kuhbandner and Reitzner (recently published in Cureus) indicates that the virus cannot explain nearly all of them. Both the timing and the age-stratified data strongly suggest that a substantial number must be related to vaccination.


Particular interest thus attaches to Japan as a comparison case:

Death trends in Japan

Death trends in Japan

Whereas 2020 saw slightly above-trend mortality in Germany, it was a year of below-average deaths in Japan. 2021 was elevated but within-trend, while 2022 saw substantial excess mortality, well in excess of the deaths caused by the natural disasters of 2011. Nor can Covid explain these deaths; official Japanese virus mortality for 2022, which we know is substantially overstated in the Omicron era, amounts to only 38,870 deaths, a mere 32% of the excess.


What’s very interesting about the pandemic is its highly variable influence on all-cause mortality across the globe, and how this contrasts with the vaccines, which seem to coincide with marked upward trends almost everywhere they were widely administered.


The authors observe that “the official fear-mongering forecasts… in 2020 from COVID-19 in high income countries did not come true, neither in Japan nor in Germany”, but note that:

[I]t should be investigated to what extent the about 5-10% highly significantly increased mortalities in Germany and Japan in 2021 and 2022 might be due to the pandemic countermeasures, including the vaccinations with their possibly underestimated immediate or protracted side effects. … From this point of view, it seems possible that a high vaccination rate has contributed to an increased all-cause mortality in some countries…

Elke Bodderas, who draws attention to this analysis in Welt, notes the profound official incuriosity surrounding these numbers:

What is the RKI [the German CDC] doing now? It’s busy with many other things. It’s very interested in “an investigation of the promotion of physical activity in childcare centres, schools and sport associations – in light of pandemic restrictions.” In other areas too it shows great industry. Interesting news will certainly come from its telephone survey “on foodborne illness”, or its general study on “health in Germany today” …

Is there anyone in the RKI who worries that German intensive care units suddenly reported a 76% increase in embolic strokes in December, as hospital data of the billing portal Inek show? Or why Japan, which [Christian] Drosten praised as an “exemplary” country, saw such an outrageously high excess mortality in 2022 – more than twice as much as in the tsunami year of 2011?

No, not a single person anywhere in officialdom has demonstrated the slightest interest in these questions.


The entire success of our genius one-cool-trick pandemic measures exists in a hypothetical world. It is never anything we can see. Deaths in Germany were totally on-trend in 2020, but we’re asked to believe they would’ve been catastrophic without lockdowns. They increased substantially with the advent of mass vaccination beginning precisely April 2021, but we’re asked to believe even more would’ve died without the vaccines.


Complicit health authorities control a great many statistics, and they’ll keep truly damning numbers under lock and key as long as they can. In the meantime, the most powerful proof that the vaccination campaign was anything but a success will remain the all-cause mortality reports, which is one of the few statistics that they can’t hide. The total lack of interest in explaining these strange numbers speaks volumes.

This article originally appeared on Eugyppius’s Substack newsletter. You can subscribe here.



More than 300 scientific papers on covid RETRACTED for fraud

07June2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

(Natural News) Retraction Watch has been keeping a close eye on Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “science” papers over the years, noting in a summary list that more than 300 of them have been retracted since publishing due to compromised ethical standards and concerns about validity and credibility.


The list, which has been growing since April 2020, makes no distinction between withdrawal and retraction because journals that make such a distinction “have typically done it to justify not saying anything about why a paper was retracted, and to sometimes make a paper disappear without a trace,” the group says.


As of this writing, there are 330 covid papers total that have been retracted, along with 19 more that have received “expressions of concern.”


Gunnveig Grødeland, a senior researcher at the University of Oslo‘s Institute of Immunology, says that many researchers compromised their ethical standards during the “pandemic” either to try to get more of their publications approved or to take deliberate shortcuts for quick publishing.


“While it is understandable for some articles to be updated or changed to be published in a different form, some have been retracted because the researchers did not obtain informed consent during the research,” reported Exposé News about the matter.


“Grødeland pointed out that other articles have been withdrawn after the editors noticed that the strategies the papers mentioned were giving the wrong impression in the media of being recommended as actual treatment or prevention of covid-19. She said these sorts of articles had to be withdrawn as they claimed things that neither the authors of the articles nor their institutions could vouch for.”


(Related: Because much of what passes today as “science” is fraudulent, a lot of what constitutes modern medicine is as well – and this is why doctors who question the status quo continue to face suppression and discrimination.)

Even “prestigious” journals like The Lancet published fake covid “science” that was later retracted or withdrawn

It was not just obscure journals that published covid junk science, either. It was reputable names like The Lancet and Science that had to tuck their tails between their legs and quietly admit through retraction or withdrawal that they had made some serious publishing errors.


Science also published a fraudulent study examining the spread of the so-called “Omicron,” or moronic in anagram, variant of covid throughout South Africa. That paper was retraced after social media users pointed out that some of the samples used could have been false positives, seeing as how PCR testing was fraudulent and wrong from the very beginning.


One study published in The Lancet directly interfered with further investigation by governments into the merit of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a remedy for covid. Both the World Health Organization (WHO) and various national governments actually halted their HCQ research because of this bogus study, which falsely claimed that the widely used drug increases the risk of heart arrhythmia and mortality for covid patients.


Most of the now-retracted papers admittedly came from less reputable journals like the International Journal of Audiology, which published somewhere around 60 different bogus covid studies. One of them claimed that covid was associated with hearing loss, tinnitus, ringing in the ears, and vertigo, only to have its authors later admit that this claim is false.


Another paper was retracted by the editor of ScienceDirect “on the basis that there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable.” The paper in question had falsely attributed many “covid deaths” to the disease itself when most of them were actually caused by co-morbidities and other things unrelated to covid.


More news coverage like this can be found at

Sources for this article include:



How Jews Were Scapegoated During the Pandemic

People congregate outside of the Congregation Yetev Lev D’Satmar synagogue in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York City, on Oct. 19, 2020. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

People congregate outside of the Congregation Yetev Lev D’Satmar synagogue in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York City, on Oct. 19, 2020. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

By Jeffrey A. Tucker
June 2, 2023 Updated: June 2, 2023

It was common in the Middle Ages for Jews to get the blame for the spreading of disease. In the 14th century, Jews were accused of poisoning wells, infecting the water with something terrible that was then transferred to the whole community.


There was of course never one shred of evidence of this. The Black Death had nothing to do with the Jews—it was a bacterial infection transferred through many sources—but they caught the blame anyway. Indeed, that’s where we get the phrase “poisoning the well.” It has anti-Semitic connotations in history.


Scapegoating Jews is a habit with ancient origins. It is an ominous sign and a terrible omen of what is to follow. Indeed, the treatment of the Jews in any society is a “canary in a coal mine.” When they are unjustly blamed for social ills, nothing good follows. We know this from all experience dating to the ancient world.


Nonetheless, at the very outset of the big virus, fully two weeks before the government announced 15 Days to Flatten the Curve, the New York Times said that the right way to handle the coronavirus was to “go Medieval on it.” That was Feb. 28, 2020 and the author was their lead virus reporter Donald G. McNeil. This was the very first indication in that grim season that something was about to go very wrong.


To go “medieval” on a virus not only involves bad virology such as the miasma theory of disease spread, which the United States did indeed adopt. It was as if the whole of 20th-century scientific understanding just went out the window.


It also meant no modern medical care, which we also did by intubating patients to their deaths. We also got rid of dentistry: it was nearly impossible to get an appointment anywhere in the country for about six weeks. And then of course, as part of going Medieval, the attacks on the Jews began.


As a precondition of the attack, please recall that governments all over the country forbid in-person community religious worship. They shut down churches, chapels, synagogues, temples, everything, all in the name of disease control. The rights won from half a millennium of experience were thrown out the window by secular states.


Most institutions and groups complied. Some did not. That’s when the attacks began.


The center of Jewish resistance was of course the boroughs in New York City (Queens and The Bronx) with a high concentration of Orthodox Jews, particularly the Hasidim and Haredim. The attacks that began in May emanated from both the Governor’s office and the Mayor’s office, happily echoed for a full year of breathless reporting from the New York Times. They sent reporters out to discover and report unapproved gatherings of Jews and filed reports such as this one from Nov. 24, 2020:


“Thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews gathered to celebrate a wedding inside a cavernous hall in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood earlier this month, dancing and singing with hardly a mask in sight. The wedding was meticulously planned, and so were efforts to conceal it from the authorities, who said that the organizers would be fined $15,000 for violating public health restrictions.”


How dare they dance and sing without masks!


Moshe Krakowski of the Tablet has finally documented the outrage of scapegoating Jews in a wonderful piece. He points out that “In April of 2020, [Bill] de Blasio issued a special ‘message to the Jewish community’ threatening that ‘the time for warnings has passed’ and indicated that he would be dispatching the police to ‘arrest those who gather in large groups.’ Jews were the only one of the city’s many ethnic groups whom de Blasio singled out for public condemnation.”


And yet a few months later, the mayor was defending BLM protestors and their right to gather.


The New York Daily News blasted away at Jews: “The ultra-Orthodox do not always share their fellow citizens’ visions for civil society … tolerance, cooperation and pluralism take a back seat to Jewish exceptionalism.”


Oh, we see now. Jews are the other, the noncompliant, the enemy amongst us. Where have we heard that before?


Anthony Fauci got in on the act; “when vaccinations get below that number you start to see outbreaks like we saw some time ago in the NYC area with Hasidic Jewish people who were not getting vaccinated.”


In the same way, the New York Times went after Jews in Israel as disease spreaders. The Haredi have a “deep distrust of state authority, ignorance of the health risks … and a zealous devotion to a way of life centered on communal activity.” Meanwhile, Andrew Cuomo’s “cluster zones” for quarantine specifically targeted Jews in New York.


Early on, Cuomo himself singled out Jews. “I understand religious gatherings, I understand the Jewish Orthodox community …. But now is not the time for large religious gatherings. We’ve paid this price already. We’ve learned this lesson.”


Actually, the real lesson we have learned is that secular leaders who forcibly prevent religious people from practicing their faith are despots and dangerous. That reality didn’t stop all the leaders in the United States from targeting people of faith and scapegoating their traditions for disease spread.


All of this required that many Jews had to hide weddings and funerals from the hounds of government and media for the better part of two years. It seems astonishing to consider that this happened. Many decades of “never again” education and Holocaust museums around the world seemed not to have any effect when it came down to it.


Fortunately, some Jewish groups finally sued for their rights.


And it wasn’t just the Jews. Christian communities that gathered were targeted early on in the pandemic. I can recall the hysterical propaganda about church choirs in Texas and how the media treated them all as disease spreaders. It began almost right away after lockdowns, and continued for a full year. “Is it safe to sing in church?” asked Religion News in May of 2021.


Governments arrested people, including a state Senator, for singing hymns even outside!


Let’s be clear about the Jewish and Christian view toward singing. It stems from a deep religious conviction. When God created Adam, God gave him life by breathing into him. So our very breath is a gift from God. When we sing praises to God, we are giving that gift back to God in thanksgiving. That’s why the book that Jews and Christian shared most in common is the collected Psalms of David.


Any government at any time that bans ritual singing by a religious group is attacking a core belief and the religion itself. It’s literally demonic. And yet it went on in government and media circles for a year or longer, and without any evidence that singing was deadly or otherwise detrimental to community health. Hardly anyone even bothered standing up for the rights of people in these times.


Ironically, it was within and from these communities of faith that the first real glimpses of helpful therapeutics came. Their distrust of the secular authorities led them to eschew conventional protocols like ventilation and instead experiment with repurposed therapeutics. That’s how Dr. Vladimir Zelenko became such a legend. But even in his death from cancer, the vicious New York Times couldn’t resist another attack. Its obit was titled “Vladimir Zelenko, 48, Dies; Promoted an Unfounded Covid Treatment.”


There is a larger point about religious communities and loyalties. The COVID response was supposed to involve “the whole of government” and the “whole of society” but what about those who have loyalties to God first and must obey his commands? The expectation was that they would give in. Most did. But some did not: many Orthodox Jews, the Amish, traditionalist Catholics, fundamentalist Mormons, and, later, evangelicals. Their faith protected them against the pseudo-science of the medical and secular elites. In the end, faith led the dissidents to a better science too.


These are not the views of a people ready to comply with every cockamamie edict from Fauci and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). And good for them. After long experience, religions have codified this suspicion and even sang about it. The Psalmist expresses the attitude perfectly: “Princes persecute me without a cause, but my heart stands in awe of your word.” The Psalmist also says: “He shall cut off the spirit of princes: he is terrible to the kings of the earth.”


Take note from recent experience. The first attacked were passionate adherents of the Jewish faith. And this happened over an extended period of time with nary a raised eyebrow from anyone in the mainstream press. Indeed, too many Jewish leaders themselves let the whole thing slide.


Too many complied and not enough defied. Certainly not enough people spoke out as the media and governments “went Medieval” and blamed the Jews for spreading disease.


As they say, never again!

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.



Worker Fired Over Refusal To Receive COVID-19 Vaccine Wins Job Back

by Tyler Durden, 03August2023 –

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The University of Virginia wrongly fired an employee who refused to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, according to a new ruling.


The university “acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner” when it fired Kaycee McCoy, a cytotechnologist, in 2021, Virginia District Court Judge Claude Worrell Jr. said in a July 27 ruling.

Ms. McCoy had asked for a religious exemption to the university’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, with support from her pastor.

But her employer denied the request and terminated Ms. McCoy in November 2021.

Ms. McCoy quickly took her case to the courts, saying that the refusal to grant an exemption violated Virginia’s Constitution, which states in part that all citizens are “entitled to the free exercise of religion” and that no citizen “shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief.”


The university defended its decision, arguing that the plaintiff’s “personal opinions” and “personal preferences” did not make her entitled to a religious exemption. They also said they did not have to grant her an exemption even if her objection was based on sincere beliefs.


Judge Worrell disagreed, finding in favor of the plaintiff.

Virginia courts uphold governmental actions unless the actions are “arbitrary and capricious” or those taken “without a determining principle,” according to previous court decisions.


The university wrongly applied a test aimed at determining the sincerity of belief, the judge said, which “is violative of the separation of church and state doctrine enshrined in both the Virginia and federal constitutions.”


He reversed the termination, ordered the university not to fire Ms. McCoy again, provided she met the exemption requirements, and awarded the plaintiff damages equal to the salary she would have received since being fired, plus interest.


The university did not respond to a request for comment.

Lawyers for Ms. McCoy said the court “handed a victory” to the plaintiff.

Requests Exemption After Mandate Announced

Ms. McCoy started working for the University of Virginia in 2011. She is a cytotechnologist or a laboratory worker who analyzes cells.


The university imposed the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on Aug. 25, 2021, but said it would consider medical and religious exemption requests. The university cited guidance by Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring, a Democrat who said that universities could require COVID-19 vaccination but that they should “be prepared to provide reasonable accommodation for medical conditions and/or religious objections.”


Ms. McCoy filed her exemption request on Sept. 12, 2021, before the deadline for such requests.

Ms. McCoy’s objection was partly based on how fetal cells were used in testing or developing all the COVID-19 vaccines.

“The presence of and use of immortalized human cell lines taken against the will of the person aborted, having been used in the development of vaccinations, violates my sincere and firm beliefs that participation in the vaccination mandate is an indirect engagement and participation in abortion,” Ms. McCoy told the university.


She also sent a letter from her pastor confirming the sincerity of Ms. McCoy’s beliefs.

“I fully support Kaycee’s right to this objection based on the exercise of her own personal and faithful convictions,” the pastor wrote.


Several weeks later, the university denied the request, with no rationale provided.

Ms. McCoy asked for a reason for the denial, but the university said all decisions made by a body described as the “Health System Vaccine Religious Exemption Committee” were final, and no appeals were allowed. Additional information supporting the request could be provided, according to the message, from human resources.


The email said employees not in compliance with the mandate as of Nov. 1, 2021, would be subject to punitive action, including possible termination.


Ms. McCoy was on vacation during the first week of November 2021. When she went to work on the first day after returning from vacation, she met with a supervisor who told her she was suspended and would be fired in five days.


Later that day, an email confirming that the university would not change its denial decision arrived in Ms. McCoy’s inbox.

Mandate Kept in Place

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, issued an executive order upon taking office in 2022 that said any “requirement of state employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccination and disclose their vaccination status or engage in mandatory testing is harmful to their individual freedoms and privacy.”


Mr. Youngkin ordered a halt to such mandates at state institutions, including state universities.

The University of Virginia suspended its mandate for some employees but not workers in its health system.

The university cited a federal rule that forced health care institutions to require COVID-19 vaccination if they receive Medicare or Medicaid funding.


President Joe Biden’s administration ended that rule, and many other mandates, in May. Mr. Biden said the decline in COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths led to the change.



New York Times and CDC now reluctantly admit that covid deaths were over-counted, pandemic was over-hyped

20July2023 // Ethan Huff //

For years, the establishment has been telling us all that the official story surrounding the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) is true, and that anything to the contrary is just a “conspiracy theory.” Now, all of a sudden, both The New York Times and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are changing the script.


Seemingly out of nowhere, the Times is calling out the CDC for overcounting covid deaths while overhyping the so-called “pandemic,” which in and of itself appears to have been a couple normal flu seasons rebranded as something bigger and scarier than it actually was.


In its latest reporting, the Times suggests that the official data on the CDC’s website is “probably an exaggeration” in that “it includes some people who had a virus when they died even though it was not the underlying cause of death” – in other words, everything we have been saying all along is truer than ever.


The CDC itself admits nearly one third of all official covid deaths as of late fall into the erroneous category for this very reason. One third of the people who have been logged as more covid death statistics died with a positive covid test rather than from covid itself.


(Related: Did you know that the CDC is a private corporation falsely referred to as a public health agency?)


Nearly half of all “covid” hospitalizations had nothing to do with covid

Another little tidbit of truth that came from The Atlantic has to do with pediatric hospitalizations for covid, which were also wildly overblown.


Two separate studies, that report explains, found that 40 to 45 percent of covid hospitalizations had nothing to do with covid. Sure, the patients may have tested positive for it, but a closer look reveals that nearly one in two of them were admitted for some other reason, including cancer treatment or psychiatric episode.


The Atlantic published a pretty straightforward title for its article about this: “Our Most Reliable Pandemic Number Is Losing Meaning.” Ouch.


It turns out that next to nothing that was officially presented to the masses during covid was accurate. So much of the plandemic was a lie that it is difficult to find anything that was honest and true from that ugly and unsettling era of medical fascism.


While the scamdemic itself is over, the hundreds of millions of people who got “vaccinated” for it still have all those spike proteins and other proteins floating around in their systems, while all the while their DNA is being reprogrammed as part of the gene therapy component.


The jabs were just as much a lie as the covid death numbers that preceded them, in other words. The world was hoodwinked to an astounding degree by the globalists behind the covid hoax, and the fallout from it is still underway.


“It is excellent that the truth is being revealed, finally,” someone wrote on Twitter in response to these latest revelations. “Many of us knew the counts were incorrect, inflated, bogus … all along.”


“Died in a car accident? No problem! It was covid,” wrote another about a very real type of scenario that occurred on the regular throughout the plandemic as the authorities tried to scare people with fake covid death numbers.


“… and the rest where deaths were covid was the ‘last straw’ infection in already dying people,” suggested another about how many “covid” deaths were just deaths from old age and other natural causes.


“That’s why the covidians stopped quoting death numbers months and months ago,” wrote another.


The latest news about the covid scam can be found at


Sources for this article include:



FACT CHECK: Covid was mild and barely killed anyone – ventilator-acquired pneumonia, on the other hand, killed millions

19May2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

(Natural News) New research out of Northwestern University in Illinois has confirmed that most of the pre-“vaccine” deaths that occurred in the early days of the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “pandemic” were caused by ventilators, and specifically ventilator-acquired pneumonia, rather than the “virus.”


SARS-CoV-2, it turns out, was relatively mild the entire time, afflicting most people with little more than a cold or sniffles. The establishment health system, however, was told and incentivized to make it appear like another black plague, which sent countless millions to an early grave through the “treatment” modalities they were offered.


One of those so-called treatments was ventilators, which caused patients who otherwise would have survived, in most cases, to develop a serious case of ventilator-acquired pneumonia. This, Northwestern researchers found, is why millions died – again, not because of covid itself.


“Covid itself has a ‘relatively low mortality rate’ compared to other respiratory illnesses, the researchers found after examining about 600 patients with severe pneumonia,” reported Alex Berenson on his Substack. “Yet Covid patients remained intubated longer than other patients and developed secondary bacterial infections more often.


“Those extra infections caused many deaths in Covid patients, the researchers wrote. More patients may have died from the bacterial infections than Covid itself.”

(Related: Be sure to also check out our recent coverage about how hospitals across America became death and murder facilities during covid.)

American hospitals murdered patients with ventilators, data shows

This revelation is really bad news for the corporate media and establishment medicine, both of which aggressively pushed for all admitted covid patients to have a ventilator smashed over their breathing holes. These same entities then tried to blame President Donald Trump for not doing enough to “save lives” by imposing even more medical tyranny.


Early on in the scamdemic when Trump openly stated that he did not believe the medical establishment needed so many ventilators, let alone even more ventilators after their overuse created a shortage, he was blasted by the powers that be for spreading “misinformation.”


“Doctors often preemptively put patients on ventilators,” The Wall Street Journal reported in December 2020, noting that the medical establishment’s excuse for ventilator overuse is that it would help protect hospital staff from “catching covid” from patients breathing out covid “viral particles.”


It was already long established at the time that putting patients on mechanical ventilation, especially for long periods of time, is really dangerous because tracheostomy tubes “are a highway to bacterial lung infections,” to quote Berenson, who warns that ventilator-acquired pneumonia is very difficult to treat, even with powerful antibiotics.


“The importance of VAP [ventilator-acquired pneumonia] as a driver of mortality in patients with COVID-19 has been underestimated,” wrote the researchers behind the new study, which was published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.


The truth about ventilators eventually came out, resulting in many hospitals simply abandoning them altogether. This resulted in truckloads of brand-new ventilators having to be given away – though nobody wanted them, so most ended up in landfills.


“By then, though,” Berenson notes, “it was too late for Covid patients admitted – and ventilated – in 2020.”

“It is incredible the speed at which the – once revered – medical profession was effortlessly dismantled,” wrote one of Berenson’s readers about what covid did – or perhaps simply brought to light – concerning the deeply embedded corruption within the medical establishment.


“Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet’s right-hand man, once said: ‘Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome,’” – and, man, was this right as far as what happened during covid, resulting in millions of needless deaths.

The latest news about the covid scamdemic and what it did to the world can be found at

Sources for this article include:

TOP logo

The lies about hydroxychloroquine were the worst of the COVID era

By John Klar 19April2023

There has been little accountability for the lies of the COVID pandemic.

Clearly the disease originated at the Wuhan Virology Lab.  The mRNA vaccines were not nearly as effective as touted (if they worked at all), and possibly unsafe.

Another glaring dishonesty, exposed by doctors like Meryl Nass, relates to the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID.


Whether or not hydroxychloroquine is effective against COVID, government authorities thwarted doctors from honestly attempting to find out, and interfered with doctor-patient relationships to do so.  Agencies conspired to undermine and discredit doctors like Dr. Meryl Nass, discouraging alternative therapies possessing strong safety records while hard-selling experimental and relatively untested mRNA vaccines.


In the case of Dr. Nass, a nationwide pattern of censorship against physicians who supported hydroxychloroquine was reflected when the State of Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine suspended her medical license and referred her for a psychiatric evaluation.  The Board slandered the good doctor by claiming her provision of care constituted “an immediate jeopardy to the health and physical safety of the public” and even suggested she might be using drugs:

The information received by the Board demonstrates that Dr. Nass is or may be unable to practice medicine with reasonable skill and safety to her patients by reason of mental illness, alcohol intemperance, excessive use of drugs, narcotics, or as a result of a mental or physical condition interfering with the competent practice of medicine.

Dr. Nass was not doing anything extreme in her patient care: she was targeted because she spoke up forcefully against the mRNA vaccine narrative.  She got in the way of efforts by politicians and pharmaceutical companies to ensure maximum jab compliance.


The immediate insistence by authorities that Covid skipped species in an open air market flew in the face of common sense—that it may have come from a lab studying that very virus with gain-of-function methodology, using bats carrying that virus, in the city where that virus then broke out.  Similarly, the rush to dismiss hydroxychloroquine as a potentially effective therapy could not have been known without study (much like early dismissals of natural immunity).  Banning its use made no sense.


As a person who had taken hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for many years for Lyme Disease, the slandering of the drug (and doctors who prescribed it) was rather stunning to me.  I knew the risks of the drug were minor.  Yet Dr. Anthony Fauci and others very aggressively opposed trying to save lives with this drug before mRNA vaccines were available, using illogical and extremist justifications.

Dr. Nass stood up boldly and early.  At her website and in her newsletters, she has competently established that:

– studies purporting to discredit HCQ employed excessive doses and were designed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

– the government limited HCQ use by reducing supplies to pharmacies.

– the government used the reduced supplies to suggest doctors who prescribed HCQ for Covid patients were depriving patients from using HCQ for traditional purposes.

– government propaganda fabricated and elevated dangers of the drug, and the FDA and CDC limited its use using false claims.

– trials were unreasonably limited to already-sickened patients.

– conflicts of interest existed in hydroxychloroquine studies with pharmaceutical companies who were stakeholders in mRNA vaccines.

– the government pressured state medical licensing boards and pharmacists against providing HCQ.

– Dr. Fauci claimed strong evidence of efficacy was required before HCQ could be endorsed; the opposite of what he proclaimed regarding mRNA vaccines.

All of these and other facts have been meticulously documented by Dr. Nass and other ethical physicians.  It appears to be her opposition to the Big Pharma COVID narrative, not concern for her patients, that caused this brave patriot to be targeted.


Many have suggested that countries that employed hydroxychloroquine against COVID experienced better health outcomes than wealthy nations that imposed lockdowns and coerced vaxxing:

Death rates in countries that rely on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the treatment of Covid-19 appear to be dramatically lower than death rates in countries that discourage the use of the drug. A new study claims that the death rate in the countries that used HCQ early on was 79% lower than in countries where the drug was not used. ….a pill costing a few cents saves lives, while the mountain of money spent on lockdown in the rich part of the world has failed to do so.

Other studies claimed the stuff actually worked very well:

HCQ was found to be consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting. It was also found to be overall effective in inpatient studies. No unbiased study found worse outcomes with HCQ use. No mortality or serious safety adverse events were found. HCQ is consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting, it is overall effective against COVID-19, it has not produced worsening of disease and it is safe.

This is the polar opposite of claims by the usual suspects The Lancet, WHO, CDC, and FDA who in unison pushed experimental jabs to the exclusion of alternative interventions.  Many patients distrusted the so-called science of these proven liars (remember when Fauci said COVID vaccines were “just like measles”?), and sought alternative scientific voices for guidance.


Dr. Meryl Nass has stood up to the Orwellian stranglehold narrative, just as she has continued to defy the Maine licensing board whose case against her continues to deteriorate like an Alvin Bragg indictment.  Americans should take their spoon of modern experimental medicine with a generous pinch of salt.  Are doctors permitted to suggest mRNA vaccines are not warranted for young children, or will that too be targeted as verboten?


Doctors like Meryl Nass are the salty hope of free-thinking physicians and patients alike.  Her case in Maine continues, and must be watched closely.  So too should the now-discredited talking heads who have spewed a litany of lies about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and mRNA vaccines.

John Klar hosts the Small Farm Republic Substack and podcast from his Vermont farm.  His new book is Small Farm Republic: Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revival.



US Failure to Recognize Natural Immunity Negatively Affected Pandemic Response: NIH Scientist

Zachary Stieber
11May2023 Updated: 11May2023


The failure to recognize how post-infection immunity is similar or superior to that bestowed by vaccination led to prolonged school closures and other problems, a National Institutes of Health (NIH) scientist told Congress on May 11.


U.S. public health agencies “chose to disregard natural immunity,” leading to “lost jobs, staffing shortages, children kept out of school, and wasted vaccines,” said Margery Smelkinson, a research scientist at the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).


She was one of three experts who testified at a hearing on immunity during the pandemic conducted by the U.S. House’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in Washington.


Smelkinson, who said she was testifying in her personal capacity, is employed by the same agency that was led for decades by Dr. Anthony Fauci, who repeatedly downplayed natural immunity along with other top public health officials.


Fauci and Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), were among the officials to meet secretly in 2021 to decide whether post-infection immunity should count as one or more vaccine doses in the recommended COVID-19 vaccination schedule, according to documents obtained by The Epoch Times. The meeting resulted in no changes to the recommendations, which advise virtually all Americans to get a vaccine even if they’ve recovered from COVID-19.


The government’s position on natural immunity meant that COVID-19 vaccine mandates across the country featured no exceptions for the naturally immune, in contrast to some other countries.


The CDC has said that there is post-infection protection but that it varies by person, it’s unclear how long it lasts, and recovered people should still get vaccinated.


But evidence from before the vaccines were even available signaled that natural immunity was robust, and later studies provided evidence that natural immunity was similar to or even better than vaccination, Smelkinson noted.


One study in July 2020, for instance, found a strong immune response in people who had recovered from COVID-19. Another in October 2020 provided similar findings. And a paper in November 2020 found that mild infections also triggered strong responses.


As early as April 2021, research suggested protection on par with that from vaccines. A CDC study found natural immunity was better than vaccination against the Delta variant, and a more recent CDC paper provided the same conclusions for the Omicron strain. An analysis of dozens of studies found that post-infection protection was similar to or better than vaccination, depending on the strain.


Smelkinson said the government’s position resulted in staffing shortages, including in the health care sector, and “caused needless loss of life as vaccines were given to essential workers with natural immunity instead of being prioritized for the elderly.”


“Additionally, the daily quarantine of thousands of students could have been significantly reduced if districts had, at least, made exceptions for students with natural immunity. At least,” she said. “Disregarding the wealth of evidence of natural immunity led to missed opportunities to implement policies that could have been more effective and efficient in controlling the pandemic and limiting collateral damage.”


Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the panel, said that the government shouldn’t have mandated vaccination for the naturally immune.

Other Experts

Dr. Marty Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, told the panel that the stance against natural immunity adopted by Fauci and others didn’t make sense. He pointed in part to Fauci saying previously that people who had recovered from influenza didn’t need vaccination “because the most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.”


“They dismissed it, saying there was uncertainty, ‘We don’t know how long it’s going to last.’ As if we knew how long vaccinated immunity was going to last,” said Makary, who also said he was testifying in a personal capacity.


Studies have shown that natural immunity does wane over time, particularly against infection. But the protection from vaccines also drops, with a number of papers indicating the waning is more rapid.


Makary estimated that prioritizing naturally immune health care workers to get vaccinated early on resulted in the deaths of thousands of people who actually needed vaccines but were unable to get them. Another result was higher medical bills, he said.


Dr. Tina Tan, a professor at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine, was also called to testify to the panel as the minority witness for the Democrats. Tan acknowledged that post-infection immunity exists but aligned with the CDC as she asserted that the level of protection after recovery “may vary from person to person.”


Tan championed so-called hybrid immunity, or vaccination on top of natural immunity. She pointed to papers including a study published in January that found hybrid immunity triggered a stronger immune response against Omicron than natural immunity alone.


“Recent data suggests that the best immunity comes from ‘hybrid immunity,’ the combination of vaccination and immunity after infection,” Tan said.


The doctor claimed that the currently available COVID-19 vaccines provide “substantial protection against severe disease, hospitalization, and death.” There is no clinical trial data available for the updated formulations of the most widely used vaccines, manufactured by Pfizer and Moderna, and observational data indicate the vaccines provide subpar protection against symptomatic infection and short-lived protection against hospitalization.


Tan also said that the vaccines are “safe,” noting that most adverse events are typical post-vaccination symptoms such as fever. But many serious side effects are either caused by the vaccines or suspected to be linked to them, including heart inflammation and blood clotting.


“We know that CDC has conducted extensive monitoring of adverse events associated with vaccines and the risks associated with getting a natural COVID-19 infection are far greater than the risks associated with COVID-19 vaccination,” Tan said.


One of the latest sets of risk-benefit analyses from the agency concluded that the benefits outweighed the risks, but was criticized by several experts for relying on hospitalization rates that didn’t include children even when estimating hospitalizations among children.


“The risk-benefit analysis is a marketing strategy to maximize uptake of the vaccine,” Allison Krug, an epidemiologist, told The Epoch Times previously. “It is not an honest effort to estimate risks and benefits because it ignores the most durable protection on the ‘market’—immunity from prior infection—which is near universal now.”



Twenty Grim Realities Unearthed By Lockdowns

by Tyler Durden, 06June2023 –

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

It’s common now to speak of the before times in contrast to the after times. The turning point was of course March 16, 2020, the day of 15 Days to Flatten the Curve, though authoritarian trends predate that. Rights were suddenly broadly throttled, even religious rights. We were told to conduct every aspect of our lives in accordance with the priorities of the bio-medical security state.

Hydra By deskridge

Hydra By deskridge


Very few people anticipated such a shocking development. It was the onset of a new state-conducted war and the enemy was something we could not see and hence could be anywhere. No one has ever doubted the omnipresence of potentially dangerous pathogens but now we were being told that life itself depended entirely on avoidance of them and the only guide going forward would be public-health authorities.


Everything changed. Nothing is the same. The trauma is real and lasting. The claim of “15 Days” was revealed to be a ruse. The emergency lasted three years and then some. The people and machinery that did this are still in power. The pick to head the CDC has a long track record of enabling and cheering the lockdowns and all that followed.


It’s a helpful exercise to summarize the new things we’ve all discovered in these years. Together they account for why the world seems different and why we all feel and think differently now than we did just a few years ago.

Twenty terrible realities unearthed by lockdowns

1. Surveillance and censorship by Big Tech. The resistance eventually found each other but it took months and years. A censorship regime descended on all major social platforms, technologies designed with the intention of keeping us more connected and expanding the range of opinion we could experience. We did not know it was happening, but we eventually learned of the crackdown, which is why so much of us felt so alone. Others could not hear us and we could not hear them. The regime faces a bold court challenge on many fronts but it still goes on today, with all but Twitter constantly policing their networks in ways that are unpredictably authoritarian. We have ironclad evidence now that they are all captured.

2. Power and influence of Big Pharma. It was April 2020 when someone asked me if the goal of the vaccine produced by the pharmaceutical cartel was really behind the lockdowns. The idea would be to terrify us and ruin our lives until we were begging for shots. I thought the whole idea was insane and that the corruption could not possibly reach this deep. I was wrong. Pharma had been at work on a vaccine since January of that year and called in every form of purchased influence to eventually make them mandatory. Now we know that the major regulators are wholly owned and controlled, to the point that necessity, safety, and efficacy don’t really matter.

3. Government propaganda by Big Media. It was relentless from day one: the major media proved hardcore partisans of Anthony Fauci. The powers that be could tap the New York Times, National Public Radio, Washington Post, and all the rest, whenever and however they wanted. Later the media was deployed to demonize those who violated lockdowns, refused masks, and resisted the shots. Gone was the idea that “democracy dies in darkness” and the “paper of record” replaced by darkness itself and constant propaganda. They showed no real curiosity of the other side. The Great Barrington Declaration itself began as an effort to educate journalists but only a few dared even show up. Now we get it: the mainstream media too is wholly owned and completely compromised. They already knew what to report and how to report it. Nothing else mattered.

4. Corruption of public health. Who in their right minds would have predicted that the CDC and NIH, not to mention the World Health Organization, would be deployed as frontline workers in the imposition of totalitarian control? Some observers perhaps predicted this but implausibly so. But in fact it was these agencies which were responsible for all the absurd protocols from closing hospitals to non-Covid cases, putting up Plexiglas everywhere, keeping schools closed, demonizing repurpose therapeutics, masking toddlers, and forcing shots. They knew no limits to their power. They revealed themselves to be faithful agents of the hegemon.

5. Consolidation of industry. Free enterprise is supposed to be free but when workers, industries, and brands were divided between essential and nonessential, where were the howls from Big Business? They weren’t there. They proved willing to put profit ahead of the system of competition. So long as they benefited from the system of consolidation, cartelization, and centralization, they were fine with it. The big-box stores got to wipe out the competition and gain a leg up in industrial standing. Same with remote learning platforms and digital technology. The biggest businesses proved to be the worst enemies of real capitalism and the biggest friends of corporatism. As for arts and music: we know now that the elites consider them dispensable.

6. Influence and power of administrative state. The Constitution established three branches of government but lockdowns were not managed by any of them. Instead it was a fourth branch that has grown up over the decades, the permanent class of bureaucrats that no one elected and no one from the public controls. These permanent “experts” were completely unleashed and unhinged with no check on their power, and they cranked out protocols by the hour and enforced them as legislatures, judges, and even presidents and governors stood by powerless and in awe. We know now that there was a coup d’etat on March 13, 2020 that transferred all power to the national security state but we certainly did not know it then. The edict was classified. The administrative state still rules the day.

7. Cowardice of intellectuals. The intellectuals are the most free to speak their minds of any group. Indeed that is their job. Instead, they stayed quiet for the most part. This was true of right and left. The pundits and scholars just went along with the most egregious attacks on human rights in this generation if not in all living memory. We employ these people to be independent but they proved themselves to be anything but that. We stood by in shock as even famed civil libertarians looked out at the suffering and said “This is fine.” A whole generation among them is today completely discredited. And by the way, the few who did stand up were called horrible names and often lost their jobs. Others took note of this reality and decided instead to behave by staying quiet or echoing the ruling-class line.

8. Pusillanimity of universities. The origin of modern academia is with the sanctuaries from war and pestilence so that great ideas could survive even the worst of times. Most universities – only a handful excepted – completely went along with the regime. They closed their doors. They locked students in their dormitories. They denied paying customers in-person education. Then came the shots. Millions were jabbed unnecessarily and could only refuse on pain of being kicked out of degree programs. They showed a complete lack of principle. Alumni should take note and so should parents who are considering where to send their high school seniors next year.

9. Spinelessness of think tanks. The job of these huge nonprofits is to test the boundaries of acceptable opinion and drive the policy and intellectual world in the direction of progress for everyone. They are also supposed to be independent. They don’t depend on tuition or political favor. They can be bold and principled. So where were they? Almost without exception they clammed up or became craven apologists for the lockdown regime. They waited and waited until the coast was clear and then eked out little opinions that had little impact. Were they just being shy? Not likely. The financials tell a different story. They are supported by the very industries that stood to benefit from the egregious policies. Donors who believe in freedom should take note!

10. Madness of crowds. We’ve all read the classic book Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds but we thought it was a chronicle of the past and probably impossible now. But within an instant, mobs of people fell into medieval-style panics, hunting down non-compliers and hiding from the invisible miasma. They had a mission. They were ferreting out dissidents and ratting out the non-compliers. None of this would have happened otherwise. Just like in the Cultural Revolution of China, these would-be members of the Red Guard became foot soldiers for the state. Mathias Desmet’s book on Mass Formation now stands as a classic explanation of how a population devoid of meaningful lives can turn these sorts of political frenzies into deluded crusades. Most of our friends and neighbors went along.

11. Lack of ideological conviction of both right and left. Both right and left betrayed their ideals. The right abandoned its affections for limited government, free enterprise, and the rule of law. And the left turned against its traditional stand for civil liberties, equal freedoms, and free speech. They all became compromised, and they all made up fake rationales for this pathetic situation. Had this all began under a Democrat, the Republicans would have been screaming. Instead they went quiet. Then the Covid regime passed to a Democrat and so they stayed quiet while the Republicans, embarrassed at their previous silence, stayed silent for far too long. Both sides proved ineffective and toothless throughout.

12. Sadism of the ruling class. The kids were denied a year or two of school in some locations. People missed medical diagnostics. Weddings and funerals were on Zoom. The aged were forced into desperate loneliness. The poor suffered. People turned to substance abuse and put on added pounds. The working classes were exploited. Small businesses were wrecked. Millions were forced to move and millions more were displaced from their jobs. The ruling class that advertised its wonderful altruism and public spiritedness became callous and completely disregarded all this suffering. Even when the data poured in about suicide ideation and mental illness from loneliness, it made no difference. They could not muster any concern. They changed nothing. The schools stayed closed and the travel restrictions stayed in place. Those who pointed this out were called terrible names. It was a form of grotesque sadism of which we did not know they were capable.

13. The real-life problem of massive class inequality. Would any of this have happened 20 years ago when a third of the workforce was not privileged enough to take their work home and pretend to produce from laptops? Doubtful. But by 2020, there had developed an overclass that was completely disconnected from the lives of those who work with their hands for a living. But the overclass didn’t care that they had to face the virus bravely and first. These workers and peasants did not have privileges and apparently they didn’t matter much. When it came time for the shots, the overclass wanted their health care workers, pilots, and delivery people to get them too, all in the interest of purifying society of germs. Huge wealth inequalities turn out to make a big difference in political outcomes, especially when one class is forced to serve the other in lockdowns.

14. The cravenness and corruption of public education. A universal education was the proudest achievement of progressives one hundred years ago. We all assumed it was the one thing that would be protected above all else. The kids would never be sacrificed. But then for no good reason, the schools were all closed. The labor unions representing the teachers rather liked their extended paid holiday and tried to make it last as long as possible, as the students got ever further behind in their studies. These are schools for which people paid for with their taxes for many years but no one promised a rebate or any compensation. Homeschooling went from existing under a legal cloud to being suddenly mandatory. And when they opened back up, the kids faced mass silencing with masks.

15. Enabling power of central banking to fund it all. From March 12, 2020, and onward, the Federal Reserve deployed every power to serve as a Congressional printing press. It slammed rates back to zero. It eliminated (eliminated!) reserve requirements for banks. It flooded the economy with fresh money, eventually reaching a peak of 26 percent expansion or $6.2 trillion in total. This of course later translated into price inflation that quickly ate away the actual purchasing power of all that free stimulus dispensed by government, thus harming on net both producers and consumers. It was a great head fake, all made possible by the central bank and its powers. Further damage came to the structure of production by a prolongation of low interest rates.

16. The shallowness of the faith communities. Where were the churches and synagogues? They closed their doors and kept out the people they had sworn to defend. They canceled holy days and holiday celebrations. They utterly and completely failed to protest. And why? Because they went along with the propaganda that ceasing their ministries was consistent with public health priorities. They went along with the state and media claim that their religions were deeply dangerous to the public. What this means is that they don’t really believe in what they claim to believe. When the opening finally came, they discovered that their congregations had dramatically shrunk. It’s no wonder. And who among them did not go along? It was the supposed crazy and odd ones: the Amish, the estranged Mormons, and the Orthodox Jews. How non-mainstream they are. How marginal! But apparently they were among the only ones whose faith was strong enough to resist the demands of princes.

17. The limitations on travel. We didn’t know the government had the power to limit our travel but they did it anyway. First it was internationally. But then it became domestic. For a few months there, it was hard to cross state lines because of the demands that everyone who did so had to quarantine for a fortnight. It was strange because we didn’t know what was and what was not legal nor did we know the enforcement mechanism. It turned out to be a training exercise for what we know now they really want, which is 15-minute cities. Apparently a people on the move are harder to control and corral. We were being acculturated toward a more medieval and tribal existence, staying put so that our masters can keep tabs on us.

18. The tolerance for segregation. Vaccine uptake was certainly disproportionate by race and income. Richer and whiter populations went along but some 40 percent of the non-white and poorer communities didn’t trust the jab and refused. That did not stop 5 major cities from imposing vaccine segregation and enforcing it with police power. For a time, major cities were segregated with disparate impact by race. I don’t recall a single article in a major newspaper that pointed this out, much less decried it. So much for public accommodations and so much for enlightenment! Segregation turns out to be just fine so long as it fits with government priorities – same now as it was in the bad old days.

19. The goal of a social credit system. It is not paranoia to speculate that all this segregation was really about the creation of a vaccine passport system running off a national base, the one they want very much to implement. And part of this is the real and long-term goal of creating a China-style social credit system that would make your participation in economic and social life contingent on political compliance. The CCP has mastered the art and imposed totalitarian control. We know for sure now that major aspects of the pandemic response were scripted in Beijing and imposed through the influence of China’s ruling class. It is completely reasonable to assume that this is the real goal of vaccine passports and even Central Bank Digital Currency.

20. Corporatism as the system under which we live, giving lie to existing ideological systems. For many generations, the great debate has been between capitalism and socialism. All the while, the real goal has passed us by: the institutionalization of an interwar-style corporatist state. This is where property is nominally private and concentrated in only top industries in major sectors but publicly controlled with an eye to political priorities. This is not traditional socialism and it certainly isn’t competitive capitalism. It is a social, economic, and political system designed by the ruling class to serve its interests above all else. Here is the main threat and the existing reality but it is not well understood by either right or left. Not even libertarians seem to get this: they are so attached to the public/private binary that they have blinded themselves to the merger of the two and the ways in which major corporate players are actually driving the advance of statism in their own interests.

If you haven’t changed your thinking over the last three years, you are a prophet, indifferent, or asleep. Much has been revealed and much has changed. To meet these challenges, we must do so with our eyes wide open. The greatest threats to human liberty today are not the ones of the past and they elude easy ideological categorization. Further, we have to admit that in many ways the plain human desire to live a fulfilling life in freedom has been subverted. If we want our freedoms back, we need to have a full understanding of the frightening challenges before us.


Brownstone’s work and influence in this regard is far beyond any that we’ve told publicly. You would be astonished at the extent of it. The times demand circumspection in overt institutional aggrandizement.


We are grateful to our donors for having faith in the power of ideas. We are daily amazed at the ability of passionate and scrupulous writers and intellectuals to make a real difference for the cause of freedom. Please, if you can, join our donor community to keep the momentum going, for the hill is perhaps the steepest we’ve climbed in our lives. We have no “development department” and no corporate or government benefactors: you can make a difference.

TOP logo

Rigorous new study of studies finds that lockdowns, not COVID, caused the destruction

By Monica Showalter 8June2023


COVID is blamed for the vast ruin and destruction of the past few years.


After all, there were a more than a million deaths in the U.S., mass layoffs, and the destruction of hundreds of thousands of small businesses.  There have been learning loss and speech delays in children, and depression and other mental health crises in teenagers.  There’s the massive inflation seen today and a huge surge in the federal debt brought on by federal COVID spending, and let’s not even get into the fraud.  There’s also the refusal of workers to return to work, the still-empty churches and downtown office spaces, and countless other lingering negative effects.


COVID did it.  Blame COVID.  That’s what the media and the bureaucrats and anyone getting rich off this pandemic do.


Except that it wasn’t that little gift from the lab in Wuhan that did it.


All of the destruction, according to an important new meta-study (or study of studies) by noted economists Steve Hanke, Lars Jonung, and Jonas Herby, came from state-enforced lockdowns, not COVID.


The study has now become a book, titled Did Lockdowns Work?, and it can be downloaded here.


Respected economists have taken note and give their approval.


According to economist Brad Polumbo:

Pandemic-era lockdown policies may “represent the biggest policy mistake in modern times.” At least, that’s the conclusion reached by one of the authors of a major new study examining many government restrictions inflicted upon the public throughout 2020 and 2021.

An updated, peer-reviewed meta analysis of lockdowns examining 22 relevant studies was just published by the Institute of Economic Affairs. In it, authors Lars Jonung, Jonas Herby, and Steve H. Hanke examined the lockdown policies enacted in the US, England, and Europe and compared them to the light-touch approach enacted in Sweden where minor government restrictions were paired with voluntary action driven by extensive public information and awareness campaigns.

They find that in the US, extensive restrictions ranging from stay-at-home orders to business closures all combined to only save approximately 4,000 lives. Some particular policies, like gathering limits, actually increased COVID mortality. (As it turns out, much of the COVID-19 spread occurred at home). This is a far cry from the projections used early in the pandemic to justify lockdowns that estimated 2 million American lives would be saved.

That’s an academically rigorous study, and what it found was pathetic.  All that destruction through Western society, and instead of saving 2 million lives, as the adamant lockdown proponents at the Imperial College of London confidently forecast, the vaunted lockdowns saved…4,000.


It’s not nothing, but it’s not what they claimed.  They said 2 million in the U.S. alone and millions more elsewhere.


Turns out they had no idea what they were talking about, yet they had tremendous power to make their Frankenstein ideas come to life.


The Imperial College of London, as noted here, is getting famous for its junk science, and that’s an extended record.


According to IEA, a rigorous academic think-tank in the U.K.:

  • Herby, Jonung, and Hanke conclude that voluntary changes in behaviour, such as social distancing, played a significant role in mitigating the pandemic – but harsher restrictions, like stay-at-home rules and school closures, generated very high costs but produced only negligible health benefits
  • COVID-19 lockdowns were “a global policy failure of gigantic proportions,” according to this peer-reviewed new academic study. The draconian policy failed to significantly reduce deaths while imposing substantial social, cultural, and economic costs.
  • The comprehensive 220-page book, began with a systematic review of 19,646 potentially relevant studies. For their meta-analysis, the authors’ screening resulted in the choice of 22 studies that are based on actual, measured mortality data, not on results derived from modelling exercises. A meta-analysis is considered the ‘gold-standard’ for evidence, as it combines comparable, independent studies to determine overall trends.

And not surprisingly, its pals are already trying to debunk this rigorous peer-reviewed study.


The Guardian’s science editor, Ian Sample, couldn’t come up with anything better than that the study “adds little insight.”


In other words, they all knew this already, so nothing to see here, move along.


No, pal.  Anyone who questioned lockdowns in the past few years was branded anti-science, anti-people, a Nazi, and someone who belonged in prison, if not cast out from society.


They dismissed effective treatments such as ivermectin with grade school–style mockery — e.g., “horse paste” and “you are not a horse” — and pretended the effects of natural immunity didn’t exist, which is first-year medical science, all to justify and extend lockdowns even as the destruction extended.


They went with a vengeance after anyone who questioned lockdowns.  They smeared top doctors such as those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration and authentic M.D.s such as Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, and they smeared inexpensive and effective treatments based on empirical evidence.  Remember how this black hero doctor who saved a whole nursing home full of patients in Texas got raked over the coals?

A Galveston-area doctor, Dr. Robin Armstrong, who was in charge of a nursing home, found himself in the middle of the worst health care nightmare anyone can imagine: a COVID-19 outbreak, on a home full of elderly people, and he was in charge.  Odds were big they were going to die.  We already know what the coronavirus did to a nursing home in Washington State, and we have subsequently learned what inserting COVID-19 patients into unwilling nursing homes in New York City did to those populations.  Coronavirus + Nursing Home = Death Sentence.  That was what he was looking at.  In desperation, the Texas doctor decided to treat his threatened patients with hydroxychloroquine in a last-ditch effort to save them…and he called it right.  Unlike those other places, his patients got well.  His informed judgment saved the lives of a building full of nursing home patients, and he reported no bad side-effects such as heart problems brought on by the treatment.  He would have been justified to take such risks because his treatment was triage, and the alternative was the death sentence.  But there wasn’t even that.  His patients lived, they regained their fragile health, and there were no stacked bodies or chaotic medical scenes in his part of Texas on his watch.

That’s frankly a story of heroism, and the brilliant medical man should be celebrated for the huge number of lives he saved.

The lockdown idiocy extended from the top to the very bottom.  I remember when my elderly parents were sick by COVID during the first wave of the pandemic, and the whole household, including even the cats, had COVID symptoms, yet I didn’t have a trace of it in that same household based on my being treated with ivermectin.  I was told by a San Diego County public health bureaucrat over the phone that I needed to wear a mask around the house.  I knew I was being fed a line, and it wasn’t about science.  I remember police patrolling our neighborhood looking for mask violators, because I was out walking on the sidewalk without one (fresh air science!) and, suspecting nothing, put my mask on and approached the cop car to ask if I could help them…and found out that I was what they were looking for — a mask violator. Who the hell gave that order?

It all comes back to us:

The Rolling Stones – Living In A Ghost Town


The Guardian piece gets worse the more you read — it complains that the study of studies didn’t include the opinions of epidemiologists, and instead just used (rigorous) economic studies by economists.  That’s a textbook case of blaming COVID instead of the lockdowns for the mass ill effects in society.  The topic was lockdowns, which are an economic phenomenon, not a disease.  Why the heck should they use the opinions of medical people, who research the disease itself?  Consulting them provides about as much insight as consulting a wokester college student or a taxi driver.  Economists study economic effects; medical researchers study viruses under microscopes.


And how’s this for a stupid weaselly understatement from one of these vaunted epidemiologists?

Prof Rowland Kao, an epidemiologist at Edinburgh University, said specific details about the UK’s lockdown matter too. In the first lockdown, care homes suffered brutal, disproportionate death rates because, despite the restrictions, residents were not adequately protected from infected patients arriving from hospitals. “As it stood, lockdown without protection of people in care homes wasn’t in a position to achieve one of its most important potential outcomes.”

“Wasn’t in a position”?  What kind of cover-your-ass statement is that?  People in old-age homes were literally trapped like prisoners with diseased patients rolling in from the hospitals and couldn’t get out.  Not surprisingly, they died by the tens of thousands and, worse still, were forced to die alone.


That’s the kind of phrase you use when maybe you can’t attend a distant nephew’s wedding, not one of the great mass-death crimes of the 21st century that has yet to see anyone punished.  This was lockdowns, not COVID, killing people.  All they had to do was let the patients out of that death trap, and they’d be alive today.


It’s all part of the continuing campaign to blame COVID instead of lockdowns for the death and havoc wrought in society from the pandemic.  We all know why they’re doing it: blaming COVID ensures that what’s blamed is a thing, not a person who made a lethal decision.


It’s nothing but a red herring.  This study of studies shows conclusively that lockdowns were a disaster, and because it was lockdowns, and not the disease, that wreaked the havoc, someone needs to be held accountable.  Society was shut down based on junk science and fear.  Not only do incompetents and chiselers and power-mongers need to be held accountable, but laws need to be made to ensure that these bureaucrats and their allies never have this kind of power again.


This study is important for advancing that critical change.



Why Are So Many COVID Authoritarians Suddenly Shifting Their Narratives?

by Tyler Durden, 01May2023 –

In February of 2019, the White House under Trump established the position of Chief Medical Advisor to the President.  The fist person to occupy that position was a physician by the name of Ronnie Jackson and his job was to advise Donald Trump on public health policy.  Right before the initial outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, Jackson left the post and it remained vacant for a year; instead the role was filled for the most part by Anthony Fauci, who did not become the next Chief Medical Advisor officially until Joe Biden entered office.


After numerous conflicts with Trump on policies and mandates, Fauci transitioned seamlessly into the new Democrat controlled White House.  Biden and Fauci were like two peas in a pod.


Fauci is a figure with a controversial career in virology and medicine and the key official best known for spreading false claims that created nationwide hysteria over the HIV/AIDS virus.  Why Trump brought him in as an adviser and who recommended him is not widely known and opinions vary.  What we do know is that the elevation of Fauci as a primary point of contact for covid rules was disastrous for the country as a whole.  Specifically, his prominence within the Biden Administration brought America to the brink of medical authoritarianism on a scale that could have erased the Bill of Rights for good.

Dr. Anthony Faucii Lies - Artwork

Dr. Anthony Faucii Lies – Artwork


Of course, Fauci didn’t act alone during the march towards total societal lockdowns and perpetual vaccine mandates, he was just one bureaucrat among many that joined forces to spread fear and panic over a virus with an average official Infection Fatality Rate of 0.23%.  Covid was a non-threat to the vast majority of the population, and yet it was presented as if there would soon be bodies in the streets if Americans did not comply with every government demand.


As if to acknowledge the ultimate failure of the pandemic narrative, multiple government officials have suddenly (and perhaps begrudgingly) started to back away from their original positions.  However, instead of admitting they were wrong and apologizing to the public, they are trying to rewrite history and claim that they were actually against many of the measures and restrictions they implemented.


In a recent interview with the New York Times, Anthony Fauci made some surprising admissions on “mistakes made” during the pandemic.  Fauci tried to distance himself from the lockdowns and school closures as if he had no say or influence in how they were enacted:

“…When people say, ‘Fauci shut down the economy’ — it wasn’t Fauci. The CDC was the organization that made those recommendations. I happened to be perceived as the personification of the recommendations. But show me a school that I shut down and show me a factory that I shut down. Never. I never did. I gave a public-health recommendation that echoed the C.D.C.’s recommendation, and people made a decision based on that. But I never criticized the people who had to make the decisions one way or the other.”  

Here is the truth:

Brandon Taylor Moore-tweet-26April2023-Fauci this morning vs Fauci 2020

Brandon Taylor Moore-tweet-26April2023-Fauci this morning vs Fauci 2020

Fauci also noted that:

“From a broad public-health standpoint, at the population level, masks work at the margins — maybe 10 percent. But for an individual who religiously wears a mask, a well-fitted KN95 or N95, it’s not at the margin. It really does work. But I think anything that instigated or intensified the culture wars just made things worse. And I have to be honest with you, David, when it comes to masking, I don’t know.”

Here is the truth – Fauci changed positions multiple times on the masks according to the political theater involved:

Dr. Fauci Explains Mask Guidance Changed | NBC News NOW

17JUly2020 In an interview with Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook, Dr. Anthony Fauci explains why the guidance on wearing face masks changed and that they have no negative effect on oxygen levels.

Interestingly, Fauci’s latest flip-flop has been published in tandem with multiple other officials who have also tried to adjust the optics surrounding their medical tyranny.  For example, Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers and a member of the AFL–CIO, advocated for the forced shutdowns of US schools for years despite extensive data showing the lockdowns were pointless.  In fact, she threatened union strikes if schools were allowed to reopen.  Now, she claims she had been trying to reopen schools the whole time…


Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Weingarten is misrepresenting her prior positions. She called attempts to reopen schools in the fall of 2020 “Reckless, callous, cruel”

Her union pushed aggressively at the local level

Areas with high union influence remained closed much longer

They continued in 2022

Washington Free Beacon-tweet-26April 2023-AFT President Randi Weingarten

Washington Free Beacon-tweet-26April 2023-AFT President Randi Weingarten

Tommy Schultz-tweet-26April2023-Never forget what the teachers unions were saying for two years

Tommy Schultz-tweet-26April2023-Never forget what the teachers unions were saying for two years


Justin Trudeau, one of the more malicious leaders among western nations when it came to covid authoritarianism, now claims that he never tried to force Canadians to get vaccinated.  Keep in mind that Trudeau regularly spread propaganda associating anti-mandate protesters with “racists” and “terrorists,” while also arresting those who refused to submit to his lockdowns:

Michael P Senger-tweet-24April2023-Justin Trudeau claims he never forced anyone to get vaccinated

Michael P Senger-tweet-24April2023-Justin Trudeau claims he never forced anyone to get vaccinated

The reason these staunch advocates for limiting freedoms in the face of covid are now acting defensively may be because the truth about the science on Covid is becoming insurmountable.  Nearly every narrative that was originally promoted by government officials in the past three years has been debunked.  To summarize, here are the realities of the mandates and vaccines:


The masks were never effective in stopping the spread of covid and mask mandates made little to no difference.  Children were never at any serious risk from covid.  School shutdowns made no difference in stopping the spread, and did more harm than good.  Economic lockdowns made no difference, doing more harm than good.


There was never any evidence of hospitals in the US being overwhelmed by covid patients (in fact, hospital admissions fell dramatically in 2020).  There is also evidence that the number of deaths associated with covid were inflated by incidental covid infections; covid was blamed for deaths caused by other conditions.


There is no such thing as “Covid Heart” (heart failure caused by covid).  The vaccines do not stop transmission of the virus.  Vaccinated people still die from the virus. Natural immunity is more effective than the vaccines.  The much hyped “pandemic of the unvaccinated” never happened.  And yes, there is ample evidence of negative side effects including heart failure associated with the mRNA vaccines.


The narratives and the agenda fell apart in spectacular fashion.  Now, the people that rallied around the virus panic and tried to exploit it for their own ends are attempting to fade into the background as if nothing ever happened.  Perhaps even more damning data is on the horizon and officials are preemptively positioning to deflect responsibility.



ANALYSIS: Top Officials Who Pushed Aggressive COVID-19 Policies Now Try to Reframe Their Positions

Former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony Fauci listens to President Joe Biden (out of frame) speak during a visit to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Md., on Feb. 11, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

Former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony Fauci listens to President Joe Biden (out of frame) speak during a visit to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Md., on Feb. 11, 2021. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

Petr Svab Publish May 3, 2023 Updated: May 4, 2023


News Analysis

Some of the people most strongly associated with promoting lockdown measures during the COVID-19 pandemic have recently sought to recast their positions. Examples include Anthony Fauci, former leader of the federal COVID-19 response, teachers’ union head Randi Weingarten, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.


Fauci seemed eager to shirk responsibility for the lockdowns when talking to The New York Times last week.


“Show me a school that I shut down and show me a factory that I shut down. Never. I never did,” he said.


It was the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that produced the lockdown recommendations, he emphasized.


“I gave a public-health recommendation that echoed the CDC’s recommendation, and people made a decision based on that,” he said, noting that he “happened to be perceived as the personification of the recommendations.”


That perception wasn’t mere happenstance though. Fauci hardly missed an opportunity for a media spotlight, accepting accolades for supposedly leading the country through the crisis.


Fauci boasted in October of 2020 that, early in the pandemic, it was he who recommended that President Donald Trump “shut the country down.”


“This was way before” the major outbreak in the New York City area at the onset of the pandemic, he said.


Moreover, Fauci now argues he was appreciative of those who had their reasons for not following the advice of federal public health agencies.


“I never criticized the people who had to make the decisions one way or the other,” he said.


That doesn’t appear to be accurate.


Fauci was repeatedly cited by the media as criticizing states that diverged from federal guidance.

A driver holds out a sign as hundreds of people gather to protest the lockdown in spite of shelter-in-place rules still being in effect at California’s state capitol building in Sacramento, Calif., on April 20, 2020. (Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images)

A driver holds out a sign as hundreds of people gather to protest the lockdown in spite of shelter-in-place rules still being in effect at California’s state capitol building in Sacramento, California on April 20, 2020. – Some people intentionally jammed roads while honking and holding out signs while others disrespected social distancing rules by gathering in close proximity, blaring Americana music and shouting to end the lockdown. (Photo by Josh Edelson / AFP) (Photo by JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images)

A driver holds out a sign as hundreds of people gather to protest the lockdown in spite of shelter-in-place rules still being in effect at California’s state capitol building in Sacramento, Calif., on April 20, 2020. (Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images)On one occasion he called it “risky” and on another warned of “needless suffering and death” if states lifted COVID-19 restrictions earlier than federal guidelines suggested.


The former pandemic adviser now acknowledges that COVID-19 vaccines were presented to the public in a less-than-ideal way.


“We probably should have communicated better that the clinical trials were only powered to look at the effect on clinically recognizable disease, symptomatic disease,” he told the New York Times.


Nonetheless, various officials made comments to the effect that the vaccines stopped transmission of the virus—which was incorrect—while people who pointed out the limitations of the vaccine clinical trials were dismissed as “anti-vax” and censored by social media.


“Records can be shown to demonstrate Fauci’s undeniable leadership on decisions that led to substantial pain for otherwise healthy and productive Americans,” commented Michael Chamberlain, director of Protect the Public’s Trust, a group that pushes for government transparency and impartiality.

School Reopening

Weingarten, head of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), recently told Congress that the union advocated for school reopening from early on in the pandemic.


“We spent every day from February [2020] on trying to get schools open,” she said.


That appears to be only partially true.


The union did issue a paper in April of 2020 that proposed reopening schools that were largely shut down the month before amid the rising spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 (pdf).


In practice, however, Weingarten always appeared to demand more to be done before schools could be opened “safely.”

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten speaks in Pittsburgh, Pa., on July 13, 2018. (Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)

PITTSBURGH – JULY 13: American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten speaks to the audience at the annual convention of the American Federation of Teachers Friday, July 13, 2018 at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (Photo by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten speaks in Pittsburgh, Pa., on July 13, 2018. (Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)Some of the core demands included universal masking of teachers and students, improving ventilation at school buildings, and maintaining 6-foot physical distancing at all times. But those requirements, according to the union, required major investment or sacrifices of classroom time. Classes needed to be much smaller, for example, to ensure the distancing.


“If you do 6 feet of physical distancing, you’re essentially saying in a school you’re going to have about 50 percent or 60 percent of people in there at any one time, not a 100 percent,” Weingarten told NBC News in February of 2021.


And the demands went on.


United Federation of Teachers’ (UFT’s) reopening report from February of 2021 called for 20 percent of all students and staff to be tested each week. If one student tested positive, the whole classroom should be sent home for 14 days; if two students in different classrooms tested positive, the whole school should shut down in-person learning for 14 days, the document recommended (pdf).


New York City schools tried to implement similar if less stringent rules, only to prompt protests from parents.


“Day 2 of school. A positive case was found in daughter’s classroom. 25 kids now have remote school for 10 days,” Jill Goldstein, who has a child in one of the city schools, wrote on Twitter.


“This is unacceptable.”

There also appeared to be a tendency to delay school reopening until teachers had ample opportunity to get vaccinated.


On one hand, the AFT said vaccinations weren’t necessary for school reopening, but on the other, it argued that teachers needed to be prioritized for vaccination and that vaccination progress should be “aligned” with the reopening.


“Teachers and school-related personnel need the layer of protection vaccines provide. It is the bare minimum of what they need to get back into the classroom,” Weingarten said in a February 24, 2021, tweet.


In some of the districts with large local unions and robust reopening demands, it was only after the vaccines became widely available that local authorities were able to reach reopening deals, according to a report by the Defense of Freedom Institute (pdf).


Some of the AFT’s largest local affiliates went even further.


United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA), one of the AFT’s largest and most powerful affiliates, argued that reopening would require “broader community preparedness and increased funding.” That was supposed to include not only prolific testing, masking, and social distancing, but also expanded sick leave, a wealth tax, a millionaire tax, “Medicare for all,” and a moratorium on charter schools, according to a document issued by the union in July of 2020 (pdf). The document is no longer accessible on the UTLA website.

Facing public resistance, the UTLA in the end agreed to a reopening plan without such extraneous demands.

Resources, Red Zones, and Politics

Weingarten seemed rather inflexible in her demands.

When the CDC lifted mask recommendations for COVID-19-vaccinated people in May of 2021, Weingarten criticized Texas for no longer requiring masks in schools, pointing out that children weren’t eligible for the vaccine yet. Two months later, the CDC recommended masks again regardless of vaccination, citing the spread of the virus’ Delta variant and data showing vaccinated people were spreading it just as much as the unvaccinated.


Experts have warned that masking children, especially the youngest ones, could stunt their development. Some people have also criticized what they perceived as arbitrary masking rules. If classes were held at restaurants, for example, students would have been presumably allowed to take their masks off while sitting, based on rules once in place in many jurisdictions.


When the CDC cut the school social distancing guideline to 3 feet, Weingarten pushed back: “The issue with the change in distancing in schools is that overcrowded and under-resourced schools are already having trouble meeting basic safety guidelines. We need to be focusing on actually getting all of the mitigation strategies in place first.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rises during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on March 28, 2023. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rises during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Tuesday, March 28, 2023. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rises during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on March 28, 2023. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)The UFT also pushed for the CDC to issue universal guidelines as a condition of schools reopening. The CDC did so in February of 2021, but only after extensive consultations with the UFT and the inclusion of several of its demands.


Just as Weingarten wanted, the guidelines called for reopening based on the level of detected COVID-19 cases in the community. Schools in “red zones”—those that couldn’t offer COVID-19 tests to all teachers and students at least once a week—should have held virtual classes, unless they could “strictly implement all mitigation strategies.”


The thresholds were so low that almost all schools were in “red zones” back then.


Weingarten made clear the guidelines couldn’t in fact be universally implemented—not unless Congress gave public schools much more money.


“Educators, students, and parents all want our schools to #ReopenSafely. But we need the resources from the #AmericanRescuePlan to do it,” she said in a February 17, 2021, tweet. She was referring to the $1.9 trillion spending package pushed by the Biden administration, which promised public schools $130 billion on top of the $110 billion given by Congress to schools and colleges in the previous COVID-19 packages.


In fact, the massive amount of federal funding had little to do with school reopening. The Congressional Budget Office stated in February of 2021 that most of the $110 billion remained unspent and less than 5 percent of the $130 billion was to be spent by September of 2021 (pdf).


Surveys have indicated that many teachers didn’t want to return to work because they were afraid they would catch COVID-19 (pdf). Yet research has indicated that the virus was spreading in schools no more than outside of schools and that children were actually less likely to spread it—even in areas that, according to Weingarten, opened prematurely, such as Florida.


Teachers could theoretically avoid the virus by shutting themselves in their homes, but that would only shift the risk from themselves to other people who still had to operate in the outside world on their behalf, delivering food and other necessities to them.


In the end, school reopening appears to have had little to do with resources and federal guidelines.

Poorer districts that masked less vigorously, for example, were somewhat more likely to be open in 2021, according to the Return to Learn Tracker. The factors most prominently associated with in-person instruction were the political leaning of the district and the estimated strength of the local teachers’ union, one research paper showed.


“The decision to return students to in-person classes this fall was strongly correlated with the county level share of the vote won by Donald Trump in 2016,” according to the working paper.


“The efforts to rewrite history by those who advocated for severe restrictions and school closures are absolutely galling, especially considering their documented roles in forming those very policies they are running from now,” Chamberlain told The Epoch Times.


“They pushed for the lockdowns that destroyed lives and livelihoods, pressed to keep students out of schools while parents watched their kids deteriorate academically, physically, and socially-emotionally, some to the point of suicide.”


National testing showed a dramatic drop in test scores after children finally returned to classrooms.


Meanwhile, hotline calls regarding children and domestic violence went up more than 50 percent during the initial lockdown months, and reports of predators enticing minors online almost doubled in 2020. Suspected suicides by self-poisoning increased by 30 percent in 2021, compared to 2019, an April paper revealed.

A student wears a mask at a school in Provo, Utah, on Feb. 10, 2021. (George Frey/Getty Images)

PROVO, UT – FEBRUARY 10: A student wears a mask as he does his work at Freedom Preparatory Academy on February 10, 2021 in Provo, Utah. Freedom Academy has done in person instruction since the middle of August of 2020 with only four days of school canceled due to COVID-19 outbreak. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)

A student wears a mask at a school in Provo, Utah, on Feb. 10, 2021. (George Frey/Getty Images)Still, Weingarten appeared at times reluctant to acknowledge how much the lack of in-person instruction set children back.


“Clearly there was education disruption, but our members push back on the idea that there was a loss of education,” she said, according to a May 18, 2021 AFT tweet.


Chamberlain accused the likes of Fauci and Weingarten of gaslighting: “trying to convince the American public that they did and said exactly the opposite of what they actually did and said.”


Meanwhile, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau claimed last week that he never forced anyone to get the vaccine, although he “chose to make sure that all the incentives and all the protections were there to encourage Canadians to get vaccinated.”

“This is precisely why the public’s trust in government has fallen off a cliff during the pandemic,” Chamberlain said.



Sen. Rand Paul Says He’s Referred Dr. Anthony Fauci to the DOJ for Prosecution

“There has probably never been a cover-up in this history of all politics that has been so completed documented that they were lying to us.”

Posted by Leslie Eastman, 16July2023


Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci

Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci

There have been some intriguing developments related to the key “experts” who were trusted to disseminate actual scientific information during the early stages of the covid pandemic, and who were trusted to develop and enact policy based on the facts. This may have been easy to miss, given the recent obsession of the American media over the Barbie move and summer temperatures.


Legal Insurrection readers will recall that Former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) chief Dr. Anthony Fauci and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul got into some spectacular exchanges during congressional hearings about the potential for gain-of-function research being funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology using American tax dollars.

Now Paul has formally accused Fauci of lying under oath over his knowledge of dangerous virus research in China. can reveal Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, wrote to Attorney General Merrick Garland last week calling for an investigation into whether Dr Fauci, 82, committed perjury when he testified in front of a Senate committee in 2021.


In a showdown with Republicans, including Sen Paul, in July that year, Dr Fauci testified that his former department ‘has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.’


Dr Fauci was the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) until the end of 2022 and was responsible for signing off on research grants.


Yet newly released emails dated February 1, 2020 show Fauci acknowledged that ‘scientists in Wuhan University are known to have been working on gain-of-function experiments to determine that molecular mechanisms associated with bat viruses adapting to human infection, and the outbreak originated in Wuhan.’


Rand Paul-tweet-18July2023-I’ve referred Anthony Fauci to the DOJ

Rand Paul-tweet-18July2023-I’ve referred Anthony Fauci to the DOJ


Related to Fauci’s statements on the WIV research is the paper he helped generate to obfuscate the possible lab origins of the coronavirus. As a reminder:

That paper, titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” was sent to Fauci for editing in draft form and again for final approval before it was published in Nature Medicine on Feb. 17, 2020. It was written four days after Fauci, and his NIH boss


Dr. Francis Collins, held a call with the four authors to discuss reports that COVID-19 may have leaked from the Wuhan lab and “may have been intentionally genetically manipulated.”


The House Oversight subcommittee published emails Sunday in which the paper’s co-author Dr. Kristian Andersen admits Fauci “prompted” him to write the paper with the goal to “disprove” the lab leak theory.


It turns out the authors of that paper found the lab leak theory far more credible than we were led to believe (hat-tip Ace of Spades HQ).

Richard H. Ebright-tweet-22July2023-The 2020 Proximal Origin paper falsely claimed science showed COVID-19 did not have a lab origin

Richard H. Ebright-tweet-22July2023-The 2020 Proximal Origin paper falsely claimed science showed COVID-19 did not have a lab origin


A team of investigative journalists, who include Michael Shellenberger, have made a cache of email exchanges about their thoughts on covid origins available on the Substack account, Public. It contains a number of gems, including from co-author Kristian Anderson:

The scientists were far more suspicious of a lab origin than was previously known. The clearest example of this was when Andersen said on February 1, 2020, “I think the main thing still in my mind is that the lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario.” In fact, the original name of the channel was “project-wuhan_engineering” until February 6, when Andersen changed it to “project-wuhan_pangolin.”

Senator Paul recently went and The Laura Ingraham Show, and had this today about “Proximal Origin” and Fauci.

“This was never about science. This is about this business of science. Follow the money trail: This was about billions of dollars exchanging hands in the first few months of 2020. The people came out and said, “nothing to see here…couldn’t have happened in the lab”.


There has probably never been a cover-up in this history of all politics that has been so completed documented that they were lying to us. Every one of their emails say, “O, my goodness, it looks like it comes from the lab.” This looks like it was manipulated…and it goes on, and on, and on.

Paul notes at the conclusion of the interview that he has referred Fauci to the Attorney General for prosecution.

As a scientist and a journalist, I am furious at everyone who contributed to this destructive lie. I spent hours looking for alternative information when the “facts” presented failed to make sense.


I can only hope Fauci and the others are held accountable. Perhaps not under Garland, but maybe in a new administration? Hope springs eternal.


freebeacon-com-logo The Washington Free Beacon

Spring Breakdown: LA Teachers’ Union Tries to Hide Vacations Amid School Reopening Fight

Alex Nester 9March2021

Los Angeles’s largest teachers’ union told its members not to post spring break photos on social media because it would make it harder to fight against reopening schools.


A private United Teachers Los Angeles Facebook post obtained by Fox 11 Los Angeles contained a “friendly reminder” for educators to refrain from posting vacation photos because it would be hard to argue to keep schools closed if parents and others saw teachers traveling.


“If you are planning any trips for Spring Break, please keep that off of Social Media,” the post read. “It is hard to argue that it is unsafe for in-person instruction, if parents and the public see vacation photos and international travel.”


While districts across the country have begun reopening schools after nearly yearlong closures due to the coronavirus pandemic, United Teachers Los Angeles has gone to great lengths to keep schools closed. The union recently gathered data on the race of parents who have vocalized their support of reopening schools for a report released last week. The report found that “whiter, healthier, and wealthier” families are overrepresented in stories about school reopening, while black and Latino voices are ignored.


Studies have shown, however, that minority students have been the most adversely affected by school closures. Black and Hispanic students in San Francisco were found to be 60 percent more likely to miss virtual class, according to a recent analysis.


The cost to students comes despite the fact that coronavirus transmission in school settings has been found to be “extremely rare.” Research from the Centers for Disease Control has found that it would be safe to bring students back to the classroom even before teachers receive the coronavirus vaccine. Still, many teachers’ unions have made vaccination a condition for a return to the classroom.


One teachers’ union leader who opposed reopening schools landed in hot water last year after posting a vacation photo online. Sarah Chambers, a Chicago Teachers Union executive-board member who rallied against school reopening, posted a photo of herself in Puerto Rico just hours after she tweeted that it was unsafe to teach face-to-face.



U.S. student test results show toll of pandemic lockdowns on learning

By 25October2022

Students' desk adhere to social distancing requirements in a classroom during a news conference at New Bridges Elementary School, ahead of schools reopening, in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, amid the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in New York, U.S., August 19, 2020. Jeenah Moon/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

Students’ desk adhere to social distancing requirements in a classroom during a news conference at New Bridges Elementary School, ahead of schools reopening, in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, amid the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in New York, U.S., August 19, 2020. Jeenah Moon/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

Students’ desk adhere to social distancing requirements in a classroom during a news conference at New Bridges Elementary School, ahead of schools reopening, in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, amid the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in New York, U.S., August 19, 2020. Jeenah Moon/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

Oct 24 (Reuters) – U.S. students have suffered historic learning setbacks with math and reading scores falling to their lowest levels since before the COVID-19 pandemic, national exam results released on Monday showed, the latest sign of the damage school closures wrought on children.

 See : Covid learning loss has been a global disaster

Math scores saw their largest drop on record, a trend consistent across most U.S. states and almost all demographic groups, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as the “Nation’s Report Card.”


The tests were administered to nationally representative samples of fourth- and eighth- graders between January and March 2022.


Reading scores declined for most jurisdictions, though not as dramatically as in math. Eighth-graders’ math proficiency scores dropped by seven percentage points compared with 2019, results showed. Reading proficiency fell by two points.


The test is considered to be the first comprehensive, nationwide account of student performance since the onset of the pandemic. Previous studies documented similar dips in reading and math after political leaders and school districts shut down classrooms for “remote learning” online.


Among students kept home during the 2020-2021 school year, high performers had more frequent access to a computer, a quiet workspace and extra assistance from their teachers, NAEP said.


Higher-performing eighth-graders reported more participation in real-time video lessons with their teachers than their lower-performing peers, NAEP added.


Test scores dropped most sharply among minority children, and performance gaps between white students and their Black and Hispanic peers have widened since the exam was last proctored in 2019.


California issued a separate report on Sunday evening, showing that students in the nation’s most populous state also showed declines in reading and math scores, although to a lesser degree. But California students lagged nationwide scores before the pandemic.


U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona in a written statement described the test results as “appalling” but said they were a call for action.


“We must treat the task of catching our children up in reading and math with the urgency this moment demands,” Cardona said.


Pandemic lockdowns were largely imposed by state governors and local officials. The U.S. government did not call for nationwide school closures under either the Trump or Biden administrations.



Huge Numbers Of Kids Permanently Damaged By Lockdowns; New Study Finds

by Tyler Durden, 03August2023 –

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,


Yet another study has found that the pandemic lockdowns had devastating effects on the development of children, with half of all parents in the UK reporting serious deterioration in emotional and social skills of their kids.


The research comes from the Institute of Fiscal Studies and notes that children aged between four and seven were significantly more likely (52%) to be affected than 12- to 15 year-olds (42%).


The research also found that children whose parents were furloughed, mandatorily made to take a leave of absence from their jobs, were “significantly more likely to experience a worsening in their socio-emotional skills than those whose parents had not been furloughed (51% versus 45%)”.


Essentially, kids whose families experienced hardship due to the lockdown were significantly more likely to have serious developmental issues.

NEWS MAKER-tweet-1August2023-Covid lockdowns had a catastrophic impact on children's social and emotional skills

NEWS MAKER-tweet-1August2023-Covid lockdowns had a catastrophic impact on children’s social and emotional skills


Author of the study Andrew McKendrick, an IFS research economist commented that “During the Covid-19 pandemic, children from all backgrounds saw their social and emotional skills worsen considerably.”

“Children lived through many changes during these years: school closures, lack of contact with friends and family, and potentially devastating severe illness or death among loved ones,” McKendrick continued, adding that the lockdowns have had “multi-generational impacts.”


“Our research shows that another important driver of children’s declining skills was the economic disruptions experienced by their parents, whether or not those disruptions led to a large income loss,” McKendrick added.

Responding to the study, Children’s Commissioner Rachel de Souza said “I am deeply concerned by the findings of this research on children’s social and emotional skills.”


‘This study shows that the disruption the pandemic caused to children’s development has been long-lasting,” de Souza added.


Arabella Skinner, of the parents’ campaign group UsForThem, commented that the research shows how kids became “collateral damage” of lockdowns, noting “There were many occasions when warnings were ignored.”

“It is an unavoidable fact that many of our children’s development has been negatively impacted by the pandemic restrictions,” Skinner asserted, further urging that “The Government must take action now – they need to support all the services which support our children and ensure that this never happens again.”

This research adds to the voluminous examples of prominent studies showing that the enforced restrictions during the pandemic were catastrophically detrimental to society.


New Johns Hopkins Study: “Lockdowns Have Had Little To No Public Health Effects” And “Imposed Enormous Economic and Social Costs”

Study: Lockdowns Drove 60,000 Children in UK to Clinical Depression

New Study: Babies Born In Lockdown Less Likely To Speak Before First Birthday

Children Suffering From as Many as Three Different Viruses Due to Weakened Immunity Caused by Lockdown

New Study Finds Many Children Unable to Say Their Own Name Due to Impact of Lockdown

Report: Effects of Lockdown May Now Be Killing More People Than COVID

Outbreak of Hepatitis in Children Caused by Lockdowns That Weakened Immunity

Disturbing Lockdown Drawings Show Effect on Children’s Mental Health

Doctors sound alarm over mysterious outbreak of brain infections in Nevada kids – and they believe it’s linked to COVID lockdowns

New Study Concludes Lockdowns Caused AT LEAST 170,000+ Excess Deaths In U.S.

Report: More Than 3000 Diabetics In UK DIED Because Of COVID Lockdowns

Lockdown Advocate Admits Negative Impacts Were Never Considered

Prominent Lockdown Advocate Admits He Got it Wrong

Highest Yearly Increase of Alcohol Deaths in UK on Record During 2020 Lockdown

*  *  *



Covid lockdowns had a ‘catastrophic’ impact on children’s social and emotional skills, half of parents say

  • Youngsters aged four to seven more likely to be affected than 12- to 15-year-olds

By Connor Stringer
Published: 22:30 BST, 31 July 2023 | Updated: 08:13 BST, 1 August 2023


Nearly half of parents said their children’s social and emotional skills got worse during the Covid-19 pandemic, a major study found.


Adults whose jobs were disrupted by the crisis, including those on furlough, were more likely to report that their offspring suffered development problems.


Youngsters aged between four and seven were significantly more likely (52 per cent) to be affected than 12- to 15-year-olds (42 per cent), the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) reported.


Furiously responding to the findings, campaigners blamed Covid lockdowns and school closures for having a ‘catastrophic’ impact on Britain’s young.


The IFS surveyed 6,095 parents in England with children aged four to 16 about the impact of the first year of the pandemic.


Youngsters aged between four and seven were significantly more likely (52 per cent) to be affected than 12- to 15-year-olds (42 per cent), the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) reported

Youngsters aged between four and seven were significantly more likely (52 per cent) to be affected than 12- to 15-year-olds (42 per cent), the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) reported

Youngsters aged between four and seven were significantly more likely (52 per cent) to be affected than 12- to 15-year-olds (42 per cent), the research by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) reported

Furiously responding to the findings, campaigners blamed Covid lockdowns and school closures for having a 'catastrophic' impact on Britain's young

Furiously responding to the findings, campaigners blamed Covid lockdowns and school closures for having a ‘catastrophic’ impact on Britain’s young

Furiously responding to the findings, campaigners blamed Covid lockdowns and school closures for having a ‘catastrophic’ impact on Britain’s young

It found that nearly half (48 per cent) reported that their sons and daughters’ social and emotional skills deteriorated.


Children whose parents were furloughed were ‘significantly more likely to experience a worsening in their socio-emotional skills than those whose parents had not been furloughed (51 per cent versus 45 per cent)’.


Researchers said the social and emotional skills of children whose parents had stable labour market experiences throughout the pandemic – whether that saw their parents employed or unemployed throughout – ‘held up better on average than the skills of children whose families faced more economic instability’.


But they found no evidence that children from disadvantaged families fared worse, in contrast to previous research looking at lost academic learning.


The IFS study was designed to screen for emotional or behavioural problems.


Questions focused on whether parents found their children to be ‘easily scared’, ‘constantly fidgeting or squirming’, or ‘generally obedient’.


Responding to the report, Arabella Skinner, of the parents’ campaign group UsForThem, said children became ‘collateral damage’ during the pandemic.


She said: ‘The pandemic policies did not take into consideration the impact on children.’


Ms Skinner added: ‘There were many occasions when warnings were ignored and children were in effect collateral damage.


‘It is an unavoidable fact that many of our children’s development has been negatively impacted by the pandemic restrictions.’


And she insisted: ‘The Government must take action now –they need to support all the services which support our children and ensure that this never happens again.’


Tory MP Esther McVey added: ‘We must now accept and learn from the extent of the damage school closures and lockdowns have caused.

‘Not just to those at school or university at the time, but to babies born during lockdown and the toddlers who were isolated when groups and classes for those crucial early months were stopped and even parks and playgrounds were closed.


‘This was catastrophic and affected mental and physical wellbeing across the board.

Researchers said the social and emotional skills of children whose parents had stable labour market experiences throughout the pandemic – whether that saw their parents employed or unemployed throughout – 'held up better on average than the skills of children whose families faced more economic instability' (file image)

Researchers said the social and emotional skills of children whose parents had stable labour market experiences throughout the pandemic – whether that saw their parents employed or unemployed throughout – ‘held up better on average than the skills of children whose families faced more economic instability’ (file image)

Researchers said the social and emotional skills of children whose parents had stable labour market experiences throughout the pandemic – whether that saw their parents employed or unemployed throughout – ‘held up better on average than the skills of children whose families faced more economic instability’ (file image)


Not just to those at school or university at the time, but to babies born during lockdown and the toddlers who were isolated when groups and classes for those crucial early months were stopped and even parks and playgrounds were closed.


‘This was catastrophic and affected mental and physical wellbeing across the board.


The findings come a year after Ofsted’s chief inspector raised concerns about the lingering impacts of the coronavirus pandemic upon children.


In 2022, Amanda Spielman reported an increasing number of young children unable to understand facial expressions – which is thought to have been a side-effect of fewer social interactions.


She also found that fewer children had learned to use the toilet independently, compared to equivalent figures reported prior to the pandemic.


Andrew McKendrick, IFS research economist and the new report’s author, said: ‘During the Covid-19 pandemic, children from all backgrounds saw their social and emotional skills worsen considerably.


‘Children lived through many changes during these years: school closures, lack of contact with friends and family, and potentially devastating severe illness or death among loved ones.


‘Our research shows that another important driver of children’s declining skills was the economic disruptions experienced by their parents, whether or not those disruptions led to a large income loss.’


Mr McKendrick explained: ‘With the cost-of-living crisis currently hitting many families’ budgets, our findings are a reminder that economic uncertainty can have multi-generational impacts.’


Following the publication of the damning study, Children’s Commissioner Rachel de Souza said: ‘I am deeply concerned by the findings of this research on children’s social and emotional skills.


‘This study shows that the disruption the pandemic caused to children’s development has been long-lasting.


‘It is vital that the right social and emotional support is made available to allow children the chance to recover and go on to achieve all that they want to.’




We Are Finally Entering A Phase Of COVID “Narrative Collapse”, Says Oxford Epidemiologist

by Tyler Durden, 28June2023 –

Authored by Sunetra Gupta, op-ed via The Telegraph,

Discussing the effects of lockdowns on children confirms that we are finally entering a phase of Covid ‘narrative collapse’…

The effects of lockdowns on children

The effects of lockdowns on children

It is now widely acknowledged that lockdowns caused immeasurable harm, particularly to children, and new research highlights that the interests of the young were forgotten by policymakers during the pandemic. Yet those who are now prepared to wring their hands about this situation are also adamant that lockdowns were unavoidable. Indeed, there is a general reluctance to criticise the very basis on which the measures that damaged children were adopted.


It is understandable that, during lockdown, some professionals were cautious so as not to antagonise those who had the power to put an end to these practices. But it is time to put such concerns aside and establish a rational framework that prevents such a disaster from recurring.


It was clear from the outset that the risk of dying from Sars-CoV-2 infection was negligible in healthy children. It follows that they did not need protection from infection.


Closing schools, forcing them to wear masks and endure the hardships of social distancing, and vaccinating them, could only be justified in terms of stopping community spread. None of these measures had a reasonable impact on the dynamics of infection.


So, is the lesson that, next time, we must lock down but keep schools open? Many of us would bargain for that, especially if we put higher education institutions into the mix, as young adults were also robbed of critical experiences at a delicate time in their lives. But by the time we implemented all these compassionate exclusions to lockdown, including the maintenance of all essential services, what we are looking at is the focused protection of the vulnerable rather than a policy that is effective against the spread of infection.


This is because there is no halfway house when it comes to halting the spread of a new pathogen. The curve between a full-scale lockdown and let-it-rip is anything but a steady slope.


It could be argued that the reason closing schools made hardly any difference was because lockdowns are, ultimately, an extremely ineffective way of stopping spread. Certainly, border closures can be used in very specific circumstances to prevent a pathogen from exiting or entering a community. But there were no credible empirical or theoretical reasons to believe that we could use social distancing measures to snuff it out once it was here. There were plenty of reasons to believe that trying to do so would cause a lot of harm.


The discussion around the effects of Covid policies on children confirms that we are entering a phase of “narrative collapse” in the perception of how the crisis was handled. But it still needs to be accepted that keeping a lid on the spread of Covid without closing schools is a fantasy; there is therefore no way to reconcile the philosophy of lockdown with avoidance of harm to children. The only coherent strategy is one of focused protection, in which vulnerable people are protected without imposing egregious costs on those not at risk.


It is my opinion that, rather than locking down earlier and harder, we should have put in place such a policy as soon as we were aware that the risks were so strongly stratified by age and linked to specific comorbidities. If the Covid Inquiry truly cares about the plight of the younger generation, it should be prepared to consider the option of immediately instituting focused protection, instead of being wedded to the notion that a rapid lockdown was the correct course.

Sunetra Gupta is professor of theoretical epidemiology at the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford



The Fact-Check Racket Finally Unravels

by Tyler Durden, 16July2023 –

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

Before the COVID lockdowns, social media companies had started contracting with new third-parties organizations called fact-checkers to assist in “content creation.” Getting a pass meant the post or story was amplified but getting dinged for inaccuracy meant that the post would be throttled or deleted.

CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

For a while we believed it but certain revelations changed that. We came to realize that the posts labeled false were typically contrary to regime narratives. And a close look at the supposed refutation revealed that many points were very much in dispute. The companies developed a talent for seeming to reveal something false that was actually still debatable and interesting to consider. In most cases, what was declared false was still under consideration.


As time went on, the attempts to censor became more brazen and obvious. Then the Twitter files and other FOIAs generated proof of what many suspected all along. These entities were funded either directly or indirectly by government or by other dark-money sources as quid pro quos for other relationships they had cultivated with interested parties.


In other words, they were not some independent, science-based entities at all but rather hit squads with a hard political agenda. What was actually happening here was a form of censorship laundering. Government wants to censor but cannot so it turns to the social-media company to do the dirty work. To make this hand-in-glove racket less obvious, the companies would outsource to a fact-checking organization, making the lines of control even more blurry.


Sometime within the last several months, the whole racket seems to have unraveled. I rarely see the fact-checks cited at all. Or maybe they are cited ironically: what is declared false came to be seen as a badge of honor, a confirmation of core truth. That might seem crazy but these are the times in which we live. Nothing is as it seems.


At any one time, Brownstone and The Epoch Times deal with a range of ongoing fact-checks, some of which result in a hit piece but others just go away for no apparent reason. I’m coming to realize that the harassing emails themselves serve a purpose. They are designed to scare publishers and chill free speech. Risk-averse managers might be inclined not to run with a story rather than be put through the ringer and deal with possible reputation hits.


It’s all become ridiculously predictable.

Three days ago, a data maven who writes for Brownstone revealed a first look at some numbers he had been crunching over the CDC’s listing of COVID as cause of death. He initially sent the results to a private email list and I suggested we go with what he had discovered as an initial look.


He had death certificates from Missouri and Massachusetts and was able to cross-check them with the same once they got into the hands of the CDC. He found thousands of instances in which COVID was not listed as cause of death in the coroner’s report but it was added directly by the CDC. The scale of the problem is vast. The implications of this are rather ominous. We’ve been relying on CDC data for three-plus years to understand the scope of COVID’s mortality.


“The worst pandemic in 100 years,” they kept saying, and that might be true. But obviously the claim is highly contingent on correctly marking the cause-of-death codes. What Aaron Hertzberg found is that the CDC was changing the code to inflate the numbers. By how much it is hard to say but based on the data so far, this is a very serious problem with awesome implications for how we understand what happened to us.


The immediate question concerns the decision-making at the CDC. We know that Deborah Birx, coronavirus task force coordinator, said from the podium that they would mark every death with COVID as being from COVID. That was in the spring of 2020 and had already set off alarm bells. Changing the cause of death to COVID from something else is next-level crazy.


Under whose authority did the CDC act? Birx was not in charge of the CDC. Indeed, her power and status was always unclear. No question that she came to the White House by recommendation of Matthew Pottinger of the National Security Council. Also we know for certain that from March 13, 2020, onward, the NSC was the lead agency with the CDC reduced to operations. If the CDC had faced some formal order to mark COVID as cause of death regardless of what state certificates said, no one has ever seen such an order.


The implications of all of this are rather ominous. And keep in mind that this discovery was not made by a whistleblower or a specialist in this field but an obsessive data maven from the citizen world who has a passion to get to the truth. If he is right, the documentation here implies a level of treachery that even I had not considered.

I saw two reactions to the article once published.

The most common reaction was that this is nothing new. Everyone knew this was happening the whole time. We saw the death numbers go up and up from COVID and equally down for every other cause. It was pretty clear that there was something fishy going on. So some people said that there is nothing surprising here. The CDC is capable of any degree of malfeasance.


The other reaction was flat-out denial and accusing Brownstone and the author of simply making things up. Indeed, many people were outraged that we could or would ever suggest that the CDC was anything other than truth-telling.


Watching all of this unfold, I began awaiting the arrival of the inevitable intimidating emails from fact-check organizations. Sure enough, they did arrive. They came to the author, to other scholars, to me personally, and everyone else. It was a true blitzkrieg. Maybe there was a time when I would have stopped my day and become defensive and answered them all, getting more data from the author and so on, and then worrying about the fallout. But this is not my first rodeo. At this point, it was easy to brush off all this drama as completely manufactured and fake. That’s exactly what I did.


To be sure, if the author made mistakes, they should be corrected. I’m sure the author would be the first to do so. This kind of research is lonely and he would welcome others to join in his efforts. That’s how science works: a community shares data and strives to get closer to the truth. But that’s not what fact-checks are about. They start with the presumption that they know the truth and you do not, and then schoolmarm you to the point that you admit them to be correct.


Here’s what I’ve concluded. Fact-check false really means: likely true but not what you are allowed to believe.

A final footnote here. A major claim of the fact-checkers for more than three years is that it is a conspiracy theory and false that the Wuhan lab conducted gain-of-function research and that the virus was a result of that research and a likely leak. Fauci dismissed this for a very long time, and fact-checkers frequently cited him and said the claim was false.


As a result of the Republican takeover of Congress, we’ve gained more access to the fullness of what was going on in those days. A committee has released an unredacted email dated Feb. 1, 2020, in which Fauci says that Wuhan was engaged in gain-of-function and that this virus might be the result.

Fauci says that Wuhan was engaged in gain-of-function-email dated 01February2020

Fauci says that Wuhan was engaged in gain-of-function-email dated 01February2020

At this point, it’s reasonable to assume that nearly every official source on the virus was wrong or lying for years now.

You probably know this. In any case, my intuition here is that we are only at the beginning of discovery of the fullness of the duplicity.

The stakes are very high: American liberty suffered a grave blow during the COVID response.

If the reason wasn’t the virus, what was it then?



CDC Used Journal To Promote Masks Despite ‘Unreliable’ And ‘Unsupported Data’: New Analysis

Megan Redshaw, J.D.

CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

A new analysis of studies in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) flagship scientific journal found the agency promoted the effectiveness of masks using unreliable data with conclusions unsupported by evidence.


The preprint, published July 11 on MedRxiv, found the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) made positive findings about the efficacy of masks 75 percent of the time, despite only 30 percent of studies testing masks, and less than 15 percent having “statistically significant results.”


No studies were randomized, yet the CDC in over half of their MMWR studies, made misleading statements indicating a causal relationship between mask-wearing and a decrease in COVID-19 cases or transmission, despite failing to show evidence of mask effectiveness.


The inappropriate use of causal language in MMWR studies was directly adopted by then CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky to promote masks and recommendations urging Americans to mask up. The authors said their findings “raise concern about the reliability of the journal for informing health policy” and suggest bias within the journal.


The MMWR, often called “the voice of the CDC,” is the agency’s primary vehicle for “scientific publication of timely, reliable, authoritative, accurate, objective, and useful public health information and recommendations.”


The publication—subject only to peer review internally by the agency—is frequently used to draft national health policies. For example, mask requirements implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic for federal workers, travelers, schools, businesses, healthcare workers, and Head Start programs—“mirrored” CDC recommendations.


Of the 77 reviews cited in the agency’s MMWR used to promote masks, researchers found the following:

  • Only 23 of 77 studies assessed the effectiveness of masks, yet 58 of 77 studies claimed masks were effective.
  • Of the 58 studies, 41 used “causal language,” and 40 misused causal language. Causal language is where an “action or entity is explicitly presented as influencing another” and should not be used in observational studies because these types of studies merely identify “associations” and cannot establish that the “associations identified represent cause-and-effect relationships.”
  • According to the analysis, the 40 studies that used causal language indicated with certainty that masks lower transmission rates, despite the fact their results, at most, found a correlation. In addition, 25 of the 40 studies didn’t even assess the effectiveness of masks. The one remaining study used causal language related to particle filtration on mannequins with “unknown relevance for human health.”
  • Of the 58 studies referenced above, only one mentioned conflicting data on mask effectiveness—the authors noted it was an international study primarily focused on influenza.
  • Four of the 77 studies had more cases in the mask group than in the comparator group, yet all four studies concluded masks were effective.

None of the 77 studies assessed after 2019 were randomized, and none cited randomized data. Randomized studies are the “gold standard” for determining whether an intervention or treatment is effective. Instead, the CDC most commonly used observational studies without controls or comparison groups.




“Honestly, it’s amazing & scary how apparently effective/convincing it was for the @CDCgov to state over & over masks are ‘critical’ & ‘important’ in spite of a total lack of high-quality data to support it,” Dr. Tracy Høeg, epidemiologist and co-author of the study said in a tweet. It will be hard to trust the journal, which they use to inform health policy decisions, moving forward, she added.

Concerns of Bias and Flawed Data Ignored by CDC

Researchers have previously raised concerns about MMWR’s publication bias, flawed methodology, and errors with the CDC that would typically warrant retraction.


Challenging the journal is difficult because the MMWR is subject to its own “clearance process” within the agency that publishes the journal instead of the independent peer-review other scientific journals are subjected to.


Of the mask studies published in the MMWR, 91 percent had one or more authors affiliated with the CDC, with a median of 13 authors per paper, some co-authoring multiple papers. In total, there were 1,544 authors, which “speaks to the large amount of effort that went into studying and publishing about this topic in the journal,” researchers stated.


In addition, beginning in September 2020, political appointees may have “demanded the ability to review and revise scientific reports” in MMWR. The process used to analyze and publish scientific data in the MMWR, which is then promoted by the CDC, has not been made available to the public.


Researchers said that political involvement and lack of accountability by outside experts unaffiliated with the CDC could influence the journal’s ability to evaluate scientific data objectively and may explain why the agency “remains an international outlier” in continuing to recommend masks for COVID-19 in specific circumstances, including for children as young as two.


naked capitalism

Is Our Health Care System Turning Hospitals into (Covid) Death Traps?

Posted on 27March2023 by

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.

Patient readers, after reading this post, you may well decide to throw a flag on a Betteridge’s Law violation, but hear me out. Clearly, one goes to a hospital to be tested, or to be treated and hopefully cured; Caveat Patiens should not be part of the deal. However, for nosocomial infection (also known as Hospital-Acquired Infection, HAI, which at CDC stands for Hospital-Associated infection, neatly removing agency) Caveat Patiens does seem to be part of the deal, at least in the United States, which I find more than a little troubling.


In this post I’ll take a quick look at HAI generally, and then HAI in relation to Covid. Both are troubling. I had hoped to go further, and lay hold of the institutional factors behind our health care system’s failures to recognize aerosol transmission and support universal masking, but — sadly, like the New Yorker writer who entered the swamp on the trail of a thought-to-be-extinct bird, and never found the bird — I’m reduced to mere speculation, and I did try. (That I can’t hold anybody in accountable for demonstrable failure is in itself an interesting data point; perhaps some kind readers will help out with pointers in links, or throw some hospital administrator’s PowerPoint over the transom. Your anonymity is guaranteed. But perhaps all the real decisions are taken out on golf courses, where private equity goons chat among themselves!)


The newest HAI scare — Cordyceps fans, take note — is a fungus. And it is scary. From NBC:

A drug-resistant and potentially deadly fungus has been spreading rapidly through U.S. health care facilities, a new government study finds.


The fungus, a type of yeast called Candida auris, or C. auris, can cause severe illness in people with weakened immune systems. The number of people diagnosed with infections — as well as the number of those who were found through screening to be carrying C. auris — has been rising at an alarming rate since it was first reported in the U.S., researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Monday.

The absolute numbers, however, are small compared to Covid, which would lead a certain type of mind to conclude that, even though C. auris is nasty, the CDC is trying to change the subject:

Since November, at least 12 people have been infected with C. auris with four “potentially associated deaths,” [MIssissippi’s] epidemiologist Dr. Paul Byers, said in an email. “By its nature it has an extreme ability to survive on surfaces,” he said. “It can colonize walls, cables, bedding, chairs. We clean everything with bleach and UV light.”

The same sort of mind would conclude that CDC is very happy to get back to fomite transmission. More:

It’s important to stop the pathogen so it doesn’t spread beyond hospitals and long-term facilities like the drug-resistant bacteria MRSA did, Snyder said.

So MRSA and CDC have form on HAI. And it’s not good. In fact, things aren’t good with HAI generally. CDC:

Although significant progress has been made in preventing some healthcare-associated infection types, there is much more work to be done. On any given day, about one in 31 hospital patients has at least one healthcare-associated infection…. There were an estimated 687,000 HAIs in U.S. acute care hospitals in 2015. About 72,000 hospital patients with HAIs died during their hospitalizations.

Granted, 72,000 deaths a year isn’t all that big a number — Joe Biden really hit the death ball out of the park at 700,000 and counting — but it’s still a lot. WaPo blames budgets:

The health system faces financial challenges and severe staffing shortages that make infection control more difficult, said Akin Demehin, senior director of policy at the American Hospital Association. “That is why we continue to advocate for needed financial support to hospitals, and for supportive workforce resources and policies across all levels of government,” Demehin said in a statement.


Hospital accreditation organizations and federal regulators require infection-prevention specialists at acute-care hospitals, experts say, but do not set standards for staffing or funding. And the rules are looser in other health-care settings

Frankly, I find AHA crying poor just a wee bit unpersuasive. Stoller writes:

The amount of cash pouring into health care is quite high. In the U.S., we spend about 20% of our GDP on health care, which is between two to three times as much as other countries. But we get worse results. Why? The answer is monopolization and cheating. As one article in 2003 noted, “It’s the Prices, Stupid.” In terms of hospital beds, physicians, and nurses, we provide fewer than most rich countries for our citizens. We pay more, and get less, because of insider skimming.

Naturally, some of the deaths in that 72,000 aggregate are from Covid. From the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health:

According to several reports, the SARS-CoV-2 hospital-acquired infection rate is 12–15%. Hospital-acquired COVID-19 represents a serious public health issue, which is a problem that could create reluctance of patients to seek hospital treatment for fear of becoming infected.

(No kidding.) Granted, these figures are from 2021, with different variants and higher transmission, but just to keep on Mr. Spike’s bright side, we’re not tracking anything any more, and we’re relaxing non-pharmaceutical interventions like masking, as we are about to see. So maybe it all evens out!


So our health care system’s performance on HAI is bad, and it’s performance on Covid HAI is also bad. Now let’s turn the specifics of Covid HAI with respect to masking, also bad. Readers of my long-ago ObamaCare coverage may recall a metaphor I often used: “In any system as baroque and Kafaesque as ObamaCare, some citizens will get lucky, and go to HappyVille; others, unlucky, will go to Pain City.” Well, our healthcare system has gone all baroque and Kafaesque on masking in hospitals, too, so whether you are more or less likely to catch Covid as an HAI — less politely, whether your hospital is a death trap — is random.


If we roll the tape back to 2020, we’ll find stories like this: “Frontline healthcare workers are locked in a heated dispute with many infection control specialists and hospital administrators over how the novel coronavirus is spread – and therefore, what level of protective gear is appropriate“:

The topic has been deeply divisive within hospitals, largely because the question of whether an illness spreads by droplets or aerosols drives two conflicting sets of protective practices, touching on everything from airflow within hospital wards to patient isolation to choices of protective gear. Enhanced protections would be expensive and disruptive to a number of industries, but particularly to hospitals, which have fought to keep lower-level “droplet” protections in place.


The hospital administrators and epidemiologists who argue that the virus is mostly droplet-spread cite studies showing it is not as contagious as an illness like the measles and spreads to a small number of people, like a cold or a flu. Therefore, N95 respirators and strict patient isolation practices aren’t necessary for routine care of Covid-19 patients, those officials say. On the other side are occupational safety experts, aerosol scientists, frontline healthcare workers and their unions, who are quick to note that the novel coronavirus is far deadlier than the flu – and argue that the science suggests that high-quality, and costlier, N95 respirators should be required for routine Covid-19 patient care.

Fast forward to 2023. The CDC lifted the federal mandate requiring masks in health care facilities in September 2022. (For the fantastically destructive role the CDC has played in hospital infection control during Covid, see NC here.) This is what happened in the state of New York:

This month, New York became the latest to join the growing list of states that have ended their requirements for routine masking in hospitals and other healthcare settings.


In response, at least one of the state’s largest hospital systems is throwing off the mask despite the continued high level of virus transmission in New York City and most of the rest of the state. NYU’s Langone hospital system decided that — outside of the Emergency Room — patients would generally only be required to mask “if they have fever and cough” (query what percentage of individuals with recent COVID-19 infections did not have this specific combo of symptoms — spoiler: it’s probably high). Similarly, the hospital announced that masking by direct care staff was optional in most situations, with masks required mainly during certain procedures, in particular patient rooms, or — more cryptically — when “there is concern for exposure to infectious aerosols.”


Indeed, even as New York dropped its mask mandate, the state’s Department of Health advised hospitals and other healthcare settings to continue to require masks at this time, and major institutions such as New York City’s public hospital system and Memorial Sloan Kettering announced they would keep masking in place.

So, New York has gone fractal; baroque and Kafka-esque. Ditto Illinois:

Dr. Robert Citronberg, executive medical director of infectious disease and prevention at Advocate Health Care said that the mask-optional policy applies to both visitors and staff members.


Citronberg also said during a press conference this morning that the liberalizing of policies is not in place at Aurora Health Care, the larger system’s facilities in Wisconsin. He said that they use the same metrics as Illinois’ Advocate, but that state-level community transmission is not as low in Wisconsin.


He said that despite other local health systems maintaining more restrictive policies, he does not think the move is premature.

Ditto the state of Washington:

Patients, staffers and visitors will continue to be required to mask up inside many health care clinics and facilities throughout the Puget Sound region, a group of Washington hospital and public health leaders decided Friday.


About 20 public health departments and health care systems around the region made the announcement a couple weeks before the state’s remaining indoor masking requirements are set to come to an end on April 3. Most of the Department of Health’s masking mandates have expired, except those in health care or correctional facilities.

“Many,” but not all. I have not been able to find national data on mask usage in hospitals in the United States. I do see a lot of anecdotes, the first being more representative on my extremely unrepresentative Twitter timeline:


AndyAF-tweet-25March2023-The hospital where I work in OR is ditching masks

AndyAF-tweet-25March2023-The hospital where I work in OR is ditching masks


But the second:


JustWee-tweet-27March2023-Husband had surgery in Nov 22 at MU

JustWee-tweet-27March2023-Husband had surgery in Nov 22 at MU


Back to the “heated dispute” in 2020. You will recall that both administrators and hospital infection control epidemiologists were united in favor of droplet dogma and against aerosol transmission (hence against masking). By 2023, the administrators and epidemiologists are split, with the epidemiologists following the science. (There’s plenty of evidence that masking substantially reduces aerosol-borne HAI, including Covid; see here, here, and here). From Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, “Hospital approaches to universal masking after public health ‘unmasking’ guidance“:

We surveyed healthcare epidemiologists in the United States following release of the updated CDC healthcare COVID-19 guidance to understand their facilities’ planned approach to universal masking and unmasking outside of patient care areas. The survey also explored the rationale for maintaining universal masking.


Among 44 healthcare epidemiologists invited to participate, the 34 respondents (response rate, 77.3%) represented health systems from diverse US regions. Most worked for health systems with multiple acute-care hospitals (n = 26, 76.5%) or facilities with ≥500 beds (n = 6, 17.6%).


Overall, 33 respondents (97.1%) reported that their facility has no immediate plans to discontinue universal masking, and 1 respondent (2.9%) reported their facility had discontinued, or planned to discontinue, universal masking if or when community transmission levels of COVID-19 were not high. No respondents reported that their facility had discontinued or would discontinue universal masking regardless of community transmission levels. Preventing non– SARS-CoV-2 seasonal respiratory viruses (90.9% of respondents) and impact on employee staffing capacity (72.7% of respondents) were the most cited reasons for continuing universal masking regardless of county-specific SARS-CoV-2 transmission levels (Table 1). The “other” reasons described by 7 facilities include several themes: standardizing approach across facilities; the operational challenges of variable or changing masking policies between facilities, within a facility, or as community transmission levels change; and the presence of high-risk individuals (Supplementary Materials online). Also, 7 respondents specifically cited inaccessibility to patients (or visitors) as defining locations where unmasking is permitted in patient care areas.

And from an epidemiologists’ trade association, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology:

The Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC) is concerned that a recent report questioning the value of masks to prevent COVID-19 could weaken the ability to mitigate future outbreaks of respiratory infectious diseases.


“The benefits of masking have been shown in healthcare and can be critical in preventing the spread of infection – but this depends on proper and consistent use,” said 2023 APIC President Patricia Jackson, RN, BSN, CIC, FAPIC. “The use of respiratory protection – including well-fitting N95s and surgical masks — is a critical public health tool in our arsenal to protect the public and healthcare workers when severe respiratory infections are spreading. APIC will continue to advocate for the value of masks and respirators in reducing transmission of respiratory infections.”

And Jackson specficiallly trashes, as she ought to have done, the “fool’s gold” Cochrane study:

“Despite Cochrane’s reputation for producing credible health reviews, the many factors and details that go into successfully using masks and respirators as a public health intervention weren’t all reflected in this review,” said Jackson.

This makes me happy. I take back everything bad I ever sad about hospital infection control departments; as it turns out, the vile and hegemonic Dr. John M. Conly — corresponding author of the Cochrane study — was an inappropriate proxy or synecdoche for the field.


* * *

To conclude, or at least to end, for patients the key point is that masking requirements will vary not merely by state but by hospital. If you are lucky, good health in Happyville. Unlucky, a death trap in Pain City. Such is our health system, the finest in the world!


That said, I am not clear at all where the health care system, taken as a whole, stands on masking in hospitals, or how much masking is still taking place. It is clear that at the Federal level, CDC — cognitively captured, no doubt, by anti-mask elites — would like to do away with masking entirely. It is also clear that many states, though not all, are following CDC’s lead. No doubt our complaisant, superspreading press — who are building the depressing anti-mask narrative I read, after all — follows CDC as well (see under Gridiron club). However, mask policy is ultimately a hospital’s decision. The survey I quoted reported that 97.1% of hospital epidemiologists surveyed[1] reported that their hospital had retained universal masking, so the machinations of the CDC and the states were for nought. If this is true, that means that hospital administrators listened to their epidemiologists[2]. And presumably the hospital owners or boards listened to the administrators. But I’m not sure whether to believe that study or not, not least because at this point I’m very suspicious of good news. And the Twitter say that things are a lot worse than that survey says.


All I can do is throw the matter open to readers. Readers, are hospitals requiring universal masking in your area?


[1] The methodology: “From participants in an informal e-mail–based list serve, we invited one representative from each US-based, nonfederal, acute-care hospital or health system.” “Informal” seems a little weak.

[2] And their lawyers? From Harvard Law: “Science, law, and the principle of “do not harm” all concur about the path to keeping patients safe from disease and hospitals safe from liability: at a minimum, continue requiring masks amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Otherwise, hospitals are proceeding at their own risk — and that of their patients.”

TOP logo

What Happened in Hospitals During Covid?

By Stella Paul
April 25, 2023


Hospitals should be places you can trust to provide comfort and healing when you’re most vulnerable. But that trust may have been shattered by brutal Covid protocols that critics claim turned many hospitals into hellscapes of systematic medical murder.


The victims’ stories have been muffled by the mainstream media, but they’re starting to break through. For one thing, lawsuits against three hospitals have been filed in California by 14 bereaved families who claim their loved ones were killed by a deadly protocol. Meanwhile, activist organizations like Protocol Kills, the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation, and American Frontline Nurses are collecting and documenting stories from bereaved families about what happened to their loved ones when they entered a hospital hoping for healing and, instead, were led to bizarre and tortured deaths.


I find it heartbreaking to read their stories, which share a haunting similarity, a feeling of being trapped in a highly organized nightmare. The ritual progresses in predictable stages: first, the patient is isolated from family, who are unable to advocate for their loved one or monitor what’s happening. Next, the patient is diagnosed with Covid-19 or Covid pneumonia, even if they came to the hospital because of a broken arm. Then, they’re bullied into getting remdesivir, a highly toxic drug which killed 53 percent of Ebola patients who had the misfortune to take it. Next, according to the California lawsuit, “They are placed on a BiPap machine at a high rate, making it difficult for them to breathe. Their hands are often tied down so they can’t take the BiPap machine off their face.”


I know this is getting unbearably painful to read, but stay with me to the bitter end to memorialize the victims’ suffering.  As the patients writhe in agony, psychiatrists are brought in to diagnose them with agitation and sedate them. Now, shot up with remdesivir, sedated with drugs that make it tough to breathe against the BiPap ventilator, and strapped down in restraints, the victims are denied food and sometimes even water.  Should they try to summon help, they may find the hospital played a vicious trick on them, placing their phone and call button for the nurse out of reach. In the final stages, they are intubated and slowly die alone, left to rot into a skeletal corpse with bed sores. Is this America?


It’s almost impossible to comprehend the magnitude of this moral collapse. How did doctors and nurses who spent years studying so they could help people all of a sudden turn into ruthless sadists, presiding over enforced deaths? How did hospitals metastasize from places of healing into chambers of horror? According to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), the answer is quite simple: money. The federal government incentivized this protocol with massive payouts to the hospitals. AAPS writes, “Our formerly trusted medical community of hospitals and hospital-employed medical staff have effectively become “bounty hunters” for your life.”


AAPS explains that two Covid emergency acts from the government created this catastrophic loss of life. The CARES Act, a $2 trillion stimulus package, was passed in 2020, purportedly to ease the financial impact of Covid on American families. It provided gigantic bonuses to hospitals to institute federal protocols on Covid, ensuring that Covid would be massively diagnosed and treated with deadly combinations of remdesivir, ventilators, and other lethal methods.


Now that this top-down death protocol was bought and paid for, the government made sure that patients and their families were helpless to fight against it. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) granted waivers to hospitals allowing them to remove critical patient rights. Your ability to give informed consent, receive visitors, and be free from solitary confinement – gone! Vanished, obliterated with a single magical government “waiver.”


These actions destroyed the ability of doctors to make independent judgements based on their patients’ needs and turned highly trained medical staff into killer robots obeying the federal government’s commands. If you want to understand the enormity of the government money gusher, here’s AAPS on what the hospital payments included:

  • A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with government-paid fee to hospital.
  • Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
  • Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
  • A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
  • Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
  • More money to the hospital if cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
  • A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans may have died due to these protocols, and we urgently need an investigation into this butchery. Who designed this protocol, which forbade safe drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and incentivized known toxins like remdesivir? Who enforced it? Were hospital administrators personally rewarded for their participation in this scheme? Were patients illegally deprived of their constitutional rights and defrauded with phony medical information? Why were patients denied nutrition and water? How was hospital staff forced to comply? Where’s the money trail? Who signed off on it?


Understanding what happened in the hospitals is a crucial piece of solving the Covid puzzle. A vast ecosystem of confusion, manipulation, and artificially induced panic was created by the government and their media lackeys to stampede the public into welcoming soul-crushing lockdowns and dangerous experimental injections. Hospitals were shut down for elective surgeries, depriving them of their usual income and making them more desperate for government payouts. Covid patients were forced into nursing homes, immediately killing thousands of frail victims and terrifying the public with the skyrocketing death count. Safe, widely used drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were demonized, and studies were fabricated to lie about their effectiveness. Doctors and scientists who tried to speak the truth were fired, investigated, and censored. Why?


We’re living through a time of historic crimes against humanity, rife with atrocities that once would have been unimaginable in America. We don’t yet know how many innocent people were killed in the hospitals during Covid, but whatever that number is — some experts estimate hundreds of thousands — it’s too many. Every one of those innocent dead was someone’s son, daughter, mother, father, husband, wife, friend.


For all the faceless dead, let’s pause for a moment to pay tribute to Grace Schara, a sweet 19-year-old girl with Down Syndrome who died on October 13, 2021, at St. Elizabeth Hospital in Appleton, Wisconsin. Grace was injected with a lethal mix of sedatives and as she sank into death, her sister was prevented from seeing her by an armed guard. Her parents begged over Facetime for the nurse to save her, but they were told that Grace was coded DNR (Do Not Resuscitate), although they had ordered the hospital to take all life-saving measures. Alone, uncomprehending, and in pain, Grace slowly died as her parents watched on Facetime. Her father, Scott Schara, is now suing the hospital to “pave the way for thousands of other victims’ families to file similar claims.” Grace was loved. May her memory be a blessing and an inspiration.

Stella can be reached through twitter @StellaPaulNY



Post-Pandemic Burnout: 20% Of Nurses May Quit In Next Four Years, Says Survey

by Tyler Durden, 20April2023 –

The total American nursing workforce has fallen 3.3% over the past two years, but experts expect the trend is about to rapidly accelerate — to the point that one in five nurses could call it quits by 2027.


“High workloads and unprecedented levels of burnout during the COVID‑19 pandemic have stressed the U.S. nursing workforce, particularly younger, less experienced RNs,” write the authors of a survey-study published on Thursday in the Journal of Nursing Regulation.

We pause to ask…was any of that burnout due to practicing choreographed dance routines for TikTok?

Guy's Politico Channel-tweet-29November2022-Nurses, with nothing else to do "during COVID", performing exquisitely choreographed dance routines for their TikTok fan base. They'd like it if you forgot this

Guy’s Politico Channel-tweet-29November2022-Nurses, with nothing else to do “during COVID”, performing exquisitely choreographed dance routines for their TikTok fan base. They’d like it if you forgot this


More than 100,000 left nursing during the pandemic, and researchers say another 800,000 could bail in the next few years. The paper was the focus of a panel discussion at the National Press Club hosted by the National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN), reports MedPage Today.


Such an exodus would have powerful ripple effects throughout healthcare, said Brendan Martin, NCSBN’s director of nursing regulation.

The survey included more than 54,000 respondents, with 92.5% of them being women. Key findings:

  • 50.8% feel emotionally drained
  • 56.4% feel used up
  • 49.7% feel fatigued
  • 45.1% feel burned out or “at the end of their rope”

In an ominous sign for what’s to come, quitting nurses skew young: 41% of the post-pandemic flameouts had an average age of 36 and fewer than 10 years on the job. Age and workload are key factors, say the study’s authors:

“The most pronounced differences emerged when comparing early career nurses with higher workloads to their more experienced peers with normal workloads. In this comparison, early career respondents with high workloads were more than three to four times more likely to report higher frequencies of feeling emotionally drained, used up, fatigued, burned out, or at the end of their rope.”


At the height of the pandemic, this Russian nurse opted to wear just a bra and panties under see-through PPE. Despite patients having "no complaints," she was disciplined.

At the height of the pandemic, this Russian nurse opted to wear just a bra and panties under see-through PPE. Despite patients having “no complaints,” she was disciplined.

At the height of the pandemic, this Russian nurse opted to wear just a bra and panties under see-through PPE. Despite patients having “no complaints,” she was disciplined.(New York Post)

ThePatriotNurse: You BETTER Know This The New Healthcare Nightmare


ThePatriotNurse:What you BETTER KNOW Before Going to the Hospital



Never Forget What They Did… Never!

by Tyler Durden, 09May2023 –

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via,

These are the days of grasping for excuses. In sector after sector, leaders who gave us lockdowns and all that followed are trying to account for their actions, not apologizing of course but admitting that, in the classic formulation, mistakes were made.


That said, they all agree on the core point. The government had to take big steps to deal with the pandemic.

A book just released from the original lockdown gangsters (about which I will write more later), a book celebrated by the Washington Post as the authoritative account, puts it this way:

“American leaders entering the Covid war plunged ahead with a breathtaking political and social experiment. Facing a dangerous pandemic, they adopted the broadest, most ambitious, and intrusive set of government controls on social behavior in the history of the United States. Given the lack of preparation at all levels of government, mistakes were inevitable and to be expected, perhaps even excusable.”

Excusable is the new watchword, and Anthony Fauci has picked it up. In a recent interview, he admits that many things went wrong but adds: “I don’t think anybody would argue with the fact that you had to shut down.”

Freezer Trucks as Propaganda Tools

Then he adds what he clearly considers the key talking point. We know because he has said this is in several interviews. He says that the obvious disaster of freezer trucks at hospitals signaled and proved the desperate need for lockdowns.


Notice too how CNN had a terrifying graphic ready to run alongside his comments. This still is particularly evocative with the Statue of Liberty in the background, not that anyone would suggest that this was staged (he said with a nudge).

Freezer Trucks as covid-19 Propaganda Tools

Freezer Trucks as covid-19 Propaganda Tools


These images from Getty are not even from March or April 2020. The Daily Mail ran them alongside an article posted on May 6, noting that the images were from May 6 and 7, 2020.


So the excuse that we had to lock down because of freezer trucks does not hold water. The lockdown edict was issued on March 16, 2020, following the declaration of emergency on March 13, three days after Trump’s advisers convinced him to issue the lockdown.


In that time, the funeral parlors and morgues closed too, as did most all medical services. The country was also in panic, which is not generally good for public health.

Was It Necessarily COVID That Was Killing People?

That there was a wave of death in those two weeks is clear. What’s not clear is whether that was Covid alone. After all, the virus had been circulating in the US for a while. The period of 15 days was also the time when intubation was deployed as the best method to deal with a seemingly problematic Covid case, resulting in many unnecessary deaths.


What’s crucial here is the timing. Two weeks following the lockdowns, the news media began running alarmist stories of the legendary freezer trucks at hospitals, giving the impression of a movie-like pandemic sweeping the country, whereas the problem was centered in only a few locations. These stories ran for a full month throughout April and into May.


On March 29, 2020, the New York Times quoted Trump himself: “I have been watching them bringing in trailer trucks, freezer trucks because they can’t handle the bodies. There are so many of them. This is in essentially my community in Queens, New York. I have seen things that I have never seen before.”


Not much of this makes sense. In this very period, New York City hospitals saw an overall 50% drop in admissions, which is what happens when you close down all services to spare all resources for one virus. If you add to that a shutdown of the entire industry of funerals, funeral homes, morgues, and cemetery services, one can imagine that a crisis would ensue.

No Wonder Why the Bodies Piled up

Even the normal embalming protocols were disrupted on the advice of the WHO and CDC. The bodies of the dead were treated as icky and untouchable and this attitude was encouraged by authorities. Workers were terrified.


It’s hardly surprising that bodies piled up and needed to be stored. The whole population and especially the health community was told that the whole of life should be organized around running away from the bad bug.


These events unfolded two weeks following essentially the same events in Italy. Morgues closed. The normal process of dealing with the dead was dramatically interrupted. Workers were at home. Funerals were banned and this ban was heavily enforced. Medical personnel were especially terrified of the death.


All of the factors led to a pile-up of bodies in the midst of a panic. The chaos caused by the panic itself was deployed by the media, and used as an excuse by government, to intensify and prolong the lockdowns.


This is like shouting fire in a crowded theater and citing the ensuing panic as the reason for an evacuation order. The fomenting of panic itself created the conditions for the panic managers to enhance their own power.


In this case, however, the ploy is pretty obvious simply because of the timing. The freezer-truck excuse frankly does not fit the timeline.

More Fauci Doubletalk

Or we can give Fauci the most charitable interpretation of his comments and say that he cited the freezer trucks as evidence that they did the right thing in locking down two weeks (or one month) earlier.


Even then, if that is his thinking, that doesn’t justify the initial lockdown at all. It only cites the evidence of the failed policy as the reason for the policy itself.


In addition, the problem was localized whereas the shutdown was countrywide. This led to a bizarre situation in which hospitals all over the country were empty of the usual stream of patients.


People missed diagnostics. They missed elective surgeries. At least 300 hospitals furloughed nurses because they had nothing to do except practice dance routines and put the results on TikTok. All of this transpired at a time when Fauci and Trump were going on about mass waves of death.


Indeed, in this exact period, healthcare spending actually declined by 8.6%. On the urging of intellectuals and officials from February, hospitals all over the country closed their services at the very time when they were likely needed most.

Never Forget

Gone was any serious discussion about how to treat Covid other than to invoke ventilation and Remdesivir (which was a disaster). Early treatment was dogmatically rejected as nothing but a quack cure. How many people needlessly died because they were denied effective early treatment? We may never know, but I believe the number is probably staggering.


All efforts, even from the earliest days, were focused on the vaccine as the only way to get out of the pandemic.


Regardless of the excuse, the public-relations team that defends the lockdowns never mention Sweden because this case demonstrates that panicked rights violations are generally not a good path for boosting public health in the case of a new virus that newly appears in the awareness of powerful people.


To this day, no one can give a clear official reason how or why this happened or what was achieved by it all relative to the cost. Even so, they will not admit that their entire lockdown paradigm was wrong from the very beginning. They should but they will not.


It wasn’t just implemented poorly and inefficiently. It never should have happened at all. And it should never happen again.

Never forget what they did. Never.



Never Forget: Leftists Showed Their True Authoritarian Colors During COVID

by Tyler Durden, 12August2023 –

Authored by Brandon Smith via,

When I think back to the first days of the covid pandemic lockdowns, I suspect the majority of people, even many conservatives and liberty movement types, had a healthy concern about the effects of the virus and the potential for structural upheaval if it turned out to be as deadly as the World Health Organization initially claimed. If covid had an Infection Fatality Rate of 3% or more as global health officials warned, then the damage would be substantial enough to change our world for many years to come.


Anyone who was not at least partially concerned about a biological disaster (or biological warfare) was probably an idiot. Anyone who was smart was prepared.  However, after a few months of the spread of the virus and after the first flurry of scientific data, several facts became evident:

1) The lockdowns did nothing to stop the spread, they were simply destroying our economy.

2) The masks were useless and did nothing to prevent transmission of the virus.

3) The IFR of covid was a tiny 0.23%, and that’s not accounting for all the co-morbidity deaths that were falsely labeled as covid deaths.

4) The vaccines did not prevent transmission for millions of people. They did not prevent infection in many cases and numerous vaccinated people have died from the virus. Not only that, but unvaccinated people with natural immunity were better protected than those that took the vaccine and boosters.

5) Studies show that the vaccines cause dangerous side effects at a much greater rate than the CDC admitted.

Everything government officials told us during the pandemic was a lie. It was not a mistake, it was not bureaucratic confusion, it was a lie. Even after this information became available, they KEPT GOING – They kept people locked down, kept them masked and they even tried to force-vaccinate the population. There were some Republican politicians that also went along with the panic, many of them Neocons (fake conservatives).  However, the majority of red states quickly ended the restrictions once the contradictory data was made public.  In the meantime, the blue states looked ridiculous and paranoid as they desperately clung to the mandates.


I believe the only reason Biden, the Democrats and globalist institutions eventually stopped was not because they realized their science was incorrect; it was because they realized millions of conservatives and independents were ready start a shooting war over the mandates and they knew they would lose.

The Statue of Liberty wearing a COVID mask

The Statue of Liberty wearing a COVID mask


Even today, months after Biden was forced to finally end the national emergency status on covid, there are still a lot of people out there running around with masks, still isolating in their homes and still complaining all over social media that the public has moved on from the pandemic hysteria. Where does this behavior originate? And why did so many Americans (mainly leftists) jump on the authoritarian bandwagon when it comes to lockdowns and forced vaccination?


I want to explore the psychology of such people here, because I think it’s the natural inclination of the public today to move on quickly from the discomfort of terrible events and ignore the deeper implications. We cannot move on from this, because the ultimate problem was never solved. These same leftists and globalists were never admonished for their behavior, they never had to admit they were wrong and they WILL attempt the same draconian measures again in the future if left unchecked.


Here is what I think happened during the covid cult frenzy…

A Useful Weapon Against The Constitution

Leftists are quick these days to change the subject or outright deny their authoritarian activities during covid. It makes sense, they view the next election as a defining election and they want people to forget that we almost lost what remains of our constitutional rights because of their policies. But again, we can’t allow these things to fade into the ether. Here’s a list of the worst trespasses on the part of leftists and globalists during the pandemic:

They lied about the effectiveness of the lockdowns.

They lied about the effectiveness of the masks.

They lied about the effectiveness of the vaccines.

They lied about how extensive the testing was for the covid vaccines.

They lied about the “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”

They enforced lockdowns OUTSIDE where it is nearly impossible to contract a virus.

They tried to put the population under house arrest.

They put legislation in motion in some states to build “covid camps” in the US.

In some countries, they did build covid camps, not just for travelers, but for everyone.

They conspired to suppress ample evidence linking the Wuhan Lab in China with the outbreak.

They (Government and Big Tech) conspired to use social media as a tool for mass censorship of conflicting data.

They exploited algorithms through search engines to bury any and all contrary information.

As many leftists openly admitted, the goal was to make life so difficult for the unvaccinated that they would eventually comply in order to survive. In this way, establishment elites and leftists could claim that people “volunteered” for the vaccines and no one was forced. What they really meant was, no one was forced at gunpoint, but we all knew that threat was coming next.  In fact, polling showed that a large percentage of Democrats were willing to scrap the Bill of Rights altogether and declare war on the unvaccinated…

Fox News-Dems Wanted More COVID Rules

Fox News-Dems Wanted More COVID Rules


Finally, the vast majority of leftists supported Biden’s vaccine passport executive orders for workers in companies with 100 employees or more, which would have ultimately led to vaccine passports for everyone. This would have destroyed the constitution as we know it and created a society in which economic participation is completely controlled by the government. Keep in mind, all of this was being justified by a virus with a tiny 0.23% median death rate.


Since the political left views the Bill of Rights as an obstacle to the majority of their political goals, I argue that they simply saw the pandemic as a vehicle they could exploit to remove constitutional protections they always wanted to get rid of anyway.

The Mentally Ill Took Over The Country

Around 23% of the US population is estimated to have at least one mental illness. On average, around 3% of the population suffers from psychotic episodes and 1% of the population is full blown psychopathic (incapable of empathy and takes joy in the suffering of others). America is a sick nation full of psychologically disturbed people, and there is currently no recourse for fixing the problem.


Instead, under the leftist methodology, the mentally ill are elevated, idolized and enabled while violent criminals are released onto the streets over and over again. Take one look at all the major cities on the west coast of the US where progressive policies rule and see the disturbing decline. But what does this have to do with medical tyranny under covid?


The political left uses the mentally ill as a bludgeon, an easily manipulated tool for chaos. During the lockdowns and restrictions the establishment and the media stoked the fires of paranoia.  By themselves they have no power; they need the crazed mob as a weapon to keep the rest of the country afraid and in line. They needed good little Stasi, always watching, always correcting, always screaming at those without masks, attacking those that refused to get vaxxed and mocking those that spoke out about scientific inconsistencies.


And, in return, the establishment made the mentally ill feel as if they were normal. For a fleeting moment in time, the most unstable and narcissistic people on the planet were made to feel like THEY were on the right side of history and rationality. It was a parasitic feedback loop that almost destroyed the last vestiges of America.

Tiny Tyrants Begging For Scraps From The Globalist Table

There are generally two kinds of people in the world – Those that want power over others, and those that just want to be left alone. The progressive ideology seems to be a breeding ground for “tiny tyrants”: People who have no individual power, little accomplishment and no influence to speak of, but are still stricken with an obsession to micromanage the world around them. These folks see crisis and government overreach as an opportunity rather than a threat.


There are also those people who view their existence as so devoid of interest or excitement that they tend to live vicariously through calamity and conflict. They saw the covid outbreak and the lockdowns as a moment that gave their lives “meaning.” Yes, it’s sad and pathetic, but this is how many people out there cope with obscurity and lack of merit.


These opportunists didn’t want the pandemic to end. They wanted it to go on forever, because if it did they could feed off the establishment power shift. They could gather scraps from the globalist table, and like carrion, feast on the corpse of our Republic. The motive? Selfish vanity, that is all.


All of this could very well happen again. The big tyrants and tiny tyrants are still out there, waiting for the next crisis; the next panic event to take the public off their guard. Another viral event is unlikely, but they do seem anxious to use climate change, war and economic turmoil as the next great “reset” button. In the end, there will have to be a dramatic shift in how the liberty minded interact with the authoritarian left. It is clear that we cannot share the same country, or the same civilization. Our values are fundamentally at odds. It’s only a matter of time before a single spark ignites a firestorm.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.



Never Forget: A Retrospective On The Media Lies Surrounding COVID

by Tyler Durden, 14May2023 –

Lest we get too comfortable once again and forget that only a couple years ago the western world was on the verge of perpetual medical tyranny, it is important to look back at the massive media disinformation campaign concerning the effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of the pandemic mandates and the mRNA vaccines.  Only two years ago, the public was bombarded by possibly the most aggressive global propaganda attack in modern history.  And, this campaign was a conjoined effort between national governments, global institutions and corporations.


Keep in mind, all the hysteria was generated over a virus with a median official Infection Fatality Rate of only 0.23%.  That’s right, all the fear mongering featured in the video below was in reaction to a “pandemic” that 99.8% of the population would easily survive, and this death rate was known only months after the spread started.  Also keep in mind that essentially every single claim made by the media concerning covid featured below ended up being false.  In many cases, the media knew that scientific evidence ran contrary to their narrative, but they promoted that narrative anyway.

Enjoy this flashback of corporate media covid fear mongering, and never forget…

Tom Elliott-tweet-12May2023-Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 1 Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum

Tom Elliott-tweet-12May2023-Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 1 Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum



NEVER FORGET: You Should Never “Trust The Science”

This Pro-Mask “Study” Is Why You Should Never “Trust The Science”

by Tyler Durden, 01August2023 –


Authored by Kit Knightly via,

Last week it was reported that the Australian state of Victoria may be considering “permanent” facemask mandates to achieve “zero-Covid”.


Now, we don’t need to get into the personal liberty implications of such a law, or  the near-infinite supply of evidence that masks don’t work to prevent the transmission of respiratory disease.

They don’t work, they never worked. Mandating them was a political move designed to make the fake Covid “pandemic” appear real, and their continued use is a symptom of brainwashing or a by-product of chronic virtue signaling.

The mask debate, such as it was, is over.


No, the only aspect of this development worth talking about is the “evidence” used to support the position – and trust me, the quotes are entirely justified.

The “study” which claims to demonstrate the benefits of permanent masking was published in the Medical Journal of Australia last week and titled “Consistent mask use and SARS‐CoV‐2 epidemiology: a simulation modelling study”.


“Simulation modelling study” is very much the key phrase there. For those who don’t know,  “simulation modelling studies” involve feeding data into a computer programme, then asking it to form conclusions.


Clearly, they are only as reliable and useful as the data you use. In fact, you can very easily make them produce any result you want by feeding in  the “right” (bad) data.


In this particular modelling study they started out by telling the computer that cloth masks reduce transmission by 53% and respirators reduced it by 80%:

Odds ratios for the relative risk of infection for people exposed to an infected person (wearing a mask v not wearing a mask) were set at 0.47 for cloth and surgical masks and 0.20 for respirators

Essentially, they told their computer that masks prevent disease…and then said “ok, computer, since you now know masks prevent disease  – what would happen if everybody wore them all the time?”

The computer then told them – obviously  – that nobody would get sick.

Because they made it logically impossible for it to say anything else.

But there’s a bit more to it.

The next layer of interest is where they got their input data from.

After all there have been dozens of studies done on masks over the years, 98% of which say masks don’t work.

So, did our guys they choose a peer-reviewed real-time control trial relying on lab-tested double-blind results?

Perhaps one of the dozen or so such trials listed in our 40 facts article?

Did they maybe average the results of multiple studies?

No, they used a phone survey.

One phone survey.

This phone survey, published last year and conducted in late 2021.


In this *ahem* “scientific study”, they had people randomly call up those who had recently been tested for “Covid”, ask them “did you wear a mask?” and then published the conclusion – “masks reduce transmission by 53%” – as if they meant something.

Interestingly, if you scroll down to the “affiliations” section you can see that one of the authors is a Pfizer grant recipient.

Rather more troublingly – and for some reason not mentioned as a conflict of interest – is that the whole study was produced by the California Board of Public Health.

California had already had a mask mandate in place for almost a year before this “study” was even started.


What we have here is not “science” it’s a computer model based on the results of a subjective phone survey conducted by a government agency with a vested interest.

What we have here is not “science” it’s a computer model based on the results of a subjective phone survey conducted by a government agency with a vested interest. It is entirely meaningless, and yet is published in journals and cited by “experts”, perhaps even used as the basis of introducing new laws.


This is how “The ScienceTM” works. And, although Covid has maybe opened many people’s eyes to this issue, it is far from unique to “Covid”. You are just as likely to find this kind of “research” published on any topic – especially those that serve a political purpose – and have been for years if not decades.


Stanford Professor of evidence-based medicine,  John Ioannidis wrote a paper called “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”, and that was back in 2005.


This has nothing to do with the “pandemic”, and everything to do with the difference between science and “The Science”. So let’s examine that distinction.


“Science” is an approach to the world. A rational method for gathering information, testing new ideas and forming evidence-based conclusions.

“The Science” is a self-sustaining industry of academics who need jobs and owe favours.

“The Science” is a self-sustaining industry of academics who need jobs and owe favours.

An ongoing quid pro quo relationship between the researchers – who want honors and knighthoods and tenure and book deals and research grants and to be the popular talking head explaining complex ideas to the multitudes on television – and the corporationsgovernments and “charitable foundations” who have all of those things in their gift.


This system doesn’t produce research intended to be read, it creates headlines for celebrities to tweet, links for “journalists” to embed, sources for other researchers to cite.


An illusion of solid substantiation that comes apart the moment you actually read the words, examine the methodology or analyse the data.


Self-reporting surveys, manipulated data, “modelling studies” that spit-out pre-ordained results. Affiliated-authors paid by the state or corporate interests to provide “evidence” that supports highly profitable or politically convenient assumptions.


This mask study is the perfect example of that.

Interlacing layers of nothing designed to create the impression of something.

That’s why they want you to trust it, rather than read it.



NEVER FORGET: Democrats wanted the unvaccinated fired from their jobs, thrown in prison for rejecting covid jabs

17May2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

Democrats wanted the unvaccinated fired from their jobs, thrown in prison for rejecting covid jabs

Democrats wanted the unvaccinated fired from their jobs, thrown in prison for rejecting covid jabs

(Natural News) The era of the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) is finally over, except for a few deranged diehards who are still choosing to wear a mask while driving alone or walking solitary through the local park. What is not over, though, are the repercussions that the covid tyrants inflicted upon society, which need to be remembered, and more importantly dealt with, through the criminal justice system.


Just because the Biden regime and other globalist power structures have suddenly decided that the covid “emergency” has ended – which is convenient since the whole thing fell apart before they could salvage the narrative – does not mean that these criminals get to walk away scot-free.


Untold millions of lives were destroyed because of this ritualistic psy-op, which included the experimental mass-drugging of the global population with a deadly chemical concoction known as covid “vaccines.” There was, in fact, a time when the perpetrators were calling for those who rejected this drugging to be jailed, or even killed, for resisting the effort to “save lives.”


Remember in early 2022 when a Rasmussen poll found that a majority of Democrats thought the unvaccinated should be locked up at home and fined until they agreed to get jabbed? Most Democrats also wanted the unvaccinated to be imprisoned, if necessary, to force their compliance.


One in three Democrats also said at the time that they believe unvaccinated parents should have their children forcibly removed from their homes by the government, while others promoted the idea of throwing vaccine resisters into government-run quarantine camps, also known as concentration camps.


(Related: Don’t forget that the Biden regime also intentionally disrupted the supply chains in an effort to punish unvaccinated Americans for their non-compliance with its demands.)

Remember when The View hosts called unvaccinated Americans “scum?”

Sadly, about one in four Republicans also told Rasmussen that unvaccinated Americans should be fined, locked up at home, or sent to a concentration camp until they agreed to obey, which makes many of them criminals just like the Democrats.


The idea of health freedom and medical choice is apparently lost on a sizeable portion of the population, which somehow still believes that government “authorities” have the rightful power to rule over their “subjects” like tyrants. The United States Constitution permits no such thing, and it is time We the People remind the others of this whenever we get the chance.


As another reminder of what the left, which apparently includes some Republicans, thought about the unvaccinated, check out the clip below from The View, in which the unvaccinated are referred to as “scum:”

The below mashup of clips shows many other leftists referring to the unvaccinated in much the same way:

Tom Elliott-tweet-12May2023-Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 1 Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum

Tom Elliott-tweet-12May2023-Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 1 Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum


It should also be noted that Rochelle Walensky, head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) throughout the covid scamdemic saga, is an anti-science loon who claims that natural immunity does not exist, among other bizarre claims:

Chief Nerd-tweet-12May2023-Dr Marty Makary Roasts CDC Dir Rochelle Walensky

Chief Nerd-tweet-12May2023-Dr Marty Makary Roasts CDC Dir Rochelle Walensky


In response to Walensky’s false claims about natural immunity, one commenter had this to say, which sums it up nicely:


“‘Science’ is man-made. ‘Natural immunity’ is God-made. I choose God.”


The latest news about what comes next for the covid criminals who committed flagrant acts of medical violence while unleashing medical fascism on the world under the guise of promoting “public health” can be found at


Sources for this article include:



Agendas Run Rampant Over Science In The Biden Administration

by Tyler Durden, 29June2023 –<

Authored by Michael Chamberlain via RealClear Wire,

“Disinformation and misinformation is the bona fide enemy of public health,” Dr. Anthony Fauci stated in a recent interview. But he also said, “We should embrace differences in opinion.”  


What if misinformation is coming from the public health officials themselves? And lately, government has not seemed to embrace differences in opinion, preferring instead to smother contrary opinions. The resulting erosion of trust in the officials in charge – less than half of Americans trust the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on COVID – could be more damaging than any “misinformation” found on social media.


Far too often in recent years, when science gets in the way of the government’s agenda, science is disregarded, ignored, or undermined. The CDC, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and National Institutes of Health (NIH) have appeared to make policy decisions and public representations inconsistent with science — including their own science.


Science is undermined when scientists and the institutions that apply science do not follow the findings of unbiased studies. And science is undermined when those institutions do not make a good faith effort to collect data and let the data dictate a conclusion. When “science” gets tunnel vision for a result, it ceases to be science. 


The Biden administration came into office promising to restore science as the driver of policy. Led by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the administration adopted strict scientific integrity standards at federal agencies. So far, though, the results don’t comport with the rhetoric.


After documenting a number of alleged violations of these standards, Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) filed a scientific integrity complaint with OSTP. The complaint was based on our tracking of numerous instances of the government either ignoring scientific findings, manipulating data, or misrepresenting data to make the science conform to policy objectives.


Each example is eye-opening. In one case, the CDC claimed that vaccinations offer higher protection from Covid-19 than a previous infection. This talking point, however, was based on data cherry-picked from a single state within a fifty-state study. So, the CDC’s talking points were possibly taken from an outlier, not the entire dataset. Worse, the cited study did not even make a comparison between those with immunity solely from vaccination and those with immunity from prior infection, as the CDC’s public statements claimed. Yet high-ranking officials at the CDC and other components of the Department of Health and Human Services touted these misrepresentations unequivocally.


It’s not just misrepresentations to the public. Actual policy decisions undermined science. In August 2022, the CDC endorsed COVID-19 vaccinations for children aged six months to four years, saying that a “lower risk of symptomatic Covid-19 was observed with vaccination compared to placebo.” But it also noted that severe adverse events were “more common in vaccine recipients.” To make matters worse, the claim that vaccinated children were at lower risk of showing symptoms was based upon bad science. “You can inject [children] with it or squirt it in their face, and you’ll get the same benefit,” one high-level CDC official declared. So, the CDC made this recommendation without proof of its efficacy, while acknowledging that the children were at heightened risk of severe adverse events.


The prioritization of policy agendas over science is not isolated to the pandemic. Protect the Public’s Trust’s research indicates that the FDA appears to have breached its obligation to uphold scientific integrity in its decision-making about vaping. We believe that the FDA knowingly disseminated scientifically unfounded statements about vaping products that were contrary to the FDA’s own research. Also ignoring its own research, and without proper scientific justification, the FDA overruled its own scientists’ recommendations to authorize menthol vapes.


The Biden administration often decries “misinformation” about anything contradicting its own narratives, but it appears to be one of the worst purveyors of misinformation. Citizens can’t trust a government that misrepresents the results of studies, or prevents the collection of, or even intentionally hides, data. The American public should expect that its science-based institutions and most prominent spokesmen follow the science and use the scientific method in reaching policy decisions. Unless these institutions and their leadership change course, public trust will continue to plummet.



STUDY: Short-term face mask use causes carbon dioxide poisoning – cognitive impairment, testicular damage, stillbirth and impaired memory

28April2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

Covid-19 Facemask child

Covid-19 Facemask child


(Natural News) Studies continue to show that face masks provided no protection against covid-19. Now, a new peer-reviewed study out of Germany finds that short-term face mask use causes carbon dioxide poisoning, leading to testicular dysfunction in young men, increased risk of stillbirth for pregnant women, cognitive decline in children, as well as impaired memory, anxiety, and other serious health problems. Masks force a person to inhale unsafe levels of CO2, synthetic microfibers, carcinogenic compounds, volatile organic compounds, and microorganisms that have adapted to the moist environment inside the mask. The researchers warn that face masks suffocate people in their own exhaled waste, increasing CO2 levels in their blood while driving up blood pressure and inflammatory markers.


The study, Possible toxicity of chronic carbon dioxide exposure associated with face mask use, particularly in pregnant women, children, and adolescents was published in the peer reviewed journal, Helion.

Face masks spike CO2 blood levels, destroying childhood brain development, depleting men’s sperm

Fresh air typically contains just .04% CO2. When a person puts on a mask, they are exposed to low level carbon dioxide poisoning in the range of 1.4–3.2%. In the study, CO2 concentrations as low as .3% were associated with significant brain damage, impaired memory, and increased anxiety in children. The study found that just five minutes of mask wearing can expose an individual to dangerous CO2 levels – laying the groundwork for serious health issues and developmental disorders in children.


In one study, 0.3% CO2 exposure on adolescent brain neurons “can cause destruction in the gyrus dentatus and the prefrontal cortex with decreased IGF-1 levels resulting in less activity, increased anxiety and impaired learning and memory.”


The concentration of CO2 in the blood has an important influence on intra- and extracellular pH. When CO2 passes quickly through the cell membranes, it goes on to form carbonic acid with H2O, causing the release of H + ions, leading to acidosis and the die-off of neurons.


When male mice are exposed to 2.5% CO2 for four hours, their testicular cells and sperm are destroyed. For humans, this exposure is equal to .5% CO2 — a common exposure during mask mandates. In the study, four hours of low-level CO2 exposure causes spermatid and Sertoli cells in testes to self-destruct, causing streaking & vacuolization of the tubular components and consequentially no maturation of the spermatids.

CO2 poisoning of pregnant women causes birth defects, higher risk of stillbirth

Carbon dioxide exposure can cause oxidative stress and the formation of lipid hydroperoxides that cause DNA fragmentation and subsequent mitochondrial damage and cell death. Pregnant rats exposed to 3% CO2 were more likely to suffer stillbirths and have offspring with birth defects. This is equal to 0.8 percent CO2 exposure for humans – a common exposure for pregnant women who worked under mask mandates.


Before widespread mask use, the stillbirth rate in humans was 7 per 1000 births. During the masking pandemonium, stillbirths increased to 21 per 1,000 births. A prominent UK hospital reported a fourfold increase in stillbirths during the covid-19 scandal, and carbon dioxide poisoning was a major contributing factor. The damage was also observed in Australia, where people were forced to wear masks for years. These increase in stillbirths was not observed in Sweden, where there were no mask mandates.


“Circumstantial evidence exists that popular mask use may be related to current observations of a significant rise of 28 percent to 33 percent in stillbirths worldwide,” the German researchers concluded.


Forceful and coercive face mask policies continue to violate the sovereign rights and health of the individual, weakening their immune system and setting up their oxygen-deprived cells for oxidative damage, inflammation, and severe disease. Pregnant women and their fetuses were directly harmed by policies of forced CO2 poisoning. Forced masking of children caused negative psychological effects and additional physiological damage to their brains, their immune system, and their development.

Sources include: [PDF]



Infectious Disease Experts Advise Health Care Facilities to Drop Universal Mask Policies

Doctors discuss the downside of continued masking, including the impact on the quality of care

FEATURED Health News
David Charbonneau May 3 2023


In another sign of changing attitudes to pandemic policy, infectious disease specialists writing in the Annals of Internal Medicine this month argued against the continuation of universal masking policies for doctors, nurses, and other health care workers.


In the article, the eight authors, who are infectious disease specialists associated with Harvard and Washington University medical schools among others, offer a timeline of the evolving responses to the pandemic. The timeline leaves out the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) initially confusing advice on masking but acknowledges that factors like the development of immunity, the evolution of the virus, and development of pharmaceutical “countermeasures” have fundamentally reshaped the landscape of the pandemic.

© 2023 American College of Physicians. Used with Permission. Erica S. Shenoy, Hilary M. Babcock, Karen B. Brust, et al. Universal Masking in Health Care Settings: A Pandemic Strategy Whose Time Has Come and Gone, For Now. Ann Intern Med. [Epub 18 April 2023]

© 2023 American College of Physicians. Used with Permission. Erica S. Shenoy, Hilary M. Babcock, Karen B. Brust, et al. Universal Masking in Health Care Settings: A Pandemic Strategy Whose Time Has Come and Gone, For Now. Ann Intern Med. [Epub 18 April 2023]

“The burden of SARS-CoV-2 has been mitigated over time,” the authors state, “through access to testing, substantial population-level immunity providing durable protection against severe disease, a series of less virulent variants, and widespread availability of medical countermeasures, which in combination have resulted in decreasing infection mortality rates.”


They conclude that “SARS-CoV-2 has transitioned to a more stable phase, during which the choice and intensity of mitigation efforts must be commensurate with the risk and align with management strategies” for other endemic, transmissible diseases.


“Recognizing these changes,” the authors state, “many pandemic interventions have been deimplemented,” but, “Masking requirements and other restrictions remain notable exceptions.”


Some in the medical field, such as Dr. Kalu Ibukunoluwa and co-authors writing in the journal Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology in January, argue for making universal masking requirements in health care settings permanent, stating that such “universal source control masking … should become the ‘new normal’ for all healthcare institutions.”


However, Dr. Erica Shenoy, an infectious diseases physician at Massachusetts General Hospital, lead author of the study and her co-authors disagree.


While acknowledging that masking may “marginally reduce the risk of transmission” between health care workers and patients (and vice versa), the authors argue that this potential benefit is outweighed by the barriers to communication masking brings to interactions with patients.


According to the specialists, “masking impedes communication, a barrier that is distributed unequally across patient populations,” such as those for whom English is not their first language as well as those who are hard of hearing due to age or other causes.


“The increase in listening effort required when masks are used in clinical encounters is associated with increased cognitive load for patients and clinicians,” the authors contend, citing several studies to support their argument. “Masks obscure facial expression; contribute to feelings of isolation; and negatively impact human connection, trust, and perception of empathy.”


The authors go on to question other pandemic-era strategies, including asymptomatic testing and resource-intensive contact tracing, “which similarly have experienced a shift in their risk-benefit balance over the course of the pandemic.”


A controversial meta-analysis from the highly regarded research institution, The Cochrane Library, published in March found “no clear difference” between masked and unmasked health care workers in preventing transmission of the flu, nor any clear difference in results using N95 masks versus other masks.


According to Sherri Tenpenny, an osteopathic medical doctor who founded the Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center in Ohio, “Masks didn’t protect people from getting sick during the pandemic and they certainly should not be used now. More than 150 comparative studies and articles have been published that show mask ineffectiveness and document how masks harm the health of persons who wear them.”


She went on to tell The Epoch Times in an email that “masking policies for everyone, including health care professionals, should be eliminated because they are not an ‘effective infection prevention strategy.’”


“They don’t prevent infection or transmission,” she said. “They are a belief system, and beliefs are difficult to change. If a person chooses to wear a mask for ‘political correctness’ or as a sign of  ‘social signaling,’ it is even more difficult for them to stop. They will cling to the lie that masks are of value, even when they are shown a mountain of evidence to the contrary.”


The CDC continues to cite mask wearing along with other measures such as social distancing and school closures as contributing to the dramatic drop in influenza rates during the pandemic.



DIRTY SHOTS: Researchers raise concerns about high levels of bacterial DNA found in mRNA COVID vaccines

09May2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

Coronavirus or sars-cov-2 virus cell with messenger RNA or mRNA and syringe on blue background 3D rendering illustration with copy space. Vaccination or vaccine, immunity, pandemic, science, medicine, medical technology concept.

Coronavirus or sars-cov-2 virus cell with messenger RNA or mRNA and syringe on blue background 3D rendering illustration with copy space. Vaccination or vaccine, immunity, pandemic, science, medicine, medical technology concept.

(Natural News) Researchers have raised concerns about the “alarmingly high” concentrations of bacterial DNA in the mRNA Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.


Dr. Kevin McKernan, a leading expert in sequencing methods for DNA and RNA, first shined a light on this issue. Canadian physician and medical researcher Dr. Mark Trozzi expounded on McKernan’s findings in an interview with the New American.


He told the magazine’s senior editor Veronika Kyrylenko that any traces of bacterial plasmids, including that from the Escherichia coli bacteria, should have been filtered out in the final batches of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. However, Trozzi pointed out that this filtration wasn’t done.


He emphasized that the contamination risks integrating bacterial plasmid DNA into E. coli bacteria entering the intestinal microbiome. This could result in ongoing spike protein production, triggering autoimmune reactions in the vaccinated and raising concerns about the potential shedding of the spike protein when breathing.


The highly persistent bacterial plasmids may explain why vaccinated individuals produce the spike protein for prolonged periods. The spike protein has been demonstrated to be a potent toxin associated with various conditions, including chronic inflammation, autoimmune-like responses and blood clotting. Additionally, the integration of bacterial DNA with human chromosomes can alter genetic information and potentially lead to malignant diseases.


“We’re at the crime scene and there’s hope for accountability,” Trozzi told Kyrylenko during his interview.


Spike protein reprograms immune system in a strange way

The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein – particularly the one in Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine – reprograms adaptive and innate immune responses as it penetrates the blood-brain barrier and cell nucleus, according to the Daily Expose. The spike protein even affects DNA replication, added the outlet.


“The worst part of this is that COVID-19 infection usually goes away in a week,” the Expose wrote. “But spike production in [the vaccinated] continues for 60 days, exposing [them] to much more spike protein damage.”


Moreover, new evidence suggests that the immune system response of vaccinated individuals may not be as broad and effective as previously thought.


Surveillance data from the U.K. Health Security Agency indicates that individuals vaccinated and subsequently infected with COVID-19 have lower levels of N antibodies produced against the virus’s nucleocapsid protein. This lack of N antibodies may leave vaccinated individuals vulnerable to any mutations of the COVID-19 virus that occur in the future.


In contrast, unvaccinated individuals contracting COVID-19 and recovering from it can produce both S and N antibodies, which may provide better immunity to mutations.


America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) issued two warnings about the COVID-19 shot.


“First, these vaccines’ mis-train the immune system to recognize only a small part of the virus [the spike protein]. Variants that differ, even slightly, in this protein can escape the narrow spectrum of antibodies created by the vaccines,” AFLDS noted. “Second, the vaccines create ‘vaccine addicts,’ meaning persons become dependent upon regular booster shots because they have been ‘vaccinated’ only against a tiny portion of a mutating virus.”


Visit for more stories about the “dirty” COVID-19 vaccines.

Watch the Health Ranger Mike Adams and Dr. Peter McCullough explain how the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine bioweapons turn the body into a walking spike protein factory.

The #Mrna ‘Vaccine’ Is A Bioweapon! It Literally Turns Your Body Into A Spike Protein Production Factory.The Spike Protein Is A Neurotoxin.It Binds To Ace2 Receptors, Crosses The Bbb Critical Thin

This video is from the Perfect Society channel on

More related stories:

New study: mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause brain diseases.

Large Nordic study finds that mRNA covid “vaccines” increase risk of myocarditis.

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny: mRNA COVID vaccines increase hospitalization and death rates – Brighteon.TV.

Study finds 29% of teenagers develop heart problems following second dose of Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

Cancer “hijacks” your cells and turns your body against itself, just like mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.

Sources include:



People are losing their teeth and dentists say the cause could be covid “vaccines”

26April2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

(Natural News) Ever since Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” were unleashed through Operation Warp Speed, there has been a sharp uptick in the number of patients suffering from mysterious and severe symptoms associated with their teeth and bones.


Dr. Amy Hartsfield, an Alabama-based orofacial pain and dental sleep medicine specialist, says she has seen a massive increase in patients as of late who say their otherwise healthy teeth and jaw bones are hurting and even deteriorating for no apparent reason.


“I’ve seen patients with no previous history of health issues [who] have perfectly healthy teeth and now have pain syndromes associated with these healthy teeth,” Hartsfield told the independent media.


Many of Hartsfield’s patients are suffering with head and facial neurovascular and myofascial pain that includes headaches, toothaches unrelated to the actual tooth or teeth, osteonecrosis of the jaw, sleeping problems, tinnitus, and oral and facial autoimmune conditions. Such conditions are linked to the propensity of Fauci Flu shots to cause “micro” blood clots throughout the body, Hartsfield explained.

(Related: Covid vaccines are also linked to baldness.)

Covid jabs are causing a lot of destruction to people’s bodies, eventually leading to early death

One such person who started suffering severe bone loss after getting injected with Moderna’s mRNA injection is 79-year-old Cheryl Alverson, who had to have all of her lower teeth extracted due to a massive recurring infection caused by extensive, post-injection bone loss.


Alverson went to see Hartsfield, who ordered multiple blood tests, including several specifically associated with blood clotting. They showed that Alverson’s body had become overloaded with microclots from the shots.


Hartsfield discovered that these microclots directly interfere with bone healing following extractions, not to mention the fact that they typically only occur in patients who are taking osteoporosis medication or who underwent radiation therapy, neither of which applied in Alverson’s case.


The only thing Alverson did prior to developing these symptoms was take the Moderna mRNA series of injections for covid, as well as a follow-up booster shot. And almost immediately afterwards, her bone and teeth problems began.


Dr. Doug Denson, another Alabama-based oral surgeon, says he is seeing much the same thing with his patients, many of whom he is now referring to Hartsfield for treatment. Denson says he is not 100 percent sure covid jabs are the cause behind his patients’ troubles, though there does seem to be a connection.


“In my opinion, correlation does not always equal causation … again, there have been some odd symptoms since the pandemic started,” he said. “It’s just impossible to tell the exact mechanism or cause.”


Hartsfield has had to start screening her patients for their vaccine status due to the onslaught of new patients she is seeing who are suffering from teeth and bone problems post-injection.


“I have to screen these people to see if they’ve been vaccinated, when and how many times, and then I see if I can treat them,” she said, adding that most practitioners do not screen for covid shots.


“When you ask the whole population to have a mandatory vaccine that has more side effects than any other vaccines in history showing in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, you will definitely see injuries.”


In the comments, someone emphasized the fact that so-called SARS-CoV-2 has still never been isolated or proven to exist. The disease is the “vaccine,” this person argued, adding that lockdowns, mask mandates, job losses, and social isolation only made matters worse.


“Another monumental scam, from the fake PCR test to wearing disgusting face diapers that lower your oxygen uptake and increase carbon dioxide inhalation from your own breath, which increases bacteria growth in the mouth.”

Covid jabs are a death sentence. To learn more, visit

Sources for this article include:


Biden Administration Announces End to Federal COVID Vaccine Mandates

Remember the COVID-19 Lie “Flattening the curve”

Flattening the curve was a public health strategy to slow down the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. The curve being flattened is the epidemic curve, a visual representation of the number of infected people needing health care over time

Flattening the curve was a public health strategy to slow down the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. The curve being flattened is the epidemic curve, a visual representation of the number of infected people needing health care over time


15 Days Finally Ends After 1,141 Days

by Tyler Durden, 04May2023 –

Via The Brownstone Institute,

On Monday, the White House announced its Covid-19 vaccine requirements for federal employees, federal contractors, and international air travelers will expire on May 11, coinciding with the end of the Covid public health emergency. The 15 Days to Flatten the Curve that began on March 16, 2020, stretched to 1,141 days. 


Nautical sundial compass with a zodiac sign celestial globe

Nautical sundial compass with a zodiac sign celestial globe

In some ways, the repeal is a victory against the irrational tyranny behind the vaccine mandates that have been part of the entire lockdown paradigm. Americans no longer have to choose between taking an experimental, ineffective medical product and keeping their job. We no longer have to endure the irrationality of enforcing vaccine mandates for air travelers but not for illegal immigrants at our southern border. We no longer have to listen to the tyrannical paternalism behind forcing people to receive a shot that they don’t want while insisting that it is saving their lives.


At the same time, however, it is far from a victory; we have returned to what should be the normal state, and we already witnessed the suffering that the mandates incurred. Millions of people were forced to choose between the truth of their convictions and earning a living. Others lost years of visiting loved ones in foreign countries. The people who implemented this Hell remain in power, and they appear unremorseful.

The Biden Administration did not admit error in its policies; instead, it took great pride in its two years of forced jabs.

“Our COVID-19 vaccine requirements bolstered vaccination across the nation, and our broader vaccination campaign has saved millions of lives,” the White House boasted.

“While vaccination remains one of the most important tools in advancing the health and safety of employees and promoting the efficiency of workplaces, we are now in a different phase of our response when these measures are no longer necessary.”

There is no solid evidence for any of those claims. And substantial policy questions remain. Since March 2020, Covid served as the basis for political initiatives far beyond the realm of public health. It was used as the justification for eviction moratoriums, travel restrictions, domestic-capacity restrictions, closures, mask mandates, and student debt relief. Considering the future requires an understanding of the Biden White House’s mandate regime.

The History of the Mandates

Beginning in July 2021, President Biden issued a series of Covid vaccine mandates.

In September 2021, he announced, “Next, I will sign an executive order that will now require all executive branch federal employees to be vaccinated — all. And I’ve signed another executive order that will require federal contractors to do the same. If you want to work with the federal government and do business with us, get vaccinated.” He then announced that the Department of Labor would require all employers with 100 or more workers to get vaccinated.


“We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin,” he scolded unvaccinated Americans. “Your refusal has cost all of us.” 


The following month, Biden banned international air travelers from entering the United States without proof of receiving the Covid shots. Visitors remained able to enter the country testing positive for the virus so long as they had agreed to the President’s mandatory injection program.


But President Biden’s disappointment in his citizens did not convince the American public of the righteousness of his crusade. In the ensuing months, the shots’ lack of efficacy became readily apparent, and Americans were reluctant to get their “boosters.”


Biden did not relent, however. He publicly scolded Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers for not getting the shots and insisted that there was a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” going into 2022.


In August 2022, the White House faced backlash when tennis superstar Novak Djokovic was unable to participate in the U.S. Open because of the ban on unvaccinated international air travelers. The strict enforcement did not apply to illegal immigrants crossing the southern border. A reporter asked the White House to explain this enforcement discrepancy later that month.


“How come migrants are allowed to come into this country unvaccinated but world-class tennis players are not?” asked Fox’s Peter Doocy.


White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre struggled to articulate an explanation.

“So as far — you know, just to — just since you asked about me — about him — you asked me about him. So, visa records are confidential under U.S. law. Therefore, the U.S. government cannot discuss the details of individual visa cases. Due to privacy reasons, the U.S. government also does not comment on medical information of individual travelers,” she stammered as she avoided the question.


She then told Doocy that the issue comparison between illegals crossing the border and international air travelers was unfounded because “they’re two different things.”


Djokovic reentered headlines in March 2023 when he was unable to participate in a Florida tournament because of the ongoing travel ban. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called on Biden to lift the restriction. When asked about the ban stemming from the President’s ban, Ms. Jean-Pierre deflected blame to the CDC, telling the press, “They’re the ones who deal with that. [The ban’s] still in place, and we expect everyone to abide by our country’s rule, whether as a participant or a spectator.”


Djokovic was unable to play in the tournament, but momentum against the Biden regime’s edicts gained steam. Later that month, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction blocking President Biden’s mandate for federal employees to receive the Covid jabs.


In April, President Biden signed a law that ended the Covid national emergency in a bill introduced by Rep. Paul Gosar. The bill passed the House in a 229-197 vote and the Senate in a 68-23 vote. 

 What happens now

A number of other pandemic-era policies will also end on May 11, including Title 42, which allows Border Patrol to immediately send illegal immigrants at the southern border back to Mexico. Texas Governor Greg Abbott expects up to 13,000 illegal immigrants to cross the US-Mexico border every day after the expiration.


This may exacerbate the ongoing crisis at the border. In the last 10 days alone, over 73,000 migrants have crossed the southern border as Title 42 comes closer to expiration. Border Patrol announced that in that time it stopped 19 sex offenders, six gang members, and a convicted murderer from entering the United States. Additionally, Border Patrol seized 19 pounds of heroin, 54 pounds of fentanyl, 1,052 pounds of meth, 676 pounds of cocaine, and 823 pounds of marijuana.


There are more issues at stake than immigration. The Supreme Court is considering whether the White House’s order to cancel student debt was constitutional. The Biden White House has defended its actions by claiming that the Heroes Act of 2003 allows the US Education Secretary to change federal student loan programs during national emergencies such as the Covid pandemic. Going forward, the White House will have to adopt new rationales for future executive actions related to student debt.


On the legal front, employment law firm Jackson Lewis reports that there are over 2,000 existing challenges to Covid 19 vaccine mandates in the courts right now, and over 35 percent involve public employers. Challenges to the federal mandates may now be moot, meaning courts will dismiss the cases because the mandates are no longer in effect. Plaintiffs will be able to return to work without adhering to the White House’s vaccine requirements, but there will also be no accountability for those in charge.


These days and for many months and years following, all the people involved in the pandemic response – not only government officials but media mouthpieces and Big Tech accomplices – will be rewriting history and hoping that everyone will forget the real history.


They are trying to avoid accountability and save whatever vestiges of despotism that they can, while hoping to institutionalize the powers that made all of this possible.

They cannot be allowed to win this struggle for essential rights, liberties, and truth. 



“Like A Bomb Went Off”: Pfizer Plant In North Carolina Destroyed By Tornado

by Tyler Durden, 20July2023 –


Dramatic footage posted on Twitter shows the aftermath of a tornado that ripped through a massive Pfizer pharmaceutical plant in North Carolina on Wednesday, scattering “50,000 pallets of medicine” across the property.


Pfizer told local media outlet ABC 11 that a twister damaged its Rocky Mount manufacturing space that sits on 250 acres in Eastern North Carolina.

“We are assessing the situation to determine the impact on production.

“Our thoughts are with our colleagues, our patients, and the community as we rebuild from this weather incident,” the company said.


According to the company’s website, the Rocky Mount plant is “one of the largest sterile injectable facilities in the world.” Here’s a list of medical devices produced at the plant:

At this facility, a wide range of products are produced, including anesthesia, analgesia, therapeutics, anti-infectives and neuromuscular blockers. These products are available in small volume presentations, such as ampules, vials and syringes, and large volume presentations, such as IV bags and semi-rigid bottles.

One Pfizer employee told ABC 11 that the twister wreaked havoc on the facility for 60 to 90 seconds. He said the tornado sounded “like a bomb went off.”

Footage of the damaged plant was posted on Twitter.


Wall Street Silver-tweet-19July2023-Pfizer building destroyed by a tornado in North Carolina

Wall Street Silver-tweet-19July2023-Pfizer building destroyed by a tornado in North Carolina

There’s no word if products related to sterile injectables will be in short supply.




Comprehensive study: There are ZERO Amish kids suffering from cancer, diabetes or autism – WHY IS THAT?

07July2023 // S.D. Wells

See: Groundbreaking Study Shows Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier Than Vaccinated Children

The current population of Amish folks in America is quickly approaching 400,000, with the largest concentrations of 90,000 in Pennsylvania and 82,000 in Ohio. Amish have settled in as many as 32 US states, and have an average of 7 kids per family, so the population is growing rapidly. In a brand new, comprehensive study (as of June 2023), presented by Steve Kirsch to the Pennsylvania State Senate, it was calculated that for Amish children, who are strictly 100 percent not vaccinated (fully unvaccinated), typical chronic conditions barely exist, if any at all.


These chronic conditions, also called preventable diseases and disorders, that nearly many vaccinated children and swaths of Americans suffer from, include auto-immune disease, heart disease, diabetes, asthma, ADHD, arthritis, cancer, and of course… wait for it… autism (think ASD and Asperger’s Syndrome).


Expert panelists testified how healthy Amish children are compared to vaccinated American children

Maybe scaring people off vaccines is a good thing, for all those pro-jab-fanatics who think every natural health advocate is a “conspiracy theorist” who spreads disease and disorder by talking about dirty vaccines, vaccine injuries and vaccine-induced deaths. During testimony, expert health advocates shared WHY there’s never been any reports published regarding the health of Amish children in general, saying “After decades of studying the Amish, there’s no report because the report would be devastating to the narrative. It would show that the CDC has been harming the public for decades and saying nothing and burying all the data.”


Dr. Peter McCullough, a top cardiologist in America, with mountains of peer-reviewed, published work, testified before the U.S. Senate and before legislatures throughout the U.S., regarding dangers of vaccines, including the COVID-19 gene-mutating jabs. Speaking of the pandemic, the Amish did NOT lock down, they did NOT put on bacteria-breeding masks, and they most certainly did NOT “vaccinate” for the Wuhan Lab Flu. They ignored every single CDC and Fauci-propagandized mandate and protocol, including the deadly clot shots (because they knew better than to get injected with millions of toxic, sticky spike proteins and graphite nanoparticles).


Guess what happened? The Amish had a survival rate of COVID 90 times higher than the rest of America. Nobody wants to talk about this, except natural health advocates. If you post anything about it on social media, you immediately get banned, blacklisted and labeled “misinformation” or “disinformation.”


Why is it so important to AVOID vaccines like the plague? Just take a look at all the insane ingredients used in vaccines, including preservatives, emulsifiers, adjuvants, genetically modified bacteria, mutated viruses and sterility-causing chemicals. This is all listed right out in the open. No human should ever have any of this injected into their blood and muscle tissue, bypassing the normal defensive shields of the body, including the skin, lungs and digestive tract.


These toxic, sometimes lethal ingredients include mercury (high doses in the multi-dose flu jab), human blood (albumin from abortions), deadly pig viruses called circovirus (in Rotateq Rotavirus jabs), eagle blood, dog blood, infected green monkey kidney cells, sucralose, monosodium glutamate (MSG), cow blood, chicken blood, eggs, dairy, antibiotics, peanut oil (yes, residuals remain, hence all the deathly peanut allergies), latex (from the stoppers on the needles and vials that the needles penetrate), aluminum and much more.


Bookmark to your favorite independent websites for updates on experimental gene therapy injections that lead directly to vascular clots, hypertension, myocarditis, pericarditis, heart attacks, strokes and death.


Sources for this article include:



Developed Nations Requiring the Most Infant Vaccines Linked With Higher Childhood Mortality Rates: Study

Megan Redshaw, J.D.
4August 2023

See: Groundbreaking Study Shows Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier Than Vaccinated Children

Highly developed nations requiring the most neonatal vaccine doses tend to have the worst mortality rates in children under age 5, according to a peer-reviewed study published July 20 in Cureus.


Researchers Neil Miller, director of the Institute of Medical and Scientific Inquiry in New Mexico, and Gary Goldman, who has a doctorate in computer science, performed several analyses based on 2019 and 2021 data to explore potential relationships between the number of early childhood vaccinations required by developed nations and their neonatal, infant, and under age 5 mortality rates.


According to global health experts, few measures in public health can compare with the impact of vaccines, which are credited with having reduced disease, disability, and death from a variety of infectious diseases. Yet the study found that developed nations requiring more neonatal vaccinations may have unintended consequences that increase childhood mortality, challenging the idea that more vaccines administered always results in fewer deaths.


“Our paper investigated potential associations between the number of early childhood vaccine doses that developed nations require and their early childhood mortality rates,” Mr. Miller told The Epoch Times in an email. “For example, some nations administer hepatitis B and tuberculosis (BCG) vaccines to their infants shortly after birth. We found that nations that require both vaccines had significantly worse infant mortality rates when compared to nations that require neither vaccine.”


Miller and Goldman’s research initially began in 2011 when they published a paper using 2009 data showing less favorable infant mortality rates among highly developed nations requiring the most infant vaccinations.


The recent study replicated their original study using 2019 and 2021 data from the top 50 nations where childhood vaccine doses range from 12 to 26.  Results showed the infant mortality rate increased by 0.167 deaths per 1,000 live births for each additional vaccine dose added to the vaccination schedule, supporting the earlier study’s findings.


Twenty-nine nations in 2009 had better infant mortality rates than the United States, but by 2019, the United States had declined to 44th in infant mortality rankings, and in 2021, ranked 50th—despite requiring the highest number of infant vaccines.

Hepatitis B and Tuberculosis Vaccination May Increase Mortality

In their latest study, Miller and Goldman broadened their research to assess the impact of hepatitis and tuberculosis vaccines on mortality rates of neonatal infants (babies under 28 days old), infants up to age 1, and children under 5. Mortality data and vaccination schedules were compiled from UNICEF, the World Health Organization, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and national governments.


Nations were then grouped based on whether they required zero, one, or two vaccine doses given to newborns to determine their statistical significance to mortality rates of the three age groups. The association demonstrated by the analysis showed neonatal vaccines for hepatitis B and tuberculosis may not contribute to an overall reduction in mortality in nations where infants are at low risk of mortality from diseases the vaccines are targeting. In these nations, infants may actually experience greater risks from vaccination.

Reduction in Infant Vaccine Doses Decreased Mortality

Using 2021 data, the researchers found a statistically significant difference of 1.28 deaths per 1000 live births between the mean infant mortality rates among nations that did not vaccinate their neonates at all and those that required two vaccine doses. For each reduction of six vaccine doses administered during infancy, the infant mortality rate improved by approximately one death per 1,000 live births.


Additionally, vaccines administered during the first year of life had a greater effect on under age 5 mortality rates compared with vaccines administered in the second through fifth years of life, suggesting younger infants who generally weigh less and receive more vaccines in a shorter period are significantly more likely to experience an adverse reaction resulting in hospitalization or death.


“Hepatitis B and tuberculosis vaccines given shortly after birth when the immune system is immature and the neonate has low weight, may increase vulnerability to serious adverse reactions and deaths that ultimately contribute to higher neonatal, infant, and under age five mortality rates,” Mr. Miller told The Epoch Times.

Vaccination Sequence and Combination Can Impact Mortality

In most nations, more than half of infant deaths occur during the neonatal period, with about 75 percent of neonatal deaths occurring during the first week of life when neonatal vaccines are administered, according to Mr. Miller. Deaths that occur during this period have a large impact on neonatal, infant, and under age 5 mortality rates.


The study states the U.S. neonatal mortality rate comprises 61 percent of its infant mortality rate and 52 percent of the mortality rate in children under age 5.


But Miller said doctors, coroners, and other medical examiners are “compelled to misclassify and conceal vaccine-related fatalities” because alternate cause-of-death classifications associated with infant vaccination do not exist.


In addition, vaccines have “non-specific effects” that can increase or decrease mortality from infectious diseases not targeted by the vaccine. “Some deaths associated with neonatal vaccines may be delayed, possibly through some priming mechanism or cumulative toxicity that increases the risk of a severe or fatal reaction to subsequently administered vaccines,” Mr. Miller added.


For example, a 2017 study published in EBioMedicine found a twofold increase in all-cause infant mortality after diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and oral polio vaccines were introduced in Guinea-Bissau. Survival rates of infants who received the DTP vaccine without oral polio vaccine compared with non-DTP vaccinated children were worse.


The sequence of vaccinations can also affect all-cause mortality, according to a 2018 study published in Vaccine, showing girls who received a pentavalent vaccine (five vaccines in one) after receiving a measles vaccine were five times more likely to die from all causes within six months of follow-up compared to girls who followed the recommended schedule. The authors also stated, “It is assumed that providing missing vaccine doses will always leave the child better off than not providing them. This may be wrong.”


According to Mr. Miller and Mr. Goldman, 17 of 18 analyses confirm that giving more vaccine doses results in higher infant and early childhood mortality rates in developed nations. They’re calling for vaccine policymakers to determine the full effect of the current vaccination schedule on deaths from any cause and for safety research into the number of recommended childhood vaccines and how they’re administered to confirm they are positively impacting child survival.



Time to process the last three years


I am still taking the rest of this week off.

But, I wanted to just post up this ‘Timeline’ of key events from the Covid 19 plandemic in Israel, that occurred over the last 3-4 years.


Because none of us has really stopped to process what it is we really went through, what was done to us, what really happened.

And so, there are still a whole bunch of ‘yucky’ feelings hanging out, deep within, that haven’t yet been acknowledged, dealt with – and released.

So, take some time this week to read this, maybe print it out, and just let the ‘feelings’ float up, as they will.

In the process of putting it together, I felt tremendous anger, sadness and also not a little despair.

That wasn’t so fun – but then, I could at least catch hold of all that, and finally ‘let it go’.

That’s the key here.




  • February 9, 2020: Rav Berland is arrested in a brutal dawn raid.
  • February 21, 2020: First case of COVID 19 diagnosed in Israel, when a passenger from the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship tests positive in Sheba Medical Center. First 14-day ‘self-isolation quarantine’ (bidud) introduced for any travellers returning from Japan or South Korea.
  • March 2, 2020: ‘COVID’ elections held in Israel. Netanyahu fails to get a mandate to govern, starts pushing a ‘National Unity Government’ with him as PM. Is quoted as saying: “unlike the holocaust, this time – this time, we identified the danger in time,” saying that the National Unity Government headed by him is needed: “like before the Six-Day War,” to “save the country.”
  • March 3, 2020: 12 more people ‘test positive’ for COVID 19. The first school in Israel – 1,150 students plus teachers – are forced to stay home for a two week ‘quarantine’.
  • March 9, 2020: PM Netanyahu announces a mandatory 14-day bidud for anyone entering Israel.
  • March 10, 2020: Israel limits gatherings to 2,000 people.
  • March 11, 2020: Israel limits gatherings to 100 people.
  • March 14, 2020: The Health Ministry announces more restrictions banning gatherings greater than 10 people, closing all schools, day-care facilities, malls, restaurants, hotels, gyms, pools, attractions, zoos, mikvas, hairdressers and wedding halls. Weddings are limited to 10 participants. Only supermarkets, pharmacies, take-out food and, of course ‘government’ is allowed to remain open. Public transportation is severely curtailed. Netanyahu tells Israel’s citizens they need to “adopt a new way of life.”
  • March 15: Justice Minister Amir Ohana freezes all ‘non-urgent’ court activity, resulting in Netanyahu’s corruption trial being postponed.
  • March 17: The Israeli government approves the contact-tracing program, “making Israel the only country in the world to use its internal security agency (Shin Bet) to track citizens’ geolocation.”
  • March 18: Israelis are encouraged to ‘clap for the nurses and doctors’ at 6pm, from their balconies.
  • March 19: Netanyahu declares a National State of Emergency, making COVID 19 restrictions legally enforceable by fining offenders. Israelis go into full lockdown and are banned from leaving their homes unless absolutely necessary. Meanwhile, the contact tracing program is challenged at the Supreme Court by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel , leading to its being suspended on April 26, 2020. Hundreds of protesters gather at the Knesset to demonstrate about government over-reach and dictatorial Covid 19 restrictions. Police make many arrests.
  • March 22: Police violently close down the Carmel Market in Tel Aviv, and the Mahane Yehuda Market in Jerusalem. Panic buying is rife, there are long queues for toilet roll and eggs. Transport Ministry starts spying on citizens’ COVID 19 status via their RavKav.
  • March 25,2020: The government imposes even more restrictions on Israeli citizens, including stopping people from venturing further than 100 m from their homes, limiting the number of people in a car to a maximum of two, and setting up ‘temperature testing’ equipment all over the country. Anyone violating the new restrictions is fined 5,000 shekels.
  • April 1, 2020: The government bans praying with a minyan, all public gatherings, and restricts people to walking outside with a maximum of just one other person from their own household. They also outlaw the public burning of chametz just ahead of Pesach.
  • April 2, 2020: The whole of Bnei Brak is declared a ‘restricted zone’ and the area is closed to incoming and outgoing traffic.
  • April 8, 2020: The government imposes a three-day total lockdown on the whole country to coincide with Pesach, banning family members from spending Seder together. Later, it’s discovered that several prominent politicians, including Netanyahu, Reuben Rivlin and Nir Birkat, still celebrated Seder with their own families, sparking outrage.
  • April 12, 2020: The government tells Israelis they have to cover their mouth and nose whenever they leave home and increases the propaganda around the necessity of ‘social distancing’. They also close the haredi neighborhoods of Jerusalem, prompting concerns that they are using the coronavirus to settle scores with the religious community.
  • May 3, 2020: Schools reopen but only first to third grade, and 11th to 12th grade. Class size is strictly limited, and the schoolchildren are required to wear face masks all day.
  • May 4, 2020: Some restrictions are eased, 100m limit is removed, weddings of up to 50 people are allowed.
  • May 19, 2020: All schools reopen, but with strict ‘social distancing’ rules of 2 m, and requirements that children need to be ‘temperature tested’ each day before they attend school.
  • July 1, 2020: Government re-imposes ‘contact tracing’, orders 30,000 Israelis into bidud (isolation).
  • July 6, 2020: Social distancing restrictions re-imposed. Gathering restricted to 20 people, including on buses, synagogues limited to 19 worshippers.
  • July 24, 2020: ‘Weekend lockdowns’ begin from 5pm Friday to 5am Sunday, beaches and gyms closed.
  • August 31, 2020: Coronavirus cabinet approves the ‘traffic light’ of Prof. Ronni Gamzu – who later successfully closes down that year’s gathering in Uman.
  • September 13, 2020, the government approves a 3-week country-wide lockdown, timed to coincide with the High Holy Days. People are forced to pray either in ‘rotas’ of 10 people at a time inside, or a maximum of 20 people outside.
  • September 26, 2020: Netanyahu announces the closure of Ben Gurion Airport – and all synagogues for the High Holiday prayers. The Lockdown is extended another week to October 19, 2020.
  • Nov 1 – 27, 2020: Restrictions eased.
  • December 20, 2020: Government introduces ‘coronavirus hotels’.
  • December 27, 2020: Third national lockdown imposed, to coincide with Chanuka. Government makes it illegal to visit another person’s home.
  • January 7, 2021: Lockdown restrictions are made even harsher. All schools are closed, all non-essential travel is banned, gatherings limited to just five people. During the third lockdown, many Israeli citizens get the ‘Covid 19 vaccinations’, manufactured by Pfizer.
  • February 7 – March 7, 2021: Restrictions are gradually eased – for vaccinated individuals.
  • February 21, 2021: Israel introduces ‘Green Pass’ apartheid. People without a ‘Green Pass’ are still banned from synagogues, tourist attractions and restaurants, among many other things.
  • April 18, 2021: Israel lifts the requirement to wear facemasks all the time when outside.
  • April 20, 2021: Schools finally re-open in-person, but students (and everyone else…) are still required to wear facemasks inside.
  • June 1, 2021: Green Pass requirements lifted, but PCR tests still required to attend school or travel abroad.
  • June 25, 2021: Masks are re-instated for inside, Green Pass requirements re-instated for any events or weddings over 100 people.
  • July 29, 2021: Third ‘booster’ shot approved, Israel starts vaccinating 12+ year olds.
  • August 8, 2021: More restrictions approved, including showing ‘proof of vaccination’.
  • October 10, 2021: Israel adopts the ‘Green Classroom’ policy, forcing all classmates of a corona-positive student to also get tested. Parents and children routinely spend hours a day queuing for PCR tests.
  • November 10, 2021: Covid vaccinations for children 5-12 are approved in Israel.
  • December 15, 2021: Rav Berland is finally released from prison, albeit under a number of continuing restrictions.
  • January 2, 2022: Israel approves 4th booster. Uptake is very small, with most Israelis becoming increasingly wary about the ‘safety and efficacy’ of the Covid shots.
  • February 7, 2022: Green Pass or ‘negative PCR tests’ are finally dropped in Israel, together with the requirement to wear masks inside.


We went into ‘coronavirus prison’ a week after the Rav was arrested, and we finally got out a few weeks after he was released.



Should a Real Expert Debate or Not?

Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Peter Hotez in file photos. (Lisa Lake/Getty Images for SiriusXM; John Mone/AP Photo)

Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dr. Peter Hotez in file photos. (Lisa Lake/Getty Images for SiriusXM; John Mone/AP Photo)

By Jeffrey A. Tucker
June 23, 2023 Updated: June 24, 2023
Emphasis by


This morning I read the 10th of probably 100s of articles pleading with vaccine cheerleader Professor Peter Hotez not to debate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. He would never do this because he would be crushed.

He would never do this because he would be crushed.

There really isn’t any doubt about that.

The only question is whether anything would be gained for quality science at all by the outcome. Our side says yes and their side says no.

Our times have taught us this with certainty: the Hotez camp (which includes all the three-letter agencies plus the whole of the pharma industry plus the media) want an information lockdown. They have one message: take your meds. It doesn’t amount to much more than that.


RFK Jr., on the other hand, has some serious questions about adverse effects, the combinations of meds we are taking, and the conflicts of interest that are everywhere in this sector. He has spent decades studying and litigating them. He also has grave questions about the relationship between gain-of-function research and the bioweapons industry in the United States and around the world.


Hotez says that he would not debate these issues for fear that giving RFK Jr. a platform would elevate his views and grant them the legitimacy that they do not deserve. He says he prefers to write for the journals and engage only with peers.


But as Tucker Carlson’s new episode points out, Hotez is not some ivory-tower researcher/doctor. He has spent three years appearing on every mainstream venue that he trusts, which are the same ones that Fauci appeared on. They have created an information bubble for themselves. They want to live in it forever.


It’s true that it is not a good tactic for any public figure to engage with people with a fraction of their own reach. Patrick Buchanan once told me that a key rule in these fights is “never shoot down.” That is usually true. You risk amplifying your critics when in fact hardly anyone has heard of them.


But at this point, it is very likely the case that RFK Jr. has a larger reach and influence than Hotez. Hotez is already losing and losing badly. He would not be shooting down. One could argue that RFK Jr. indeed has more to lose from a debate than Hotez, so why would he do it? He would do it for one simple reason: he has a passion for facts, truth, and justice.


Even more importantly, RFK Jr. has worked hard to become an authentic expert on the topic of pharmaceuticals and the industry backing them.


A great feature of becoming a real expert in a field of study is that you can encounter any setting in which the topic is being discussed and engage with calm confidence.


Real experts invite more information and challenges, even direct debate, because doing so satisfies that deep curiosity that led them to be experts in the first place.

They welcome it!

A real expert is voracious for engagement with others on the topic.

A real expert wants to test his views against his opponent, just as great athletes and artists welcome performance and competition.

It inspires them to achieve excellence in the field that inspires them the most.


I would never claim to be an expert in the interaction of infectious disease and policy but I’ve studied the topic incessantly over the last few years. This week, I’m at Porcfest where the topic has come up constantly and there are a variety of opinions out there. It’s super exciting to hear a number of different perspectives because it gives me a chance to test my own conclusions. I desperately want this because I need to know if my conclusions are correct or can otherwise be improved.


At the Brownstone tent, we’ve been running an open mic. Two nights ago, one speaker got up to celebrate his vaccination and personal COVID avoidance strategies. I could feel the room start to get a bit angry so I took the mic and congratulated the man for speaking.


Then I started asking him questions. Why did he feel the need to “socially distance” following the taking of the vaccine if he is so sure that it worked? What does it mean to him that the vaccine did work? Is it possible that he kept getting sick with COVID precisely because of the repeated use of the vaccine?


The whole time I spoke with calm and sympathy. My interlocutor did the same. Within a few minutes, this nice man admitted that he had no real idea what he was saying and could not make sense of his actions and views. He further said that if he could do it over, he would never have taken a shot because now he worries about what it might have done to him.


This was not a debate but rather a discussion. I was genuinely curious about this man’s views and he was interested in mine. I gained some insight and empathy into another’s person’s plight and he into mine. We were better off as a result. This is the best form of “debate:” a mature and calm exchange of contrary views.


I’ve become suspicious of people who believe that their best strategy for winning an argument is to interrupt, shout, spit, fling clever rhetoric at ever higher decimal levels, and hurl insults. These people are also good at yelling out technical details in great rapidity so that they cannot be checked in real time. These habits don’t prove that the person is a fraud but they certainly raise suspicions.


A person with a real command of facts, theories, and real experience can patiently listen to contrary views and answer them with calm reason. There is no grounds to interrupt. On the contrary, all such a person needs is a bit of quiet and some willingness to listen. That person will win the debate against the most belligerent opponent.


There’s something else fascinating about the Hotez refusal. It suggests that he doesn’t really trust the intelligence of the listeners. He figures that people are too stupid to figure out fact from fiction and so therefore the only correct path is to endlessly repeat his exhortations to comply with his latest declarations.


In this way, fake experts are often condescending, arrogant, pushy, [NARCISSISTIC] and hortatory. Maybe you have had a boss or a friend like this. You have probably learned to stay away from such people. Indeed, with power, they can become dangerous.


In contrast, watch any interview or speech of RFK Jr. He is reasoned, fact-filled, curious, a natural educator, calm, and unfailingly kind to his critics. I saw it the other day when he pointed to a New York Times journalist in the audience. The audience started to boo but he quieted people down and said she is a very nice person with real abilities. This is how he is: he is even kind to those who have smeared him the hardest. He is not infallible and admits it. He wants to improve his understanding. This is the difference between real and fake experts.


The best book I’ve seen on the problem of fake expertise is that of Thomas Harrington: “The Treason of the Experts.” Here he discusses a deeper problem that afflicts many people in academia and government. They have been granted credentials. They deploy these credentials—which may or may not signify expertise—as weapons. They dismiss every view but their own.


Hotez is hardly alone in this. He is an archetype of an entire army of the credentialled who cheered as masses of people were robbed of their rights and liberties over these three years. Now they are on the hot seat. They cannot stand it. They don’t believe that anyone has the right to judge them. But he cannot stop the trajectory of public opinion, which is turning ferociously against them. They are losing. And they cannot stand it.


Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.



Dr. Peter Hotez’s Funding Linked To Controversial Chinese Military Scientists At Wuhan Lab

by Tyler Durden, 29June2023 –

Authored by Kanekoa The Great via Kanekoa News (emphasis ours),

Funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s R01AI098775 grant, Dr. Shibo Jiang and Dr. Lanying Du collaborated with scientists from the People’s Liberation Army and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Peter Hotez - Dr. Shibo Jiang - Wuhan Institute of Virology

Dr. Peter Hotez – Dr. Shibo Jiang – Wuhan Institute of Virology


In a groundbreaking revelation, it has come to light that Dr. Peter Hotez, an esteemed vaccine researcher, has been entangled in a web of funding, collaboration, and research with Chinese military scientists potentially involved in the development of COVID-19. The intricate tale weaves together key Chinese military virologists and culminates in the smoking gun evidence surrounding COVID-19’s notorious furin cleavage site.


At the center of this narrative lies Dr. Hotez, a distinguished professor at Baylor College of Medicine, who secured a substantial research grant (R01AI098775) from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) led by Dr. Anthony Fauci. This grant, amounting to over $1 million per year, supports Dr. Hotez’s project titled “RBD Recombinant Protein-Based SARS Vaccine for Biodefense,” with Dr. Shibo Jiang listed as a Principal Investigator.


Dr. Shibo Jiang, a professor at Fudan University, boasts an impressive academic background. After completing his Master’s degree from the People’s Liberation Army’s Guangzhou First Military Medical University (广州第一军医大学) and his Medical Doctor degree from Xi’an Fourth Military Medical University (西安第四军医大学微), he pursued postdoctoral training at Rockefeller University in New York from 1987 to 1990.

Dr. Shibo Jiang, a professor at Fudan University

Dr. Shibo Jiang, a professor at Fudan University

Source: Fudan University

RBD recombinant protein-based SARS vaccine for biodense

RBD recombinant protein-based SARS vaccine for biodense

Source: National Institute of Health

Subsequently, he held various positions at the New York Blood Center’s Lindsley F. Kimball Research Institute until 2010, including Head of the Viral Immunology Laboratory. Since then, he has served as a professor at Fudan University’s Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Virology in Shanghai, China.


During his time in the United States, Dr. Shibo Jiang also acted as a visiting professor at several prestigious People’s Liberation Army (PLA) universities, including the First and Fourth Military Medical University, the Academy of Military Medical Sciences (AMMS), and Southern Medical University (formerly known as the First Military Medical University). Despite his collaboration with the Chinese military, he received research grants totaling over $20 million from NIAID under Dr. Fauci’s leadership between 1997 and 2016.


Professor Jiang, a member of China’s renowned Thousand Talents Plan, actively collaborated with PLA scientists on numerous scientific papers supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the First Military Medical University, and the AMMS. However, concerns have been raised regarding the nature of these collaborations, as a 2020 FBI report indicates that such talent recruitment plans “usually involve undisclosed and illegal transfers of information, technology, or intellectual property detrimental to U.S. institutions.”

Professor Shibo Jiang obtained his Master’s and Medical Doctor degrees from the People’s Liberation Army's Guangzhou First Military Medical University

Professor Shibo Jiang obtained his Master’s and Medical Doctor degrees from the People’s Liberation Army’s Guangzhou First Military Medical University

Professor Shibo Jiang obtained his Master’s and Medical Doctor degrees from the People’s Liberation Army’s Guangzhou First Military Medical University (广州第一军医大学) and the Xi’an Fourth Military Medical University (西安第四军医大学微).

Together with Dr. Zhou Yusen, a distinguished PLA virologist and fellow AMMS alumnus, Professor Jiang co-invented multiple U.S. patents and published numerous scientific papers on SARS and MERS coronaviruses, often with the support of NIAID funds. Dr. Yusen, the former director of the PLA’s AMMS Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity at the Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, filed the world’s first patent application for a COVID-19 vaccine in China on February 24, 2020, just a month after the country acknowledged human-to-human transmission.


KanekoaTheGreat-tweet-27June2023-Why do five publications funded by Dr. Peter Hotez's R01AI098775 grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen as a co-author?

KanekoaTheGreat-tweet-27June2023-Why do five publications funded by Dr. Peter Hotez’s R01AI098775 grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen as a co-author?

This discovery raises suspicions that the Chinese military may have been working on a vaccine even before officially notifying the World Health Organization about the outbreak.

Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer, filed the world’s first patent application for a COVID-19 vaccine in China on February 24, 2020. The patent application listed Dr. Yusen as the lead inventor and was submitted by the PLA’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences.

Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer, filed the world’s first patent application for a COVID-19 vaccine in China on February 24, 2020. The patent application listed Dr. Yusen as the lead inventor and was submitted by the PLA’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences.


The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences

The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences

The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences which was taken offline in 2017. Source: PLA’s AMMS via Internet Archive


The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences-2

The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences-2

Source: PLA’s AMMS via Internet Archive


The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences-3

The archived website of the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences-3

Source: PLA’s AMMS via Internet Archive


Interestingly, concerns surrounding the origins of the COVID-19 virus intensify when examining the furin cleavage site. Dr. Richard Ebright, a respected molecular biologist, and laboratory director, highlights the unique nature of the furin cleavage, stating that:

“SARS-CoV-2 is the only member of the SARS-related betacoronavirus group that contains a furin cleavage site. The SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site exhibits unusual codon usage, and the SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site is located at a position that previously has been used to engineer coronaviruses having enhanced infectivity.”

Further compounding the intrigue, Dr. David Baltimore, a renowned US virologist and co-discoverer of reverse transcriptase, expresses his belief that the furin cleavage indicates a laboratory origin for the virus, stating, “When I first saw the furin cleavage site in the viral sequence, with its arginine codons, I said to my wife it was the smoking gun for the origin of the virus.”


With an esteemed career, a Nobel Prize, and extensive scientific expertise, Dr. Baltimore’s observations carry significant weight. Of additional concern is Professor Jiang’s expertise in inserting furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses.


inserting furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses

inserting furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses

Phylogenetic tree of coronavirus spike protein sequences. A) Noting genera of coronavirus. B) Subtree of Betacoronavirus, noting subgenera. Sarbecovirus (e.g., SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV), Merbecovirus (e.g., MERS-CoV), Embecovirus (e.g., human coronavirus OC43 and human coronavirus HKU1, both causing common cold), and two small subgenera Hibecovirus and Nobecovirus. Source: Journal of Stem Cell Research


The furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2

The furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2

The furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 in the region of the S1/S2 junction is unique among sarbecoviruses. Source: National Academy of Sciences


Moreover, Professor Jiang and Dr. Lanying Du, another prominent Chinese virologist funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s R01AI098775 grant, have collaborated on various scientific papers with the PLA’s AMMS and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The untimely death of Dr. Yusen, who fell from the roof of the Wuhan Institute of Virology within three months of filing the patent, further fuels suspicions surrounding the origins of COVID-19.


Dr. Du, the widow of Dr. Yusen, published at the PLA’s AMMS before migrating to the United States, where she joined Professor Jiang at the New York Blood Center’s Lindsley F. Kimball Research Institute. Remarkably, a U.S. Senate report reveals that the data referenced in Dr. Yusen’s patent could not have been generated as quickly as claimed, suggesting that he and his team may have started developing a COVID vaccine as early as November 2019.


Furthermore, at least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer central to the COVID-19 origin controversy at the Wuhan lab, as a co-author. These findings raise concerns about the connections between Dr. Fauci, Dr. Hotez, Dr. Jiang, Dr. Du, Dr. Yusen, and the Chinese military scientists potentially involved in the origin of COVID-19.


At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez's grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer

Source: Journal of Virology


At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez's grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-2

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-2

Source: Journal of Virology


At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez's grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-3

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-3

Source: Journal of Nature Communication


At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez's grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-4

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-4

Source: Journal of Science China

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez's grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-5

At least five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, a People’s Liberation Army officer-5

Five publications funded by Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez’s R01AI098775 grant list Dr. Zhou Yusen, the People’s Liberation Army officer that filed the world’s first COVID-19 vaccine patent for the Chinese military, as a co-author. Dr. Yusen was reportedly thrown off the roof of the Wuhan lab three months after filing the patent. Source: National Institute of Health


Additionally, both Professor Jiang and Dr. Du have published scientific research for the AMMS, which was added to the U.S. government’s Foreign Entity Blacklist in 2021 due to its use of “biotechnology processes to support Chinese military end uses.” Dr. Hotez’s involvement in this complex situation becomes evident when examining his subcontracted funding for these scientists connected to the People’s Liberation Army and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, particularly in the field of artificially inserting furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses.


During a February 2021 interview, Dr. Hotez discussed their collaboration, stating, “About ten years ago, we got approached by a group at the New York Blood Center led by Shibo Jiang and Lanying Du that had a pretty good idea for coronavirus vaccines.


Before migrating to the U.S. and receiving funding from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez, Dr. Lanying Du co-published research on SARS-coronaviruses

Before migrating to the U.S. and receiving funding from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez, Dr. Lanying Du co-published research on SARS-coronaviruses

Before migrating to the U.S. and receiving funding from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez, Dr. Lanying Du co-published research on SARS-coronaviruses with Dr. Shibo Jiang and Dr. Zhou Yusen for the People’s Liberation Army’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences. Source: Journal of Vaccine


Notably, in 2013, Professor Jiang and Dr. Du, along with their Chinese military colleagues, demonstrated the artificial insertion of a furin cleavage site similar to the one found in the COVID-19 virus. This study was funded by the Chinese government and a private Chinese biotech company, while Professor Jiang and Dr. Lanying also received funding from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Hotez.


Simultaneous Expression of Displayed and Secreted Antibokies for Antibody Screen

Simultaneous Expression of Displayed and Secreted Antibokies for Antibody Screen

Source: Public Library of Science

A study published by Dr. Shibo Jiang, Dr. Lanying Du, Dr. Shi Zhengli, and Dr. Ralph Baric, an American scientist considered a pioneer in gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, demonstrated the introduction of a human protease cleavage site into the spike protein of coronaviruses, enabling cross-species transmission to humans. Notably, this aligns precisely with the furin cleavage site found in the S1/S2 junction of SARS-CoV-2.


Two Mutations Were Critical for Bat-to Human Transmission of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus

Two Mutations Were Critical for Bat-to Human Transmission of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus

Source: Journal of Virology


While Dr. Hotez criticizes congressional hearings on the origins of COVID-19, stating that they are “inviting fringe elements to testify and promote outlandish conspiracy theories,” even warning that investigation will “undermine the fabric of science in America,” it is crucial to examine the mounting connections between Dr. Hotez, Dr. Fauci, Dr. Jiang, Dr. Du, and Dr. Yusen with Chinese military scientists, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the suspicious furin cleavage site. This evidence demands a thorough investigation to uncover the truth about the origins of the COVID-19 virus, a truth that holds profound implications for people worldwide.


The 8th International Symposium on Emerging Viral Diseases hosted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology

The 8th International Symposium on Emerging Viral Diseases hosted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology

Professor Shibo Jiang with Dr. Zhengli Shi, Dr. Ralph Baric, and Dr. Peter Daszak at the 8th International Symposium on Emerging Viral Diseases hosted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Source: WIV</em.


Lanying Du, Zhou Yusen, Shibo Jiang, Peter Hotez, Anthony Fauci

Lanying Du, Zhou Yusen, Shibo Jiang, Peter Hotez, Anthony Fauci


Source: Lawrence Sellin Substack



CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

CDC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention headquarters in Atlanta

CDC Officials Make False Statements About Possible COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects

By Zachary Stieber April 26, 2023 Updated: April 26, 2023

Officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have made multiple false statements this month regarding possible COVID-19 vaccine side effects, continuing a trend of mis- and disinformation from the public health agency.


Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a top CDC official, recently repeated the lie that the agency has never detected a safety signal for ischemic stroke for the old COVID-19 vaccines.


“No safety signals were detected for ischemic stroke for primary series or monovalent boosters for Pfizer or Moderna vaccines in U.S. and global monitoring,” Shimabukuro told the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a CDC advisory panel, on April 19.


CDC researchers identified ischemic stroke as a safety signal for the original Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, according to files obtained by The Epoch Times. More recently obtained documents show that the CDC detected the signal as early as May 6, 2022.


The CDC acknowledged in official documents that any adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination that meet certain criteria constitute “a safety signal.”


Shimabukuro, who also made the false claim during a meeting in February, hasn’t responded to requests by The Epoch Times for comment.


A CDC spokesperson previously doubled down on the claim, saying Shimabukuro was correct.

Ischemic stroke happens when the brain fails to get enough blood, according to the Mayo Clinic. It causes brain cells to die within minutes and often leads to death.


Another unnamed CDC official falsely told NBC that the agency hasn’t found data “suggesting a link between COVID-19 vaccines and tinnitus,” or ringing in the ears.


The CDC identified tinnitus as a safety signal in its analysis of possible signals in data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), according to the files obtained by The Epoch Times.


Bert Kelly, a CDC spokesman, told The Epoch Times in an email: “To date, we have no data to support tinnitus and its link to COVID-19 infection or vaccination.”


After becoming aware of reports made to the adverse event system of tinnitus after COVID-19 vaccination, the CDC analyzed data from a different surveillance system called the Vaccine Safety Datalink. CDC researchers didn’t identify any “clustering of tinnitus diagnoses” in the datalink system in the 70 days after COVID-19 vaccination, according to Kelly.


He didn’t make the data available.

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, noted that there have been more than 24,000 reports of tinnitus submitted to VAERS after COVID-19 vaccination.


“There is mounting evidence in the medical literature that tinnitus involves inflammation in the brain,” Fisher said, pointing to several studies. “CDC officials should be taking the tinnitus signal seriously and actively pursuing every available avenue of research to find out what is going on rather than doing everything they can to quickly dismiss the reported risk for developing chronic ringing in the ears after COVID shots.”


Tinnitus is listed as a potential side effect of Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine, and regulators in some countries list the condition as a potential adverse event following AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine. Moderna and Pfizer haven’t been formally linked with tinnitus, although some research has found a statistically significant increase in tinnitus following COVID-19 vaccination, which researchers said “[suggests] an association between the COVID-19 vaccines” and tinnitus.


One sufferer recently told The Epoch Times that she has a dull ringing in her ears that started an hour after receiving a dose of the Pfizer vaccine. Another said she suffered hearing loss after getting a COVID-19 vaccine.

Another Official Gives False Information

The CDC stated that it would analyze VAERS data through a data mining technique called Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR). The agency later falsely stated that the mining wasn’t in the agency’s purview before changing its tune and saying it had actually started running PRRs in February 2021.


Dr. John Su, head of the CDC’s VAERS team, provided the new dates in a statement to The Epoch Times.

Su has since acknowledged that the date was incorrect. The CDC now says it actually didn’t start the PRRs until March 2022 and stopped before the year ended.


Newly obtained emails show that Su was told by a colleague that the CDC wasn’t running PRRs between February 2021 and September 2021 but still gave the false information.


“We were not running any PRRs during this time,” Paige Marquez, a CDC employee, told Su and others in a June 2, 2022, email.

A month later, Su conveyed the false information to a CDC spokesperson, who relayed it to The Epoch Times.

“We’ve been performing PRRs since [February] 2021 and continue to do [so] to date,” he claimed.

Su didn’t respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

He also gave the false information in August 2022 to a colleague, Jeremy Goodman, before Marquez stepped in, the newly obtained messages show.

“I stand corrected: we did not conduct PRR analysis during the specified period,” Su wrote in one email.

The CDC has stated that none of its workers intentionally gave false information about PRRs.



Most Infected in COVID Outbreak at CDC Conference Were Vaccinated, Agency Confirms

Zachary Stieber
29May2023 Updated: 29May2023


A COVID-19 outbreak unfolded at a conference held by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) despite most attendees being vaccinated.


About 1,800 CDC staffers and others gathered in April in a hotel in Atlanta, where the CDC is headquartered, for a conference focused on epidemiological investigations and strategies.


On April 27, the last day of the conference, several people notified organizers that they had tested positive for COVID-19. The CDC and the Georgia Department of Public Health worked together to survey attendees to try to figure out how many people had tested positive.


“The goals were to learn more about transmission that occurred and add to our understanding as we transition to the next phase of COVID-19 surveillance and response,” the CDC said in a May 26 statement.


Approximately 80 percent of attendees filled out the survey. Among those, 181 said they tested positive for COVID-19.


Pretty much all respondents—99.4 percent—had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose.


The number of unvaccinated people who got sick, if any, was not disclosed. Officials also did not break down the vaccinated between those who had received a dose of the updated bivalent vaccines and those who had not. The CDC has not responded to requests for more information.


About 360 people did not respond to the survey, so the actual outbreak may have been larger.


Dr. Eric Topol, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, said on Twitter that the numbers made the conference a “superspreader event.”


Dr. Tom Inglesby, director of the Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, added that the outbreak shows COVID-19 is “still capable of causing big outbreaks and infecting many.”


A Georgia Department of Public Health spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email that many people who attended the conference were not residents of Georgia, and that many used tests at home.

Bivalent Protection

The CDC said the survey results “underline the importance of vaccination for protecting individuals against severe illness and death related to COVID-19” because none of the people who said they tested positive reported going to a hospital.


No clinical trial efficacy data are available for the bivalent shots, even though they were first cleared nine months ago. They provide little protection against infection, according to observational data, though officials maintain they protect against severe illness. That protection is short-lived, according to studies, including non-peer-reviewed CDC publications.


The most recent publication, released on May 26, showed poor effectiveness against hospitalization from the Pfizer and Moderna bivalent COVID-19 vaccines, which replaced the old vaccines earlier this year.


Among adults without “documented immunocompromising conditions,” the protection was 62 percent between seven and 59 days but went to 47 percent before plunging to just 24 percent after 120 days.


Among adults with “documented immunocompromising conditions,” the effectiveness peaked at just 41 percent, hitting 13 percent after 120 days.


Researchers did not provide the effectiveness estimates among all adults, or the combined population of those with and without “documented immunocompromising conditions.” They also did not provide the unadjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates, or estimates before adjusting for certain variables.


“Both the crude VE and adjusted VE should be reported so that big discrepancies are evident to the reader and questioned,” David Wiseman, founder and president of Synechion, told The Epoch Times via email.


Effective against critical illness—defined as admission to intensive care, or death—peaked at 85 among the people deemed immunocompetent, but plunged to 33 percent after 120 days. Among those described as immunocompromised, the effectiveness was not estimated above 53 percent.


Effectiveness was not measured beyond 180 days.


Effectiveness for children was not examined as part of the research.


CDC researchers looked at data from its VISION Network, a network of hospitals in the United States. Exclusions included people under 50 who received four or more old vaccine boosters.


Just 23.5 percent of the immunocompetent and 16.4 percent of the immunocompromised were vaccinated, while the rest had received at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine.


About 8 percent of American adults are still unvaccinated, according to CDC data, though that percentage may be a big overestimate (pdf).


Researchers said the data showed that bivalent doses “helped provide protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization and critical disease” adding that “waning of protection was evidence in some groups.”



BIOWEAPONS FACTORIES: New study finds that the fully vaccinated are shedding mRNA and spike proteins onto the unvaccinated

19January2023 // Ethan Huff //

Coronavirus or sars-cov-2 virus cell with messenger RNA or mRNA and syringe on blue background 3D rendering illustration with copy space. Vaccination or vaccine, immunity, pandemic, science, medicine, medical technology concept.

Coronavirus or sars-cov-2 virus cell with messenger RNA or mRNA and syringe on blue background 3D rendering illustration with copy space. Vaccination or vaccine, immunity, pandemic, science, medicine, medical technology concept.

It is entirely possible, according to the findings of a recent study, that those who are fully vaccinated for covid shed messenger RNA (mRNA) and spike proteins onto others, including the unvaccinated.

Click to download PDF file Click to Download the Study Current state of knowledge on the excretion of mRNA and spike produced by anti-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines; possibility of contamination of the entourage of those vaccinated by these products

This is the perspective held by Dr. Peter McCullough, an outspoken opponent of covid jabs who cites a paper published by French pharmacologist Dr. Helene Banoun in the medical journal Infectious Diseases Research, as evidence of this.


The un-injected can contract covid jab ingredients via bodily fluids such as saliva, sweat, and sexual contact, Dr. Banoun found. Pfizer’s own clinical trials reveal much the same, suggesting that covid jab ingredients can pass “through inhalation or skin contact,” as well as “through semen from a man … and passage through breast milk.”


(Related: Check out this episode of the Health Ranger Report on Natural News Radio to learn more about how pine needle tea, suramin, and shikimic acid can help to mitigate any potential damage caused by covid jab shedding.)


Covid vaccines are a BIOWEAPON developed more than a decade before Operation Warp Speed

We now know, based on Dr. McCullough’s extensive research into the matter, that the mRNA technology used in the covid injections taken by most of the now-vaccinated population was developed by none other than the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) as far back as 2011 – a decade before the covid scamdemic appeared.


Based on this, it would surmise that testing was taking place on these injections long before Donald “father of the vaccine” Trump launched Operation Warp Speed. Trump bragged, as you may recall, about getting his injections which he has repeatedly taken credit for, developed, tested, and thrust onto the market at warp speed.


It turns out that covid injections were a long time in the making, rendering Trump’s claims a lie. The shots are a bioweapon that was more than likely intentionally developed in such a way as to spread itself to the unvaccinated via shedding.


“Sadly, these careful development steps were skipped from the beginning in our military-style vaccine development program, and now the public is grappling with the issue of nucleic acid and Spike protein shedding as a potential concern among those who have worked so hard to remain healthy and free of COVID-19 vaccination,” Dr. McCullough writes on his blog.


“The pivotal questions are: 1) For how long is a recently vaccinated person at risk to shed on to others? 2) Can mRNA be taken up by the recipient and begin to produce Spike protein just like vaccination? 3) Can shed Spike protein cause disease as it does in the vaccinated (e.g., myocarditis, blood clots, etc.)?”


Based on all that is now known about these injections, including their bioweapon ingredients, many, including Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), are calling for their immediate removal from the market. Dr. McCullough also wants them halted immediately for public safety, having spoken at a recent roundtable event hosted by Sen. Johnson.


“The pathway to prevent any more harm is that all the vaccines need to be pulled off the market, withdrawn. That needs to happen immediately,” Dr. McCullough is quoted as saying.


“All the vaccine mandates should be dropped immediately. We need requests for applications and immediate funding for vaccine injury treatment centers of excellence across the United States. What’s at stake here is death.”


You can read through Dr. Banoun’s study for yourself to see what Dr. McCullough, Sen. Johnson, and others are seeing that is prompting them to call for covid vaccination to end immediately.


Want to learn more about the dangers and ineffectiveness of covid injections? Be sure to check out


Sources for this article include:



mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Should Be Labeled Gene Therapy Products: Peer-Reviewed Paper

Megan Redshaw,   30June2023


Now that the pandemic has ended, researchers are urging regulatory agencies to consider the safety issues associated with the rapid approval of COVID-19 vaccines—and to correctly classify messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines as gene therapy products (GTPs) to prevent pharmaceutical companies from bypassing regulatory standards.

Click to download PDF file  Click to Download the Paper mRNA: Vaccine or Gene Therapy? The Safety Regulatory Issues

According to a paper published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences on June 22, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, by mode and action, are gene therapy products and should adhere to different regulatory standards. Yet U.S. and European regulatory agencies have not classified COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as gene therapy products, which has allowed them to be regulated as vaccines against infectious diseases instead of being subjected to the more stringent regulation of GTPs.


Because current regulatory guidelines either do not apply, do not mention RNA therapeutics, or do not have a widely accepted definition for these products, regulatory agencies adopted a modified and accelerated approval process for COVID-19 vaccines in the form of a “rolling review.”


A rolling review is a regulatory tool typically used during a public health emergency to speed up the assessment of data for medicines or vaccines. It allows data to be reviewed as it becomes available—without the complete data package or specific controls.


This process led to broad and continuous biodistribution of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines that were not thoroughly studied and yielded tests with noncompliant results regarding purity, quality, and batch homogeneity. Manufacturers are now planning to replace classic vaccines with mRNA vaccines using the same process—starting with influenza vaccines.


Vaccines With mRNA Technology Are Gene Therapies

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention currently defines a “vaccine” as a preparation used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. However, the agency’s definition was changed in 2021 out of concern it didn’t apply to COVID-19 vaccines.


A vaccine must contain an antigen to trigger the body’s natural immune response. Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines do not contain antigens. The active substance used to elicit an immune response in these vaccines is the mRNA—a form of nucleic acid and the genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that provides instructions to the body for producing antigens—spike proteins.


In other words, the mRNA is not the substance causing active immunization. Instead, the mRNA must be translated into protein by the cells of the person vaccinated, and that person’s immune system must produce its own antigens to trigger an immune response.


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that gene therapy seeks to “modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or to alter the biological properties of living cells for therapeutic use.” Moderna’s Q2 2020 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission acknowledged that mRNA is “considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.” In addition, BioNTech founder Ugur Sahin, in a 2014 article stated, “One would expect the classification of an mRNA drug to be a biologic, gene therapy, or somatic cell therapy.”


According to the FDA, mRNA vaccines are comparable to the TypeIA of prodrugs—substances that, after administration, are converted in the body into pharmacologically active drugs.


This “prodrug property” could suggest that additional controls should be applied in addition to those required for vaccines. However, neither the FDA nor the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have referenced these qualifications for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.


“With a conventional vaccine, you have the antigen, and you inject it into a person, and that is the thing that your immune system looks at and says, ‘ah ha,’ we need to make antibodies, T-cells, and other immune system components to what’s being injected,” said Dr. David Wiseman, a research scientist with a background in pharmacy, pharmacology, and experimental pathology, in an interview with The Epoch Times.


“The prime reaction of an mRNA vaccine is that it instructs the body how to make the antigen of interest. So, it’s similar to a prodrug, which is converted inside the body via metabolism and enzymes into the desired drug effect. The substance you’re injecting isn’t doing the final action; it leads to the thing that does the final action. With a prodrug, the molecule you inject does not get changed into the final molecule of the antigen, it simply provides instructions because it’s gene therapy.”


Wiseman said the FDA and EMA guidance and regulations that discuss gene therapy all define gene therapies “more or less” the same way. However, a number of years ago, the FDA decided to exclude vaccines for infectious diseases from its various guidance for unknown reasons, including vaccines made from gene therapy technology. Vaccines, in essence, were given their “own set of rules.”


However, the FDA can “change or exclude whatever they want from regulatory guidance, but it doesn’t change the biologic definition of the product,” said Wiseman. “Since Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines meet the definition of gene therapy, they should be handled according to gene therapy guidelines.”


mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Bypassed Essential Studies

According to the paper, because mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were not classified as gene therapy, necessary tests required for GTPs were not performed for the following:

  • Genotoxicity.
  • Genome integration.
  • Germ-line transmission.
  • Insertional mutagenesis.
  • Tumorigenicity.
  • Embryo/fetal and perinatal toxicity.
  • Long-term expression.
  • Repeated toxicity.
  • Excretion in the environment, such as shedding through seminal fluid or breast milk.

“The long-term safety monitoring of GTPs is required over several years whereas, for vaccines, it is generally only carried out over a few weeks,” wrote Dr. Helene Banoun with the French Institute of Health and Medical Research in the paper. “This should not be acceptable, given the persistence of the drug product and the expressed protein.”


In addition, known results of anti-cancer therapies that use gene therapy technology and mRNA vaccines could lead us to anticipate safety and efficacy problems, she added.


In the EU, gene therapy medicinal products are required to undergo “tests or trials to evaluate the risk of genome integration and germ-line transmission, even if this integration is unlikely,” and tests and clinical trials to evaluate the risk of “insertional mutagenesis, tumorigenicity, embryo/fetal and perinatal toxicity, and long-term expression.”


EMA requires “extensive studies on both the nucleic acid and the vector particle/delivery system that includes biodistribution, dose study, potential target toxicity, the identification of the target organ to obtain biological activity, toxicity linked to the expression of structurally altered proteins.”


It is necessary to insist pharmacokinetic studies be performed to determine how the body interacts with the administered substance during the entire duration of exposure—even though they are generally not required for vaccines unless there’s a new formulation or a vaccine contains novel adjuvants or excipients (inactive substances such as preservatives).


For GTPs, shedding studies are also needed to determine excretion and dissemination in the body, and biodistribution studies are needed to assess where injected compounds—such as lipid nanoparticles, the delivery system used to deliver mRNA—travel in the body and which tissues or organs they accumulate in.


After assessing Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine documents obtained by attorney Aaron Siri through the Freedom of Information Act, Wiseman noted many studies listed in nonclinical summaries that should have been performed but were not.


“Several studies should have been done but weren’t done because they fell under the auspices of vaccines. But if you read the guidelines, it doesn’t say these studies are unnecessary, just that circumstances may deem them unnecessary,” Wiseman said. “We need laws for products that say you can’t just exclude them from regulations because you feel like it—because they are still gene therapies,” he said.”We are hijacking the machines of our bodies to produce spike proteins in an uncontrolled, undefined way—there are too many things we don’t know about.”




FDA Approved 65 Percent of New Drugs in 2022 Based on a Single Study

FEATURED Research & Discoveries
Megan Redshaw, J.D.

FDA Drug Approval

FDA Drug Approval


The 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act), signed into law in December 2016, was created to help accelerate medical product development and “bring new innovations and advances” to patients quicker and more efficiently. Yet some researchers suggest the law is being used to bypass the once rigorous and evidenced-based standards for new drug approvals, allowing novel drugs to flood the market without adequate data and public transparency.


According to a research letter published on August 8 in the Journal of the American Medical Association Network Open (JAMA), 24 of the 37 drugs approved in 2022 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were based on a single study, with only four drugs having more than three studies to support their approval.


“I’m not surprised,” David Gortler, a pharmacologist, pharmacist, and FDA reform advocate at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, told The Epoch Times in an email. As a former senior advisor to the FDA commissioner, Mr. Gortler said he saw the agency grant expedited approval to a medication called aducanumab—used to treat Alzheimer’s disease “based on zero positive studies.”


“They did the same with other monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer’s disease,” Mr. Gortler said.

According to the research letter, most of the 413 studies evaluating the 37 drugs approved in 2022 were sponsored by the industry—meaning they were manufactured, funded, and analyzed by the company producing the product, seeking FDA approval, and standing to benefit financially from the drug.


Of the studies available for analysis, only 25 percent of study results have been made publicly available, with the results of six percent of those studies published after the FDA had already approved the drug for use.


Furthermore, researchers found that only 55 percent of studies evaluating drugs in 2022 consisted of randomized clinical trials—the “gold standard” of evidence-based medicine—despite the FDA justifying most approvals based on randomized clinical trial data.


For comparison, only 20 percent of medical products in 2016 were approved based on a single study, and 55 percent were approved based on three or more studies, whereas 65 percent of drugs in 2022 were approved based on a single study, with only 11 percent having three or more studies.


“We believe consumers deserve access to the full range of evidence for the drugs they are considering, not just from the selected studies released to the public,” the authors wrote.


The researchers say their results “highlight a trend toward less rigorous standards for novel drug approvals that has evolved over the past few decades” and are consistent with other reports showing a widespread decrease in the number of trials used for drug approvals.


“The authors point to the deterioration of the quality and rigor of the regulatory review and approval of new drugs over time,” Sasha Latypova told The Epoch Times in an email. Ms. Latypova is a retired pharmaceutical industry executive with 25 years of experience in pharmaceutical research and development and co-founder of several organizations that work with pharmaceutical companies to design, execute, collect data, and submit clinical trial data to the FDA.


Ms. Latypova says this trend began with a “fast track” designation implemented in 1988 that increased the number of special regulatory programs available by the FDA and decreased the evidentiary requirements for approval. In the 2000s, Ms. Latypova said many blockbuster drugs became generic medicines, which started a “patent cliff” where industry investments began to focus on narrower niches in an effort to get patent exclusivity—which is more profitable for a pharmaceutical company.


“For example, approvals receiving an ‘orphan’ designation or what is considered rare disease increased to over 50% percent,” Ms. Latypova said. “These products are sometimes approved on as little as a single observational study with fewer than 20 subjects, however, once approved, the drug’s price increased one million to three million dollars per treatment and was fully covered by the taxpayer and private insurance—driving the costs of premiums.”


Thus, the “regulatory requirements are minimal, but the profits are outsized,” she added.


FDA Cures Act Made It Easier for Pharma and Regulatory Agencies to Cut Corners

The FDA, on its website, states the intent of the Cures Act (pdf) passed by Congress in December 2016  was to “incorporate the perspectives of patients into the development of drugs, biological products, and devices in FDA’s decision-making process” and enhance its ability to “modernize clinical trial designs,” including the use of “real world evidence” to speed up the development and review of novel medical products, including emergency and preparedness response countermeasures used to justify rapid authorization of COVID-19 vaccines.


Allowing the FDA to consider real-world evidence instead of randomized trials previously required under its strict methodological standards used to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a drug relaxed requirements for pharmaceutical companies and opened the door for bias.


The Cures Act gave new authority to the FDA to “recruit and retain scientific, technical, and professional experts and it establishes new expedited product development programs” and directed the agency to create one or more intercenter institutes to assist with coordination of activities between the drug, biologics, and device centers to improve the regulation of combination products.


The 312-page Act provided $500 million U.S. tax dollars to help the FDA implement the law over nine years and provided $6.3 billion in funding, mainly to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a major funder of American universities and research institutions.


According to the National Center for Health Research (NCHR), the Cures Act dramatically benefits pharmaceutical and medical device companies, lowers the standards for drugs and devices, and makes it difficult for patients and physicians to decide whether to try a new treatment without knowing if it is safe or effective. This may explain why the Act was originated and promoted by major pharmaceutical companies, universities, and other organizations that hired more than 1,455 lobbyists to advance the bill.


The NCHR says the bill has had the following effects:

  • Allowed anecdotal, unreliable, and easily manipulated health data to be used to approve new drugs.
  • Allowed pharmaceutical and device companies to bypass public reporting requirements related to funding and gifts provided to physicians.
  • Weakened patient safety by lowering the evidentiary standards required to prove a new drug or medical device is safe and effective.
  • Allowed companies to disseminate potentially inaccurate scientific information not evaluated as part of the FDA approval process, opening the door for widespread use of drugs and treatments not FDA-approved.
  • Reduced the FDA’s authority to regulate electronic health records systems and other medical software, which, if defective, can lead to deaths and permanent harm.
  • Encourages smaller and shorter-term studies that are less likely to measure product safety and effectiveness for excluded parts of the population who may rely on them.

FDA Is Not Enforcing Reporting Requirements for Clinical Trials

Problems with clinical trial reporting go back to a law passed in 2007 requiring companies, universities, and other institutions to publish most clinical trial data in a federal database so that doctors and patients can determine whether a new product is safe or effective, according to a Science analysis. After trial sponsors failed to follow the law, the NIH and FDA attempted in 2017 to enact a final rule explaining the requirements and penalties for failing to disclose clinical trial results. Yet many sponsors ignored the requirements, and federal officials have done “little or nothing” to enforce the law.


The analysis of more than 4,700 clinical trials that should have been published on the NIH database under the 2017 rule showed improved compliance rates of most large pharmaceutical companies and some universities. Yet the performance of many other sponsors, including the NIH, was “lackluster.” is an online registry of clinical trials run by the National Library of Medicine at NIH, where researchers, doctors, and patients are supposed to be able to see data on trial outcomes from peer-reviewed publications and can compare results across trials. Yet according to the analysis, thousands of trials are never published, especially when treatments are shown to be ineffective.


The Science analysis showed roughly 67 percent of studies from 30 of the 184 sponsor organizations with at least five trials failed to report any results on, reinforcing the 2022 data published in the JAMA research letter.


Perhaps even more concerning is that these organizations consisting of pharmaceutical companies, universities, and medical centers failed to meet a single deadline. Those considered “habitual violators” didn’t report results in 67 percent of their trials and were an average of 268 days late disclosing data past their original deadlines.


These institutions included Harvard University, the University of Minnesota, and Baylor College of Medicine—leading recipients of NIH grants in 2019. Researchers found that The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and Mayo Clinic both failed to report results on time, or at all, in nearly two-thirds of their clinical trials. Yale University did not report results in 84 percent of its trials.


The NIH is tasked with reporting results when they sponsor studies done by agency staff or certain grantees, and the top four NIH institute sponsors reported results late or not at all in more than six of every ten trials assessed by Science. In addition, the Science analysis found the sponsors violated the reporting law more than 55 percent of the time and identified hundreds of cases where sponsors were credited for reporting results where the results themselves were not publically posted.


Despite the 2017 rule promising “aggressive enforcement and stiff penalties,” the NIH and FDA have not penalized sponsors who have not followed the requirements. The FDA in 2019 said it would not enforce penalties of up to $12,103 a day for failing to report a trial’s results until the agency issues further guidance on how it will exercise its power.

The FDA and NIH did not respond to requests for comment at the time of press.



The government’s sprawling effort to censor (true) information during the pandemic

27April2023 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

(Natural News) The Twitter Files exposed a lot of malfeasance, but one effort spearheaded by Stanford University and federal agencies was particularly Orwellian in both concept and practice.

(Article by Jon Miltimore republished from

In July 2022, Twitter permanently suspended Rhode Island physician Andrew Bostom after awarding the epidemiologist and longtime researcher at Brown University a fifth strike for spreading “misinformation.”


A July 26 tweet alleging that there was no solid evidence Covid-19 vaccines had prevented any children from being hospitalized—”only RCT data we have from children reveals ZERO hospitalizations prevented by vaccination vs. placebo”—was apparently the final straw.


The funny thing was, it appeared Bostom’s tweet was true.

Dr. Anish Koka, a cardiologist and writer, said he was initially skeptical of Bostom’s claim. But after speaking with him for more than an hour, he realized Bostom was citing the government’s own data, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) briefing document that included randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on children.


“…Dr. Bostom’s tweet appears quite correct as per the FDA documents,” Koka wrote on Substack. “In the RCTs available, there does not appear to be evidence that the vaccine prevented hospitalizations.”

‘They Veered From CDC Guidance’

Bostom’s permanent suspension was one of many anecdotes shared by journalist David Zweig in a December Twitter Files thread viewed by more than 64 million people, which exposed how the government worked with Twitter to try to “rig the Covid debate.”


It turns out this was not the only one of Bostom’s tweets that was true but was nevertheless flagged for “misinformation.”

“A review of Twitter log files revealed that an internal audit, conducted after Bostom’s attorney contacted Twitter, found that only 1 of Bostom’s 5 violations were valid,” Zweig notes. “The one Bostom tweet found to still be in violation cited data that was legitimate but inconvenient to the public health establishment’s narrative about the risks of flu versus Covid in children.”


In other words, all five of Bostom’s tweets that had been flagged as “misinformation” were legitimate. At the very least, four-out-of-five were, and that’s according to Twitter’s own internal audit.


How this happened was partially explored by Zweig, who explained Twitter’s convoluted censorship process, which relied heavily on bots, contractors in foreign countries who lacked the expertise to make informed decisions, and Twitter brass who carried their own biases and incentives. This structure led to a predictable result.


“In my review of internal files,” writes Zweig, “I found countless instances of tweets labeled as ‘misleading’ or taken down entirely, sometimes triggering account suspensions, simply because they veered from CDC guidance or differed from establishment views.”

The CDC had effectively become the arbiter of truth.

This is alarming for at least two reasons. First, for anyone familiar with the government’s track record on truth, there’s reason to be skeptical of putting any government agency in charge of deciding what is true and false. Second, the CDC has been, to put it kindly, fallible throughout the pandemic. Indeed, the agency has been plagued with so much dysfunction and made so many crucial mistakes that its own director announced less than a year ago the organization needed an overhaul.


So there’s some reason to believe that Bostom and people like him—including epidemiologists like Dr. Martin Kuldorff (formerly of Harvard) and mRNA vaccine creator Dr. Robert Malone—were being suspended, banned, and de-amplified simply because Twitter was poorly situated to determine what was true and what was false.

There’s reason to doubt this claim, however.


David Zweig-tweet-26December2022-THE TWITTER FILES: HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*

– By censoring info that was true but inconvenient to U.S. govt. policy
– By discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed
– By suppressing ordinary users, including some sharing the CDC’s *own data*

‘Worrisome Jokes,’ ‘Natural Immunity,’ and Other ‘Potential Violations’

Months after Zweig published his report on the Twitter Files, journalist Matt Taibbi published a separate deep dive exploring the Virality Project, an initiative launched by Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center.


The project, which Taibbi described as “a sweeping, cross-platform effort to monitor billions of social media posts by Stanford University, federal agencies, and a slew of (often state-funded) NGOs,” is noteworthy because officials made it clear that a goal was not just to flag false information, but information that was true but inconvenient to the government’s goals. Reports of “vaccinated individuals contracting Covid-19 anyway,” “worrisome jokes,” and “natural immunity” were all characterized as “potential violations,” as were conversations “interpreted to suggest that coronavirus might have leaked from a lab.”


In what Taibbi describes as “a pan-industry monitoring plan for Covid-related content,” the Virality Project began analyzing millions of posts each day from platforms such as Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Medium, TikTok, and other social media sites, which were submitted through the JIRA ticketing system. On February 22, 2021, in a video no longer public, Stanford welcomed social media leaders to the group and offered instruction on how to join the JIRA system.


In contrast to Twitter’s previous internal guidance, which required narratives on Covid-19 to be “demonstrably false” before any censorship actions were taken, the Virality Project made it clear that information that was true was also fair game if it undermined the larger aims of the government and the Virality Project.


Specifically noted were “true stories that could fuel [vaccine] hesitancy,” personal testimonials about adverse side effects of vaccination, concerns over vaccine passports, and actual deaths of people following vaccination, such as Drene Keyes.


As NBC noted in 2021, Keyes, a 58-year-old black woman, died after receiving the Pfizer vaccine in February 2021. Described as an “elderly Black woman” by the Virality Project, Keyes’s death became a “disinformation” event after it garnered attention from “anti vax groups”—even though no one denied that she died within hours of taking the vaccine.


No autopsy was conducted on Keyes and there’s no way of knowing if the vaccine caused her death. But merely raising the possibility could have resulted in a ban. Officials at the Virality Project warned platforms that “just asking questions”—at least the wrong questions—was a tactic “commonly used by spreaders of misinformation.”


Ironically, Taibbi notes, the Virality Project itself was often “extravagantly wrong” about Covid science, describing breakthrough events as “extremely rare events” (a fact it later conceded was wrong) and implying that natural immunity did not offer protection from Covid.


“Even in its final report, [the Virality Project] claimed it was misinformation to suggest the vaccine does not prevent transmission, or that governments are planning to introduce vaccine passports,” Taibbi writes. “Both things turned out to be true.”


Matt Taibbi-tweet-17March2023-TWITTER FILES #19-The Great Covid-19 Lie Machine

Matt Taibbi-tweet-17March2023-TWITTER FILES #19-The Great Covid-19 Lie Machine


‘You Can’t Handle the Truth’

It’s clear that the Virality Project’s primary purpose was not to protect Americans from misinformation. Its goal, as Taibbi notes, was to get the public to submit to authority and accept the state’s Covid narrative, particularly the pronouncements of public figures such as Drs. Anthony Fauci and Rochelle Walensky.


The official policy can be summed up in the immortal words of Colonel Nathan Jessup, the villain portrayed by Jack Nicholson in Aaron Sorkin’s popular 1992 film A Few Good Men: “You can’t handle the truth.”


It’s important to understand that public officials, just like Col. Jessup, genuinely believe this. Jessup utters these words in anger in a wonderful monologue, after he is baited by Lt. Daniel Kaffee (Tom Cruise) into telling the court how he really feels. Similarly, the Twitter Files reveal a program designed to control information—even true information—because it serves the state’s plan.


The last word—plan—is important, because it calls to mind Ludwig von Mises’s warning about those seeking to plan society.

“The planner is a potential dictator who wants to deprive all other people of the power to plan and act according to their own plans,” Mises wrote. “He aims at one thing only: the exclusive absolute preeminence of his own plan.”

Mises’ words apply perfectly to the Virality Project, a program designed specifically to get people to submit to the government’s narrative and objectives, not their own. The preeminence of the plan is so important that it requires censoring information and targeting individuals—as the Virality Project did—even if it’s true.


It’s difficult to overstate how Orwellian this is.

In Orwell’s classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, Winston Smith, the protagonist of the story, says, “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four.”


Absent any context, the quote doesn’t make much sense. But it’s important to understand that Orwell saw statism and politics as forces destructive to the truth. His own brushes with state propaganda during the Spanish Civil War left him terrified that objective truth was “fading out of the world,” and he saw the state as inherently prone to obfuscation and euphemism (regardless of party).


“Political language,” he wrote, “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”


Within the context of Nineteen Eighty-Four, the meaning of Winston Smith’s words becomes crystal clear. Saying “two plus two makes four” might be an objective truth, but sometimes objective truth runs counter to Big Brother’s plan. Winston Smith is a slow learner, state agents tell him, because he can’t seem to grasp this simple reality.

“How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder.”

Many people who lived through the Covid-19 pandemic likely can identify with the terror of Nineteen Eighty-Four and Orwell’s fear that objective truth is “fading out of the world.” We witnessed public officials say things that were demonstrably false and face no consequences, while Andrew Bostom and countless others were exiled from public discourse because they said things that were true, but ran counter to the state’s narrative.


Fortunately, in large part because of Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, we now know how this happened.

“Government, academia, and an oligopoly of would-be corporate competitors organized quickly behind a secret, unified effort to control political messaging,” Taibbi writes.


All of it was designed to control information. And in doing so, the state—which actually attempted to create a “Disinformation Governance Board,” which critics promptly dubbed a Ministry of Truth—created an environment hostile to free speech and truth.


Ironically, despite the egregious abuse delivered upon the truth over the last three years in the name of fighting “misinformation,” polls show roughly half of Americans believe social media companies should be censoring such material from their sites. Few seem to realize this will almost certainly involve those with influence and power—especially the government—deciding who and what are censored.


This is a recipe for disaster. History shows there’s no greater purveyor of falsehood and propaganda than the government itself. The Twitter Files are a reminder of that.

Read more at:



‘Not-So Veiled Threats’: Judge Compares Biden Regime To Mafia For ‘Strong-Arming’ Social Media Companies

by Tyler Durden, 12August2023 –

“This notion that COVID censorship is over is completely unsupportable,” said Sauer.

A three-judge panel excoriated the ‘mob-like’ Biden administration over its ‘strong-arm’ tactics to bully social media companies into complying with censorship requests, which “time and time again” prove to be true.

Biden administration-The Godfather Mafia

Biden administration-The Godfather Mafia


The judicial smackdown took place during a Thursday hearing in front of the Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments over the administration’s appeal of an injunction barring the US government from communication with social media giants in order to censor protected speech.


Representing the government was attorney Daniel Tenny – who had quite the trio of pissed off judges on his hands. At one point, Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod compared the Biden administration to the mafia before walking it back.


In these movies that we see with the mobthey don’t say and spell out things, but they have these ongoing relationships,” she said, adding “They never actually say ‘go do this or else you’re going to have this consequence.’ But everybody just knows.


“I’m certainly not equating the federal government with anybody in illegal organized crime but there are certain relationships that people know things without always saying the ‘or else,'” Elrod continued.


She had earlier noted that the Biden administration had a “very close working relationship” with social media giants, and browbeated them like “a supervisor complaining about a worker” until they got their way.


“What appears to be in the record are these irate messages from time to time from high ranking government officials that say, ‘You didn’t do this yet!’ — and that’s my toning down the language— ‘Why haven’t you done this yet?’” she said. “It’s like ‘jump’ and ‘how high?'” said Elrod.


Judges Edith Brown Clement and Don R. Willett were also obviously perturbed by the government’s behavior – with Willett noting that the government operated “out of the public eye” via “unsubtle strong-arming and veiled or not-so-veiled threats.”


“That’s a really nice social media platform you’ve got there, it would be a shame if something happened to it,” he summarized, according to the Daily Caller.

Tenney goes on defense

Clearly sensing the judges’ hostility, Daniel Tenny attempted to tap-dance his way out of claims of government overreach – saying: “The government is generically going to be angry” when companies refuse to take action, but that the communications show federal officials and social media giants alternating between “friendly” and “testy,” as opposed to giving specific orders to comply “or else.”


Judge Elrod wasn’t buying it, calling the government’s messages “irate” at times, and saying that they actually show high-ranking officials badgering counterparts about why they hadn’t censored the material they wanted censored.


Elrod asked Tenney if high-level government officials had asked companies “in a coercive manner to propagate certain things that the government knew were untrue, and to deamplify certain things that it knew were true … but didn’t fit its message, would that be able to be enjoined?”


To which Tenney said the question presumes that the government acted coercively – for which he says they had no factual evidence, and claimed that the Biden administration knows it can’t unilaterally sidestep legal liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.


Elrod fired back, saying “Time and time again,” what the government considers mis-, dis- and malinformation, “always with great fervor,” turn out to be true. For example, the government’s attempts by National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins’ attempts to issue a published takedown of the Great Barrington Declaration – an open letter by Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University, Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford, and Martin Kulldorff of Harvard – which challenged government lockdowns during the pandemic.


Tenney argued that the judges also couldn’t consider a ‘friend of the court‘ briefing by leading House Republicans – which includes members of the Judiciary and Weaponization of the Federal Government committees – which lays out how much of the “[v]ery recent evidence’ their committees had obtained ‘further corroborates’ the basis for the injunction.


Tenney also argued that the plaintiffs don’t have legal standing to bring the case, because conservative officials who claim that their own posts were censored didn’t argue that they plan to make similar posts in the future – which would create “ongoing injury” from the censorship.


When asked by Judge Edith Brown Clement if the Biden administration is still communicating with social media giants, he admitted that they hadn’t “entirely stopped,” but dodged a question over whether they maintained “day-to-day involvement,” according to Just the News.

Attorney John Sauer, representing the State of Louisiana, asked the judges what they would think of a senior White House staffer contacting Amazon, Barnes & Noble and other booksellers to participate in a “book-burning program” focused on authors who criticize the administration, with the companies only giving in after months of escalating White House rhetoric. 


That’s exactly what the White House did to compel platforms to remove and throttle the “most persuasive speakers” critical of its policies, such as former New York Times drug industry reporter Alex Berenson and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Sauer said.


Sauer added that the appellate court should indeed take “judicial notice” of the congressional amicus brief because there’s no dispute on the authenticity of the newly identified communications and it “powerfully reinforces” the alleged coercion, such as a Facebook official suggesting the company back down because of “bigger fish we have to fry” with the administration. -JTN

According to Sauer, one of the individual plaintiffs, Health Freedom Louisiana co-director Jill Hines, claimed as recently as May that Facebook continues to remove groups she’s created to protest COVID policies.

“This notion that COVID censorship is over is completely unsupportable,” said Sauer.



Oracle Drops UK-Based Disinfo Nannies After Conservative Blacklisting Cited In Lawsuit

by Tyler Durden, 22April2023 –

Gabe Kaminsky of the Washington Examiner is out with another report on the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a UK-based group which targets and blacklists conservative websites in order to drain them of revenue and support by working with “advertisers and the ad tech industry in assessing the reputational and brand risk when advertising with online media outlets and to help them avoid financially supporting disinformation online.”

Big Brother - Apple 1984 commercial

Big Brother – Apple 1984 commercial


As Kaminsky reports, software giant Oracle announced on Wednesday that it will no longer collaborate with GDI, which has received just under $666,000 from the US State Department between 2020 and 2021. The news comes one day after GDI was cited in a lawsuit against the Biden administration which claims the government has colluded with big tech to censor free speech.

This same British entity, which has two affiliated United States nonprofit groups that have come under fire for shielding information from their 2021 tax forms, was cited in a Tuesday friend-of-the-court brief filed by Alliance Defending Freedom in State of Louisiana v. Biden — a lawsuit filed in May 2022 that claims the government has colluded with Big Tech to stifle discourse online. -Washington Examiner

“All signs point to a growing government influence over social media,” reads the brief. “The Biden Administration admitted as early as 2021 that it was flagging and reporting posts on Facebook, YouTube, and other platforms as COVID-19-related ‘misinformation.’ A recent report found that the U.S. State Department sent $330 million [sic] to The Global Disinformation Index, a British organization that is attempting to discredit and blacklist many conservative news outlets for peddling ‘disinformation.'”


Kaminsky notes that the brief mistakenly attributes $330 million sent to the National Endowment for Democracy to the GDI, when in reality the NED has granted money to GDI out of the $330 million. Following the Examiner‘s reporting on the grants, the NED announced in late February that they were cutting off funding to GDI.

Louisiana v. Biden was brought forth by Republican attorneys general Jeff Landry of Louisiana and then-Missouri’s Eric Schmitt, now a senator for The Show-Me State. The lawsuit alleges that the Biden administration infringed on the public’s First Amendment Rights through its efforts working with Big Tech employees to engage in content moderation related to election integrity, COVID-19, Hunter Biden’s infamous abandoned laptop, and more.


For instance, Landry released a document in January showing that the White House urged a Facebook employee in April 2021 to restrict posts about Fox News host Tucker Carlson claiming that there have been efficacy issues with “vaccines.” The White House also told Facebook in May 2021 that “slowing down” posts appearing to be “anti-vax” would be “reasonable,” and also urged Twitter to remove a post by anti-vaccine critic Robert Kennedy, Jr., who recently announced his Democratic bid for White House in 2024, documents show. -Washington Examiner

“Government should be freedom’s strongest defender, not its greatest threat,” said senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, Travis Barham, in a Wednesday statement. “Americans don’t look to the White House or Silicon Valley to discover and express the truth. That’s not the role of government, and it certainly isn’t the role of Big Tech.”


Oracle, meanwhile, told the Examiner that it would no longer maintain a relationship with GDI, which they had previously announced a 2021 collaboration with in order to engage in “brand safety.”


“After conducting a review, we agree with others in the advertising industry that the services we provide marketers must be in full support of free speech, which is why we are ending our relationship with GDI,” said Michael Egbert, vice president for corporate communications at Oracle.


Microsoft has similarly launched an internal investigation into its partnership with GDI after ad industry whistleblowers revealed how conservative sites were being blacklisted by the Microsoft-owned Xandr as “false/misleading” , “reprehensible/offensive” , or “hate speech.”

Meanwhile, GDI’s co-founder and CEO Clare Melford was sent a letter on Tuesday by Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO), who demanded its two affiliated nonprofit groups in the U.S. release a “complete and unredacted list of donors.The letter came days after a Washington Examiner investigation revealed that the private AN Foundation, also known as the Disinformation Index Foundation, and its affiliated public charity, Disinformation Index Inc., are shielding items like board members, officers, and donors from tax forms, while claiming to be “harassed” under a little-known federal exemption law. -Washington Examiner

“This is outrageous,” said Paul Kamenar, counsel to the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative watchdog that plans to file an IRS complaint against both GDI groups, in a statement last week.



Farewell Questions For Rochelle Walensky

by Tyler Durden, 15May2023 –

Authored by El Gato Malo via The Brownstone Institute,

Given what we now know about the complete failure of covid vaccines to provide sterilizing immunity, stop infection, or stop spread as well as the fact that such issues were not even tested for in the drug trials that approved them, certain questions would seem to demand asking:

Just what was this “Data from the CDC today” that suggested that “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus?”

The Recount-tweet-30March2021-CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensk

The Recount-tweet-30March2021-CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensk

Was there, in fact, any data at all?

Or was this a completely fabricated claim used to underpin the mass rollout of a product that failed so spectacularly right out of the gates and:

There seem to be an awfully large body of claims made by CDC that appear to have lacked foundation in fact or data. Both Dr Walensky and her predecessor Robert Redfield would seem to have a great deal to answer for here.

“The covid vaccine will make the vaccinated a dead end for the virus.

This talking point was simply everywhere all at once.


Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla certainly pushed this narrative.  Presumably, the fact that he was allowed to do so (itself quite an exceptional situation) implies the acquiescence of FDA, CDC, and other regulators.


Upon what was this seemingly widespread consensus based?


The matter appears to have never even been studied at the time the claims were made.


Why were the usually strict and fastidious US regulators so sanguine about such unusually aggressive and certain statements?


This is a most unusual situation and such an extraordinary outcome would seem to demand an extraordinary explanation.


Yet none seems forthcoming.


“The mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body” constitutes another key early safety claim similarly rooted in opaque or absent evidence or perhaps simply assumed or invented. (before being quietly retracted later).


“Protein do not last long in the body” was a key early safety claim similarly rooted in opaque or absent evidence or perhaps simply assumed or invented. (before being quietly retracted later).

CDC - Facts about mRNA Covid Vaccines

CDC – Facts about mRNA Covid Vaccines


This claim also proved extravagantly incorrect.

Wherever one looks, it seems one finds that these grand claims of safety and efficacy were underpinned by a paucity or utter absence of supporting evidence.


Even the definitions themselves such as “Any positive for trace covid from a PCR test at a 40 Cycle Threshold is covid” or “No disease outcomes from vaccines are to be counted until 2 weeks after the second (or third) dose” which left a large window (4-6 weeks) during a period of known immune suppression from the jabs uncounted or even, in many cases, attributed to the unvaccinated in a manner that can make placebo look like high efficacy preventative are so unusual and inconsistent with past practice or sound science as to demand the most pointed of questions as to how such practices came to be and who the decision makers who put them in place were.


This series of unfounded claims and distortionary definitions seems both a poor and a deeply dangerous practice for Public Health.


If we are to have any hope of restoring faith in this field, we must ask and answer the pointed questions of “How did this happen?” and “At whose behest?”


Someone made these choices for some reason. Who and why would seem to be the bare minimum of post mortem here.


It is oft opined that a bad map is worse than no map at all and in this, I must wholeheartedly agree. The public health agencies in America have become the most calamitous of cartographers.


If we would seek to have the agents of public health act as something other than a marketing arm and apologist for the revolving door of Pharma with whom they seem to so regularly swap staff and sinecure then it must once more be turned to serve the public. It may do so only if it regains the public trust and such trust, once lost, may only be restored by asking the hard questions and diligently following the answers wherever so they may lead until we may understand what went wrong, hold the malefactors to account, and effect the means to prevent this from happening again.


Please make no mistake, if nothing is done and this is swept beneath some august Congressional rug or societal memory hole, it will happen again. And soon. This is not a choice I would have for America and one I do not believe you should countenance.

Public health runs on public trust. 

I ask you to restore it.



FDA “turned a blind eye” to “submission of fraudulent data” on covid injections, investigator reveals

15December2022 by:

This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

(Natural News) Documents released as part of a whistleblower complaint against Pfizer reveal that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “turned a blind eye” to the “fraudulent data” that Pfizer submitted alongside its messenger RNA (mRNA) Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine.”


An agent within the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigation (OCI) admitted in an email that the agency knew Pfizer’s data was fraudulent but accepted it anyway, using it to emergency authorize (EUA), then approve, Pfizer’s covid injection products.


The OCI operates much like a police force, conducting criminal investigations into illegal activities involving FDA-approved products. It then presents cases before the Department of Justice (DoJ) for prosecution.


Roughly 200 federal agents hired from the Secret Service, the FBI, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) criminal investigations unit work at the OCI, which has agents stationed all across the country, as well as at some overseas posts.


The OCI, which has the same arresting authority as other federal law enforcement agents, was established by former FDA Commissioner David Kessler following the generic drug scandal of the late 1980s. Kessler wanted to crack down on FDA employees for accepting bribes in exchange for drug approvals.


“What I care about most is restoring the credibility and the integrity of the Food and Drug Administration,” Kessler stated at the time. “And the only way to do that is to focus on strong enforcement. We are going to enforce the law.” (Related: Back in May, the FDA finally admitted that covid jabs cause clots.)


FDA knew about fraudulent data from AstraZeneca, too

The email in question from the OCI agent, dated March 26, 2021, was leaked as part of whistleblower Brook Jackson’s complaint against Pfizer. Jackson, as you may recall, blew the lid on Pfizer’s fraudulent clinical trials and “falsified data.”


“Having worked at FDA, I see it as surprising, for many reasons, that the agency turned a blind eye to a company’s knowing submission of fraudulent data,” is what the OCI officer wrote in the discourse.


The FDA, he added, “likely feared the criticism they undoubtedly would have received for holding up a vaccine (which they knew they would eventually approve anyway) at the expense of untold lives lost,” noting that the agency was also “weighing the risk / benefit ratio.”


It was a decision between telling the truth or telling a lie, though the OCI officer presented it in somewhat more anomalous, politically charged terms. The answer is the simple one: tell the truth – but we know the FDA is reluctant to ever choose that option.


There was also mention of AstraZeneca’s failed covid injection, and the fraudulent clinical trial data that was used to push that one as well. The company trial’s own Data and Safety Monitoring Board drew attention to the “outdated and potentially misleading data” submitted to the FDA, and the OCI officer addressed this matter, too.


“The general public must be able to trust that the clinical results are valid to sell, approve or take medication,” he wrote, adding the politically correct caveat that the jab is probably “still extremely likely to be safe and effective.”


“My point here is that instead of the regulators protecting the public, in our case, they were complicit in a fraud,” he further suggested in a later statement about the matter.


“At the time, they may have been doing what they believed to be the right thing under extraordinary circumstances. But now they may soon have some explaining to do.”


More of the latest news coverage about covid injections and the fraudulent data the FDA used to emergency authorize and approve them can be found at


Sources for this article include:



Faulty COVID Study Claims Republicans Had 43% Higher Death Rate Due To “Vaccine Hesitancy”

by Tyler Durden, 03August2023 –

We have seen numerous false conclusions made by covid studies over the course of the past few years, with the majority of them relying on assumptions rather than scientific data.  In the majority of cases, these studies attempt to paint conservatives and unvaccinated individuals as a danger to others or a danger to themselves, with a clear political bias in favor of Democrats and pro-vaccine advocates.  In other words, the studies fit the data to support their preconceived notions – The exact opposite of science.


Leftists are abuzz this week on social media in light of a newly published study funded by Yale University suggesting that Republicans in Florida and Ohio died at a rate 43% higher than Democrats.  This is proof, they claim, that Republicans were wrong about covid mandates and vaccinations and they are paying for it with their lives.  Except, this is not reality.

Lying Medical Professionals Covid-19

Lying Medical Professionals Covid-19

First, to be clear, every major study on covid deaths puts the median Infection Fatality Rate at 0.23%.  Meaning, on average 99.8% of people are under no serious threat from the virus.  This vital stat is never mention in the Yale study (or in the media, for that matter).


Yale uses excess mortality data at the county level, coupled with voter registration records to form conclusions on covid death rates in correlation with party affiliation.  Published at JAMA Network under the title ‘Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic’, it relies on a data drought rather than a complete set of statistics to form its conclusions.  Let’s go through the failings of the study one by one….

1)  For example, the study admits that it did not have access to the cause of death for the individuals involved.  They simply assume that excess deaths were in fact covid related deaths.

2)  The study does not include data on vaccination status at the individual level.  Meaning, they had no proof that excess deaths in Republican counties were unvaccinated people.  Again, they merely assume that this is the case.   

3)  The study also admits that research before the COVID-19 pandemic has found evidence of higher death rates in Republican-leaning counties than Democratic-leaning counties.  Meaning, death rates are supposedly higher within Republican counties regardless of covid.

4)  The study did not find a significant difference in death rates between Republican and Democrat counties in Florida.  It only found such differences in counties in Ohio.  Already, this suggests a failed premise given it was only applicable in one state.  

5)  The study excluded voters registered as independent and third party (Why?).  Around 41% of American voters identify as politically independent according to Gallup polls.  Would their inclusion in the study dilute the results contrary to the study’s obvious political bias?

6) The study gathered excess death data from May 2021, around the time they argue most US adults would have access to the covid vaccines. This is a narrow snapshot in time rather than a comprehensive look at Republican and Democrat deaths over the full length of the pandemic and vaccinations.  It should be noted that infections and fatality rates started plunging months before the vaccines were introduced widely to the public.  This is not a factor the study takes into consideration.  

Daily Covid-19 cases reported in the US

Daily Covid-19 cases reported in the US

7)  Out of the four age groups included in the study, Republicans only had higher excess deaths in two of them (and only in Ohio).  The study briefly glosses over the fact that Democratic voters had significantly higher excess death rates compared with Republican voters for the age group 65 to 74 years.  That is to say, the baseline theory that Republicans have more covid deaths is debunked by the study’s own data.  

Where does this leave us?  To summarize, the Yale study is incomplete and in some ways self contradicting.  In some age groups, Democrats had more excess deaths than Republicans.  In Florida, there was no significant difference in deaths between Republicans and Democrats.  Yet, Yale jumps to a politically charged conclusion in favor of Democrats anyway.  Why?


A cursory glance at Yale University’s medical departments and their relationship to Pfizer should give people pause before accepting this study at face value.  Pfizer has donated tens of millions of dollars over the past two decades to Yale, including the building of a $35 million medical research center and millions in covid research related grants in the past few years.


The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation has also given millions to Yale specifically for covid research.  Both Gates and Pfizer have a vested monetary and political interest in pushing a pro-vaccine message.  Beyond that, the vast majority of Yale faculty political donations go to Democrat candidates.  Yale is a Democrat run university, so it’s not surprising that they would fund an incomplete study that favors Democrat narratives.


The lesson here?  Science is being politically weaponized, and every single new claim from such institutions needs to be thoroughly examined rather than taken at face value.



Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study

Zachary Stieber, Reporter


Repeated COVID-19 vaccination weakens the immune system, potentially making people susceptible to life-threatening conditions such as cancer, according to a new study.


Multiple doses of the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines lead to higher levels of antibodies called IgG4, which can provide a protective effect. But a growing body of evidence indicates that the “abnormally high levels” of the immunoglobulin subclass actually make the immune system more susceptible to the COVID-19 spike protein in the vaccines, researchers said in the paper.


They pointed to experiments performed on mice that found multiple boosters on top of the initial COVID-19 vaccination “significantly decreased” protection against both the Delta and Omicron virus variants and testing that found a spike in IgG4 levels after repeat Pfizer vaccination, suggesting immune exhaustion.


Studies have detected higher levels of IgG4 in people who died with COVID-19 when compared to those who recovered and linked the levels with another known determinant of COVID-19-related mortality, the researchers also noted.


A review of the literature also showed that vaccines against HIV, malaria, and pertussis also induce the production of IgG4.


“In sum, COVID-19 epidemiological studies cited in our work plus the failure of HIV, Malaria, and Pertussis vaccines constitute irrefutable evidence demonstrating that an increase in IgG4 levels impairs immune responses,” Alberto Rubio Casillas, a researcher with the biology laboratory at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico and one of the authors of the new paper, told The Epoch Times via email.


The paper was published by the journal Vaccines in May.


Pfizer and Moderna officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.


Both companies utilize messenger RNA (mRNA) technology in their vaccines.


Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the technology, said the paper illustrates why he’s been warning about the negative effects of repeated vaccination.


“I warned that more jabs can result in what’s called high zone tolerance, of which the switch to IgG4 is one of the mechanisms. And now we have data that clearly demonstrate that’s occurring in the case of this as well as some other vaccines,” Malone, who wasn’t involved with the study, told The Epoch Times.


“So it’s basically validating that this rush to administer and re-administer without having solid data to back those decisions was highly counterproductive and appears to have resulted in a cohort of people that are actually more susceptible to the disease.”

Possible Problems

The weakened immune systems brought about by repeated vaccination could lead to serious problems, including cancer, the researchers said.


“Increased IgG4 synthesis due to repeated mRNA vaccination with high antigen concentrations may also cause autoimmune diseases, and promote cancer growth and autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible individuals,” they wrote in the paper.


Myocarditis is a form of heart inflammation that is caused by COVID-19 vaccination, with young males facing the highest risk.


Potential longer-term consequences of repeated vaccination include vaccinated people who get infected suffering from more severe cases of COVID-19, according to the researchers.


“Without an adequate protection level, even the new Omicron sub-variants (considered as mild) could cause severe multi-organ damage and death in immuno-compromised individuals and those with comorbidities,” they said.


Some studies have pegged the vaccinated as having a higher risk of infection when compared to people who enjoy natural immunity, or post-recovery protection. One recent study, published in April by Open Forum Infectious Diseases, found that each additional dose raised the risk of infection.


The tolerance stemming from heightened levels of IgG4 means the immune system lacks the ability to respond to antigens, or foreign substances, Malone said.


Further experiments could include following vaccinated patients over time and comparing their antibody profile to a group of naturally immune people, Malone said. Other testing could include in vitro studies or animal experiments, Casillas said.

Cautious Approach Warranted

The new paper shows that repeated vaccination “should be approached with caution,” the researchers said.


Some countries have recently halted or slowed down recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination after years of promoting repeated shots as data show the vaccines provide substandard protection against infection and short-lived protection against severe illness. The United States, for instance, stopped recommending boosters for all and changed the primary vaccination of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines from two doses to one.


Still, some health agencies are moving toward a model based on the approach to influenza vaccination. That would involve selecting updated vaccine compositions each year aimed at targeting the circulating COVID-19 strains, and recommending certain groups, or virtually everybody, get an annual shot.


The World Health Organization said in May that the composition should be updated to focus on the XBB.1 Omicron subvariant “in order to improve protection.” Advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are set to convene in June to consider whether the vaccines should be updated for the 2023–2024 “vaccination campaign.” Officials in many countries have already discontinued the old Moderna and Pfizer vaccines and cleared shots that target the BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 Omicron subvariants.



Techno-Hell: Pfizer mRNA Flu Shots Soon to Hit Pharmacies Worldwide

by TDB, 27July2023 –

Originally published via Armageddon Prose:

The benevolent multinational technocratic overlords at Pfizer, assisted of course by the magnanimous Public Health™ authorities in the United States and throughout the West, are excited to introduce mRNA flu shots, seeing as how the mRNA COVID-19 injections have performed so admirably over the past two and a half years.


Via Pfizer:

“In September 2022, Pfizer began recruiting volunteers to participate in its Phase 3 clinical trial for that mRNA flu vaccine candidate. The hope, says McLaughlin, is that scientists can develop a flu vaccine faster, and with more accurate strain matching with in-season circulating strains than those currently available. One that may also spark a more robust immune response.   


“As these viruses continue to adapt, what really matters is how well your vaccine matches what strains are currently circulating,” says McLaughlin. “And the speed with which you can keep up with that determines the success of a vaccination program.””

Eerily reminiscent of “Operation Warp Speed,” no?


The National Institutes of Health bureaucrats are also eager beavers to get their biotech into the arms of every American man, woman, child, and baby. Because they care.

Via NIH:

“A clinical trial of an experimental universal influenza vaccine developed by researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ (NIAID) Vaccine Research Center (VRC), part of the National Institutes of Health, has begun enrolling volunteers at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. This Phase 1 trial will test the experimental vaccine, known as H1ssF-3928 mRNA-LNP, for safety and its ability to induce an immune response.”

Here is unindicted war criminal and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla predicting this new technology will be available for deployment by flu season 2023.

Pfizer CEO on Vaccine Developments

To the non-immunocompromised, of course — an inconvenient truth, so to speak, for all of the biomedical profiteers — the flu presents no real risk. A strong immune system, as conferred by proper eating habits, exercising, and vitamin D exposure, is well enough to combat the flu.


But, then again, non-patentable vitamin D from the sun is not going to generate executive bonuses or hearty kickbacks to NIH bureaucrats, now is it?


Perhaps this is why Bill Gates and Co. want to blot out the sun.

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.


Follow his stuff Substack if you are inclined to support independent journalism free of corporate slant. Also, keep tabs via Twitter.

For hip Armageddon Prose t-shirts, hats, etc., peruse the merch store.

Insta-tip jar and Bitcoin public address: bc1qvq4hgnx3eu09e0m2kk5uanxnm8ljfmpefwhawv

My Plan B Blueprint to Become Anti-fragile

The US and US dollar are clearly deteriorating. And there is a lot of danger in having too much exposure to a crumbling empire.

That is why I have a Plan B, which has allowed me to:

  • Cut my tax rate to 4%
  • Use that savings to invest in real assets, precious metals, and crypto
  • Gain a second residency and apply for a second passport
  • Diversify internationally

And much more.


A Plan B gives you the tools to respond to whatever the world throws at you from a position of strength.




After Long Silence on ‘Long Vax,’ Science Magazine Links Autoimmune Disorders to COVID Shots

After years of organizing and advocacy by people suffering autoimmune injuries from the COVID-19 vaccine, one of the world’s top scientific journals reports on the existence of “Long Vax.”

By  Brenda Baletti, Ph.D.

Mainstream publications and regulatory agencies have buckled to public pressure to admit the COVID-19 vaccine can cause injuries such as myocarditis and pericarditis — but until recently, they’ve published little or nothing about the substantial number of people suffering from autoimmune disease after vaccination.


However, on Tuesday, the journal Science published an article confirming that COVID-19 vaccines are linked to autoimmune disorders, such as small fiber neuropathy and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS).


“We’ve been screaming from the top of our lungs about these things happening,” Agnieszka Wilson, founder of #CanWeTalkAboutIt told The Defender. “And finally, slowly, it’s being acknowledged.”

The #CanWeTalkAboutIt campaign is a global effort to break the silence around injuries from the COVID-19 vaccine.

Suzanna Newell, former board member of the vaccine-injured patient advocacy group React19, told The Defender:


“I am extremely grateful that doctors and medical institutions are now willing to talk about adverse reactions. [They] should have been listening to the injured. We even have many injured medical professionals among the injured who have had trouble being heard.”


Science reported that in addition to abnormal blood clotting and heart inflammation, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines give rise to “another apparent complication”:


“[This] debilitating suite of symptoms that resembles Long Covid, has been more elusive, its link to vaccination unclear and its diagnostic features ill-defined.


“But in recent months, what some call Long Vax has gained wider acceptance among doctors and scientists, and some are now working to better understand and treat its symptoms.”


According to Science, Long Vax cases “seem very rare.” They include a wide range of symptoms such as persistent headaches, severe fatigue and abnormal heart rate and blood pressure.


The symptoms can begin to appear within hours or weeks after vaccination and are difficult to study, the authors of the article said.


Science reported that increasing numbers of researchers are making diagnoses that include small fiber sensory neuropathy, which causes tingling or electric shock-like sensations, burning pain and blood circulation problems, and POTS — a condition that affects blood flow and can result in symptoms such as lightheadedness, fainting and increased heartbeat — that appear when standing up from a reclined position.


Post-vaccination symptoms could have features of one or both conditions. People with long COVID can suffer similar symptoms, according to the article.


Small sensory fiber neuropathy and POTS also are associated with other vaccines such as Gardasil, Merck’s human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine.


Commenting on the article, Substacker Igor Chudov wrote that the authors acknowledge the suffering, but also minimize it, falsely asserting that it is rare. “It goes on and on about how ‘rare’ vaccine injuries are.”


Brianne Dressen, founder of React19, said that despite the fact the article qualifies some of its key claims, she sees it as an important step toward getting these conditions more widely recognized.


Dressen told The Defender:

“Science Magazine is speaking to an audience that the rest of us who have been pigeonholed into this corner can’t speak to because they don’t even know we exist. We’ve all been censored to no end. So how are we going to reach those people?


“They’ve been hammered over and over again in outlets like Science Magazine — which is kind of ironic — with the idea that the vaccines are wonderful and there’s no possible way that anything bad can happen …


“So if we ever get an opportunity to put a little bit of content out there in their lane for them to question even just a little bit what’s going on around them, then we’ll be able to pull them back over to, you know, to the truth.”

Vaccine-related autoimmune disorders are underreported

Scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were attempting to study and treat patients with Long Vax symptoms in 2021. They published a preprint report on their work, but the study was abruptly halted without explanation and the NIH has stonewalled attempts to discover details about what the agency knew early on.


Science also cited previous and forthcoming research by Sujana Reddy identifying post-vaccine POTS, and a study published in Nature Cardiovascular Research by researchers from Cedars Sinai Medical Center last year that linked COVID-19 and the vaccine to POTS.


Other peer-reviewed research reported similar links and has revealed a wide range of immune system and neurological effects from the COVID-19 vaccine.


Numerous people with autoimmune disorders from the COVID-19 vaccine have also shared their stories with The Defender. Some reported difficulties in submitting their health information to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).


A total of 1,569,668 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and June 23, 2023, to VAERS.


The latest available data from VAERS show 770 reports of POTS with 578 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine, 160 reports attributed to Moderna’s and 31 reports to Johnson & Johnson’s.


Under-reporting is a known and serious disadvantage of the VAERS system,” according to VAERs expert Jessica Rose, Ph.D.

Rose wrote, “Unfortunately, we can never really know how many people are suffering from adverse events. Reports can go missing, reports can remain in temporary VAERS ID limbo or never get filed in the first place.”

Scientists hesitantly speak out

“You see one or two patients and you wonder if it’s a coincidence,” Anne Louise Oaklander, M.D. Ph.D., a neurologist and researcher at Harvard Medical School, told Science. “But by the time you’ve seen 10, 20,” she continued, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”


In addition to Oaklander, a top researcher on small fiber neuropathy, Harlan Krumholz, M.D., a Yale cardiologist, Sujana Reddy, D.O., an internal medicine resident physician at East Alabama Health, Tae Chung, M.D., a neuromuscular physiatrist who runs a POTS clinic at Johns Hopkins, Matthew Schelke, M.D., a neurologist at Columbia University and Lawrence Purpura, M.D., MPH, an infectious disease specialist at Columbia University, and William Murphy, Ph.D., an immunologist at the University of California, Davis all commented on their ongoing research on autoimmune illness associated with COVID-19 vaccination.


The article also reports that “regulators in the US and Europe say they have not found a connection between COVID-19 vaccines and small fiber neuropathy or POTS.”


But even Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which has denied and downplayed the existence of vaccine autoimmune side effects, conceded to Science, “If a provider has somebody in front of them, they may want to take seriously the concept [of] a vaccine side effect.”


German Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach has “acknowledged that Long Covid-like symptoms after vaccination are a real phenomenon,” Science also reported.


Marks told Science he worried “the sensational headline” about vaccine side effects could “mislead” the public. And several other researchers quoted in the article also expressed concern that their research could “undermine trust in COVID-19 vaccines.”


Dressen said researchers are hesitant to speak out because it carries great risk.

“There is not a single person, whether they are new to the game or whether they’ve been in this for decades, there’s not a single person that when they do step across that line and they do speak out, that they don’t get punished,” Dressen said.


She added, “There’s not a single person that gets hailed a hero and money flows and their research happens. There’s always repercussions. And these researchers knew that, right? Which is why they came out together and they came out in force.”

The power of patient advocacy

Dressen also told The Defender that doctors and researchers are finally speaking out because of the work being done by vaccine-injured patients.


“The interesting thing about these researchers though,” she said, “is that they too had to be deprogrammed. And that happened because of … the patients [who] ended up in their offices,” she said.


“The majority of the advocacy that happened to get these researchers to where they were willing to speak out, it happened on the ground floor with their own patients. So, you know, that’s the power that the patients have.”


Newall, who suffers from COVID-19 vaccine-related autoimmune disease, said:

“The best advice and support I have had about my reactions have come directly from other injured. They have been a lifeline for me. I knew to ask for a skin punch biopsy only because other injured people had told me to based on my symptoms.


“Even knowing what to ask for, the first neurologist wanted to wait and run other tests because he said small fiber neuropathy doesn’t normally present the way I was presenting. I told him we are in unchartered [sic] waters learning as we go, so please run the test.

“Finally after months of waiting, he tested me and I was positive for small fiber polyneuropathy.”

Immune overreaction to spike protein

The article hypothesizes that the Long Vax symptoms might be caused by an immune overreaction to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Science wrote:


“One theory is that after vaccination some people generate another round of antibodies targeting the first. Those antibodies could function somewhat like spike itself: Spike targets a cell surface protein called the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, enabling the virus to enter cells.”


Bernhard Schieffer, M.D, Ph.D., a cardiologist at the University of Marburg, is also quoted:

“The rogue antibodies might also bind to ACE2, which helps regulate blood pressure and heart rate. … If those antibodies disrupt ACE2 signaling, that could cause the racing heart rates and blood pressure swings seen in POTS.


“Small fiber neurons also have the ACE2 receptor on their surface, so in theory rogue antibodies could contribute to neuropathy.”


Rose told The Defender that “molecular mimicry” is a possible action for spike-induced autoimmunity. Molecular mimicry refers to a significant similarity between pathogenic elements contained in a vaccine and some human proteins.


According to Nature, this similarity may lead to immune cross reactivity, where the reaction of the immune system toward the pathogenic antigens may harm the similar human proteins, essentially causing autoimmune disease.

‘Needless gaslighting’ has to end

Vaccine-injured advocates say that much more research into these types of adverse events is imperative.

“This is just one of the many injuries and many side effects that they write about in this article. There’s so much more work to be done in the area, so much more attention to be given to a lot of people who are suffering today,” Wilson said.


Newell said that when vaccine-injured can get access to early treatments, they are more likely to recover.

“But, that requires acknowledgment,” she said, adding, “Just like Guillain-Barré [syndrome] is recognized as a vaccine reaction, we need small fiber neuropathy and POTS to be recognized as well.”

She added:

“Had there been a medical and financial safety net along with processes to accurately research the injured and adequately support us, we would be much farther along than we are and so many wouldn’t have had to needlessly be gaslit at the doctor’s office with all of these new symptoms.


“I wish those of us who were not using the medical system prior to our Covid vaccines and were now suddenly showing up with debilitating and scary symptoms would have been at the very least researched.


“We needed acknowledgment even though our truths are uncomfortable. It has been a painful and lonely ride that I would not wish on anyone. We need to be able to talk openly about reactions because what doesn’t get talked about leads to shame and isolation. Isolation can lead to suicide. We have seen far too many injured take their lives.


“We have waited years because our reactions might cause vaccine hesitancy. That has delayed progress. We are part of the science. The medical world needs to study our reactions to make this brand-new vaccine safer for all people.”


Science reported that a few university-sponsored research projects are moving forward. Yale’s LISTEN study will examine both long COVID and Long Vax cases.


React19 also plans to distribute small grants for studying immunology, biomarkers, and other features of post-vaccine illness. “Even modest support matters,” Krumholz told Science, because “it’s incumbent on us to produce preliminary data” to win over funders with deep pockets.


“The deep-pocketed funders of Covid vaccines had no problem pouring billions into them without any preliminary data — but helping their victims is not one of their financial priorities,” Chudov commented.


He added, “Thus, the researchers helping the vaccine-injured operate with tens of thousands of dollars, while Pfizer shareholders enjoy their multi-billion windfall.”


Wilson, who is also a journalist who interviews doctors and scientists on her program, the “Aga Wilson Show,” added, “This is not a fight between the anti and the pro-vax. it’s a fight for people’s health.”


She said public health agencies should be responsible for creating better systems to track injuries and should be funding research to understand and treat them and stop them from happening again.


“We are in a very bad situation because the governments are not taking responsibility for this. This research needs to be funded,” she said.



A Colossal Failure Around the World

The safety data are nothing less than horrifying

Health Viewpoints
Colleen Huber



Let’s summarize what we now know of the negative efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, and why vaccinated people—not the unvaxxed—suffer frequent bouts of COVID-19.


The COVID-19 vaccines—and the new bivalents, of which they are a part—are alarmingly and irredeemably unsafe, as well as ineffective for the advertised purposes. It is increasingly recognized by laypeople, physicians, and scientists throughout the world that the COVID-19 vaccines are neither safe, nor effective, nor reversible.


In this article, I show irrefutable proof that the COVID-19 vaccines are irredeemably ineffective. (See many dozens of my other Substack articles, and my book, “Neither Safe Nor Effective,” on how dangerous these vaccines are.)


U.S. mortality data at the end of 2020 did not support the allegation of a pandemic, because there was no more of an outlying peak in excess deaths in 2020 than other peaks throughout the past two decades, as reported at that time. A series of CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] revisions have continually increased the number claimed dead in 2020. Even now, as of April 24, the CDC shows that 3,383,729 people died from all causes in the United States in 2020 on one page written in December 2021, [1]

NCHS Data Brief-No 427 December2021

NCHS Data Brief-No 427 December2021

and also claims that 3,390,079 people died from all causes in the United States in 2020 on a different page.

NCHS Table 1 Deaths involving Covid-19 pneumonia flu

NCHS Table 1 Deaths involving Covid-19 pneumonia flu

If even two years after the end of 2020, allegations of the number of those dead in 2020 continue to increase, at what point will that number be settled? How is it that by December 2021 an accurate number of deaths in 2020 was not available to the CDC?


In either case, mortality for 2020 (the year of COVID-19 virulence) was less than for 2021 (the year of the COVID-19 vaccine), which was 3,464,000. [2] The 2020 mortality number remained at about one percent of the total U.S. population, as in each of the previous three years, in which there was no pandemic.


Notably, December 2020 had by far the highest deaths of any month in 2020 in the United States, 32 percent higher than the average of the previous 11 months of what had been advertised to be the worst pandemic in a century, but in fact had no more than typical numbers of deaths in the U.S. during that alleged pandemic.


Data released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show that each of those last three weeks in December 2020, excess deaths (number of deaths over those expected) had higher excess deaths than any of the previous weeks of the alleged pandemic. [3]  Each of those last three weeks of December 2020 exceeded 25,000 excess deaths per week, whereas even the worst COVID-19 hospitalization weeks, the first two weeks of April 2020, did not exceed 25,000 excess deaths per week.


The Pfizer vaccines were released to the American public on Dec. 14, 2020. [4]

2020 US Excess Mortality by Week

2020 US Excess Mortality by Week

As of this time, no children are known to have died in the United States with a COVID-19 diagnosis except for those having terminal leukemia and other advanced cancers and grave terminal illnesses and other non-COVID-19 life-threatening circumstances.  It has been calculated that seasonal flu, lightning, and being a passenger in a motor vehicle are all more life-threatening to children and adolescents than any of the COVID-19 variants.


It may be no coincidence that December 2020 was the month that the vaccines became available to the public. Early 2021 showed striking excess deaths, and the COVID-19 vaccine was the new factor. Furthermore, January to November 2020 show an average of 274,000 deaths in the United States per month, but since December 2020, according to the same CDC tables of data, the average deaths per month jumped to 288,250.


The Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines first became available for mass vaccination in the United States on Dec. 14, 2020, followed by the Moderna vaccine a few days later. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine would not become available till Feb. 27, 2021. As soon as the earlier vaccines became distributed en masse, the total number of deaths per week for the rest of 2020 from all causes in the United States jumped from 63,000 to 84,000, which is a 32 percent increase, unlikely to be attributable to any other cause but the vaccines. Before the officially reported numbers change yet again, let’s take a screenshot from the CDC.

Monthly and 12 month-ending number of live births, deaths and infant deaths United States

Monthly and 12 month-ending number of live births, deaths and infant deaths United States

CDC National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics System. Monthly and 12 month-ending number of live births, deaths, and infant deaths: United States.


Notice how much higher January 2021 deaths are than for each of the next five months.  Although January is typically the month with highest deaths in most years, January’s death rate was 32 percent higher than February’s.


It can be seen from the CDC data, that the deaths per week in the United States in each of the first seven weeks following the Pfizer and Moderna rollout all exceeded even the deadliest weeks of 2020 (the two weeks ending April 11 and April 18 of 2020). [5]  This should be enough to make anyone hesitant about the vaccines, and logically, more fearful of the vaccines than of COVID-19.

Public Health ‘Experts’ Have Not Been Straightforward With the Data

A confounding factor for assessing safety or efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines has been a deceptive use of the word “unvaccinated” by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to not only include those who were never COVID-19-vaccinated but also those who have received a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine less than seven or 14 days ago.  This “case-counting window bias” allows infections, injuries, and deaths immediately following vaccination to be assigned to, and sometimes even attributed to, the “unvaccinated” category, by deceptive sleight of hand.


Fung, Jones, et al. write of such deception: “This asymmetry, in which the case-counting window nullifies cases in the vaccinated group but not in the unvaccinated group, biases estimates.” [6]  A problem with this miscategorization is that injuries and deaths have all peaked closely following COVID-19 vaccination—mostly on the first day—as in the graph below. Yet those individuals, for being so recently vaccinated, are falsely assigned the label “unvaccinated,” confounding much of the reported data.

VAERS COVID-FLU Vaccine Reported Deaths by Days to Onset All Ages

VAERS COVID-FLU Vaccine Reported Deaths by Days to Onset All Ages only good about this mis-categorization problem is that it is no longer such an issue now in 2023 and going forward. This deception really confounded much data in 2021, the year of peak COVID-19 vaccine uptake, and to a much lesser extent in 2022.


Now in 2023, very few individuals are still being COVID-19-vaccinated, so nearly everyone has made their decision to be vaccinated or not, more than 14 days ago, and are therefore now in widely agreed upon and accurate categories at this late time. But there is little likelihood at this point of eventual correction of previous miscategorization—and therefore corruption—of this essential public health data, 2020 through 2022.

COVID-19 Vaccines Have Negative Efficacy, and What That Means

The COVID-19 vaccines are so ineffective against COVID-19 that they have negative efficacy. This means that you have a greater likelihood of infection and/or hospitalization from COVID-19 after having received the vaccine than not receiving it.  The COVID-19 vaccines have not only failed to reduce cases and hospitalizations from Omicron and COVID-19 generally, but they have actually increased the incidence of both. Results of negative efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines are seen all over the world.


Neither the Pfizer nor Moderna clinical trials addressed preventing transmission.

Tal Zaks is the chief medical officer at Moderna.  He told the British Medical Journal, “Our trial will not demonstrate prevention of transmission, because in order to do that you have to swab people twice a week for very long periods, and that becomes operationally untenable.” [7]


Dr. Larry Corey oversaw the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. He said on Nov. 20, 2020: “The studies aren’t designed to assess transmission.  They don’t ask that question, and there’s really no information on this at this point in time.” (The article where he was quoted as saying this had not been, but is now, behind a paywall.) [8]

Negative Efficacy Shown by the Most Prestigious Medical Journals

The New England Journal of Medicine shows that those who are fully vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19 recover significantly more slowly from the illness and remain contagious for longer periods of time after SARS-CoV-2 infection. [9]

Fully vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19 recover more slowly from the illness remain contagious

Fully vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19 recover more slowly from the illness remain contagious

From Figure 1, J Boucau and C Marino, Duration of shedding of culturable virus in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (BA.1) infection. Jun 29, 2022. N Eng J Med.


The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published data showing that persons receiving two or more doses of COVID-19 vaccines experienced more re-infections with COVID-19 than people receiving 0 to 1 dose and that the probability of reinfection increased with time.  “Surprisingly, 2 or more doses of vaccine were associated with a slightly higher probability of reinfection compared with 1 dose or less.” [10]

An analysis in the British Medical Journal found a “net expected individual harm” from the COVID-19 vaccines in the context of college mandates, and calculated that “boosting young adults with BNT 162b2 [BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine that encodes a prefusion stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein] could cause 18.5 times more SAEs [significant adverse events] per million (593.5) than COVID-19 hospitalizations averted (32.0).”  And “for each hospitalization averted we estimate approximately 18.5 SAEs and 1430-4626 disruptions of daily activities—that is not outweighed by a proportionate public health benefit.” [11]

Negative Efficacy of the COVID Vaccines Is Seen Throughout the World

Subramanian and Kumar examined COVID vaccination across 68 countries and found “… the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.” [12]


Switkay showed that Subramanian and Kumar’s trend line regarding relation between new COVID-19 cases and vaccination is not only positive but “… indeed, there is a very strong positive association.” [13]

Relation between new COVID-19 cases and vaccination is positive

Relation between new COVID-19 cases and vaccination is positive

H Switkay. Comment on Subramanian and Kumar… Mar 13, 2022. PDMJ.

A Bayesian analysis of data from 145 countries shows that the COVID-19 vaccines cause more COVID-19 cases per million and more COVID-19-associated deaths per million over the vast international scope of this study. [14]  The study found “a marked increase in both COVID-19 related cases and death due directly to a vaccine deployment …” The results in the United States were 38 percent more cases per million [15] and 31 percent more deaths per million [16] caused by the COVID-19 vaccines.


Other studies found no difference in viral loads or rates of infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated. [17] [18] [19]

In order to further comprehend this vast worldwide lack of efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, let’s now look at analyses of the phenomenon of negative efficacy of the vaccines in specific countries.


A study of 51,011 employees of the Cleveland Clinic in the United States was done.  It found the “Risk of COVID-19 increased with time since the most recent prior COVID-19 episode and with the number of vaccine doses previously received.” [20]


The following graph shows increasing cumulative incidence of COVID-19 disease starting after the first day of the Cleveland Clinic study. We can see a clear dose-dependent increase in infections made worse by each successive dose of the COVID-19 vaccines, with the unvaccinated having far less COVID-19 disease than their vaccinated co-workers.


The small print at the right says, going down from the top [in yellow] more than 3 doses.  [in blue] 3 doses, [in green] 2 doses, [in red] one dose, [in black] 0 doses.

Risk of COVID-dose-dependent increase in infections

Risk of COVID-dose-dependent increase in infections

N Shrestha, P Burke, et al. Effectiveness of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) bivalent vaccine. Dec 19, 2022. “Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 [infections] for subjects stratified by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. Day zero was 12 September 2022, the day the bivalent vaccine began to be offered to employees. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals are jittered along the x-axis to improve visibility.”

An Oxford University study of 900 hospital staff members in Vietnam showed that peak viral loads among the infected vaccinated (“breakthrough” infected) staff were 251 times higher than those of unvaccinated personnel. [21]This Danish study [22] showed that both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines showed negative efficacy against the Omicron variant within only 90 days of administration and that that decline in efficacy was even faster for Omicron than for the earlier Delta variant. This sharp decline is illustrated in the following graph.

mRNA COVID-19 vaccines predispose toward increased risk for Omicron infection

mRNA COVID-19 vaccines predispose toward increased risk for Omicron infection

C Hansen, A Schelde, et al. Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: A Danish cohort study.


The above graph shows that both of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines predispose toward increased risk for Omicron infection, as the timeline passes the 90-day point, due to negative efficacy.


89.7 percent of people infected with Omicron in Denmark were either “fully vaccinated” or had their first booster. 77.9 percent of the Danish population was fully vaccinated as of the time of the study. [23] Therefore, the vaccinated have been more predisposed to Omicron infection than the unvaccinated in Denmark.


Data from the UK government, Office for National Statistics, shows that each successive vaccine dose has increased the likelihood of testing positive for the Omicron variant, in a stunning display of negative vaccine efficacy. [24]


Worse yet, risk of death from COVID-19 is shown to increase with each successive dose of vaccine for most age groups, as in the following table published by the UK government’s Health Security Agency.  [25]

UK Health Security Agency COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 9 March 3 2022

UK Health Security Agency COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 9 March 3 2022

UK Health Security Agency. COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report. Week 9. Mar 3, 2022.


On a population-wide level in Ireland, mass vaccination is correlated in timing with dramatically rising COVID-19 cases. The Irish population has had among the highest rates of vaccine penetration in its adult population, 94.8 percent fully vaccinated as of Jan. 22, 2022, yet COVID-19 cases rose 317 percent over the previous January before the vaccines were in use. [26]

In Scotland also, among those who had received one, two, or three vaccines, or none at all, the unvaccinated had the lowest case rates in January 2022 of all four groups, as seen in this table [27] and graph. [28]

Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report Jan 17 2022 p38

Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report Jan 17 2022 p38

Public Health Scotland. Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report. Jan 17, 2022. p. 38.

Covid-19 age-standardised case rate per 100000 individuals by vaccine status

Covid-19 age-standardised case rate per 100000 individuals by vaccine status

Public Health Scotland. Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report. Jan 17, 2022. p. 40.


Two other very heavily vaccinated countries saw their case rates skyrocket following mass vaccination. Here are South Korea and Germany: [29]

South Korea saw their case rates skyrocket following mass vaccination

South Korea saw their case rates skyrocket following mass vaccination

Johns Hopkins University. Our World in Data.

Germany saw their case rates skyrocket following mass vaccination

Germany saw their case rates skyrocket following mass vaccination

Johns Hopkins University. Our World in Data.


A study of 4,020 cases of Omicron in Germany on Dec. 31, 2021, showed that of those, 1,137 were boosted. There were only 1097 unvaccinated Omicron cases. [30] [31]


However, there are similar numbers of people in the three categories of “boosted,” fully vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” in Germany as of Dec. 31, 2021. German scientists studying the German government’s excess mortality data observed that the higher the vaccination rate, the higher the excess mortality. [32]


As we can see, the unvaccinated have had a strong advantage against Omicron, which was the prevalent COVID-19 strain throughout the world at that time. The COVID-19 vaccines do not work against the Delta strain either. In July 2021, in the United States, in Massachusetts, at a time and place that Delta was predominant, of a total of 469 new COVID-19 cases, 346 of those (74 percent) were in people who were partially or fully vaccinated, and 274 of the vaccinated were symptomatic. [33]


In Delhi, India, of 34 Omicron cases at a hospital, 33 were fully vaccinated (97 percent). However, India’s COVID-19 vaccination rate was only 40 percent at that time. [34]


Both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were found to plunge to negative efficacy within months. [35] [36] [37]

The Implications of Negative Efficacy in a Heavily Jabbed World

A study by Chemaitelly et al. in Qatar of over 2,000,000 people, for whom vaccination status and COVID-19 disease incidence data were available, showed, just as the preceding studies, that zero to negative efficacy was apparent within months after injection. Authors attributed that decline to “immune imprinting compromising protection in people who had the booster vaccination against the newer omicron sublineages.” The authors explain the mechanism further as [the booster] “could have trained the immune response to expect a specific narrow pre-omicron challenge; thus the response was suboptimal when the actual challenge was an immune-evasive omicron subvariant.” [38]

Original Antigenic Sin

OAS is likely exacerbated by the mistaken approach of vaccinologists, tampering with the blood, whereas the body is well-prepared to confront new microbes by way of the respiratory tract, not by way of first introduction through the blood.


If the COVID-19 vaccines merely predisposed one to higher risk of the common cold now known as the Delta and Omicron and subsequent variants, then we might simply laugh off these vaccines as a frivolous and superstitious activity. However, the safety data are nothing less than horrifying.

Reposted from Colleen Huber’s Substack.

◇ References:
[1] U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
NCHS Data Brief  No 427.  Mortality in the United States, 2020. December 2021.
[2] U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Vital Statistics System.
State and national provisional counts.
Monthly and 12-month ending number of live births, deaths, and infant deaths: United States.
[3] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
OECD Stat. Health, COVID-19 health indicators, Excess deaths per week, 2020-2023.
[4] BBC. COVID-19: First vaccine given in U.S. as rollout begins. Dec. 14, 2020.
[5] U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Vital Statistics System.
State and national provisional counts.
Monthly and 12-month ending number of live births, deaths, and infant deaths: United States.
[6] K Fung, M Jones, et al.
Sources of bias in observational studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. Mar 26, 2023. J Eval in Clin Practice.
[7] P Doshi.
Will COVID-19 vaccines save lives?
Current trials aren’t designed to tell us. Oct. 21, 2020. British Medical Journal.  371.
[8] A Ault.
Can a COVID-19 vaccine stop the spread?
Good question. Nov. 20, 2020.  Medscape.
[9] J Boucau, C Marino.
Duration of shedding of culturable virus in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (BA.1)
infection. Jun 29, 2022. N Eng J Med.
[10] E Eythorsson, H Runolfsdottir, et al.
Rate of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection during an omicron wave in Iceland.
Aug. 2022.
JAMA Netw Open. 5 (8).
[11] K Bardosh, A Krug, et al.
COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults:
a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities.
Dec. 5, 2022.
BMJ J Med Ethics.
[12] S Subraminian, A Kumar.
Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States.
Sept. 30, 2021.  Eur J Epidemio. 36(12)  1237-1240.
[13] H Switkay.
Comment on Subramanian and Kumar,
“Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination.”  Mar 13, 2022.  PDMJ.
[14] K Beattie.
Worldwide Bayesian causal impact analysis of vaccine administration on deaths and cases associated with COVID-19:
A big data analysis of 145 countries.  Preprint. Nov. 15, 2021.
[15] Ibid Beattie. p 41.
[16] Ibid Beattie. p 39.
[17] K Riemersma, B Grogan, et al.
Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 variant.
July 31, 2021.
[18] C Brown, J Vostok, et al.
Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infections, including COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections, associated with large public gatherings,
Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021. Aug 6, 2021.
MMWR Morb Moral Wkly Rep.
[19] C Acharya, J Schrom, et al.
No significant difference in viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated,asymptomatic, and symptomatic groups when infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant.
Oct 5, 2021.
[20] N Shrestha, P Burke, et al. Effectiveness of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) bivalent vaccine.
Dec. 19, 2022.
[21] N Chau, N Ngoc.
Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated healthcare workers, Vietnam.  Oct 11, 2021.
The Lancet. id=3897733
[22]  C Hansen, A Schelde, et al.
Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infectionwith the Omicron or Delta variants
following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: A Danish cohort study.
[23] Status of the SARS-CoV-2 variant Omicron in Denmark.
COVID-19 Omicron variant report.  Dec 31, 2021. Statens Serum Institut.
[24] Office for National Statistics.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection survey, UK:Characteristics related to having an Omicron compatible result in those who test positive for COVID-19. Dec. 21, 2021.
[25] UK Health Security Agency. COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report. Week 9. Mar 3, 2022.
[26] J Horgan-Jones.
The Irish Times. Jan. 22, 2022.
Total of 100,000 Covid vaccines expire amid slowing demand, Ministers told.
[27] Public Health Scotland.
Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report. Jan. 17, 2022. p. 38.
[28] Ibid, Public Health Scotland. p. 40.
[29] Johns Hopkins University.
Our World in Data.
Robert Koch Institut.
COVID-19 in Germany.
[31] Wochentlicher Lagebericht des RKI zur Coronavirus-Krankheit-2019 (COVID-19)
[article in German] Dec 30 2021.
Robert Koch Institut.
[32] R Steyer, G Kappler.
The higher the vaccination rate, the higher the excess mortality.
Nov. 16, 2021.
[33] G Kampf.
COVID-19 stigmatizing the unvaccinated is not justified.
Nov. 20, 2021.  The Lancet. 398: 10314. P 1871.
[34]  A Dutt.
Out of 34 Omicron cases at Delhi hospital, 33 are fully vaccinated.
The Indian Express. Dec. 23, 2021.
[35] C Hansen, A Schelde, et al.
Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: A Danish cohort study.
[36] H Tseng, B Ackerson, et al.
Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 against infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariants: BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5.
Oct. 1, 2022.
[37] H Tseng, B Ackerson, et al.
Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 against SARS-CoV-2 omicron and delta variants.  Jan 8, 2022.
[38] H Chemaitelly, H Ayoub, et al.
Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study.
Mar 10, 2023.
Lancet Infect Dis.
A Vatti, D Monsalve, et al.
Original antigenic sin: A comprehensive review. September 2017.
J Autoimmun.  83.
A Schiepers, M van’t Wout, et al.
Molecular fate-mapping of serum antibody responses to repeat immunization. Jan. 16, 2023.
Nature. 615. 482-489.
D Burnett, R Bull.
Total recall? Understanding the effect of antigenic distance on original antigenic sin. March 7, 2023.
Immunol and Cell Biol.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.



Beware the Huge Negative Lag Impact of Three Rounds of Covid Stimulus

Mike Shedlock 25July2023

Estimates from econometric studies indicate that the government expenditure multiplier is positive for the first four to six quarters after the initial deficit financing, then turns negative after three years. The lag now begins to bite.

Real Per Capital Average of GDP and GDI courtesy of Lacy Hunt at Hoisington Management

Real Per Capital Average of GDP and GDI courtesy of Lacy Hunt at Hoisington Management

The Hoisington Management 2023 Q2 Review by Lacy Hunt is another gem. His focus this quarter is on government debt, negative multipliers, and lag times.

2023 Q2 Key Ideas

Rising Budget Deficits

The U.S. Government budget deficit has taken a serious turn for the worse this year. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, as enacted, add over $1 trillion to the deficit over the next several years. The Penn Wharton Budget Model, however, indicates that due to the way instructions were written, the cost of the IRA is running three times greater than the amount appropriated by Congress. Current year federal tax revenues have also fallen considerably below a year ago. This is consistent with real gross domestic income (GDI) which fell in three of the last four quarters.


Increased interest payments and a short fall in tax revenues both add to the deficit, but they do not boost economic activity. Neither produce a new job, a new road, or a new dollar of research and development. More importantly, the lagged effects of the huge budget deficits of FY 2020-21 are likely to be negative due to the government expenditure multiplier.


Estimates from econometric studies of highly indebted industrialized economies indicate that the government expenditure multiplier is positive for the first four to six quarters after the initial deficit financing, then turns negative after three years. This implies that a dollar of debt financed federal expenditures will, ‘at the end of the day,’ reduce private GDP.

Successfully Time Tested

Two different rigorous studies, one completed in 2011 and the other in 2012, each using different methodologies, both concluded government fiscal policy actions that either increase the size of government relative to GDP or increase the government debt relative to GDP significantly weaken the trend rate of economic growth. The evidence, from more than a decade since this research was published, confirms those findings and indicates that the government multiplier is becoming increasingly negative.


Andreas Bergh and Magnus Henrekson (BH), writing in the peer-reviewed Journal of Economic Surveys in 2011, determined that a one percentage point increase in government size reduces the annual growth rate in real per capita GDP by 0.05% to 0.1% per year. Increases in government size means that more of the economy is being shifted away from the high positive multiplier private sector into the negative multiplier government sector.


When President Nixon closed the Gold Window, the 20-year moving average of the ratio of government size relative to GDP was 25.2% while the real per capita GDP/GDI average growth rate was 2.2%, which coincided with the average real per capita GDP growth rate since 1870. Based on the comparable numbers in early 2023, government size was a considerably higher 34.3%, and the growth in the real per capita GDP/GDI average was a much slower 1.3%. Thus, government size increased 9.1 percentage points and the real per capita GDP/GDI average growth lost 0.9% per year [Lead Chart]. Thus, the actual results, twelve years of which were beyond BH’s publication date, means the negative impact on economic performance was within 0.1% of BH’s top of the range.

Reinhardt, Reinhardt and Rogoff (RRR)

The Reinhardts (Carmen and Vincent) and Kenneth Rogoff, published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives in 2012, found that when gross government debt exceeds 90% of GDP for more than five years, then economies lose 1/3 of the trend rate of growth. Gross U.S. government debt moved decisively above this 90% threshold ten years ago. As previously stated, the trend rate of growth of real per capita GDP since 1870 is 2.2%. Over the last twenty years the average growth rate has fallen to 1.3%, a loss of slightly more than 1/3 of the yearly growth rate even though the last twenty years included some years in which the debt ratio was not above 90%. If the U.S. economy were on trend, real per capita GDP would be approximately $73,000, almost $13,000 higher than the actual level. RRR also argued that the deleterious effects of high debt levels would build even before reaching the 90% threshold, and indeed they did. This finding leads to the causal explanation that the overuse of debt reflects the law of diminishing returns.


Productivity, or output per hour in the nonfarm sector, declined by a record pace over the past ten quarters. Neither a rising standard of living nor increasing corporate profitability are achievable over time without higher productivity. Since January, non-farm payrolls have increased by 1.2 million, but the average workweek has dropped from 34.6 hours to 34.4 hours, leaving aggregate hours worked virtually unchanged. To restore productivity, firms will need to rationalize their workforce, which will simultaneously reduce labor costs, inflation and household purchasing power.

The above paragraphs from Lacy Hunt highlight some of my recent articles on the ridiculously named Inflation Reduction Act, Industrial Production, and declining productivity.

Labor Productivity vs Costs

Labor productivity, costs, and hourly earnings data from BLS, chart by Mish.

Labor productivity, costs, and hourly earnings data from BLS, chart by Mish.

Labor Productivity vs Costs Long Term

Labor Productivity vs Costs Long Term 2023 Q1

Labor Productivity vs Costs Long Term 2023 Q1

Productivity Dead Zone

A huge wave of boomers retirements is in progress. Skilled boomers are now replaced with unskilled Zoomers (generation Z), who do not seem to have the same work ethic.


So, it’s no wonder productivity is in the gutter.

For discussion, please see Four to Six PM and Friday Afternoons Are a Productivity Dead Zone

The Fed Reports Abysmal Industrial Production Numbers and Negative Revisions Too

Industrial production data from the Fed, chart by Mish

Industrial production data from the Fed, chart by Mish


Recession Lead Times From IP Peaks

Recession Lead Time After Industrial Production Peak 2023-06

Recession Lead Time After Industrial Production Peak 2023-06

In yet another sign of a weakening economy, the latest industrial production report was an outright disaster.


The Bloomberg Econoday consensus estimate was unchanged in May from June. Instead, Industrial production fell 0.5 percent and the Fed revised May from -0.2 percent to -0.5 percent.


For discussion, please see The Fed Reports Abysmal Industrial Production Numbers and Negative Revisions Too


Also note that Despite Huge Incentives, Supply of EVs on Dealer Lots Soars to 92 Days

Why build cars that nobody seems to want?


President Biden can mandate ridiculous rules, but he cannot force people to buy EVs.

Largest Discrepancy Between GDP and GDI in 20 Years

Real GDP, Real Final Sales, and Real GDI data from BEA, chart by Mish

Real GDP, Real Final Sales, and Real GDI data from BEA, chart by Mish

Economists have given up on the idea of a strong recession, if indeed any at all. That’s despite the fact that GDI suggests a recession may have already started.


Note that we have the Largest Discrepancy Between GDP and GDI in 20 Years

It would be a hoot if recession started just as economists finally gave up on the idea of one happening.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!




“Combustible Mixture Of Ignorance & Power” – Carl Sagan Warned ‘Authoritarian Science’ Would “Blow Up In Our Faces”

by Tyler Durden, 25July2023 –

Authored by Ben Bartree via PJ Media,

The late astronomer Carl Sagan, who perhaps understood the unique threat of technocracy as well as anyone ever has, has emerged from the grave with a prescient warning on the dangers we are wading into unchecked.


Old Soldier-tweet-17July2023-Essential viewing

Old Soldier-tweet-17July2023-Essential viewing

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology,” Sagan says. “And this combustible mixture of ignorance and power, sooner or later, is going to blow up in our faces.”

“I mean, who is running the science and technology in a democracy if the people don’t know anything about it?” he asks rhetorically.

“Science is more than a body of knowledge. It’s a way of thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility,” he adds.



Carl Sagan with two CDC employees

Carl Sagan with two CDC employees

I have previously written about the uniquely 21st-century phenomenon of turning scientists into a new kind of priest class in possession of knowledge forbidden or unattainable to the population at large.

In this way, normal, mortal humans with questionable ethics (to put it charitably) are magically transformed into unquestionable demigods who cannot be criticized by mere mortals.

To hear it straight from the horse’s mouth, the expert class is The Science™. The man is inseparable from the discipline.

Fauci I Am The Science / Senate Meme

Via Forbes (emphasis added):

“Research both sides and make up your own mind.” It’s simple, straightforward, common sense advice. And when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, [doing your own research] can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly. The techniques that most of us use to navigate most of our decisions in life — gathering information, evaluating it based on what we know, and choosing a course of action — can lead to spectacular failures when it comes to a scientific matter.

The reason is simple: most of us, even those of us who are scientists ourselves, lack the relevant scientific expertise needed to adequately evaluate that research on our own. In our own fields, we are aware of the full suite of data, of how those puzzle pieces fit together, and what the frontiers of our knowledge is. When laypersons espouse opinions on those matters, it’s immediately clear to us where the gaps in their understanding are and where they’ve misled themselves in their reasoning. When they take up the arguments of a contrarian scientist, we recognize what they’re overlooking, misinterpreting, or omitting. Unless we start valuing the actual expertise that legitimate experts have spent lifetimes developing, “doing our own research” could lead to immeasurable, unnecessary suffering.

Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Substack, Locals, Gab, and Twitter.



“Significantly Worse Outcomes” – Scottish COVID Inquiry Savages Lockdowns And Vaccines

by Tyler Durden, 10August2023 –


Authored by Will Jones via,

Throughout the Covid pandemic, the Scottish Government made a show of imposing stricter and longer restrictions than Boris Johnson’s ‘reckless’ Tory Government south of the border. Yet despite these additional measures, in the two years from the start of the pandemic to spring 2022, Scotland averaged 23.9 excess deaths per million weekly, writes Dr. David Livermore in Spiked. “That was by far the highest in the U.K., with Wales suffering 22.9 excess deaths per million, Northern Ireland 18.8 and England 18.6.”


This obvious failure of Scotland’s response was, remarkably, summarised in an opening report commissioned by Scotland’s official Covid inquiry and written by Dr. Ashley Croft, a public health infection epidemiologist who spent most of his career working for the military and now practises from Harley Street as a medico-legal expert witness.

He told the inquiry that:

In 2020, there was scientific evidence to support the use of some of the physical measures (e.g., frequent handwashing, the use of PPE in hospital settings) adopted against COVID-19. For other measures (e.g., face-mask mandates outside of healthcare settings, lockdowns, social distancing, test, trace and isolate measures), there was either insufficient evidence in 2020 to support their use – or alternatively, no evidence; the evidence base has not changed materially in the intervening three years. It has been argued that the restrictive measures introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in individual, societal and economic harm that was avoidable and that should not have occurred.

Dr. Livermore says he agrees entirely.

As Sweden’s already-concluded Covid inquiry found, “Several countries which did impose lockdowns… had ‘significantly worse outcomes’ than Sweden”.


It also found that the restriction of individual freedom was “hardly defensible other than in the face of very extreme threats”.

Dr. Croft is similarly downbeat about the vaccines, saying “it remains unclear as to whether or not COVID-19 vaccination has resulted in fewer deaths from COVID-19”. Dr. Livermore disputes this conclusion, saying “it seems fairly clear that vaccines did break the link between cases and deaths in the spring and summer of 2021”. However, recent analysis by experts like Dr. Eyal Shahar suggests that much of the apparent effectiveness of the vaccines may be an illusion created by the healthy vaccinee effect, whereby those who took the vaccines tend, other things being equal, to have fewer underlying risk factors.


In any case, Dr. Livermore agrees with Dr. Croft that “the protection they offered was brief and incomplete”.

Long before vaccine passports were imposed on Scots in autumn 2021, there was abundant evidence that vaccines did not stop infection and transmission. This should have blown the bottom out of the case for vaccine passports. That it failed to stop them is a disgrace.

Dr. Croft adds that the “2,362 spontaneous [Yellow Card] reports suggesting a fatal outcome following COVID-19 vaccination” are “of concern”, noting such events are likely under-reported.

But the most important point about Dr. Croft’s report, says Dr. Livermore, is that it so flagrantly defies the Official Narrative of harsh but necessary lockdowns saving the population from the ravages of a deadly plague.

Irrespective of whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, Croft is to be congratulated for addressing the core question: did the Government’s restrictions, deployed at great cost and societal disruption, work?


The fact that he has even asked this question stands in contrast to the groupthink on display at the U.K. inquiry, presided over by Lady Hallett. Its first theme, examining ‘Preparedness and Resilience’, concluded last month. During the hearings, witnesses were indulged in long meanders through Brexit and Tory/Lib Dem austerity. This was despite the obvious fact that adjacent EU countries not previously governed by David Cameron and Nick Clegg experienced similar travails with the virus.


Witnesses also said that Britain had prepared for the wrong type of pandemic, with all of our plans anticipating an influenza pandemic rather than a coronavirus pandemic. But if coronavirus and influenza pandemics were so obviously different, scientists wouldn’t still be arguing about whether the 1889-94 ‘Russian Flu’ – which was comparable to Covid in terms of mortality – was a form of influenza or a coronavirus.


Unsurprisingly, Croft’s report hasn’t gone down well with the lockdown-supporting press in Scotland. He has been attacked as being ‘not an expert’ in viral pandemics. I don’t know Croft and hold no personal brief for him, but his CV indicates a much longer experience of microbiology-related public health than, say, public-health academic Devi Sridhar, who exerted much influence on Scotland’s Covid response. Military medicine – where he spent his career – takes a great interest in epidemics. They have stopped many armies, from Charles VIII at Naples (syphilis) to Admiral Vernon at Cartagena (yellow fever).

Dr. Livermore concludes that “it is telling that Scottish commentators no longer even try to say that Scotland’s lockdowns were a success… there is too much evidence to the contrary”.


“I sincerely hope that Scotland’s inquiry reflects upon this. And that Lady Hallett reads Croft’s report. It might just refocus the U.K. inquiry on the questions that really matter.”


Good Little Sheep Wear Their Mask The same people who bought into mandates over a 99% survival rate will do it for the next one, and the next one after it turns out, cowards will always act cowardly. Adjust your social circles accordingly

Good Little Sheep Wear Their Mask
The same people who bought into mandates over a 99% survival rate will do it for the next one, and the next one after that… it turns out, cowards will always act cowardly. Adjust your social circles accordingly

source: Grunt Proof

It’s Really Happening: Mask Mandates, Contact Tracing RE-IMPLEMENTED At Colleges, Offices

Alex Jones was right

Steve Watson Published 22August2023


There are reports circulating that colleges and offices are beginning to reinstate COVID mask mandates and contact tracing despite no new cases of the virus being reported.


See Below: These Hospitals Across the US Are Bringing Back Mask Mandates


The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Monday that Morris Brown College, a black private liberal arts college has reinstated the measures as part of a “precautionary step.”


The report notes that students and staff will all be asked to mask up while on campus, only one week after classes began.

A communication issued by the college claims there have been “reports of positive cases among students in the Atlanta University Center,” a consortium of black colleges and universities located on the western side of Atlanta.


Covid Report-tweet-21August2023-Morris Brown College bringing back a mask mandate

Covid Report-tweet-21August2023-Morris Brown College bringing back a mask mandate


The measures, which include social distancing, temperature checks and no large gatherings are to be in place for two weeks, it is claimed.


Cernovich-tweet-22August2023-Alex Jones had the scoop of a lifetime that this was coming back

Cernovich-tweet-22August2023-Alex Jones had the scoop of a lifetime that this was coming back


Infowars’ Alex Jones reported last week that restrictions were on their way back:


Melissa Tate-tweet-19August2023-Alex Jones says TSA employees were instructed on Tue that masks are coming back

Melissa Tate-tweet-19August2023-Alex Jones says TSA employees were instructed on Tue that masks are coming back


Cernovich-tweet-21August2023-Alex Jones was right

Cernovich-tweet-21August2023-Alex Jones was right


In addition, it has been reported that California-based film studio Lionsgate has reimplemented a mask mandate at its Santa Monica office.


laurie allee-tweet-21August2023-Lionsgate has brought back the mask mandate

laurie allee-tweet-21August2023-Lionsgate has brought back the mask mandate


An internal memo states that “Employees must wear a medical grade face covering (surgical mask, KN95 or N95) when indoors except when alone in an office with the door closed, actively eating, actively drinking at their desk or workstation, or if they are the only individual present in a large open workspace.”


Anthony LaMesa-tweet-21August2023-Lionsgates Santa Monica headquarters Medical mask mandate

Anthony LaMesa-tweet-21August2023-Lionsgates Santa Monica headquarters Medical mask mandate

Los Angeles County Public Health has recommended that higher-risk residents need to wear masks, claiming that COVID cases are increasing, while admitting that hospitalizations remain low.


LA Public Health-tweet-18August2023-Who can reply-People LA Public Health mentioned can reply

LA Public Health-tweet-18August2023-Who can reply-People LA Public Health mentioned can reply


JerusalemCats Comments

Translation; Shut up Sheep! Be a Good Sheep and wait to be CULLED.

Definition  culled of a population: reduced in size by removal (as by hunting or slaughter) of especially weak or sick individuals.



Butcher's shop in Bath, Somerset. (© Ad Meskens / Wikimedia Commons)

Butcher’s shop in Bath, Somerset. (© Ad Meskens / Wikimedia Commons)


The mainstream media is on board with this imaginary “COVID resurgence”:


The Post Millennial-tweet-18August2023-They’re trying to do the Covid thing again

The Post Millennial-tweet-18August2023-They’re trying to do the Covid thing again




These Hospitals Across the US Are Bringing Back Mask Mandates

By Jack Phillips
28august2023 Updated: 28August2023


Several hospital systems have reinstated mask mandates, citing an increase in COVID-19 cases, and some prominent conservatives have sounded the alarm in recent days.


However, unlike previous iterations, it appears that some of the mask mandates apply only to staff and physicians, not to patients or visitors.

UMass Memorial

In Massachusetts, UMass Memorial Hospital confirmed in a statement last week that it would reimpose masking for staff. Patients and visitors are exempt from the mandate, it stated.


“We have continued to see a dramatic increase in the number of COVID-19 positive employees over the past two weeks, which has led to exposures of both fellow caregivers and patients,” the statement read. “In response to this, as a protective measure for our staff and patients, effective immediately we are requiring mandatory caregiver masking for all patient encounters in all licensed clinical areas.”


The hospital, which is based in Worcester, stated that if the trend keeps up, it might force masks on anyone who comes inside the hospital, including patients and visitors. In four weeks, officials will reevaluate the COVID-19 situation before making a decision, according to the statement.


“Please know that these changes are not made lightly and we know … that a return to masking may be upsetting for some of our caregivers,” UMass Memorial said, local media reported.

United Health Services in New York

Earlier this month, United Health Services in Binghamton, New York, confirmed that it would also again require masks for patients, visitors, staff, and doctors.


“Because of an uptick in COVID-19 cases, masks are once again required in all clinical areas at UHS Wilson Medical Center, UHS Binghamton General Hospital, UHS Chenango Memorial Hospital and UHS Delaware Valley Hospital, as well as primary and specialty care sites,” United Health Services stated on its website.


The policy, imposed last week, is “in effect immediately for all patients, visitors, employees, medical staff, volunteers, students and vendors.”


“Masks are required at nurses’ stations and in conference rooms within clinical departments, including areas where patients register, wait, transport through, or receive testing and care,” it stated.


Masks will also be mandated in “common spaces,” the announcement added. That includes hospital lobbies, hallways, stairwells, cafeterias, and patient care units.

Auburn Community Hospital in New York

Elsewhere in the state, Auburn Community Hospital in upstate New York stated on Aug. 19, about a month after its previous mask mandate ended, that it would again be requiring masks on-site.


The mandate applies to patients, staff, and visitors, according to the hospital in a statement posted to its website.

“Face coverings are mandatory inside our facilities, regardless of your immunization status,” the statement reads. “If you do not arrive with one or yours is deemed inappropriate, a mask will be provided to you. It must be worn at all times and must cover your nose and mouth.”


Other than masking, the hospital stated that hospitalized COVID-19 patients can only see one visitor at a time and have to wear full personal protective equipment.

Kaiser Permanente in Northern California

A Kaiser Permanente location in Santa Rosa, California, stated that it will again require masks because of what it said was a rise in COVID-19 tests as of Aug. 22. However, days later, the hospital clarified that the mandate applies only to staff and physicians, not visitors and patients.


Kaiser told a local newspaper in Santa Rosa that it’s still “strongly encouraging masks for patients, members, and visitors in the hospital and medical offices in the Santa Rosa Service Area in response to this latest increase in COVID-19 cases.” But face coverings aren’t required for those people, it stated.


“Our intent was to communicate that as of Tuesday, we have expanded the masking requirement for our employees and physicians to medical offices and clinic settings; we apologize for any confusion among Press Democrat readers,” the hospital’s updated statement reads.


“Visitors, patients, and members are strongly encouraged to also wear masks in these settings,” it continued. “We have not changed our masking requirements in the hospital, which have been in effect since April: employees and physicians are required to wear masks and we ask visitors to wear masks when in the hospital.”

University Hospital in Syracuse

As of mid-August, University Hospital in Syracuse, New York, reimposed masking for everyone entering the building. The hospital’s mandate was lifted in late April.


“Effective immediately, mandatory masking is required by all staff, visitors and patients in clinical areas of Upstate University Hospital, Upstate Community Hospital and ambulatory clinical spaces,” the hospital stated, according to “Clinical areas are defined as any location patients gather, wait, transport thorough or receive care.”


The hospital stated that there has been an increase in staff who are sick with COVID-19 and an increase in hospitalized patients.


Over the past three years, there have been a large number of studies from around the world that suggested masks don’t prevent the transmission of COVID-19, and others have suggested that many people wear masks incorrectly.


However, some public health officials have said that masks should be recommended or required in hospitals or health care facilities where there are large numbers of people who are vulnerable to developing severe COVID-19, including people with weak immune systems and the elderly.


Why do People Listen to these FOOLISH EXPERTS?


The test of Korach

Hole in the Wall (Photo by <a href=";utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_content=creditCopyText">Mihai Nițu</a> on <a href=";utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_content=creditCopyText">Unsplash</a>)

Hole in the Wall (Photo by Mihai Nițu on Unsplash)



In every generation, there are 36 (and some say 72….) hidden tzaddikim.

These are known as the ‘lamed vav’ tzaddikim, and Hashem created the whole world, and continues to sustain it, in the merit of these holy tzaddikim.

And they exist in every generation.

Even ours.


Just what’s the problem?

The problem is that for the last 200 years….400 years….1000 years….2000 years…. the Jewish world has been flooded with fakers and impostors, people who want to ‘lead’ because they have massive egos, and they want the money and power that comes along with having a ‘position’.

Rebbe Nachman explains that really, these people are not to blame for their actions on some level, because they are crazy people with a lust for power.

Interestingly, Rabbenu says that the real fault lies with THE PEOPLE WHO FOLLOW these false leaders, and accord them honor and influence etc.

For a very long time, this puzzled me tremendously.

But now, I think I’m perhaps starting to understand it a little.


It boils down to this:

We seek out people to follow who actually reflect ourselves, and our own opinions, and our own desires and ‘world-view’.

Angry, judgemental people who have a grudge against others (which is basically just a grudge against Hashem, and how He’s choosing to run the world) – they will gravitate to angry, judgemental ‘leaders’ who turn ‘being angry’ into the biggest mitzvah in the world.

Self-indulgent people, who don’t want to hear about overcoming their own negative desires and lusts will gravitate towards ‘leaders’ who have a heter for everything.

And who minimise working to overcome bad middot, etc, because hey, we’re all just human beings here, bub!

Arrogant people with ‘scientific-atheist’ tendencies will look for ‘leaders’ who reverberate in the same small echo chamber they occupy.


And people who don’t want to take responsibility for their own lives, their own decisions, their own relationship with Hashem – they will look for ‘strong leaders’ who dictate and control every aspect of their lives.

And who demand ‘blind obedience’.

And who silence any questions and any challenges…. (often, literally, by using force, blackmail or threats.)

Clearly, these types of ‘leaders’ aren’t nice, good people.

But just as clearly – we actually follow the type of ‘leader’ we want, usually based on considerations that most people aren’t even aware of, because they don’t spend regular time every day trying to ‘dig in’ to their own psyche, to understand their real motivations, fears, expectations and issues.


So yes, the world is full of ‘fake leaders’ and ‘false messiahs’ of every stripe.

And the less a person is following ‘truth’ – wherever it leads them – the more they will be subject to thinking that these false leaders are ‘real tzaddikim’.

It’s an ongoing massive test.

And once I realised that really, these people are just seeking out ‘mirrors’ of themselves, I stopped arguing with people over ‘Trump being the good in Edom’, and I stopped (mostly….) arguing with people who are following obvious fakers – because the problem is not the ‘false leader’ they are following.

The problem is them, and the lies they like to keep telling themselves.


Here’s what Rebbe Nachman says, (from ‘His Wisdom’ – the English translation of Sichot HaRan, 126):

Regarding the messianic age, it is written:

“And it will be that he who is left in Zion, and he who remains in Jerusalem, ‘holy’ shall be said to him.” (Isaiah 4:3.)

The Talmud teaches that the angels will chant ‘holy, holy, holy’ before the Tzaddikim, just as they do before God. (Bava Batra 75b.)

This means just what it says. 

The Tzaddikim who remain faithful before the coming of the Moshiach will deserve this, and much more – so difficult will it be to remain firm in faith and not be misled by everyone’s mistaken beliefs in the pre-Messianic era.


At that time, there will be many fake religious leaders.

A group such as ours [referring Rebbe Nachman’s own talmidim], in which people gather together thirsting for God’s word, certainly will no longer exist.

There will remain some truly religious individuals, but they will be very widely scattered.

The Rebbe than quoted the verse:

“Write this as a record in a book.” (Exodus 17:14).

In days to come, let people know that there was one who predicted this.

They will know and be encouraged in their faith in God and the true tzaddikim.


Know: There are still 36 TRUE TZADDIKIM in the world!

(And some say, 72.)

And it’s our job to work on ourselves enough, and to vanquish the lies we tell ourselves enough, to start to be able to figure out who those people might actually be.


In ‘Tzaddik’ (the English translation of Chayei Moharan) 605, it says this:

“The Rebbe said:

“Even if you aren’t a good Jew, following a Tzaddik is still very good.

This is what R Shimon [ben Natanel] meant when he said: ‘Don’t be wicked all by yourself.” (Pirkei Avot 2:13)

In other words, even if you are wicked, God forbid, ‘don’t be wicked all by yourself’  – you too should try to get closer to the Tzaddik, so that at least tehre will be some hope for you in the end.”


We’re at the stage where more and more of us are realising that ‘fake rabbis’ and false leaders of all stripes are really a thing.

In the Jewish world, in the orthodox reality, that means that for many people, the test is now switching to the ‘test of Korach’ – i.e. the test of continuing to believe in true Tzaddikim, and the test of understanding that God wants us to be close to the true Tzaddikim – at least 36 of them! – that He put into the world to help and guide us.

This is not about ‘blindly’ following some ‘cult leader’, God forbid.

But it is about asking God to show us what is true, and what isn’t – and then trusting Hashem to do that and guide us to the right ideas and the right people.


Xtianity (and its many derivatives that popped up in ‘chassidic’ thought) teaches that THE TRUE TZADDIK does all the work for us.

We just go and polish buttons, and we’re ‘saved’ automatically.

This isn’t yiddishkeit.

Anyone who sat ‘polishing buttons’ in Egypt instead of following Moshe Rabbenu out into the wilderness died in the plague of darkness.


But here’s the thing:

Anyone who refused to accept that Moshe Rabbenu was THE TRUE TZADDIK, and thought he was just some charismatic cult-leader who wasn’t encouraging people to think for themselves, with all his Torah laws and brand-new regulations – those people also died.

It stands to reason, that people like this also didn’t follow Moshe Rabbenu out into the desert in the first place, because how could you trust anyone who tells you something so obviously irrational?!?!?

I mean, the guy stuttered…. and he was married to the daughter of the biggest idolater in the whole world…. and he ran away from the authorities….

Only a gormless, brainwashed retard would follow someone like that out into the desert.



But that’s not where the test ended.

Even after all the miracles, the manna, the splitting of the sea – people were continually muttering against Moshe Rabbenu, and challenging his leadership.

The classic example was Korach.

Who needs all this TRUE TZADDIK, stuff Moshe?! You are just aggrandising yourself at the expense of everyone else, collecting tithes for your own personal use…

Every Jew is a ‘tzaddik’ – a true tzaddik! So who needs you, and all your rules and diktats, Moshe Rabbenu?!

You are just trying to turn us all into a cult….


Korach was very persuasive.

And all of the people he ‘persuaded’ got swallowed alive by the earth and also didn’t make it to the promised land, Eretz Yisrael.

Yeah, sure, they passed ‘Stage 1’ of geula, and they got out of Egypt, and they understood the world is full of ‘false leaders’ and big lies.

But they didn’t pass Stage 2 – the test of Korach, where they still understood there were 36 True Tzaddikim in every generation, and a TRUE TZADDIK hidden away in every generation, who they had to search for and get close to.

As it was then, so it is now.


Let’s end with some more Rabbenu.

In Sichos HaRan (translated into English as ‘Rebbe Nachman’s Wisdom’, by the Breslov Research Institute), Rebbe Nachman tells us the following:

“It’s written about the time of Moshiach (Job 38:13): ‘To grasp the ends of the earth and shake the wicked from it’.

However, one who comes close to a true Tzaddik, [he] can grab hold of him, and not be cast off.

When we hold on to the Tzaddik, we can stay firm.”


Personally, I am seeing a MASSIVE difference between those people who are really working on their emuna, emunat tzaddikim, and staying close to Rebbe Nachman’s teachings, and sheltering under the Rav’s wing – and everyone else.

People are still going through so many tests and hardships, but there is absolutely no talk of ‘suicide’ or ending it all or anything like that.

Nothing even close to that.

There is still a lot of joy, even amongst the tears, and a lot of hope, even amongst all the worry and fear.

And the source of that is Rabbenu’s teachings, and the Rav’s gentle support via his shiurim and prayers.


Rebbe Nachman also teaches this:

In Sefer HaMiddot (Tzaddik, #151),  he writes:


Next, he explains (Tzaddik #152):



There are 36 True Tzaddikim (and some say 72…) even in our lowly generation.

And the big test now is to avoid the ‘test of Korach’, swallow our own pride and arrogance – and to go and seek them out.





Florida surgeon general tells Americans to NOT cooperate with mask mandates

29August2023 // Ethan Huff //


With all the talk right now about fake president Joe Biden soon ordering Americans to mask back up due to the latest Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “variant” fears, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo has an urgent message for America: Do not comply!

On social media, Ladapo blasted the Biden regime for trying to resurrect “pandemic” tyranny just in time for the 2024 presidential election – the very same thing, in fact, that was pulled just before the 2020 presidential election.


“What do you call re-imposing mask policies that have been proven ineffective or restarting lockdowns that are known to cause harm?” Ladapo asked. “You don’t call it sanity.”


“These terrible policies only work with your cooperation. How about refusing to participate …”


These are what you call fighting words from one of the top state doctors against a regime obsessed with medical fascism. We know that masks are about control and suffocation, and that the regime does not have our best interests in mind – and Ladapo seems to understand that.


(Related: Last year, Ladapo warned the public that covid injections destroy the hearts of young men.)


DeSantis press secretary calls children in N95 masks “gross”

Already, we are hearing about colleges, movie studios, and other components of the establishment bringing back the mask mandates. Fake news giant CNN is also now telling its handful of viewers to slap back on a mask, because “science.”


“If you’re at high risk of serious illness or death from Covid-19, it’s time to dust off those N95 masks, according to a growing number of experts,” CNN tweeted.


Jeremy Redfern, the press secretary for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, responded to the CNN tweet in disgust, particularly because it showed a picture of a young child wearing a mask.


“They’re using a picture of a child in an N95,” Redern tweeted. “Gross.”


“Luckily, @GovRonDeSantis proposed and signed legislation that banned mask mandates in Florida … We aren’t going to play in the federal government’s biomedical security theater.”


That legislation, by the way, was signed into law back in May. It permanently bans all mask mandates in the Sunshine State, including for all government buildings, schools, and medical facilities such as hospitals and doctors’ offices.


DeSantis also signed a law against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) so-called “Pandemic Treaty,” as well as banned gain of function research and signed a Protection of Medical Conscience Act.


“I want to be a haven for physicians who put the evidence above what some medical society said,” DeSantis said about himself after signing what some say is the strongest medical freedom law in the country.


“It is the intent of the Legislature that Floridians be free from mandated facial coverings, mandates of any kind relating to vaccines as provided in this section, and discrimination based on such vaccination status,” the law reads.


In his 2023 State of the State address, DeSantis warned that Americans everywhere face a denial of their freedoms “due to a coercive biomedical apparatus.”


“These policies,” DeSantis would add, “are grounded more in blind adherence to Faucian declarations than they are in the Constitutional traditions that are the foundation of free nations.”


Chris Nelson-tweet-11January2022-Across the nation we see Americans denied freedoms due to a coercive biomedical apparatus

Chris Nelson-tweet-11January2022-Across the nation we see Americans denied freedoms due to a coercive biomedical apparatus


Ladapo is thrilled about what DeSantis has done. He is also one of the America’s Frontline Doctors who appeared on the front steps of the Supreme Court back in July 2020 and called for an end to all COVID mandates while promoting the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for treating the disease.


There is never a good reason to get “vaccinated” for COVID. Learn more at


Sources for this article include:



IT’S ALL AN IQ TEST: Ten OBVIOUS lessons every intelligent person should have learned from COVID 1.0 (that can save you from what’s coming with COVID 2.0)

29August2023 // Mike Adams //



Truly, you’d have to be an oblivious idiot at this point to think the government’s COVID orders are intended to benefit the people. You’d also have to be an idiot to think that N95 masks stop COVID transmission, that social distancing works or that COVID vaccines prevent infections and transmission.


Yet, astonishingly, these are things that oblivious idiots still believe. These people also tend to believe that Joe Biden is the “most popular president ever,” that Big Pharma is run by angels who seek to help humanity and that mainstream doctors are driven by medical science evidence rather than profit motives.


The great IQ test has commenced. COVID 1.0 was the training round, to present lessons in government tyranny and medical science fraud for all to witness. COVID 2.0 is the final exam to see who is stupid enough to still have not learned the lessons from the training round. However, this “final exam” is more like a final solution, and those who fail this round of the global IQ test will find their projected lifespan rapidly shrinking.


The ramp-up to COVID 2.0 tyranny is already apparent. Joe Biden just announced $1+ billion in funding for a new vaccine, and he’s publicly stating that all Americans will be urged to get the new jab, even after Biden himself has taken five COVID shots but still managed to get infected twice.


The CDC, meanwhile, now admits that all previous COVID shots no longer work against the new “variant” they’ve named BA.2.86, which the CDC says infects those who are fully vaccinated.


We have dubbed the new variant BS.24.7 and called it the “Election Variant” because it’s obvious this new round of a virus scare is intended to steal the 2024 election via nationwide mail-in voting, mandated by yet another ginned up “emergency” fabricated by the lawless Democrats.

Biden Virus 2024 - Make America Scared Again

Biden Virus 2024 – Make America Scared Again


In fact, as point #1 reveals below, as long as you comply with tyranny, the government will always find new reasons to act like tyrants. That’s why the only way out of this cycle of psyops, plandemics and lockdowns is to stop complying with the insanity. Jolt yourself awake and stop acting like a programmable zombie.


Here are ten obvious lessons that any intelligent person should have already learned from COVID 1.0

1) As long as you comply with tyranny, the government will always find new reasons to act like tyrants


Keep going along with the tyranny and the corrupt, criminal government will keep invoking a new “crisis” to keep you in line. Climate crisis. COVID crisis. Insurrection crisis. Cyber attack crisis. Russia crisis. Aliens. Bigfoot. Sasquatch… you name it. There’s always another emergency right out the corner, ready to be played across the theater of your mind.


Stop falling for the Truman Show. Think for yourself.


2) Masks don’t work. Even the CDC openly admits it


The CDC has been forced to admit that N95 cloth masks – the type commonly push by the government for COVID “protection” – offer no protection against wildfire smoke particles, which are orders of magnitude larger than coronavirus particles. From their own website, “masks that are used to slow the spread of COVID-19 offer little protection against the harmful air pollutants in wildfire smoke.”

See: CDC-Wildfire Smoke

But coronavirus particles are only about 0.1 micrometers in diameter, while smoke particles are typically in the range of 10 micrometers. That means the CDC, in pushing masks, is somehow arguing that masks which cannot stop 10 micrometer particles can somehow stop 0.1 micrometer particles. The non-logic makes no sense, of course.


Del Bigtree-tweet-27August2023-Oops

Del Bigtree-tweet-27August2023-Oops

See: CDC-Wildfire Smoke

On this issue, the CDC is being deliberately dishonest. Across their various pages, they also claim that N95 “respirators” work against COVID and wildfires, while trying to obfuscate the fact that a respirator is not the same thing as a simple cloth mask. A respirator is an air-tight, face-fitting device with no air leaks. N95 cloth masks are not N95 respirators. They do not seal to the face and are therefore useless in stopping both smoke and coronavirus particles.


That’s why CDC researchers don’t rely on simple N95 masks when touring level-4 biohazard facilities. If they did, they would likely all die. But they tell you to use N95 masks, even when they would never rely on such things themselves.


3) Hospitals were ordered by the federal government to mass murder hundreds of thousands of people… and they gladly complied


We now know with certainty that hospitals across the United States were financially incentivized to generate COVID fatalities en masse, receiving as much as $500,000 in incentives per COVID death. Federal incentives quickly transformed hospitals into murder factories where patients who merely showed flu symptoms were falsely diagnosed with COVID, intubated for a ventilator, isolated from their family members, and routinely “homicided” by the hospital which collected a large payout as a result.


Here’s my interview with attorney Thomas Renz who represents a health care worker whistleblower who has audio proof that an entire floor of patients in one hospital was ordered to be terminated so that the hospital could collect huge profits:



Understand that under Biden, US hospitals are now assassins-for-hire, and they get a per-death payout, just like contract killers. Medicine has become murder.


4) COVID vaccines don’t prevent infections or transmission


It has all been admitted by the CDC and even the corporate media: COVID vaccines don’t prevent infections or transmission. The medical establishment no longer even pretends they do. Instead, they say that receiving COVID vaccines will “reduce the symptoms” of a COVID infection. Occupier-in-chief Joe Biden received five COVID shots and boosters, but we are told he still contracted COVID twice (even after promising America that the vaccine would stop infections).


Perhaps this is why multiple Florida counties are now on board with a resolution to outright ban COVID shots. They are biological weapons, after all, which offer no protection against COVID but wildly increase the risk of heart attacks, stroke, neurological problems and death. COVID 2.0 “vaccines” also won’t be legitimate vaccines either. They will be engineered to achieve mass death, infertility and depopulation, as those are the real goals of the entire COVID agenda.


Anybody stupid enough to line up and take one of the new COVID shots is only engaging in vaccine-assisted suicide, a kind of euthanasia obedience ritual that often ends in their own death.


5) The government will weaponize COVID to rig elections and destroy economies


We all know that the “election variant” of COVID is being timed to interfere with the 2024 elections where Democrats don’t stand a chance against Trump in a fair and free competition. That’s why they’re trying to criminalize Trump and his speech, hoping to lock him up and deny him the opportunity to even run against Biden (or whatever mindless puppet the Dems replace him with).


Democrats know they will lose all political power if the will of the people is reflected in election outcomes. That’s why they oppose paper ballots and voter ID, of course. Cheating is their only pathway to power, which reflects Democrats’ total lack of ethics, morality and fairness. With few exceptions, Democrats are destructive, dishonest people who are wholly incompatible with free society, as they almost universally support censorship, child mutilations, cheating in elections and criminalizing their political opponents.

Biden Virus 2024 - Make America Scared Again

Biden Virus 2024 – Make America Scared Again


6) PCR tests for infection diagnosis are a complete fraud


PCR “diagnosis” of COVID has always been a quack science fraud from day one. PCR instruments are incapable of quantitation analysis, which means they can’t determine the viral load in any given sample. Furthermore, PCR instruments can be easily adjusted to increase their replication cycles so that background noise is magnified to the point where a “positive” outcome is achieved for virtually any desired sample.


The entire narrative surrounding “swabs” and tests and “surveillance” of COVID using PCR is 100% pure fiction with no basis in science or fact. The entire thing is a deliberate lie, pushed by dishonest authorities and operators who are part of the plandemic scheme that’s designed to murder people, destroy economies, achieve mass obedience and empower governments to act as lawless tyrants.


A PCR machine can no more diagnose a viral infection than a magnifying glass can see the future.


7) Your doctor was BRIBED to push unsafe, unproven COVID mRNA jabs, and he gladly went along with it


If your doctor pressured you to take a COVID jab, he (or she) was financially incentivized to do so. He got paid, in other words, like a pharma whore, to push an experimental injection in gross violation of international war crimes treaties as well as the Hippocratic Oath.


It turns out, there’s nothing conventional doctors won’t inject into their patients if they get paid a bonus to do it. Even biological weapons, depopulation jabs and experimental spike protein factories. What’s especially noteworthy is that these doctors, once paid, also manage to lie to themselves by claiming that COVID vaccines were well tested, clinically validated, safe and effective. They can’t cite any real evidence to back up such false claims, but they tell themselves it’s all true so that they can internally justify exterminating patients for profit.


Depopulation has never paid as well as it does today, thanks to the government’s anti-human COVID policies and financial incentives. Conventional doctors are more than happy to play their front line role in the mass extermination of human populations as long as they maintain power and profits as a result.


8) The WHO is run by globalists with a depopulation agenda


One of the key goals of the United Nations, under which the WHO operates, is to eliminate billions of humans beings living on planet Earth today. This genocidal agenda is the foundation upon which the climate change fraud has been built. The entire “climate” narrative is really about ending human activity by ending humans.


This effort to depopulate planet Earth takes many forms, but vaccines are one of the most effective forms, since they give mad scientists direct access to the tissues and bloodstream of victims. Those same victims, under the false belief that “vaccines are safe and effective,” don’t even resist being injected with depopulation bioweapons. The primary purpose of the COVID narrative, of course, was to exploit fear to drive people into voluntary death shots… the easiest way for globalists to dispose of billions of people by making sure they don’t fight back.


In plandemic 2.0, now being launched, the WHO will order local jurisdictions to round up people and imprison them in concentration camps – dubbed “quarantine camps” – where they will likely be murdered, then counted as “COVID casualties” to further pump up the dead body count.


In COVID 2.0, if they come to take you to any sort of camp, they most likely intend to murder you. #DoNotComply (or you die).


Recently, WEF advisor Prof. Sarah Harper said the population collapse currently being observed in the UK is “good for the planet.”


“In speaking about the precipitous decline in the number of new births across Great Britain these days, Harper pretty much celebrated this as a great thing that will help to stop global warming and climate change,” reports Natural News.


We’ve seen many other examples of globalists accidentally letting it slip that they equate global depopulation with planetary benefits.


9) Food supply chain disruptions are not a side effect but a FEATURE of government-enforced lockdowns (i.e. they are trying to starve us all)


One of the ways the western governments of the world are trying to slaughter their own people is by wrecking the food supply chain.


By invoking a fraudulent pandemic emergency, governments can force food production and farming facilities to shut down. Fraudulent PCR swab tests are routinely used across food facilities in order to generate “positive” PCR results that flag an imaginary “COVID case.” This case is then cited by local health authorities to order the shutdown of that facility, causing severe disruption in the food supply chain (leading to food scarcity and food inflation, both deliberately engineered).


When food prices are engineered to rise, it causes a huge increase in food scarcity. More people go hungry, and many people become homeless because the necessary increase in food costs impairs their ability to cover rent or mortgage costs.


With COVID 2.0, watch for extreme food supply disruptions and scarcity, beyond what most of us saw with the original COVID. This time, the globalists are going all-out to achieve mass extermination. We will soon see masses of starving Americans in the streets of Democrat-run cities, begging for food and being offered free hamburgers if they merely agree to be injected with euthanasia shots (labeled “vaccines”).


10) Government believes the people will mindlessly obey almost anything… and they’re half right


As COVID 2.0 is a global IQ test for humans, the government is counting on the fact that some percentage of human beings are so stupid, they’ll go along with anything pushed by an apparent “authority.”


They’re not wrong in this assumption, by the way. Perhaps half of those exposed to government lies and medical fraud still fall for it, as they are incapable of independent thinking. They will march themselves right into “kill shot” pharmacies and vaccination extermination zones, happily reminding themselves how smart they think they are to follow exactly what the government tells them to do. (Yes, the brainwashed zombies actually think they are “smarter” for acting like brainwashed zombies.)


Despite all this, the push back against the government’s demanded obedience is growing. Recently, both a medical group and a Hollywood studio reversed their mask mandates after customers and employees raised alarm. It’s an indication that when people choose to avoid complying with tyranny, they can force changes across corporations and institutions.


Simple rules that will keep you alive while oblivious (gullible) people are culled

In summary, any intelligent person should be able to learn these obvious lessons from COVID plandemic 1.0. The most obvious lesson is that complying with tyranny only rewards the tyrants with power, incentivizing them to keep coming up with emergencies that justify their tyranny.


Fortunately, those of you who are reading this site are well informed enough to avoid falling for any more COVID tricks. Thanks to the rather blatant dishonesty of the establishment during COVID 1.0, we now know the following hard rules:


1) They will lie about the numbers of dead and the cause of death.


2) They will lie about the effectiveness of masks and the vaccine.


3) They will lie about “the science” and will publish fabricated “science” papers in medical journals.


4) They will interfere with treatments that work and try to criminalize those who promote them.


5) They will bully and bludgeon people into compliance via threats and coercion.


6) They will incentivize doctors and hospitals to murder you.


7) They will censor any speech that opposes their death agenda.


8) They will assert wildly unconstitutional powers through sheer audacity, hoping people will just go along with it.


9) If you want to survive all this, you must refuse to believe the lies and refuse to comply with their tyranny.




Watch each episode of my new show, Decentralize TV, which features top guests who teach pro-freedom decentralized living principles and skills, at www.Decentralize.TV


Discover more interviews and podcasts each day at:


Follow me on: (my breaking news gets posted here first)






Truth Social:














Join the free email newsletter to stay alerted about breaking news each day.


Download my current audio books — including Ghost World, Survival Nutrition, The Global Reset Survival Guide and The Contagious Mind — at:


Download my new audio book, “Resilient Prepping” at – it teaches you how to survive the total collapse of civilization and the loss of both the power grid and combustion engines.



COVID is now a religion


Watch: Canadian Activists Demanding Return Of Mask Mandates Attack Counter Protester

by Tyler Durden, 29August2023 –

The covid cult is still out there, desperate for a return to the days of lockdowns and restrictions and in Canada they appear to be highly militant.

Mask mandates were perhaps one of the most egregious violations of science during the pandemic scare (though there were so many violations, that question is up for debate).  Government officials including Anthony Fauci in the US admitted in the early days of the crisis that masks would do little to save the public from transmission.  Suddenly, the narrative changed and masks became a hard requirement in many regions just to enter retail establishments to buy necessities.

Medical tyranny was upon us. 

Luckily, enough people in the US and Canada stood against the mandates and eventually disrupted the agenda.

As it turns out, according to multiple studies all common masks (including N95 masks) offer no significant protection against the covid virus. 

That’s right, the science says the masks are useless; they are nothing more than a placebo.

We’ll say that again:  The masks are ineffective against covid.  This is a fact.  

Yet, activists in Canada are still demanding mandated masks, specifically in health facilities, after the government of British Columbia finally dropped the requirements.


Protesters gathered in front of Health Minister Adrian Dix’s MLA office in Vancouver Friday, calling for mask mandates to be brought back.


Protesters describe the event as an “expression of outrage,” ignoring the reality that their mindless fears conflict with the facts at hand, and are also irrelevant to individual freedoms.  What the above news broadcast conveniently cuts out is how the mask obsessives react when someone expresses a viewpoint contrary to theirs:


Dan Dicks-tweet-28August2023-Unhinged COVID Masked Protesters

Dan Dicks-tweet-28August2023-Unhinged COVID Masked Protesters


So, why continue to support the mask mandates to the point of violence? Because the masks became more than a safety tool.  They became a signal of ideological virtue, a uniform for the political left.  The masks were also a signal of submission to state controls, and for a period of a couple years maskers were like an army, an extension of state power, and they loved it.  They could easily identify their “enemies” merely by looking for a missing mask, thereby applying mob pressure to force those people to conform.  It doesn’t matter to them that the masks offer little-to-zero protection, that was not their true purpose anyway.


With the masking mandates gone from most of the west and covid exposed as an over-hyped illness with a tiny Infection Fatality Rate of 0.23%, leftists act as if they are floundering.  They got a taste of power and then it was taken away from them, and now they’re angry.  The lesson?  People who want power this badly should never have access to it.  Hysteria is food for fanatics.



Kids Almost Never Transmitted COVID In Schools; Major New Study Finds

by Tyler Durden, 08August2023 –

Authored by Alex Berenson via ‘Unreported Truths’ Substack,


The research should end what’s left of the pathetic rear-guard effort to defend school closures – or any mitigation measures like making kids wear masks…


Children almost never passed Covid infections in school, a study published Friday reveals.


In fall 2021, in four Massachusetts school districts with 18,000 children, researchers found 44 potential cases of in-school transmission.


You read that right.

18,000 students. 34 schools. Four months. And 44 Covid infections – including no infections of teachers or other staff members.


Throughout 2020 and 2021, as parents pressed with increasing urgency to reopen classrooms, teachers unions and Democratic politicians warned in-school Covid transmission would lead to waves of death. “Teachers are so worried about returning to school that they’re preparing wills,” CNN infamously wrote on July 16, 2020.


In reality, schools were among the safest possible places for students and teachers during Covid, this study suggests.

The study, which ran in the peer-reviewed journal JAMA Health Forumis both nearly useless and vital.


It’s nearly useless in advancing our actual knowledge about Covid- because serious researchers have known since 2020 that children spread Covid much less frequently than adults and that schools and camps were likely to be major sources of new Covid cases.


As early as April 11, 2020, French researchers published a paper showing that an infected nine-year-old child had not transmitted the disease “despite close interactions within schools.” By August 2020, researchers in Spain and Sweden had confirmed that finding on a much larger scale.


The reason is obvious too, since it is the same reason kids get much less sick than adults. They have lower viral loads and clear the infection more quickly. For many healthy children, Covid is barely even a cold.



(Just another good reason to hate CNN)

CNN lies-Teachers are so woried about returning to school

CNN lies-Teachers are so woried about returning to school




Yet the new paper is also vital.

Why? Because it covers American schools and was published in an American journal. And the American Covid-political-medical complex has had the habit for three-plus years of simply ignoring any research from outside the United States, especially if it includes inconvenient data and facts.


And so having concrete American evidence that schools were not in any way meaningful vectors for Covid transmission can only help to make sure the colossal mistake of mass school closures never happens again.


Too bad it comes far too late to matter to the kids in blue states who in some cases were denied over a year of in-person education.

*  *  *

Subscribe to Unreported Truths


Print Friendly, PDF & Email